From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Nov 1 02:29:31 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 21:29:31 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Notes Message-ID: <80ced4fa-986c-8ac3-c12d-9f45a2c9aede@forestfield.org> A light set of notes tonight (maybe you've got enough recent older notes to add to these); I just don't have my mojo workin' due to some long work days and downtime due to illness. Have a great show guys. -J Censorship: The censors are seeking to publish on a network that won't censor them. Go figure. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-50150981 -- The BBC has made its website available on Tor ("The Onion Router") sometimes called the 'dark web'. Tor-hosted websites can use a top-level domain of .onion which are reachable by anyone who uses the Tor network. To get on the Tor network, get the Tor Browser -- a modified version of Firefox that makes it easy to browse websites on the Tor network -- from torproject.org/download/. The BBC (state-funded British media) has been noteworthy for not covering stories of great importance. Recently the BBC has failed to keep up with Julian Assange stories including his eviction from the Ecuadorian embassy (RT had exclusive coverage; other networks abandoned the site), Assange being moved in a prison van for reasons unknown (again, RT had exclusive coverage), and coverage of Assange's hearing a week ago (as journalist John Pilger said to Afshin Rattansi on Rattansi's RT show "Going Underground"): > Afshin Rattansi: It didn't make Channel 4 news here. It made headlines > around the world, but not news here. > > John Pilger: No, it didn't make it-- the BBC-- deliberately, > deliberately excluded the most important case: a publisher and > journalist is brought to a court. He is convicted of nothing. Charged, > in this country, with nothing. The charges against him are not only > concocted but as his QC pointed out yesterday, the treaty -- > extradition treaty -- between Britain and the United States has a > specific section in it that says a person cannot be extradited if the > offenses are said to be political. Sixteen of the seventeen, at least, > charges against Assange in the United States are unlawful. They are > political. That's not opinion. That's not a piece of agitprop. They are, > under law, political. They're based on a 1917 law called the Espionage > Act which was used to chase down conscientious objectors. RT has had no special access to Assange's activity. RT merely did what any journalist in the area could have done but chose not to do -- keep their cameras rolling and report on what they saw and heard. The footage BBC ran of Assange's eviction was licensed from from RT's RUPTLY. What reporting the BBC carried in their article on his hearing (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50132599) left out pertinent details (such as the conflicts of interest of the people involved in the case against Assange, that Magistrate Vanessa Baraitser was reportedly elevated from being a magistrate to a judge for this case, and nothing which appears in that article was clearly sourced by a reporter in the courtroom instead of someone listening to reports from people who were there including John Pilger. Business/Economy: Restaurateur organizations got the economics of the New York City $15/hr minimum wage wrong: restaurant revenue and restaurant employment are up, not down. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-15-minimum-wage-was-supposed-to-hurt-new-york-city-restaurants-but-both-revenue-and-employment-are-up-2019-10-28 > Critics would have you believe that upping the minimum wage in > restaurants will lead to massive layoffs and closures. But since raising > the minimum wage to $15 per hour nearly a year ago, the restaurant > industry in New York City has thrived. [...] > When worker pay goes up, employers can respond in a number of different > ways. They can cut hours, lay off workers, accept smaller profits or > raise prices. > > With profits so low in the restaurant industry, averaging just 3%-5%, > employers may not have the option to accept less in profits without > going in the red. > > In many industries, increased labor costs may prompt businesses to lay > off American workers and move operations overseas where labor costs are > lower. But this isn?t a viable solution in the restaurant industry, > since most of the work is done on-site. > > That leaves restaurant owners with two options. The first is to > decrease the number of hours each employee works, which might explain > why income gains from a higher minimum wage aren?t as large as one would > predict. > > Still, massive layoffs in the restaurant industry are unlikely because > owners need a certain number of staff to operate a full-service > kitchen. > > The other option is to increase prices, which many restaurants in New > York City have done. > > Some in the restaurant industry have argued that raising menu prices > will lead to fewer people dining out and, consequentially, more > restaurant closures. > > But this hasn?t happened. > > In fact, both restaurant revenue and employment are up. The reason for > this is that restaurants don?t have to raise prices very much to pay for > a minimum-wage increase. > > In one study, for example, a $0.80 minimum wage increase equated to a > 3.2% increase of food prices in restaurants in New Jersey. This is the > amount that the New Jersey minimum wage increased in 1992. > > Even a one-time increase of 10% to 15% is unlikely to dissuade large > numbers of customers from dining out. That would amount to an extra > $1.20 on a $12 burger. > > The focus on single restaurants also ignores the larger economic impact > of raising the minimum wage. According to an analysis by the Federal > Reserve Bank of Chicago, if low-wage workers have more money in their > pockets, they will have more money to spend, potentially expanding the > number of consumers who can afford to eat out. > > In fact, some people ? including those from the Economic Policy > Institute ? have posited that a minimum-wage increase will actually lead > to an increase in employment because of the effects of giving low-wage > workers a raise. Other advantages to restaurants may include lower > turnover rates and better job performance. Russiagate/Propaganda posing as entertainment: Call of Duty (videogame) makes Russia the new enemy of the game, blames Russians for US war crimes, hides blame from Russian audience https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_Z4SeOieCY -- RT's report filled with quotes and footage from the game including how the edition for non-Russian customers makes Russia the enemy while the Russian edition makes some made-up family the enemy. The war crimes of the US are pinned on Russia, and the White Helmets (US stooges who, among many horrible choices, work with murderers and pose for fake death pictures) become the "Green Helmets" for the Russian edition. Corporate-friendly policy: US tax forms are complex and costly, and gratis tax filing not universal and hard to find because the tax preparation industry writes the IRS's rules. https://www.propublica.org/article/the-irs-tried-to-hide-emails-that-show-tax-industry-influence-over-free-file-program -- ProPublica's report on what they learned from suing the IRS > For a decade and a half, the IRS program to allow most Americans to file > their taxes for free has been floundering. > > Now, IRS emails obtained by ProPublica help show why: The agency has > allowed the tax preparation industry to write the rules. [...] > This year, as part of our coverage of the IRS and TurboTax maker Intuit, > we filed a request for correspondence between the IRS and the Free File > Alliance, an industry group. The request sought records surrounding a > public-private partnership called Free File. > > Under that program, which has long been championed by Intuit, the IRS > agrees not to create its own tax filing system that would pose a threat > to the industry?s profits. In exchange, Intuit and several other tax > prep companies agree to offer free tax filing to most Americans. But the > program has been declining for years, with less than 3% of eligible > Americans using it this year. > > The email correspondence sheds light on a pivotal moment for the future > of Free File in the fall of 2018: An expert body called the IRS Advisory > Council (IRSAC) had spent months investigating the program. It was > preparing to publish a blistering report concluding that the IRS? > ?deficient oversight and performance standards for the Free File program > put vulnerable taxpayers at risk.? Chicago Teachers fight the good fight against corporatist mayor Lori Lightfoot From Redacted Tonight at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2RORUTCo_E > Redacted Tonight's Anders Lee: New Chicago mayor [...] Lori Lightfoot > has reached a conclusion to the strike: On Tuesday her office has issued > a letter promising to continue negotiations with teachers while also > directing them to get back to work. Truly some masterful negotiation > tactics right there! Only someone with the lightfooted heels of Hermes > could maneuver such a closing offer to strike a grand bargain without > having to do any bargaining. The Teachers Union, however, didn't quite > appreciate Lightfoot's feat. No punion intended. > > [Plays a clip from CBS News] > > CBS News: Mayor sent out a letter saying that she wants students to > go back to class during the negotiations. Your thoughts on that? > > Alison Eichhor, teacher: Yeah, that's not gonna happen. I don't know if > the Mayor's familiar with what unions do but we've gotten more deals, > more tentative agreements, in these last two days than we have in ten > months. > > [end clip] > > Anders Lee: C'mon, you gotta let Mayor Lori work that lightfooted magic! > She wants to improve Chicago public schools too. She just needs some > time for you to work without a contract so she can get around to it. And > she believes all the same things you do! Just look at what she > campaigned on: From a Jacobin article titled "Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot Has Become Rahm Emanuel 2.0" at https://jacobinmag.com/2019/10/lori-lightfoot-chicago-teachers-union-strike > "[...] Mayor Lori Lightfoot promised to end business as usual in > Chicago. Instead, she?s antagonizing teachers, refusing to fully fund > public schools, and giving the rich whatever they want. That agenda > didn?t end well for Rahm Emanuel. It won?t for Lightfoot, either." > > Anders Lee: Now that she's in office and none of that stuff is > happening, is exactly the time to trust her! [...] > The mayor could have easily avoided a strike by sticking to her campaign > promises. Lightfoot actually ran on many of the Chicago teachers? > longtime demands for public education: an elected representative school > board rather than one appointed by the mayor, a freeze on charter-school > expansion, strong investments in public schools. She even told the > Chicago Sun-Times, ?As mayor, I will ? provide each school with basic > educational support positions like librarians, nurses, and social > workers? ? the CTU?s own contract demands in this strike. > > Like Rahm in 2012, Mayor Lightfoot is now claiming there?s simply no > money to give students what they need. In reality, Chicago ? like the > rest of the country ? is facing a priorities crisis, not a funding > crisis. Not only is Chicago Public Schools now receiving one billion > dollars more yearly from the state, but the city recently decided to > move ahead with plans to give over a billion in public funds to build > Lincoln Yards, a luxury real-estate development project. As we?ve seen > in strike after strike since West Virginia erupted in early 2018, > politicians can be forced to find the money ? if they are compelled to > from below. From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Nov 1 22:44:59 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 17:44:59 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News from Neptune #439 notes Message-ID: <2d2a17ba-a312-04a4-5bb1-7a77f702e784@forestfield.org> News from Neptune #439 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sf5n72rYgII A "Wrong Reason" edition A list of links to items referenced on the show. T.S. Eliot's "Murder in the Cathedral" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_in_the_Cathedral Challenging Nicholas Kristof?s Claim of ?Thousands More Jeffrey Epsteins? https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/10/02/challenging-nicholas-kristofs-claim-of-thousands-more-jeffrey-epsteins/ Democracy at Work shows including "Capitalism Hits Home" and "Anti-Capitalist Chronicles" and other shows https://www.democracyatwork.info/media New evidence puts Epstein 'suicide' in doubt https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0_yaZ5Xgfw David Green on "Harassment study is silly propaganda" https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/letter-to-the-editor-harassment-study-is-silly-propaganda/article_9d4eee6b-a8fa-5d8a-8609-169c0d256af9.html Julie Wurth on "UI set to present recommendations for sexual-misconduct policies to trustees" https://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/university-illinois/ui-set-to-present-recommendations-for-sexual-misconduct-policies-to/article_281f9cf2-5c01-5808-9095-97c5c004fbd1.html Noam Chomsky on "Trump?s Actions on Syria Reflect the Foreign Policy of a Con Man" -- Chomsky in interview with C.J. Polychroniou https://truthout.org/articles/chomsky-trumps-actions-on-syria-reflect-the-foreign-policy-of-a-con-man/ Noam Chomsky's "The New Military Humanism" Complete book: http://freebookbrowser.com/english/Sociology/Noam%20Chomsky/New%20Military%20Humanism%20by%20Noam%20Chomsky.pdf "Moderate Rebels" show Video: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNiXhsI4QtmQaeICpT-k7BQ/videos Audio RSS feed: https://moderaterebels.libsyn.com/rss "In the NOW" show Video: https://www.youtube.com/user/InTheNowRT/videos Rania Khalek https://youtube.com/user/RaniaKhalek https://twitter.com/raniakhalek "Unauthorized Disclosure" show RSS feed: https://unauthorizeddisclosure.libsyn.com/rss S5E37 -- Rania Khalek reports on Lebanon protests https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/unauthorizeddisclosure/S6E37.mp3?dest-id=183202 Rania Khalek on "Why are US troops returning to Syria?" https://twitter.com/RaniaKhalek/status/1190039664901677057 Marxism mailing list (Louis Proyect) archives https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism/ Aron Lund Century Foundation profile https://tcf.org/experts/aron-lund/ Aron Lund on "How Assad?s Enemies Gave Up on the Syrian Opposition" https://tcf.org/content/report/assads-enemies-gave-syrian-opposition/ Thanassis Cambanis Century Foundation profile https://tcf.org/experts/thanassis-cambanis/ Robert Fisk on "Fear on the Streets: Hezbollah and the Protests in Lebanon" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/10/29/fear-on-the-streets-hezbollah-and-the-protests-in-lebanon/ "The Angry Arab" (Asad AbuKhalil) http://twitter.com/asadabukhalil https://consortiumnews.com/tag/asad-abukhalil/ https://therealnews.com/bios/asad-abukhalil Benjamin Studebaker, Aimee Terese's show "What's Left?" https://soundcloud.com/whatisleftpod/ep-1-whats-left-of-the-left -- Episode 1 https://twitter.com/whatisleftpod -- Twitter account https://feeds.soundcloud.com/users/soundcloud:users:595199712/sounds.rss -- RSS feed "The Bruenigs" show RSS feed: https://feeds.soundcloud.com/users/soundcloud:users:111880201/sounds.rss https://feeds.soundcloud.com/stream/571710981-ebruenig-review-of-liz-warrens-book-the-two-income-trap.mp3 -- Review of Liz Warren's Book: The Two-Income Trap Anis Shivani on "Five Questions for Elizabeth Warren" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/10/25/five-questions-for-elizabeth-warren/ Russiagate propaganda in "Call of Duty" videogame https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_Z4SeOieCY -- RT's report filled with quotes and excerpts from the Russian and non-Russian variants of the game Rodney Reed on death row despite evidence saying he isn't guilty, mistakes from expert witness, new evidence making it clear he must be freed https://www.innocenceproject.org/stand-with-rodney-reed-on-texas-death-row/ https://www.innocenceproject.org/expert-witnesses-admit-error-in-case-of-rodney-reed-who-has-served-22-years-on-texas-death-row-prompting-new-appeal/ https://www.gdinvestigations.com/press/2019/1/9/new-evidence-makes-clear-rodney-reed-must-be-freed Notes from J.B. Nicholson https://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/2019-November/051473.html -J From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Sat Nov 2 17:15:06 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2019 12:15:06 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Spread what news? https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/us-immigration-laws-unconstitutional-double-standards/599140/ The above article was extensively quoted by Thomas Garza, head of the CU Immigration Forum, in the his most recent appearance on UPTV (youtube). This article is from George Mason University, one of the homes of Koch Brothers-style libertarianism, which includes, I guess, "open borders." It also, of course, includes rights to desecrate the land. Sometimes strange political bedfellows are to be desired--apparently even the Koch Brothers, or the remaining non-deceased Brother, is not happy with U.S. troops around the world. That's fine, I guess, if they actually want to do something about that, of which I haven't seen any evidence, although maybe they have Trump's ear. But what does anyone think that the sort of libertarian capitalism advocated by the KBs, and by George Mason, will get us? The immigrant rights movement is motivated by basic human decency, at least from the more casual observer. But in its more public expressions, it is also motivated by liberal political expedience, see Bend the Arc etc., as I have noted in past letters to the editor, regarding their Zionism and their liberal hypocrisy, not to mention their obnoxious claim to represent the "Jewish community." It is also motivated by good old-fashioned capitalist greed, and a desire to think that "markets," including the "market" for immigrants to move to the U.S., well seriously address our economic problems. Capital is free to move, labor is free to move, welcome to Koch Brothers utopia. See these recent article from the News-Gazette: https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/guest-commentary-building-a-welcoming-economy/article_859ff35b-cbd6-546f-97c5-1862fc43ab4c.html https://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/university-illinois/ui-business-school-dean-among-who-signed-letter-to-trump/article_41e30891-7403-57fa-aaf6-5914f59e7684.html It would appear that immigration is the solution to all of our economic problems, according to these neoliberal perspectives, subscribed to by both the Campus YMCA and the Gies School of Business (Dean Jeffrey Brown, arch Zionist). Disgusting. (Why isn't he proposing that we bring a few million stateless, well-educated Palestinians to our country in order to solve our labor problems?) There is, of course, an implicit disregard of and disrespect for American citizens, especially including the African-American ones in our own working class community, who have no voice and no representatives in these matters, including from anyone named Ammons. Not to mention the notorious "white working class." But then again, if they opened their mouths and asked a few obvious questions, like: "Why can't African-American children be the future skilled workforce?", they risk being called xenophobic. Thomas Garza, Ricardo Diaz, and the CU Immigration Forum (constituted by the two of them) honored the Zionist, racist Bend the Arc group in a recent ceremony at the Urbana Free Library. The UFL seemed to endorse this event, not just host it. Isn't this crossing the line from the civic to the political, just as they did when they allowed the "trans-rights" activists to demonstrate upstairs while Nina Paley was hosting a panel downstairs? Does the UFL think that anything it does is automatically good and true and beautiful? Thomas Garza honors Koch Brothers libertarianism on his WRFU/UPTV program, without saying so, or even clearly referencing the article from which he is reading, although he didn't give himself time to finish it. When I ran for Congress in 2014 and attended (was on the panel at) a "forum" sponsored by Garza and his group at CPL, my impression was that Garza was judging people up or down depending on whether or not they agree with his rather shallow and de-contextualized view of the immigration issue. Over the years, that impression has been nothing but reinforced. My impression is that Garza's analytical skills are sorely lacking; he is far from being the sharpest tool in anyone's shed, and he is arrogant to boot. He goes on about "playing politics with people" on show after show, but he doesn't address how economic interests are always "playing politics with people." Garza and his allies are, in fact, "playing politics with people," whatever the hell that means. He talks about xenophobic bigotry, and then describes entire unnamed groups of people in clearly generalized, stereotypical, bigoted terms; classic projection: "deplorables." Indeed, it's probably the only clearly bigoted speech that is allowed on UPTV. I think Garza is a "pro-immigrant" neoliberal, and that he is not in any way antiwar. He allies himself, generally speaking, with corporate forces at this university and in this community; they want their fancy, highly-educated immigrant friends; and they want someone to cheaply clean their houses and take care of their children. Who needs a higher minimum wage? Something to think about as we "spread the word." As we're doing so, it might be worth noting that we are assuring the re-election of Donald Trump. Hooray! People aren't stupid. They know that "open borders" doesn't address their economic issues; it's a thumb in their eye. They know that the exploitation of immigrant labor on top of the exploitation of citizen labor is not the answer to our problems, it is just more corporate neoliberalism, supported by both parties. But at least the immigrant issue gives some people plenty of chance to virtue signal and feel really good about themselves and feel that their being "welcoming" while they get on with their privileged lives; I will say that much for it. DG On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 7:03 AM Debra Schrishuhn via Peace < peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > Smugglers Cut Through Sections of Trump?s Border Wall > > > November 2, 2019 at 7:23 am EDT By Taegan Goddard > 29 Comments > > > ?Smuggling gangs in Mexico have repeatedly sawed through new sections of > President Trump?s border wall in recent months by using commercially > available power tools, opening gaps large enough for people and drug loads > to pass through, according to U.S. agents and officials with knowledge of > the damage,? the Washington Post reports. > > ?The breaches have been made using a popular cordless household tool known > as a reciprocating saw that retails at hardware stores for as little as > $100. When fitted with specialized blades, the saws can slice through one > of the barrier?s steel-and-concrete bollards in a matter of minutes,.? > > ?After cutting through the base of a single bollard, smugglers can push > the steel out of the way, allowing an adult to fit through the gap. Because > the bollards are so tall ? and are attached only to a panel at the very top > ? their length makes them easier to push aside once they have been cut and > are left dangling.? > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From naiman.uiuc at gmail.com Sat Nov 2 20:30:30 2019 From: naiman.uiuc at gmail.com (Robert Naiman) Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2019 16:30:30 -0400 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Trump=E2=80=99s_Syrian_oil_grab_is_a_R?= =?utf-8?q?orschach_test_forleft-liberals?= Message-ID: https://www.facebook.com/robert.naiman/posts/10158790349872656 Trump?s Syrian oil grab is a Rorschach test for left-liberals. The Wilsonian American Exceptionalist liberal interventionists are crying themselves a river. The Emperor, ad-libbing, is bragging that his naked birthday suit is the best naked birthday suit in God?s creation. That was never in the Blob?s script. The Left is laughing their asses off. Their historic mission to expose ?U.S. foreign policy? as an existentially corrupt enterprise is completed, ?but not in circumstances of their choosing.? Trump stormed in and took away their jobs. _*Scab!*_ What shall the Left do with their Saturday afternoons now, with no U.S Empire to expose? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Sat Nov 2 20:38:23 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2019 15:38:23 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <004501d591bd$793f5da0$6bbe18e0$@comcast.net> Very well stated David ! I have also had run ins with these neo liberal ? pro ? immigrant rights groups. I had one of them tell me once that it didn?t matter if employers of undocumented workers were exploiting them, that at least they were ? giving them a job ?. And that was after I told them a horror story I thought they would be sympathetic to, which involved a construction / landscaping contractor in Texas who would consistently hire 10 to 20 undocumented workers and tell them they would be paid in two weeks and then come pay day immigration officers showed up to arrest the workers. When I stated that my solution to the current undocumented immigrant ? problem ? was to give everyone a Green Card, they just scoffed and said that it wasn?t ? feasible ?. That they had to work with Democrats in Congress. The same Democrats who went nowhere with immigration reform. These same people when I approached them 10-15 years ago about seeing if they would assist in organizing undocumented workers into the IWW Union so that they could collectively demand more money for their labor replied ? ? They are not interested in Unions ?. End of discussion. Your characterization of them as Neo Liberals is spot on. I would go even further and call them ? poverty pimps ?. Also, leaving Israel ? Palestine aside, groups like Bend the Arc refuse to even acknowledge much less discuss the economic and foreign policy of the U.S. government CREATING the undocumented immigration problem in the Western Hemisphere. ESPECIALLY Honduras where the 2009 Obama-Clinton State Dept. encouraged and supported a violent military coup to oust a progressive democratically elected President, and turned Honduras into a brutal narco state, where medical services and all education has been privatized and dead bodies in the streets is a common sight. I know this not just from independent journalist reports but also from a friend of mine who is married to a Honduran woman. And then in addition there is ; Haiti, Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia, and El Salvador, though not as bad as Honduras ( even though Haiti and Colombia comes close ) they nevertheless have been economically devastated by U.S. government neo liberal economic austerity policies. And it is U.S. military aid and TRAINING to their respective police and military that also contributes to repressive actions against Unions, Cooperatives, environmental activism, etc.. in these other countries. A good book that documents the above is : ? Drug War Capitalism ? by Dawn Paley. David J. From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of David Green via Peace-discuss Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2019 12:15 PM To: Debra Schrishuhn; Peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news Spread what news? https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/us-immigration-laws-unconstitutional-double-standards/599140/ The above article was extensively quoted by Thomas Garza, head of the CU Immigration Forum, in the his most recent appearance on UPTV (youtube). This article is from George Mason University, one of the homes of Koch Brothers-style libertarianism, which includes, I guess, "open borders." It also, of course, includes rights to desecrate the land. Sometimes strange political bedfellows are to be desired--apparently even the Koch Brothers, or the remaining non-deceased Brother, is not happy with U.S. troops around the world. That's fine, I guess, if they actually want to do something about that, of which I haven't seen any evidence, although maybe they have Trump's ear. But what does anyone think that the sort of libertarian capitalism advocated by the KBs, and by George Mason, will get us? The immigrant rights movement is motivated by basic human decency, at least from the more casual observer. But in its more public expressions, it is also motivated by liberal political expedience, see Bend the Arc etc., as I have noted in past letters to the editor, regarding their Zionism and their liberal hypocrisy, not to mention their obnoxious claim to represent the "Jewish community." It is also motivated by good old-fashioned capitalist greed, and a desire to think that "markets," including the "market" for immigrants to move to the U.S., well seriously address our economic problems. Capital is free to move, labor is free to move, welcome to Koch Brothers utopia. See these recent article from the News-Gazette: https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/guest-commentary-building-a-welcoming-economy/article_859ff35b-cbd6-546f-97c5-1862fc43ab4c.html https://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/university-illinois/ui-business-school-dean-among-who-signed-letter-to-trump/article_41e30891-7403-57fa-aaf6-5914f59e7684.html It would appear that immigration is the solution to all of our economic problems, according to these neoliberal perspectives, subscribed to by both the Campus YMCA and the Gies School of Business (Dean Jeffrey Brown, arch Zionist). Disgusting. (Why isn't he proposing that we bring a few million stateless, well-educated Palestinians to our country in order to solve our labor problems?) There is, of course, an implicit disregard of and disrespect for American citizens, especially including the African-American ones in our own working class community, who have no voice and no representatives in these matters, including from anyone named Ammons. Not to mention the notorious "white working class." But then again, if they opened their mouths and asked a few obvious questions, like: "Why can't African-American children be the future skilled workforce?", they risk being called xenophobic. Thomas Garza, Ricardo Diaz, and the CU Immigration Forum (constituted by the two of them) honored the Zionist, racist Bend the Arc group in a recent ceremony at the Urbana Free Library. The UFL seemed to endorse this event, not just host it. Isn't this crossing the line from the civic to the political, just as they did when they allowed the "trans-rights" activists to demonstrate upstairs while Nina Paley was hosting a panel downstairs? Does the UFL think that anything it does is automatically good and true and beautiful? Thomas Garza honors Koch Brothers libertarianism on his WRFU/UPTV program, without saying so, or even clearly referencing the article from which he is reading, although he didn't give himself time to finish it. When I ran for Congress in 2014 and attended (was on the panel at) a "forum" sponsored by Garza and his group at CPL, my impression was that Garza was judging people up or down depending on whether or not they agree with his rather shallow and de-contextualized view of the immigration issue. Over the years, that impression has been nothing but reinforced. My impression is that Garza's analytical skills are sorely lacking; he is far from being the sharpest tool in anyone's shed, and he is arrogant to boot. He goes on about "playing politics with people" on show after show, but he doesn't address how economic interests are always "playing politics with people." Garza and his allies are, in fact, "playing politics with people," whatever the hell that means. He talks about xenophobic bigotry, and then describes entire unnamed groups of people in clearly generalized, stereotypical, bigoted terms; classic projection: "deplorables." Indeed, it's probably the only clearly bigoted speech that is allowed on UPTV. I think Garza is a "pro-immigrant" neoliberal, and that he is not in any way antiwar. He allies himself, generally speaking, with corporate forces at this university and in this community; they want their fancy, highly-educated immigrant friends; and they want someone to cheaply clean their houses and take care of their children. Who needs a higher minimum wage? Something to think about as we "spread the word." As we're doing so, it might be worth noting that we are assuring the re-election of Donald Trump. Hooray! People aren't stupid. They know that "open borders" doesn't address their economic issues; it's a thumb in their eye. They know that the exploitation of immigrant labor on top of the exploitation of citizen labor is not the answer to our problems, it is just more corporate neoliberalism, supported by both parties. But at least the immigrant issue gives some people plenty of chance to virtue signal and feel really good about themselves and feel that their being "welcoming" while they get on with their privileged lives; I will say that much for it. DG On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 7:03 AM Debra Schrishuhn via Peace wrote: Smugglers Cut Through Sections of Trump?s Border Wall November 2, 2019 at 7:23 am EDT By Taegan Goddard 29 Comments ?Smuggling gangs in Mexico have repeatedly sawed through new sections of President Trump?s border wall in recent months by using commercially available power tools, opening gaps large enough for people and drug loads to pass through, according to U.S. agents and officials with knowledge of the damage,? the Washington Post reports. ?The breaches have been made using a popular cordless household tool known as a reciprocating saw that retails at hardware stores for as little as $100. When fitted with specialized blades, the saws can slice through one of the barrier?s steel-and-concrete bollards in a matter of minutes,.? ?After cutting through the base of a single bollard, smugglers can push the steel out of the way, allowing an adult to fit through the gap. Because the bollards are so tall ? and are attached only to a panel at the very top ? their length makes them easier to push aside once they have been cut and are left dangling.? _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Sun Nov 3 10:01:36 2019 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 04:01:36 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news In-Reply-To: <004501d591bd$793f5da0$6bbe18e0$@comcast.net> References: <004501d591bd$793f5da0$6bbe18e0$@comcast.net> Message-ID: Geez, I was not trying to solve the entire existential problem and history of immigration and deep-seated xenophobia. Rather, my intent was to show how ineffectual and wasteful (aside from being destructive and counter-productive on so many levels) the Trumpian wall solution as constructed is with a concrete--er, commercially available power tool--example, one that is easily understood even by those who may not be "the sharpest tool in anyone's shed." If you don't find the article useful, ignore it, delete it, and don't spread it around. It really is as simple as that. Debra On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 3:38 PM David Johnson wrote: > Very well stated David ! > > > > I have also had run ins with these neo liberal ? pro ? immigrant rights > groups. > > I had one of them tell me once that it didn?t matter if employers of > undocumented workers were exploiting them, that at least they were ? giving > them a job ?. And that was after I told them a horror story I thought they > would be sympathetic to, which involved a construction / landscaping > contractor in Texas who would consistently hire 10 to 20 undocumented > workers and tell them they would be paid in two weeks and then come pay day > immigration officers showed up to arrest the workers. > > > > When I stated that my solution to the current undocumented immigrant ? > problem ? was to give everyone a Green Card, they just scoffed and said > that it wasn?t ? feasible ?. That they had to work with Democrats in > Congress. The same Democrats who went nowhere with immigration reform. > > These same people when I approached them 10-15 years ago about seeing if > they would assist in organizing undocumented workers into the IWW Union so > that they could collectively demand more money for their labor replied ? ? > They are not interested in Unions ?. End of discussion. > > > > Your characterization of them as Neo Liberals is spot on. I would go even > further and call them ? poverty pimps ?. > > > > Also, leaving Israel ? Palestine aside, groups like Bend the Arc refuse to > even acknowledge much less discuss the economic and foreign policy of the > U.S. government CREATING the undocumented immigration problem in the > Western Hemisphere. ESPECIALLY Honduras where the 2009 Obama-Clinton State > Dept. encouraged and supported a violent military coup to oust a > progressive democratically elected President, and turned Honduras into a > brutal narco state, where medical services and all education has been > privatized and dead bodies in the streets is a common sight. I know this > not just from independent journalist reports but also from a friend of mine > who is married to a Honduran woman. And then in addition there is ; Haiti, > Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia, and El Salvador, though not as bad as Honduras > ( even though Haiti and Colombia comes close ) they nevertheless have been > economically devastated by U.S. government neo liberal economic austerity > policies. And it is U.S. military aid and TRAINING to their respective > police and military that also contributes to repressive actions against > Unions, Cooperatives, environmental activism, etc.. in these other > countries. > > > > A good book that documents the above is : ? Drug War Capitalism ? by Dawn > Paley. > > > > David J. > > > > *From:* Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] *On > Behalf Of *David Green via Peace-discuss > *Sent:* Saturday, November 02, 2019 12:15 PM > *To:* Debra Schrishuhn; Peace-discuss > *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news > > > > > > Spread what news? > > > > > https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/us-immigration-laws-unconstitutional-double-standards/599140/ > > > > > The above article was extensively quoted by Thomas Garza, head of the CU > Immigration Forum, in the his most recent appearance on UPTV (youtube). > > > > This article is from George Mason University, one of the homes of Koch > Brothers-style libertarianism, which includes, I guess, "open borders." It > also, of course, includes rights to desecrate the land. > > > > Sometimes strange political bedfellows are to be desired--apparently even > the Koch Brothers, or the remaining non-deceased Brother, is not happy with > U.S. troops around the world. That's fine, I guess, if they actually want > to do something about that, of which I haven't seen any evidence, although > maybe they have Trump's ear. > > > > But what does anyone think that the sort of libertarian capitalism > advocated by the KBs, and by George Mason, will get us? > > > > The immigrant rights movement is motivated by basic human decency, at > least from the more casual observer. But in its more public expressions, it > is also motivated by liberal political expedience, see Bend the Arc etc., > as I have noted in past letters to the editor, regarding their Zionism and > their liberal hypocrisy, not to mention their obnoxious claim to represent > the "Jewish community." > > > > It is also motivated by good old-fashioned capitalist greed, and a desire > to think that "markets," including the "market" for immigrants to move to > the U.S., well seriously address our economic problems. Capital is free to > move, labor is free to move, welcome to Koch Brothers utopia. See these > recent article from the News-Gazette: > > > > > https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/guest-commentary-building-a-welcoming-economy/article_859ff35b-cbd6-546f-97c5-1862fc43ab4c.html > > > > > > https://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/university-illinois/ui-business-school-dean-among-who-signed-letter-to-trump/article_41e30891-7403-57fa-aaf6-5914f59e7684.html > > > > It would appear that immigration is the solution to all of our economic > problems, according to these neoliberal perspectives, subscribed to by both > the Campus YMCA and the Gies School of Business (Dean Jeffrey Brown, arch > Zionist). Disgusting. (Why isn't he proposing that we bring a few million > stateless, well-educated Palestinians to our country in order to solve our > labor problems?) > > > > There is, of course, an implicit disregard of and disrespect for American > citizens, especially including the African-American ones in our own working > class community, who have no voice and no representatives in these matters, > including from anyone named Ammons. Not to mention the notorious "white > working class." But then again, if they opened their mouths and asked a few > obvious questions, like: "Why can't African-American children be the future > skilled workforce?", they risk being called xenophobic. > > > > Thomas Garza, Ricardo Diaz, and the CU Immigration Forum (constituted by > the two of them) honored the Zionist, racist Bend the Arc group in a recent > ceremony at the Urbana Free Library. The UFL seemed to endorse this event, > not just host it. Isn't this crossing the line from the civic to the > political, just as they did when they allowed the "trans-rights" activists > to demonstrate upstairs while Nina Paley was hosting a panel downstairs? > Does the UFL think that anything it does is automatically good and true and > beautiful? > > > > Thomas Garza honors Koch Brothers libertarianism on his WRFU/UPTV program, > without saying so, or even clearly referencing the article from which he is > reading, although he didn't give himself time to finish it. > > > > When I ran for Congress in 2014 and attended (was on the panel at) a > "forum" sponsored by Garza and his group at CPL, my impression was that > Garza was judging people up or down depending on whether or not they agree > with his rather shallow and de-contextualized view of the immigration > issue. Over the years, that impression has been nothing but reinforced. > > > > My impression is that Garza's analytical skills are sorely lacking; he is > far from being the sharpest tool in anyone's shed, and he is arrogant to > boot. He goes on about "playing politics with people" on show after show, > but he doesn't address how economic interests are always "playing politics > with people." Garza and his allies are, in fact, "playing politics with > people," whatever the hell that means. He talks about xenophobic bigotry, > and then describes entire unnamed groups of people in clearly generalized, > stereotypical, bigoted terms; classic projection: "deplorables." Indeed, > it's probably the only clearly bigoted speech that is allowed on UPTV. > > > > I think Garza is a "pro-immigrant" neoliberal, and that he is not in any > way antiwar. He allies himself, generally speaking, with corporate forces > at this university and in this community; they want their fancy, > highly-educated immigrant friends; and they want someone to cheaply clean > their houses and take care of their children. Who needs a higher minimum > wage? > > > > Something to think about as we "spread the word." > > > > As we're doing so, it might be worth noting that we are assuring the > re-election of Donald Trump. Hooray! > > > > People aren't stupid. They know that "open borders" doesn't address their > economic issues; it's a thumb in their eye. They know that the exploitation > of immigrant labor on top of the exploitation of citizen labor is not the > answer to our problems, it is just more corporate neoliberalism, supported > by both parties. > > > > But at least the immigrant issue gives some people plenty of chance to > virtue signal and feel really good about themselves and feel that their > being "welcoming" while they get on with their privileged lives; I will say > that much for it. > > > > DG > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 7:03 AM Debra Schrishuhn via Peace < > peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > Smugglers Cut Through Sections of Trump?s Border Wall > > > November 2, 2019 at 7:23 am EDT By Taegan Goddard > 29 Comments > > > ?Smuggling gangs in Mexico have repeatedly sawed through new sections of > President Trump?s border wall in recent months by using commercially > available power tools, opening gaps large enough for people and drug loads > to pass through, according to U.S. agents and officials with knowledge of > the damage,? the Washington Post reports. > > ?The breaches have been made using a popular cordless household tool known > as a reciprocating saw that retails at hardware stores for as little as > $100. When fitted with specialized blades, the saws can slice through one > of the barrier?s steel-and-concrete bollards in a matter of minutes,.? > > ?After cutting through the base of a single bollard, smugglers can push > the steel out of the way, allowing an adult to fit through the gap. Because > the bollards are so tall ? and are attached only to a panel at the very top > ? their length makes them easier to push aside once they have been cut and > are left dangling.? > > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Sun Nov 3 14:00:27 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 08:00:27 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news In-Reply-To: References: <004501d591bd$793f5da0$6bbe18e0$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <001801d5924f$0bf90b00$23eb2100$@comcast.net> Deb, I saw no references to xenophobia, either in the article, David Green?s comments or my comments. Can you explain why you mentioned xenophobia ? Unless you meant that Trump?s wall is a response to xenophobia in general ? Just curious. David J. From: Debra Schrishuhn [mailto:deb.pdamerica at gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2019 4:02 AM To: David Johnson Cc: David Green; peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news Geez, I was not trying to solve the entire existential problem and history of immigration and deep-seated xenophobia. Rather, my intent was to show how ineffectual and wasteful (aside from being destructive and counter-productive on so many levels) the Trumpian wall solution as constructed is with a concrete--er, commercially available power tool--example, one that is easily understood even by those who may not be "the sharpest tool in anyone's shed." If you don't find the article useful, ignore it, delete it, and don't spread it around. It really is as simple as that. Debra On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 3:38 PM David Johnson wrote: Very well stated David ! I have also had run ins with these neo liberal ? pro ? immigrant rights groups. I had one of them tell me once that it didn?t matter if employers of undocumented workers were exploiting them, that at least they were ? giving them a job ?. And that was after I told them a horror story I thought they would be sympathetic to, which involved a construction / landscaping contractor in Texas who would consistently hire 10 to 20 undocumented workers and tell them they would be paid in two weeks and then come pay day immigration officers showed up to arrest the workers. When I stated that my solution to the current undocumented immigrant ? problem ? was to give everyone a Green Card, they just scoffed and said that it wasn?t ? feasible ?. That they had to work with Democrats in Congress. The same Democrats who went nowhere with immigration reform. These same people when I approached them 10-15 years ago about seeing if they would assist in organizing undocumented workers into the IWW Union so that they could collectively demand more money for their labor replied ? ? They are not interested in Unions ?. End of discussion. Your characterization of them as Neo Liberals is spot on. I would go even further and call them ? poverty pimps ?. Also, leaving Israel ? Palestine aside, groups like Bend the Arc refuse to even acknowledge much less discuss the economic and foreign policy of the U.S. government CREATING the undocumented immigration problem in the Western Hemisphere. ESPECIALLY Honduras where the 2009 Obama-Clinton State Dept. encouraged and supported a violent military coup to oust a progressive democratically elected President, and turned Honduras into a brutal narco state, where medical services and all education has been privatized and dead bodies in the streets is a common sight. I know this not just from independent journalist reports but also from a friend of mine who is married to a Honduran woman. And then in addition there is ; Haiti, Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia, and El Salvador, though not as bad as Honduras ( even though Haiti and Colombia comes close ) they nevertheless have been economically devastated by U.S. government neo liberal economic austerity policies. And it is U.S. military aid and TRAINING to their respective police and military that also contributes to repressive actions against Unions, Cooperatives, environmental activism, etc.. in these other countries. A good book that documents the above is : ? Drug War Capitalism ? by Dawn Paley. David J. From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of David Green via Peace-discuss Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2019 12:15 PM To: Debra Schrishuhn; Peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news Spread what news? https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/us-immigration-laws-unconstitutional-double-standards/599140/ The above article was extensively quoted by Thomas Garza, head of the CU Immigration Forum, in the his most recent appearance on UPTV (youtube). This article is from George Mason University, one of the homes of Koch Brothers-style libertarianism, which includes, I guess, "open borders." It also, of course, includes rights to desecrate the land. Sometimes strange political bedfellows are to be desired--apparently even the Koch Brothers, or the remaining non-deceased Brother, is not happy with U.S. troops around the world. That's fine, I guess, if they actually want to do something about that, of which I haven't seen any evidence, although maybe they have Trump's ear. But what does anyone think that the sort of libertarian capitalism advocated by the KBs, and by George Mason, will get us? The immigrant rights movement is motivated by basic human decency, at least from the more casual observer. But in its more public expressions, it is also motivated by liberal political expedience, see Bend the Arc etc., as I have noted in past letters to the editor, regarding their Zionism and their liberal hypocrisy, not to mention their obnoxious claim to represent the "Jewish community." It is also motivated by good old-fashioned capitalist greed, and a desire to think that "markets," including the "market" for immigrants to move to the U.S., well seriously address our economic problems. Capital is free to move, labor is free to move, welcome to Koch Brothers utopia. See these recent article from the News-Gazette: https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/guest-commentary-building-a-welcoming-economy/article_859ff35b-cbd6-546f-97c5-1862fc43ab4c.html https://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/university-illinois/ui-business-school-dean-among-who-signed-letter-to-trump/article_41e30891-7403-57fa-aaf6-5914f59e7684.html It would appear that immigration is the solution to all of our economic problems, according to these neoliberal perspectives, subscribed to by both the Campus YMCA and the Gies School of Business (Dean Jeffrey Brown, arch Zionist). Disgusting. (Why isn't he proposing that we bring a few million stateless, well-educated Palestinians to our country in order to solve our labor problems?) There is, of course, an implicit disregard of and disrespect for American citizens, especially including the African-American ones in our own working class community, who have no voice and no representatives in these matters, including from anyone named Ammons. Not to mention the notorious "white working class." But then again, if they opened their mouths and asked a few obvious questions, like: "Why can't African-American children be the future skilled workforce?", they risk being called xenophobic. Thomas Garza, Ricardo Diaz, and the CU Immigration Forum (constituted by the two of them) honored the Zionist, racist Bend the Arc group in a recent ceremony at the Urbana Free Library. The UFL seemed to endorse this event, not just host it. Isn't this crossing the line from the civic to the political, just as they did when they allowed the "trans-rights" activists to demonstrate upstairs while Nina Paley was hosting a panel downstairs? Does the UFL think that anything it does is automatically good and true and beautiful? Thomas Garza honors Koch Brothers libertarianism on his WRFU/UPTV program, without saying so, or even clearly referencing the article from which he is reading, although he didn't give himself time to finish it. When I ran for Congress in 2014 and attended (was on the panel at) a "forum" sponsored by Garza and his group at CPL, my impression was that Garza was judging people up or down depending on whether or not they agree with his rather shallow and de-contextualized view of the immigration issue. Over the years, that impression has been nothing but reinforced. My impression is that Garza's analytical skills are sorely lacking; he is far from being the sharpest tool in anyone's shed, and he is arrogant to boot. He goes on about "playing politics with people" on show after show, but he doesn't address how economic interests are always "playing politics with people." Garza and his allies are, in fact, "playing politics with people," whatever the hell that means. He talks about xenophobic bigotry, and then describes entire unnamed groups of people in clearly generalized, stereotypical, bigoted terms; classic projection: "deplorables." Indeed, it's probably the only clearly bigoted speech that is allowed on UPTV. I think Garza is a "pro-immigrant" neoliberal, and that he is not in any way antiwar. He allies himself, generally speaking, with corporate forces at this university and in this community; they want their fancy, highly-educated immigrant friends; and they want someone to cheaply clean their houses and take care of their children. Who needs a higher minimum wage? Something to think about as we "spread the word." As we're doing so, it might be worth noting that we are assuring the re-election of Donald Trump. Hooray! People aren't stupid. They know that "open borders" doesn't address their economic issues; it's a thumb in their eye. They know that the exploitation of immigrant labor on top of the exploitation of citizen labor is not the answer to our problems, it is just more corporate neoliberalism, supported by both parties. But at least the immigrant issue gives some people plenty of chance to virtue signal and feel really good about themselves and feel that their being "welcoming" while they get on with their privileged lives; I will say that much for it. DG On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 7:03 AM Debra Schrishuhn via Peace wrote: Smugglers Cut Through Sections of Trump?s Border Wall November 2, 2019 at 7:23 am EDT By Taegan Goddard 29 Comments ?Smuggling gangs in Mexico have repeatedly sawed through new sections of President Trump?s border wall in recent months by using commercially available power tools, opening gaps large enough for people and drug loads to pass through, according to U.S. agents and officials with knowledge of the damage,? the Washington Post reports. ?The breaches have been made using a popular cordless household tool known as a reciprocating saw that retails at hardware stores for as little as $100. When fitted with specialized blades, the saws can slice through one of the barrier?s steel-and-concrete bollards in a matter of minutes,.? ?After cutting through the base of a single bollard, smugglers can push the steel out of the way, allowing an adult to fit through the gap. Because the bollards are so tall ? and are attached only to a panel at the very top ? their length makes them easier to push aside once they have been cut and are left dangling.? _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Sun Nov 3 15:33:48 2019 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 09:33:48 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news In-Reply-To: <001801d5924f$0bf90b00$23eb2100$@comcast.net> References: <004501d591bd$793f5da0$6bbe18e0$@comcast.net> <001801d5924f$0bf90b00$23eb2100$@comcast.net> Message-ID: Yes Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 3, 2019, at 8:00 AM, David Johnson wrote: > > Deb, > > I saw no references to xenophobia, either in the article, David Green?s comments or my comments. > > Can you explain why you mentioned xenophobia ? > > Unless you meant that Trump?s wall is a response to xenophobia in general ? > > Just curious. > > David J. > > From: Debra Schrishuhn [mailto:deb.pdamerica at gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2019 4:02 AM > To: David Johnson > Cc: David Green; peace-discuss > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news > > Geez, I was not trying to solve the entire existential problem and history of immigration and deep-seated xenophobia. Rather, my intent was to show how ineffectual and wasteful (aside from being destructive and counter-productive on so many levels) the Trumpian wall solution as constructed is with a concrete--er, commercially available power tool--example, one that is easily understood even by those who may not be "the sharpest tool in anyone's shed." > > If you don't find the article useful, ignore it, delete it, and don't spread it around. It really is as simple as that. > > Debra > > On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 3:38 PM David Johnson wrote: > Very well stated David ! > > I have also had run ins with these neo liberal ? pro ? immigrant rights groups. > I had one of them tell me once that it didn?t matter if employers of undocumented workers were exploiting them, that at least they were ? giving them a job ?. And that was after I told them a horror story I thought they would be sympathetic to, which involved a construction / landscaping contractor in Texas who would consistently hire 10 to 20 undocumented workers and tell them they would be paid in two weeks and then come pay day immigration officers showed up to arrest the workers. > > When I stated that my solution to the current undocumented immigrant ? problem ? was to give everyone a Green Card, they just scoffed and said that it wasn?t ? feasible ?. That they had to work with Democrats in Congress. The same Democrats who went nowhere with immigration reform. > These same people when I approached them 10-15 years ago about seeing if they would assist in organizing undocumented workers into the IWW Union so that they could collectively demand more money for their labor replied ? ? They are not interested in Unions ?. End of discussion. > > Your characterization of them as Neo Liberals is spot on. I would go even further and call them ? poverty pimps ?. > > Also, leaving Israel ? Palestine aside, groups like Bend the Arc refuse to even acknowledge much less discuss the economic and foreign policy of the U.S. government CREATING the undocumented immigration problem in the Western Hemisphere. ESPECIALLY Honduras where the 2009 Obama-Clinton State Dept. encouraged and supported a violent military coup to oust a progressive democratically elected President, and turned Honduras into a brutal narco state, where medical services and all education has been privatized and dead bodies in the streets is a common sight. I know this not just from independent journalist reports but also from a friend of mine who is married to a Honduran woman. And then in addition there is ; Haiti, Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia, and El Salvador, though not as bad as Honduras ( even though Haiti and Colombia comes close ) they nevertheless have been economically devastated by U.S. government neo liberal economic austerity policies. And it is U.S. military aid and TRAINING to their respective police and military that also contributes to repressive actions against Unions, Cooperatives, environmental activism, etc.. in these other countries. > > A good book that documents the above is : ? Drug War Capitalism ? by Dawn Paley. > > David J. > > From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of David Green via Peace-discuss > Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2019 12:15 PM > To: Debra Schrishuhn; Peace-discuss > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news > > > Spread what news? > > https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/us-immigration-laws-unconstitutional-double-standards/599140/ > > The above article was extensively quoted by Thomas Garza, head of the CU Immigration Forum, in the his most recent appearance on UPTV (youtube). > > This article is from George Mason University, one of the homes of Koch Brothers-style libertarianism, which includes, I guess, "open borders." It also, of course, includes rights to desecrate the land. > > Sometimes strange political bedfellows are to be desired--apparently even the Koch Brothers, or the remaining non-deceased Brother, is not happy with U.S. troops around the world. That's fine, I guess, if they actually want to do something about that, of which I haven't seen any evidence, although maybe they have Trump's ear. > > But what does anyone think that the sort of libertarian capitalism advocated by the KBs, and by George Mason, will get us? > > The immigrant rights movement is motivated by basic human decency, at least from the more casual observer. But in its more public expressions, it is also motivated by liberal political expedience, see Bend the Arc etc., as I have noted in past letters to the editor, regarding their Zionism and their liberal hypocrisy, not to mention their obnoxious claim to represent the "Jewish community." > > It is also motivated by good old-fashioned capitalist greed, and a desire to think that "markets," including the "market" for immigrants to move to the U.S., well seriously address our economic problems. Capital is free to move, labor is free to move, welcome to Koch Brothers utopia. See these recent article from the News-Gazette: > > https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/guest-commentary-building-a-welcoming-economy/article_859ff35b-cbd6-546f-97c5-1862fc43ab4c.html > > https://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/university-illinois/ui-business-school-dean-among-who-signed-letter-to-trump/article_41e30891-7403-57fa-aaf6-5914f59e7684.html > > It would appear that immigration is the solution to all of our economic problems, according to these neoliberal perspectives, subscribed to by both the Campus YMCA and the Gies School of Business (Dean Jeffrey Brown, arch Zionist). Disgusting. (Why isn't he proposing that we bring a few million stateless, well-educated Palestinians to our country in order to solve our labor problems?) > > There is, of course, an implicit disregard of and disrespect for American citizens, especially including the African-American ones in our own working class community, who have no voice and no representatives in these matters, including from anyone named Ammons. Not to mention the notorious "white working class." But then again, if they opened their mouths and asked a few obvious questions, like: "Why can't African-American children be the future skilled workforce?", they risk being called xenophobic. > > Thomas Garza, Ricardo Diaz, and the CU Immigration Forum (constituted by the two of them) honored the Zionist, racist Bend the Arc group in a recent ceremony at the Urbana Free Library. The UFL seemed to endorse this event, not just host it. Isn't this crossing the line from the civic to the political, just as they did when they allowed the "trans-rights" activists to demonstrate upstairs while Nina Paley was hosting a panel downstairs? Does the UFL think that anything it does is automatically good and true and beautiful? > > Thomas Garza honors Koch Brothers libertarianism on his WRFU/UPTV program, without saying so, or even clearly referencing the article from which he is reading, although he didn't give himself time to finish it. > > When I ran for Congress in 2014 and attended (was on the panel at) a "forum" sponsored by Garza and his group at CPL, my impression was that Garza was judging people up or down depending on whether or not they agree with his rather shallow and de-contextualized view of the immigration issue. Over the years, that impression has been nothing but reinforced. > > My impression is that Garza's analytical skills are sorely lacking; he is far from being the sharpest tool in anyone's shed, and he is arrogant to boot. He goes on about "playing politics with people" on show after show, but he doesn't address how economic interests are always "playing politics with people." Garza and his allies are, in fact, "playing politics with people," whatever the hell that means. He talks about xenophobic bigotry, and then describes entire unnamed groups of people in clearly generalized, stereotypical, bigoted terms; classic projection: "deplorables." Indeed, it's probably the only clearly bigoted speech that is allowed on UPTV. > > I think Garza is a "pro-immigrant" neoliberal, and that he is not in any way antiwar. He allies himself, generally speaking, with corporate forces at this university and in this community; they want their fancy, highly-educated immigrant friends; and they want someone to cheaply clean their houses and take care of their children. Who needs a higher minimum wage? > > Something to think about as we "spread the word." > > As we're doing so, it might be worth noting that we are assuring the re-election of Donald Trump. Hooray! > > People aren't stupid. They know that "open borders" doesn't address their economic issues; it's a thumb in their eye. They know that the exploitation of immigrant labor on top of the exploitation of citizen labor is not the answer to our problems, it is just more corporate neoliberalism, supported by both parties. > > But at least the immigrant issue gives some people plenty of chance to virtue signal and feel really good about themselves and feel that their being "welcoming" while they get on with their privileged lives; I will say that much for it. > > DG > > > On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 7:03 AM Debra Schrishuhn via Peace wrote: > Smugglers Cut Through Sections of Trump?s Border Wall > > November 2, 2019 at 7:23 am EDT By Taegan Goddard 29 Comments > > ?Smuggling gangs in Mexico have repeatedly sawed through new sections of President Trump?s border wall in recent months by using commercially available power tools, opening gaps large enough for people and drug loads to pass through, according to U.S. agents and officials with knowledge of the damage,? the Washington Post reports. > > ?The breaches have been made using a popular cordless household tool known as a reciprocating saw that retails at hardware stores for as little as $100. When fitted with specialized blades, the saws can slice through one of the barrier?s steel-and-concrete bollards in a matter of minutes,.? > > ?After cutting through the base of a single bollard, smugglers can push the steel out of the way, allowing an adult to fit through the gap. Because the bollards are so tall ? and are attached only to a panel at the very top ? their length makes them easier to push aside once they have been cut and are left dangling.? > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sun Nov 3 15:42:27 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 09:42:27 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news In-Reply-To: References: <004501d591bd$793f5da0$6bbe18e0$@comcast.net> Message-ID: Deb, of course I was just using your posting to vent some of my festering critiques of how the immigrant issue has been treated, including of course in the progressive community; nothing personal. I probably should have just written up an article summarizing my views in light of the onslaught of News-Gazette articles that clearly show the alignment of "pro-immigration" views with neoliberal business interests. In any event, of course Trump is ridiculous with his wall, and just "playing to his base." And the human suffering around the border is horrific. But the attention devoted to the wall serves the interests of the Democratic Party establishment, and I know you don't want that. DG On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 4:01 AM Debra Schrishuhn wrote: > Geez, I was not trying to solve the entire existential problem and history > of immigration and deep-seated xenophobia. Rather, my intent was to show > how ineffectual and wasteful (aside from being destructive and > counter-productive on so many levels) the Trumpian wall solution as > constructed is with a concrete--er, commercially available power > tool--example, one that is easily understood even by those who may not be > "the sharpest tool in anyone's shed." > > If you don't find the article useful, ignore it, delete it, and don't > spread it around. It really is as simple as that. > > Debra > > On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 3:38 PM David Johnson > wrote: > >> Very well stated David ! >> >> >> >> I have also had run ins with these neo liberal ? pro ? immigrant rights >> groups. >> >> I had one of them tell me once that it didn?t matter if employers of >> undocumented workers were exploiting them, that at least they were ? giving >> them a job ?. And that was after I told them a horror story I thought they >> would be sympathetic to, which involved a construction / landscaping >> contractor in Texas who would consistently hire 10 to 20 undocumented >> workers and tell them they would be paid in two weeks and then come pay day >> immigration officers showed up to arrest the workers. >> >> >> >> When I stated that my solution to the current undocumented immigrant ? >> problem ? was to give everyone a Green Card, they just scoffed and said >> that it wasn?t ? feasible ?. That they had to work with Democrats in >> Congress. The same Democrats who went nowhere with immigration reform. >> >> These same people when I approached them 10-15 years ago about seeing if >> they would assist in organizing undocumented workers into the IWW Union so >> that they could collectively demand more money for their labor replied ? ? >> They are not interested in Unions ?. End of discussion. >> >> >> >> Your characterization of them as Neo Liberals is spot on. I would go even >> further and call them ? poverty pimps ?. >> >> >> >> Also, leaving Israel ? Palestine aside, groups like Bend the Arc refuse >> to even acknowledge much less discuss the economic and foreign policy of >> the U.S. government CREATING the undocumented immigration problem in the >> Western Hemisphere. ESPECIALLY Honduras where the 2009 Obama-Clinton State >> Dept. encouraged and supported a violent military coup to oust a >> progressive democratically elected President, and turned Honduras into a >> brutal narco state, where medical services and all education has been >> privatized and dead bodies in the streets is a common sight. I know this >> not just from independent journalist reports but also from a friend of mine >> who is married to a Honduran woman. And then in addition there is ; Haiti, >> Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia, and El Salvador, though not as bad as Honduras >> ( even though Haiti and Colombia comes close ) they nevertheless have been >> economically devastated by U.S. government neo liberal economic austerity >> policies. And it is U.S. military aid and TRAINING to their respective >> police and military that also contributes to repressive actions against >> Unions, Cooperatives, environmental activism, etc.. in these other >> countries. >> >> >> >> A good book that documents the above is : ? Drug War Capitalism ? by Dawn >> Paley. >> >> >> >> David J. >> >> >> >> *From:* Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] *On >> Behalf Of *David Green via Peace-discuss >> *Sent:* Saturday, November 02, 2019 12:15 PM >> *To:* Debra Schrishuhn; Peace-discuss >> *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news >> >> >> >> >> >> Spread what news? >> >> >> >> >> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/us-immigration-laws-unconstitutional-double-standards/599140/ >> >> >> >> >> The above article was extensively quoted by Thomas Garza, head of the CU >> Immigration Forum, in the his most recent appearance on UPTV (youtube). >> >> >> >> This article is from George Mason University, one of the homes of Koch >> Brothers-style libertarianism, which includes, I guess, "open borders." It >> also, of course, includes rights to desecrate the land. >> >> >> >> Sometimes strange political bedfellows are to be desired--apparently even >> the Koch Brothers, or the remaining non-deceased Brother, is not happy with >> U.S. troops around the world. That's fine, I guess, if they actually want >> to do something about that, of which I haven't seen any evidence, although >> maybe they have Trump's ear. >> >> >> >> But what does anyone think that the sort of libertarian capitalism >> advocated by the KBs, and by George Mason, will get us? >> >> >> >> The immigrant rights movement is motivated by basic human decency, at >> least from the more casual observer. But in its more public expressions, it >> is also motivated by liberal political expedience, see Bend the Arc etc., >> as I have noted in past letters to the editor, regarding their Zionism and >> their liberal hypocrisy, not to mention their obnoxious claim to represent >> the "Jewish community." >> >> >> >> It is also motivated by good old-fashioned capitalist greed, and a desire >> to think that "markets," including the "market" for immigrants to move to >> the U.S., well seriously address our economic problems. Capital is free to >> move, labor is free to move, welcome to Koch Brothers utopia. See these >> recent article from the News-Gazette: >> >> >> >> >> https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/guest-commentary-building-a-welcoming-economy/article_859ff35b-cbd6-546f-97c5-1862fc43ab4c.html >> >> >> >> >> >> https://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/university-illinois/ui-business-school-dean-among-who-signed-letter-to-trump/article_41e30891-7403-57fa-aaf6-5914f59e7684.html >> >> >> >> It would appear that immigration is the solution to all of our economic >> problems, according to these neoliberal perspectives, subscribed to by both >> the Campus YMCA and the Gies School of Business (Dean Jeffrey Brown, arch >> Zionist). Disgusting. (Why isn't he proposing that we bring a few million >> stateless, well-educated Palestinians to our country in order to solve our >> labor problems?) >> >> >> >> There is, of course, an implicit disregard of and disrespect for American >> citizens, especially including the African-American ones in our own working >> class community, who have no voice and no representatives in these matters, >> including from anyone named Ammons. Not to mention the notorious "white >> working class." But then again, if they opened their mouths and asked a few >> obvious questions, like: "Why can't African-American children be the future >> skilled workforce?", they risk being called xenophobic. >> >> >> >> Thomas Garza, Ricardo Diaz, and the CU Immigration Forum (constituted by >> the two of them) honored the Zionist, racist Bend the Arc group in a recent >> ceremony at the Urbana Free Library. The UFL seemed to endorse this event, >> not just host it. Isn't this crossing the line from the civic to the >> political, just as they did when they allowed the "trans-rights" activists >> to demonstrate upstairs while Nina Paley was hosting a panel downstairs? >> Does the UFL think that anything it does is automatically good and true and >> beautiful? >> >> >> >> Thomas Garza honors Koch Brothers libertarianism on his WRFU/UPTV >> program, without saying so, or even clearly referencing the article from >> which he is reading, although he didn't give himself time to finish it. >> >> >> >> When I ran for Congress in 2014 and attended (was on the panel at) a >> "forum" sponsored by Garza and his group at CPL, my impression was that >> Garza was judging people up or down depending on whether or not they agree >> with his rather shallow and de-contextualized view of the immigration >> issue. Over the years, that impression has been nothing but reinforced. >> >> >> >> My impression is that Garza's analytical skills are sorely lacking; he is >> far from being the sharpest tool in anyone's shed, and he is arrogant to >> boot. He goes on about "playing politics with people" on show after show, >> but he doesn't address how economic interests are always "playing politics >> with people." Garza and his allies are, in fact, "playing politics with >> people," whatever the hell that means. He talks about xenophobic bigotry, >> and then describes entire unnamed groups of people in clearly generalized, >> stereotypical, bigoted terms; classic projection: "deplorables." Indeed, >> it's probably the only clearly bigoted speech that is allowed on UPTV. >> >> >> >> I think Garza is a "pro-immigrant" neoliberal, and that he is not in any >> way antiwar. He allies himself, generally speaking, with corporate forces >> at this university and in this community; they want their fancy, >> highly-educated immigrant friends; and they want someone to cheaply clean >> their houses and take care of their children. Who needs a higher minimum >> wage? >> >> >> >> Something to think about as we "spread the word." >> >> >> >> As we're doing so, it might be worth noting that we are assuring the >> re-election of Donald Trump. Hooray! >> >> >> >> People aren't stupid. They know that "open borders" doesn't address their >> economic issues; it's a thumb in their eye. They know that the exploitation >> of immigrant labor on top of the exploitation of citizen labor is not the >> answer to our problems, it is just more corporate neoliberalism, supported >> by both parties. >> >> >> >> But at least the immigrant issue gives some people plenty of chance to >> virtue signal and feel really good about themselves and feel that their >> being "welcoming" while they get on with their privileged lives; I will say >> that much for it. >> >> >> >> DG >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 7:03 AM Debra Schrishuhn via Peace < >> peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: >> >> Smugglers Cut Through Sections of Trump?s Border Wall >> >> >> November 2, 2019 at 7:23 am EDT By Taegan Goddard >> 29 Comments >> >> >> ?Smuggling gangs in Mexico have repeatedly sawed through new sections of >> President Trump?s border wall in recent months by using commercially >> available power tools, opening gaps large enough for people and drug loads >> to pass through, according to U.S. agents and officials with knowledge of >> the damage,? the Washington Post reports. >> >> ?The breaches have been made using a popular cordless household tool >> known as a reciprocating saw that retails at hardware stores for as little >> as $100. When fitted with specialized blades, the saws can slice through >> one of the barrier?s steel-and-concrete bollards in a matter of minutes,.? >> >> ?After cutting through the base of a single bollard, smugglers can push >> the steel out of the way, allowing an adult to fit through the gap. Because >> the bollards are so tall ? and are attached only to a panel at the very top >> ? their length makes them easier to push aside once they have been cut and >> are left dangling.? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 Sun Nov 3 15:48:37 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 09:48:37 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news In-Reply-To: <001801d5924f$0bf90b00$23eb2100$@comcast.net> References: <004501d591bd$793f5da0$6bbe18e0$@comcast.net> <001801d5924f$0bf90b00$23eb2100$@comcast.net> Message-ID: David, I was probably the one who raised the issue of xenophobia, in the context of critiquing the manner in which it is assumed (by Thomas Garza) that xenophobia is what's driving immigration policy. And it's true of course that Trump manipulates whatever xenophobia there is, and provides people like Garza with a convenient target. Nevertheless (as I know you know) xenophobia, like racism, doesn't explain the material and class dynamics that drive are behind the manner in which so many people try to explain why their lives have gotten worse. And the further irony behind all of this is that over the 4 decades of neoliberalism, Americans in general have become more civilized and tolerant regarding cultural differences, not less. DG On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 8:00 AM David Johnson wrote: > Deb, > > > > I saw no references to xenophobia, either in the article, David Green?s > comments or my comments. > > > > Can you explain why you mentioned xenophobia ? > > > > Unless you meant that Trump?s wall is a response to xenophobia in general ? > > > > Just curious. > > > > David J. > > > > *From:* Debra Schrishuhn [mailto:deb.pdamerica at gmail.com] > *Sent:* Sunday, November 03, 2019 4:02 AM > *To:* David Johnson > *Cc:* David Green; peace-discuss > *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news > > > > Geez, I was not trying to solve the entire existential problem and history > of immigration and deep-seated xenophobia. Rather, my intent was to show > how ineffectual and wasteful (aside from being destructive and > counter-productive on so many levels) the Trumpian wall solution as > constructed is with a concrete--er, commercially available power > tool--example, one that is easily understood even by those who may not be > "the sharpest tool in anyone's shed." > > > > If you don't find the article useful, ignore it, delete it, and don't > spread it around. It really is as simple as that. > > > > Debra > > > > On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 3:38 PM David Johnson > wrote: > > Very well stated David ! > > > > I have also had run ins with these neo liberal ? pro ? immigrant rights > groups. > > I had one of them tell me once that it didn?t matter if employers of > undocumented workers were exploiting them, that at least they were ? giving > them a job ?. And that was after I told them a horror story I thought they > would be sympathetic to, which involved a construction / landscaping > contractor in Texas who would consistently hire 10 to 20 undocumented > workers and tell them they would be paid in two weeks and then come pay day > immigration officers showed up to arrest the workers. > > > > When I stated that my solution to the current undocumented immigrant ? > problem ? was to give everyone a Green Card, they just scoffed and said > that it wasn?t ? feasible ?. That they had to work with Democrats in > Congress. The same Democrats who went nowhere with immigration reform. > > These same people when I approached them 10-15 years ago about seeing if > they would assist in organizing undocumented workers into the IWW Union so > that they could collectively demand more money for their labor replied ? ? > They are not interested in Unions ?. End of discussion. > > > > Your characterization of them as Neo Liberals is spot on. I would go even > further and call them ? poverty pimps ?. > > > > Also, leaving Israel ? Palestine aside, groups like Bend the Arc refuse to > even acknowledge much less discuss the economic and foreign policy of the > U.S. government CREATING the undocumented immigration problem in the > Western Hemisphere. ESPECIALLY Honduras where the 2009 Obama-Clinton State > Dept. encouraged and supported a violent military coup to oust a > progressive democratically elected President, and turned Honduras into a > brutal narco state, where medical services and all education has been > privatized and dead bodies in the streets is a common sight. I know this > not just from independent journalist reports but also from a friend of mine > who is married to a Honduran woman. And then in addition there is ; Haiti, > Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia, and El Salvador, though not as bad as Honduras > ( even though Haiti and Colombia comes close ) they nevertheless have been > economically devastated by U.S. government neo liberal economic austerity > policies. And it is U.S. military aid and TRAINING to their respective > police and military that also contributes to repressive actions against > Unions, Cooperatives, environmental activism, etc.. in these other > countries. > > > > A good book that documents the above is : ? Drug War Capitalism ? by Dawn > Paley. > > > > David J. > > > > *From:* Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] *On > Behalf Of *David Green via Peace-discuss > *Sent:* Saturday, November 02, 2019 12:15 PM > *To:* Debra Schrishuhn; Peace-discuss > *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news > > > > > > Spread what news? > > > > > https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/us-immigration-laws-unconstitutional-double-standards/599140/ > > > > > The above article was extensively quoted by Thomas Garza, head of the CU > Immigration Forum, in the his most recent appearance on UPTV (youtube). > > > > This article is from George Mason University, one of the homes of Koch > Brothers-style libertarianism, which includes, I guess, "open borders." It > also, of course, includes rights to desecrate the land. > > > > Sometimes strange political bedfellows are to be desired--apparently even > the Koch Brothers, or the remaining non-deceased Brother, is not happy with > U.S. troops around the world. That's fine, I guess, if they actually want > to do something about that, of which I haven't seen any evidence, although > maybe they have Trump's ear. > > > > But what does anyone think that the sort of libertarian capitalism > advocated by the KBs, and by George Mason, will get us? > > > > The immigrant rights movement is motivated by basic human decency, at > least from the more casual observer. But in its more public expressions, it > is also motivated by liberal political expedience, see Bend the Arc etc., > as I have noted in past letters to the editor, regarding their Zionism and > their liberal hypocrisy, not to mention their obnoxious claim to represent > the "Jewish community." > > > > It is also motivated by good old-fashioned capitalist greed, and a desire > to think that "markets," including the "market" for immigrants to move to > the U.S., well seriously address our economic problems. Capital is free to > move, labor is free to move, welcome to Koch Brothers utopia. See these > recent article from the News-Gazette: > > > > > https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/guest-commentary-building-a-welcoming-economy/article_859ff35b-cbd6-546f-97c5-1862fc43ab4c.html > > > > > > https://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/university-illinois/ui-business-school-dean-among-who-signed-letter-to-trump/article_41e30891-7403-57fa-aaf6-5914f59e7684.html > > > > It would appear that immigration is the solution to all of our economic > problems, according to these neoliberal perspectives, subscribed to by both > the Campus YMCA and the Gies School of Business (Dean Jeffrey Brown, arch > Zionist). Disgusting. (Why isn't he proposing that we bring a few million > stateless, well-educated Palestinians to our country in order to solve our > labor problems?) > > > > There is, of course, an implicit disregard of and disrespect for American > citizens, especially including the African-American ones in our own working > class community, who have no voice and no representatives in these matters, > including from anyone named Ammons. Not to mention the notorious "white > working class." But then again, if they opened their mouths and asked a few > obvious questions, like: "Why can't African-American children be the future > skilled workforce?", they risk being called xenophobic. > > > > Thomas Garza, Ricardo Diaz, and the CU Immigration Forum (constituted by > the two of them) honored the Zionist, racist Bend the Arc group in a recent > ceremony at the Urbana Free Library. The UFL seemed to endorse this event, > not just host it. Isn't this crossing the line from the civic to the > political, just as they did when they allowed the "trans-rights" activists > to demonstrate upstairs while Nina Paley was hosting a panel downstairs? > Does the UFL think that anything it does is automatically good and true and > beautiful? > > > > Thomas Garza honors Koch Brothers libertarianism on his WRFU/UPTV program, > without saying so, or even clearly referencing the article from which he is > reading, although he didn't give himself time to finish it. > > > > When I ran for Congress in 2014 and attended (was on the panel at) a > "forum" sponsored by Garza and his group at CPL, my impression was that > Garza was judging people up or down depending on whether or not they agree > with his rather shallow and de-contextualized view of the immigration > issue. Over the years, that impression has been nothing but reinforced. > > > > My impression is that Garza's analytical skills are sorely lacking; he is > far from being the sharpest tool in anyone's shed, and he is arrogant to > boot. He goes on about "playing politics with people" on show after show, > but he doesn't address how economic interests are always "playing politics > with people." Garza and his allies are, in fact, "playing politics with > people," whatever the hell that means. He talks about xenophobic bigotry, > and then describes entire unnamed groups of people in clearly generalized, > stereotypical, bigoted terms; classic projection: "deplorables." Indeed, > it's probably the only clearly bigoted speech that is allowed on UPTV. > > > > I think Garza is a "pro-immigrant" neoliberal, and that he is not in any > way antiwar. He allies himself, generally speaking, with corporate forces > at this university and in this community; they want their fancy, > highly-educated immigrant friends; and they want someone to cheaply clean > their houses and take care of their children. Who needs a higher minimum > wage? > > > > Something to think about as we "spread the word." > > > > As we're doing so, it might be worth noting that we are assuring the > re-election of Donald Trump. Hooray! > > > > People aren't stupid. They know that "open borders" doesn't address their > economic issues; it's a thumb in their eye. They know that the exploitation > of immigrant labor on top of the exploitation of citizen labor is not the > answer to our problems, it is just more corporate neoliberalism, supported > by both parties. > > > > But at least the immigrant issue gives some people plenty of chance to > virtue signal and feel really good about themselves and feel that their > being "welcoming" while they get on with their privileged lives; I will say > that much for it. > > > > DG > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 7:03 AM Debra Schrishuhn via Peace < > peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > Smugglers Cut Through Sections of Trump?s Border Wall > > > November 2, 2019 at 7:23 am EDT By Taegan Goddard > 29 Comments > > > ?Smuggling gangs in Mexico have repeatedly sawed through new sections of > President Trump?s border wall in recent months by using commercially > available power tools, opening gaps large enough for people and drug loads > to pass through, according to U.S. agents and officials with knowledge of > the damage,? the Washington Post reports. > > ?The breaches have been made using a popular cordless household tool known > as a reciprocating saw that retails at hardware stores for as little as > $100. When fitted with specialized blades, the saws can slice through one > of the barrier?s steel-and-concrete bollards in a matter of minutes,.? > > ?After cutting through the base of a single bollard, smugglers can push > the steel out of the way, allowing an adult to fit through the gap. Because > the bollards are so tall ? and are attached only to a panel at the very top > ? their length makes them easier to push aside once they have been cut and > are left dangling.? > > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Sun Nov 3 16:55:14 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 10:55:14 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news In-Reply-To: References: <004501d591bd$793f5da0$6bbe18e0$@comcast.net> <001801d5924f$0bf90b00$23eb2100$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <005a01d59267$7774fca0$665ef5e0$@comcast.net> Absolutely ! David J. From: David Green [mailto:davidgreen50 at gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2019 9:49 AM To: David Johnson Cc: Debra Schrishuhn; peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news David, I was probably the one who raised the issue of xenophobia, in the context of critiquing the manner in which it is assumed (by Thomas Garza) that xenophobia is what's driving immigration policy. And it's true of course that Trump manipulates whatever xenophobia there is, and provides people like Garza with a convenient target. Nevertheless (as I know you know) xenophobia, like racism, doesn't explain the material and class dynamics that drive are behind the manner in which so many people try to explain why their lives have gotten worse. And the further irony behind all of this is that over the 4 decades of neoliberalism, Americans in general have become more civilized and tolerant regarding cultural differences, not less. DG On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 8:00 AM David Johnson wrote: Deb, I saw no references to xenophobia, either in the article, David Green?s comments or my comments. Can you explain why you mentioned xenophobia ? Unless you meant that Trump?s wall is a response to xenophobia in general ? Just curious. David J. From: Debra Schrishuhn [mailto:deb.pdamerica at gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2019 4:02 AM To: David Johnson Cc: David Green; peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news Geez, I was not trying to solve the entire existential problem and history of immigration and deep-seated xenophobia. Rather, my intent was to show how ineffectual and wasteful (aside from being destructive and counter-productive on so many levels) the Trumpian wall solution as constructed is with a concrete--er, commercially available power tool--example, one that is easily understood even by those who may not be "the sharpest tool in anyone's shed." If you don't find the article useful, ignore it, delete it, and don't spread it around. It really is as simple as that. Debra On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 3:38 PM David Johnson wrote: Very well stated David ! I have also had run ins with these neo liberal ? pro ? immigrant rights groups. I had one of them tell me once that it didn?t matter if employers of undocumented workers were exploiting them, that at least they were ? giving them a job ?. And that was after I told them a horror story I thought they would be sympathetic to, which involved a construction / landscaping contractor in Texas who would consistently hire 10 to 20 undocumented workers and tell them they would be paid in two weeks and then come pay day immigration officers showed up to arrest the workers. When I stated that my solution to the current undocumented immigrant ? problem ? was to give everyone a Green Card, they just scoffed and said that it wasn?t ? feasible ?. That they had to work with Democrats in Congress. The same Democrats who went nowhere with immigration reform. These same people when I approached them 10-15 years ago about seeing if they would assist in organizing undocumented workers into the IWW Union so that they could collectively demand more money for their labor replied ? ? They are not interested in Unions ?. End of discussion. Your characterization of them as Neo Liberals is spot on. I would go even further and call them ? poverty pimps ?. Also, leaving Israel ? Palestine aside, groups like Bend the Arc refuse to even acknowledge much less discuss the economic and foreign policy of the U.S. government CREATING the undocumented immigration problem in the Western Hemisphere. ESPECIALLY Honduras where the 2009 Obama-Clinton State Dept. encouraged and supported a violent military coup to oust a progressive democratically elected President, and turned Honduras into a brutal narco state, where medical services and all education has been privatized and dead bodies in the streets is a common sight. I know this not just from independent journalist reports but also from a friend of mine who is married to a Honduran woman. And then in addition there is ; Haiti, Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia, and El Salvador, though not as bad as Honduras ( even though Haiti and Colombia comes close ) they nevertheless have been economically devastated by U.S. government neo liberal economic austerity policies. And it is U.S. military aid and TRAINING to their respective police and military that also contributes to repressive actions against Unions, Cooperatives, environmental activism, etc.. in these other countries. A good book that documents the above is : ? Drug War Capitalism ? by Dawn Paley. David J. From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of David Green via Peace-discuss Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2019 12:15 PM To: Debra Schrishuhn; Peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] spread the news Spread what news? https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/us-immigration-laws-unconstitutional-double-standards/599140/ The above article was extensively quoted by Thomas Garza, head of the CU Immigration Forum, in the his most recent appearance on UPTV (youtube). This article is from George Mason University, one of the homes of Koch Brothers-style libertarianism, which includes, I guess, "open borders." It also, of course, includes rights to desecrate the land. Sometimes strange political bedfellows are to be desired--apparently even the Koch Brothers, or the remaining non-deceased Brother, is not happy with U.S. troops around the world. That's fine, I guess, if they actually want to do something about that, of which I haven't seen any evidence, although maybe they have Trump's ear. But what does anyone think that the sort of libertarian capitalism advocated by the KBs, and by George Mason, will get us? The immigrant rights movement is motivated by basic human decency, at least from the more casual observer. But in its more public expressions, it is also motivated by liberal political expedience, see Bend the Arc etc., as I have noted in past letters to the editor, regarding their Zionism and their liberal hypocrisy, not to mention their obnoxious claim to represent the "Jewish community." It is also motivated by good old-fashioned capitalist greed, and a desire to think that "markets," including the "market" for immigrants to move to the U.S., well seriously address our economic problems. Capital is free to move, labor is free to move, welcome to Koch Brothers utopia. See these recent article from the News-Gazette: https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/guest-commentary-building-a-welcoming-economy/article_859ff35b-cbd6-546f-97c5-1862fc43ab4c.html https://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/university-illinois/ui-business-school-dean-among-who-signed-letter-to-trump/article_41e30891-7403-57fa-aaf6-5914f59e7684.html It would appear that immigration is the solution to all of our economic problems, according to these neoliberal perspectives, subscribed to by both the Campus YMCA and the Gies School of Business (Dean Jeffrey Brown, arch Zionist). Disgusting. (Why isn't he proposing that we bring a few million stateless, well-educated Palestinians to our country in order to solve our labor problems?) There is, of course, an implicit disregard of and disrespect for American citizens, especially including the African-American ones in our own working class community, who have no voice and no representatives in these matters, including from anyone named Ammons. Not to mention the notorious "white working class." But then again, if they opened their mouths and asked a few obvious questions, like: "Why can't African-American children be the future skilled workforce?", they risk being called xenophobic. Thomas Garza, Ricardo Diaz, and the CU Immigration Forum (constituted by the two of them) honored the Zionist, racist Bend the Arc group in a recent ceremony at the Urbana Free Library. The UFL seemed to endorse this event, not just host it. Isn't this crossing the line from the civic to the political, just as they did when they allowed the "trans-rights" activists to demonstrate upstairs while Nina Paley was hosting a panel downstairs? Does the UFL think that anything it does is automatically good and true and beautiful? Thomas Garza honors Koch Brothers libertarianism on his WRFU/UPTV program, without saying so, or even clearly referencing the article from which he is reading, although he didn't give himself time to finish it. When I ran for Congress in 2014 and attended (was on the panel at) a "forum" sponsored by Garza and his group at CPL, my impression was that Garza was judging people up or down depending on whether or not they agree with his rather shallow and de-contextualized view of the immigration issue. Over the years, that impression has been nothing but reinforced. My impression is that Garza's analytical skills are sorely lacking; he is far from being the sharpest tool in anyone's shed, and he is arrogant to boot. He goes on about "playing politics with people" on show after show, but he doesn't address how economic interests are always "playing politics with people." Garza and his allies are, in fact, "playing politics with people," whatever the hell that means. He talks about xenophobic bigotry, and then describes entire unnamed groups of people in clearly generalized, stereotypical, bigoted terms; classic projection: "deplorables." Indeed, it's probably the only clearly bigoted speech that is allowed on UPTV. I think Garza is a "pro-immigrant" neoliberal, and that he is not in any way antiwar. He allies himself, generally speaking, with corporate forces at this university and in this community; they want their fancy, highly-educated immigrant friends; and they want someone to cheaply clean their houses and take care of their children. Who needs a higher minimum wage? Something to think about as we "spread the word." As we're doing so, it might be worth noting that we are assuring the re-election of Donald Trump. Hooray! People aren't stupid. They know that "open borders" doesn't address their economic issues; it's a thumb in their eye. They know that the exploitation of immigrant labor on top of the exploitation of citizen labor is not the answer to our problems, it is just more corporate neoliberalism, supported by both parties. But at least the immigrant issue gives some people plenty of chance to virtue signal and feel really good about themselves and feel that their being "welcoming" while they get on with their privileged lives; I will say that much for it. DG On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 7:03 AM Debra Schrishuhn via Peace wrote: Smugglers Cut Through Sections of Trump?s Border Wall November 2, 2019 at 7:23 am EDT By Taegan Goddard 29 Comments ?Smuggling gangs in Mexico have repeatedly sawed through new sections of President Trump?s border wall in recent months by using commercially available power tools, opening gaps large enough for people and drug loads to pass through, according to U.S. agents and officials with knowledge of the damage,? the Washington Post reports. ?The breaches have been made using a popular cordless household tool known as a reciprocating saw that retails at hardware stores for as little as $100. When fitted with specialized blades, the saws can slice through one of the barrier?s steel-and-concrete bollards in a matter of minutes,.? ?After cutting through the base of a single bollard, smugglers can push the steel out of the way, allowing an adult to fit through the gap. Because the bollards are so tall ? and are attached only to a panel at the very top ? their length makes them easier to push aside once they have been cut and are left dangling.? _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Sun Nov 3 18:54:26 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 12:54:26 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: free workshop on Medicare for All! Message-ID: <00d501d59278$1f290350$5d7b09f0$@comcast.net> EVERYBODY IN! NOBODY OUT! IMPROVED MEDICARE FOR ALL! ISPC-CU invites you to an upcoming free workshop on Medicare for All! with Charlene Stevens, BSN, RN and Patricia Simpson, Emerita Professor, Loyola University Chicago DATE: NOVEMBER 16, 2019 TIME: 2 - 4 PM LOCATION: CHAMPAIGN PUBLIC LIBRARY ROBESON PAVILION ROOM B REFRESHMENTS AVAILABLE -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11454 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jbn at forestfield.org Wed Nov 6 02:14:21 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 20:14:21 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] AWARE on the Air #497 Message-ID: <03226cf0-6aa8-da91-0e55-fdff969a182d@forestfield.org> AWARE on the Air #497 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtfZIGZzlAk A list of links to items referenced on the show. "Human Smoke: The Beginnings of World War II, the End of Civilization" by Nicholson Baker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Smoke ISBN: 9781416572466 T.S. Eliot's "Murder in the Cathedral" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_in_the_Cathedral War of Aggression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_aggression Noam Chomsky on "If the Nuremberg Laws were Applied?" https://chomsky.info/1990____-2/ Ady Barkan on "Elizabeth Warren?s Plan Is a Massive Win for the Medicare for All Movement" https://theintercept.com/2019/11/01/elizabeth-warren-medicare-for-all/ A response to Barkan's Intercept article and why we can't believe the Democrats on Medicare for All was original material written by J.B. Nicholson. Dave DeCamp on "Tulsi Gabbard Introduces Bill to Withdraw Troops from Syria" https://news.antiwar.com/2019/11/03/tulsi-gabbard-introduces-bill-to-withdraw-troops-from-syria/ Jason Ditz on "Turkish-Backed Forces Attack Kurds South of Syria Safe Zone" https://news.antiwar.com/2019/11/03/turkish-backed-forces-attack-kurds-south-of-syria-safe-zone/ Jason Ditz on "US Troops Not Sure Who They Are Supposed to Shoot At in Syria" https://news.antiwar.com/2019/11/03/us-troops-not-sure-who-they-are-supposed-to-shoot-at-in-syria/ Jason Ditz on "US B-52 Bomber Unexpectedly Approached Russian Base in Syria" https://news.antiwar.com/2019/11/03/us-b-52-bomber-unexpectedly-approached-russian-base-in-syria/ Maj. Danny Sjursen, USA (ret.) on "Send the FBI a Message: Support Antiwar.com, Support Free Speech" https://original.antiwar.com/danny_sjursen/2019/11/03/send-the-fbi-a-message-support-antiwar-com-support-free-speech/ Articles and Twitter posts from Maj. Danny Sjursen, USA (ret.) https://original.antiwar.com/author/danny_sjursen/ -- Maj. Sjursen's articles on antiwar.com https://www.huffpost.com/author/danny-sjursen -- Huffpost.com articles https://twitter.com/skepticalvet -- His Twitter account "Ghost Riders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge" by Maj. Danny Sjursen, USA (ret.) ISBN-10: 1611687810 ISBN-13: 978-1611687811 Ray McGovern on "First They Came for Max" https://raymcgovern.com/2019/11/01/first-they-came-for-max/ https://www.opednews.com/articles/First-They-Came-For-Max-by-Ray-McGovern-Investigations_Max-Blumenthal-Arrest_Podcast-191102-556.html https://popularresistance.org/first-they-came-for-max/ http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/52483.htm https://www.antiwar.com/blog/2019/11/01/first-they-came-for-max/ Chris Hedges interview with defendants about the Kings Bay Plowshares 7 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xP2nG5dokD4 -J From carl at newsfromneptune.com Wed Nov 6 19:14:13 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2019 13:14:13 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Ukraine In-Reply-To: <03226cf0-6aa8-da91-0e55-fdff969a182d@forestfield.org> References: <03226cf0-6aa8-da91-0e55-fdff969a182d@forestfield.org> Message-ID: https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/11/06/which-is-worse-trying-to-get-ukraine-into-nato-or-trying-to-use-ukraine-to-reelect-trump/ The Nazi-infested government that the Obama administration installed in Kiev has killed 13,000 Ukrainians in Donbass, which resisted the coup. ?CGE From carl at newsfromneptune.com Thu Nov 7 17:04:24 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:04:24 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Did you know this about the abortion pill? References: <1573143516121.4f6a4a40-99de-445c-bb1a-623114cbefea@bf10a.hubspotemail.net> Message-ID: <278B217A-7C55-4C48-A3D3-82AF13CF3A4E@newsfromneptune.com> > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Lila Rose > Subject: Did you know this about the abortion pill? > Date: November 7, 2019 at 10:33:30 AM CST > To: cgestabrook at gmail.com > Reply-To: lila.rose at liveaction.org > > > Hi C. G., > > I want to make sure you didn?t miss last week?s trending video exposing the true history behind one of the most common methods used to kill preborn children - the abortion pill. > > Did you know that the creators of the abortion pill are subsidiaries to the company that created the gas used to execute Jews during the Holocaust? > > Watch the video here:https://www.facebook.com/liveaction/videos/412132136377992/ > The roots of this deadly drug, known as RU-486, are disturbing. > > But what is horrifying are the consequences we live with today, as the abortion pill kills hundreds of thousands of preborn children every year. > > Every day, these chemical abortions are used to kill preborn children at 10 weeks or younger. > > At 10 weeks, a baby already has a face, arms, legs, and a beating heart. > > In 2017 alone, the abortion pill killed nearly 340,000 preborn children, accounting for roughly 39% of all abortions that year. > > Currently, the Food and Drug Administration requires that the pill is administered by approved providers, to ensure emergency care is available in the event of serious complications. > > However, the abortion industry is seeking to make the pill available online for so-called ?self-managed? abortions. > > That?s why it?s vital you know the history behind this drug and share this video with your friends on social media.? > Already, the abortion lobby is pushing for laws in pro-abortion states to build demand for the abortion pill and kill more preborn children for profit. > > Earlier this year, California passed legislation requiring all state universities to offer the pill in their health centers. > > Your action is critical in stopping these efforts from spreading to other states - by educating yourself and sharing this video with others - before countless more preborn lives are lost. > > Thank you for watching and sharing this important video. > > > For life, > > Lila Rose > President & Founder > Live Action > > Live Action 2200 Wilson Blvd. Suite 102 PMB 111, Arlington, VA 22201 > > You received this message because you are subscribed to General Email Updates from Live Action. > If you would rather not receive this type of email, you can update your email preferences here or unsubscribe from all future emails. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carl at newsfromneptune.com Thu Nov 7 17:14:18 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:14:18 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] When was the last midterm election in which the president's party didn't lose seats? Message-ID: https://therealnews.com/stories/off-year-election-pushes-republicans-back-are-political-winds-shifting From jbn at forestfield.org Thu Nov 7 23:59:21 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 17:59:21 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Notes Message-ID: <41d91953-a7e5-992f-d36f-fe37c543d8dc@forestfield.org> Have a good show, guys. Here are some notes on things to consider talking about. -J Health: "Vaping is even more addictive than cigarettes" -- Judith Grisel, former nicotine addict and author https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/10/breaking-up-with-my-juul-why-quitting-vaping-is-harder-than-quitting-cigarettes Kari Paul recently wrote an op-ed for The Guardian. She says she has "decided to quit using her Juul e-cigarette amid reports of users with lung problems" > Nicotine is one of the world?s most addictive chemicals. Even smoking > just one cigarette a month induces addiction in more than 30% of users, > a 2002 study from Medical School found. Another study found 97% of > people who smoked three or more cigarettes became addicted. The number > of teens using vapes daily increased by 80% in 2018. > > ?It?s almost a guaranteed addiction,? Judith Grisel, a former nicotine > addict herself and author of Never Enough: the Neuroscience of > Addiction, said. ?It?s very compelling because the brain adapts to it so > quickly, in a way that isn?t true with opiates or alcohol. Some people > can drink alcohol without developing a problem, not everyone who takes > opiates recreationally has a problem, but pretty much everyone likes the > feeling of nicotine.? > > Vaping is even more addictive than cigarettes, Grisel said, and Juul is > more addictive than other brands of vapes. In 2015, when Juul was > introduced to the market, the most popular e-cigarettes had only between > 1% and 2.4% nicotine. Juul debuted pods with 5% nicotine. > > ?The delivery of nicotine in vapes is even quicker than cigarettes, > which is hard to do,? Grisel said. ?That?s the biggest factor in > addictive liability if it?s the same chemical: the speed with which you > get the hit.? > > Juul says it selected the 5% nicotine concentration in its products in > the US ?to provide adult smokers with a viable, satisfying alternative > to combustible cigarettes?. > > The company said it also offers 3% strength products and that far higher > nicotine concentrations in products other than Juul were available when > the company launched in 2015. > > The function of Juul makes it difficult to quit as well. Its discrete > puffs of smoke and small size make using it much easier, and quitting it > much harder. When I Juuled, I didn?t take smoke breaks ? I had grown > accustomed to puffing away all day at my desk, and even more on > stressful deadlines. I was often Juuling in my pajamas the last thing > before bed and the first thing when I woke up. I Juuled on bike rides, > on plane bathrooms, and at the office. Once I repeatedly hit my Juul on > a kayak as I floated through the rivers of northern California, storing > the device in my swimsuit top. Democrats/Medicare for All: Don't worry -- there's no chance Speaker Pelosi will bring a Medicare for All bill to the floor for a vote. So stop looking to the Democrats to be your passport to Medicare for All. https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/11/01/not-big-fan-medicare-all-pelosi-attacks-plan-backed-leading-2020-democrats-majority -- > House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in an interview Friday that she is "not > a big fan of Medicare for All" despite support for the ambitious > proposal among the majority of her caucus, three-quarters of Democratic > voters, and two leading 2020 Democratic presidential candidates. > > "It is expensive," Pelosi told Bloomberg, without mentioning that > studies show Medicare for All would save the U.S. trillions of dollars > while providing comprehensive coverage to all. > > "Medicare for All doesn't cost money. It saves money by eliminating the > for-profit waste in the insurance system and ending the rip-off of > paying the highest drug prices in the world." ?Alex Lawson, Social > Security Works > > "Who pays is very important," continued Pelosi. "What are the benefits > that come in there? So I would think that hopefully as we emerge into > the election year, the mantra would be more 'Healthcare for All > Americans.'" > > The Speaker added that "there is a comfort level that some people have > with their current private insurance that they have, and if that is to > be phased out, let's talk about it." > > [...] > > In a statement applauding Warren's proposal, Social Security Works > executive director Alex Lawson said "Medicare for All doesn't cost > money." > > "It saves money by eliminating the for-profit waste in the insurance > system and ending the rip-off of paying the highest drug prices in the > world," said Lawson. "That's why 'how will you pay for it?' has always > been a completely false premise." > > Contrary to Pelosi's suggestion that Medicare for All could damage > Democrats' chances in the 2020 election, recent polling (pdf) by Data > for Progress showed "supporting Medicare for All would not hurt" the > Democratic presidential nominee in a race against President Donald > Trump. > > "We tested a Democrat running on Medicare for All against Trump. Six > times. With three different vendors," Data for Progress co-founder Sean > McElwee said Friday. "Every time the Medicare for All Democrat wins, > usually by double-digits." Labor: 3-day weekends, every weekend? Sounds like it's more productive and beneficial to the worker as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYrLsnEgSTw -- The Real News' Greg Wilpert interview with Richard Wolff https://therealnews.com/stories/microsofts-reduced-workweek-increased-productivity-40 -- The Real News' Greg Wilpert interview with Richard Wolff transcript https://mspoweruser.com/microsoft-4-day-workweek/ > In August this year, Microsoft Japan ran an experiment where for one > month they had a 3 day weekend, taken Friday off. This was paid leave > and did not impact the worker?s usual vacation allocation. > > [...] > > Workers were happier and took 25.4 percent fewer days off during the > month. > > There were also savings from spending less time at work. 23.1 percent > less electricity was used and 58.7 percent fewer pages were printed. > > More importantly from a bottom-line standpoint, however, productivity > went up 39.9%, as fewer and shorter meetings were held, often virtually > rather than in person. > > In the end, the project had 92.1 percent employee approval, suggesting > workers were happy with getting more done in less time. > > The trial involved 2,300 employees, and Microsoft is looking to repeat > it next summer. War: Pentagon says veteran suicide "surpasses the number of lives lost during the operations in Afghanistan and Iraq to date [and] The total number lost in the past decade totals more than the number of deaths incurred during the Vietnam War" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHVmNd24l3M -- "Watching the Hawks" report https://www.rand.org/pubs/testimonies/CT510.html -- report with video (testimony presented before the House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on National Security on May 8, 2019) and link to PDF https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/testimonies/CT500/CT510/RAND_CT510.pdf -- PDF of report From the report (page 3): > Suicide is the tenth leading cause of death in the United States, and > over the past 30 years, America?s suicide rate has increased by 30 > percent. Suicide is a national public health crisis, not just a > veteran problem. Yet the number of veterans and service members lost to > suicide in just one year now surpasses the number of lives lost during > the operations in Afghanistan and Iraq to date. The total number lost in > the past decade totals more than the number of deaths incurred during > the Vietnam War. The "Watching the Hawks" report includes an interview with Rory Riley-Topping, described as a "veterans' advocate". Riley-Topping said: > Any servicemember goes through what they call a 'service enlistment' > exam. And I hear from veterans that I speak to all the time that they're > not very thorough. So that's a challenge. So in addition to, perhaps, > having people who are a little bit older, perhaps we also need to screen > them a little bit better and have people who, perhaps, are otherwise > struggling with depression or are prone to it to have time to cope with > that and deal with that. In terms of the age issue [...] in an > all-volunteer force I think right now they are often times -- the Army > didn't meet its recruiting goal last year -- so that's another issue and > a lot of times they're taking people into the military that would not > have otherwise been accepted into service. Riley-Topping used the phrase "all-volunteer force" a few times in the interview. This phrase doesn't acknowledge the economic pressure on applicants to enlist. An enlistment offer of a paid college scholarship in exchange for joining the military is very tempting for poor applicants who otherwise couldn't afford college tuition. It's not clear how much time applicants ought to be given to "cope with and deal with" depression; depression can be lifelong, not something that can be eliminated like a headache. This never comes up in the interview which is remarkably supportive of Riley-Toppings' way of framing the issue. If our social goal were to help Americans lead better lives, a guaranteed annual income and gratis (free) college education would be better steps to take than slightly changing military admission policy or lowering recruiting goals. Environment: Air quality index tops out measuring New Delhi's pollution at 999 -- the pollution is worse but the meter can't go any higher. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHVmNd24l3M -- "Watching the Hawks" report https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2019/11/03/delhis-air-pollution-is-so-bad-that-it-is-an-emergency/ -- "Delhi?s Air Pollution Is So Bad That It Is An Emergency" > This tweet > (https://twitter.com/iamabhimanyut/status/1190961695734284288) mentioned > an air quality index (AQI) of over 1000: > > Abhimanyu Thakur: Delhi -NCR draped in air pollution. Its exceeding over > 1000 AQI, from one end to another end of delhi. #DelhiAirEmergency > #DelhiPollution #DelhiBachao > > That would mean the air quality is way above the hazardous threshold > according to the following scale provided by the Air Now U.S. government > website: > > "Good" AQI is 0 to 50: satisfactory, and little or no risk. > > "Moderate" AQI is 51 to 100: acceptable. May be moderate health concern > for very small number of people (e.g., those unusually sensitive to > ozone may experience respiratory symptoms). > > "Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups" AQI is 101 to 150. General public not > likely to be affected. But people with lung disease, older adults, and > children at greater risk from ozone exposure. People with heart and lung > disease, older adults and children at greater risk from particles in the > air. > > "Unhealthy" AQI is 151 to 200. Potential adverse health effects for > everyone and serious ones for those more sensitive. > > "Very Unhealthy" AQI is 201 to 300. Health alert. Everyone may have more > serious health effects. > > "Hazardous" AQI greater than 300. Emergency conditions. > > The AQI may not really be over 1000 in Delhi. It?s just that the air > quality is so bad that it may be exceeding the ability of many meters to > read the levels per this tweet > (https://twitter.com/varun_jhaveri/status/1190887202319790080): > > Varun Jhaveri: I think we are heading towards Delhi recording the most > polluted day in the history of world!! Most of the Delhi areas are > showing an AQI of 999 because the meters can't record above that. This > is a DISASTER! #DelhiAirEmergency [see picture of computer map with signposts reading "999" at many locations including New Delhi and surrounding areas at https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIbhl5YXYAAtCqZ.jpg] Environment: Now Canadian cities are getting leaded water. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnzsaarcNtU -- RT news report https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHVmNd24l3M -- "Watching the Hawks" report https://globalnews.ca/news/6120639/drinking-water-lead-levels-prince-rupert/ -- > Reporters from the University of British Columbia, as part of an investigation by a national consortium of universities and media companies, including Concordia University?s Institute for Investigative Journalism, Global News and Star Vancouver, tested water samples from Peterson?s kitchen in December. An accredited lab measured 15.6 parts per billion (ppb) of lead in her water ? three times Health Canada?s guideline. [...] > Eighty-four per cent of the 25 homes sampled in Prince Rupert for this investigation exceeded the federal guideline for lead in drinking water. > > Coastal B.C.?s rainy climate can produce naturally acidic surface water. Left untreated, it can corrode pipes and plumbing, leaching metals into drinking water. > > Despite federal guidelines recommending corrosion control and monitoring, some municipalities aren?t taking steps to combat corrosive water or testing for lead at the tap in private homes. Residents are being left in the dark about the safety of their water. > > For years, that was the case in Prince Rupert. CTV News Saskatoon adds https://saskatoon.ctvnews.ca/high-lead-levels-found-in-saskatchewan-drinking-water-1.4669520 or https://archive.md/bTWFN > Saskatoon, Regina and Moose Jaw are among a group of Canadian cities > where high levels of lead were found in tap water, according to a new > study. > > The investigation, conducted by more than 120 journalists from nine > universities and 10 media groups including the Associated Press, the > Saskatoon StarPhoenix, and the Institute for Investigative Journalism at > Concordia University, tested water from hundreds of homes and reviewed > thousands of undisclosed results. > > "What we found is that Montreal, Gatineau, Saskatoon, Regina, Moose Jaw, > and Prince Rupert had lead levels comparable or higher than those of > Flint, Michigan during its 2015 lead crisis," Patti Sonntag, the > institute's director said in a news release. > > About one-third of tests exceeded the Canadian guidelines of 5 parts per > billion. Some of the highest levels were recorded in Saskatchewan. > > Prolonged exposure to high amounts of lead over months or years can > result in lead poisoning, which can cause serious health effects, > particularly among young children. > > In Canada, there is no national mandate to test drinking water and > agencies that conduct tests have no obligation to inform residents. > > Provinces set their own rules for water testing and lead pipe > replacements. Propaganda/War: Former ISIS leader Al Baghdadi (not his real name) was promoted by the U.S. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPROkzJ52HA -- Redacted Tonight's report on the man whose recent murder is the subject of much recent corporate media reportage. Corporate media doesn't cover that this is the 6th or 7th time his death has been announced (as Lee Camp pointed out "The seventh time's the charm"). This alleged murder won't stop ISIS and won't make much of a difference to anything, really, but it's worth noting that the U.S. made him the man he was by chatting him up a lot much like: > Naomi Karavanni: [...] Zarqawi [the founder of ISIS] who also was a > nobody until the US military led a $24 million propaganda campaign > against him [shows picture of [1] and quotes "U.S. propaganda efforts in > Iraq in 2004 cost $24 million, but that included extensive building of > offices and residences for troops involved, as well as radio broadcasts > and distribution of thousands of leaflets with Zarqawi's face on them > [in Iraq]"] [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2006/04/10/military-plays-up-role-of-zarqawi-span-classbankheadjordanian-painted-as-foreign-threat-to-iraqs-stabilityspan/9dbb8dca-12a1-4a78-9a33-d373d7cccfab/ Karavanni also reminds us of the ineffectiveness of the US torture program and how torture didn't help us find Osama bin Laden. In each of Baghdadi and bin Laden's cases, someone looking for a hefty monetary reward provided the location of a wanted man. The New York Times in https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/18/magazine/what-do-we-really-know-about-osama-bin-ladens-death.html discussed Seymour Hersh's journalism: > Hersh?s most consequential claim was about how bin Laden was found in > the first place. It was not years of painstaking intelligence-gathering, > he wrote, that led the United States to the courier and, ultimately, to > bin Laden. Instead, the location was revealed by a ??walk-in?? ? a > retired Pakistani intelligence officer who was after the $25 million > reward that the United States had promised anyone who helped locate him. > For that matter, bin Laden was hardly ??in hiding?? at all; his compound > in Abbottabad was actually a safe house, maintained by the Pakistani > intelligence service. When the United States confronted Pakistani > intelligence officials with this information, Hersh wrote, they > eventually acknowledged it was true and even conceded to provide a DNA > sample to prove it. > > According to Hersh?s version, then, the daring raid wasn?t especially > daring. The Pakistanis allowed the U.S. helicopters into their airspace > and cleared out the guards at the compound before the SEALs arrived. > Hersh?s sources told him the United States and Pakistani intelligence > officials agreed that Obama would wait a week before announcing that > bin Laden had been killed in a ??drone strike somewhere in the mountains > on the Pakistan/Afghanistan border.?? But the president was forced to > go public right away, because the crash and subsequent destruction of > the Black Hawk ? among the rare facts in the official story that Hersh > does not dispute ? were going to make it impossible to keep the > operation under wraps. Snowden: "What do you do when the most powerful institutions in society have become the least accountable to society? I think that's the question our generation exists to answer." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1kpI-XnCOs -- In terms of technology: I think there's a lot of education needed to properly answer this question. The public still doesn't understand software freedom because they've never been taught to know what software freedom is (it's the freedom to run, inspect, share, and modify published computer software) or why they should care about software freedom. Snowden makes a number of great points in this talk, one of them is: > The General Data Protection Regulation [UK regulation aiming to increase > privacy and respect people's ability to get data from firms regarding > what the firm knows about that individual] misplaces the problem -- the > problem isn't data protection, the problem is data collection. > Regulating the protection of data presumes that the collection of data > in the first place was proper; that it was appropriate, that it doesn't > present a threat or danger, that it's okay to spy on everybody all the > time whether they're your customers or whether they're your citizens so > long as it never leaks. Snowden's words are comparable with what other insightful people have said about the danger of unlimited data collection such as Richard Stallman who has long objected to Facebook: From https://stallman.org/facebook2.html > The US Federal Trade Commission ruled that Facebook's violation of its > stated privacy policies was illegal[1]. > > It is proper to make Facebook keep its promises, but this does not go > far enough to make Facebook acceptable to use. It does not limit > Facebook's data collection ? for instance, it doesn't stop Facebook from > collecting of data about browsing through "Like" buttons. It only limits > what Facebook can do with that data, and certainly does not stop > Facebook from handing it over to Big Brother under the U SAP AT RIOT > act. [1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/nov/29/facebook-ftc-privacy-settlement Assange: TRNN's Greg Wilpert interviewed John Pilger about Assange and Manning -- both prisoners of conscience who aren't recognized as such by Amnesty International -- and, to their credit, The Real News covered it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekfNGMeofbM -- video (15m02s) https://therealnews.com/stories/julian-assange-extradition-process-charade -- transcript TRNN has horrible politics on Russiagate (TRNN is a Russiagator and their pro-Russiagate views caused the Izzy-award-winning Aaron Mate to leave TRNN). But this didn't stop Greg Wilpert from running this story covering John Pilger. You've probably seen Wilpert before as he expertly covers Latin American affairs including the ongoing US coup attempts against Venezuela. > GREG WILPERT: Welcome to The Real News Network. I?m Greg Wilpert in > Arlington, Virginia. > > Julian Assange recently lost a court bid to have his upcoming February > 2020 extradition hearing postponed. The hearing about the postponement > took place on October 21, and according to observers who were present, > he could barely speak in coherent sentences. Reacting to the hearing, UN > Human Rights Rapporteur Nils Melzer warned last Friday that Assange > continues to show symptoms of psychological torture. Melzer had visited > Assange in May when he conducted an extensive review of his physical and > psychological condition. In his statement on Friday, Melzer said, > ?Despite the medical urgency of my first appeal, and the seriousness of > the alleged violations, the U.K. has not undertaken any measures of > investigation, prevention, and redress required under international > law.? > > In addition to the concerns about Assange?s treatment at Belmarsh Prison > outside of London, many have also raised concerns about the impartiality > of the proceedings against him. Assange was jailed last April when the > Ecuadorian Embassy, where he had been given political asylum, allowed > the police to arrest him. He then received a 50-week sentence for having > skipped jail in 2012. The Trump Administration has since then requested > Assange?s extradition on 17 charges of espionage for which he could > receive a 170-year prison sentence in the United States. > > Joining me now to discuss the latest developments in the case of Julian > Assange is John Pilger. He has been observing the Assange case very > closely and was present at the October 21 court hearing. He is an > award-winning journalist and documentary filmmaker. His most recent film > is The Coming War on China. Thanks for joining us again, John. > > JOHN PILGER: Very welcome. > > GREG WILPERT: Let?s start with Assange?s condition. As I said, you were > there at the last hearing. What was your perception of his condition, > and how he presented himself? > > JOHN PILGER: Well, I was at the last hearing, and I saw Julian about a > week before that, so I?ve seen him up close on a number of occasions > recently. I think I can agree with Nils Melzer?s assessment. It?s very > difficult to tell. His physical condition has changed dramatically. He?s > lost about 15 kilos in weight. To see him in court struggling to say his > name, and his date of birth, was really very moving. I?ve seen that when > I visited Julian in Belmarsh Prison where he struggles at first, and > then collects himself. I?m always impressed by the sheer resilience of > the man, because as Melzer says, absolutely nothing has been done to > change the conditions imposed on him by the prison regime. Nothing has > been done by the British authorities. > > This was almost underlined by the contemptuous way that this court > hearing recently was conducted by this judge, by this magistrate. There > was a sense among all of us who were there that the whole charade, and > it seemed a charade, was preordained. You had sitting in front of us, on > a long table, four Americans who were from the U.S. Embassy here in > London, and one of the prosecution team was scurrying backwards and > forwards to get instructions from them. The judge could see this, and > she allowed it. It was just absolutely outrageous. > > When Julian did try to speak, and to say that basically he was being > denied the very tools with which to prepare his case, he was denied the > right to call his American lawyer. He was denied the right to have any > kind of word process or laptop. He was denied certain documents. As he > said, ?I?m even denied my own writings,? as he called it. That is, his > own notes and manuscripts. This hasn?t changed at all, and of course the > effect of that on his morale, to say the least, has been very > significant, and that showed in the court. > > GREG WILPERT: Yeah. I want to dig a little bit deeper on that issue > about the fairness of this trial. Craig Murray who is a blogger, and was > also at the last hearing, wrote about a number of issues, which you also > mentioned. He specifically mentions district judge, Vanessa Baraitser, > and one of the things that she did was completely dismiss Assange?s > request for determination whether the extradition proceedings are even > legal. That is, he cites according to U.K. law, ?Extradition shall not > be granted if the offense for which extradition is requested is a > political offense.? Now, what do you think of this issue? Is Assange?s > offense political, and what do you say about the judge?s reaction to > that request? > > JOHN PILGER: I know his lawyer Gareth Peirce very well, and she?s not a > person to really be angered as such. But I saw her before and after the > hearing, and she was quite angry about the fact as she said, ?Here we > have an extradition hearing, based on a treaty between the United States > and Britain, and there is a section in that treaty that said,? as you?ve > just mentioned, ?No one can be extradited if the,? and I paraphrase, if > the so-called offense is in any way political. Well under law, it?s not > a matter of opinion. They are political. All but one of the charges > concocted in Virginia are based on the 1917 Espionage Act, which was a > political piece of legislation used to chase off the conscientious > objectors during the first World War. > > It?s political. There is no charge. There is no basis, no foundation, > for allowing these extradition proceedings to go forward, and almost > perversely the judge seemed to, if not acknowledged that in her contempt > for the proceedings. Whenever Julian Assange spoke, she feigned a > disinterest, a boredom, and whenever his lawyers spoke, the same thing. > Whenever the prosecutor spoke, she was attentive. The theatrics of this > hearing were quite remarkable. I?ve never seen anything like it. Then > very hurriedly, when Julian Assange?s lawyer requested a delay in when > the case actually starts from February, they said, ?We?re not going to > be ready in February,? and she dismissed that out of hand. > > Not only that, she said that the extradition case would be held in a > court that is in fact adjoining Belmarsh prison. It?s almost part of the > prison. It?s a long way out of London. So you have, if not a secret > trial, but a trial in which, or an extradition hearing in which very few > seats are available to the public. It?s a very difficult place to get > to. So every obstacle has been put in the way of Assange getting a fair > hearing. And I can only repeat, this is a publisher and a journalist > convicted of nothing, charged with nothing in Britain, whose only crime > is journalism. That may sound like a slogan, but it?s true. They want > him for exposing the kind of outrageous war crimes, Iraq, Afghanistan, > that journalists are supposed to do. > > GREG WILPERT: Right. Finally, I want to ask you also about the support > that Assange seems to have been getting or not getting. It seems that > the media organizations that benefited tremendously from Assange?s work, > are hardly mentioning his case, let alone supporting him. Also, human > rights groups such as Amnesty International have urged the U.K. not to > extradite Julian, but they haven?t elevated the case. I just looked it > up. They haven?t elevated it to the status of a campaign as they do for > political prisoners normally. How do you explain this lack of concern > among the media and human rights groups for Assange?s situation? > > JOHN PILGER: Because so many human rights groups are deeply political, > Amnesty International never made Chelsea Manning a prisoner of > conscience. A really disgraceful thing. Chelsea Manning, who was > effectively tortured in prison, and they haven?t, as you say, they > haven?t elevated Julian?s case. Why? Well, they?re an extension. They?re > an extension of an establishment that is now almost systematically > coming down on any form of real dissent. In the last five, six years, > the last gaps, the last bolt holes, the last spaces in the mainstream > media for journalists, from average journalists for the likes Assange, > not only Assange, for the likes of people like even myself and others, > have closed. > > The mainstream media, certainly in Britain, always held open those > spaces. They?ve closed, and there is generally I would think a fear, > right throughout the media, a fear about opposing the state on something > like the Assange case. You see the way the whole obsession with Russia > has consumed the media with so many nonsensical stories. The hostility, > the animosity towards Julian. My own theory is that his work shamed so > many journalists. He does what journalists ought to have done, and don?t > do any more. He?s done the job of a journalist. That can only explain > it. I mean when you take a newspaper like The Guardian, which published > originally the WikiLeaks revelations about Iraq and Afghanistan, they > turned on Julian Assange in the most vicious way. > > They exploited him for one thing. A number of their journalists did > extremely well with their books, and Hollywood scripts, and so on, but > they turned on him personally. It was one of the most unedifying sights > I think I?ve ever seen in journalism. The same thing happened in the New > York Times. Again, I can only surmise the reason for that. It?s that he > shames them. We have a desert of journalism at the moment. There are a > few who still do their jobs; who still stand up against establishment > power; who still are not frightened. But there?re so few now, and Julian > Assange is totally fearless in that. He knew that he was going to run > into a great deal of trouble with the state in Britain, the state in the > United States?but he went ahead anyway. That?s a true journalist. > > GREG WILPERT: Well, we?re going to have to leave it there for now, but > of course we?re going to continue to follow his case as we have been > since the beginning. I was speaking to John Pilger, award-winning > journalist and documentary filmmaker. Thanks again, John, for having > joined us today. > > JOHN PILGER: Very welcome, Greg. WikiLeaks/Assange: Corporate media (including UK media) still won't cover Assange show trials so his torture is more likely to proceed unnoticed. https://newint.org/features/2019/10/31/journalists-must-pay-attention-julian-assange > The UK media has long adopted a cynical attitude towards Julian Assange, > but recent footage of the Wikileaks publisher?s recent court appearance > is prompting many to have second thoughts. > > In the latest clip to find its way on to the internet we see Assange > squinting, sealed within the tiny compartment of a Serco prison van > leaving Westminster Magistrates? Court on 21 October, trying to adjust > to the bright lights shone directly into his eyes at close range. > Several hours earlier, a large and loud crowd of supporters had > intercepted another Serco van, but all the chanting, cheering and > solidarity was in vain ? Assange?s transport was delayed several hours > until almost everyone had left. > > Assange looked despondent. His lawyers had requested a routine > postponement of his main extradition hearing, which was refused, > apparently after the prosecution took instructions from US > representatives during a 10 minute recess. His lawyers also requested > the magistrate schedule time for arguments about the political nature of > the charges against Assange, given that the UK-US Extradition Treaty > stipulates that if the offence is political, extradition must not > proceed. > > The fact that for several years Assange?s meetings with lawyers were > filmed and streamed live to the CIA was also raised as a critical issue. > But to no avail. The magistrate provided a little more time for > pre-trial presentation of evidence, but warned that the main hearing > would take place as scheduled, in February 2020, and at London?s > Belmarsh Prison. > > According to eyewitnesses, Assange appeared disoriented and distressed > in court, exhibiting the physical and psychological symptoms of someone > arbitrarily detained for nine years. UN rapporteur on torture Nils > Melzer has put it thus: ?The evidence is overwhelming and clear? Mr > Assange has been deliberately exposed, for a period of several years, to > progressively severe forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or > punishment, the cumulative effects of which can only be described as > psychological torture.? > > Assange completed his sentence in Belmarsh maximum security prison for > bail violations on 23 September ? thus completing his punishment for > applying for and receiving political asylum. For many years, we heard > that Julian was in the Ecuadorian Embassy to avoid allegations of sexual > misconduct in Sweden, despite the fact that no country on earth gives > asylum to non-citizens to avoid sexual misconduct allegations. As > subsequent events have demonstrated, Assange?s fears were more than > justified. > > Assange broke bail conditions in order to seek asylum from the scenario > he now faces: life in prison for publishing. Ecuador granted that asylum > because the US obviously intended to prosecute Assange for publishing. > This was confirmed shortly after his expulsion from their London > embassy, a moment for which the US was poised and ready. > > Assange also received asylum because he was ?without the support of the > country of which he is a citizen? ? Australia. While a cross party > ?Bring Julian Assange Home Parliamentary Group? has recently been > established in Australia, for the time being his own government remains > mute. > > The indictments for which Assange is now imprisoned have nothing to do > with Sweden, Russia, Trump or his cat. They are a straightforward > attempt to prosecute a publisher for committing acts of journalism: > specifically the releases of 2010-11 on Guantanamo Bay, the wars in > Afghanistan and Iraq, and Cablegate. These are the most significant > series of public-interest disclosures of our times. > > The US Justice Department?s case will hinge on whether it can > successfully redefine national-security journalism as a form of > espionage. Assange is the first publisher ever to be charged under the > Espionage Act, under which it is not possible to mount a public interest > defence. > > Even those who have spent years demonizing Assange have balked at this > lunge of extraterritorial executive power by the US government. The New > York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the > Guardian have expressed grave concern about the charges he faces. UK > Special Envoy on Media Freedom Amal Clooney stated at the June Global > Conference for Media Freedom, the charges ?criminalize common practices > in journalism?, which the American Civil Liberties Union has warned, > ?establish a dangerous precedent that can be used to target all news > organizations that hold the government accountable by publishing its > secrets?. > > The indictments for which Assange is now imprisoned have nothing to do > with Sweden, Russia, Trump or his cat. They are a straightforward > attempt to prosecute a publisher for committing acts of journalism > > Some have tried to claim Assange is not a journalist, but it?s difficult > to argue with the US Army?s Counterintelligence Centre?s description of > WikiLeaks as a ?news organization,? and Assange as a ?writer? and > ?journalist? that had ?show[n] journalist responsibility to the > newsworthiness or fair use of the classified document?. Or with the > Australian Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance, the union representing > journalists and publishers, of which Assange has been a member since > 2009, carrying a journalist?s card. > > For his work, he was presented with the Walkley Award for Most > Outstanding Contribution to Journalism in 2011, the Martha Gellhorn > Prize for Journalism, the Economist?s New Media Award, the Amnesty > International New Media Award and a dozen others. Even the High Court of > the United Kingdom in its ruling of 2 November 2011, described Julian > Assange as ??a journalist, well known through his operation of > WikiLeaks? in its opening line. > > For this journalism, he is held, alone for more than 20 hours a day in a > cell on the health ward of Belmarsh, only just able to receive documents > from his lawyers. Years of unsympathetic and hostile treatment from his > peers have left him almost as alone in the public realm as he is now in > Belmarsh. And yet it is on this man, resilient but much weakened after a > decade of unrelenting pressure, that the future of the freedom to > report, and to read, rests. Democrats/who gets to be a "whistleblower": If you're a so-called whistleblower speaking in defense of power (like the CIA recently did) you're a so-called "whistleblower" or "savvy official" and Sen. Chuck Schumer will defend the secrecy of your identity. But not if you whisleblow against power (proper whistleblowing). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZVb4R3OeAM -- RT's report. jbn: Consider what Caitlin Johnstone told us https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/msm-defends-cias-whistleblower-ignores-actual-whistleblowers-5fbe577d988d > [E]ven to call this spook a ?whistleblower? is ridiculous on its face. > You don?t get to call someone from the US intelligence community a > whistleblower unless they are actually whistleblowing on the US > intelligence community. That?s not a thing. A CIA officer who exposes > information about government officials is an operative performing an > operation unless proven otherwise, because that?s what the CIA does; it > liberally leaks information wherever it?s convenient for CIA agendas > while withholding all other information behind a veil of government > secrecy. > > A CIA officer who exposes information about CIA wrongdoings without the > CIA?s permission is a whistleblower. A CIA officer who exposes > information about someone else is just a spook doing spook things. You > can recognize the latter by the way the mass media supports, applauds > and employs them. You can recognize the former by the way they have been > persecuted, imprisoned, and/or died under mysterious circumstances. RT's report illustrates this point -- here's Sen. Schumer on the CIA operative (sometimes referred to as a "savvy official" in corporate media): > Sen. Chuck Schumer: The calls to make public the whistleblower's > identity are despicable. [...] Whistleblowers should be protected. > Period. Period. But when the subject was Edward Snowden Schumer said: > Sen. Chuck Schumer: And each day that Snowden is allowed to roam free is > another twist of the knife. RT told us: > RT: As a damning report from an intelligence watchdog shows [The > Intelligence Community Inspector General Office] the CIA and NSA win 189 > our of 190 cases of whistleblower complaints. I'd send you the link [to > the report] but the report was shut down. The (recommendable) RT report adds examples from other real whistleblowers who were smeared -- former US intelligence analyst Richard Barlow who blew the whistle on the US selling banned nuclear technology to Pakistan, former US Marine Franz Gayl who blew the whistle about how to reduce US troop lives lost in Iraq to improvised explosive devices with a swap of patrol vehicles used, and former US State Dept. employee Peter Van Buren who blew the whistle on State Dept. mismanagement and waste in Iraq -- all were whistleblowing against the US. -J From carl at newsfromneptune.com Fri Nov 8 02:09:02 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 20:09:02 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Notes In-Reply-To: <41d91953-a7e5-992f-d36f-fe37c543d8dc@forestfield.org> References: <41d91953-a7e5-992f-d36f-fe37c543d8dc@forestfield.org> Message-ID: <997828B1-21EC-407F-B4AF-75339813ACA1@newsfromneptune.com> These are great. Thanks. Leigh?s cooking supper Friday (no frozen pizza) - come if you can! > On Nov 7, 2019, at 5:59 PM, J.B. Nicholson via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Have a good show, guys. Here are some notes on things to consider talking about. > > -J > > > > > Health: "Vaping is even more addictive than cigarettes" -- Judith Grisel, former nicotine addict and author > > https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/10/breaking-up-with-my-juul-why-quitting-vaping-is-harder-than-quitting-cigarettes > > Kari Paul recently wrote an op-ed for The Guardian. She says she has "decided to quit using her Juul e-cigarette amid reports of users with lung problems" > >> Nicotine is one of the world?s most addictive chemicals. Even smoking >> just one cigarette a month induces addiction in more than 30% of users, >> a 2002 study from Medical School found. Another study found 97% of >> people who smoked three or more cigarettes became addicted. The number >> of teens using vapes daily increased by 80% in 2018. >> ?It?s almost a guaranteed addiction,? Judith Grisel, a former nicotine >> addict herself and author of Never Enough: the Neuroscience of >> Addiction, said. ?It?s very compelling because the brain adapts to it so >> quickly, in a way that isn?t true with opiates or alcohol. Some people >> can drink alcohol without developing a problem, not everyone who takes >> opiates recreationally has a problem, but pretty much everyone likes the >> feeling of nicotine.? >> Vaping is even more addictive than cigarettes, Grisel said, and Juul is >> more addictive than other brands of vapes. In 2015, when Juul was >> introduced to the market, the most popular e-cigarettes had only between >> 1% and 2.4% nicotine. Juul debuted pods with 5% nicotine. >> ?The delivery of nicotine in vapes is even quicker than cigarettes, >> which is hard to do,? Grisel said. ?That?s the biggest factor in >> addictive liability if it?s the same chemical: the speed with which you >> get the hit.? >> Juul says it selected the 5% nicotine concentration in its products in >> the US ?to provide adult smokers with a viable, satisfying alternative >> to combustible cigarettes?. >> The company said it also offers 3% strength products and that far higher >> nicotine concentrations in products other than Juul were available when >> the company launched in 2015. >> The function of Juul makes it difficult to quit as well. Its discrete >> puffs of smoke and small size make using it much easier, and quitting it >> much harder. When I Juuled, I didn?t take smoke breaks ? I had grown >> accustomed to puffing away all day at my desk, and even more on >> stressful deadlines. I was often Juuling in my pajamas the last thing >> before bed and the first thing when I woke up. I Juuled on bike rides, >> on plane bathrooms, and at the office. Once I repeatedly hit my Juul on >> a kayak as I floated through the rivers of northern California, storing >> the device in my swimsuit top. > > > > > > Democrats/Medicare for All: Don't worry -- there's no chance Speaker Pelosi will bring a Medicare for All bill to the floor for a vote. So stop looking to the Democrats to be your passport to Medicare for All. > > https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/11/01/not-big-fan-medicare-all-pelosi-attacks-plan-backed-leading-2020-democrats-majority -- > >> House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in an interview Friday that she is "not a big fan of Medicare for All" despite support for the ambitious proposal among the majority of her caucus, three-quarters of Democratic voters, and two leading 2020 Democratic presidential candidates. >> "It is expensive," Pelosi told Bloomberg, without mentioning that >> studies show Medicare for All would save the U.S. trillions of dollars >> while providing comprehensive coverage to all. >> "Medicare for All doesn't cost money. It saves money by eliminating the >> for-profit waste in the insurance system and ending the rip-off of >> paying the highest drug prices in the world." ?Alex Lawson, Social >> Security Works >> "Who pays is very important," continued Pelosi. "What are the benefits >> that come in there? So I would think that hopefully as we emerge into >> the election year, the mantra would be more 'Healthcare for All >> Americans.'" >> The Speaker added that "there is a comfort level that some people have >> with their current private insurance that they have, and if that is to >> be phased out, let's talk about it." >> [...] >> In a statement applauding Warren's proposal, Social Security Works >> executive director Alex Lawson said "Medicare for All doesn't cost >> money." >> "It saves money by eliminating the for-profit waste in the insurance >> system and ending the rip-off of paying the highest drug prices in the >> world," said Lawson. "That's why 'how will you pay for it?' has always >> been a completely false premise." >> Contrary to Pelosi's suggestion that Medicare for All could damage >> Democrats' chances in the 2020 election, recent polling (pdf) by Data >> for Progress showed "supporting Medicare for All would not hurt" the >> Democratic presidential nominee in a race against President Donald >> Trump. >> "We tested a Democrat running on Medicare for All against Trump. Six >> times. With three different vendors," Data for Progress co-founder Sean >> McElwee said Friday. "Every time the Medicare for All Democrat wins, >> usually by double-digits." > > > > > > > Labor: 3-day weekends, every weekend? Sounds like it's more productive and beneficial to the worker as well. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYrLsnEgSTw -- The Real News' Greg Wilpert interview with Richard Wolff > https://therealnews.com/stories/microsofts-reduced-workweek-increased-productivity-40 -- The Real News' Greg Wilpert interview with Richard Wolff transcript > > https://mspoweruser.com/microsoft-4-day-workweek/ > >> In August this year, Microsoft Japan ran an experiment where for one >> month they had a 3 day weekend, taken Friday off. This was paid leave >> and did not impact the worker?s usual vacation allocation. >> [...] >> Workers were happier and took 25.4 percent fewer days off during the >> month. >> There were also savings from spending less time at work. 23.1 percent >> less electricity was used and 58.7 percent fewer pages were printed. >> More importantly from a bottom-line standpoint, however, productivity >> went up 39.9%, as fewer and shorter meetings were held, often virtually >> rather than in person. >> In the end, the project had 92.1 percent employee approval, suggesting >> workers were happy with getting more done in less time. >> The trial involved 2,300 employees, and Microsoft is looking to repeat >> it next summer. > > > > > > > War: Pentagon says veteran suicide "surpasses the number of lives lost during the operations in Afghanistan and Iraq to date [and] The total number lost in the past decade totals more than the number of deaths incurred during the Vietnam War" > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHVmNd24l3M -- "Watching the Hawks" report > https://www.rand.org/pubs/testimonies/CT510.html -- report with video (testimony presented before the House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on National Security on May 8, 2019) and link to PDF > https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/testimonies/CT500/CT510/RAND_CT510.pdf -- PDF of report > > From the report (page 3): > >> Suicide is the tenth leading cause of death in the United States, and >> over the past 30 years, America?s suicide rate has increased by 30 >> percent. Suicide is a national public health crisis, not just a veteran problem. Yet the number of veterans and service members lost to >> suicide in just one year now surpasses the number of lives lost during >> the operations in Afghanistan and Iraq to date. The total number lost in >> the past decade totals more than the number of deaths incurred during >> the Vietnam War. > > The "Watching the Hawks" report includes an interview with Rory Riley-Topping, described as a "veterans' advocate". Riley-Topping said: > >> Any servicemember goes through what they call a 'service enlistment' >> exam. And I hear from veterans that I speak to all the time that they're >> not very thorough. So that's a challenge. So in addition to, perhaps, >> having people who are a little bit older, perhaps we also need to screen >> them a little bit better and have people who, perhaps, are otherwise >> struggling with depression or are prone to it to have time to cope with >> that and deal with that. In terms of the age issue [...] in an >> all-volunteer force I think right now they are often times -- the Army >> didn't meet its recruiting goal last year -- so that's another issue and >> a lot of times they're taking people into the military that would not >> have otherwise been accepted into service. > > Riley-Topping used the phrase "all-volunteer force" a few times in the interview. This phrase doesn't acknowledge the economic pressure on applicants to enlist. An enlistment offer of a paid college scholarship in exchange for joining the military is very tempting for poor applicants who otherwise couldn't afford college tuition. > > It's not clear how much time applicants ought to be given to "cope with and deal with" depression; depression can be lifelong, not something that can be eliminated like a headache. > > This never comes up in the interview which is remarkably supportive of Riley-Toppings' way of framing the issue. If our social goal were to help Americans lead better lives, a guaranteed annual income and gratis (free) college education would be better steps to take than slightly changing military admission policy or lowering recruiting goals. > > > > > > > > Environment: Air quality index tops out measuring New Delhi's pollution at 999 -- the pollution is worse but the meter can't go any higher. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHVmNd24l3M -- "Watching the Hawks" report > https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2019/11/03/delhis-air-pollution-is-so-bad-that-it-is-an-emergency/ -- "Delhi?s Air Pollution Is So Bad That It Is An Emergency" > >> This tweet >> (https://twitter.com/iamabhimanyut/status/1190961695734284288) mentioned >> an air quality index (AQI) of over 1000: >> Abhimanyu Thakur: Delhi -NCR draped in air pollution. Its exceeding over >> 1000 AQI, from one end to another end of delhi. #DelhiAirEmergency >> #DelhiPollution #DelhiBachao >> That would mean the air quality is way above the hazardous threshold >> according to the following scale provided by the Air Now U.S. government >> website: >> "Good" AQI is 0 to 50: satisfactory, and little or no risk. >> "Moderate" AQI is 51 to 100: acceptable. May be moderate health concern >> for very small number of people (e.g., those unusually sensitive to >> ozone may experience respiratory symptoms). >> "Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups" AQI is 101 to 150. General public not >> likely to be affected. But people with lung disease, older adults, and >> children at greater risk from ozone exposure. People with heart and lung >> disease, older adults and children at greater risk from particles in the >> air. >> "Unhealthy" AQI is 151 to 200. Potential adverse health effects for >> everyone and serious ones for those more sensitive. >> "Very Unhealthy" AQI is 201 to 300. Health alert. Everyone may have more >> serious health effects. >> "Hazardous" AQI greater than 300. Emergency conditions. >> The AQI may not really be over 1000 in Delhi. It?s just that the air >> quality is so bad that it may be exceeding the ability of many meters to >> read the levels per this tweet >> (https://twitter.com/varun_jhaveri/status/1190887202319790080): >> Varun Jhaveri: I think we are heading towards Delhi recording the most >> polluted day in the history of world!! Most of the Delhi areas are >> showing an AQI of 999 because the meters can't record above that. This >> is a DISASTER! #DelhiAirEmergency > > [see picture of computer map with signposts reading "999" at many locations including New Delhi and surrounding areas at https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIbhl5YXYAAtCqZ.jpg] > > > > > > > Environment: Now Canadian cities are getting leaded water. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnzsaarcNtU -- RT news report > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHVmNd24l3M -- "Watching the Hawks" report > https://globalnews.ca/news/6120639/drinking-water-lead-levels-prince-rupert/ -- > >> Reporters from the University of British Columbia, as part of an investigation by a national consortium of universities and media companies, including Concordia University?s Institute for Investigative Journalism, Global News and Star Vancouver, tested water samples from Peterson?s kitchen in December. An accredited lab measured 15.6 parts per billion (ppb) of lead in her water ? three times Health Canada?s guideline. > > [...] > >> Eighty-four per cent of the 25 homes sampled in Prince Rupert for this investigation exceeded the federal guideline for lead in drinking water. >> Coastal B.C.?s rainy climate can produce naturally acidic surface water. Left untreated, it can corrode pipes and plumbing, leaching metals into drinking water. >> Despite federal guidelines recommending corrosion control and monitoring, some municipalities aren?t taking steps to combat corrosive water or testing for lead at the tap in private homes. Residents are being left in the dark about the safety of their water. >> For years, that was the case in Prince Rupert. > > CTV News Saskatoon adds > > https://saskatoon.ctvnews.ca/high-lead-levels-found-in-saskatchewan-drinking-water-1.4669520 or https://archive.md/bTWFN > >> Saskatoon, Regina and Moose Jaw are among a group of Canadian cities >> where high levels of lead were found in tap water, according to a new >> study. >> The investigation, conducted by more than 120 journalists from nine >> universities and 10 media groups including the Associated Press, the >> Saskatoon StarPhoenix, and the Institute for Investigative Journalism at >> Concordia University, tested water from hundreds of homes and reviewed >> thousands of undisclosed results. >> "What we found is that Montreal, Gatineau, Saskatoon, Regina, Moose Jaw, >> and Prince Rupert had lead levels comparable or higher than those of >> Flint, Michigan during its 2015 lead crisis," Patti Sonntag, the >> institute's director said in a news release. >> About one-third of tests exceeded the Canadian guidelines of 5 parts per >> billion. Some of the highest levels were recorded in Saskatchewan. >> Prolonged exposure to high amounts of lead over months or years can >> result in lead poisoning, which can cause serious health effects, >> particularly among young children. >> In Canada, there is no national mandate to test drinking water and >> agencies that conduct tests have no obligation to inform residents. >> Provinces set their own rules for water testing and lead pipe >> replacements. > > > > > > > > Propaganda/War: Former ISIS leader Al Baghdadi (not his real name) was promoted by the U.S. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPROkzJ52HA -- Redacted Tonight's report on the man whose recent murder is the subject of much recent corporate media reportage. Corporate media doesn't cover that this is the 6th or 7th time his death has been announced (as Lee Camp pointed out "The seventh time's the charm"). This alleged murder won't stop ISIS and won't make much of a difference to anything, really, but it's worth noting that the U.S. made him the man he was by chatting him up a lot much like: > >> Naomi Karavanni: [...] Zarqawi [the founder of ISIS] who also was a >> nobody until the US military led a $24 million propaganda campaign >> against him [shows picture of [1] and quotes "U.S. propaganda efforts in >> Iraq in 2004 cost $24 million, but that included extensive building of >> offices and residences for troops involved, as well as radio broadcasts >> and distribution of thousands of leaflets with Zarqawi's face on them >> [in Iraq]"] > [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2006/04/10/military-plays-up-role-of-zarqawi-span-classbankheadjordanian-painted-as-foreign-threat-to-iraqs-stabilityspan/9dbb8dca-12a1-4a78-9a33-d373d7cccfab/ > > Karavanni also reminds us of the ineffectiveness of the US torture program and how torture didn't help us find Osama bin Laden. In each of Baghdadi and bin Laden's cases, someone looking for a hefty monetary reward provided the location of a wanted man. > > The New York Times in https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/18/magazine/what-do-we-really-know-about-osama-bin-ladens-death.html discussed Seymour Hersh's journalism: > >> Hersh?s most consequential claim was about how bin Laden was found in >> the first place. It was not years of painstaking intelligence-gathering, >> he wrote, that led the United States to the courier and, ultimately, to >> bin Laden. Instead, the location was revealed by a ??walk-in?? ? a >> retired Pakistani intelligence officer who was after the $25 million >> reward that the United States had promised anyone who helped locate him. >> For that matter, bin Laden was hardly ??in hiding?? at all; his compound >> in Abbottabad was actually a safe house, maintained by the Pakistani >> intelligence service. When the United States confronted Pakistani >> intelligence officials with this information, Hersh wrote, they >> eventually acknowledged it was true and even conceded to provide a DNA >> sample to prove it. >> According to Hersh?s version, then, the daring raid wasn?t especially daring. The Pakistanis allowed the U.S. helicopters into their airspace and cleared out the guards at the compound before the SEALs arrived. Hersh?s sources told him the United States and Pakistani intelligence officials agreed that Obama would wait a week before announcing that >> bin Laden had been killed in a ??drone strike somewhere in the mountains >> on the Pakistan/Afghanistan border.?? But the president was forced to >> go public right away, because the crash and subsequent destruction of >> the Black Hawk ? among the rare facts in the official story that Hersh >> does not dispute ? were going to make it impossible to keep the >> operation under wraps. > > > > > > > Snowden: "What do you do when the most powerful institutions in society have become the least accountable to society? I think that's the question our generation exists to answer." > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1kpI-XnCOs -- In terms of technology: I think there's a lot of education needed to properly answer this question. The public still doesn't understand software freedom because they've never been taught to know what software freedom is (it's the freedom to run, inspect, share, and modify published computer software) or why they should care about software freedom. > > Snowden makes a number of great points in this talk, one of them is: > >> The General Data Protection Regulation [UK regulation aiming to increase >> privacy and respect people's ability to get data from firms regarding >> what the firm knows about that individual] misplaces the problem -- the >> problem isn't data protection, the problem is data collection. >> Regulating the protection of data presumes that the collection of data >> in the first place was proper; that it was appropriate, that it doesn't >> present a threat or danger, that it's okay to spy on everybody all the >> time whether they're your customers or whether they're your citizens so >> long as it never leaks. > > Snowden's words are comparable with what other insightful people have said about the danger of unlimited data collection such as Richard Stallman who has long objected to Facebook: > > From https://stallman.org/facebook2.html > >> The US Federal Trade Commission ruled that Facebook's violation of its >> stated privacy policies was illegal[1]. >> It is proper to make Facebook keep its promises, but this does not go >> far enough to make Facebook acceptable to use. It does not limit >> Facebook's data collection ? for instance, it doesn't stop Facebook from >> collecting of data about browsing through "Like" buttons. It only limits >> what Facebook can do with that data, and certainly does not stop >> Facebook from handing it over to Big Brother under the U SAP AT RIOT >> act. > > [1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/nov/29/facebook-ftc-privacy-settlement > > > > > > Assange: TRNN's Greg Wilpert interviewed John Pilger about Assange and Manning -- both prisoners of conscience who aren't recognized as such by Amnesty International -- and, to their credit, The Real News covered it. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekfNGMeofbM -- video (15m02s) > https://therealnews.com/stories/julian-assange-extradition-process-charade -- transcript > > TRNN has horrible politics on Russiagate (TRNN is a Russiagator and their pro-Russiagate views caused the Izzy-award-winning Aaron Mate to leave TRNN). But this didn't stop Greg Wilpert from running this story covering John Pilger. You've probably seen Wilpert before as he expertly covers Latin American affairs including the ongoing US coup attempts against Venezuela. > >> GREG WILPERT: Welcome to The Real News Network. I?m Greg Wilpert in >> Arlington, Virginia. >> Julian Assange recently lost a court bid to have his upcoming February >> 2020 extradition hearing postponed. The hearing about the postponement >> took place on October 21, and according to observers who were present, >> he could barely speak in coherent sentences. Reacting to the hearing, UN >> Human Rights Rapporteur Nils Melzer warned last Friday that Assange >> continues to show symptoms of psychological torture. Melzer had visited >> Assange in May when he conducted an extensive review of his physical and >> psychological condition. In his statement on Friday, Melzer said, >> ?Despite the medical urgency of my first appeal, and the seriousness of >> the alleged violations, the U.K. has not undertaken any measures of >> investigation, prevention, and redress required under international >> law.? >> In addition to the concerns about Assange?s treatment at Belmarsh Prison >> outside of London, many have also raised concerns about the impartiality >> of the proceedings against him. Assange was jailed last April when the >> Ecuadorian Embassy, where he had been given political asylum, allowed >> the police to arrest him. He then received a 50-week sentence for having >> skipped jail in 2012. The Trump Administration has since then requested >> Assange?s extradition on 17 charges of espionage for which he could >> receive a 170-year prison sentence in the United States. >> Joining me now to discuss the latest developments in the case of Julian >> Assange is John Pilger. He has been observing the Assange case very >> closely and was present at the October 21 court hearing. He is an >> award-winning journalist and documentary filmmaker. His most recent film >> is The Coming War on China. Thanks for joining us again, John. >> JOHN PILGER: Very welcome. >> GREG WILPERT: Let?s start with Assange?s condition. As I said, you were >> there at the last hearing. What was your perception of his condition, >> and how he presented himself? >> JOHN PILGER: Well, I was at the last hearing, and I saw Julian about a >> week before that, so I?ve seen him up close on a number of occasions >> recently. I think I can agree with Nils Melzer?s assessment. It?s very >> difficult to tell. His physical condition has changed dramatically. He?s >> lost about 15 kilos in weight. To see him in court struggling to say his >> name, and his date of birth, was really very moving. I?ve seen that when >> I visited Julian in Belmarsh Prison where he struggles at first, and >> then collects himself. I?m always impressed by the sheer resilience of >> the man, because as Melzer says, absolutely nothing has been done to >> change the conditions imposed on him by the prison regime. Nothing has >> been done by the British authorities. >> This was almost underlined by the contemptuous way that this court >> hearing recently was conducted by this judge, by this magistrate. There >> was a sense among all of us who were there that the whole charade, and >> it seemed a charade, was preordained. You had sitting in front of us, on >> a long table, four Americans who were from the U.S. Embassy here in >> London, and one of the prosecution team was scurrying backwards and >> forwards to get instructions from them. The judge could see this, and >> she allowed it. It was just absolutely outrageous. >> When Julian did try to speak, and to say that basically he was being >> denied the very tools with which to prepare his case, he was denied the >> right to call his American lawyer. He was denied the right to have any >> kind of word process or laptop. He was denied certain documents. As he >> said, ?I?m even denied my own writings,? as he called it. That is, his >> own notes and manuscripts. This hasn?t changed at all, and of course the >> effect of that on his morale, to say the least, has been very >> significant, and that showed in the court. >> GREG WILPERT: Yeah. I want to dig a little bit deeper on that issue >> about the fairness of this trial. Craig Murray who is a blogger, and was >> also at the last hearing, wrote about a number of issues, which you also >> mentioned. He specifically mentions district judge, Vanessa Baraitser, >> and one of the things that she did was completely dismiss Assange?s >> request for determination whether the extradition proceedings are even >> legal. That is, he cites according to U.K. law, ?Extradition shall not >> be granted if the offense for which extradition is requested is a >> political offense.? Now, what do you think of this issue? Is Assange?s >> offense political, and what do you say about the judge?s reaction to >> that request? >> JOHN PILGER: I know his lawyer Gareth Peirce very well, and she?s not a >> person to really be angered as such. But I saw her before and after the >> hearing, and she was quite angry about the fact as she said, ?Here we >> have an extradition hearing, based on a treaty between the United States >> and Britain, and there is a section in that treaty that said,? as you?ve >> just mentioned, ?No one can be extradited if the,? and I paraphrase, if >> the so-called offense is in any way political. Well under law, it?s not >> a matter of opinion. They are political. All but one of the charges >> concocted in Virginia are based on the 1917 Espionage Act, which was a >> political piece of legislation used to chase off the conscientious >> objectors during the first World War. >> It?s political. There is no charge. There is no basis, no foundation, >> for allowing these extradition proceedings to go forward, and almost >> perversely the judge seemed to, if not acknowledged that in her contempt >> for the proceedings. Whenever Julian Assange spoke, she feigned a >> disinterest, a boredom, and whenever his lawyers spoke, the same thing. >> Whenever the prosecutor spoke, she was attentive. The theatrics of this >> hearing were quite remarkable. I?ve never seen anything like it. Then >> very hurriedly, when Julian Assange?s lawyer requested a delay in when >> the case actually starts from February, they said, ?We?re not going to >> be ready in February,? and she dismissed that out of hand. >> Not only that, she said that the extradition case would be held in a >> court that is in fact adjoining Belmarsh prison. It?s almost part of the >> prison. It?s a long way out of London. So you have, if not a secret >> trial, but a trial in which, or an extradition hearing in which very few >> seats are available to the public. It?s a very difficult place to get >> to. So every obstacle has been put in the way of Assange getting a fair >> hearing. And I can only repeat, this is a publisher and a journalist >> convicted of nothing, charged with nothing in Britain, whose only crime >> is journalism. That may sound like a slogan, but it?s true. They want >> him for exposing the kind of outrageous war crimes, Iraq, Afghanistan, >> that journalists are supposed to do. >> GREG WILPERT: Right. Finally, I want to ask you also about the support >> that Assange seems to have been getting or not getting. It seems that >> the media organizations that benefited tremendously from Assange?s work, >> are hardly mentioning his case, let alone supporting him. Also, human >> rights groups such as Amnesty International have urged the U.K. not to >> extradite Julian, but they haven?t elevated the case. I just looked it >> up. They haven?t elevated it to the status of a campaign as they do for >> political prisoners normally. How do you explain this lack of concern >> among the media and human rights groups for Assange?s situation? >> JOHN PILGER: Because so many human rights groups are deeply political, >> Amnesty International never made Chelsea Manning a prisoner of >> conscience. A really disgraceful thing. Chelsea Manning, who was >> effectively tortured in prison, and they haven?t, as you say, they >> haven?t elevated Julian?s case. Why? Well, they?re an extension. They?re >> an extension of an establishment that is now almost systematically >> coming down on any form of real dissent. In the last five, six years, >> the last gaps, the last bolt holes, the last spaces in the mainstream >> media for journalists, from average journalists for the likes Assange, >> not only Assange, for the likes of people like even myself and others, >> have closed. >> The mainstream media, certainly in Britain, always held open those >> spaces. They?ve closed, and there is generally I would think a fear, >> right throughout the media, a fear about opposing the state on something >> like the Assange case. You see the way the whole obsession with Russia >> has consumed the media with so many nonsensical stories. The hostility, >> the animosity towards Julian. My own theory is that his work shamed so >> many journalists. He does what journalists ought to have done, and don?t >> do any more. He?s done the job of a journalist. That can only explain >> it. I mean when you take a newspaper like The Guardian, which published >> originally the WikiLeaks revelations about Iraq and Afghanistan, they >> turned on Julian Assange in the most vicious way. >> They exploited him for one thing. A number of their journalists did >> extremely well with their books, and Hollywood scripts, and so on, but >> they turned on him personally. It was one of the most unedifying sights >> I think I?ve ever seen in journalism. The same thing happened in the New >> York Times. Again, I can only surmise the reason for that. It?s that he >> shames them. We have a desert of journalism at the moment. There are a >> few who still do their jobs; who still stand up against establishment >> power; who still are not frightened. But there?re so few now, and Julian >> Assange is totally fearless in that. He knew that he was going to run >> into a great deal of trouble with the state in Britain, the state in the >> United States?but he went ahead anyway. That?s a true journalist. >> GREG WILPERT: Well, we?re going to have to leave it there for now, but >> of course we?re going to continue to follow his case as we have been >> since the beginning. I was speaking to John Pilger, award-winning >> journalist and documentary filmmaker. Thanks again, John, for having >> joined us today. >> JOHN PILGER: Very welcome, Greg. > > > > > WikiLeaks/Assange: Corporate media (including UK media) still won't cover Assange show trials so his torture is more likely to proceed unnoticed. > > https://newint.org/features/2019/10/31/journalists-must-pay-attention-julian-assange > >> The UK media has long adopted a cynical attitude towards Julian Assange, >> but recent footage of the Wikileaks publisher?s recent court appearance >> is prompting many to have second thoughts. >> >> In the latest clip to find its way on to the internet we see Assange >> squinting, sealed within the tiny compartment of a Serco prison van >> leaving Westminster Magistrates? Court on 21 October, trying to adjust >> to the bright lights shone directly into his eyes at close range. >> Several hours earlier, a large and loud crowd of supporters had >> intercepted another Serco van, but all the chanting, cheering and >> solidarity was in vain ? Assange?s transport was delayed several hours >> until almost everyone had left. >> >> Assange looked despondent. His lawyers had requested a routine >> postponement of his main extradition hearing, which was refused, >> apparently after the prosecution took instructions from US >> representatives during a 10 minute recess. His lawyers also requested >> the magistrate schedule time for arguments about the political nature of >> the charges against Assange, given that the UK-US Extradition Treaty >> stipulates that if the offence is political, extradition must not >> proceed. >> >> The fact that for several years Assange?s meetings with lawyers were >> filmed and streamed live to the CIA was also raised as a critical issue. >> But to no avail. The magistrate provided a little more time for >> pre-trial presentation of evidence, but warned that the main hearing >> would take place as scheduled, in February 2020, and at London?s >> Belmarsh Prison. >> >> According to eyewitnesses, Assange appeared disoriented and distressed >> in court, exhibiting the physical and psychological symptoms of someone >> arbitrarily detained for nine years. UN rapporteur on torture Nils >> Melzer has put it thus: ?The evidence is overwhelming and clear? Mr >> Assange has been deliberately exposed, for a period of several years, to >> progressively severe forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or >> punishment, the cumulative effects of which can only be described as >> psychological torture.? >> >> Assange completed his sentence in Belmarsh maximum security prison for >> bail violations on 23 September ? thus completing his punishment for >> applying for and receiving political asylum. For many years, we heard >> that Julian was in the Ecuadorian Embassy to avoid allegations of sexual >> misconduct in Sweden, despite the fact that no country on earth gives >> asylum to non-citizens to avoid sexual misconduct allegations. As >> subsequent events have demonstrated, Assange?s fears were more than >> justified. >> >> Assange broke bail conditions in order to seek asylum from the scenario >> he now faces: life in prison for publishing. Ecuador granted that asylum >> because the US obviously intended to prosecute Assange for publishing. >> This was confirmed shortly after his expulsion from their London >> embassy, a moment for which the US was poised and ready. >> >> Assange also received asylum because he was ?without the support of the >> country of which he is a citizen? ? Australia. While a cross party >> ?Bring Julian Assange Home Parliamentary Group? has recently been >> established in Australia, for the time being his own government remains >> mute. >> >> The indictments for which Assange is now imprisoned have nothing to do >> with Sweden, Russia, Trump or his cat. They are a straightforward >> attempt to prosecute a publisher for committing acts of journalism: >> specifically the releases of 2010-11 on Guantanamo Bay, the wars in >> Afghanistan and Iraq, and Cablegate. These are the most significant >> series of public-interest disclosures of our times. >> >> The US Justice Department?s case will hinge on whether it can >> successfully redefine national-security journalism as a form of >> espionage. Assange is the first publisher ever to be charged under the >> Espionage Act, under which it is not possible to mount a public interest >> defence. >> >> Even those who have spent years demonizing Assange have balked at this >> lunge of extraterritorial executive power by the US government. The New >> York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the >> Guardian have expressed grave concern about the charges he faces. UK >> Special Envoy on Media Freedom Amal Clooney stated at the June Global >> Conference for Media Freedom, the charges ?criminalize common practices >> in journalism?, which the American Civil Liberties Union has warned, >> ?establish a dangerous precedent that can be used to target all news >> organizations that hold the government accountable by publishing its >> secrets?. >> >> The indictments for which Assange is now imprisoned have nothing to do >> with Sweden, Russia, Trump or his cat. They are a straightforward >> attempt to prosecute a publisher for committing acts of journalism >> >> Some have tried to claim Assange is not a journalist, but it?s difficult >> to argue with the US Army?s Counterintelligence Centre?s description of >> WikiLeaks as a ?news organization,? and Assange as a ?writer? and >> ?journalist? that had ?show[n] journalist responsibility to the >> newsworthiness or fair use of the classified document?. Or with the >> Australian Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance, the union representing >> journalists and publishers, of which Assange has been a member since >> 2009, carrying a journalist?s card. >> >> For his work, he was presented with the Walkley Award for Most >> Outstanding Contribution to Journalism in 2011, the Martha Gellhorn >> Prize for Journalism, the Economist?s New Media Award, the Amnesty >> International New Media Award and a dozen others. Even the High Court of >> the United Kingdom in its ruling of 2 November 2011, described Julian >> Assange as ??a journalist, well known through his operation of >> WikiLeaks? in its opening line. >> >> For this journalism, he is held, alone for more than 20 hours a day in a >> cell on the health ward of Belmarsh, only just able to receive documents >> from his lawyers. Years of unsympathetic and hostile treatment from his >> peers have left him almost as alone in the public realm as he is now in >> Belmarsh. And yet it is on this man, resilient but much weakened after a >> decade of unrelenting pressure, that the future of the freedom to >> report, and to read, rests. > > > > > Democrats/who gets to be a "whistleblower": If you're a so-called whistleblower speaking in defense of power (like the CIA recently did) you're a so-called "whistleblower" or "savvy official" and Sen. Chuck Schumer will defend the secrecy of your identity. But not if you whisleblow against power (proper whistleblowing). > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZVb4R3OeAM -- RT's report. > > jbn: Consider what Caitlin Johnstone told us https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/msm-defends-cias-whistleblower-ignores-actual-whistleblowers-5fbe577d988d > >> [E]ven to call this spook a ?whistleblower? is ridiculous on its face. >> You don?t get to call someone from the US intelligence community a >> whistleblower unless they are actually whistleblowing on the US >> intelligence community. That?s not a thing. A CIA officer who exposes >> information about government officials is an operative performing an >> operation unless proven otherwise, because that?s what the CIA does; it >> liberally leaks information wherever it?s convenient for CIA agendas >> while withholding all other information behind a veil of government >> secrecy. >> A CIA officer who exposes information about CIA wrongdoings without the >> CIA?s permission is a whistleblower. A CIA officer who exposes >> information about someone else is just a spook doing spook things. You >> can recognize the latter by the way the mass media supports, applauds >> and employs them. You can recognize the former by the way they have been >> persecuted, imprisoned, and/or died under mysterious circumstances. > > RT's report illustrates this point -- here's Sen. Schumer on the CIA operative (sometimes referred to as a "savvy official" in corporate media): > >> Sen. Chuck Schumer: The calls to make public the whistleblower's >> identity are despicable. [...] Whistleblowers should be protected. >> Period. Period. > But when the subject was Edward Snowden Schumer said: > >> Sen. Chuck Schumer: And each day that Snowden is allowed to roam free is >> another twist of the knife. > RT told us: > >> RT: As a damning report from an intelligence watchdog shows [The >> Intelligence Community Inspector General Office] the CIA and NSA win 189 >> our of 190 cases of whistleblower complaints. I'd send you the link [to >> the report] but the report was shut down. > The (recommendable) RT report adds examples from other real whistleblowers who were smeared -- former US intelligence analyst Richard Barlow who blew the whistle on the US selling banned nuclear technology to Pakistan, former US Marine Franz Gayl who blew the whistle about how to reduce US troop lives lost in Iraq to improvised explosive devices with a swap of patrol vehicles used, and former US State Dept. employee Peter Van Buren who blew the whistle on State Dept. mismanagement and waste in Iraq -- all were whistleblowing against the US. > > -J > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From jbn at forestfield.org Sat Nov 9 00:33:28 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 18:33:28 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News from Neptune #440 notes Message-ID: <898b4292-4688-1c8b-96eb-5fed9fcbebec@forestfield.org> News from Neptune #440 A "Palace Coup" edition Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neZoBvVR8hg A list of links to items referenced on the show. Stephen F. Cohen on "Inconvenient Truths" http://www.unz.com/scohen/inconvenient-truths/ https://www.thenation.com/article/inconvenient-truths-2/ Sen. Frank Church (D-ID) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Church Church Committee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee Sen. William Fulbright (D-AK) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Fulbright C. G. Estabrook on News-Gazette?s feature ?Those Who Served? weekly feature in a letter to the News-Gazette https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/letter-to-the-editor-u-s-has-killed-millions-in/article_87b213e5-9f21-5acf-8f54-df41b18d026d.html David Green on "Harassment study is silly propaganda" in a letter to the News-Gazette https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/letter-to-the-editor-harassment-study-is-silly-propaganda/article_9d4eee6b-a8fa-5d8a-8609-169c0d256af9.html "Boomer" & "OK Boomer" https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Boomer https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Ok%20boomer Aaron Mat? interviews on "Push Back with Aaron Mat?" https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEXR8pRTkE2vFeJePNe9UcQ/videos "Reality Asserts Itself" (RAI) series Paul Jay interviews Stephen F. Cohen Is Russian ?Meddling? an Attack on America? ? RAI with Stephen Cohen (1/5) https://therealnews.com/stories/is-russian-meddling-an-attack-on-america-rai-with-stephen-cohen Is Trump for Detente or Militarism? ? RAI with Stephen Cohen (2/5) https://therealnews.com/stories/is-trump-for-detente-or-militarism-rai-with-stephen-cohen-2-5 U.S. Hoped Putin Would be a ?Sober Yeltsin? ? RAI with Stephen Cohen (3/5) https://therealnews.com/stories/u-s-hoped-putin-would-be-a-sober-yeltsin-rai-with-stephen-cohen-3-5 From Jim Crow Kentucky to Red Square ? RAI with Stephen Cohen (4/5) https://therealnews.com/stories/from-jim-crow-kentucky-to-red-square-rai-with-stephen-cohen-4-5 Why I?m Pro-Detente with Russia ? RAI with Stephen Cohen (5/5) https://therealnews.com/stories/why-im-pro-detente-with-russia-rai-with-stephen-cohen-5-5 The Nation magazine https://www.thenation.com/ Aaron Mat? interviews his father Dr. Gabor Mat? on "Push Back with Aaron Mat?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TBBhPUwrCU David Green on "Concerns voiced about Bend the Arc" in a letter to the News-Gazette https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letter-to-the-editor-concerns-voiced-about-bend-the-arc/article_99b2ac36-4279-5cad-8b60-892ca30dde6e.html CU Immigration Forum TV episodes https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLiG7sxd3aTy1359M7OXX2Yzw6UTdob1Jr Julie Wurth on "UI business school dean among 50 who signed letter to Trump, Congress on visa policy" https://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/university-illinois/ui-business-school-dean-among-who-signed-letter-to-trump/article_41e30891-7403-57fa-aaf6-5914f59e7684.html Julie Wurth's News-Gazette articles https://www.news-gazette.com/users/profile/julie%20wurth/ Dean Baker articles https://truthout.org/authors/dean-baker/ -- on Truthout.org https://www.counterpunch.org/author/phuste/ -- on CounterPunch.org Leah Boyd on "Fuqua dean spearheaded open letter to Trump administration for immigration reform" https://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2019/11/duke-fuqua-dean-open-letter-trump-administration-immigration-reform RT on whistleblowing, Sen. Chuck Schumer, and the hypocrisy therein https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZVb4R3OeAM Benjamin Studebaker & Aimee Terese's show "What's Left?" https://soundcloud.com/whatisleftpod/ -- list of recent episodes https://twitter.com/whatisleftpod -- Twitter account https://feeds.soundcloud.com/users/soundcloud:users:595199712/sounds.rss -- RSS feed Dean Baker sides with Elizabeth Warren on Medicare for All ("Senator Warren is Exactly Right") https://www.youtube.com/embed/yRoGyyXfSKc https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/10/26/senator-warren-exactly-right Assange: TRNN's Greg Wilpert interviewed John Pilger about Assange and Manning https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekfNGMeofbM -- video https://therealnews.com/stories/julian-assange-extradition-process-charade -- transcript John Pilger's "The Coming War on China" (full movie) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDl9ecICIYg Craig Murray on "Assange in Court" https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/10/assange-in-court/ Pres. Obama's use of the Espionage Act https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/06/obama-abuse-espionage-act-mccarthyism -- from John Kiriakou https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jan/10/jake-tapper/cnns-tapper-obama-has-used-espionage-act-more-all-/ Venezuela Analysis https://venezuelanalysis.com/ Mary Schenk on "A Life Remembered | 'He was just everything you would want a judge to be'" https://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/courts-police-fire/a-life-remembered-he-was-just-everything-you-would-want/article_a7344c67-af9b-5c0f-9b66-b02b9bfe9169.html Snowden: "What do you do when the most powerful institutions in society have become the least accountable to society? I think that's the question our generation exists to answer." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1kpI-XnCOs David Green on "Challenging Nicholas Kristof?s Claim of ?Thousands More Jeffrey Epsteins?" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/10/02/challenging-nicholas-kristofs-claim-of-thousands-more-jeffrey-epsteins/ David Rosen on "The Epstein Story Continues to Unravel" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/11/08/the-epstein-story-continues-to-unravel/ John Demjanjuk (born Ivan Mykolaiovych Demianiuk) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Demjanjuk David Green on "The Deportation of Demjanjuk" https://www.counterpunch.org/2009/05/14/the-deportation-of-demjanjuk/ Jeffrey St. Clair on "Roaming Charges: Enter Sondland" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/11/08/roaming-charges-enter-sondland/ David Green's articles on CounterPunch.org https://www.counterpunch.org/author/david-green/ Rodney Reed on death row despite evidence saying he isn't guilty, mistakes from expert witness, new evidence making it clear he must be freed https://www.innocenceproject.org/stand-with-rodney-reed-on-texas-death-row/ https://www.innocenceproject.org/expert-witnesses-admit-error-in-case-of-rodney-reed-who-has-served-22-years-on-texas-death-row-prompting-new-appeal/ https://www.gdinvestigations.com/press/2019/1/9/new-evidence-makes-clear-rodney-reed-must-be-freed J.B. Nicholson's notes https://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/2019-November/051489.html -J From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Sat Nov 9 17:37:10 2019 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (Stuart Levy) Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2019 11:37:10 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] coup at The Real News Network? Message-ID: Have people been following Real News Network in recent months? There's an alarming article from Yves Smith of Naked Capitalism -- where it seems that Paul Jay and Sharmini Peries have been ousted as of this summer, but TRNN isn't talking about it: ????? https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/11/paul-jay-and-sharmini-peries-ousted-from-the-real-news-network-in-june-current-fundraiser-hides-that-fact-falling-viewership-and-liberal-turn-result.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Sat Nov 9 19:08:09 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2019 13:08:09 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] coup at The Real News Network? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not at all surprising; TRNN has been pretty hollowed out of content over the past year beyond the still good local Baltimore coverage, and some of Greg Wilpert's stories. Marc Steiner is a disaster, even though he interviews decent people regarding Israel/Palestine. Almost the same, BTW, can be said for Amy Goodman these days. DG On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 11:37 AM Stuart Levy via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > Have people been following Real News Network in recent months? > > There's an alarming article from Yves Smith of Naked Capitalism -- where > it seems that Paul Jay and Sharmini Peries have been ousted as of this > summer, but TRNN isn't talking about it: > > > https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/11/paul-jay-and-sharmini-peries-ousted-from-the-real-news-network-in-june-current-fundraiser-hides-that-fact-falling-viewership-and-liberal-turn-result.html > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sat Nov 9 19:51:47 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2019 13:51:47 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Matthew_Hoh=3A_And_the_Armies_That_Rem?= =?utf-8?q?ained_Suffer=E2=80=99d=3A_Veterans=2C_Moral_Injury_and_S?= =?utf-8?q?uicide?= Message-ID: *- CounterPunch.org - https://www.counterpunch.org -*And the Armies That Remained Suffer?d: Veterans, Moral Injury and SuicidePosted By Matthew Hoh On November 8, 2019 @ 1:58 am In articles 2015,Leading Article | Comments Disabled Photograph Source: USAG- Humphreys ? CC BY 2.0 I was very pleased to see the *New York* *Times* editorial on November 1, 2019, *Suicide Has Been Deadlier than Combat for the Military* . As a combat veteran myself and someone who has struggled with suicidality since the Iraq war I am grateful for such public attention to the issue of veteran suicides, particularly as I know many who have been lost to it. However, the *Times* editorial board made a serious error when it stated ?Military officials note that the suicide rates for service members and veterans are comparable to the general population after adjusting for the military?s demographics, predominantly young and male.? By incorrectly stating veteran suicide rates* are comparable to civilian suicide rates the *Times *makes the consequences of war seem tragic yet statistically insignificant. The reality is that deaths by suicide often kill veterans at a level greater than combat, while the primary reason for these deaths lie in the immoral and ghastly nature of war itself. To the *Times?* discredit annual suicide data provided by the Veterans Administration (VA) since 2012 clearly notes that veteran suicide rates when compared with the civilian population are adjusted for age and sex. In the 2019 National Veteran Suicide Prevention Annual Report on pages 10 and 11 the VA reports that adjusted for age and sex the suicide rate for the veteran population is 1.5 times that of the civilian population ; military veterans make up 8% of the US adult population, but account for 13.5% of the adult suicides in the US (page 5). As one notes the differences in populations of veterans, specifically, between veterans who have seen combat and those that have not seen combat, one sees a much higher likelihood of suicide among veterans with combat exposure. VA data shows among veterans that had deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, those in the youngest cohort , i.e. those most likely to have seen combat, had suicide rates, again adjusted for age and sex, 4-10 times higher than their civilian peers. Studies outside the VA that focus on veterans who have seen combat, because not all veterans who deploy to a war zone are engaged in combat, confirm higher rates of suicide. In a 2015 *New York Times* story a Marine Corps infantry unit that was tracked after coming home from war saw suicide rates among its young men 4 times greater than other young male veterans and 14 times that of civilians. This increased risk of suicide for veterans who served during war holds true for all generations of veterans , including the Greatest Generation. A study in 2010 by *The Bay Citizen* and New America Media, as reported by Aaron Glantz, found the current suicide rate for WWII veterans to be 4 times higher than for their civilian peers, while VA data, released since 2015 , show rates for WWII veterans well elevated above their civilian peers. A 2012 VA study found that Vietnam veterans with killing experiences had twice the odds of suicidal ideation than those with lower or no killing experiences, even after adjusting for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance abuse and depression. The VA?s Veterans Crisis Line (VCL), one of many programs of support unavailable to previous generations of veterans, is a good measure of how intense the current struggle with veteran suicide is for the VA and caregivers. Since its opening in 2007 through the end of 2018 , VCL responders ?have answered more than 3.9 million calls, conducted more than 467,000 online chats and responded to more than 123,000 texts. Their efforts have resulted in the dispatch of emergency services nearly 119,000 times to Veterans in need.? Putting that last statistic into context more than 30 times a day VCL responders call police, fire or EMS to intervene in a suicide situation, again a service that was not available prior to 2007. The VCL is just one part of a larger support system for suicidal veterans and there are undoubtedly many more than 30 needed emergency interventions for veterans each day, just note the oft mentioned number of 20 veteran suicides a day . That number of men and women who die by suicide each day, without end, brings the true costs of war: bodies buried, families and friends destroyed, resources expended, back to a nation that has always thought itself protected from war by its two protecting oceans. How tragic do Abraham Lincoln?s words now sound when the thought of the consequences of the wars the US has brought to others return home to us: Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant to step the ocean and crush us at a blow? Never! All the armies of Europe, Asia, and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest, with a Bonaparte for a commander, could not by force take a drink from the Ohio or make a track on the Blue Ridge in a trial of a thousand years. At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer. If it ever reach us it must spring up amongst us; it cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide. This high rate of suicide in veterans leads to a total number of deaths of combat troops at home that surpasses the totals killed in war. In 2011, Glantz and *The Bay Citizen* ?using public health records, reported that 1,000 California veterans under 35 died from 2005 to 2008 ? three times the number killed in Iraq and Afghanistan during the same period.? The VA data tells us that close to two Afghan and Iraq veterans die by suicide each day on average, meaning the estimated 7,300 veterans who have killed themselves since just 2009, after coming home from Afghanistan and Iraq, are greater in number than the 7,012 service members killed in those wars since 2001. To visually understand this concept that the killing in war does not end when the soldiers come home, think of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, DC, The Wall, with its 58,000 names. Now visualize The Wall but lengthen it by some 1,000-2,000 feet to include the 100,000 to 200,000 plus Vietnam veterans who are estimated to have been lost to suicide, while keeping space available to continue to add names for as long as Vietnam veterans survive, because the suicides will never stop. (Include the victims of Agent Orange, another example of how wars never end, and The Wall extends past the Washington Monument). The mental, emotional and spiritual injuries that come with surviving war are not unique to the United States or the modern age. Disparate historical sources, such as Roman and Native American accounts, tell of the psychological and psychiatric wounds of war, and what was done for returning soldiers, while in both Homer and Shakespeare we find clear references to the lasting invisible wounds of war. Contemporary literature and newspapers of the post Civil War era chronicled the consequences of that war on the minds, emotions and health of Civil War veterans by documenting the prevalence of afflicted veterans in cities and towns all across the United States. Estimates are that hundreds of thousands of men died in the decades after the Civil War from suicide, alcoholism , drug overdoses and the effects of homelessness induced by what they had done and seen in the war. Walt Whitman?s ?When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard Bloom?d ?, primarily an elegy to Abraham Lincoln, pays tribute to all who suffered after the war was over on the battlefields, but not in minds or memories: And I saw askant the armies, I saw as in noiseless dreams hundreds of battle-flags, Borne through the smoke of the battles and pierc?d with missiles I saw them, And carried hither and yon through the smoke, and torn and bloody, And at last but a few shreds left on the staffs, (and all in silence,) And the staffs all splinter?d and broken. I saw battle-corpses, myriads of them, And the white skeletons of young men, I saw them, I saw the debris and debris of all the slain soldiers of the war, But I saw they were not as was thought, They themselves were fully at rest, they suffer?d not, The living remain?d and suffer?d, the mother suffer?d, And the wife and the child and the musing comrade suffer?d, And the armies that remain?d suffer?d. Digging further into the data on veterans suicide provided by the VA one finds still another chilling statistic. It is difficult to truly ascertain an exact ratio of suicide attempts to death by suicide. Among US adults the CDC and other sources report that there are roughly 25-30 attempts for each death. Looking at information from the VA it appears that this ratio is much lower, perhaps in the single digits , perhaps as low as 5 or 6 attempts for each death. The primary explanation for this seems to be that veterans are much more likely to use a firearm for suicide than civilians; it?s not hard to understand how using a gun is a much more likely way to kill oneself than by other methods. Data shows the lethality of using a firearm for suicide is above 85%, while other methods of death by suicide have only a 5% success rate . This does not satisfy the question though as to why veterans have a stronger intention of killing themselves than civilians; why do veterans reach a place of distress and despair in their suicidality that initiates such a serious determination to end their lives? Multiple answers have been offered to this question. Some suggest veterans struggle to reintegrate into society, while others believe the culture of the military dissuades veterans from asking for help. Other thoughts extend to the idea that because veterans are trained in violence they are more likely to turn to violence as a solution, while another line of thinking is that because a high number of veterans own guns the solution to their problems is in their immediate possession. There are studies that show of predispositions to suicide or the relationship between opiates and suicide. In all these suggested answers there are elements that are partiality true or complement a larger reason, but they are incomplete and are ultimately belied, because if these were the reasons for elevated veteran suicides then the entire veteran population should respond in a similar manner. However, as noted above, veterans who have been to war and who have seen combat have higher rates of suicide than veterans who did not go to war or experience combat. The answer to this question of veteran suicide is simply there is a clear link between combat and suicide. This link has been confirmed over and over again in peer reviewed research by the VA and US universities. In a 2015 meta-analyis by the University of Utah National Center for Veteran Studies researchers found 21 of 22 previously conducted peer reviewed studies investigating the link between combat and suicide confirmed a clear relationship between the two.** Titled ?Combat Exposure and Risk for Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviors Among Military Personnel and Veterans: A Systematic Review and Meta?Analysis?, the researchers concluded: ?The study found a 43 percent increased suicide risk when people were exposed to killing and atrocity compared to just 25 percent when looking at deployment [to a war zone] in general.? There are very real connections between PTSD and traumatic brain injury and suicide, both conditions often being the result of combat. Additionally, combat veterans experience high levels of depression, substance abuse and homelessness. However, the primary cause of suicidality in combat veterans I believe is not something biological, physical or psychiatric, but rather something that in recent times has come to be known as moral injury . Moral injury is a wounding of the soul and spirit caused when a person transgress against her or his values, beliefs, expectations, etc. Very often moral injury occurs when someone does something or fails to do something, eg. I shot and killed that lady or I failed to save my friend from dying because I saved myself. Moral injury can also occur when a person is betrayed by others or by an institution, such as when one is sent to a war based on lies or is raped by their fellow soldiers and then denied justice by their commanders. An equivalent for moral injury is guilt, but such an equivalence is too simple, as the severity of moral injury transmits to not just a blackness of the soul and spirit, but also to a deconstruction of one?s own self. In my own case it was as if the foundations of my life, my existence, were cut out from underneath me. This is what drove me to suicidality . My conversations with fellow veterans inflicted with moral injury attest to the same. For decades the importance of moral injury, whether or not this exact term has been utilized, has been understood in literature examining suicide among veterans. As early as 1991 the VA identified the best predictor of suicide in Vietnam veterans as being ?intensive combat related guilt?. In the aforementioned meta-analysis of studies examining the relationship of combat and suicide by the University of Utah, multiple studies speak to the importance of ?guilt, shame, regret, and negative self-perceptions? in the suicidal ideation of combat veterans. Killing in war does not come natural to young men and women. They have to be conditioned to do so and the US government has spent tens of billions of dollars, if not more, perfecting the process of conditioning young men and women to kill. When a young man enters the Marine Corps to become a rifleman he will go through 13 weeks of recruit training. He will then go for six to eight weeks of additional weapons and tactics training. During all these months he will be conditioned to kill. When receiving an order he will not say ?yes, sir? or ?aye, sir? but will respond with the yell ?Kill!?. This will last for months of his life in an environment where the self is replaced with unquestioning group think in a training environment perfected over centuries to create disciplined and aggressive killers. After his initial training as a rifleman, this young man will report to his unit where he will spend the rest of his enlistment, approximately 3 ? years, doing only one thing: training to kill. All of this is necessary to ensure the Marine will engage and kill his enemy with certainty and without hesitation. It is a non-stop, academically and scientifically proven process unmatched within anything in the civilian world. Without such conditioning men and women will not pull the trigger, at least not as many of them as the generals want; studies of past wars showed the majority of soldiers did not fire their weapons in battle unless they were conditioned to do so. Upon release from the military, upon returning from war, the conditioning to kill no longer serves a purpose outside of combat and the bubble of military life. Conditioning is not brain washing and like physical conditioning such mental, emotional and spiritual conditioning can and will atrophy. Faced with himself in society, allowed to view the world, life and humans as he once knew them a dissonance between what he was conditioned to in the Marine Corps and what he once knew of himself now exists. Values he was taught by his family, his teachers or coaches, his church, synagogue or mosque; things he learned from the books he read and the movies he watched; and the good person he always thought he was to be return, and that dissonance between what he did in war and what and who he believed himself to be results in moral injury. Although there are many reasons people join the military, such as the economic draft , the majority of young men and women who join the US Armed Forces do so with the intention of helping others, they view themselves, rightly or wrongly, as being someone with a white hat on. This role of hero is further inculcated through military training , as well as through our society?s near-deification of the military; witness the continued and unquestioning reverence of soldiers whether it be at sporting events, in movies, or on the political campaign trail. However, the experience of veterans at war is often that the people who were occupied and to whom the war was brought didn?t view US soldiers as wearing white hats, but rather black ones. Here, again, a dissonance exists within a veteran?s mind and soul, between what society and the military tells him and what he has truly experienced. The moral injury sets in and leads to a despair and distress to which, in the end, only suicide seems to provides relief. I mentioned Shakespeare before and it is to him I often return when I speak of moral injury and death by suicide in veterans. Remember Lady MacBeth and her words in Act 5, Scene 1 of MacBeth : Out, damned spot! Out, I say!?One, two. Why, then, ?tis time to do ?t. Hell is murky!?Fie, my lord, fie! A soldier, and afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account??Yet who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him? The thane of Fife had a wife. Where is she now??What, will these hands ne?er be clean??No more o? that, my lord, no more o? that. You mar all with this starting? Here?s the smell of the blood still. All the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand. Oh, Oh, Oh! Think now of young men or women home from Iraq or Afghanistan, Somalia or Panama, Vietnam or Korea, the woods of Europe or the islands of the Pacific, what they have done cannot be undone, all the words of assurance that their actions were not murder cannot be justified, and nothing can clean the haunting blood from their hands. That in essence is moral injury, the reason why warriors throughout history have killed themselves long after coming home from war. And that is why the only way to prevent veterans from killing themselves is to prevent them from going to war. *Notes.* *With regards to active duty military suicides , active duty suicide rates are comparable to civilian rates of suicide, when adjusted for age and sex, however, it is important to note that prior to the post 9/11 years suicide rates were as little as half that of the civilian population among active duty service members (the Pentagon did not start tracking suicides until 1980 so data on previous wars in incomplete or non-existent for active duty forces). **The study that did not confirm a link between suicide and combat was inconclusive due to methodology issues. Article printed from CounterPunch.org: *https://www.counterpunch.org * URL to article: *https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/11/08/and-the-armies-that-remained-sufferd-veterans-moral-injury-and-suicide/ * Click here to print. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jbn at forestfield.org Sat Nov 9 23:01:23 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2019 17:01:23 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] coup at The Real News Network? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <656e3ce6-a815-9e00-9f0b-c5222a95bc01@forestfield.org> David Green wrote: > Not at all surprising; TRNN has been pretty hollowed out of content over > the past year beyond the still good local Baltimore coverage, and some of > Greg Wilpert's stories. Marc Steiner is a disaster, even though he > interviews decent people regarding Israel/Palestine. Almost the same, BTW, > can be said for Amy Goodman these days. I concur about Steiner for his Russiagate repeating on TRNN (which I've brought up in News from Neptune notes). It seems I'm not alone in noticing how Democracy Now covers Russiagate taking Russiagate stories at face value. DN didn't do that with the New York Times pro-war stories leading up to the 2003 Iraq war, DN always followed up on those stories with something from the IAEA or someone else who had been to Iraq explaining what they saw or didn't see. On nakedcapitalism.com: Michael Fiorillo in https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/11/paul-jay-and-sharmini-peries-ousted-from-the-real-news-network-in-june-current-fundraiser-hides-that-fact-falling-viewership-and-liberal-turn-result.html#comment-3238796 wrote > With all due respect to Amy Goodman and and Juan Gonzalez, DN really > blew it on Russiagate, guzzling the Kool Aid. They featured a frequently > unhinged Marcy Wheeler ? someone with no relevant experience, who made > preposterous assertions and betrayed sources ? as their go-to analyst on > the topic. To their credit, unlike other channels they?ve at least given > Glen Greenwald and others a chance to re-assess the Russiagate dumpster > fire, but they nevertheless undermined trust in their judgement and > credibility. I appreciate hearing from Greenwald as well, but it's pretty clear where the DN show stands on Russiagate (as Fiorello says). Their headline segments uncritically repeat Russiagate stories. In two ways Marcy Wheeler is like Rachel Maddow: both used to say and write well-researched reasonable things. Later both became Russiagate supporters ("Russiagators"?). Yves Smith regarding Wheeler's incoherent responses to Aaron Mat? in https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/11/paul-jay-and-sharmini-peries-ousted-from-the-real-news-network-in-june-current-fundraiser-hides-that-fact-falling-viewership-and-liberal-turn-result.html#comment-3239047 > Oh, this has been going on for a VERY long time on Twitter! She > [Wheeler] is always after him [Mat?] and he keeps having to rebut her > nonsense. She is rarely comprehensible. She doesn?t make a coherent > argument, cites names and legal provisions with explaining the > significance, as if just dropping them has talismanic value. I think that's a fair assessment of what Wheeler has become and exhibits now throughout her Russiagate defense. From brussel at illinois.edu Sat Nov 9 23:55:28 2019 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2019 23:55:28 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] coup at The Real News Network? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <96576FFD-3B0B-47BD-A453-F2171CE46025@illinois.edu> It is certainly evident that TRNN is no longer a critical place for most important news events. It?s been degraded. Paul Jay was an exceptiona commeentator. The loss of Aaron Mat? was regrettable: Was that due to Paul Jay? On Nov 9, 2019, at 11:37 AM, Stuart Levy via Peace-discuss > wrote: Have people been following Real News Network in recent months? There's an alarming article from Yves Smith of Naked Capitalism -- where it seems that Paul Jay and Sharmini Peries have been ousted as of this summer, but TRNN isn't talking about it: https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/11/paul-jay-and-sharmini-peries-ousted-from-the-real-news-network-in-june-current-fundraiser-hides-that-fact-falling-viewership-and-liberal-turn-result.html _______________________________________________ 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 Sat Nov 9 23:56:33 2019 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2019 23:56:33 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] coup at The Real News Network? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <22AA43E5-A2D2-4070-8082-E9C34D05205C@illinois.edu> Yeah. On Nov 9, 2019, at 1:08 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss > wrote: Not at all surprising; TRNN has been pretty hollowed out of content over the past year beyond the still good local Baltimore coverage, and some of Greg Wilpert's stories. Marc Steiner is a disaster, even though he interviews decent people regarding Israel/Palestine. Almost the same, BTW, can be said for Amy Goodman these days. DG On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 11:37 AM Stuart Levy via Peace-discuss > wrote: Have people been following Real News Network in recent months? There's an alarming article from Yves Smith of Naked Capitalism -- where it seems that Paul Jay and Sharmini Peries have been ousted as of this summer, but TRNN isn't talking about it: https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/11/paul-jay-and-sharmini-peries-ousted-from-the-real-news-network-in-june-current-fundraiser-hides-that-fact-falling-viewership-and-liberal-turn-result.html _______________________________________________ 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 Sun Nov 10 00:37:29 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2019 18:37:29 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Aaron_Mat=C3=A9_leaving_Democracy_Now_?= =?utf-8?q?=28Russiagate_=26_Syria=29=2C_The_Intercept_=28Russiagate=29=2C?= =?utf-8?q?_and_The_Real_News_=28Russiagate=29?= In-Reply-To: <96576FFD-3B0B-47BD-A453-F2171CE46025@illinois.edu> References: <96576FFD-3B0B-47BD-A453-F2171CE46025@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <06de9a3c-a83b-3e64-1023-9aa2036e8c09@forestfield.org> Brussel, Morton K wrote: > It is certainly evident that TRNN is no longer a critical place for most > important news events. It?s been degraded. Naked Capitalism has also withdrawn its endorsement of The Real News Network. From https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/11/paul-jay-and-sharmini-peries-ousted-from-the-real-news-network-in-june-current-fundraiser-hides-that-fact-falling-viewership-and-liberal-turn-result.html > Naked Capitalism is withdrawing its endorsement of The Real News Network > as a trusted platform for interviewees, financial contributors and/or > viewers. Dishonest efforts to create the impression that it is operating > on a ?business as usual? suggest that even more is amiss. It is our view > that The Real News Network is no longer, either intrinsically or > administratively, what it once was and aspired to be. > > Moreover, if you are as deeply disturbed as we are by this turn of > events, I strongly urge you to contact The Real News Network, give them > a piece of your mind, and demand answers. The official contact form is > here[1]. Please also circulate this post widely, including featuring it > on Facebook and Twitter [1] https://therealnews.com/about/contact-us Brussel, Morton K wrote: > The loss of Aaron Mat? was regrettable: Was that due to Paul Jay? The two did not agree on Russiagate. Jay struck me as being either somewhat supportive of Russiagate or he dismissed the idea that Russiagate was a story of importance. Mat? left Democracy Now over Syria & Russiagate differences, and he left The Intercept over Russiagate differences as well. https://www.reddit.com/r/WayOfTheBern/comments/a81poe/aaron_mate_is_now_basically_saying_he_got_fired/ -- used to have some information about Aaron Mat?'s departure from The Real News Aaron Mat? posted https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/985980643971608576 (which is now removed) but used to say: > I was a producer at @democracynow for 10 years, until early 2016, and > even before I worked there it was hugely formative for me. I disagree > with where it's gone on two crucial issues, Russiagate and especially > Syria. In https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zS0AlApiWLs Aaron Mat? discussed that he couldn't get his Russiagate analysis published at The Intercept. 27m07s: > Jimmy Dore: But that's what most of the people in journalism are about > -- they're about their career and they don't have a lot of courage. > Because that's what it takes to do this; it took a lot of guts to stick > your chin out and do this and thank God you found someone like Katrina > Vanden Heuvel over at The Nation to champion your writing otherwise you > would have been spending [your time], you and me over on our jagoff > YouTube channel and nobody would have been getting awards. > > Aaron Mat?: It's true. It's true. It's true. Listen, I can tell you that > I tried to write this stuff at The Intercept. It wasn't welcome there. I > wrote one piece about Rachel Maddow -- you covered this on your show, I > wrote that piece about Rachel Maddow and talking about how she covered > Russia more than all other issues combined and going through and > debunking a lot of her conspiracy theories; basically, arguing very > politely that she was a propagandist. That piece did very well but after > that I was never welcome back at The Intercept again. And I tried, you > know. And I thought that of all outlets, an outlet that calls itself > fearless and adversarial would wanna put resources that challenging the > claims of intelligence officials like John Brennan and challenging this > conspiracy theory that was so widespread across the corporate media. But > they weren't interested, and instead they went and hired Jim Risen. > > [Jimmy Dore throws his head back and laughs.] > > Dore: Jim Risen, who famously misused the word 'treason': it was pointed > out to him on video that he was misusing it, he admitted he was misusing > it, and then he said I don't give a fuck I'm gonna keep misusing it and > because words aren't that important to journalists like Jim Risen when > he's angry at someone like Donald Trump he reveals all the cracks in his > personality. A guy like Trump revealed every crack in Jim Risen's > personality. And it was shone a light on and that guy fell down harder > on the job than fucking anybody and I wish he would quit doing what he's > doing. > > Mat?: And to The Intercept's credit, they publish Glenn Greenwald who > pushed back on Russiagate from the beginning, before I did. It was > pretty much him and Bob Perry, the late legendary Bob Perry of > Consortium News, a legend. So Glenn and Bob Perry were among the first. > And so Glenn deserves a lot of credit. The Intercept cannot take credit > for what Glenn did because Glenn has autonomy, he does whatever he > wants, and they have nothing to do with what he did. > > Dore: Who are the people you work for at The Intercept? Who are your > editors that said no? > > Mat?: I'm not going to get into individuals, but the point is: > institutionally there was a decision that -- this website that does such > great work -- they do, I mean I love The Intercept, actually. I think > it's a great website. But on this key issue, the one that was engulfing > our politics, I think, they could maybe argue to the contrary if they > want to, but I think they made a concerted editorial decision to not be > aggressive and adversarial but to be careerist and to go along with the > prevailing narrative and sort of burnish their adversarial bona fides > through Glenn Greenwald over whom, again, they had no editorial control. > And that's why, for example, they also publish this really over-hyped > and overblown piece about based on the Reality Winner leak about how > Russia was trying to hack into voting systems. I mean, if you look at > the actual document they based their article on, the document itself > doesn't even show what they said it did. It was like a vague attribution > [to] Russian hacking but that was based on one analysts' judgment and > that was contextual information, it wasn't even -- they distinguished > between contextual information and confirmed information, which it was > not but they ignored that. It also was basically a spearphishing attack > that they were talking about which they kind of minimized; spearphishing > is not a sophisticated hacking thing. As illustrated by the fact that > whoever was carrying out this supposed massive attack on our election > system was using a GMail address impersonating a voting company with a > GMail address. And that's why when I had on James Risen when I was back > at The Real News and we discussed this issue, he couldn't defend the > substance of the article and he hung up on me. > > [...] > > Mat?: And I'll say also my former workplace Democracy Now which is my > favorite news show has the most noble, has such a noble legacy and I > benefit a lot from it. But their top guest on Russiagate was Marcy > Wheeler who is one of the most vocal conspiracy theorists out there. > > Dore: And revealed a source to the FBI, no? > > Mat?: That's right, she also turned in a source to the FBI who she said > played a key role in what she called "Russia's attack on the election". > Well, her source and her story are nowhere in the Mueller report. And > we haven't heard her explain what happened there. And yet she was > treated by many people as sort of a hero for turning in her source, > when really she was actually violating one of the core tenets of > journalism [which] is don't turn your source in to the government. And > now we know, based on the fact that Mueller didn't go anywhere with it > that it was baseless as was her entire conspiracy theory. So, I'm not > saying that these two outlets -- Democracy Now and The Intercept -- were > the worst, but the fact that even our most noble outlets could drink the > Kool-Aid and go along with it really says something about how bad our > media culture was. > > Dore: And that's why it was emotionally wrenching for me to see places > like Democracy Now, The Intercept, The Young Turks where I worked push > Russiagate. It destroyed me, kind of, internally. It was way worse than > the [coverage of the] Iraq war for me because at least during the Iraq > war most of the people on the Left were awake about it, right? But this > was ubiquitous, it was horrible. I looked up who is the editor: Betsy > Reed is the Editor-in-Chief of The Intercept. Betsy Reed is the editor > based in New York City, Glenn Greenwald is the co-founding editor. Now > we know where he stood at. Then the other one is Jeremy Scahill, he's > the co-founding editor. So I'm gonna guess Betsy Reed sets the tone over > there, I guess. Side note: I disagree with Dore at 45m05s when he claims that: > [J]ournalists are bigger fuck-ups and screw-ups than comedians. > Comedians have a higher standard than these people [journalists]. There are plenty of corporate-friendly comics and they get corporate media comedy specials (Sarah Silverman, for instance, who famously chastised Clinton/DNC rally attendees they were "being ridiculous" for not accepting Hillary Clinton's nomination), they get TV shows (Samantha Bee, John Oliver, Bill Maher, Joy Behar, Whoopie Goldberg are all neoliberals and neocons or push for same via identity politics), they get interviewed by mainstream-compatible interviewers (Margaret Cho saying G.W. Bush "is cute now" when interviewed by Larry King on his RT show which is easily RT's worst show when King hosts), and virtually everyone on Saturday Night Live. Most comics you are allowed to hear from on establishment media have very low standards and will echo whatever the establishment wants them to say. If they didn't echo establishment propaganda they wouldn't be allowed to appear on establishment media. From carl at newsfromneptune.com Mon Nov 11 01:22:25 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2019 19:22:25 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Marcuse interview Tuesday 11:30 References: Message-ID: <109F348C-8876-40AA-A92B-9C449F96E8F9@newsfromneptune.com> Herbert Marcuse American-German philosopher Herbert Marcuse was a German-American philosopher, sociologist, and political theorist, associated with the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory. Born in Berlin, Marcuse studied at the Humboldt University of Berlin and then at Freiburg, where he received his PhD. Wikipedia Born: July 19, 1898, Berlin, Germany Died: July 29, 1979, Starnberg, Germany Influenced: J?rgen Habermas, Angela Davis, Douglas Kellner... Influenced by: Karl Marx, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer... Quotes "Free election of masters does not abolish the masters or the slaves." "The people recognize themselves in their commodities; they find their soul in their automobile, hi-fi set, split-level home, kitchen equipment." "Not every problem someone has with his girlfriend is necessarily due to the capitalist mode of production." > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Schumacher, Jake" > Subject: Marcuse > Date: November 10, 2019 at 7:13:45 PM CST > To: 'C G Estabrook' > > Don?t know how you feel about him but I found a half-hour interview with him from 1979 (the year of his death) that I?m running in the ?Vintage Documentaries? slot this Tuesday at 11:30pm, just in case you?re interested! > > Jake Schumacher > UPTV Program Coordinator > City of Urbana > 400 S. Vine Street > Urbana, IL 61801 > (217) 384-2452 > jaschumacher at urbanaillinois.us > urbanapublictelevision.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carl at newsfromneptune.com Tue Nov 12 02:28:23 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 20:28:23 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] WSWS on 'whistle-blower' In-Reply-To: <01E7E389-DD69-47BC-AECA-76BD0165CDA6@newsfromneptune.com> References: <01E7E389-DD69-47BC-AECA-76BD0165CDA6@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: <1E3F4D5B-E47A-4AB6-B8D7-7DEDBBE0BD42@newsfromneptune.com> https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/11/11/face-n11.html From jbn at forestfield.org Tue Nov 12 04:32:25 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 22:32:25 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] WSWS on 'whistle-blower' In-Reply-To: <1E3F4D5B-E47A-4AB6-B8D7-7DEDBBE0BD42@newsfromneptune.com> References: <01E7E389-DD69-47BC-AECA-76BD0165CDA6@newsfromneptune.com> <1E3F4D5B-E47A-4AB6-B8D7-7DEDBBE0BD42@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: C. G. Estabrook wrote: > https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/11/11/face-n11.html From that webpage: > In an email statement, Facebook said, ?Any mention of the potential > whistleblower?s name violates our coordinating harm policy, which > prohibits content ?outing of witness, informant or activist?,? adding, > ?We are removing any and all mentions of the potential whistleblower?s > name and will revisit this decision should their name be widely > published in the media or used by public figures in debate.? > > CNN also reported that YouTube issued a statement saying that it was > using a combination of artificial intelligence software and human > monitors to find and delete videos with the name of the ?Ukrainegate? > whistleblower. ?The removals, the spokesperson added, would affect the > titles and descriptions of videos as well as the video?s actual > content,? the CNN report said. First off: Why is the WSWS (which calls Eric Ciaramella a "career CIA analyst") not identifying him as a "spook doing spook things" as Caitlin Johnstone put it in https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/msm-defends-cias-whistleblower-ignores-actual-whistleblowers-5fbe577d988d ? Caitlin Johnstone: > In all seriousness, even to call this spook a ?whistleblower? is > ridiculous on its face. You don?t get to call someone from the US > intelligence community a whistleblower unless they are actually > whistleblowing on the US intelligence community. That?s not a thing. A > CIA officer who exposes information about government officials is an > operative performing an operation unless proven otherwise, because > that?s what the CIA does; it liberally leaks information wherever it?s > convenient for CIA agendas while withholding all other information > behind a veil of government secrecy. > > A CIA officer who exposes information about CIA wrongdoings without the > CIA?s permission is a whistleblower. A CIA officer who exposes > information about someone else is just a spook doing spook things. You > can recognize the latter by the way the mass media supports, applauds > and employs them. You can recognize the former by the way they have been > persecuted, imprisoned, and/or died under mysterious circumstances. As CrossTalk pointed out on Monday (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lelpr2m4k-s), this person's name (Eric Ciaramella) is mentioned in the Mueller Report (see page 71 as labeled in the report, which appears on page 283 of the searchable 448 page PDF at https://www.washingtonian.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/searchable-mueller-report.pdf). Peter Lavelle (CrossTalk host) and panel were aware of this ongoing censorship and didn't dare mention Ciaramella by name on that show, lest it become cause for no longer publishing that video (for which I blame RT for choosing to distribute the video via the censorious YouTube instead of their own website; the copy of this show on https://www.rt.com/podcast/473010-tech-politics-johnson-brexit/ only contains audio). Disappointingly this same episode of CrossTalk goes on to lament the censorship on grounds that don't include acknowledging that Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, etc. are all private organizations; private organizations being pressured by the US government into carrying out a censorship regime that would be unlawful for the US government to carry out itself. Furthermore the real problem of the Internet these days is that it is an overwhelmingly privately-run affair -- to do anything on the Internet one needs to have multiple relationships with private organizations (domain name hosters, network providers, and more) each of which could choose not to relay one's messages. This should stir people to reconsider the fantasy promised long ago by naive libertarians who thought that a privately-run Internet would be a vehicle for freedom of expression and organization. We see that leaving important matters in private hands is a bad choice, the services people pick matter, and when most users pick the same set of services they effectively give those services power to censor them. From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Nov 12 16:56:11 2019 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 16:56:11 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [recovery_human_face] DO I REGRET THE DEMISE OF THE WTO? By Walden Bello References: Message-ID: Dear friends, The English original of my article in the German periodical Welt-Sichten, Nov 7, 2019 By Walden Bello State University of New York at Binghamton and Focus on the Global South [https://external.fbkk22-3.fna.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQBTDZUFl7F5SBKe&w=540&h=282&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.welt-sichten.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Ff%2Fteaserbild%2Fartikel%2Fwelthandel_teaser.jpg&cfs=1&upscale=1&fallback=news_d_placeholder_publisher&_nc_eui2=AeEC_MOskx_5XXVGqaRfd3qOlac06C6MVRXng0EgmFFwSGCjPv_AsE3_GA9_D8joVj7ONJeP_KeVQH-OoHemGfszV62jjK18Dvm1DeT3KWgYXA&_nc_hash=AQADZMpG_bwMfGcR] Die WTO ist tot ? na und? | Welt-Sichten https://www.welt-sichten.org/artikel/36918/die-wto-ist-tot-na-und Do I regret the demise of the World Trade Organization now that Trump is on a unilateral trade rampage? No. I always saw the WTO and unilateralism as two faces of US power deployed against those countries seeking to remake the world trading order in a more equitable and just direction. Multilateralism and unilateralism have since the end of the Second World War been alternative strategies for global hegemony preferred by competing factions of the US ruling elite. The Democrats preferred multilateralism because they felt it would both institutionalize the US?s hegemonic status in the world trading order at the same time that it would make it more legitimate because it would obtain the consent of its allies. Republicans, however, felt that the exercise of US power should be as little constrained by global rules and institutions as possible. These two views clashed head on in 1948 during the debate over the ratification of the Havana Charter, which would have established the International Trade Organization (ITO). After having participated in the negotiations, the Democratic administration of President Truman did not submit it to the Senate for ratification, worried that the Republicans would successfully block it. The Republicans argued that ratifying the Havana Charter would be unconstitutional since no legal code could stand above the US Constitution, and that a treaty governing trade would do precisely that. Republicans and Democrats agreed to a compromise: the much weaker General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which had little checks on US trade practices and did not bring under its ambit global agricultural trade that US corporations dominated. With trade making up only a small part of US gross domestic product (GDP), the US was not worried about the absence of strong rules on global trade and felt these would only harm the bottom line of its emerging transnational corporations. Paradoxically, GATT allowed the rise of a number of formerly minor trading countries into major actors in global trade, which would not have been possible within an iron-clad free trade regime. These were mainly economies from East Asia like South Korea, Taiwan, and Malaysia that engaged in aggressive export policies while building up manufacturing industries protected by high tariffs and import quotas. At the same time, by the 1970?s and 1980?s, trade accounted for a greater part of US GDP than in the late forties and US corporations wanted less restrictions in their penetration of foreign markets. So Washington changed its mind in the 1980?s and both Republicans and Democrats agreed to push for a strengthened global trade regime. The US was confident that it would benefit mainly its corporations which it saw as the most competitive in the world. The European Union decided to join the bandwagon for a strengthened international trade regime mainly because, like Washington, it wanted to dump its massive agricultural surpluses on developing countries. Leading industries in Europe, the US, and Japan, like the auto and information industries, also had a joint interest in preventing the emergence of new competitors from East and Southeast Asia by making the latter?s liberal acquisition of complex technologies?dubbed ?intellectual piracy?-- a violation of trade rules. The result was the World Trade Organization, which came into being in 1995. The WTO, from the perspective of US interests, was a set of rules and institutions that would promote, consolidate, and legitimize structures of global trade ensuring the hegemony of US interests. While free trade was the rhetoric of the WTO, the achievement of monopoly was actually the aim of the WTO?s three most important agreements. The Agreement on Agriculture (AOA) institutionalized the dumping of US and European surpluses on developing countries by forcing the latter to end their import quotas and lower their tariffs. The Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPs) sought to institutionalize US corporations? monopoly of high technology by outlawing reverse engineering and other methods used by developing countries to get universal access to knowledge. The Trade Related Investment Measures Agreement (TRIMs) sought to prevent countries from imitating Japan, South Korea, and Malaysia and using trade policy, like reducing imported inputs into finished goods in favor of local inputs, to build up industries that became significant competitors both in local and global markets. Then, in 2003, with the heft provided by India, Brazil, and China (a WTO member since 2001), the developing countries in the WTO were able to prevent the US and EU?s attempt to dismantle government protection of small farmers. They foiled attempts to tighten the already very restrictive TRIPs Agreement, and prevented the joint US-EU attempt to bring investment, government procurement, and competition policy under the ambit of the WTO. Following this, the US abandoned the multilateral route. After the Fifth Ministerial of the WTO collapsed in Cancun in 2003, the Republican Bush administration?s Special Trade Representative Robert Zoellick warned: ?As the WTO members ponder the future, the U.S. will not wait: we will move towards free trade with can-do countries.? Over the next few years, the US and the EU preferred to put their efforts into forging bilateral trade agreements or limited multilateral agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) that was the fallback position favored by the Obama administration. So Trump did not initiate the move back to unilateralism; he merely brought to its climax, with his trade war with China, a swing back to unilateralism that had begun with the George W. Bush administration in 2003. The result, the current global trading system, is a hodge-podge featuring a weakened WTO, failed trade agreements like the TPP, stalemated or slow-moving negotiations like the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), developing country trade arrangements like Mercosur, bilateral treaties like the South Korea-US free trade agreement, and non-institutionalized bilateral and unilateral initiatives. This may, in fact, be the least undesirable of outcomes. For many developing countries, the era of the weak GATT regime from 1948 to 1995 was a dynamic era that left them a lot of development space owing to the lack of pressure for them to open up their agricultural and manufacturing sectors, weak trade dispute mechanisms, and the absence of anti-development pro-developed country regimes like TRIPs. Instead of the chaos that neoliberal ideologues warn us against, current conditions might, in fact, be moving in the direction of a hybrid GATT-like system that would hold out a larger space for efforts at genuine sustainable development by the global South. *One of the principal actors in the Alter Globalization Movement, Walden Bello is the author of Deglobalization: Ideas for a New World Economy (Zed, 2000) and Revisiting and Reclaiming Deglobalization (Focus on the Global South, 2019). He has also recently written on the global financial crisis (Paper Dragons: China and the Next Crash, Zed, 2019) and the rise of counterrevolutionary movements (Counterrevolution: The Global Rise of the Right, Practical Action, 2019). ________________________________ Please share your inputs by e-mailing: recoveryhumanface at socpro.list.ilo.org. To see earlier messages http://www.recoveryhumanface.org/. This e-discussion is intended to facilitate the exchange of knowledge and ideas; the views expressed by contributors do not reflect the policies of ILO. The discussion is moderated by Isabel Ortiz, contact at isabel.ortiz at ymail.com . Subscribe ? Unsubscribe -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Tue Nov 12 18:36:05 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:36:05 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] This is pretty unbelievable Message-ID: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/11/11/john-cobin-chile-shooting-protesters-video/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Tue Nov 12 19:08:49 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 13:08:49 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] This is pretty unbelievable In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <006901d5998c$9e256660$da703320$@comcast.net> David, Would you mind copying and pasting this article ? I cannot access it. David J. From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of David Green via Peace-discuss Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 12:36 PM To: Peace-discuss Subject: [Peace-discuss] This is pretty unbelievable https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/11/11/john-cobin-chile-shooting-protesters-video/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Tue Nov 12 20:41:58 2019 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (Stuart Levy) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 14:41:58 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] This is pretty unbelievable In-Reply-To: <006901d5998c$9e256660$da703320$@comcast.net> References: <006901d5998c$9e256660$da703320$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <70049f71-65bc-79fe-5af5-3d41dfcbbba4@gmail.com> Here it is.?? We could wish this story were unbelievable.??? It seems entirely in character. > washingtonpost.com > > > > > A Californian economist loves neoliberalism. When Chileans started > protesting it, he opened fire on them. > > By Teo Armus?? Reporter on the Morning Mix team > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > John Cobin, a U.S.-born economist and former member of a > neo-Confederate group, is so passionate about a free market ? and > about Chile ? that he has devoted the past two decades to marrying the > two. > > But Cobin?s unusual story took a violent turn this weekend, when he > drove through one of the many crowds that have paralyzed Chile in > recent weeks as they protest income inequality and a high cost of living. > > The 56-year-old was arrested Sunday, police said, after he repeatedly > fired a gun into a crowd in the beachside town of Re?aca, seriously > injuring at least one person. > > ?I did not do anything wrong,? Cobin said in a video > filmed just before his > arrest. ?It was very dangerous, very scary time for me. Thankfully, I > had my gun to be able to defend myself." > > After speeding his pickup truck through a crowd of people, video of > the scene shows > , > Cobin shot his gun at demonstrators five times. > > The shocking incident underscores the violence that Chilean protesters > have been facing at the hands of their government, and occasionally > other civilians. As of Friday, at least 20 people have been killed and > about 1,600 have been injured, according to human rights observers > , as crowds face water > cannons and tear gas and pellets are shot in close range > . > > The protests erupted in mid-October, when student-led strikes against > a metro fare increase quickly widened into massive anti-government > demonstrations that blocked off streets and set subway stations > aflame. Even as the Chilean government reshuffled its cabinet and > increased taxes on the wealthy, crowds have continued to rail against > decades of neoliberal economic policies, including the privatization > of water, highways and the pension system. > > It was those policies that first made Chile such an attractive > destination for staunch free-market Americans like Cobin. > > A professor with a PhD in public policy, he moved his family to Chile > in 1996, setting up a business to help other recent arrivals from the > Anglophone world and teaching courses at Andr?s Bello National University. > > In the United States, he had grown sick of > political correctness, > eroding family values and high taxes, and his attempts at political > relevancy had proved futile. He had participated in the League of the > South, a neo-Confederate hate group, and failed in his libertarian bid > for a U.S. congressional seat in South Carolina. Days before the > election, he was arrested > > on charges of domestic violence. > > In Chile, however, he emerged as a prolific conservative commentator, > hosting a talk radio show called ?Red Hot Chile,? traveling to every > major town around the country and remarrying a Chilean woman. He > dubbed himself the ?biggest neoliberal in the entire country.? > (Chilean media outlets would later describe him > > as a white supremacist.) > > In 2012, he helped three other Americans found a libertarian compound > in the mountains, Galt?s Gulch, named for the fictional capitalist > haven in Ayn Rand?s ?Atlas Shrugged > .? > Cobin quickly split and founded a competing sustainable farm and > libertarian compound, called Freedom Orchard. > > A brochure > > for the mountainside compound advertised an idyllic 400-unit paradise, > where ?liberty-loving people from all over the world? could enjoy low > taxes, organic produce, and freedom from ?intrusive and abusive > government meddling.? One group, however, was not welcome on his > orchard: liberals from the United States. > > ?You?ve already messed up your country,? Cobin told Mother Jones in > 2014 > . > ?We don?t need you.? > > In countless interviews and letters to the editor, he also expressed a > particular admiration for the anti-communist policies of Augusto > Pinochet, Chile?s disgraced former military dictator. Cobin > established ties with Herm?genes P?rez de Arce > , a > widely read ? and to his opponents, widely reviled ? conservative > newspaper columnist known as one of Pinochet?s most prominent > defenders. (P?rez de Arce, who could not be reached for comment, is > serving as Cobin?s lawyer.) > > In an undated video > > circulating on social media, Cobin had even spoken about eliminating > the ?communist plague." > > ?When they show off machetes, we?ll have the most massive firearms > legally allowed in this country, and shoot to kill,? he said. ?Not > shoot at their legs, [but] straight in the heart so no witnesses are > left.? > > On Sunday, it seems as though he got close. > > In a since-deleted YouTube video he sent to his online followers, > Cobin recounted how he had been driving to a gun range when he > stumbled through protesters in Re?aca, a beachside resort town about > 20 minutes north of Valpara?so, the country?s third-largest city. > > According to Chilean news reports > , > about 2,000 people were protesting along a main road, partaking in a > tactic in which they stop cars > > and ask drivers to dance with them as a show of solidarity. Cobin, > wearing a neon yellow vest, refused. He started speeding through the > crowd instead. > > As Cobin tells it, the mob began banging against his pickup truck when > he took out his gun and loaded it. He was fending against the > possibility of assault, he said, as he began firing. > > ?I was in fear for my life, being attacked by a violent mob,? he said. > > Video of the incident > , > however, showed a largely isolated vehicle moving past the crowd. > After Cobin opened fire, a barefoot protester threw an object toward > Cobin, who responded with more shots in the direction of the > demonstrators. One of his bullets hit someone in the thigh, reportedly > landing that man in the hospital. > > As footage of the incident circulated around Chilean social media, > Cobin was identified and doxed, his address and phone numbers released > on social media. His phone was ringing off the hook, he said, as > police came to his home to arrest him. > > ?We will not tolerate that anyone, regardless of their condition or > belief, use firearms to impose their ideas,? said > > Jorge Mart?nez, the governor of Valparaiso. Cobin is set to be > presented on Monday on charges of attempted murder and severe > injuries, even as many critics say government forces have gone > unchecked for the same sort of violence. > > Late Sunday, another trace emerged on social media: Cobin had taken a > selfie with the police officers who arrested him. > On 11/12/19 1:08 PM, David Johnson via Peace-discuss wrote: > > David, > > ? > > Would you mind copying and pasting this article ? > > I cannot access it. > > ? > > David J. > > ? > > ? > > ? > > *From:*Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] > *On Behalf Of *David Green via Peace-discuss > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 12, 2019 12:36 PM > *To:* Peace-discuss > *Subject:* [Peace-discuss] This is pretty unbelievable > > ? > > https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/11/11/john-cobin-chile-shooting-protesters-video/? > > ? > > ? > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Tue Nov 12 23:56:53 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 17:56:53 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] This is pretty unbelievable In-Reply-To: <70049f71-65bc-79fe-5af5-3d41dfcbbba4@gmail.com> References: <006901d5998c$9e256660$da703320$@comcast.net> <70049f71-65bc-79fe-5af5-3d41dfcbbba4@gmail.com> Message-ID: <00e801d599b4$dc07a830$9416f890$@comcast.net> Thank you Stuart ! David J. From: Stuart Levy [mailto:stuartnlevy at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 2:42 PM To: David Johnson; 'David Green'; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Cc: Stuart Levy Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] This is pretty unbelievable Here it is. We could wish this story were unbelievable. It seems entirely in character. washingtonpost.com A Californian economist loves neoliberalism. When Chileans started protesting it, he opened fire on them. By Teo Armus Reporter on the Morning Mix team _____ John Cobin, a U.S.-born economist and former member of a neo-Confederate group, is so passionate about a free market ? and about Chile ? that he has devoted the past two decades to marrying the two. But Cobin?s unusual story took a violent turn this weekend, when he drove through one of the many crowds that have paralyzed Chile in recent weeks as they protest income inequality and a high cost of living. The 56-year-old was arrested Sunday, police said, after he repeatedly fired a gun into a crowd in the beachside town of Re?aca, seriously injuring at least one person. ?I did not do anything wrong,? Cobin said in a video filmed just before his arrest. ?It was very dangerous, very scary time for me. Thankfully, I had my gun to be able to defend myself." After speeding his pickup truck through a crowd of people, video of the scene shows , Cobin shot his gun at demonstrators five times. The shocking incident underscores the violence that Chilean protesters have been facing at the hands of their government, and occasionally other civilians. As of Friday, at least 20 people have been killed and about 1,600 have been injured, according to human rights observers , as crowds face water cannons and tear gas and pellets are shot in close range . The protests erupted in mid-October, when student-led strikes against a metro fare increase quickly widened into massive anti-government demonstrations that blocked off streets and set subway stations aflame. Even as the Chilean government reshuffled its cabinet and increased taxes on the wealthy, crowds have continued to rail against decades of neoliberal economic policies, including the privatization of water, highways and the pension system. It was those policies that first made Chile such an attractive destination for staunch free-market Americans like Cobin. A professor with a PhD in public policy, he moved his family to Chile in 1996, setting up a business to help other recent arrivals from the Anglophone world and teaching courses at Andr?s Bello National University. In the United States, he had grown sick of political correctness, eroding family values and high taxes, and his attempts at political relevancy had proved futile. He had participated in the League of the South, a neo-Confederate hate group, and failed in his libertarian bid for a U.S. congressional seat in South Carolina. Days before the election, he was arrested on charges of domestic violence. In Chile, however, he emerged as a prolific conservative commentator, hosting a talk radio show called ?Red Hot Chile,? traveling to every major town around the country and remarrying a Chilean woman. He dubbed himself the ?biggest neoliberal in the entire country.? (Chilean media outlets would later describe him as a white supremacist.) In 2012, he helped three other Americans found a libertarian compound in the mountains, Galt?s Gulch, named for the fictional capitalist haven in Ayn Rand?s ?Atlas Shrugged .? Cobin quickly split and founded a competing sustainable farm and libertarian compound, called Freedom Orchard. A brochure for the mountainside compound advertised an idyllic 400-unit paradise, where ?liberty-loving people from all over the world? could enjoy low taxes, organic produce, and freedom from ?intrusive and abusive government meddling.? One group, however, was not welcome on his orchard: liberals from the United States. ?You?ve already messed up your country,? Cobin told Mother Jones in 2014 . ?We don?t need you.? In countless interviews and letters to the editor, he also expressed a particular admiration for the anti-communist policies of Augusto Pinochet, Chile?s disgraced former military dictator. Cobin established ties with Herm?genes P?rez de Arce , a widely read ? and to his opponents, widely reviled ? conservative newspaper columnist known as one of Pinochet?s most prominent defenders. (P?rez de Arce, who could not be reached for comment, is serving as Cobin?s lawyer.) In an undated video circulating on social media, Cobin had even spoken about eliminating the ?communist plague." ?When they show off machetes, we?ll have the most massive firearms legally allowed in this country, and shoot to kill,? he said. ?Not shoot at their legs, [but] straight in the heart so no witnesses are left.? On Sunday, it seems as though he got close. In a since-deleted YouTube video he sent to his online followers, Cobin recounted how he had been driving to a gun range when he stumbled through protesters in Re?aca, a beachside resort town about 20 minutes north of Valpara?so, the country?s third-largest city. According to Chilean news reports , about 2,000 people were protesting along a main road, partaking in a tactic in which they stop cars and ask drivers to dance with them as a show of solidarity. Cobin, wearing a neon yellow vest, refused. He started speeding through the crowd instead. As Cobin tells it, the mob began banging against his pickup truck when he took out his gun and loaded it. He was fending against the possibility of assault, he said, as he began firing. ?I was in fear for my life, being attacked by a violent mob,? he said. Video of the incident , however, showed a largely isolated vehicle moving past the crowd. After Cobin opened fire, a barefoot protester threw an object toward Cobin, who responded with more shots in the direction of the demonstrators. One of his bullets hit someone in the thigh, reportedly landing that man in the hospital. As footage of the incident circulated around Chilean social media, Cobin was identified and doxed, his address and phone numbers released on social media. His phone was ringing off the hook, he said, as police came to his home to arrest him. ?We will not tolerate that anyone, regardless of their condition or belief, use firearms to impose their ideas,? said Jorge Mart?nez, the governor of Valparaiso. Cobin is set to be presented on Monday on charges of attempted murder and severe injuries, even as many critics say government forces have gone unchecked for the same sort of violence. Late Sunday, another trace emerged on social media: Cobin had taken a selfie with the police officers who arrested him. On 11/12/19 1:08 PM, David Johnson via Peace-discuss wrote: David, Would you mind copying and pasting this article ? I cannot access it. David J. From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of David Green via Peace-discuss Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 12:36 PM To: Peace-discuss Subject: [Peace-discuss] This is pretty unbelievable https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/11/11/john-cobin-chile-shooting-protesters-video/ _______________________________________________ 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 Nov 13 18:07:35 2019 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 18:07:35 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Anti-war activists might wish to attend this symposium Thursday Message-ID: I suggest anti-war activists be on hand for this one, it looks to me, like a pro-war propaganda attempt: "All are welcome to this year?s Cline Symposium keynote on November 14th. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry will help us better understand the growing militarization of US foreign policy. In nearly 400 overseas interventions, American soldiers, flyers, sailors and Marines have fought on every inhabited continent fighting a staggering array of national armies, insurgents, terrorists, and criminals. Ambassador Eikenberry will help us ask critical questions about this expenditure of blood and treasure. What has it all achieved, and to what end have we expended so many lives and resources? Have we neglected ?soft power? alternatives to military action like diplomatic, legal, and economic foreign policy tools? Prior to his service as US envoy to Afghanistan, our speaker spent more than three decades in the US Army, retiring with the rank of lieutenant general. He now directs the American Academy of Arts and Sciences study on civil wars and international responses. The event will be open to the public on November 14th at 7:30 in the Alice Campbell Ballroom, and live-streamed on Facebook." [https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/c0.15.843.444a/p843x403/72455208_1429006170595937_4825221845240250368_o.jpg?_nc_cat=109&_nc_eui2=AeGJOyEIgOG5BHQuW5S8YMR3vbzDii1el9czro9FXBg6pqzwPCOB6wZHFCpig2Yyph9B6yiY1bluHItnQtAVMDBJAEA79pP5loR-ENoJMfwwQg&_nc_oc=AQnQ7u7288s20EGIsHofFIyKlKdhbflV130Hu1R61Xs03G4J1gJ4dtda1emOSaJxxEU&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=1d3a6e4af22a53a3000f2c3ce93368cb&oe=5E5F98D3] THU, NOV 14 AT 7:30 PM CST Lecture: The Growing Militarization of US Foreign Policy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Wed Nov 13 18:24:48 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 12:24:48 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Why_Are_Pundits_Fawning_Over_Elizabeth?= =?utf-8?q?_Warren=E2=80=99s_Medicare-for-All_Financing_Proposal=3F?= Message-ID: JACOBIN 11.12.2019 *Why Are Pundits Fawning Over Elizabeth Warren?s Medicare-for-All Financing Proposal?* BY MATT BRUENIG Somehow, the least progressive Medicare-for-All funding proposal I have ever seen is being championed by many in the media as our best and only choice. I have been swimming in the Medicare-for-All waters for over a decade now, going back to when I worked on the Ralph Nader presidential campaign that made Medicare for All (M4A) its number-one issue. During this time, I developed a specific understanding of what we might call ?the M4A Financing Problem.? *The Problem* The M4A Financing Problem, in simple terms, is that even if you bring in existing federal spending on health care, existing state spending on health care, and a bunch of new rich-people taxes, you still fall short of financing the program. Thus, to actually complete the financing, you have to use some middle-class taxes. The proper response to this ?problem? has always been to point out that it is no problem at all. Yes, you will have to impose some middle-class taxes to round out the total amount of money you need, but those taxes will charge the middle class far less than they are currently paying for health care. What people don?t like about taxes is that it means they have less money. But swapping these taxes for the elimination of premiums and out-of-pocket expenses would actually mean that the middle class has a lot more money. However, for some pundits, this explanation has never been satisfactory. They say that any tax imposed on the middle class is a problem and has to be avoided. And, insofar as you cannot do M4A without some middle-class taxes, it is a nonstarter. *The Solution?* When Warren released her Medicare-for-All financing proposal this week, nearly every left-liberal journalist declared she had made a huge breakthrough: an M4A financing plan with no middle-class taxes. David Dayen of the American Prospect announced that ?Warren?s Medicare for All Plan Includes No New Taxes on the Middle Class.? Sahil Kapur says that, contrary to Bernie Sanders, Warren?s plan has ?no middle class taxes.? Danielle Kurtzleben of NPR says Warren?s plan has ?no new taxes on the middle class.? Ady Barkan of the Intercept writes that ?her plan doesn?t raise taxes on working families.? Even Eric Levitz of New York magazine, who seems to know better in parts of his piece, says that the plan ?does not raise the American middle class?s taxes by a dime.? Every single one of these people is incorrect, under the typical definition of ?middle-class taxes? that has always been used in this discussion. Just like every person that came before her, Warren realized that after bringing in existing government spending and some targeted rich-people taxes, there was still more money that needed to be collected. And, just like those people, she came up with a middle-class tax to do it. Her middle-class tax is an employer-side head tax. It is an $8.8 trillion tax hike on the middle class. To understand where the discourse has gone so far off the rails on this, it is necessary to distinguish between three concepts. Middle-class taxes. Any tax whose incidence falls on the middle class, meaning that it is the middle class who really pays the tax, regardless of how it is collected. Direct middle-class taxes. Any tax that is directly charged to middle-class people, including employee-side payroll taxes and income taxes. Indirect middle-class taxes. Any tax whose incidence falls on the middle class but is collected from entities other than the middle class, including employer-side head taxes, employer-side payroll taxes, and value-added taxes. Discourse participants who are claiming Warren?s employer-side head tax is not a middle-class tax hike seem to be stuck in a kind of weird conceptual vortex in which they drift between the point that (a) Warren?s employer-side head tax is charged to employers rather than directly to workers (i.e., it is an indirect tax), and the point that (b) the employer-side head tax simply replaces employer premiums in a way that actually costs less than the status quo. Somewhere in the intersection of these two concepts comes the claim that Warren?s head tax is not a middle-class tax hike. But point (b) is just the standard point mentioned at the top of the piece, that what matters is not whether something is a ?tax? or a ?premium,? but rather what the total cost is to the middle class. Pointing out that you are replacing health-care spending with a lower tax has never been enough in the past to be able to claim that you are not imposing ?middle-class taxes.? Yet now it somehow is. And point (a) just says that indirect middle-class taxes are not middle-class taxes. But in that case, employer-side payroll taxes and value-added taxes are also not middle-class taxes, and so proposals to use those have actually been solving the M4A Financing Problem all along. Yet, as with (b), nobody has ever previously permitted people to claim that indirect middle-class taxes are not middle-class taxes in this debate. Of course, my analysis probably gives pundits on this more credit than they deserve. A heaping dose of pro-Warren bias and a general inability to really evaluate policies that are put in front of them no doubt goes a long way toward explaining why so many people ran with the talking points put out by the Warren campaign. Regardless of that, if we want to be serious about this debate, we really should establish some kind of ground rules for what solves the M4A Financing Problem (however defined). If an employer-side head tax solves the problem because middle-class health-care costs are still lower after its imposition, then every M4A financing proposal I have ever seen solves the problem ? and does it in a much more progressive way than Warren has. If the employer-side head tax solves the problem because it is less costly while also being an indirect tax, then an employer-side payroll tax also solves the problem, but in a way that is far more progressive than Warren?s head tax. The idea that Warren?s specific cost-saving indirect middle-class tax hike ? an employer-side head tax ? is the only thing that counts as solving the M4A Financing Problem is clearly nonsensical. And yet, here we are, with the least progressive M4A funding proposal I have ever seen being championed as the only one that solves the problem. *Matt Bruenig is the founder of People's Policy Project.* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Wed Nov 13 19:07:20 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 13:07:20 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Western terrorists are coming home to roost Message-ID: <00b801d59a55$93996920$bacc3b60$@comcast.net> * Home Politics Middle East Western terrorists are coming home to roost Western terrorists are coming home to roost * https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/d11e1196071d428d806f980a02f65313?s=30&d=m m&r=gMideast discourse * November 13, 2019 Steven Sahiounie, political commentator Turkey is deporting terrorists to their country of origin. President Recep Tayyip Erdo?an said Tuesday, "Some countries have started panicking after we began the repatriation process of foreign Daesh terrorists. Turkey has been worrying about this issue for years, let others worry now," He added, "The American Daesh terrorists stranded in the buffer zone on Greece border is none of Turkey's concern, deportations will continue regardless." The Turkish Interior Minister, S?leyman Soylu, said last week that Ankara would start sending ISIS terrorists back to their country of origin even if they had been stripped of their citizenship, adding that Turkey was not a 'hotel' for foreign jihadists. "There is no need to try to escape from it; we will send them back to you. Deal with them how you want," said Soylu. Turkey has criticized Western countries for refusing to take back their citizens who were members of ISIS, also known as Daesh, and stripping them of their citizenship, although the 1961 New York Convention made it illegal to leave people stateless. Since 2010, the UK has stripped more than 100 people of British citizenship. One of the first deported terrorists was an American, unnamed, who was deported to the USA via Greece. However, he refused to go into Greece, and returned to Turkey, upon which the Turks refused him re-entry and pushed him back to Greece. Finally, when he asked to enter Greece, they refused which has left him in 'limbo' in a buffer space between Turkey and Greece. The US State Department acknowledges they are aware of the situation but offer no further details about the man who has been photographed and was shown on Turkish TV. Plans to deport eleven French citizens and seven Germans, along with three from Denmark and two from Ireland, were forming, according to Turkish Interior Ministry spokesman Ismail Catakli. A spokesman for the German Foreign Ministry, Christofer Burger, announced in Berlin that ten people were to be deported to Germany suspected of ISIS involvement, including women and children. The Germans were due to be flown home on November 14th. Turkey has deported 7,500 ISIS members, with another 1,149 ISIS terrorists in Turkish prisons. Turkish state media reported Turkey planned to repatriate about 2,500 militants, most going home to European Union nations. Erdogan will meet with Trump today at the White House. Erdogan will present documentation that Ferhat Abdi Sahin, who is known to the US military as 'General' Mazloum Kobani, is a PKK terrorist. Recently, Trump spoke with Mazloum, who is the military leader of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), and spoke highly of Mazloum and had invited him to the White House. Trump ordered the withdrawal of US troops from northeastern Turkey, which paved the road for Erdogan to order an invasion on October 9th, to remove the SDF. The US military partnered with the SDF in the fight to defeat ISIS in Syria. However, the fight was over and Trump had promised his citizens to 'bring the troops home'. Many felt this was a betrayal of the SDF, who had fought and died in the fight to stop ISIS, alongside US troops. However, Erdogan views the SDF, and Mazloum, as part of the internationally recognized terrorist group, PKK, who has waged a terror campaign against Turkey for more than 30 years, resulting in the deaths of nearly 40,000 people, including women, children, and infants. Not every terrorist is being deported from Turkey, only the ones they don't want. The mercenary militia Free Syrian Army (FSA) is on the Turkish government payroll and fighting inside Syria today on behalf of Erdogan. The ground troops used in 'Operation Spring Peace' are Syrian terrorists who are now mercenary soldiers employed by Turkey. We first heard of the FSA in 2011 when Obama and Sen. John McCain called them 'freedom fighters' and funded them through covert CIA programs, as well as through Congressional funding, lobbied by McCain and others. McCain made a personal trip to meet with the FSA near Idlib and the photos his office posted online were controversial. The FSA ended up a failure in Syria, while their 'brother's in arms', Al Qaeda, arrived and were successful, with the FSA either switching uniforms to Al Qaeda or their 'brother' ISIS. Erdogan continued to support them as the remnants of the FSA re-grouped in Turkey, and he rebranded them as the "Syrian National Army"; however, the new name never stuck and they are still called FSA. Since the FSA have invaded northeast Syria, about 200,000 people have been displaced, according to the UN. Families are scattered across the area, and it is the FSA who are blamed for beatings, rapes, looting, kidnappings, and executions. The FSA invokes the name of God in every action they take. If they kill innocent civilians or armed SDF soldiers, they do so by invoking the name of God. Their shouts of " Allahu Akbar" are remembered from their first appearance in 2011 in Homs, when the carried banners which read, "Christians to Beirut, Alowis to the grave." They were followers of the Muslim Brotherhood ideology which gave them the Islamic authority to slaughter in the name of God and to judge who is a 'heathen' or not. "Those people are filled with hatred and a lust for blood," said Fateh, a barber from Ras al-Ayn. "They do not distinguish between Arab and Kurdish, Muslim and non-Muslim. They contacted me before the offensive and said that as an Arab Muslim, it is my duty to rise up against the Kurds and help Turkey invade my city." He refused and left the area. "Someone called me and simply said 'we want your head' as if stealing my home and driving me out of my city merely for being Kurdish was not enough." said Mohammad Aref, a radiologist from Tal Abyad. He said he was reminded of how ISIS acted when they invaded his town in 2013. The FSA terrorists "destroyed a lion stonework at the entrance of our building, thinking it was idolatry", he said. "They took our carpets and threw them on the street to prostrate themselves on them during public prayers that they were holding." "Let's be clear, Tal Abyad is not under the control of Turkey. It's under the control of Turkey's mercenaries. They have taken over the houses of us Kurds and made them their own. Each one of those mercenaries acts as if he was in charge of the town. They walk into houses and proclaim them theirs. They kidnap and execute people for being 'atheists' or 'blasphemers'. And they are looting people's properties in broad daylight." said Mikael Mohammad, the Kurdish owner of a clothing shop in Tal Abyad. The FSA terrorists "believe that taking your life is doing God's work and that stealing your property is their reward for it," said a Kurdish aid worker from Ras al-Ayn, now displaced in Qamishli. Graphic videos uploaded by the FSA showed them executing captives along a highway near Tal Abyad. On October 12th the Syrian Kurdish politician, Hevrin Khalaf, was tortured, murdered and dismembered after the FSA ambushed her car. The videos of her body and the mutilations of the corpse went viral online. Her mother said after receiving the body for burial, the only thing she could recognize was a portion of her chin. Speaking to journalists recently, Erdogan defended his Syrian allies, saying they were not "terrorists" but Islamic holy warriors who were "defending their land there, hand in hand, arm in arm, shoulder to shoulder with my soldiers". In 2012, Daniel Wagner, the author of "Virtual Terror", wrote about the FSA, at a time when the Obama administration and the US media were supporting the FSA regardless of the war crimes and atrocities they were committing. He wrote, "The West should not be surprised if an Islamic state results from an FSA victory." That was written seven years ago, while Turkey today, a US ally and NATO member, is using the same terrorists to murder in northeast Syria, and there is no international outcry, as they had all supported them before. Interestingly, the only international outcry is that their terrorists are coming home to roost. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 901 bytes Desc: not available URL: From carl at newsfromneptune.com Wed Nov 13 19:10:01 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 13:10:01 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The impeachment pantomime Message-ID: https://consortiumnews.com/2019/11/12/patrick-lawrence-the-impeachment-pantomime/ ?...what do the past three years of incessant efforts to unseat a president tell us about the power of unelected constituencies? The CIA is now openly operating on American soil in clear breach of its charter and U.S. law. There is absolutely no way this can be questioned. We must now contemplate the frightening similarities Russiagate and Ukrainegate share with the agency?s classic coup operations abroad: Commandeering the media, stirring discontent with the leadership, pumping up the opposition, waving false flags, incessant disinformation campaigns: Maybe it was fated that what America has been doing abroad the whole of the postwar era would eventually come home.? ?CGE From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Wed Nov 13 19:14:49 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 13:14:49 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The impeachment pantomime In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00da01d59a56$9eefd380$dccf7a80$@comcast.net> Yes ! AS much as I hate and loathe Trump, I have said many times to people in the last year or so, that if you think what the CIA et al are doing to Trump is good, what do you think is going to happen if Bernie Sanders is elected President ? I contend it would be even worse. That idea has caused some pause in people's attitudes. David J. -----Original Message----- From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 1:10 PM To: peace-discuss at anti-war.net Cc: Peace Subject: [Peace-discuss] The impeachment pantomime https://consortiumnews.com/2019/11/12/patrick-lawrence-the-impeachment-pantomime/ ?...what do the past three years of incessant efforts to unseat a president tell us about the power of unelected constituencies? The CIA is now openly operating on American soil in clear breach of its charter and U.S. law. There is absolutely no way this can be questioned. We must now contemplate the frightening similarities Russiagate and Ukrainegate share with the agency?s classic coup operations abroad: Commandeering the media, stirring discontent with the leadership, pumping up the opposition, waving false flags, incessant disinformation campaigns: Maybe it was fated that what America has been doing abroad the whole of the postwar era would eventually come home.? ?CGE _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Wed Nov 13 23:21:18 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 17:21:18 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Elizabeth_Warren=E2=80=99s_Medicare-Fo?= =?utf-8?b?ci1BbGwg4oCcUGxhbuKAnSBpcyBQcmV0ZW5k?= Message-ID: Elizabeth Warren?s Medicare-For-All ?Plan? is Pretendby Benjamin Studebaker After a great deal of prodding from both centrist and lefty critics, Elizabeth Warren finally put out her Medicare-For-All plan. The problem is that the plan is both unrealistic on its own terms and openly pretend. Let me show you how. Before I dig into the actual proposal, I want to highlight this line from page 2: We must fix this system. And over the *long-term*, the best way to achieve that goal is to move from the system we have now to a system of Medicare for All. See that phrase ?long-term?? That?s code to rich people for ?this is all pretend?. Most presidential candidates will tell you that they?re going to do stuff ?in the first one-hundred days? or even on their ?very first day?. When wannabe presidents tell you they?re going to do something right away, it usually doesn?t happen, but at least you have some reason to think they might try. Warren put ?long-term? in this plan to send an unequivocal message to the rich and the powerful that she isn?t serious about this and doesn?t care. She uses the phrase over and over. On the very next page, in case you missed it the first time, she repeats it: I?m filling in the details and releasing a plan that describes how I would implement the *long-term* policy prescriptions of the Medicare for All Act and how to pay for it. But wait! Maybe you missed it on page 2 *and *on page 3. In case you missed it twice, she uses the phrase again on page 4: Every candidate who opposes my *long-term* goal of Medicare for All should explain why the ?choice? of private insurance plans is more important than being able to choose the doctor that?s best for you without worrying about whether they are in-network or not. And then she uses it twice more on page 5: And every candidate who opposes my *long-term* goal of Medicare for All should put forward their own plan to make sure every single person in America can get high-quality health care and won?t go broke ? and fully explain how they intend to pay for it. Or, if they are unwilling to do that, concede that their half-measures will leave millions behind. And make no mistake ? any candidate who opposes my *long-term* goal of Medicare for All and refuses to answer these questions directly should concede that they have no real strategy for helping the American people address the crushing costs of health care in this country. And in case you forget, it?s there again one more time on page 19: And the American people know that in the *long-term*, a simple system that covers everybody, provides the care they need when they need it, puts $11 trillion back in their pockets and uses all of the public?s leverage to keep costs as low as possible is the best option for their family budgets and for the health of their loved ones. Harry Reid, who encouraged Warren to run for senate and helped jump start her career, is on the record doubting her commitment to the proposal: wideofthepost at wideofthepost Harry Reid tells David Axelrod that he doesn?t think Elizabeth Warren will follow through on ?Medicare for All.? ?Give her some time, I think that she?s not in love with that, I think that she, you?ll wait and see how that all turns out... oh I know she?s pragmatic, just wait? [image: Embedded video] 3,781 5:50 PM - Oct 12, 2019 Twitter Ads info and privacy 1,604 people are talking about this If Elizabeth Warren really wanted people to believe she was committed to Medicare-For-All, she?d at least do us the courtesy of pretending she?d try to do it right away. ?Long-term? shows she?s not even serious enough to lie properly. This isn?t the first time Warren has used code words to conceal her intentions. Back in March, Warren said : When we talk about Medicare for All, there are a lot of different pathways?Some folks are talking about ?Let?s start lowering the age. Maybe bring it down to 60, 55, 50??Some people say ?Do it the other way. Let?s bring it up, from, uh, everybody under 30 gets covered by Medicare.? Others say ?Let employers be able to buy into the Medicare plans.? Others say ?Let?s let employees buy into the Medicare plans.? For me, what?s key is we get everybody at the table on this?I?ve also co-sponsored other bills including expanding Medicaid as another approach that we use. This ?pathways? or ?many paths? language was a way of appearing to support Medicare-For-All without committing to the actual proposal put forward by Bernie Sanders. As Warren goes onto illustrate, ?many paths? meant everything from ?buying into? Medicare, which is Pete Buttigieg?s public option, to gradually lowering the Medicare eligibility age. But you know the one thing she didn?t list? Bernie?s bill. Elizabeth Warren likes to pretend Bernie?s bill doesn?t exist. In September, she used another code word, calling Medicare-For-All a ?framework?: Right now, what we?ve got in Medicare for All is a framework. It doesn?t have the details and you?re right to be asking. But the most important part of your asking is to raise awareness so we get this right as we go through it. By calling Medicare-For-All a ?framework?, Warren insinuates that it has no specific content and could mean whatever you want it to mean. At the time Warren was acting as if Medicare-For-All were a mere slogan, Bernie Sanders quite literally had a website up which enables you to calculate your savings under his bill. This website has been up since 2016. It?s still up. You can still go there. Please do: https://valadian.github.io/SandersHealthcareCalculator/ At every stage, Warren has been careful to signal that for her, Medicare-For-All means whatever you want it to mean. Now, by telling us it?s a ?long-term? goal, she?s signalling it means nothing at all. And because she?s doing it right in front of our faces in a *policy* plan, most people can?t see it. The thing to realise about Warren is that the policy plans are not real plans?they?re campaign devices. A Warren ?plan? is no different from an issues section of a candidate?s website. Candidates use issues sections to play games all the time. Andrew Yang loves to use his issues section to feign support for Medicare-For-All. Initially, in April, Yang?s website said: Either through expanding Medicare to all, or through creating a new healthcare system, we must move in the direction of a public option. In suggesting that Medicare-For-All was merely a move ?in the direction? of nothing more than a public option, Yang said loudly what most of the Democratic candidates have been saying quietly. It was too obvious. By August, he swapped it out for a framework-version of Medicare-For-All, with no details : Through a Medicare for All system, we can ensure that all Americans receive the healthcare they deserve. Not only will this raise the quality of life for all Americans, but, by increasing access to preventive care, it will also bring overall healthcare costs down. Before too long, I?m sure Yang will be telling us his ?long-term strategy? for Medicare-For-All, and I?m sure his supporters will be expecting us to take it very, *very* seriously. There are stages here: 1. Say you support Medicare-For-All, but suggest it could mean anything, including a public option. There are ?many paths? and we need to go ?in the direction?. 2. Say you support Medicare-For-All, but suggest that it is a ?framework? or a slogan that needs to be defined. 3. Issue a plan for Medicare-For-All, but insinuate repeatedly that the plan is ?long-term? and not a priority. Andrew Yang does it on his issues page. Elizabeth Warren does it behind the thin veneer of a policy ?plan?. It?s pretend. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carl at newsfromneptune.com Wed Nov 13 23:53:07 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 17:53:07 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The impeachment pantomime In-Reply-To: <00da01d59a56$9eefd380$dccf7a80$@comcast.net> References: <00da01d59a56$9eefd380$dccf7a80$@comcast.net> Message-ID: And - except for Gabbard (and possibly Sanders) - the Democrat candidates are pro-war. ?...nothing I?ve written here should be construed as support for Donald Trump or that I believe he?s antiwar. Trump is aberration only in that his brand of Western imperialism means that the victims remain foreigners while U.S. soldiers remain out of harm?s way. He knows that boots on the ground can quickly descend into bodies in the ground and unlike his opponents, coffins returning to Dover Air Base are not worth risking his personal ambitions. This is clearly something to build upon?? ?CGE > On Nov 13, 2019, at 1:14 PM, David Johnson wrote: > > Yes ! > > AS much as I hate and loathe Trump, I have said many times to people in the last year or so, that if you think what the CIA et al are doing to Trump is good, what do you think is going to happen if Bernie Sanders is elected President ? > I contend it would be even worse. > That idea has caused some pause in people's attitudes. > > David J. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 1:10 PM > To: peace-discuss at anti-war.net > Cc: Peace > Subject: [Peace-discuss] The impeachment pantomime > > https://consortiumnews.com/2019/11/12/patrick-lawrence-the-impeachment-pantomime/ > > ?...what do the past three years of incessant efforts to unseat a president tell us about the power of unelected constituencies? The CIA is now openly operating on American soil in clear breach of its charter and U.S. law. There is absolutely no way this can be questioned. We must now contemplate the frightening similarities Russiagate and Ukrainegate share with the agency?s classic coup operations abroad: Commandeering the media, stirring discontent with the leadership, pumping up the opposition, waving false flags, incessant disinformation campaigns: Maybe it was fated that what America has been doing abroad the whole of the postwar era would eventually come home.? > > ?CGE > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > From brussel at illinois.edu Thu Nov 14 02:02:31 2019 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 02:02:31 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Swanson on impeachment Message-ID: Akin to Chris Hedges? arguments against the current impeachment procedures: http://davidswanson.org/what-does-the-pelosi-posse-want/?link_id=13&can_id=30c99f619261edd8090e5d11fe17267c&source=email-what-does-the-pelosi-posse-want-3&email_referrer=email_662456&email_subject=what-does-the-pelosi-posse-want -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Thu Nov 14 17:36:15 2019 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 11:36:15 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] RAY McGOVERN: Ukraine For Dummies Message-ID: Here is the link to the article: https://consortiumnews.com/2019/11/14/ray-mcgovern-ukraine-for-dummies/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Sat Nov 16 05:03:43 2019 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 05:03:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Bolivia Message-ID: Fine resum?, destroying Trump?s boasting and lying? https://original.antiwar.com/Ted_Snider/2019/11/14/finally-got-him-the-bolivian-coup/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jbn at forestfield.org Sun Nov 17 20:10:25 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2019 14:10:25 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Comparing drone views from two military women Message-ID: <1d3b1c86-5740-7664-b41e-25069b7426e7@forestfield.org> I recently re-watched "National Bird" a documentary from 2016 about the drone war and I came across an interesting quote that reminded me of something Rep. Tulsi Gabbard said. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard from https://theintercept.com/2018/01/17/intercepted-podcast-white-mirror/ > So, with these terrorist cells, for example, yes, I do still believe > that the right approach to take is these quick strike forces, surgical > strikes, in and out, very quickly, no long-term deployment, no long-term > occupation to be able to get rid of the threat that exists and then get > out and the very limited use of drones in those situations where our > military is not able to get in without creating an unacceptable level of > risk, and where you can make sure that you?re not causing, you know, a > large amount of civilian casualties. Heather Linebaugh served in the United States Air Force from 2009 until March 2012. Her bio in The Guardian says she worked in intelligence as an imagery analyst and geo-spatial analyst for the drone program during the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Two years before Rep. Gabbard said that Heather Linebaugh said: > Hearing politicians speak about drones being precision weapons, being > able to make 'surgical strikes', to me it's completely ridiculous, > completely ludicrous to even make those statements. It's as flawed as it > can be with those people operating it from across the world. If they > really think they can send a bomb through a window of a compound and hit > one militant then why are we seeing so many civilians die of collateral > damage? I'd like to ask those politicians have they not been notified of > that? Do they not know what's going on in their own war that they're > controlling? Linebaugh is also the author of: "I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on" https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/29/drones-us-military From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Nov 18 13:42:19 2019 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:42:19 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Comparing drone views from two military women In-Reply-To: <1d3b1c86-5740-7664-b41e-25069b7426e7@forestfield.org> References: <1d3b1c86-5740-7664-b41e-25069b7426e7@forestfield.org> Message-ID: Yesterdays interview of Jimmy Dore by Aaron Mate is quite good: https://youtu.be/ufduP0bLfAY > On Nov 17, 2019, at 12:10, J.B. Nicholson via Peace wrote: > > I recently re-watched "National Bird" a documentary from 2016 about the drone war and I came across an interesting quote that reminded me of something Rep. Tulsi Gabbard said. > > Rep. Tulsi Gabbard from https://theintercept.com/2018/01/17/intercepted-podcast-white-mirror/ > > > So, with these terrorist cells, for example, yes, I do still believe > > that the right approach to take is these quick strike forces, surgical > > strikes, in and out, very quickly, no long-term deployment, no long-term > > occupation to be able to get rid of the threat that exists and then get > > out and the very limited use of drones in those situations where our > > military is not able to get in without creating an unacceptable level of > > risk, and where you can make sure that you?re not causing, you know, a > > large amount of civilian casualties. > > Heather Linebaugh served in the United States Air Force from 2009 until March 2012. Her bio in The Guardian says she worked in intelligence as an imagery analyst and geo-spatial analyst for the drone program during the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. > > Two years before Rep. Gabbard said that Heather Linebaugh said: > > > Hearing politicians speak about drones being precision weapons, being > > able to make 'surgical strikes', to me it's completely ridiculous, > > completely ludicrous to even make those statements. It's as flawed as it > > can be with those people operating it from across the world. If they > > really think they can send a bomb through a window of a compound and hit > > one militant then why are we seeing so many civilians die of collateral > > damage? I'd like to ask those politicians have they not been notified of > > that? Do they not know what's going on in their own war that they're > > controlling? > > Linebaugh is also the author of: > > "I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on" > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/29/drones-us-military > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace From moboct1 at aim.com Tue Nov 19 14:04:03 2019 From: moboct1 at aim.com (Mildred O'brien) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 14:04:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Comparing drone views from two military women In-Reply-To: References: <1d3b1c86-5740-7664-b41e-25069b7426e7@forestfield.org> Message-ID: <1995362996.3179590.1574172243299@mail.yahoo.com> No doubt why so many remote drone operators have/had the highest suicide rate of Middle East wars veterans... Midge? -----Original Message----- From: Karen Aram via Peace-discuss To: Peace Discuss Cc: J.B. Nicholson ; Peace Sent: Mon, Nov 18, 2019 7:43 am Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Comparing drone views from two military women Yesterdays interview of Jimmy Dore by Aaron Mate is quite good: https://youtu.be/ufduP0bLfAY > On Nov 17, 2019, at 12:10, J.B. Nicholson via Peace wrote: > > I recently re-watched "National Bird" a documentary from 2016 about the drone war and I came across an interesting quote that reminded me of something Rep. Tulsi Gabbard said. > > Rep. Tulsi Gabbard from https://theintercept.com/2018/01/17/intercepted-podcast-white-mirror/ > > > So, with these terrorist cells, for example, yes, I do still believe > > that the right approach to take is these quick strike forces, surgical > > strikes, in and out, very quickly, no long-term deployment, no long-term > > occupation to be able to get rid of the threat that exists and then get > > out and the very limited use of drones in those situations where our > > military is not able to get in without creating an unacceptable level of > > risk, and where you can make sure that you?re not causing, you know, a > > large amount of civilian casualties. > > Heather Linebaugh served in the United States Air Force from 2009 until March 2012. Her bio in The Guardian says she worked in intelligence as an imagery analyst and geo-spatial analyst for the drone program during the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. > > Two years before Rep. Gabbard said that Heather Linebaugh said: > > > Hearing politicians speak about drones being precision weapons, being > > able to make 'surgical strikes', to me it's completely ridiculous, > > completely ludicrous to even make those statements. It's as flawed as it > > can be with those people operating it from across the world. If they > > really think they can send a bomb through a window of a compound and hit > > one militant then why are we seeing so many civilians die of collateral > > damage? I'd like to ask those politicians have they not been notified of > > that? Do they not know what's going on in their own war that they're > > controlling? > > Linebaugh is also the author of: > > "I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on" > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/29/drones-us-military > _______________________________________________ > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Tue Nov 19 17:35:22 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 11:35:22 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Warren Criticized for Conciliatory Remarks on Post-Coup Bolivia Message-ID: <009c01d59eff$b9467830$2bd36890$@comcast.net> Published on Tuesday, November 19, 2019 by Common Dreams After Week of Violence and Unrest, Warren Criticized for Conciliatory Remarks on Post-Coup Bolivia "Maybe it's just me, but if you're going to call yourself a progressive who stands up for the little guy you might want to start calling a right wing coup that's resulted in the curbing of democratic freedoms and onslaught of violence... well, a right wing coup." by Eoin Higgins, staff writer 0 Comments 2020 Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) came under fire Monday for her statement on the Bolivian coup. 2020 Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) came under fire Monday for her statement on the Bolivian coup. (Photo: Marc Nozell/ Flickr/cc) Top-tier 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren is under fire from progressives and Indigenous activists for her comments Monday about the recent coup in Bolivia?remarks her critics called too conciliatory to the right-wing un-elected government that seized power after President Evo Morales was forced to resign and flee the country. "The Bolivian people deserve free and fair elections, as soon as possible," Warren tweeted Monday afternoon. "Bolivia's interim leadership must limit itself to preparing for an early, legitimate election. Bolivia's security forces must protect demonstrators, not commit violence against them." "Sometimes silence is better," replied journalist Katie Halper. "Please get a better foreign policy advisor and condemn the coup," said attorney Eva Golinger. The coup on November 10 resulted in the democratically-elected Morales being forced to resign from office. Morales fled Bolivia for Mexico days later after Sen. Jeanine A?ez, a right-wing Christian extremist, unilaterally declared herself president. Jacobin's Luke Savage pointed out that Warren's statement appeared to be an attempt to downplay the violence of the coup and reframe the conflict as a purely political conflict. "This isn't an issue of process," said Savage. "A right wing military coup deposed Bolivia's sitting president and the U.S.A. supported it." Chief among progressive criticiques of Warren's statement were the Massachusetts' senator's apparent endorsement of the legitimacy of the coup government. "Maybe it's just me, but if you're going to call yourself a progressive who stands up for the little guy you might want to start calling a right wing coup that's resulted in the curbing of democratic freedoms and onslaught of violence... well, a right wing coup," tweeted Al Jazeera host Sana Saeed. "And condemn it." Protests against A?ez's government have spread across Boliva over the past week. On Friday, as Common Dreams reported, police and military forces killed nine Indigenous protesters in the city of Sacaba, near Cochabamba. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a fellow frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination, on Monday evening tweeted once again his condemnation of what he has consistently called a coup and shared a video of the violence in Cochabamba. "I oppose the intervention of Bolivia's security forces in the democratic process and their repression of Indigenous protesters," said Sanders. "When the military intervened and asked President Evo Morales to leave, in my view, that's called a coup." "Bolivia highlights another stark contrast with Sanders that can't be obscured with semantics," tweeted journalist and media critic Adam Johnson. "Sanders firmly calls what happened a coup, Warren gives us process handwringing." In response to Warren's statement, civil rights activist Kade Crockford tweeted: "This has me seriously reconsidering my support for Warren over Sanders." The Intercept's Ryan Grim, in a tweet, called out Warren's refusal to call A?ez's seizure of power a coup. "The 'interim leadership' has already threatened to arrest elected lawmakers in Morales' party for sedition," said Grim, "while killing people in the streets." Texas Democrat Sema Hernandez, who is Indigenous, said on Twitter that she found Warren's statements on the coup and the violence unaccetable. "I condemn Elizabeth Warren for taking this position on the Bolivia coup," said Hernandez. "The interim leadership is ethnically cleansing Bolivia's indigenous population and declaring Bolivia a Christian nation." In the Now journalist Rania Khalek, in a withering criticism of Warren's position, referred to the Massachusetts senator's longstanding controversial claim of Cherokee heritage. "This is a pathetic statement in light of a U.S. backed coup," said Khalek. "And it's coming from a person who claimed to be Indigenous. But now she says nothing in defense of actual Indigenous people." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 77950 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kmedina67 at gmail.com Wed Nov 20 15:55:51 2019 From: kmedina67 at gmail.com (kmedina67) Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 09:55:51 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Fwd: Trump's Removal Can't Wait for Impeachment by Paul Street In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5dd5620c.1c69fb81.e6ee6.43d9@mx.google.com> He is demented.He is fascist.?He is an oligarch.?He is corrupt.?I believe in democracy.??Periodically 50% or more of the people will swoon over a demented fascist oligarch. And his ruthless VP. And his loyal people surrounding him.?So, my point is that I think the problem runs much deeper than the current president and vice president.?I think we do not have a healthy democracy. We, and generations before us, permitted the erosion of the building blocks of democracy.??So, what would removal of Trump and Pence and the loyal entourage accomplish for the democracy?The crimes against the refugees might end -- or would they? The crimes against the environment might end -- or would they? ...And how long would it be before another demented fascist oligarch charmed the people?- Karen Medina -------- Original message --------From: Karen Aram via Peace Date: 11/20/19 09:20 (GMT-06:00) To: peace , Peace Subject: [Peace] Fwd: Trump's Removal Can't Wait for Impeachment by Paul Street The most important point Paul Street makes, in addition to the futility of impeachment, is:? ?If we are serious about getting rid of the demented fascist oligarch and his insurance policy, Pence, then we are going to have to join and expand an authentic opposition, a real popular resistance in the streets. The effective and meaningfully democratic way to remove Trump is not through elite procedures designed by 18th century slaveholders for whom democracy was the ultimate nightmare. It is through sustained mass civil disobedience?through rebellion by and for those whom the American ruling class fears and hates the most: the working-class majority." Trump's Removal Can't Wait for Impeachment COMMENTS President Donald Trump addresses the mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio, at the White House in August.?(Mike Vucci /?AP)? The most powerful position in the world?s most powerful nation is occupied by a demented fascist oligarch. He demonizes and scapegoats minorities and immigrants. He provides?dog-whistle cover?for white supremacists. He?sparks racist hate crimes?with his vicious nativist words. He?speaks with disdain?about inner-city black communities. He tells police officers?not to ?be too nice??with suspects. He?packs the courts?with hard-right racists, classists, sexists and eco-exterminists, toxically reshaping the federal judiciary for a generation. He has cultivated and rewarded?Christian fascists, one of whom (Mike Pence) is his vice president He calls African nations?shithole countries. He told four nonwhite progressive U.S. Congresswomen to ?go back?to ? the crime infested places from which they came.? He has absurdly threatened to ?end birthright citizenship? (the granting of U.S. citizenship to all persons born on U.S. soil under the Constitution?s 14th Amendment) with an executive order. Trump violates?international asylum law?and?separates migrant children from their parents. He indefinitely?detains tens of thousands of migrant children?and families in?for-profit concentration camps. He declared a?fake national emergency?to criminally divert taxpayer dollars to the construction of a nativist border wall that most of the citizenry hates and Congress refused to fund. Believing his dotard self ?the world?s greatest person,? he promotes an absurd cult of personality, proclaiming himself a ?stable genius.? He?regularly praises dictators and despots?the world over. He absurdly claims that Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution means that ?I have the power to?do whatever I want?as president.? Donald Trump attacks basic press freedoms. He demonizes and falsely conflates liberals and leftists. He mocks and disrespects intellectuals and science. He absurdly denies climate science and arch-criminally ramps up the eco-exterminist war on livable ecology. He?refused to adequately prepare for and respond?to the epic climate change-fueled Hurricanes Harvey and Maria. He absurdly blames California?s deadly climate change-driven wildfires on the state?s failure to ?sweep the forest floors.? He threatened North Korea and Iran with nuclear annihilation. He?provided cover?for the absolutist Saudi Arabian regime?s murderous vivisection of a dissident journalist. He funds and equips the Saudis??criminal and catastrophic war?on Yemen?over Congressional opposition. Last Friday?he pardoned?three murderous U.S. military war criminals. He has turned the U.S. Attorney General?into his own personal attorney. He has conducted a corrupt foreign policy on behalf of his own economic and political self-interest. He brazenly?violates the Constitution?s emoluments clause?while preposterously?calling that clause ?phony.??He denies and?obstructs Congress??constitutional right and duty to investigate his conduct. He criminally intimidates witnesses and whistleblowers, calling them ?traitors.? He describes a constitutionally appropriate inquiry into his immoral and illegal behavior as?a ?lynching? and a ?coup.? His far right-wing attorney general, William Barr, argues that his?executive powers are essentially unlimited?and?seeks to undermine?the constitutional separation of church and state. He wages a relentless Orwellian war on Truth, replete with?more than 10,000 documentable false statements?since his inauguration. He?openly flirts?with calling for the use of extra-legal political violence on his behalf by his heavily armed backers, suggesting that impeachment?could spark ?Civil War.??He is the first president in American history to pose a serious threat of?refusing to honor?a re-election count that doesn?t go his way. This is a national, and indeed global, emergency. We need Donald Trump out of the White House. How do we make that happen? There?s no great mystery about how citizens humble and even overthrow corrupt and tyrannical governments. They take to the streets in significant numbers, engaging in mass disruption for as long as it takes. Look at?Algeria, Hong Kong,?Lebanon, Puerto Rico,?Ecuador?and?Chile, to mention six places where mass protest and popular resistance have recently proven highly effective. Look now to Iraq, where hundreds of thousands have marched against corruption,?even in the face of lethal live ammunition, and to?Bolivia, where?workers and peasants are facing bloody repression to resist?a neofascist coup?that was immediately applauded as a?victory for ?freedom? and ?democracy??by Trump. It doesn?t take the whole population to change history from the bottom up. Five days of insurrection by 200,000 people forced the French government to?back down?on its regressive gas tax last year. Extinction Rebellion leader?Roger Hallam notes?that it requires dedicated resistance by just 3% of the population to overthrow a regime. If Hallam is right, then ten days of rebellion by a quantity of Americans roughly equivalent to the population of the Chicago metropwolitan area could force the U.S. ruling class to get rid of Trump. It is unthinkable that any but a few marginal voices in the mainstream ?liberal? Democrats and their media (CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Politico, The Atlantic, The New Yorker, et al.) would call for peoples? power in the streets to bring down the Trump tyranny. The ?liberal? elite is fiercely committed to Fake Resistance. It may be obsessed with Trump to the exclusion of practically everything else that ought to matter in national and world events (popular rebellions from France to Chile, Beirut, Quito and Hong Kong included) but they will not embrace the most effective method of collapsing the Trump-Pence regime collapse: mass mobilization and protest. Embracing an authentic people?s resistance movement would open a popular-democratic door that the Democratic establishment prefers to keep shut. That establishment is instead advancing two tepid, deeply conservative strategies that will likely fail to get Trump out and will come with dreadful downsides?even if they succeed. Both of these strategies are designed keep the U.S. working-class majority functioning not as engaged historical agents, but as passive, system-trusting spectators who accede to?a narrow definition of ?politics? as little more?than the occasional, strictly time-staggered marking of ballots next to the names of candidates selected in advance by the nation?s unelected and interrelated dictatorships of money and empire. The first of these power-serving strategies is the standard quadrennial get-out-the-vote effort to rally citizens behind yet another corporate-centrist billionaire-pleasing and militaristic ?national security? Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Democratic presidential candidate like Jimmy Carter, Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden or the?newly minted Iowa Caucus front-runner?Pete Buttigieg?a silver-tongued right-winger (see?Nathan Robinson?s brilliant take-down?in Current Affairs last spring) wearing fake-progressive identity cloaking (like a certain?technically black Wall Street-serving drone bomber-to-be?in 2007). This is the?same depressing neoliberal track?that has so badly betrayed, divided and demobilized the nation?s working-class majority so as to grease the skids for Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Newt Gingrich?s Contract on America, George Bush Jr, the racist Tea Party and the malignant white nationalist Trump. With the usual help from the?anti-democratic Electoral Collegeand?racist voter suppression in battleground states, Trump will likely prevail over yet another dismal, dollar-drenched capitalist Democrat in November 2020. But even if the Democrats are able to win the Electoral College count and induce Trump to leave (with some help perhaps from constitutionalists in the U.S. military command), putting another Wall Street Democrat in the White House will just open door the for another neofascist white-nationalist Republican president in 2024?possibly someone more ideologically dedicated, less obviously corrupt and thus more dangerous than Trump. (Yes, the Democrats could prevail if they run the self-declared democratic socialist Bernie Sanders. But the Democrats? big money bankrollers and media won?t let that happen. The Democratic establishment?s dirty little secret is that it?would rather lose to the right, even to a hard-right nationalist right-wing party, than lose to the mildly left wing of its own party. Even the avowedly ?capitalist to her bones? Elizabeth Warren is?considered ?too far left??by top Democratic Wall Street funders). The second flawed ?liberal? strategy is, of course, impeachment, likely by the end of the year. It requires just a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, where the Democrats hold sway. But (as a remarkable number of U.S.-Americans I encounter seem not to know) removal requires a two-thirds vote in the U.S. Senate, where the nation?s most racist and right-wing regions are?absurdly over-represented?and the Trumpified Republican Party holds sway. The Republican-run Senate is not going to remove the demented fascist oligarch from office just because he tried to trade New Cold War arms for political dirt on Joe Biden in Ukraine?not when?a super-majority of Republicans ?strongly approve??of Trump?s performance no matter what he does or says. And Trump may well use ?exoneration? by the Senate to his electoral advantage next November. At the same time, the Democrats are pursuing impeachment on chillingly narrow and imperialist grounds that whitewash the crimes of U.S. foreign policy, past and present. Democratic politicos and talking heads proclaim House impeachment testifier Ambassador William B. Taylor Jr. a great ?national hero? and all-around ?good guy? because Taylor was a rifle company commander ?serving? in the Quang Tri and Thua Tien provinces in the United States? beloved 101st Airborne during?the so-called Vietnam War. Fellow Ukraine-Gate witness Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman is upheld as another great patriot for ?serving? in the U.S. invasion of Iraq. How depressing: The U.S. ?crucifixion of Southeast Asia? (Noam Chomsky)?murdered 2-5 millionVietnamese, Laotians and Cambodians between 1962 and 1975. The arch-criminal U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq killed one million-plus Iraqis. One need not be a fan of Vladimir Putin?s oligarchic regime to wonder what?s so great about Washington?s sponsorship of the corrupt U.S.-backed capitalist Ukraine government, which is the product of a U.S.-backed 2014 coup and contains neo-Nazis. On what grounds do top Democrats think Washington?has the rightto play power politics and help fuel hot wars on Russia?s western border? ?The U.S. government,??Sheldon Richman?tried to remind Americans one year ago, ?has no businesses policing relations between Ukraine and Russia. Even if that role were appropriate for some party, the U.S. government would not be the one, because it hardly has clean hands in the matter.? How would U.S.-Americans feel about Russia and/or China sending military equipment to an anti-U.S. regime in Mexico or Canada? And if Democrats are so committed to democracy around the world, why have none of them beyond Sanders and a few other progressives denounced the recent neofascist coup in Bolivia or voiced support for this year?s popular uprisings in Ecuador and Chile? Trump deserves removal not just for his crooked Ukraine shenanigans and related obstructions of justice, but for setting up concentration camps,?separating babies and children?from their families,?inciting violence,?interfering with voting rights,?discriminating on the basis of religion,?waging criminal war, criminally?threatening nuclear war,?abusing his pardon power, violating the emoluments clause, assaulting press freedoms, backing coups in Venezuela and Bolivia, unconstitutionally declaring?a fake national emergency, violating campaign finance laws, illegal?proliferation of nuclear technology,?tax fraud,?instructing Border Patrol to violate the law,?stripping environmental and public lands protections, and doing everything he can to turn the planet into a giant Greenhouse Gas Chamber as soon as possible. Even if impeachment leads to removal, Trump?s defenestration merely for interjecting his personal interests into Washington?s imperialist policy in Eastern Europe could constitute both an undeserved validation of that policy and an exoneration of Trump for his much bigger transgressions. And it would put the dangerous right-evangelical troglodyte Mike Pence in the Oval Office?a chilling prospect. To make matters worse, impeachment threatens to become a great rallying point for Trump?s ugly white-nationalist base while encouraging the nation?s all-too-silent progressive majority to stay seated in front of glowing Telescreens to watch House Democrats and liberal cable news taking heads falsely claim to be collapsing the Trump regime from the top down. If we are serious about getting rid of the demented fascist oligarch and his insurance policy, Pence, then we are going to have to join and expand an authentic opposition, a real popular resistance in the streets. The effective and meaningfully democratic way to remove Trump is not through elite procedures designed by 18th?century slaveholders for whom democracy was the?ultimate nightmare. It is through?sustained mass civil disobedience?through rebellion by and for those whom the American ruling class fears and hates the most: the working-class majority. The sooner Trump can be forced out, the better. Curiously enough, impeachment makes the need to form a grassroots movement to overthrow the Trump-Pence regime more urgent than ever. Now that he?s looking at impeachment and a Senate trial, there?s no telling what Trump and his heavily armed minions might do. He has enormous means of mass destruction and mass distraction at his neofascistic fingertips. We need Trump and Pence out now, not some time next year. The way to make that happen is with a mass movement that will not only sweep him from power but challenge the richly bipartisan racist, sexist, imperial and eco-cidal class rule system that hatched the Trump regime in the first place. Paul Street Contributor Paul Street holds a doctorate in U.S. history from Binghamton University. He is former vice president for research and planning of the Chicago Urban League. Street is also the author of numerous books,? IN THIS ARTICLE: chile?donald trump?ecuador?fascism?george h w bush?hong kongmike pence?new york times?newt gingrich?twitter?ukrainevladimir putin?william barr _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carl at newsfromneptune.com Wed Nov 20 17:54:21 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 11:54:21 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Balderdash from the pro-war political establishment Message-ID: <5EB783A2-4CBE-4766-911C-3788036D5612@newsfromneptune.com> [A mail-out from a Democratic party front group] Dear MoveOn member, We're in trouble, and it's time to wake up. In our most recent survey, 57.2% of MoveOn members said that they believe that Donald Trump will be defeated in 2020. But new polling tells a very different story that should send chills down our spines. According to a new poll from The New York Times, the presidential election in 2020, just like in 2016, will most likely be decided by a few hundred thousand votes spread across the critical swing states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida, North Carolina, and Arizona?as those states will tip the Electoral College to the winner. New data shows a statistical dead heat or even an advantage for Trump in every single one of these states.1 It gets worse. Even as Trump's national approval rating has cratered, his edge in the states that will likely decide the election has grown since 2016.2 And if you think that it's still too early to rely on polling data, here's the harsh truth: In the last three presidential elections, head-to-head polling one year out from Election Day has been just as close to the final result as polls taken the day before the election.3 These polls are a stark reminder that we cannot rely on impeachment?or on Trump's unpopularity, cruelty, and ineptitude?to hand us an election victory. 2020 is likely to be the most hard-fought and important election in our lifetimes, and there is not a moment to waste. MoveOn is ready to meet this moment and fight hard every day until the election, and it is why we are preparing to reveal the details of the largest election campaign in our 21-year history?] [?] 1. "One Year From Election, Trump Trails Biden but Leads Warren in Battlegrounds," The New York Times, November 4, 2019 https://act.moveon.org/go/113142?t=8&akid=250957%2E36782652%2EeVW7m3 2. "Trump's Electoral College Edge Could Grow in 2020, Rewarding Polarizing Campaign," The New York Times, July 19, 2019 https://act.moveon.org/go/113143?t=10&akid=250957%2E36782652%2EeVW7m3 3. "One Year From Election, Trump Trails Biden but Leads Warren in Battlegrounds," The New York Times, November 4, 2019 https://act.moveon.org/go/113142?t=12&akid=250957%2E36782652%2EeVW7m3 [?] PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. This email was sent to C. Estabrook on November 20, 2019. To change your email address or update your contact info, click here. If you'd like to receive less frequent emails from MoveOn, you can click here. To remove yourself from this list, click here. From jbw292002 at gmail.com Wed Nov 20 20:44:04 2019 From: jbw292002 at gmail.com (John W.) Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 14:44:04 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Fwd: Trump's Removal Can't Wait for Impeachment by Paul Street In-Reply-To: <009301d59fd2$a879a2b0$f96ce810$@comcast.net> References: <009301d59fd2$a879a2b0$f96ce810$@comcast.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 12:46 PM David Johnson via Peace < peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: Great effective tactic Paul Street is advocating. > > > > The HUGE problem is, WHO will organize it ? > > > > David J. > Especially since half of the so-called "working class" thinks that tRump is the greatest thing since sliced lunchmeat. :-/ > *From:* Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] *On Behalf Of *Karen > Aram via Peace > > *Sent:* Wednesday, November 20, 2019 9:21 AM > *To:* peace; Peace > *Subject:* [Peace] Fwd: Trump's Removal Can't Wait for Impeachment by > Paul Street > > > > The most important point Paul Street makes, in addition to the futility of > impeachment, is: > > > > ?If we are serious about getting rid of the demented fascist oligarch and > his insurance policy, Pence, then we are going to have to join and expand > an authentic opposition, a real popular resistance in the streets. The > effective and meaningfully democratic way to remove Trump is not through > elite procedures designed by 18th century slaveholders for whom democracy > was the ultimate nightmare. It is through sustained mass civil > disobedience?through rebellion by and for those whom the American ruling > class fears and hates the most: the working-class majority." > > Trump's Removal Can't Wait for Impeachment > > > > > COMMENTS > > > > > ? > > ? > > ? > > ? > > [image: Image removed by sender. Trump's Removal Can't Wait for > Impeachment]President Donald Trump addresses the mass shootings in El > Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio, at the White House in August. (Mike Vucci / > AP > > ) > > The most powerful position in the world?s most powerful nation is occupied > by a demented fascist oligarch. > > He demonizes and scapegoats minorities and immigrants. He provides dog-whistle > cover > for > white supremacists. He sparks racist hate crimes > with his vicious > nativist words. He speaks with disdain > about > inner-city black communities. He tells police officers not to ?be too > nice? with > suspects. > > He packs the courts > with > hard-right racists, classists, sexists and eco-exterminists, toxically > reshaping the federal judiciary for a generation. He has cultivated and > rewarded Christian fascists > , > one of whom (Mike Pence) is his vice president > > He calls African nations shithole countries > . > He told four nonwhite progressive U.S. Congresswomen to ?go back > to > ? the crime infested places from which they came.? > > He has absurdly threatened to ?end birthright citizenship > ? > (the granting of U.S. citizenship to all persons born on U.S. soil under > the Constitution?s 14th Amendment) with an executive order. > > Trump violates international asylum law > > and separates migrant children from their parents > . > He indefinitely detains tens of thousands of migrant children > and families in for-profit > concentration camps > > . > > He declared a fake national emergency > to > criminally divert taxpayer dollars to the construction of a nativist border > wall that most of the citizenry hates and Congress refused to fund. > > Believing his dotard self ?the world?s greatest person > ,? > he promotes an absurd cult of personality, proclaiming himself a ?stable > genius.? He regularly praises dictators and despots > the > world over. He absurdly claims that Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution > means that ?I have the power to do whatever I want > as > president.? > > Donald Trump attacks basic press freedoms. He demonizes and falsely > conflates liberals and leftists. He mocks and disrespects intellectuals and > science. > > He absurdly denies climate science and arch-criminally ramps up the > eco-exterminist war on livable ecology. He refused to adequately prepare > for and respond > to the > epic climate change-fueled Hurricanes Harvey and Maria. He absurdly blames > California?s deadly climate change-driven wildfires on the state?s failure > to ?sweep the forest floors > > .? > > He threatened North Korea and Iran with nuclear annihilation. He provided > cover > for > the absolutist Saudi Arabian regime?s murderous vivisection of a dissident > journalist. He funds and equips the Saudis? criminal and catastrophic war > on > Yemen over Congressional opposition > . > Last Friday he pardoned > three > murderous U.S. military war criminals. > > He has turned the U.S. Attorney General into his own personal attorney > . > He has conducted a corrupt foreign policy on behalf of his own economic and > political self-interest. He brazenly violates the Constitution?s > emoluments clause > while > preposterously calling that clause ?phony.? > He > denies and obstructs Congress? > constitutional > right and duty to investigate his conduct. He criminally intimidates > witnesses and whistleblowers, calling them ?traitors. > ? > He describes a constitutionally appropriate inquiry into his immoral and > illegal behavior as a ?lynching? and a ?coup.? > > > His far right-wing attorney general, William Barr, argues that his executive > powers are essentially unlimited > > and seeks to undermine > the > constitutional separation of church and state. > > He wages a relentless Orwellian war on Truth, replete with more than > 10,000 documentable false statements > since > his inauguration. > > He openly flirts > with > calling for the use of extra-legal political violence on his behalf by his > heavily armed backers, suggesting that impeachment could spark ?Civil > War.? > He > is the first president in American history to pose a serious threat of refusing > to honor > a > re-election count that doesn?t go his way. > > This is a national, and indeed global, emergency. We need Donald Trump out > of the White House. How do we make that happen? > > There?s no great mystery about how citizens humble and even overthrow > corrupt and tyrannical governments. They take to the streets in significant > numbers, engaging in mass disruption for as long as it takes. Look at > Algeria > , > Hong Kong, Lebanon , > Puerto Rico, Ecuador > > and Chile > , > to mention six places where mass protest and popular resistance have > recently proven highly effective. Look now to Iraq, where hundreds of > thousands have marched against corruption, even in the face of lethal > live ammunition > , > and to Bolivia, where > workers > and peasants are facing bloody repression to resist a neofascist coup > that > was immediately applauded as a victory for ?freedom? and ?democracy? > by > Trump. > > It doesn?t take the whole population to change history from the bottom up. > Five days of insurrection by 200,000 people forced the French government to back > down > on > its regressive gas tax last year. Extinction Rebellion leader Roger > Hallam notes > that > it requires dedicated resistance by just 3% of the population to overthrow > a regime. If Hallam is right, then ten days of rebellion by a quantity of > Americans roughly equivalent to the population of the Chicago metropwolitan > area could force the U.S. ruling class to get rid of Trump. > > It is unthinkable that any but a few marginal voices in the mainstream > ?liberal? Democrats and their media (CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, The > Washington Post, Politico, The Atlantic, The New Yorker, et al.) would call > for peoples? power in the streets to bring down the Trump tyranny. The > ?liberal? elite is fiercely committed to Fake Resistance. It may be > obsessed with Trump to the exclusion of practically everything else that > ought to matter in national and world events (popular rebellions from > France to Chile, Beirut, Quito and Hong Kong included) but they will not > embrace the most effective method of collapsing the Trump-Pence regime > collapse: mass mobilization and protest. Embracing an authentic people?s > resistance movement would open a popular-democratic door that the > Democratic establishment prefers to keep shut. > > That establishment is instead advancing two tepid, deeply conservative > strategies that will likely fail to get Trump out and will come with > dreadful downsides?even if they succeed. Both of these strategies are > designed keep the U.S. working-class majority functioning not as engaged > historical agents, but as passive, system-trusting spectators who accede to a > narrow definition of ?politics? as little more > than the occasional, strictly > time-staggered marking of ballots next to the names of candidates selected > in advance by the nation?s unelected and interrelated dictatorships of > money and empire. > > The first of these power-serving strategies is the standard quadrennial > get-out-the-vote effort to rally citizens behind yet another > corporate-centrist billionaire-pleasing and militaristic ?national > security? Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Democratic presidential > candidate like Jimmy Carter, Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, John Kerry, Bill > Clinton, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden or the newly minted > Iowa Caucus front-runner > Pete > Buttigieg?a silver-tongued right-winger (see Nathan Robinson?s brilliant > take-down in > Current Affairs last spring) wearing fake-progressive identity cloaking > (like a certain technically black Wall Street-serving drone bomber-to-be > in > 2007). This is the same depressing neoliberal track > that > has so badly betrayed, divided and demobilized the nation?s working-class > majority so as to grease the skids for Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, > Newt Gingrich?s Contract on America, George Bush Jr, the racist Tea Party > and the malignant white nationalist Trump. > > With the usual help from the anti-democratic Electoral College > > and racist voter suppression in battleground states > , > Trump will likely prevail over yet another dismal, dollar-drenched > capitalist Democrat in November 2020. But even if the Democrats are able to > win the Electoral College count and induce Trump to leave (with some help > perhaps from constitutionalists in the U.S. military command), putting > another Wall Street Democrat in the White House will just open door the for > another neofascist white-nationalist Republican president in 2024?possibly > someone more ideologically dedicated, less obviously corrupt and thus more > dangerous than Trump. > > (Yes, the Democrats could prevail if they run the self-declared democratic > socialist Bernie Sanders. But the Democrats? big money bankrollers and > media won?t let that happen. The Democratic establishment?s dirty little > secret is that it would rather lose to the right > , > even to a hard-right nationalist right-wing party, than lose to the mildly > left wing of its own party. Even the avowedly ?capitalist to her bones > ? > Elizabeth Warren is considered ?too far left? > by > top Democratic Wall Street funders). > > The second flawed ?liberal? strategy is, of course, impeachment, likely by > the end of the year. It requires just a majority in the U.S. House of > Representatives, where the Democrats hold sway. But (as a remarkable number > of U.S.-Americans I encounter seem not to know) removal requires a > two-thirds vote in the U.S. Senate, where the nation?s most racist and > right-wing regions are absurdly over-represented > and > the Trumpified Republican Party holds sway. The Republican-run Senate is > not going to remove the demented fascist oligarch from office just because > he tried to trade New Cold War arms for political dirt on Joe Biden in > Ukraine?not when a super-majority of Republicans ?strongly approve? > of > Trump?s performance no matter what he does or says. And Trump may well use > ?exoneration? by the Senate to his electoral advantage next November. > > At the same time, the Democrats are pursuing impeachment on chillingly > narrow and imperialist grounds that whitewash the crimes of U.S. foreign > policy, past and present. Democratic politicos and talking heads proclaim > House impeachment testifier Ambassador William B. Taylor Jr. a great > ?national hero? and all-around ?good guy? because Taylor was a rifle > company commander ?serving? in the Quang Tri and Thua Tien provinces in the > United States? beloved 101st Airborne during the so-called Vietnam War > . > Fellow Ukraine-Gate witness Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman is upheld as another > great patriot for ?serving? in the U.S. invasion of Iraq. How depressing: > The U.S. ?crucifixion of Southeast Asia? (Noam Chomsky) murdered 2-5 > million Vietnamese, > Laotians and Cambodians between 1962 and 1975. The arch-criminal U.S. > invasion and occupation of Iraq killed one million-plus Iraqis. > > One need not be a fan of Vladimir Putin?s oligarchic regime to wonder > what?s so great about Washington?s sponsorship of the corrupt U.S.-backed > capitalist Ukraine government, which is the product of a U.S.-backed 2014 > coup and contains neo-Nazis. On what grounds do top Democrats think > Washington has the right > to play power > politics and help fuel hot wars on Russia?s western border? ?The U.S. > government,? Sheldon Richman > tried to > remind Americans one year ago, ?has no businesses policing relations > between Ukraine and Russia. Even if that role were appropriate for some > party, the U.S. government would not be the one, because it hardly has > clean hands in the matter.? > > How would U.S.-Americans feel about Russia and/or China sending military > equipment to an anti-U.S. regime in Mexico or Canada? And if Democrats are > so committed to democracy around the world, why have none of them beyond > Sanders and a few other progressives denounced the recent neofascist coup > in Bolivia or voiced support for this year?s popular uprisings in Ecuador > and Chile? > > Trump deserves removal not just for his crooked Ukraine shenanigans and > related obstructions of justice, but for setting up concentration camps, separating > babies and children > from > their families, inciting violence > > , interfering with voting rights > , discriminating > on the basis of religion > > , waging criminal war > , > criminally threatening nuclear war > > , abusing his pardon power > , > violating the emoluments clause, assaulting press freedoms, backing coups > in Venezuela and Bolivia, unconstitutionally declaring a fake national > emergency > , > violating campaign finance laws, illegal proliferation of nuclear > technology > , tax > fraud , instructing > Border Patrol to violate the law, > stripping > environmental and public lands protections, and doing everything he can to > turn the planet into a giant Greenhouse Gas Chamber as soon as possible. > > Even if impeachment leads to removal, Trump?s defenestration merely for > interjecting his personal interests into Washington?s imperialist policy in > Eastern Europe could constitute both an undeserved validation of that > policy and an exoneration of Trump for his much bigger transgressions. And > it would put the dangerous right-evangelical troglodyte Mike Pence in the > Oval Office?a chilling prospect. > > To make matters worse, impeachment threatens to become a great rallying > point for Trump?s ugly white-nationalist base while encouraging the > nation?s all-too-silent progressive majority to stay seated in front of > glowing Telescreens to watch House Democrats and liberal cable news taking > heads falsely claim to be collapsing the Trump regime from the top down. > > If we are serious about getting rid of the demented fascist oligarch and > his insurance policy, Pence, then we are going to have to join and expand > an authentic opposition, a real popular resistance in the streets. The > effective and meaningfully democratic way to remove Trump is not through > elite procedures designed by 18th century slaveholders for whom democracy > was the ultimate nightmare > . > It is through sustained mass civil disobedience > ?through > rebellion by and for those whom the American ruling class fears and hates > the most: the working-class majority. > > The sooner Trump can be forced out, the better. Curiously enough, > impeachment makes the need to form a grassroots movement to overthrow the > Trump-Pence regime more urgent than ever. Now that he?s looking at > impeachment and a Senate trial, there?s no telling what Trump and his > heavily armed minions might do. He has enormous means of mass destruction > and mass distraction at his neofascistic fingertips. > > We need Trump and Pence out now, not some time next year. The way to make > that happen is with a mass movement that will not only sweep him from power > but challenge the richly bipartisan racist, sexist, imperial and eco-cidal > class rule system that hatched the Trump regime in the first place. > Paul Street > > *Contributor* > > Paul Street holds a doctorate in U.S. history from Binghamton University. > He is former vice president for research and planning of the Chicago Urban > League. Street is also the author of numerous books,? > > [image: Image removed by sender. Paul Street] > > IN THIS ARTICLE: > > chile donald trump > ecuador > fascism > george h w bush > hong kong > mike pence > new york times > newt gingrich > twitter > ukraine > vladimir putin > william barr > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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: 3308 bytes Desc: not available URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Wed Nov 20 22:49:40 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 16:49:40 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Fwd: Trump's Removal Can't Wait for Impeachment by Paul Street In-Reply-To: References: <009301d59fd2$a879a2b0$f96ce810$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <00e501d59ff4$cd2183e0$67648ba0$@comcast.net> Actually John, If you look at the 2016 election data, about 27 % of eligible voters voted for Trump. 46 % either ; did not vote, voted for 3rd parties, or left blank the choice between Clinton and Trump. Then there were all those millions who were disenfranchised from voting. And those who voted for Trump who were upper middle class to minor wealthy. So with that in consideration, we are looking at between 20 to 25 %. And then amongst Trump voters there were many who didn?t so much vote for Trump as they voted against Hillary Clinton and the system in general. Bad strategy I know, but a real observed phenomena. So with all of the above taken into consideration, we are looking at Trump?s die hard supporters in the Working class at around 20 %. Not good but better than half. David Johnson From: John W. [mailto:jbw292002 at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 2:44 PM To: David Johnson Cc: Karen Aram; Peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace] Fwd: Trump's Removal Can't Wait for Impeachment by Paul Street On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 12:46 PM David Johnson via Peace wrote: Great effective tactic Paul Street is advocating. The HUGE problem is, WHO will organize it ? David J. Especially since half of the so-called "working class" thinks that tRump is the greatest thing since sliced lunchmeat. :-/ From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 9:21 AM To: peace; Peace Subject: [Peace] Fwd: Trump's Removal Can't Wait for Impeachment by Paul Street The most important point Paul Street makes, in addition to the futility of impeachment, is: ?If we are serious about getting rid of the demented fascist oligarch and his insurance policy, Pence, then we are going to have to join and expand an authentic opposition, a real popular resistance in the streets. The effective and meaningfully democratic way to remove Trump is not through elite procedures designed by 18th century slaveholders for whom democracy was the ultimate nightmare. It is through sustained mass civil disobedience?through rebellion by and for those whom the American ruling class fears and hates the most: the working-class majority." Trump's Removal Can't Wait for Impeachment COMMENTS ? ? ? ? Image removed by sender. Trump's Removal Can't Wait for ImpeachmentPresident Donald Trump addresses the mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio, at the White House in August. (Mike Vucci / AP) The most powerful position in the world?s most powerful nation is occupied by a demented fascist oligarch. He demonizes and scapegoats minorities and immigrants. He provides dog-whistle cover for white supremacists. He sparks racist hate crimes with his vicious nativist words. He speaks with disdain about inner-city black communities. He tells police officers not to ?be too nice? with suspects. He packs the courts with hard-right racists, classists, sexists and eco-exterminists, toxically reshaping the federal judiciary for a generation. He has cultivated and rewarded Christian fascists, one of whom (Mike Pence) is his vice president He calls African nations shithole countries. He told four nonwhite progressive U.S. Congresswomen to ? go back to ? the crime infested places from which they came.? He has absurdly threatened to ? end birthright citizenship? (the granting of U.S. citizenship to all persons born on U.S. soil under the Constitution?s 14th Amendment) with an executive order. Trump violates international asylum law and separates migrant children from their parents. He indefinitely detains tens of thousands of migrant children and families in for-profit concentration camps. He declared a fake national emergency to criminally divert taxpayer dollars to the construction of a nativist border wall that most of the citizenry hates and Congress refused to fund. Believing his dotard self ? the world?s greatest person,? he promotes an absurd cult of personality, proclaiming himself a ?stable genius.? He regularly praises dictators and despots the world over. He absurdly claims that Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution means that ?I have the power to do whatever I want as president.? Donald Trump attacks basic press freedoms. He demonizes and falsely conflates liberals and leftists. He mocks and disrespects intellectuals and science. He absurdly denies climate science and arch-criminally ramps up the eco-exterminist war on livable ecology. He refused to adequately prepare for and respond to the epic climate change-fueled Hurricanes Harvey and Maria. He absurdly blames California?s deadly climate change-driven wildfires on the state?s failure to ? sweep the forest floors.? He threatened North Korea and Iran with nuclear annihilation. He provided cover for the absolutist Saudi Arabian regime?s murderous vivisection of a dissident journalist. He funds and equips the Saudis? criminal and catastrophic war on Yemen over Congressional opposition. Last Friday he pardoned three murderous U.S. military war criminals. He has turned the U.S. Attorney General into his own personal attorney. He has conducted a corrupt foreign policy on behalf of his own economic and political self-interest. He brazenly violates the Constitution?s emoluments clause while preposterously calling that clause ?phony.? He denies and obstructs Congress? constitutional right and duty to investigate his conduct. He criminally intimidates witnesses and whistleblowers, calling them ? traitors.? He describes a constitutionally appropriate inquiry into his immoral and illegal behavior as a ?lynching? and a ?coup.? His far right-wing attorney general, William Barr, argues that his executive powers are essentially unlimited and seeks to undermine the constitutional separation of church and state. He wages a relentless Orwellian war on Truth, replete with more than 10,000 documentable false statements since his inauguration. He openly flirts with calling for the use of extra-legal political violence on his behalf by his heavily armed backers, suggesting that impeachment could spark ?Civil War.? He is the first president in American history to pose a serious threat of refusing to honor a re-election count that doesn?t go his way. This is a national, and indeed global, emergency. We need Donald Trump out of the White House. How do we make that happen? There?s no great mystery about how citizens humble and even overthrow corrupt and tyrannical governments. They take to the streets in significant numbers, engaging in mass disruption for as long as it takes. Look at Algeria, Hong Kong, Lebanon, Puerto Rico, Ecuador and Chile, to mention six places where mass protest and popular resistance have recently proven highly effective. Look now to Iraq, where hundreds of thousands have marched against corruption, even in the face of lethal live ammunition, and to Bolivia, where workers and peasants are facing bloody repression to resist a neofascist coup that was immediately applauded as a victory for ?freedom? and ?democracy? by Trump. It doesn?t take the whole population to change history from the bottom up. Five days of insurrection by 200,000 people forced the French government to back down on its regressive gas tax last year. Extinction Rebellion leader Roger Hallam notes that it requires dedicated resistance by just 3% of the population to overthrow a regime. If Hallam is right, then ten days of rebellion by a quantity of Americans roughly equivalent to the population of the Chicago metropwolitan area could force the U.S. ruling class to get rid of Trump. It is unthinkable that any but a few marginal voices in the mainstream ?liberal? Democrats and their media (CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Politico, The Atlantic, The New Yorker, et al.) would call for peoples? power in the streets to bring down the Trump tyranny. The ?liberal? elite is fiercely committed to Fake Resistance. It may be obsessed with Trump to the exclusion of practically everything else that ought to matter in national and world events (popular rebellions from France to Chile, Beirut, Quito and Hong Kong included) but they will not embrace the most effective method of collapsing the Trump-Pence regime collapse: mass mobilization and protest. Embracing an authentic people?s resistance movement would open a popular-democratic door that the Democratic establishment prefers to keep shut. That establishment is instead advancing two tepid, deeply conservative strategies that will likely fail to get Trump out and will come with dreadful downsides?even if they succeed. Both of these strategies are designed keep the U.S. working-class majority functioning not as engaged historical agents, but as passive, system-trusting spectators who accede to a narrow definition of ?politics? as little more than the occasional, strictly time-staggered marking of ballots next to the names of candidates selected in advance by the nation?s unelected and interrelated dictatorships of money and empire. The first of these power-serving strategies is the standard quadrennial get-out-the-vote effort to rally citizens behind yet another corporate-centrist billionaire-pleasing and militaristic ?national security? Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Democratic presidential candidate like Jimmy Carter, Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden or the newly minted Iowa Caucus front-runner Pete Buttigieg?a silver-tongued right-winger (see Nathan Robinson?s brilliant take-down in Current Affairs last spring) wearing fake-progressive identity cloaking (like a certain technically black Wall Street-serving drone bomber-to-be in 2007). This is the same depressing neoliberal track that has so badly betrayed, divided and demobilized the nation?s working-class majority so as to grease the skids for Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Newt Gingrich?s Contract on America, George Bush Jr, the racist Tea Party and the malignant white nationalist Trump. With the usual help from the anti-democratic Electoral Collegeand racist voter suppression in battleground states, Trump will likely prevail over yet another dismal, dollar-drenched capitalist Democrat in November 2020. But even if the Democrats are able to win the Electoral College count and induce Trump to leave (with some help perhaps from constitutionalists in the U.S. military command), putting another Wall Street Democrat in the White House will just open door the for another neofascist white-nationalist Republican president in 2024?possibly someone more ideologically dedicated, less obviously corrupt and thus more dangerous than Trump. (Yes, the Democrats could prevail if they run the self-declared democratic socialist Bernie Sanders. But the Democrats? big money bankrollers and media won?t let that happen. The Democratic establishment?s dirty little secret is that it would rather lose to the right, even to a hard-right nationalist right-wing party, than lose to the mildly left wing of its own party. Even the avowedly ? capitalist to her bones? Elizabeth Warren is considered ?too far left? by top Democratic Wall Street funders). The second flawed ?liberal? strategy is, of course, impeachment, likely by the end of the year. It requires just a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, where the Democrats hold sway. But (as a remarkable number of U.S.-Americans I encounter seem not to know) removal requires a two-thirds vote in the U.S. Senate, where the nation?s most racist and right-wing regions are absurdly over-represented and the Trumpified Republican Party holds sway. The Republican-run Senate is not going to remove the demented fascist oligarch from office just because he tried to trade New Cold War arms for political dirt on Joe Biden in Ukraine?not when a super-majority of Republicans ?strongly approve? of Trump?s performance no matter what he does or says. And Trump may well use ?exoneration? by the Senate to his electoral advantage next November. At the same time, the Democrats are pursuing impeachment on chillingly narrow and imperialist grounds that whitewash the crimes of U.S. foreign policy, past and present. Democratic politicos and talking heads proclaim House impeachment testifier Ambassador William B. Taylor Jr. a great ?national hero? and all-around ?good guy? because Taylor was a rifle company commander ?serving? in the Quang Tri and Thua Tien provinces in the United States? beloved 101st Airborne during the so-called Vietnam War. Fellow Ukraine-Gate witness Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman is upheld as another great patriot for ?serving? in the U.S. invasion of Iraq. How depressing: The U.S. ?crucifixion of Southeast Asia? (Noam Chomsky) murdered 2-5 millionVietnamese, Laotians and Cambodians between 1962 and 1975. The arch-criminal U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq killed one million-plus Iraqis. One need not be a fan of Vladimir Putin?s oligarchic regime to wonder what?s so great about Washington?s sponsorship of the corrupt U.S.-backed capitalist Ukraine government, which is the product of a U.S.-backed 2014 coup and contains neo-Nazis. On what grounds do top Democrats think Washington has the rightto play power politics and help fuel hot wars on Russia?s western border? ?The U.S. government,? Sheldon Richman tried to remind Americans one year ago, ?has no businesses policing relations between Ukraine and Russia. Even if that role were appropriate for some party, the U.S. government would not be the one, because it hardly has clean hands in the matter.? How would U.S.-Americans feel about Russia and/or China sending military equipment to an anti-U.S. regime in Mexico or Canada? And if Democrats are so committed to democracy around the world, why have none of them beyond Sanders and a few other progressives denounced the recent neofascist coup in Bolivia or voiced support for this year?s popular uprisings in Ecuador and Chile? Trump deserves removal not just for his crooked Ukraine shenanigans and related obstructions of justice, but for setting up concentration camps, separating babies and children from their families, inciting violence, interfering with voting rights, discriminating on the basis of religion, waging criminal war, criminally threatening nuclear war, abusing his pardon power, violating the emoluments clause, assaulting press freedoms, backing coups in Venezuela and Bolivia, unconstitutionally declaring a fake national emergency, violating campaign finance laws, illegal proliferation of nuclear technology, tax fraud, instructing Border Patrol to violate the law, stripping environmental and public lands protections, and doing everything he can to turn the planet into a giant Greenhouse Gas Chamber as soon as possible. Even if impeachment leads to removal, Trump?s defenestration merely for interjecting his personal interests into Washington?s imperialist policy in Eastern Europe could constitute both an undeserved validation of that policy and an exoneration of Trump for his much bigger transgressions. And it would put the dangerous right-evangelical troglodyte Mike Pence in the Oval Office?a chilling prospect. To make matters worse, impeachment threatens to become a great rallying point for Trump?s ugly white-nationalist base while encouraging the nation?s all-too-silent progressive majority to stay seated in front of glowing Telescreens to watch House Democrats and liberal cable news taking heads falsely claim to be collapsing the Trump regime from the top down. If we are serious about getting rid of the demented fascist oligarch and his insurance policy, Pence, then we are going to have to join and expand an authentic opposition, a real popular resistance in the streets. The effective and meaningfully democratic way to remove Trump is not through elite procedures designed by 18th century slaveholders for whom democracy was the ultimate nightmare. It is through sustained mass civil disobedience?through rebellion by and for those whom the American ruling class fears and hates the most: the working-class majority. The sooner Trump can be forced out, the better. Curiously enough, impeachment makes the need to form a grassroots movement to overthrow the Trump-Pence regime more urgent than ever. Now that he?s looking at impeachment and a Senate trial, there?s no telling what Trump and his heavily armed minions might do. He has enormous means of mass destruction and mass distraction at his neofascistic fingertips. We need Trump and Pence out now, not some time next year. The way to make that happen is with a mass movement that will not only sweep him from power but challenge the richly bipartisan racist, sexist, imperial and eco-cidal class rule system that hatched the Trump regime in the first place. Paul Street Contributor Paul Street holds a doctorate in U.S. history from Binghamton University. He is former vice president for research and planning of the Chicago Urban League. Street is also the author of numerous books,? Image removed by sender. Paul Street IN THIS ARTICLE: chile donald trump ecuador fascism george h w bush hong kong mike pence new york times newt gingrich twitter ukraine vladimir putin william barr _______________________________________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 3308 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 823 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mkb3 at icloud.com Thu Nov 21 22:57:00 2019 From: mkb3 at icloud.com (Morton K. Brussel) Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 16:57:00 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Chomsky interview Message-ID: "The consequences [re. Dem candidate in 2020] are hard to predict. If the donor class succeeds in nominating a centrist candidate, progressive activist forces might be disillusioned and reluctant to do the work on the ground that will be needed to prevent the tragedy ? repeat, tragedy ? of four more years of Trumpism. If a progressive candidate does gain the nomination, centrist power and wealth may back away, again opening the path to tragedy. It will be a fateful year. It will be even more important than usual to remain level-headed and to think through with care the consequences of action, and inaction.? https://default.salsalabs.org/Ta40ddf84-42c3-473e-b791-38682c06a7d5/e081e176-f60b-4371-b5ea-9f34d72c618f The tragedy Chomsky has in mind concerns Climate Change and a conceivable nuclear conflagration? under Trump tutelage. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Thu Nov 21 23:37:33 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 17:37:33 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Excellent recent analysis by Max Blumenthal Message-ID: <00cc01d5a0c4$a66be260$f343a720$@comcast.net> Excellent recent analysis ( a few days ago ) by independent journalist and author Max Blumenthal on how the U.S. corporate media manufactures a false reality in regards to war and regime change actions by the U.S. government. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOV-RYnpQH4 David J. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Thu Nov 21 23:44:50 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 17:44:50 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Chomsky interview References: Message-ID: <00e601d5a0c5$aadf4ca0$009de5e0$@comcast.net> From: David Johnson [mailto:davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 5:45 PM To: 'Morton K. Brussel' Subject: RE: [Peace-discuss] Chomsky interview Indeed Mort ! The big question is, WHEN the ruling class cheats Sanders again from the primary elections, what people will do ? Will they fall in line like sheep to the slaughter or will they begin to realize that some other avenue / vehicle of change needs to happen. David J. From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Morton K. Brussel via Peace-discuss Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 4:57 PM To: Peace Discuss Cc: Morton K. Brussel Subject: [Peace-discuss] Chomsky interview "The consequences [re. Dem candidate in 2020] are hard to predict. If the donor class succeeds in nominating a centrist candidate, progressive activist forces might be disillusioned and reluctant to do the work on the ground that will be needed to prevent the tragedy ? repeat, tragedy ? of four more years of Trumpism. If a progressive candidate does gain the nomination, centrist power and wealth may back away, again opening the path to tragedy. It will be a fateful year. It will be even more important than usual to remain level-headed and to think through with care the consequences of action, and inaction.? https://default.salsalabs.org/Ta40ddf84-42c3-473e-b791-38682c06a7d5/e081e176-f60b-4371-b5ea-9f34d72c618f The tragedy Chomsky has in mind concerns Climate Change and a conceivable nuclear conflagration? under Trump tutelage. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Nov 22 01:08:06 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 19:08:06 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Notes Message-ID: <34bc9dcf-9d78-9c12-56ca-483a0f356207@forestfield.org> Here are some additional topics for you to consider discussing. Have a good show guys. -J Democratic Party: Democracy is a "dangerous position" to leave in the hands of the electorate. https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/111819-1 -- Nancy Pelosi in a memo to Democratic Party colleagues: > The weak response to these hearings has been, ?Let the election decide.? > That dangerous position only adds to the urgency of our action, because > the President is jeopardizing the integrity of the 2020 elections. Coup news: Sadly there's enough going on in US-led coups to have a recurring segment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCY_ReFRT8o -- The Grayzone: Anya Parampil debunks media myths about the Bolivian coup (which, by the way, is only recognized as the coup it is by alternative media not mainstream corporate media) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2cHKyqaRo8 -- The Grayzone report on Jeanine ??ez. jbn: Jeanine ??ez:Bolivia::Juan Guaido:Venezuela -- both self-declared "presidents", both US stooges, both beneficiaries of US-led coup attempts and very likely both are funded by US funding. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMscskEEAyw -- The Grayzone: Economic motives behind the Bolivian coup: lithium (used in batteries for our "green" future) & natural gas, and leaked recordings to back up the claims. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37XnuBIonT0 -- RT: Evo Morales urges UN to stop bloodshed in Bolivia Syria: OPCW leaks are confirming what we had good reason to believe -- the gas canisters in the Syrian so-called 'gas attack' were placed on the scene, not dropped. In other words, the alleged 'gas attack' was staged. You'll recall that this (now we know: staged attack) prompted a coordinated US/French/UK missile attack. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaq2wOf2Haw -- The Grayzone: Another whistleblower inside the OPCW says the 'chemical attack' may have been staged (also includes BBC interview). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMSyLg1E49M -- The Grayzone: Whistleblower: OPCW suppressed Syria chemical evidence after US pressure. jbn: Since this involves the OPCW this has a connection to the current UK Prime Minister (Boris Johnson) and the Skripal attacks too -- Boris Johnson pushed for the OPCW to be able to make statements about the origin of that poison when the experts were unwilling to make such a statement. Johnson was clearly hoping for a real connection to Russia but the evidence just wasn't there to make that connection because information about the "novichok" (Russian for 'newcomer') poison allegedly used had been widely published years before the Skripals were poisoned. And the allegations about the lethality of that poison don't match what happened to the Skripals (father Sergey, daughter Yulia, and a policeman all survived). So far only one human has died in those poisonings, Dawn Sturgess, and one RT report suggested she might have succumbed because she was a recovering heroin addict (hence she might have been compromised). The UK government killed Skripals pets (it's not clear why) and arranged to buy his house and everything in it. It's looking more and more like the OPCW's leadership is corrupt enough to hide reports that don't favor the state's narrative but the OPCW still has a few scientists working for it that are willing to tell the truth (including leaking it). There's not a lot of mainstream coverage of either the Skripal/Sturgess poisoning incidents or the recent OPCW whistleblowers. You'll likely have to get your news on this from alternative sources. Press freedom/Assange/WikiLeaks: Protests supporting Assange continue, Craig Murray explains how the Swedish sexual misconduct allegations (never charges, as far as I know) were always bogus, and why this case ought to be of chief importance to American media but isn't portrayed that way in American corporate media. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EM6YDIna5ww -- Assange supporters (including his father) gather outside London court hearing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8caSQ5hlTH4 -- Swedish prosecutor announces she will "discontinue preliminary investigation on the Julian Assange case". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VfbJBxViac -- Ben Swann interview https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/1196777248474517505 -- Twitter post referred to in Swann interview: > Kristinn Hrafnsson, WikiLeaks editor-in-chief: ?Let us now focus on the > threat Mr Assange has been warning about for years: the belligerent > prosecution of the United States and the threat it poses to the First > Amendment. " https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOY2n2-ojrM -- ?gmundur J?nasson interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZX-AyUpf-M -- Craig Murray interview https://www.aklagare.se/en/news-and-press/press-releases/?newsId=3265699 -- press release from Swedish prosecutor https://www.aklagare.se/en/news-and-press/media/the-assange-matter/chronology/ -- chronology of Assange case from Swedish prosecutor https://www.aklagare.se/globalassets/dokument/ovriga-dokument/decision_19nov.pdf -- translation of decision to discontinue the preliminary investigation of Assange's case from the Swedish prosecutor RT has been one of the very few news outlets to properly cover the Assange case. Other news outlets showing Assange being pulled out of the Ecuadorian embassy had to license that footage from RT's RUPTLY outlet because the other news organizations decided not to keep their cameras rolling when the ejection event occurred (despite widespread notice ahead of time via Twitter that Assange was due to be ejected). Democracy Now, which has been on the decline in recent years including buying into Russiagate and offering no serious analysis of Syria (two topics Aaron Mat? cited as reasons for his leaving DN), has had no news on the Assange case since October 24 and no critical analysis of the relevance of the Swedish allegations against Assange. The RT interview with investigative journalist Ben Swann is easily the worst of these interviews because the host doesn't seem to know what she's talking about: the current WikiLeaks editor-in-chief and spokesperson, Kristinn Hrafnsson, is a man (the host refers to Hrafnsson twice as a woman), and both host and guest call the Swedish sexual misconduct allegations "charges" (see https://www.democracynow.org/2017/10/10/julian_assange_marks_55_years_inside for Assange himself mentioning this) -- as far as I know Assange has not been charged with anything by Sweden. Sweden has made many telling claims about that "preliminary investigation" along the way (they slow-walked the entire investigation for years, the Swedes made false claims about how they could interview him: only in-person not over the Internet, and not from the Ecuadorian embassy but only in their facility, but both claims were untrue) and the investigation was closed and re-opened multiple times for no reason rooted in evidence. Taken as a whole this was indistinguishable from an accusations which were baseless from the start and the corrupt Swedish prosecutors were working for the US. Craig Murray's interview makes these points clear. Ben Swann made some good points: the 50-week jail term for skipping bail has expired. Assange, therefore, shouldn't be in jail for this past that time (which he's served). Therefore what this is really about becomes more clear: the US is dictating the terms of Assange's UK imprisonment aiming for extradition to the US on a case that has no evidence (helping Manning break into computers makes no sense because Manning was given all the access necessary to copy the now leaked Iraq & Afghan war logs showing war crimes committed by American military). Assange faces no charges in the UK. So it's fair to conclude that the UK's sovereignty is subject to the US' limits: on issues of importance to the US the US sets down the allowable limits within which the UK works. Craig Murray's RT interview (with a different host than the Ben Swann interview) is far more recommendable because Murray knows what he's talking about and he reaches important and reasonable conclusions given the available evidence. > RT host: Now clearly one less legal woe for Julian Assange but is it > good news? > > Craig Murray: Well it's excellent news but it was entirely expected > because, of course, the Swedish allegations were very obviously always a > CIA fit-up and they were only ever intended to get Assange into custody > in order to pave the way for a extradition to the United States for > publishing; for publishing the truth about American war crimes. And now > that these allegations have served their purpose, and plainly there was > never a scintilla of credible evidence behind them, they're not needed > anymore. So it's entirely expected that they're dropped now. > > RT: And how much do you think this is going to affect extradition to the > US that Assange is currently facing? > > Craig Murray: Well I think the idea that anybody can be extradited to > the United States of America for publishing documents leaked to them, > documents which were also published by the New York Times, the > Washington Post, The Guardian, and thousands of other media outlets > around the world, you know this is a fundamental attack on media > freedom. I'm afraid to say that governments in the west nowadays seem to > have lost all clue when it comes to the fundamental meanings of liberty > and democracy. So it's not impossible that extradition will succeed and > will go ahead and we will be fighting very very hard to make sure that > it does not. > > RT: We here at RT have reported extensively on Assange's poor > imprisonment conditions as he continues to be held in Belmarsh prison. > What do you make of the conditions he's being held in? Are they fair? > > Craig Murray: Oh, it's absolutely horrifying! I mean there is no reason > whatsoever why a publisher who is in prison for nothing whatsoever > except for having published things the government did not want him to > publish should be kept in solitary confinement. That is simply > appalling. Plainly. I was devastated when I saw him at his last court > appearance at Westminster Magistrates Court, he was stumbling, he was > incoherent, he couldn't easily remember his own name and date of birth > and this is an extremely intelligent and articulate man. These > conditions amount to torture. Whatever is being done to him otherwise > physically or by medication, I don't know, but plainly he's being kept > in conditions which are extremely injurious to his health and absolutely > unnecessary for he has no track record of violence and doesn't need to > be treated like a terrorist. > > RT: Well at the same time Assange's legal team has claimed that their > client is struggling to prepare his defense against that extradition > because the computer he has been given is in rather poor condition. Do > you think that there's any chance of those being upgraded, his computer > being upgraded, having better resources to prepare his defense? > > Craig Murray: I think, you know, his defense has been quite deliberately > crippled at all stages. You know, the idea of giving him a virtually > unworkable computer. All his papers and documents were stolen by the > United States of America were given to the United States by the > Ecuadorian embassy perfectly illegally, the United States has no rights > to hold his documents, he has no access to prepare his defense. And, of > course, the court refused to allow time for evidence to emerge from his > Spanish court case that shows that his defense lawyers were spied upon > in the Ecuadorian embassy against all rules of legal privilege by a > security firm acting on behalf of the CIA. So everything possible is > being done; he's not having a fair court proceeding or fair defense at > all. This ought to be a scandal of the highest kind. > > RT: There's, of course, a lot of controversy around Assange, but if we > look specifically at the sexual assault allegations back in 2010 when > the allegations first arose, Assange was questioned in Sweden but then > the case was closed and he was allowed to leave the country, only to > then be re-opened again shortly after he left. What do you make of > Sweden's overall handling of the whole case? > > Craig Murray: It's absolutely ludicrous. And then he was eventually > questioned -- they could have questioned him at any time in the > Ecuadorian embassy, they waited 6 years to do so. But when they > eventually questioned him it became plain their case would not stand up, > that there was no evidence which could form a basis of a conviction. > They then closed the case again in 2017 then they opened it again in > 2019, reopened it for the second time. It was never ever more than a > preliminary investigation. To go for a European arrest warrant on the > basis of a preliminary investigation not endorsed by any court was > unprecedented. No, the case has obviously been a political fit-up from > the start. And I should say that I thought today that the prosecutor, > Eva-Marie Persson in Sweden, was an absolute disgrace. She said that the > accusers had given credible evidence. Well if the accusers had given > credible evidence why close the case? Unless it's also the case that the > defense gave credible evidence. And if the defense gave credible > evidence also why didn't you say that? I think an attempt even while > dropping the case because you have insufficient evidence to do so in a > way designed to blacken the name of somebody, while at the same time > denying them the chance to prove themselves innocent in court was > absolutely disgusting and reprehensible by Eva-Marie Persson. And I > think the Swedish people should be ashamed of her, should be ashamed of > the entire way they have been played by the CIA with these bogus cases > in order to get Julian Assange into custody. Everybody in Sweden should > be deeply deeply ashamed today. Where are the feminist organizations calling the Swedish/American allegations against Assange what they really are? Anyone fighting real rape cases ought to be outraged at the years-long government misuse of such allegations; this raises reasonable doubts that allegations are raised for political reasons rather than reasons of seeking justice. War criminality: Trump pardons war criminals https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iu5ZG-G4EVk -- Chris Hedges on Trump pardoning those who carry out atrocities. Protests: France, Hong Kong, Iran -- circle of economic life? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiO-CjOfRRs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evm0Hy5dcfs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gjdhk1BhVao https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxFbjct-Re0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_2dyQig0DE -- Multiple reports about the 1 year of Yellow Vest (Les Gillets Jaunes) protests in France. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sjti7XX9bHc -- Hong Kong protest outside Polytechnic University https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJqP6SLQpS8 -- Iran government pushes for 50% petrol price increase (a petrol price increase is how the Yellow Vest protests started). Neoliberalism is still failing: Big business racks up the electoral losses in Seattle and there's no evidence to support the notion that identity politics distractions are helping. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/09/seattle-amazon-kshama-sawant-socialist-elections -- Hallie Golden wrote: > In a blow to Amazon, the socialist candidate Kshama Sawant appeared on > Saturday to have beaten the business-backed Egan Orion for a seat on > Seattle city council, despite an unprecedented financial effort from the > tech giant. > > Amazon is headquartered in the city. It ploughed $1.5m into the city > council election through a political action committee sponsored by the > Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce. > > Civic Alliance For A Sound Economy dispensed about $440,000 in support > of Orion and backed six other candidates considered business-friendly. > In 2015, according to the New York Times, Amazon and its employees only > contributed about $130,000 to city council candidates. > > Sawant, a member of the Socialist Alternative party and a former tech > worker, was elected six years ago as the first socialist on the Seattle > council in almost 100 years. On election night she trailed Orion by 8%. > But as more ballots were counted she closed the gap, and by Friday > evening, with the vast majority of ballots counted, she was up by almost > 4%, or about 1,500 votes. [...] > ?All of this clarified to people that big business is not on our side,? > she said. ?This mythology that, ?Oh if only we behaved nicely and we > brought big business to the table, things would work out.? Well that?s > been blown to smithereens. They are not on our side and in fact they > will use every dollar that they can to try and crush the movement.? > > Orion, an LGBTQ community leader and advocate for small businesses who > considers himself a progressive liberal, has said he considered the > funding from Amazon unnecessary and largely a distraction. > > Four other candidates endorsed by the Civic Alliance For A Sound Economy > also seemed set to lose. Phil Tavel, Heidi Wills, Mark Solomon and Jim > Pugel trailed their opponents by at least 6%, with Solomon down by about > 20%. Two candidates endorsed by the Pac, Alex Pedersen and Debora > Juarez, had substantial leads. > > A win for Sawant would give her a third term. She has been a fierce > critic of the influence of big business on Seattle, and helped lead the > push last year for the head tax, a per-employee tax on large > corporations that was repealed a month after passing unanimously. > > On Saturday, Sawant said she planned to continue her battle for a tax on > big business. Orion does not support the head tax. jbn: Also note that Khama Sawant's opponent Egan Orion is "an LGBTQ community leader and advocate for small businesses who considers himself a progressive liberal". Not only an advocate for small businesses who thinks taking money from Amazon is right and proper, but someone who is "organizer of the city's annual LGBT pride festival" (per Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kshama_Sawant#2019_election). It's not clear what being LGBTQ or being an "LGBTQ community leader" has to do with this story other than that this is another example of how identity politics attempts to get us to focus on something less relevant -- Sawant's politics have apparently won her re-election to her third term on the Seattle city council. But identity politics are sometimes used to distract away from far more relevant political issues that affect more people's lives. Other examples of distractive identity politics include: - Ellen DeGeneres: who recently hosted former US president G.W. Bush on her TV talk show including giving him a warm and comfortable segment that didn't bring up his legacy which includes running a torture regime or launching the 2003 illegal and unethical invasion of Iraq based on lies. As is reported widely in LGBT press, G.W. Bush is also known for seeking a Constitutional amendment that would permanently ban non-heterosexual marriage such as DeGeneres' & de Rossi's marriage. After being photographed spending time with the Bushes at a football game, DeGeneres tried to distract attention from her class allegiance (she, her wife Portia de Rossi, and the Bushes are all very wealthy) and paint her friendship with the former president as something innocent. - Rep. Ayanna Pressley: in 2018 Pressley, a black woman, ran an identity politics campaign against incumbent Rep. Mike Capuano, a white man. In one debate aired on Radio Boston Pressley said "We will vote the same way, but lead differently". Her campaign was defined chiefly by who she is rather than what she stands for and how she intended to vote on bills (the latter being the things that affect people's lives): The Intercept wrote in https://theintercept.com/2018/08/18/mike-capuano-ayanna-pressley-massachusetts-primary/ > While [Alexandria] Ocasio-Cortez and [Nebraskan Kara] Eastman won by > sharply criticizing the moderate voting records of their primary > opponents, Pressley has demurred repeatedly when asked to point to > major policy areas in which she disagrees with her opponent. Ayanna Pressley also funded her campaign by relying on establishment money, as The Intercept pointed out: > Pressley is backed by major donors and powerful figures within the > Democratic Party?s elite. According to Politico, Pressley, a former aide > to then-Sen. John Kerry, was urged by the ?donor class? to make her run. [...] > Pressley['s] establishment [...] campaign contributors include > Boston-area megadonor Barbara Lee; Minyon Moore, a so-called Democratic > National Committee superdelegate and principal of the corporate lobbying > firm Dewey Square group; and Super PAC strategist Guy Cecil. Capuano's record of supporting progressive causes was apparently less valued than seeing someone who "look[s] like them" in the race: The Intercept wrote: > Capuano suggested in a one debate that his identity was less important > than his track record of working on behalf of a diverse community. > ?There is a majority of no one in this district,? said Capuano. ?No > race, no ethnicity, no religion, nothing. So anybody who sits in this > seat has to be able to work with people that don?t look like them, > people that don?t think like them, people that don?t worship like them ? > and has to be able to bring people together.? > > Capuano, a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, blazed an > unusual path on Capitol Hill. He has championed ?Medicare for All? for > over a decade, helped establish the influential Office of Congressional > Ethics, and, as Congress has increasingly abandoned its corporate > oversight responsibilities, has made a name for himself dressing down > the chief executives of big banks, airlines, and other industries for > engaging in fraud and abuse. > > For some activists on the left who have supported Capuano?s policy > stances, the prospect of challenging the progressive stalwart is a > misguided venture. Robert Naiman, policy director of the progressive > think tank Just Foreign Policy, said he has cheered on the wave of > progressive insurgent candidates, but was surprised to see Capuano ? who > is known for his progressive foreign policy stances ? facing a > challenge. Naiman, a watchdog on foreign intervention, rattled off a > list of foreign policy stances Capuano has staked, agitating for peace > even against his own party, from leading the opposition to the war in > Yemen to maintaining a lonely battle against President Barack Obama?s > war in Libya. > > ?Taking down Capuano? That would be terrible,? Naiman said. ?He?s a > progressive champion.? Pressley won her race against Capuano and currently represents Massachusetts' 7th district. War/Technology: Microsoft funds privacy-busting facial recognition software (currently used against Palestinians) while claiming that "privacy is a fundamental human right". https://mondoweiss.net/2019/11/microsoft-revealed-to-be-funding-israeli-surveillance-on-palestinians/ -- Ramzy Baroud wrote: > Microsoft prides itself on being a leader in corporate social > responsibility (CSR), emphasizing that ?privacy (is) a fundamental human > right.? > > The Washington-State based software giant dedicates much attention, at > least on paper, to the subject of human rights. ?Microsoft is committed > to respecting human rights,? Microsoft Global Human Rights Statement > asserts. ?We do this by harnessing the beneficial power of technology to > help realize and sustain human rights everywhere.? > > In practice, however, Microsoft?s words are hardly in line with its > action, at least not when its human rights maxims are applied to > occupied and besieged Palestinians. > > This story shows that ethical principles are fundamentally meaningless > if they exist in the abstract. It boils down ot whether Microsoft > considers Palestinians to have democratic freedoms that are being > infringed by Israeli military surveillance https://t.co/pIi8zscga2 > ? Olivia Solon (@oliviasolon) October 28, 2019 > > Writing for the NBC news on October 27, Olivia Solon reported on > Microsoft funding of the Israeli firm, AnyVision, which uses facial > recognition ?to secretly watch West Bank Palestinians.? > > Through its venture capital arm M12, Microsoft has reportedly invested > $78 million in the Israeli startup company that ?uses facial recognition > to surveil Palestinians throughout the West Bank, in spite of the tech > giant?s public pledge to avoid using the technology if it encroaches on > democratic freedoms.? > > AnyVision had developed an ?advanced tactical surveillance? software > system, dubbed ?Better Tomorrow? that, according to a joint NBC-Haaretz > investigation, ?lets customers identify individuals and objects in any > live camera feed, such as a security camera or smartphone, and then > track targets as they move between different feeds.? > > As disquieting as ?Better Tomorrow?s? mission sounds, it takes on a > truly sinister objective in Palestine. ?According to five sources > familiar with the matter,? wrote Solon, ?AnyVision?s technology powers a > secret military surveillance project throughout the West Bank.? War/Occupation: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/11/hypocrisy-critics-slam-israeli-army-twitter-post-191109162240458.html > Social media users have called out the Israeli army for a Twitter post > celebrating two female soldiers for cutting off their hair for a good > cause. > > The Israeli army said the pair donated their hair to make wigs for > cancer patients, and described it as "a beautiful act of kindness". > > A picture of the two soldiers, identified as Noam and Inbal, shows them > smiling and holding their freshly cut hair. > > But critics pointed out the irony of the post, reminding the Israeli > army that they regularly deny thousands of cancer patients from the Gaza > Strip permission to travel for treatment. > > "Nothing says kindness like forcing cancer patients to die in an open > air prison in Gaza," Remi Kenazi, a Palestinian-American poet based in > New York, responded on Twitter. [...] > According to the World Health Organization (WHO), 39 percent of patient > applications for permits to exit Gaza for healthcare in 2018 were > unsuccessful. > > "The ability of Gaza's hospitals to provide adequate diagnosis and > treatment to cancer patients is severely limited due to chronic > shortages of medicines and lack of medical equipment," WHO said in a > report last February. > > The Palestinian Ministry of Health said in February that the number of > cancer patients in the Gaza Strip had risen to 8,515 - including 608 > children. > > Most cases are diagnosed at a late stage, leading to difficulties in > symptom control and treatment options. Other Twitter posts on the IDF ad: https://twitter.com/rooafzapapi96/status/1192863831497699329 > If you guys can also stop killing Palestinians that be super > ? braderoni https://twitter.com/aptly_engineerd/status/1192886669449383936 > Israel regularly refuses permits to cancer patients trying to leave Gaza > for treatment, something they are forced to do because the Israeli and > Egyptian enforced siege prevents them from getting treatment at home > ? Rebecca Pierce https://twitter.com/sarahleah1/status/1192868479419981824 > Hi Noam and Inbal - great that you want to help! can you please ask your > bosses at the @IDF to open the #Gaza border so that cancer patients > there can get urgently needed medical treatment? They and so many other > Palestinians urgently need medical care but are blocked by #Israel > ? Sarah Leah Whitson https://twitter.com/RonitLentin/status/1193198218592636928 > Revolting IDF boast about their female stormtroopers 'kindly' donating > their hair for wigs for Gaza children with cancer, while Sick Gazans die > because they are not permitted to access medical treatment. Genocide and > hubris in the racial colony > ? Ronit Lentin Corporate media obedience: Netflix CEO tells the world where Netflix stands on publishing the truth. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20191108/10071343348/netflix-were-not-truth-to-power-business-were-entertainment-business.shtml -- > Netflix CEO Reed Hastings recently came out and publicly washed his > company's hands of any kind of value-based stance. > > Hastings: We?re not in the truth-to-power business. We?re in the > entertainment business. > > That?s Reed Hastings, chief executive of Netflix Inc., defending a > decision earlier this year to pull an episode of comedian Hasan Minaj?s > ?Patriot Act,? which was critical of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin > Salman, keeping it from airing in Saudi Arabia. > > Hastings: We can accomplish a lot more by being entertainment and > influencing a global conversation about how people live than trying to > be another news channel,? Hastings said Wednesday in an interview at the > New York Times? Dealbook Conference. > > I can't say I know for sure exactly who is supposed to be the intended > audience for Hastings' remarks, but sure as hell hope the creative > public is listening. For content creators, Netflix has made it > abundantly clear that it will not support disruptive art in the face of > authoritarian criticism. Given how much of art and content is > specifically designed to speak truth to power, and given just how > squishy many governments legal justifications for censorship are, the > future is certain to be filled with these types of take down requests. > Do artists really want to utilize such a platform for expression? > > Making all of this even more frustrating is where Hastings decides the > lines should be drawn, which only serves to throw all of this into more > confusion. > > Hastings added a caveat on how far he would go: > > Hastings: If they can came to us and said you can?t have gay content, we > wouldn?t do that. We would not comply with that. jbn: Of course Netflix won't go against "gay content". Identity politics are how corporations signal their virtue, how corporations let us know that they're safe to do business with. Netflix thus secures its place in every liberal's heart while doing nothing to threaten the establishment that makes most of us poorer, lose our liberties, and distract us so it might appear that we're tacitly accepting killing and torturing people worldwide. It's okay to have, say, an out lesbian woman talk show host enjoy an unchallenging chat with someone who should be in irons in the Hague awaiting trial as a war criminal, which is what Ellen DeGeneres did with former President G.W. Bush. Proper liberals won't mind because Ellen DeGeneres is out and proud, and after a few selfies, some dancing, and a few jokes about Bush's trouble wearing a rain poncho at Trump's inauguration will distract us from expressing our disagreement with torture and war. Economy/Exploitation of the "gig economy": No unions to protect them from being exploited, low-cost transcription service "Rev" lowers the minimum price on their service. https://gizmodo.com/transcription-platform-rev-slashes-minimum-pay-for-work-1839784941 -- > Launched in 2010, Rev made a name for itself by charging customers who > wanted transcriptions of interviews, videos, podcasts, or whatever else > the bargain-basement price of $1 per minute of audio. That?s attracted > some notable clients, including heavyweight podcast This American Life, > according to the company. (Some teams at Gizmodo and its sister > websites have also used Rev for transcriptions.) According to one > whistleblower, a little less than half of that buck went to the > contractor, while about 50 to 55 cents on the dollar lined Rev?s > pockets. > > But in an effort to ?more fairly compensate Revvers for the effort > spent on files,? Rev announced on an internal message board on Wednesday > that its job pricing model would change?with a new minimum of 30 cents > per minute (cpm) going into effect last Friday. > > ?There was an internal forum post made two days prior, but not > everybody checks the forums,? one Revver who wished to remain anonymous > for fear of retaliation, told Gizmodo. ?A lot of people found out when > they logged on on Friday. People are still showing up in the forums > asking what?s going on!? > > In an update reviewed by Gizmodo, marked as being appended last > Wednesday, Rev sought to downplay the impact of the pay algorithm > change. ?30 cpm will be a starting price for a very small number of > jobs. On the other hand, some jobs will now start at 80 cpm,? the > company wrote, according to screenshots of the Rev?s internal message > board. ?The goal is NOT to take pay away from Revvers but to pay more > fairly for the level of effort/skill required.? > > According to the Rev worker who spoke to Gizmodo, ?People have seen cpm > start higher on a few jobs, but for the most part, it feels like the > floor has shifted downward, and rates have dropped with it.? > > Regardless of what goal Rev had in mind, the effect among some > transcribers is to see this as a way to short-change workers. They?re > right to be skeptical: After all, the gig economy has been the genesis > of some clever accounting?whether its platforms shifting their pay > algorithms or subsidizing wages with workers? own tips?that rarely > favors contractors. > > Update 11/11/19 8:43pm ET: A spokesperson from Rev provided the > following response: > > "Rev freelancers have full control over what jobs they decide to work > on. They can accept or reject any projects without consequences as well > as set preferences indicating what jobs they choose to accept, with > full control over all parameters including file types, audio length, and > pay. We informed our community of these changes on our central online > communications hub in advance of them going into effect on Friday, > 11/8. We welcome feedback on these changes and will continue to make > adjustments in order to ensure our freelancers receive fair pay." Advertising: Is your YouTube program 'no longer commercially viable'? If so, YouTube might cancel it. https://www.technewsworld.com/story/New-YouTube-Terms-of-Service-Create-Stir-86352.html > Google has published changes to YouTube's Terms of Service Agreement > that have stoked fears among some users. The new terms take effect Dec. > 10. > > One controversial provision addresses YouTube's hosting > responsibilities. > > "Content is the responsibility of the person or entity that provides it > to the Service," states the new policy. "YouTube is under no obligation > to host or serve Content." > > Another section, Terminations by YouTube for Service Changes, has > creators in an uproar. > > "YouTube may terminate your access, or your Google account's access to > all or part of the Service if YouTube believes, in its sole discretion, > that provision of the Service to you is no longer commercially viable," > the new ToSA states. jbn: Google is correct -- YouTube is not obliged to publish your videos -- any more than, say, a newspaper owes one publication of their letters to the editor. It's interesting how the YouTube terms of service are changing to focus on what YouTube finds to be "commercially viable" but YouTube apparently isn't obliged to follow any restrictions they describe in those terms of service. It's worth noting that one can publish videos on one's own website and also host videos on archive.org at no charge and embed the videos anywhere. Related: https://www.youtube.com/static?template=terms -- YouTube's current terms of service. Related: https://www.youtube.com/t/terms?preview=20191210#main -- YouTube's terms of service that will take effect on December 10, 2019. War/sanctions: the anti-Nicaraguan pro-regime change law "Nicaraguan Investment and Conditionality Act" (NICA) passes Congress unanimously, signed into law by Pres. Trump and not covered by English-language media. https://thegrayzone.com/2018/12/14/congress-sanctions-nicaragua-nica-act/ -- > Every single member in both chambers of the US Congress approved > legislation that will impose sanctions and financial restrictions on > Nicaragua in an explicit effort to weaken its government. > > Known as the NICA Act, the bill is now on its way to the desk of > President Donald Trump, who will almost certainly sign it into law > [update: since the publication of this article NICA was signed into > law]. Its passage was spearheaded by neoconservative lawmakers centered > around the Miami lobby of right-wing Latin American exiles dedicated to > eradicating any iteration of socialism in the Western hemisphere. > > The United States has spent decades trying to topple Nicaragua?s > government, now led by the left-wing Sandinista movement. In April, > US-backed opposition[1] figures launched an unsuccessful and exceedingly > violent coup attempt[2] in the Central American country ? one of the > last bastions of leftist politics in an increasingly right-leaning Latin > America. > > The newly approved Nicaraguan Investment and Conditionality Act > (NICA)[3] will give the US president the authority to impose targeted > sanctions on Nicaraguan government officials, former officials, or > people purportedly ?acting on behalf of? Managua. > > The bill also seeks to prevent international financial institutions from > providing ?any loan or financial or technical assistance? to Nicaragua?s > government. > > [...] > > The NICA Act encourages the US government to increase assistance to > anti-government ?civil society in Nicaragua, including independent > media, human rights, and anti-corruption organizations? and to ?support > the protection of human rights and anti-corruption advocates in > Nicaragua.? > > The legislation also suggests that political negotiations should be > ?mediated by the Catholic Church in Nicaragua,? which has for decades > supported violent right-wing forces in the region. > > This October, leaked audio[4] revealed the Catholic Church?s auxiliary > bishop of Managua, Silvio Baez, conspiring with the opposition to oust > Nicaragua?s elected president, Daniel Ortega. > > ?The unity that we need at this moment must include everyone opposed to > the government, even if they are suspected of being opportunists, > abortionists, homosexuals, [drug] traffickers?,? Baez declared, > according to a translation of the leaked audio. > > [...] > > In lieu of a formal vote, the NICA Act was sent to the bipartisan House > Committee on Foreign Affairs for amendments[5], and these changes were > then agreed to by each chamber, without any objections. > > On November 27, amendments for the combined legislation were approved > with unanimous consent in the Senate[6]. Then on December 11, the > changes were unanimously approved in the House[7] without objection. > > [...] > > The unanimous approval of the de facto economic embargo on Nicaragua > received very little attention in the English-language media. The story > was covered by only a small handful of local[8] news[9] outlets[10], > although it received much more attention in right-wing Spanish-language > media. > > In an interview with Confidencial ? an opposition outlet funded[11] by > the US government?s National Endowment for Democracy[12] regime change > arm ? Nicaragua?s former foreign affairs minister Norman Caldera > exclaimed[13] that the ?NICA Act is a devastating blow for the regime.? > > The right-wing channel 100% Noticias[14], whose director, Miguel Mora, > stands accused[15] by family members of coup victims of inciting hatred > and violence, echoed the celebratory language. > > CNN Espa?ol reported[16] favorably[17] on the NICA Act (it even has a > tag on its website[18] devoted to the law), although its > English-language counterpart demonstrated little interest. CNN Espa?ol > referred to the democratically elected government in Managua as a > ?regime? and noted, ?The opposition of Nicaragua celebrates this > decision.? [1] https://grayzoneproject.com/2018/06/19/ned-nicaragua-protests-us-government/ [2] https://soundcloud.com/moderaterebels/nicaragua-right-wing-us-coup-managua-episode-22 [3] https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1918 [4] https://www.vivanicaragua.com.ni/2018/10/23/sociales/revelan-pruebas-de-reunion-conspirativa-de-silvio-baez-en-contra-del-gobierno-de-nicaragua/ [5] https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr1918 [6] https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4767702/senate-unanimously-approves-sanctions-nicaragua [7] https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4767701/house-unanimously-approves-sanctions-nicaragua [8] https://www.insidernj.com/press-release/bi-partisan-group-lawmakers-commend-final-passage-nica-act-sending-presidents-desk/ [9] http://sunshinestatenews.com/story/ileana-ros-lehtinens-ted-cruzs-marco-rubios-nicaraguan-investment-and-conditionality-act [10] https://havanatimes.org/?p=145261 [11] https://www.ned.org/wp-content/themes/ned/search/grant-search.php?organizationName=invermeDIA®ion=&projectCountry=Nicaragua&amount=&fromDate=&toDate=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&projectFocus%5B%5D=&search=&maxCount=25&orderBy=Year&start=1&sbmt=1 [12] https://grayzoneproject.com/2018/08/20/inside-americas-meddling-machine-the-us-funded-group-that-interferes-in-elections-around-the-globe/ [13] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JE8Be4gewh0 [14] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMAgo_0ay7Q [15] https://www.tn8.tv/nacionales/463376-denuncian-miguel-mora-incitar-odio-violencia-nicaragua/ [16] https://cnnespanol.cnn.com/video/nicaragua-ley-nica-estados-unidos-daniel-ortega-conclusiones-kay-guerrero/ [17] https://cnnespanol.cnn.com/video/autores-ley-nica-rep-sires-objetivo-principal-intvw-dusa-cnnee/ [18] https://cnnespanol.cnn.com/tag/nica-act/ jbn: NICA, supported by the "US government?s National Endowment for Democracy regime change arm", passed the House unanimously. Sanctions have an ugly history of killing people, that's why sanctions are used; the poorest part of society suffers the effect of the sanctions the most. As more people suffer more people pressure their government to seek compliance with the power imposing the sanctions in order to end the suffering. Sanctions are a form of war. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) is often described as "anti-war" and "anti-establishment" and she objects to "regime change wars". Are supporting sanctions consistent with being "anti-war"? Jimmy Dore interviewed Rep. Tulsi Gabbard on her vote opposing BDS (Boycott, Divest, Sanctions). This interview took place on Veteran's Day (originally known as Armistice Day) 2019 (2019-11-11). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf-dzfTpguM -- A complete transcript of the interview Jimmy Dore has titled "Tulsi Explains Her BDS Vote": > Jimmy Dore: People made a raucous [sic] out of your vote, they said was > anti-BDS, right? Tell us why you voted for that, because there's a > reason, and then you also voted for Rashid Talib's also [sic] bill that > kind of spoke to that too. Can you talk about that? > > Tulsi Gabbard: Yes, there were a few bills that came before Congress > either for co-sponsorship or actually came to the floor for a vote. I > took a vote on a bill that spoke to finding a peaceful solution to the > ongoing conflict in the Middle East. Part of that bill said -- I don't > have the exact language -- it did condemn the BDS movement, which I > didn't necessarily agree with the language but I voted on it because I > don't think that this BDS movement is the only or perhaps the best way > to achieve that peaceful outcome of stability and security for both the > Palestinian people and the Israeli people. I think that's gotta be our > focus and objective. Right along side that I co-sponsored a bill I think > was originally introduced by Ilhan Omar and Congressman John Lewis that > spoke to the protection of freedom of speech in our own country which I > wholeheartedly stand up for to protect and defend especially as a > servicemember; [I'm] willing to give my life to do so. So while I > personally disagree with the tactics of the BDS movement to achieve that > objective, I absolutely and wholeheartedly support the rights for those > who choose to be involved with that or are choosing that as their method > of protest to be able to continue to do so without fear of repercussions > either from state government or our federal government. > > Jimmy Dore: So the natural question that is if you don't support the > BDS, which is a nonviolent way to protest the occupation, what > nonviolent protest -- because when they nonviolently protest they shoot > them so this would be another -- so what would be a way that they could > protest nonviolently if you don't support BDS? > > Tulsi Gabbard: Well this is a movement that I think, especially this > legislation is specifically talking about, people here in the United > States as a way for them to lodge their positions and protesting > positions within our own government which I support their right to do > so. As we look to the negotiations ultimately that need to take place > between the Palestinian leadership and the Israeli leadership I think > that that negotiation process is ultimately what's gonna be required to > find a lasting peaceful resolution. > > Jimmy Dore: Right. But don't you think that -- I think that the way this > worked is -- again, I'm older than you so I remember the apartheid state > in South Africa and how they used divestments and that was actually a > good pressure point. So whatever is nonviolent I'm okay for. You support > a two-state solution, right? > > Tulsi Gabbard: I do. > > Jimmy Dore: Alright. Tulsi Gabbard, thanks for coming in on Veteran's > Day. Now you're off to a Town Hall tonight, right? > > Tulsi Gabbard: Thank you. Yes. We're gonna have a Town Hall this evening > focused on honoring veterans and talking about a lot of the other issues > that we face. The rest of the video is a boilerplate segment Dore attaches to all of his videos listing where he will do upcoming live shows, and thanking his audience for their support. I think it would be fair to conclude that Rep. Gabbard did herself no favors here despite Dore being in the tank for her. Dore has proven virtually every other time he's brought her up that he will lie by omission or support double-standards to make Gabbard look better than she is: he never mentions any of the evidence against calling her "anti-war" such as Gabbard's 2018 Intercept interview with Jeremy Scahill or an article from https://intpolicydigest.org/2019/07/31/how-anti-war-really-is-tulsi-gabbard/ which is sharply but rightly critical of her pro-drone views, her voting for increasing the so-called "defense" budget in 2018 (a quote from the article: "something that her [Gabbard's] supporters deemed unforgivable when Elizabeth Warren voted to do the same thing in 2017"). The intpolicydigest.org article also brings up that Gabbard accepted war profiteer money ("between 2012 and 2016 Gabbard accepted over $100,000 from the defence industry from the likes of BAE Systems, Raytheon, Boeing, and Lockheed Martin. In fact, via HuffPost[1], both Lockheed Martin and Boeing were two of her largest donors during the 2016 cycle")[2], and her pro-war voting history. [1] https://www.huffpost.com/entry/tulsi-gabbard-anti-war-campaign-donations_n_5c530708e4b093663f5bfa69?source=post_page--------------------------- [2] From that Huffington Post article: "The congresswoman said in May 2017 that she had ?recently? stopped accepting money from the defense industry and would no longer accept political action committee largesse. Her total income from the arms industry by that point had hit $111,500, with weapons producers Boeing and Lockheed Martin featuring as her ninth and 12th biggest donors, respectively, in the 2016 election cycle." Dore chastised Sen. Bernie Sanders for saying that he'll support whomever wins the Democratic Party primary; Dore pointed out that Sanders will end up supporting someone who stands against Sanders' ostensible values. But Gabbard said the same thing to CBS News and Dore never brought up this interview or criticized Gabbard for exactly the same reason. In this segment ("Tulsi Gabbard Explains Her BDS Vote") Dore really tried hard to manufacture a better outcome for Gabbard but her anti-BDS vote dug her a hole she apparently can't get out of. I'm not willing to give credit for co-sponsorship because bill co-sponsorship is more about public relations than substance (see my recent comments on how the Democrats keep Medicare for All fans strung along by writing and co-sponsoring bills such as HR676 which they'll never bring to the floor for a vote even when the Democrats have a majority in the House and Senate). Related: https://71republic.com/tag/tulsi-gabbard-drone-strikes/ -- Ryan Lau wrote more which shows how Rep. Gabbard is being judged by her words instead of her deeds (including referencing the aforementioned Intercept article where she talked about how she's down with the drone war). Related: https://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/2019-November/051517.html -- my post to peace at anti-war.net and peace-discuss at anti-war.net "Comparing drone views from two military women". Democrats/Journalism: Do you want to be associated with a party that arrests those who challenge its views? And what of the corrupt police who go along with such arrests? Why is Democracy Now playing favorites? https://www.democracynow.org/2019/11/14/activist_medea_benjamin_faces_threats_of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XNPvXO2wwI -- Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL, 97th district) threatened to arrest CodePink activist Medea Benjamin after Benjamin attended a press conference where Wasserman Schultz announced the creation of a so-called "Venezuela Democracy Caucus", a bipartisan Congressional group which supports the opposition in Venezuela. Benjamin protested the Bolivian and Venezuelan coups holding up a sign reading "NO COUPS [in] Bolivia [and] Venezuela" and shouted that the US should end its sanctions in Venezuela. Benjamin was forcibly removed from the press conference. Later the police visited Benjamin's home without a warrant and did not arrest her. Democracy Now (DN) and RT each interviewed Benjamin and journalist Max Blumenthal but DN didn't interview Blumenthal: https://www.democracynow.org/2019/10/30/headlines/blogger_max_blumenthal_says_he_was_arrested_on_false_charges -- Democracy Now gives Max Blumenthal a much more skeptical reception in its coverage of his arrest. Here's the entirety of DN's coverage of Blumenthal's arrest: > Max Blumenthal, editor of the website The Grayzone, reports he was > arrested at his home in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 25 by a team of > police, in what he describes as an attack on the press. Blumenthal says > he was arrested on a five-month-old warrant for assaulting a Venezuelan > opposition member during protests at the Venezuelan embassy in March. > Blumenthal denies the charges. He says he was held in jail for two days, > shackled for five hours and denied a phone call. Every sentence of that DN report contains distancing language ("[he] reports", "what he describes as", and "he says") instead of reporting the events as facts, facts that are independently verifiable (but DN apparently chose not to verify anything). Is there cause for this language? Does DN have some reason to not trust that Blumenthal was needlessly forced out of his home and taken into custody as per his description? RT did the journalism DN apparently chose not to do. RT interviewed Blumenthal and Bill Moran, Blumenthal's attorney, and RT ran the interview with Blumenthal in multiple languages: Moran interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORE4f8pvGBE -- in English Blumenthal interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yge_QObOp3k -- in Spanish https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xi9xQjyH0s -- in German https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDYNu7X5ifc -- in German RT put the story in context, giving the viewer information DN never covered. RT didn't question whether the arrest happened (RT said "He was arrested on Friday 8 hours after the publication of his latest article criticizing the US opposition in Venezuela."). RT used "claim" language about conclusions Blumenthal reached but not whether the events of Blumenthal's arrest occurred. Both Benjamin and Blumenthal said their respective assaults and interactions with police are politically motivated: > Medea Benjamin to RT: [...] It's a travesty that they [the police] came > to my house in such numbers and so intimidating and I think it's meant > to intimidate those of us who work against US intervention in countries > like Venezuela. > > Medea Benjamin to DN: [...] I guess they didn?t arrest me because they > saw that, and maybe they feel they would have to arrest the people who > assaulted me. But once again, I do feel very intimidated. And I don?t > feel like this is the end, that they could show up at my house anytime > with a warrant, just to keep me in this process, like they have done to > so many of our other comrades, to try to stop people from standing up > for this principle of nonintervention. The Grayzone on Max Blumenthal's arrest: > His arrest warrant labels him as ?armed and dangerous.? Blumenthal says > the charges are false and a retaliation against The Grayzone?s > journalism on the US-backed coup in Venezuela and corrupt members of the > right-wing Venezuelan opposition carrying it out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hyGUXabDvE -- "Push Back with Aaron Mat?" interview with Max Blumenthal. Arms for kids: Royal Air Force museum has an exhibition for kids sponsored by Raytheon. What could possibly go wrong? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ES1XtdRU68U -- RT's report jbn: But this kind of sponsorship is not new, particularly for Raytheon. https://www.girlscouts.org/en/about-girl-scouts/our-partners/raytheon.html -- Girl Scouts USA bragging about their "partnership" with Raytheon includes the following text: > This is the right action at the right time with the right partners. For > example, the majority of millennial women say they would?ve been more > interested in a cybersecurity career if they?d had access to more > information about and training in STEM during middle and high school, > according to a 2017 survey commissioned by Raytheon, Forcepoint, and the > National Cyber Security Alliance. jbn: Nothing says cooperation with "partners" like a company called "Forcepoint", by the way. Raytheon manufactures some of the missiles used to kill Yemeni in the US-backed Saudi war against Yemen which is considered a major humanitarian disaster with thousands dead and millions struggling to survive. What does more girls in weapons manufacturing businesses lead to? Continuing the shift of who runs the world's weapons manufacturers, of course. Related story: The US military-industrial complex is now run by women! "You Dropped a Bomb on Me" by The Gap Band (August 1982) Lyrics: > You were the girl that changed my world > You were the girl for me > You lit the fuse, I stand accused > You were the first for me > But you turned me out, baby > You dropped a bomb on me, baby Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVWERU_xY6I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FOGowwQToM -- Redacted Tonight was one of very few places to cover this as continuity of policy now adhering to identity politics (thus undermining the legitimacy of identity politics and removing doubt that if women ran more stuff we'd be more peaceful; it turns out we'll need more than a mere change of the heads of things to accomplish worthwhile change like not killing people). https://on.rt.com/9lqs -- "Girl power to kill: Women now control America?s military-industrial complex" from January 4, 2019: > Women have taken control of the US? multibillion dollar > military-industrial complex too. Who said that war is only a man?s > business? > > With the 116th Congress being hailed as the most diverse and most female > one yet, the rise of the empowered woman has left few sectors of > business and government untouched and now extends to the US? cosy-cosy > club of arms manufacturers and their government procurers. > > Politico[1] celebrated this ?watershed? moment on Wednesday, announcing > that as of January 1, the CEOs of four of the nation?s top five defense > contractors ? Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, and > Boeing?s defense wing ? are now women. The latest appointment was of > Kathy Warden as CEO and president of Northrop Grumman. Read more State > Department arms secretary gives thanks to weapons industry in bizarre > tweet State Department arms secretary gives thanks to weapons industry > in bizarre tweet State Department arms secretary gives thanks to weapons > industry in bizarre tweet > > In government, the Pentagon?s top weapons buyer, the State Department?s > weapons seller, the Department of Energy?s nuclear weapons chief, and > the secretary of the Air Force are all women. [...] Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson told the House Armed Services Committee: > "If I ask everyone in this room to think about the most protective person > you know in your life, someone who would do anything to keep you safe, > half the people in this room would think about their moms. We are the > protectors; that?s what the military does. We serve to protect the rest > of you, and that?s a very natural place for a woman to be." [...] > With US-made weapons responsible for thousands of deaths worldwide ? > including a conservative estimate of almost 250,000 civilians in Iraq > and Afghanistan over the last two decades and dozens of schoolchildren > in Yemen ? the irony of Wilson?s feelgood statement was not lost on some > Twitter commenters. > > ?The way intersectional feminism is going right now, we?re going to have > a very diverse group of war criminals and capitalist patriarchs,? one > wrote. [1] https://archive.fo/MHWwp -- source article https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/02/how-women-took-over-the-military-industrial-complex-1049860 requires Javascript to read. Internet: The Internet is no longer an optional nicety (and hasn't been for many years), it's a necessity. It's time to nationalize Internet access -- high-speed access to every home should be a right. At 1h48m18s into https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvFK0jqoG2I (episode 22 of George Galloway's "The Mother of All Talkshows") Jeremy Corbyn has promised free (taxpayer-funded) Internet access for all citizens. > George Galloway receives a note from 'Dave' in the audience: Dave says, > "Ironic you need the Internet to get Universal Credit but it's not a > necessity to the Tories.". [...] Now let's talk about that for a minute: > The Tories regarded it as 'Communist' [...], a kind of madness anyways, > thei idea that we should nationalize broadband and give it to people, > every person in the country, for free. "A communist crackpot"[1], that's > what it was. Now being neither a communist nor a crackpot myself, I > wondered why I felt that this was a very good idea. Why should broadband > be owned by private companies? Why should Richard Branson or Mark > Zuckerberg or any of the other plutocrats that are running these > megacorporations in the media/Internet-based companies, why should they > own the airwaves? The country, the state, the people should own these > airwaves. I really don't get why people are upset about it. Then I began > to get, once I said this, a bit of a backlash, people saying 'Well, we > don't trust the state to control our access to the Internet' but of > course the state already does. They can tell Richard Branson to cut you > off and Richard Branson will cut you off. The idea that the private > corporations are more of a guarantor of Internet freedom than the > elected government of the day in Britain would be, as I think, > fanciful. [1] See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_Z_nH-fOqI for a report on this. jbn: I think Galloway is right on this, both that the state doesn't already surveil and control your access, and in pointing out the folly in thinking that small-d democratic control over net access is somehow less desirable than leaving all access to private entities. Market-based access (one pays to get on the net) doesn't even mean that those who can pay can reliably get on the net, given that government override power exists. The US government throws around its weight in those hearings on how to get YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook to carry out the government's censorious wishes (censorship that would be illegal for the government to carry out directly). Anyone who depends on any pressured firm to connect them to the Internet would be cut off precisely as Galloway described. And currently the great scam of the Internet is that one must simultaneously appeal to multiple unaccountable private actors (ISPs, domain hoster, website/blog hoster, and more) to do anything online. As YouTube recently pointed out, they don't owe anyone video hosting. They're empowered to cut anyone off at any time without even giving a reason. Thus the terms of service are vague markers of how oppressive they wish to be in order to not appear quite so capricious as they cut people off for saying the "wrong" things. -J From jbn at forestfield.org Fri Nov 22 02:31:08 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 20:31:08 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] One small update to the notes In-Reply-To: <34bc9dcf-9d78-9c12-56ca-483a0f356207@forestfield.org> References: <34bc9dcf-9d78-9c12-56ca-483a0f356207@forestfield.org> Message-ID: I wrote: > The RT interview with investigative journalist Ben Swann is easily the > worst of these interviews because the host doesn't seem to know what she's > talking about: [...] One small update: The RT interview host was Faran Fronczak (https://www.faranfronczak.com/), a relatively new RT host whose profile page wasn't live on RT's "On-air talent" page https://www.rt.com/onair-talent/ when I checked. Currently she hosts "In Question" on RT America. From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Fri Nov 22 16:18:05 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 10:18:05 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Joe Bauers' great letter in today's N-G Message-ID: Life in the U.S. a tableau of misery The biggest problem with Donald Trump is that far too many people think he is the only problem. In truth, the factors that propelled this preposterous man to the presidency have festered for decades. Trump is not the cause of these problems; he is the result of them. We now live in a country that is grotesquely divided between the very rich and the rest of us. Working Americans see income inequality growing day by day. Most Americans earn $30,000 per year or less; most live paycheck to paycheck; the majority cannot sustain a $400 emergency. Against this tableau of misery, what do Americans see? A bloated military/industrial complex that binges on taxpayer dollars in endless wars around the world; a health care system that is dominated by the greed of insurers, pharmaceutical companies, and corporate medicine, and that bankrupts people of lesser means; a criminal justice system that turns a blind eye to the thievery of Wall Street, while incarcerating poor people at alarming rates. So who stands for the people? Certainly neither of our moribund political parties. The old paradigm of left vs. right, Democrat vs. Republican, is outdated. Both groups court voters at election time, but when it really counts, they slavishly dance on the strings of their corporate masters. So is it any wonder that a huckster like Trump, offering bogus answers to the disaffected, could bully his way into the highest office in the land? JOSEPH BAUERS Champaign -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jbn at forestfield.org Sat Nov 23 00:29:24 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 18:29:24 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News from Neptune #441 notes Message-ID: <2df5c395-6bfd-0776-6340-15118ca223f0@forestfield.org> News from Neptune #441 A "Palace Coup" edition Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aeqYsucn6s A list of links to items referenced on the show. Jefferson Morley on "JFK: What the CIA Hides" https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/11/22/jfk-what-the-cia-hides/ James W. Douglass' "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters" ISBN: 9781570757556 Joseph Bauer's recent letter to the editor in the News-Gazette https://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/2019-November/051530.html Joseph Bauers on "JFK, the unspeakable and me" https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/guest-commentary/joseph-bauers-voices-jfk-the-unspeakable-and-me/article_7c01e434-b78f-5662-8161-e7ab727a5b68.html Daniel McCarthy on "Trump Is Doing Exactly What He Was Elected to Do" https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/20/opinion/trump-impeachment.html Modern Age: A Conservative Review https://isi.org/modern-age Recent Dean Baker articles on Trump's trade war with China https://fair.org/home/dean-baker-on-trumps-trade-war-leo-fitzpatrick-on-wireless-merger/ https://truthout.org/articles/trumps-trade-war-with-china-is-waged-to-make-the-rich-richer/ Dean Baker articles https://truthout.org/authors/dean-baker/ -- on Truthout.org https://www.counterpunch.org/author/phuste/ -- on CounterPunch.org Dean Baker's blog "Beat the Press" http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/ Investigations involving Benjamin Netanyahu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016%E2%80%932018_investigations_involving_Benjamin_Netanyahu Yumna Patel on "After years of investigations, Netanyahu charged with bribery, fraud, breach of trust" https://mondoweiss.net/2019/11/after-years-of-investigations-netanyahu-charged-with-bribery-fraud-breach-of-trust/ Aaron Mat? interviews Stephen Cohen on "Why is the US Arming Ukraine?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpASSqz1hGc The Grayzone https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEXR8pRTkE2vFeJePNe9UcQ/videos Julie Wurth's News-Gazette articles https://www.news-gazette.com/users/profile/julie%20wurth/ Q&A from "Does Sex Matter?" panel including panelist Nina Paley https://player.vimeo.com/video/326585294 Urbana Free Library policy pages https://urbanafreelibrary.org/your-right-know#pol https://urbanafreelibrary.org/sites/default/files/page/attachments/2019/10/IV-C%20Meeting%20Room%20Oct%202019.pdf -- "Meeting room" policy https://urbanafreelibrary.org/sites/default/files/page/attachments/2015/02/IV-A%20Rules%20of%20Behavior%20Feb%202015.pdf -- "Rules of behavior" policy TERF -- trans-exclusionary radical feminist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terf Redline https://rdln.wordpress.com/ Marxism mailing list https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/listinfo/marxism CU Immigration Forum with Thomas Garza https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLiG7sxd3aTy1359M7OXX2Yzw6UTdob1Jr Angela Nagle on "The Left Case against Open Borders" https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2018/11/the-left-case-against-open-borders/ Jacobin Radio on "The Left Knows No Borders" with Richard Seymour & Daniel Denvir https://media.blubrry.com/jacobin/content.blubrry.com/jacobin/The_Dig_-_EP_166_-_Seymour.mp3 Universal Basic Income (UBI) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income David M. Halbfinger on "Arab Thinkers Call to Abandon Boycotts and Engage With Israel" https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/20/us/israel-arab-dialog.html James North on "?NY Times? makes up news about ?a new group of Arab thinkers? who want to end the Israel boycott" https://mondoweiss.net/2019/11/nytimes-makes-up-news-about-a-new-group-of-arab-thinkers-who-want-to-end-the-israel-boycott/ Asad Abukhalili ("The Angry Arab") twitter.com posts about this article https://twitter.com/asadabukhalil/status/1198025778824241152 https://twitter.com/asadabukhalil/status/1198025102442450944 Eddy Ram?rez on "Defendant Ignored Amnesty On Iraq Relics, Witness Says" https://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/03/nyregion/defendant-ignored-amnesty-on-iraq-relics-witness-says.html David Brooks, Ross Douthat and Michelle Goldberg on "Are Public Impeachment Hearings Working? And is America?s tipping system immoral?" https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/21/opinion/the-argument-impeachment-hearings-trump.html Notes from J.B. Nicholson https://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/2019-November/051528.html -J From carl at newsfromneptune.com Sat Nov 23 22:02:13 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2019 16:02:13 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate Message-ID: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think by Joe Giambrone / November 22nd, 2019 Did you know that Donald Trump had the State Department, USAID, NED, and the CIA fund and train Neo-Nazi, fascist militias to overthrow the government of Ukraine? These riot mobs, primarily Svoboda and Right Sector, stormed the capital, firebombed and shot the police, and destroyed democracy inside Ukraine. When the legitimately elected president was forced out by the rioters, the population which had supported him in the east seceded from the country, tearing the entire nation into pieces and sparking a civil war. The Ukraine civil war has cost the lives of over 13,000 Ukrainians. There is so much blood on Donald Trump?s hands. Oh, wait a minute! That was Barack Obama. Change that paragraph, please. Since 2014, it?s been glaringly obvious to astute (and honest) observers that the Administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden supported the most vicious street mobs in Europe, people who considered themselves proud fascists. Western media routinely censored this part of the story. Obama?s Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, made deals with their leaders and was caught on an open phone line handpicking the next unelected leader of Ukraine, someone they could sell to the US public: ?Yats is the guy.? Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed outrage on Bill O?Reilly?s TV show that the Obama Administration had aided this bloody, illegitimate coup. The head of the CIA-linked STRATFOR called Ukraine ?the most blatant coup in history.? America?s proxy terrorists burned Kiev, seized power violently, and through the power of the purse strings, Obama?s Administration installed friendly-faced fascists, who immediately set about attacking their countrymen in the east, with a policy of mass murder and indiscriminate bombings. Eastern provinces of Crimea and Donetsk, which notably had supported the ousted president, held referenda. The people there voted overwhelmingly to secede from the illegitimate, unelected, foreign-sponsored coup regime in Kiev. The above is most certainly not the reason cited this week for Impeachment hearings. Aiding and abetting fascist militias to violently siege a foreign capital is not considered a crime in Washington DC, at all. Conversely, it is business as usual, as Bolivians and Venezuelans can attest to. Woody Allen directed a film entitled ?Crimes and Misdemeanors.? That pretty much sums up the DC circus unfolding in Congress. Everything above is completely true, and yet Barack Obama is heralded as someone in the neighborhood of saints and superheroes. To the belligerent American empire, Obama was a star quarterback. Let?s not even delve into Barack?s support for Al Qaeda in Syria, and another half-million dead there, or we?ll be here all day. Donald Trump made a phone call. In his phone call, he is said to have bullied the President of Ukraine a little. He may have even delayed some weapons transfers to that country, which was engaged in a proxy war with nuclear-armed Russia and its separatist allies in the east of Ukraine. That?s a crime? A real crime? In light of over thirteen thousand slaughtered and an illegal coup in broad daylight? Trump?s telephone call is the real crime? Other Presidents haven?t bullied other client-state puppet leaders, ever? And why exactly is the President of the United States of America required to send lethal weapons to foreign fascists at all? Has anyone located that section of the Constitution? This farce is so laughable on its face and so irrelevant to the American people?s interests, that it?s difficult to overstate the insanity?and outrageous hypocrisy?of the Democrats? contrived ?Ukrainegate? case. This impeachment charge has nothing whatsoever to do with right and wrong. In 2014, Barack Obama?s White House, ?refused to include weapons in an aid package? for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.? Obama didn?t send any weapons at all, which would have provoked Russia to an even greater degree, after overthrowing their legitimately elected next-door ally and tearing Ukraine apart. It was obvious that Russia wasn?t ?invading? Ukraine, as propaganda memes claimed, but simply responding to these international crimes and to the dangerous destabilization on its border. The US had already done quite enough damage, and they didn?t need to escalate a proxy war against Russia toward nuclear Armageddon. Which brings us now to Donald Trump, who became interested in Joe Biden?s obvious corruption inside Ukraine, installing his own son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma. Hunter Biden knew absolutely nothing about Ukraine or the natural gas industry. The nepotism was glaring. This was clear graft, payback, kickback, corruption, parasites descending after the violent seizure of the state. Biden the elder was in charge of US Ukraine policy, and specifically the big money spigot, after the illegal, US-supported coup there. Then?as Joe will be Joe?Biden bragged publicly about getting Ukraine?s top prosecutor fired to the strains of Washington insider laughter. The Ukrainian prosecutor had been investigating that same company which Biden had arranged his son Hunter onto the board of. Biden?s conflict of interest was so obvious that Trump certainly believed he was onto something. Joe Biden, and media sympathetic to his claims, has predictably tried to cloud the issue, but the corruption is too obvious not to notice. This should, and may, have ended Joe Biden?s 2020 presidential bid. What happened in Ukraine was old-timey Smash & Grab, a reckless attack right on Russia?s western border. Joe Biden arrived to grab as much loot from Ukraine?s gas sector as he possibly could through a cut-out, his son. Biden used his leverage over Ukraine?s international ?loan guarantees? (which is money the coup leaders receive but don?t have to pay back) to finance their new illegitimate junta. Biden?s own quid pro quo, in his own words: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.? This is exactly the type of crime they now accuse Trump of perpetrating with his telephone. The hypocrisy is comical. The Obama Administration?s corruption, along with a bloody war and thirteen-thousand corpses, is what a real crime looks like. Hold onto that picture. Democrats were allegedly the good guys vis a vis Ukraine? Weren?t these international war crimes breaching the UN Charter, which demands exclusively peaceful actions between states, Article II? "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered." ? United Nations Charter, a ratified Treaty, and the ?Supreme Law of the Land? Launching a proxy war on nuclear-armed Russia was a sane foreign policy? Sending even more arms to escalate that conflict was allegedly such a glorious idea that any delay in weapons shipments becomes an impeachable offense? This unserious charge leveled against Donald Trump distracts from all of his obvious corruption. Trump?s Emoluments violations have been impeachable for years, but the Democrats weren?t interested. Do Democrats long to cash in on the Office of the Presidency next time? Multiple deaths of refugee children in US federal custody at the southern border could be considered murders linked directly to official policies of harsh treatment and deliberate neglect. Are Democrats afraid of exposing Obama?s own caging of immigrant children? This current Ukrainegate impeachment charade appears to be motivated only by blind partisanship and the desire to insulate corrupt insiders like Joe Biden from any scrutiny of their actions. The farce has gone so over-the-top that even as Democratic partisan media heralded the testimony of Trump?s Ukraine Ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, Donald Trump?s allies have already used portions of her testimony as a video advertisement for his reelection! Yovanovitch blatantly lied in her introductory remarks and was caught admitting that Obama?s own State Department had groomed her to answer uncomfortable questions about Joe Biden?s son, Hunter, and his appointment inside Ukraine?s gas sector. This gift to Trump now undermines the entire endeavor. Are Democrats trying to hurt or to help Trump?s reelection? [Joe Giambrone has written for WhoWhatWhy, Foreign Policy Journal, International Policy Digest, Counterpunch, GlobalResearch, OpEdNews, and his fabulous new novel is DEMIGODS. This article was posted on Friday, November 22nd, 2019 at 11:13pm and is filed under Barack Obama, Democrats, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Russia, Ukraine.] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidgreen50 at gmail.com Sun Nov 24 17:24:00 2019 From: davidgreen50 at gmail.com (David Green) Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2019 11:24:00 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] My letter in today's News-Gazette Message-ID: (As read and discussed on the most recent edition of News from Neptune) Immigration is about exploitation While immigration policy has historically been rhetorically shaped by racism, it has been more fundamentally structured by globalized economic exploitation and (since WWII) our foreign wars and geopolitical alliances. During this four-decade neoliberal era, immigration policies of all administrations have been consistent with massive redistribution of income/ wealth upwards, decline of unions, austerity and ?free trade? policies that offshore jobs, suppress wages and send economic refugees north (NAFTA). Compassionate immigration policies are, obviously, desirable. Nevertheless, such controversies obscure continuities regarding the abandonment of American workers (and children), while stereotyping them (especially African-American and rural folk) as ?unskilled.? When Jeffrey Brown advocates for increased immigration, he promotes intensified immiseration of the working class; that?s what business school deans do. When Mike Doyle of the campus YMCA supports business leaders? ?Heartland? and HB1 agenda, he displays his ignorance and compromises his institution. The supporters of our ?welcoming community? ? Bend the Arc, Solidarity Sundays, CU Immigration Forum, etc. ? are oblivious to the class politics behind their agenda. That?s because they?re immersed in class privilege, while disingenuously claiming to have rejected ?white privilege.? Ironically, Thomas Garza of the Immigration Forum (read Immigration Doctrine) stereotypes those who disagree with his views as xenophobic bigots, thus revealing his own bigotry. Garza?s overtly anti-Trumpian electoral advocacy serves establishment Democrats (anti-Sanders/ Gabbard, pro-Biden). Thus, when the Urbana Free Library endorses Garza?s annual awards program, it not only displays inappropriate partisanship, it effectively supports Brown?s 1 percent, Gies-driven, pitiless economic agenda. DAVID GREEN Champaign -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From baldwinricky at yahoo.com Sun Nov 24 19:49:50 2019 From: baldwinricky at yahoo.com (Ricky Baldwin) Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2019 19:49:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate In-Reply-To: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> References: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> I've read suggestions that the Obama Administration did this, which I don't necessarily doubt any more than anything else that I don't know for sure.? I certainly wouldn't put it past them.? But most sources I'm able to scrounge seem to be adamant that this version - that the Obama Admin trained and funded it all - is either obviously true or clearly false.?? If I've missed something on this list that's more probative, I apologize, but to be blunt what evidence is there?? (I'm aware of the circumstantial stuff, the hints, the signals, Biden's pressure in the former president of Ukraine to step down, but nothing definitive about this stringer claim about funding/training.) I tend to accept it to some degree, but I'd sure like more. Thanks,Ricky Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 4:03 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think by Joe Giambrone / November 22nd, 2019 Did you know that Donald Trump had the State Department, USAID,?NED, and the CIA fund and train Neo-Nazi, fascist militias to overthrow the government of Ukraine? These riot mobs, primarily?Svoboda?and Right Sector, stormed the capital, firebombed and shot the police, and destroyed democracy inside Ukraine. When the legitimately elected president was forced out by the rioters, the population which had?supported him in the east seceded from the country, tearing the entire nation into pieces and sparking a civil war. The Ukraine civil war has cost the lives of?over 13,000 Ukrainians. There is so much blood on?Donald Trump?s hands. Oh, wait a minute! That was?Barack Obama. Change that paragraph, please. Since 2014, it?s been glaringly obvious to astute (and honest) observers that the Administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden supported the most vicious street mobs in Europe, people who considered?themselves proud?fascists. Western media routinely censored this part of the story. Obama?s Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, made deals with their leaders and was?caught on an open phone line?handpicking the next?unelected?leader of Ukraine, someone they could sell to the US public:??Yats is the guy.? Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed?outrage on Bill O?Reilly?s TV show?that the Obama Administration had aided this bloody, illegitimate coup. The head of the CIA-linked STRATFOR called Ukraine ?the?most blatant coup in history.? America?s proxy terrorists burned Kiev, seized power violently, and through the power of the purse strings, Obama?s Administration installed friendly-faced fascists, who immediately set about attacking their?countrymen in the east, with a policy of mass murder and indiscriminate bombings. Eastern provinces of?Crimea?and?Donetsk, which notably had supported the ousted president, held referenda. The people?there voted overwhelmingly to secede from the illegitimate, unelected, foreign-sponsored coup regime in Kiev. The above is most certainly?not?the reason cited this week for Impeachment hearings. Aiding and abetting fascist militias to violently siege a foreign capital is not considered a crime in Washington DC, at all. Conversely, it is business as usual, as Bolivians and Venezuelans can attest to. Woody Allen directed a film entitled??Crimes and Misdemeanors.??That pretty much sums up the DC circus unfolding in Congress. Everything above is completely true, and yet Barack Obama is heralded as?someone in the neighborhood of saints and superheroes. To the belligerent American empire, Obama was a star quarterback. Let?s not even delve into Barack?s?support for Al Qaeda in Syria, and another half-million dead there, or we?ll be here all day. Donald Trump made a phone call. In his phone call, he is said to have bullied the President of Ukraine a little. He may have even delayed some weapons transfers to that country, which was engaged in a proxy?war with nuclear-armed Russia and its separatist allies in the east of Ukraine. That?s a crime? A real crime? In light of over thirteen thousand slaughtered and an illegal coup in broad daylight? Trump?s telephone call is the real crime? Other Presidents haven?t bullied other client-state puppet leaders, ever? And why exactly is the President of the United States of America?required?to send lethal weapons to?foreign fascists?at all? Has anyone located that section of the Constitution? This farce is so laughable on its face and so irrelevant to the American people?s interests, that it?s difficult to overstate the insanity?and outrageous hypocrisy?of the Democrats? contrived ?Ukrainegate? case.?This impeachment charge has nothing whatsoever to do with right and wrong. In 2014, Barack Obama?s White House, ?refused to include weapons in an aid package? for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military?assistance.? Obama didn?t send any weapons at all, which would have provoked Russia to an even greater degree, after overthrowing their legitimately elected next-door ally and tearing Ukraine apart. It was?obvious that Russia wasn?t ?invading? Ukraine, as propaganda memes claimed, but simply responding to these international crimes and to the dangerous destabilization on its border. The US had already done?quite enough damage, and they didn?t need to escalate a proxy war against Russia toward nuclear?Armageddon. Which brings us now to Donald Trump, who became interested in Joe Biden?s obvious corruption inside Ukraine, installing his own son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company,?Burisma. Hunter Biden knew?absolutely nothing about Ukraine or the natural gas industry. The nepotism was glaring. This was clear graft, payback, kickback, corruption, parasites descending after the violent seizure of the state. Biden the?elder was in charge of US Ukraine policy, and specifically the big money spigot, after the illegal, US-supported coup there. Then?as Joe will be Joe?Biden bragged publicly about?getting Ukraine?s top prosecutor fired?to the strains of Washington insider laughter. The Ukrainian prosecutor had been investigating that same company?which Biden had arranged his son Hunter onto the board of. Biden?s conflict of interest was so obvious that Trump certainly believed he was onto something. Joe Biden, and media sympathetic to his claims, has?predictably tried to cloud the issue,?but the corruption is too obvious?not to notice. This should, and may, have ended Joe Biden?s 2020 presidential bid. What happened in Ukraine was old-timey?Smash & Grab, a reckless attack right on Russia?s western border. Joe Biden arrived to grab as much loot from Ukraine?s gas sector as he possibly could through a cut-out, his son. Biden used his leverage over Ukraine?s international ?loan guarantees? (which is money the coup leaders receive but don?t have to pay back) to finance their new illegitimate junta. Biden?s own?quid pro quo, in his own words: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.? This is exactly the type of crime they now?accuse Trump of perpetrating with his telephone. The hypocrisy is comical. The Obama Administration?s corruption, along with a bloody war and thirteen-thousand corpses, is what a real crime looks like. Hold onto that picture. Democrats were allegedly the good guys?vis a vis?Ukraine? Weren?t these international war crimes breaching the UN Charter, which demands exclusively?peaceful?actions between states, Article II? "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered." ? United Nations Charter, a ratified Treaty, and the ?Supreme Law of the Land? Launching a proxy war on nuclear-armed Russia was a sane foreign policy? Sending even more arms to escalate that conflict was allegedly such a glorious idea that any delay in weapons shipments becomes an?impeachable offense? This?unserious charge?leveled against Donald Trump distracts from all of his obvious corruption. Trump?s?Emoluments violations?have been impeachable for years, but the Democrats weren?t interested. Do?Democrats long to cash in on the Office of the Presidency next time? Multiple deaths of refugee children?in US federal custody at the southern border could be considered?murders?linked directly to official policies of harsh treatment and deliberate neglect. Are Democrats afraid of?exposing?Obama?s own caging?of immigrant children? This current?Ukrainegate?impeachment charade appears to be motivated only by blind partisanship and the desire to insulate corrupt insiders like Joe Biden from any scrutiny of their actions. The farce has gone?so over-the-top that even as Democratic partisan media heralded the testimony of Trump?s Ukraine Ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, Donald Trump?s allies have already used portions of her testimony as a video?advertisement for his reelection! Yovanovitch blatantly lied in her introductory remarks and was caught admitting?that Obama?s own State Department had groomed her to answer uncomfortable questions about Joe Biden?s son, Hunter, and his?appointment inside Ukraine?s gas sector. This gift to Trump now undermines the entire endeavor. Are Democrats trying to hurt or to help Trump?s reelection? [Joe Giambrone has written for WhoWhatWhy, Foreign Policy Journal, International Policy Digest, Counterpunch, GlobalResearch, OpEdNews, and his fabulous new novel is DEMIGODS.?This article was posted on Friday, November 22nd, 2019 at 11:13pm and is filed under?Barack Obama,?Democrats,?Donald Trump,?Joe Biden,?Russia,?Ukraine.]_______________________________________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Untitled URL: From baldwinricky at yahoo.com Sun Nov 24 19:49:50 2019 From: baldwinricky at yahoo.com (Ricky Baldwin) Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2019 19:49:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate In-Reply-To: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> References: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> I've read suggestions that the Obama Administration did this, which I don't necessarily doubt any more than anything else that I don't know for sure.? I certainly wouldn't put it past them.? But most sources I'm able to scrounge seem to be adamant that this version - that the Obama Admin trained and funded it all - is either obviously true or clearly false.?? If I've missed something on this list that's more probative, I apologize, but to be blunt what evidence is there?? (I'm aware of the circumstantial stuff, the hints, the signals, Biden's pressure in the former president of Ukraine to step down, but nothing definitive about this stringer claim about funding/training.) I tend to accept it to some degree, but I'd sure like more. Thanks,Ricky Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 4:03 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think by Joe Giambrone / November 22nd, 2019 Did you know that Donald Trump had the State Department, USAID,?NED, and the CIA fund and train Neo-Nazi, fascist militias to overthrow the government of Ukraine? These riot mobs, primarily?Svoboda?and Right Sector, stormed the capital, firebombed and shot the police, and destroyed democracy inside Ukraine. When the legitimately elected president was forced out by the rioters, the population which had?supported him in the east seceded from the country, tearing the entire nation into pieces and sparking a civil war. The Ukraine civil war has cost the lives of?over 13,000 Ukrainians. There is so much blood on?Donald Trump?s hands. Oh, wait a minute! That was?Barack Obama. Change that paragraph, please. Since 2014, it?s been glaringly obvious to astute (and honest) observers that the Administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden supported the most vicious street mobs in Europe, people who considered?themselves proud?fascists. Western media routinely censored this part of the story. Obama?s Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, made deals with their leaders and was?caught on an open phone line?handpicking the next?unelected?leader of Ukraine, someone they could sell to the US public:??Yats is the guy.? Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed?outrage on Bill O?Reilly?s TV show?that the Obama Administration had aided this bloody, illegitimate coup. The head of the CIA-linked STRATFOR called Ukraine ?the?most blatant coup in history.? America?s proxy terrorists burned Kiev, seized power violently, and through the power of the purse strings, Obama?s Administration installed friendly-faced fascists, who immediately set about attacking their?countrymen in the east, with a policy of mass murder and indiscriminate bombings. Eastern provinces of?Crimea?and?Donetsk, which notably had supported the ousted president, held referenda. The people?there voted overwhelmingly to secede from the illegitimate, unelected, foreign-sponsored coup regime in Kiev. The above is most certainly?not?the reason cited this week for Impeachment hearings. Aiding and abetting fascist militias to violently siege a foreign capital is not considered a crime in Washington DC, at all. Conversely, it is business as usual, as Bolivians and Venezuelans can attest to. Woody Allen directed a film entitled??Crimes and Misdemeanors.??That pretty much sums up the DC circus unfolding in Congress. Everything above is completely true, and yet Barack Obama is heralded as?someone in the neighborhood of saints and superheroes. To the belligerent American empire, Obama was a star quarterback. Let?s not even delve into Barack?s?support for Al Qaeda in Syria, and another half-million dead there, or we?ll be here all day. Donald Trump made a phone call. In his phone call, he is said to have bullied the President of Ukraine a little. He may have even delayed some weapons transfers to that country, which was engaged in a proxy?war with nuclear-armed Russia and its separatist allies in the east of Ukraine. That?s a crime? A real crime? In light of over thirteen thousand slaughtered and an illegal coup in broad daylight? Trump?s telephone call is the real crime? Other Presidents haven?t bullied other client-state puppet leaders, ever? And why exactly is the President of the United States of America?required?to send lethal weapons to?foreign fascists?at all? Has anyone located that section of the Constitution? This farce is so laughable on its face and so irrelevant to the American people?s interests, that it?s difficult to overstate the insanity?and outrageous hypocrisy?of the Democrats? contrived ?Ukrainegate? case.?This impeachment charge has nothing whatsoever to do with right and wrong. In 2014, Barack Obama?s White House, ?refused to include weapons in an aid package? for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military?assistance.? Obama didn?t send any weapons at all, which would have provoked Russia to an even greater degree, after overthrowing their legitimately elected next-door ally and tearing Ukraine apart. It was?obvious that Russia wasn?t ?invading? Ukraine, as propaganda memes claimed, but simply responding to these international crimes and to the dangerous destabilization on its border. The US had already done?quite enough damage, and they didn?t need to escalate a proxy war against Russia toward nuclear?Armageddon. Which brings us now to Donald Trump, who became interested in Joe Biden?s obvious corruption inside Ukraine, installing his own son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company,?Burisma. Hunter Biden knew?absolutely nothing about Ukraine or the natural gas industry. The nepotism was glaring. This was clear graft, payback, kickback, corruption, parasites descending after the violent seizure of the state. Biden the?elder was in charge of US Ukraine policy, and specifically the big money spigot, after the illegal, US-supported coup there. Then?as Joe will be Joe?Biden bragged publicly about?getting Ukraine?s top prosecutor fired?to the strains of Washington insider laughter. The Ukrainian prosecutor had been investigating that same company?which Biden had arranged his son Hunter onto the board of. Biden?s conflict of interest was so obvious that Trump certainly believed he was onto something. Joe Biden, and media sympathetic to his claims, has?predictably tried to cloud the issue,?but the corruption is too obvious?not to notice. This should, and may, have ended Joe Biden?s 2020 presidential bid. What happened in Ukraine was old-timey?Smash & Grab, a reckless attack right on Russia?s western border. Joe Biden arrived to grab as much loot from Ukraine?s gas sector as he possibly could through a cut-out, his son. Biden used his leverage over Ukraine?s international ?loan guarantees? (which is money the coup leaders receive but don?t have to pay back) to finance their new illegitimate junta. Biden?s own?quid pro quo, in his own words: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.? This is exactly the type of crime they now?accuse Trump of perpetrating with his telephone. The hypocrisy is comical. The Obama Administration?s corruption, along with a bloody war and thirteen-thousand corpses, is what a real crime looks like. Hold onto that picture. Democrats were allegedly the good guys?vis a vis?Ukraine? Weren?t these international war crimes breaching the UN Charter, which demands exclusively?peaceful?actions between states, Article II? "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered." ? United Nations Charter, a ratified Treaty, and the ?Supreme Law of the Land? Launching a proxy war on nuclear-armed Russia was a sane foreign policy? Sending even more arms to escalate that conflict was allegedly such a glorious idea that any delay in weapons shipments becomes an?impeachable offense? This?unserious charge?leveled against Donald Trump distracts from all of his obvious corruption. Trump?s?Emoluments violations?have been impeachable for years, but the Democrats weren?t interested. Do?Democrats long to cash in on the Office of the Presidency next time? Multiple deaths of refugee children?in US federal custody at the southern border could be considered?murders?linked directly to official policies of harsh treatment and deliberate neglect. Are Democrats afraid of?exposing?Obama?s own caging?of immigrant children? This current?Ukrainegate?impeachment charade appears to be motivated only by blind partisanship and the desire to insulate corrupt insiders like Joe Biden from any scrutiny of their actions. The farce has gone?so over-the-top that even as Democratic partisan media heralded the testimony of Trump?s Ukraine Ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, Donald Trump?s allies have already used portions of her testimony as a video?advertisement for his reelection! Yovanovitch blatantly lied in her introductory remarks and was caught admitting?that Obama?s own State Department had groomed her to answer uncomfortable questions about Joe Biden?s son, Hunter, and his?appointment inside Ukraine?s gas sector. This gift to Trump now undermines the entire endeavor. Are Democrats trying to hurt or to help Trump?s reelection? [Joe Giambrone has written for WhoWhatWhy, Foreign Policy Journal, International Policy Digest, Counterpunch, GlobalResearch, OpEdNews, and his fabulous new novel is DEMIGODS.?This article was posted on Friday, November 22nd, 2019 at 11:13pm and is filed under?Barack Obama,?Democrats,?Donald Trump,?Joe Biden,?Russia,?Ukraine.]_______________________________________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Untitled URL: From carl at newsfromneptune.com Mon Nov 25 00:30:00 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2019 18:30:00 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate In-Reply-To: <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> References: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <920D48DD-41B5-4D3E-8695-6EB896123727@newsfromneptune.com> That the 2014 coup against an elected president in Ukraine was engineered by the sitting US administration (notably in the person of Victoria Nuland) is hardly in doubt. (Even Wikipedia admits it: .) The result was the first government in Europe containing explict nazis since 1945 - another accomplishment of the president who said, ?Turns out I'm really good at killing people. Didn't know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine? (WaPo). The government that Obama's administration installed killed thousands in the Ukrainian region of Donbass (Donetsk and Luhansk) who wouldn?t accept the coup government. But as my quondam colleague Ron Szoke said about the contemporary MSM accounts of those casualties of Obama?s policy, ?Donetsk? Don?t tell!? It?s not surprising that people as well informed as you don?t know about Obama?s accomplishments. That?s what Giambrone is talking about - more corpses piled around the White House. See our friend Francis Boyle?s account: . ?CGE > On Nov 24, 2019, at 1:49 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote: > > I've read suggestions that the Obama Administration did this, which I don't necessarily doubt any more than anything else that I don't know for sure. I certainly wouldn't put it past them. But most sources I'm able to scrounge seem to be adamant that this version - that the Obama Admin trained and funded it all - is either obviously true or clearly false. > > If I've missed something on this list that's more probative, I apologize, but to be blunt what evidence is there? (I'm aware of the circumstantial stuff, the hints, the signals, Biden's pressure in the former president of Ukraine to step down, but nothing definitive about this stringer claim about funding/training.) I tend to accept it to some degree, but I'd sure like more. > > Thanks, > Ricky > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 4:03 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: > Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think > by Joe Giambrone / November 22nd, 2019 > > Did you know that Donald Trump had the State Department, USAID, NED, and the CIA fund and train Neo-Nazi, fascist militias to overthrow the government of Ukraine? These riot mobs, primarily Svoboda and Right Sector, stormed the capital, firebombed and shot the police, and destroyed democracy inside Ukraine. When the legitimately elected president was forced out by the rioters, the population which had supported him in the east seceded from the country, tearing the entire nation into pieces and sparking a civil war. The Ukraine civil war has cost the lives of over 13,000 Ukrainians. There is so much blood on Donald Trump?s hands. > > Oh, wait a minute! That was Barack Obama. Change that paragraph, please. > > Since 2014, it?s been glaringly obvious to astute (and honest) observers that the Administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden supported the most vicious street mobs in Europe, people who considered themselves proud fascists. Western media routinely censored this part of the story. Obama?s Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, made deals with their leaders and was caught on an open phone line handpicking the next unelected leader of Ukraine, someone they could sell to the US public: ?Yats is the guy.? > > Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed outrage on Bill O?Reilly?s TV show that the Obama Administration had aided this bloody, illegitimate coup. The head of the CIA-linked STRATFOR called Ukraine ?the most blatant coup in history.? > > America?s proxy terrorists burned Kiev, seized power violently, and through the power of the purse strings, Obama?s Administration installed friendly-faced fascists, who immediately set about attacking their countrymen in the east, with a policy of mass murder and indiscriminate bombings. Eastern provinces of Crimea and Donetsk, which notably had supported the ousted president, held referenda. The people there voted overwhelmingly to secede from the illegitimate, unelected, foreign-sponsored coup regime in Kiev. > > The above is most certainly not the reason cited this week for Impeachment hearings. > > Aiding and abetting fascist militias to violently siege a foreign capital is not considered a crime in Washington DC, at all. Conversely, it is business as usual, as Bolivians and Venezuelans can attest to. > > Woody Allen directed a film entitled ?Crimes and Misdemeanors.? That pretty much sums up the DC circus unfolding in Congress. Everything above is completely true, and yet Barack Obama is heralded as someone in the neighborhood of saints and superheroes. To the belligerent American empire, Obama was a star quarterback. Let?s not even delve into Barack?s support for Al Qaeda in Syria, and another half-million dead there, or we?ll be here all day. > > Donald Trump made a phone call. In his phone call, he is said to have bullied the President of Ukraine a little. He may have even delayed some weapons transfers to that country, which was engaged in a proxy war with nuclear-armed Russia and its separatist allies in the east of Ukraine. > > That?s a crime? A real crime? In light of over thirteen thousand slaughtered and an illegal coup in broad daylight? Trump?s telephone call is the real crime? > > Other Presidents haven?t bullied other client-state puppet leaders, ever? > > And why exactly is the President of the United States of America required to send lethal weapons to foreign fascists at all? Has anyone located that section of the Constitution? > > This farce is so laughable on its face and so irrelevant to the American people?s interests, that it?s difficult to overstate the insanity?and outrageous hypocrisy?of the Democrats? contrived ?Ukrainegate? case. This impeachment charge has nothing whatsoever to do with right and wrong. > > In 2014, Barack Obama?s White House, ?refused to include weapons in an aid package? for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.? Obama didn?t send any weapons at all, which would have provoked Russia to an even greater degree, after overthrowing their legitimately elected next-door ally and tearing Ukraine apart. It was obvious that Russia wasn?t ?invading? Ukraine, as propaganda memes claimed, but simply responding to these international crimes and to the dangerous destabilization on its border. The US had already done quite enough damage, and they didn?t need to escalate a proxy war against Russia toward nuclear Armageddon. > > Which brings us now to Donald Trump, who became interested in Joe Biden?s obvious corruption inside Ukraine, installing his own son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma. Hunter Biden knew absolutely nothing about Ukraine or the natural gas industry. The nepotism was glaring. This was clear graft, payback, kickback, corruption, parasites descending after the violent seizure of the state. Biden the elder was in charge of US Ukraine policy, and specifically the big money spigot, after the illegal, US-supported coup there. > > Then?as Joe will be Joe?Biden bragged publicly about getting Ukraine?s top prosecutor fired to the strains of Washington insider laughter. The Ukrainian prosecutor had been investigating that same company which Biden had arranged his son Hunter onto the board of. Biden?s conflict of interest was so obvious that Trump certainly believed he was onto something. Joe Biden, and media sympathetic to his claims, has predictably tried to cloud the issue, but the corruption is too obvious not to notice. This should, and may, have ended Joe Biden?s 2020 presidential bid. > > What happened in Ukraine was old-timey Smash & Grab, a reckless attack right on Russia?s western border. Joe Biden arrived to grab as much loot from Ukraine?s gas sector as he possibly could through a cut-out, his son. Biden used his leverage over Ukraine?s international ?loan guarantees? (which is money the coup leaders receive but don?t have to pay back) to finance their new illegitimate junta. > > Biden?s own quid pro quo, in his own words: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.? This is exactly the type of crime they now accuse Trump of perpetrating with his telephone. The hypocrisy is comical. > > The Obama Administration?s corruption, along with a bloody war and thirteen-thousand corpses, is what a real crime looks like. Hold onto that picture. > > Democrats were allegedly the good guys vis a vis Ukraine? > > Weren?t these international war crimes breaching the UN Charter, which demands exclusively peaceful actions between states, Article II? > > "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered." > ? United Nations Charter, a ratified Treaty, and the ?Supreme Law of the Land? > > Launching a proxy war on nuclear-armed Russia was a sane foreign policy? Sending even more arms to escalate that conflict was allegedly such a glorious idea that any delay in weapons shipments becomes an impeachable offense? > > This unserious charge leveled against Donald Trump distracts from all of his obvious corruption. Trump?s Emoluments violations have been impeachable for years, but the Democrats weren?t interested. Do Democrats long to cash in on the Office of the Presidency next time? > > Multiple deaths of refugee children in US federal custody at the southern border could be considered murders linked directly to official policies of harsh treatment and deliberate neglect. Are Democrats afraid of exposing Obama?s own caging of immigrant children? > > This current Ukrainegate impeachment charade appears to be motivated only by blind partisanship and the desire to insulate corrupt insiders like Joe Biden from any scrutiny of their actions. The farce has gone so over-the-top that even as Democratic partisan media heralded the testimony of Trump?s Ukraine Ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, Donald Trump?s allies have already used portions of her testimony as a video advertisement for his reelection! > > Yovanovitch blatantly lied in her introductory remarks and was caught admitting that Obama?s own State Department had groomed her to answer uncomfortable questions about Joe Biden?s son, Hunter, and his appointment inside Ukraine?s gas sector. This gift to Trump now undermines the entire endeavor. > > Are Democrats trying to hurt or to help Trump?s reelection? > > [Joe Giambrone has written for WhoWhatWhy, Foreign Policy Journal, International Policy Digest, Counterpunch, GlobalResearch, OpEdNews, and his fabulous new novel is DEMIGODS. > This article was posted on Friday, November 22nd, 2019 at 11:13pm and is filed under Barack Obama, Democrats, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Russia, Ukraine.] > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > From carl at newsfromneptune.com Mon Nov 25 00:30:00 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2019 18:30:00 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate In-Reply-To: <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> References: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <920D48DD-41B5-4D3E-8695-6EB896123727@newsfromneptune.com> That the 2014 coup against an elected president in Ukraine was engineered by the sitting US administration (notably in the person of Victoria Nuland) is hardly in doubt. (Even Wikipedia admits it: .) The result was the first government in Europe containing explict nazis since 1945 - another accomplishment of the president who said, ?Turns out I'm really good at killing people. Didn't know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine? (WaPo). The government that Obama's administration installed killed thousands in the Ukrainian region of Donbass (Donetsk and Luhansk) who wouldn?t accept the coup government. But as my quondam colleague Ron Szoke said about the contemporary MSM accounts of those casualties of Obama?s policy, ?Donetsk? Don?t tell!? It?s not surprising that people as well informed as you don?t know about Obama?s accomplishments. That?s what Giambrone is talking about - more corpses piled around the White House. See our friend Francis Boyle?s account: . ?CGE > On Nov 24, 2019, at 1:49 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote: > > I've read suggestions that the Obama Administration did this, which I don't necessarily doubt any more than anything else that I don't know for sure. I certainly wouldn't put it past them. But most sources I'm able to scrounge seem to be adamant that this version - that the Obama Admin trained and funded it all - is either obviously true or clearly false. > > If I've missed something on this list that's more probative, I apologize, but to be blunt what evidence is there? (I'm aware of the circumstantial stuff, the hints, the signals, Biden's pressure in the former president of Ukraine to step down, but nothing definitive about this stringer claim about funding/training.) I tend to accept it to some degree, but I'd sure like more. > > Thanks, > Ricky > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 4:03 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: > Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think > by Joe Giambrone / November 22nd, 2019 > > Did you know that Donald Trump had the State Department, USAID, NED, and the CIA fund and train Neo-Nazi, fascist militias to overthrow the government of Ukraine? These riot mobs, primarily Svoboda and Right Sector, stormed the capital, firebombed and shot the police, and destroyed democracy inside Ukraine. When the legitimately elected president was forced out by the rioters, the population which had supported him in the east seceded from the country, tearing the entire nation into pieces and sparking a civil war. The Ukraine civil war has cost the lives of over 13,000 Ukrainians. There is so much blood on Donald Trump?s hands. > > Oh, wait a minute! That was Barack Obama. Change that paragraph, please. > > Since 2014, it?s been glaringly obvious to astute (and honest) observers that the Administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden supported the most vicious street mobs in Europe, people who considered themselves proud fascists. Western media routinely censored this part of the story. Obama?s Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, made deals with their leaders and was caught on an open phone line handpicking the next unelected leader of Ukraine, someone they could sell to the US public: ?Yats is the guy.? > > Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed outrage on Bill O?Reilly?s TV show that the Obama Administration had aided this bloody, illegitimate coup. The head of the CIA-linked STRATFOR called Ukraine ?the most blatant coup in history.? > > America?s proxy terrorists burned Kiev, seized power violently, and through the power of the purse strings, Obama?s Administration installed friendly-faced fascists, who immediately set about attacking their countrymen in the east, with a policy of mass murder and indiscriminate bombings. Eastern provinces of Crimea and Donetsk, which notably had supported the ousted president, held referenda. The people there voted overwhelmingly to secede from the illegitimate, unelected, foreign-sponsored coup regime in Kiev. > > The above is most certainly not the reason cited this week for Impeachment hearings. > > Aiding and abetting fascist militias to violently siege a foreign capital is not considered a crime in Washington DC, at all. Conversely, it is business as usual, as Bolivians and Venezuelans can attest to. > > Woody Allen directed a film entitled ?Crimes and Misdemeanors.? That pretty much sums up the DC circus unfolding in Congress. Everything above is completely true, and yet Barack Obama is heralded as someone in the neighborhood of saints and superheroes. To the belligerent American empire, Obama was a star quarterback. Let?s not even delve into Barack?s support for Al Qaeda in Syria, and another half-million dead there, or we?ll be here all day. > > Donald Trump made a phone call. In his phone call, he is said to have bullied the President of Ukraine a little. He may have even delayed some weapons transfers to that country, which was engaged in a proxy war with nuclear-armed Russia and its separatist allies in the east of Ukraine. > > That?s a crime? A real crime? In light of over thirteen thousand slaughtered and an illegal coup in broad daylight? Trump?s telephone call is the real crime? > > Other Presidents haven?t bullied other client-state puppet leaders, ever? > > And why exactly is the President of the United States of America required to send lethal weapons to foreign fascists at all? Has anyone located that section of the Constitution? > > This farce is so laughable on its face and so irrelevant to the American people?s interests, that it?s difficult to overstate the insanity?and outrageous hypocrisy?of the Democrats? contrived ?Ukrainegate? case. This impeachment charge has nothing whatsoever to do with right and wrong. > > In 2014, Barack Obama?s White House, ?refused to include weapons in an aid package? for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.? Obama didn?t send any weapons at all, which would have provoked Russia to an even greater degree, after overthrowing their legitimately elected next-door ally and tearing Ukraine apart. It was obvious that Russia wasn?t ?invading? Ukraine, as propaganda memes claimed, but simply responding to these international crimes and to the dangerous destabilization on its border. The US had already done quite enough damage, and they didn?t need to escalate a proxy war against Russia toward nuclear Armageddon. > > Which brings us now to Donald Trump, who became interested in Joe Biden?s obvious corruption inside Ukraine, installing his own son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma. Hunter Biden knew absolutely nothing about Ukraine or the natural gas industry. The nepotism was glaring. This was clear graft, payback, kickback, corruption, parasites descending after the violent seizure of the state. Biden the elder was in charge of US Ukraine policy, and specifically the big money spigot, after the illegal, US-supported coup there. > > Then?as Joe will be Joe?Biden bragged publicly about getting Ukraine?s top prosecutor fired to the strains of Washington insider laughter. The Ukrainian prosecutor had been investigating that same company which Biden had arranged his son Hunter onto the board of. Biden?s conflict of interest was so obvious that Trump certainly believed he was onto something. Joe Biden, and media sympathetic to his claims, has predictably tried to cloud the issue, but the corruption is too obvious not to notice. This should, and may, have ended Joe Biden?s 2020 presidential bid. > > What happened in Ukraine was old-timey Smash & Grab, a reckless attack right on Russia?s western border. Joe Biden arrived to grab as much loot from Ukraine?s gas sector as he possibly could through a cut-out, his son. Biden used his leverage over Ukraine?s international ?loan guarantees? (which is money the coup leaders receive but don?t have to pay back) to finance their new illegitimate junta. > > Biden?s own quid pro quo, in his own words: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.? This is exactly the type of crime they now accuse Trump of perpetrating with his telephone. The hypocrisy is comical. > > The Obama Administration?s corruption, along with a bloody war and thirteen-thousand corpses, is what a real crime looks like. Hold onto that picture. > > Democrats were allegedly the good guys vis a vis Ukraine? > > Weren?t these international war crimes breaching the UN Charter, which demands exclusively peaceful actions between states, Article II? > > "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered." > ? United Nations Charter, a ratified Treaty, and the ?Supreme Law of the Land? > > Launching a proxy war on nuclear-armed Russia was a sane foreign policy? Sending even more arms to escalate that conflict was allegedly such a glorious idea that any delay in weapons shipments becomes an impeachable offense? > > This unserious charge leveled against Donald Trump distracts from all of his obvious corruption. Trump?s Emoluments violations have been impeachable for years, but the Democrats weren?t interested. Do Democrats long to cash in on the Office of the Presidency next time? > > Multiple deaths of refugee children in US federal custody at the southern border could be considered murders linked directly to official policies of harsh treatment and deliberate neglect. Are Democrats afraid of exposing Obama?s own caging of immigrant children? > > This current Ukrainegate impeachment charade appears to be motivated only by blind partisanship and the desire to insulate corrupt insiders like Joe Biden from any scrutiny of their actions. The farce has gone so over-the-top that even as Democratic partisan media heralded the testimony of Trump?s Ukraine Ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, Donald Trump?s allies have already used portions of her testimony as a video advertisement for his reelection! > > Yovanovitch blatantly lied in her introductory remarks and was caught admitting that Obama?s own State Department had groomed her to answer uncomfortable questions about Joe Biden?s son, Hunter, and his appointment inside Ukraine?s gas sector. This gift to Trump now undermines the entire endeavor. > > Are Democrats trying to hurt or to help Trump?s reelection? > > [Joe Giambrone has written for WhoWhatWhy, Foreign Policy Journal, International Policy Digest, Counterpunch, GlobalResearch, OpEdNews, and his fabulous new novel is DEMIGODS. > This article was posted on Friday, November 22nd, 2019 at 11:13pm and is filed under Barack Obama, Democrats, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Russia, Ukraine.] > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Mon Nov 25 12:58:04 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 06:58:04 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate In-Reply-To: <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> References: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000901d5a38f$fa780c80$ef682580$@comcast.net> Ricky, The film maker Oliver Stone did a great documentary about this called ? Ukraine On Fire ?. David J. From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Ricky Baldwin via Peace-discuss Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2019 1:50 PM To: C. G. Estabrook; C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss; peace-discuss at anti-war.net Cc: Peace Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate I've read suggestions that the Obama Administration did this, which I don't necessarily doubt any more than anything else that I don't know for sure. I certainly wouldn't put it past them. But most sources I'm able to scrounge seem to be adamant that this version - that the Obama Admin trained and funded it all - is either obviously true or clearly false. If I've missed something on this list that's more probative, I apologize, but to be blunt what evidence is there? (I'm aware of the circumstantial stuff, the hints, the signals, Biden's pressure in the former president of Ukraine to step down, but nothing definitive about this stringer claim about funding/training.) I tend to accept it to some degree, but I'd sure like more. Thanks, Ricky Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 4:03 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think by Joe Giambrone / November 22nd, 2019 Did you know that Donald Trump had the State Department, USAID, NED, and the CIA fund and train Neo-Nazi, fascist militias to overthrow the government of Ukraine? These riot mobs, primarily Svoboda and Right Sector, stormed the capital, firebombed and shot the police, and destroyed democracy inside Ukraine. When the legitimately elected president was forced out by the rioters, the population which had supported him in the east seceded from the country, tearing the entire nation into pieces and sparking a civil war. The Ukraine civil war has cost the lives of over 13,000 Ukrainians. There is so much blood on Donald Trump?s hands. Oh, wait a minute! That was Barack Obama. Change that paragraph, please. Since 2014, it?s been glaringly obvious to astute (and honest) observers that the Administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden supported the most vicious street mobs in Europe, people who considered themselves proud fascists. Western media routinely censored this part of the story. Obama?s Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, made deals with their leaders and was caught on an open phone line handpicking the next unelected leader of Ukraine, someone they could sell to the US public: ?Yats is the guy.? Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed outrage on Bill O?Reilly?s TV show that the Obama Administration had aided this bloody, illegitimate coup. The head of the CIA-linked STRATFOR called Ukraine ?the most blatant coup in history.? America?s proxy terrorists burned Kiev, seized power violently, and through the power of the purse strings, Obama?s Administration installed friendly-faced fascists, who immediately set about attacking their countrymen in the east, with a policy of mass murder and indiscriminate bombings. Eastern provinces of Crimea and Donetsk, which notably had supported the ousted president, held referenda. The people there voted overwhelmingly to secede from the illegitimate, unelected, foreign-sponsored coup regime in Kiev. The above is most certainly not the reason cited this week for Impeachment hearings. Aiding and abetting fascist militias to violently siege a foreign capital is not considered a crime in Washington DC, at all. Conversely, it is business as usual, as Bolivians and Venezuelans can attest to. Woody Allen directed a film entitled ?Crimes and Misdemeanors.? That pretty much sums up the DC circus unfolding in Congress. Everything above is completely true, and yet Barack Obama is heralded as someone in the neighborhood of saints and superheroes. To the belligerent American empire, Obama was a star quarterback. Let?s not even delve into Barack?s support for Al Qaeda in Syria, and another half-million dead there, or we?ll be here all day. Donald Trump made a phone call. In his phone call, he is said to have bullied the President of Ukraine a little. He may have even delayed some weapons transfers to that country, which was engaged in a proxy war with nuclear-armed Russia and its separatist allies in the east of Ukraine. That?s a crime? A real crime? In light of over thirteen thousand slaughtered and an illegal coup in broad daylight? Trump?s telephone call is the real crime? Other Presidents haven?t bullied other client-state puppet leaders, ever? And why exactly is the President of the United States of America required to send lethal weapons to foreign fascists at all? Has anyone located that section of the Constitution? This farce is so laughable on its face and so irrelevant to the American people?s interests, that it?s difficult to overstate the insanity?and outrageous hypocrisy?of the Democrats? contrived ?Ukrainegate? case. This impeachment charge has nothing whatsoever to do with right and wrong. In 2014, Barack Obama?s White House, ?refused to include weapons in an aid package? for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.? Obama didn?t send any weapons at all, which would have provoked Russia to an even greater degree, after overthrowing their legitimately elected next-door ally and tearing Ukraine apart. It was obvious that Russia wasn?t ?invading? Ukraine, as propaganda memes claimed, but simply responding to these international crimes and to the dangerous destabilization on its border. The US had already done quite enough damage, and they didn?t need to escalate a proxy war against Russia toward nuclear Armageddon. Which brings us now to Donald Trump, who became interested in Joe Biden?s obvious corruption inside Ukraine, installing his own son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma. Hunter Biden knew absolutely nothing about Ukraine or the natural gas industry. The nepotism was glaring. This was clear graft, payback, kickback, corruption, parasites descending after the violent seizure of the state. Biden the elder was in charge of US Ukraine policy, and specifically the big money spigot, after the illegal, US-supported coup there. Then?as Joe will be Joe?Biden bragged publicly about getting Ukraine?s top prosecutor fired to the strains of Washington insider laughter. The Ukrainian prosecutor had been investigating that same company which Biden had arranged his son Hunter onto the board of. Biden?s conflict of interest was so obvious that Trump certainly believed he was onto something. Joe Biden, and media sympathetic to his claims, has predictably tried to cloud the issue, but the corruption is too obvious not to notice. This should, and may, have ended Joe Biden?s 2020 presidential bid. What happened in Ukraine was old-timey Smash & Grab, a reckless attack right on Russia?s western border. Joe Biden arrived to grab as much loot from Ukraine?s gas sector as he possibly could through a cut-out, his son. Biden used his leverage over Ukraine?s international ?loan guarantees? (which is money the coup leaders receive but don?t have to pay back) to finance their new illegitimate junta. Biden?s own quid pro quo, in his own words: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.? This is exactly the type of crime they now accuse Trump of perpetrating with his telephone. The hypocrisy is comical. The Obama Administration?s corruption, along with a bloody war and thirteen-thousand corpses, is what a real crime looks like. Hold onto that picture. Democrats were allegedly the good guys vis a vis Ukraine? Weren?t these international war crimes breaching the UN Charter, which demands exclusively peaceful actions between states, Article II? "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered." ? United Nations Charter, a ratified Treaty, and the ?Supreme Law of the Land? Launching a proxy war on nuclear-armed Russia was a sane foreign policy? Sending even more arms to escalate that conflict was allegedly such a glorious idea that any delay in weapons shipments becomes an impeachable offense? This unserious charge leveled against Donald Trump distracts from all of his obvious corruption. Trump?s Emoluments violations have been impeachable for years, but the Democrats weren?t interested. Do Democrats long to cash in on the Office of the Presidency next time? Multiple deaths of refugee children in US federal custody at the southern border could be considered murders linked directly to official policies of harsh treatment and deliberate neglect. Are Democrats afraid of exposing Obama?s own caging of immigrant children? This current Ukrainegate impeachment charade appears to be motivated only by blind partisanship and the desire to insulate corrupt insiders like Joe Biden from any scrutiny of their actions. The farce has gone so over-the-top that even as Democratic partisan media heralded the testimony of Trump?s Ukraine Ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, Donald Trump?s allies have already used portions of her testimony as a video advertisement for his reelection! Yovanovitch blatantly lied in her introductory remarks and was caught admitting that Obama?s own State Department had groomed her to answer uncomfortable questions about Joe Biden?s son, Hunter, and his appointment inside Ukraine?s gas sector. This gift to Trump now undermines the entire endeavor. Are Democrats trying to hurt or to help Trump?s reelection? [Joe Giambrone has written for WhoWhatWhy, Foreign Policy Journal, International Policy Digest, Counterpunch, GlobalResearch, OpEdNews, and his fabulous new novel is DEMIGODS. This article was posted on Friday, November 22nd, 2019 at 11:13pm and is filed under Barack Obama, Democrats, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Russia, Ukraine.] _______________________________________________ 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 davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Mon Nov 25 13:08:44 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 07:08:44 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate In-Reply-To: <920D48DD-41B5-4D3E-8695-6EB896123727@newsfromneptune.com> References: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> <920D48DD-41B5-4D3E-8695-6EB896123727@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: <001601d5a391$77efd750$67cf85f0$@comcast.net> Indeed ! Of course the corporate media propaganda narrative was that it was a " people's uprising ", with even a Netflix propaganda film made. Of course what the U.S. corporate media convenient omits is that the " Color " revolution ( coup ) organizing to get many people to turn out to initially protest was that they were told that the elected Ukrainian President had turned down a " wonderful economic development deal " with the IMF, the EU, and the World Bank that was going to miraculously raise the standard of living in Ukraine to the level of Germany, and that the President turned it down in favor of a Russian deal, therefore he ( President ) must have been paid off or something. Of course the reality was that the " deal " the President turned down was a typical IMF type of development plan that was going to privatize all of the public assets and resources, lower wages and pensions, raise utility rates, eliminate free public healthcare and education, etc.. To be continued, I have to get off the PC now. David J. -----Original Message----- From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2019 6:30 PM To: baldwinricky at yahoo.com Cc: peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate That the 2014 coup against an elected president in Ukraine was engineered by the sitting US administration (notably in the person of Victoria Nuland) is hardly in doubt. (Even Wikipedia admits it: .) The result was the first government in Europe containing explict nazis since 1945 - another accomplishment of the president who said, ?Turns out I'm really good at killing people. Didn't know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine? (WaPo). The government that Obama's administration installed killed thousands in the Ukrainian region of Donbass (Donetsk and Luhansk) who wouldn?t accept the coup government. But as my quondam colleague Ron Szoke said about the contemporary MSM accounts of those casualties of Obama?s policy, ?Donetsk? Don?t tell!? It?s not surprising that people as well informed as you don?t know about Obama?s accomplishments. That?s what Giambrone is talking about - more corpses piled around the White House. See our friend Francis Boyle?s account: . ?CGE > On Nov 24, 2019, at 1:49 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote: > > I've read suggestions that the Obama Administration did this, which I don't necessarily doubt any more than anything else that I don't know for sure. I certainly wouldn't put it past them. But most sources I'm able to scrounge seem to be adamant that this version - that the Obama Admin trained and funded it all - is either obviously true or clearly false. > > If I've missed something on this list that's more probative, I apologize, but to be blunt what evidence is there? (I'm aware of the circumstantial stuff, the hints, the signals, Biden's pressure in the former president of Ukraine to step down, but nothing definitive about this stringer claim about funding/training.) I tend to accept it to some degree, but I'd sure like more. > > Thanks, > Ricky > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 4:03 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: > Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think > by Joe Giambrone / November 22nd, 2019 > > Did you know that Donald Trump had the State Department, USAID, NED, and the CIA fund and train Neo-Nazi, fascist militias to overthrow the government of Ukraine? These riot mobs, primarily Svoboda and Right Sector, stormed the capital, firebombed and shot the police, and destroyed democracy inside Ukraine. When the legitimately elected president was forced out by the rioters, the population which had supported him in the east seceded from the country, tearing the entire nation into pieces and sparking a civil war. The Ukraine civil war has cost the lives of over 13,000 Ukrainians. There is so much blood on Donald Trump?s hands. > > Oh, wait a minute! That was Barack Obama. Change that paragraph, please. > > Since 2014, it?s been glaringly obvious to astute (and honest) observers that the Administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden supported the most vicious street mobs in Europe, people who considered themselves proud fascists. Western media routinely censored this part of the story. Obama?s Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, made deals with their leaders and was caught on an open phone line handpicking the next unelected leader of Ukraine, someone they could sell to the US public: ?Yats is the guy.? > > Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed outrage on Bill O?Reilly?s TV show that the Obama Administration had aided this bloody, illegitimate coup. The head of the CIA-linked STRATFOR called Ukraine ?the most blatant coup in history.? > > America?s proxy terrorists burned Kiev, seized power violently, and through the power of the purse strings, Obama?s Administration installed friendly-faced fascists, who immediately set about attacking their countrymen in the east, with a policy of mass murder and indiscriminate bombings. Eastern provinces of Crimea and Donetsk, which notably had supported the ousted president, held referenda. The people there voted overwhelmingly to secede from the illegitimate, unelected, foreign-sponsored coup regime in Kiev. > > The above is most certainly not the reason cited this week for Impeachment hearings. > > Aiding and abetting fascist militias to violently siege a foreign capital is not considered a crime in Washington DC, at all. Conversely, it is business as usual, as Bolivians and Venezuelans can attest to. > > Woody Allen directed a film entitled ?Crimes and Misdemeanors.? That pretty much sums up the DC circus unfolding in Congress. Everything above is completely true, and yet Barack Obama is heralded as someone in the neighborhood of saints and superheroes. To the belligerent American empire, Obama was a star quarterback. Let?s not even delve into Barack?s support for Al Qaeda in Syria, and another half-million dead there, or we?ll be here all day. > > Donald Trump made a phone call. In his phone call, he is said to have bullied the President of Ukraine a little. He may have even delayed some weapons transfers to that country, which was engaged in a proxy war with nuclear-armed Russia and its separatist allies in the east of Ukraine. > > That?s a crime? A real crime? In light of over thirteen thousand slaughtered and an illegal coup in broad daylight? Trump?s telephone call is the real crime? > > Other Presidents haven?t bullied other client-state puppet leaders, ever? > > And why exactly is the President of the United States of America required to send lethal weapons to foreign fascists at all? Has anyone located that section of the Constitution? > > This farce is so laughable on its face and so irrelevant to the American people?s interests, that it?s difficult to overstate the insanity?and outrageous hypocrisy?of the Democrats? contrived ?Ukrainegate? case. This impeachment charge has nothing whatsoever to do with right and wrong. > > In 2014, Barack Obama?s White House, ?refused to include weapons in an aid package? for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.? Obama didn?t send any weapons at all, which would have provoked Russia to an even greater degree, after overthrowing their legitimately elected next-door ally and tearing Ukraine apart. It was obvious that Russia wasn?t ?invading? Ukraine, as propaganda memes claimed, but simply responding to these international crimes and to the dangerous destabilization on its border. The US had already done quite enough damage, and they didn?t need to escalate a proxy war against Russia toward nuclear Armageddon. > > Which brings us now to Donald Trump, who became interested in Joe Biden?s obvious corruption inside Ukraine, installing his own son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma. Hunter Biden knew absolutely nothing about Ukraine or the natural gas industry. The nepotism was glaring. This was clear graft, payback, kickback, corruption, parasites descending after the violent seizure of the state. Biden the elder was in charge of US Ukraine policy, and specifically the big money spigot, after the illegal, US-supported coup there. > > Then?as Joe will be Joe?Biden bragged publicly about getting Ukraine?s top prosecutor fired to the strains of Washington insider laughter. The Ukrainian prosecutor had been investigating that same company which Biden had arranged his son Hunter onto the board of. Biden?s conflict of interest was so obvious that Trump certainly believed he was onto something. Joe Biden, and media sympathetic to his claims, has predictably tried to cloud the issue, but the corruption is too obvious not to notice. This should, and may, have ended Joe Biden?s 2020 presidential bid. > > What happened in Ukraine was old-timey Smash & Grab, a reckless attack right on Russia?s western border. Joe Biden arrived to grab as much loot from Ukraine?s gas sector as he possibly could through a cut-out, his son. Biden used his leverage over Ukraine?s international ?loan guarantees? (which is money the coup leaders receive but don?t have to pay back) to finance their new illegitimate junta. > > Biden?s own quid pro quo, in his own words: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.? This is exactly the type of crime they now accuse Trump of perpetrating with his telephone. The hypocrisy is comical. > > The Obama Administration?s corruption, along with a bloody war and thirteen-thousand corpses, is what a real crime looks like. Hold onto that picture. > > Democrats were allegedly the good guys vis a vis Ukraine? > > Weren?t these international war crimes breaching the UN Charter, which demands exclusively peaceful actions between states, Article II? > > "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered." > ? United Nations Charter, a ratified Treaty, and the ?Supreme Law of the Land? > > Launching a proxy war on nuclear-armed Russia was a sane foreign policy? Sending even more arms to escalate that conflict was allegedly such a glorious idea that any delay in weapons shipments becomes an impeachable offense? > > This unserious charge leveled against Donald Trump distracts from all of his obvious corruption. Trump?s Emoluments violations have been impeachable for years, but the Democrats weren?t interested. Do Democrats long to cash in on the Office of the Presidency next time? > > Multiple deaths of refugee children in US federal custody at the southern border could be considered murders linked directly to official policies of harsh treatment and deliberate neglect. Are Democrats afraid of exposing Obama?s own caging of immigrant children? > > This current Ukrainegate impeachment charade appears to be motivated only by blind partisanship and the desire to insulate corrupt insiders like Joe Biden from any scrutiny of their actions. The farce has gone so over-the-top that even as Democratic partisan media heralded the testimony of Trump?s Ukraine Ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, Donald Trump?s allies have already used portions of her testimony as a video advertisement for his reelection! > > Yovanovitch blatantly lied in her introductory remarks and was caught admitting that Obama?s own State Department had groomed her to answer uncomfortable questions about Joe Biden?s son, Hunter, and his appointment inside Ukraine?s gas sector. This gift to Trump now undermines the entire endeavor. > > Are Democrats trying to hurt or to help Trump?s reelection? > > [Joe Giambrone has written for WhoWhatWhy, Foreign Policy Journal, International Policy Digest, Counterpunch, GlobalResearch, OpEdNews, and his fabulous new novel is DEMIGODS. > This article was posted on Friday, November 22nd, 2019 at 11:13pm and is filed under Barack Obama, Democrats, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Russia, Ukraine.] > _______________________________________________ > 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 From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Mon Nov 25 13:50:09 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 07:50:09 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Ukrainegate In-Reply-To: <920D48DD-41B5-4D3E-8695-6EB896123727@newsfromneptune.com> References: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> <920D48DD-41B5-4D3E-8695-6EB896123727@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: <002801d5a397$415b4f70$c411ee50$@comcast.net> Consortiumnews Volume 25, Number 328?Monday, November 25, 2019 Human Rights, Lost History, Media, Obama Administration, Right Wing Ukraine?s ?Dr. Strangelove? Reality May 5, 2014 Exclusive: The horrendous fire in Odessa, killing dozens of ethnic Russians protesting against the U.S.-backed coup regime in Kiev, has lurched the country closer to full-scale civil war and disrupted the American media?s efforts to deny the existence of pro-regime neo-Nazis, Robert Parry reports. By Robert Parry As much as the coup regime in Ukraine and its supporters want to project an image of Western moderation, there is a ?Dr. Strangelove? element that can?t stop the Nazism from popping up from time to time, like when the Peter Sellers character in the classic movie can?t keep his right arm from making a ?Heil Hitler? salute. This brutal Nazism surfaced again on Friday when right-wing toughs in Odessa attacked an encampment of ethnic Russian protesters driving them into a trade union building which was then set on fire with Molotov cocktails. As the building was engulfed in flames, some people who tried to flee were chased and beaten, while those trapped inside heard the Ukrainian nationalists liken them to black-and-red-striped potato beetles called Colorados, because those colors are used in pro-Russian ribbons. Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove as he struggles to control his right arm from making a Nazi salute. Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove as he struggles to control his right arm from making a Nazi salute. ?Burn, Colorado, burn? went the chant. As the fire worsened, those dying inside were serenaded with the taunting singing of the Ukrainian national anthem. The building also was spray-painted with Swastika-like symbols and graffiti reading ?Galician SS,? a reference to the Ukrainian nationalist army that fought alongside the German Nazi SS in World War II, killing Russians on the eastern front. The death by fire of dozens of people in Odessa recalled a World War II incident in 1944 when elements of a Galician SS police regiment took part in the massacre of the Polish village of Huta Pieniacka, which had been a refuge for Jews and was protected by Russian and Polish partisans. Attacked by a mixed force of Ukrainian police and German soldiers on Feb. 28, hundreds of townspeople were massacred, including many locked in barns that were set ablaze. The legacy of World War II especially the bitter fight between Ukrainian nationalists from the west and ethnic Russians from the east seven decades ago is never far from the surface in Ukrainian politics. One of the heroes celebrated during the Maidan protests in Kiev was Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, whose name was honored in many banners including one on a podium where Sen. John McCain voiced support for the uprising to oust elected President Viktor Yanukovych, whose political base was in eastern Ukraine. During World War II, Bandera headed the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists-B, a radical paramilitary movement that sought to transform Ukraine into a racially pure state. OUN-B took part in the expulsion and extermination of thousands of Jews and Poles. Though most of the Maidan protesters in 2013-14 appeared motivated by anger over political corruption and by a desire to join the European Union, neo-Nazis made up a significant number. These storm troopers from the Right Sektor and Svoboda party decked out some of the occupied government buildings with Nazi insignias and even a Confederate battle flag, the universal symbol of white supremacy. Then, as the protests turned violent from Feb. 20-22, the neo-Nazis surged to the forefront. Their well-trained militias, organized in 100-man brigades called ?the hundreds,? led the final assaults against police and forced Yanukovych and many of his officials to flee for their lives. In the days after the coup, as the neo-Nazi militias effectively controlled the government, European and U.S. diplomats scrambled to help the shaken parliament put together the semblance of a respectable regime, although four ministries, including national security, were awarded to the right-wing extremists in recognition of their crucial role in ousting Yanukovych. Seeing No Nazis Since February, virtually the entire U.S. news media has cooperated in the effort to play down the neo-Nazi role, dismissing any mention of this inconvenient truth as ?Russian propaganda.? Stories in the U.S. media delicately step around the neo-Nazi reality by keeping out relevant context, such as the background of national security chief Andriy Parubiy, who founded the Social-National Party of Ukraine in 1991, blending radical Ukrainian nationalism with neo-Nazi symbols. Parubiy was commandant of the Maidan?s ?self-defense forces.? When the neo-Nazi factor is mentioned in the mainstream U.S. press, it is usually to dismiss it as nonsense, such as an April 20 column by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof who visited his ancestral home, the western Ukrainian town of Karapchiv, and portrayed its residents as the true voice of the Ukrainian people. ?To understand why Ukrainians are risking war with Russia to try to pluck themselves from Moscow?s grip, I came to this village where my father grew up,? he wrote. ?Even here in the village, Ukrainians watch Russian television and loathe the propaganda portraying them as neo-Nazi thugs rampaging against Russian speakers. ??If you listen to them, we all carry assault rifles; we?re all beating people,? Ilya Moskal, a history teacher, said contemptuously.? In an April 17 column from Kiev, Kristof wrote that what the Ukrainians want is weapons from the West so they can to go ?bear-hunting,? i.e. killing Russians. ?People seem to feel a bit disappointed that the United States and Europe haven?t been more supportive, and they are humiliated that their own acting government hasn?t done more to confront Russian-backed militants. So, especially after a few drinks, people are ready to take down the Russian Army themselves.? Kristof also repeated the U.S. ?conventional wisdom? that the resistance to the coup regime among eastern Ukrainians was entirely the work of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who, Kristof wrote, ?warns that Ukraine is on the brink of civil war. But the chaos in eastern cities is his own creation, in part by sending provocateurs across the border.? However, when the New York Times finally sent two reporters to spend time with rebels from the east, they encountered an indigenous movement motivated by hostility to the Kiev regime and showing no signs of direction from Moscow. [See Consortiumnews.com?s ?Another NYT ?Sort of? Retraction on Ukraine.?] Beyond the journalistic risk of jumping to conclusions, Kristof, who fancies himself a great humanitarian, also should recognize that the clever depiction of human beings as animals, whether as ?bears? or ?Colorado beetles,? can have horrendous human consequences as is now apparent in Odessa. Reagan?s Nazis But the problem with some western Ukrainians expressing their inconvenient love for Nazis has not been limited to the current crisis. It bedeviled Ronald Reagan?s administration when it began heating up the Cold War in the 1980s. As part of that strategy, Reagan?s United States Information Agency, under his close friend Charles Wick, hired a cast of right-wing Ukrainian exiles who began showing up on U.S.-funded Radio Liberty praising the Galician SS. These commentaries included positive depictions of Ukrainian nationalists who had sided with the Nazis in World War II as the SS waged its ?final solution? against European Jews. The propaganda broadcasts provoked outrage from Jewish organizations, such as B?nai B?rith, and individuals including conservative academic Richard Pipes. According to an internal memo dated May 4, 1984, and written by James Critchlow, a research officer at the Board of International Broadcasting, which managed Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europe, one RL broadcast in particular was viewed as ?defending Ukrainians who fought in the ranks of the SS.? Critchlow wrote, ?An RL Ukrainian broadcast of Feb. 12, 1984 contains references to the Nazi-oriented Ukrainian-manned SS ?Galicia? Division of World War II which may have damaged RL?s reputation with Soviet listeners. The memoirs of a German diplomat are quoted in a way that seems to constitute endorsement by RL of praise for Ukrainian volunteers in the SS division, which during its existence fought side by side with the Germans against the Red Army.? Harvard Professor Pipes, who was an adviser to the Reagan administration, also inveighed against the Radio Liberty broadcasts, writing on Dec. 3, 1984 ?the Russian and Ukrainian services of RL have been transmitting this year blatantly anti-Semitic material to the Soviet Union which may cause the whole enterprise irreparable harm.? Though the Reagan administration publicly defended Radio Liberty against some of the public criticism, privately some senior officials agreed with the critics, according to documents in the archives of the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California. For instance, in a Jan. 4, 1985, memo, Walter Raymond Jr., a top official on the National Security Council, told his boss, National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane, that ?I would believe much of what Dick [Pipes] says is right.? What the Reagan administration apparently didn?t understand three decades ago and what the U.S. State Department still has not seemed to learn today is that there is a danger in stirring up the old animosities that divide Ukraine, east and west. Though clearly a minority, Ukraine?s neo-Nazis remain a potent force that is well-organized, well-motivated and prone to extreme violence, whether throwing firebombs at police in the Maidan or at ethnic Russians trapped in a building in Odessa. As vengeance now seeks vengeance across Ukraine, this Nazi imperative will be difficult to hold down, much as Dr. Strangelove struggled to stop his arm from making a ?Heil Hitler? salute. Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his new book, America?s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). For a limited time, you also can order Robert Parry?s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America?s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here. -----Original Message----- From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook via Peace Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2019 6:30 PM To: baldwinricky at yahoo.com Cc: peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate That the 2014 coup against an elected president in Ukraine was engineered by the sitting US administration (notably in the person of Victoria Nuland) is hardly in doubt. (Even Wikipedia admits it: .) The result was the first government in Europe containing explict nazis since 1945 - another accomplishment of the president who said, ?Turns out I'm really good at killing people. Didn't know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine? (WaPo). The government that Obama's administration installed killed thousands in the Ukrainian region of Donbass (Donetsk and Luhansk) who wouldn?t accept the coup government. But as my quondam colleague Ron Szoke said about the contemporary MSM accounts of those casualties of Obama?s policy, ?Donetsk? Don?t tell!? It?s not surprising that people as well informed as you don?t know about Obama?s accomplishments. That?s what Giambrone is talking about - more corpses piled around the White House. See our friend Francis Boyle?s account: . ?CGE > On Nov 24, 2019, at 1:49 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote: > > I've read suggestions that the Obama Administration did this, which I don't necessarily doubt any more than anything else that I don't know for sure. I certainly wouldn't put it past them. But most sources I'm able to scrounge seem to be adamant that this version - that the Obama Admin trained and funded it all - is either obviously true or clearly false. > > If I've missed something on this list that's more probative, I apologize, but to be blunt what evidence is there? (I'm aware of the circumstantial stuff, the hints, the signals, Biden's pressure in the former president of Ukraine to step down, but nothing definitive about this stringer claim about funding/training.) I tend to accept it to some degree, but I'd sure like more. > > Thanks, > Ricky > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 4:03 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: > Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think > by Joe Giambrone / November 22nd, 2019 > > Did you know that Donald Trump had the State Department, USAID, NED, and the CIA fund and train Neo-Nazi, fascist militias to overthrow the government of Ukraine? These riot mobs, primarily Svoboda and Right Sector, stormed the capital, firebombed and shot the police, and destroyed democracy inside Ukraine. When the legitimately elected president was forced out by the rioters, the population which had supported him in the east seceded from the country, tearing the entire nation into pieces and sparking a civil war. The Ukraine civil war has cost the lives of over 13,000 Ukrainians. There is so much blood on Donald Trump?s hands. > > Oh, wait a minute! That was Barack Obama. Change that paragraph, please. > > Since 2014, it?s been glaringly obvious to astute (and honest) observers that the Administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden supported the most vicious street mobs in Europe, people who considered themselves proud fascists. Western media routinely censored this part of the story. Obama?s Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, made deals with their leaders and was caught on an open phone line handpicking the next unelected leader of Ukraine, someone they could sell to the US public: ?Yats is the guy.? > > Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed outrage on Bill O?Reilly?s TV show that the Obama Administration had aided this bloody, illegitimate coup. The head of the CIA-linked STRATFOR called Ukraine ?the most blatant coup in history.? > > America?s proxy terrorists burned Kiev, seized power violently, and through the power of the purse strings, Obama?s Administration installed friendly-faced fascists, who immediately set about attacking their countrymen in the east, with a policy of mass murder and indiscriminate bombings. Eastern provinces of Crimea and Donetsk, which notably had supported the ousted president, held referenda. The people there voted overwhelmingly to secede from the illegitimate, unelected, foreign-sponsored coup regime in Kiev. > > The above is most certainly not the reason cited this week for Impeachment hearings. > > Aiding and abetting fascist militias to violently siege a foreign capital is not considered a crime in Washington DC, at all. Conversely, it is business as usual, as Bolivians and Venezuelans can attest to. > > Woody Allen directed a film entitled ?Crimes and Misdemeanors.? That pretty much sums up the DC circus unfolding in Congress. Everything above is completely true, and yet Barack Obama is heralded as someone in the neighborhood of saints and superheroes. To the belligerent American empire, Obama was a star quarterback. Let?s not even delve into Barack?s support for Al Qaeda in Syria, and another half-million dead there, or we?ll be here all day. > > Donald Trump made a phone call. In his phone call, he is said to have bullied the President of Ukraine a little. He may have even delayed some weapons transfers to that country, which was engaged in a proxy war with nuclear-armed Russia and its separatist allies in the east of Ukraine. > > That?s a crime? A real crime? In light of over thirteen thousand slaughtered and an illegal coup in broad daylight? Trump?s telephone call is the real crime? > > Other Presidents haven?t bullied other client-state puppet leaders, ever? > > And why exactly is the President of the United States of America required to send lethal weapons to foreign fascists at all? Has anyone located that section of the Constitution? > > This farce is so laughable on its face and so irrelevant to the American people?s interests, that it?s difficult to overstate the insanity?and outrageous hypocrisy?of the Democrats? contrived ?Ukrainegate? case. This impeachment charge has nothing whatsoever to do with right and wrong. > > In 2014, Barack Obama?s White House, ?refused to include weapons in an aid package? for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.? Obama didn?t send any weapons at all, which would have provoked Russia to an even greater degree, after overthrowing their legitimately elected next-door ally and tearing Ukraine apart. It was obvious that Russia wasn?t ?invading? Ukraine, as propaganda memes claimed, but simply responding to these international crimes and to the dangerous destabilization on its border. The US had already done quite enough damage, and they didn?t need to escalate a proxy war against Russia toward nuclear Armageddon. > > Which brings us now to Donald Trump, who became interested in Joe Biden?s obvious corruption inside Ukraine, installing his own son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma. Hunter Biden knew absolutely nothing about Ukraine or the natural gas industry. The nepotism was glaring. This was clear graft, payback, kickback, corruption, parasites descending after the violent seizure of the state. Biden the elder was in charge of US Ukraine policy, and specifically the big money spigot, after the illegal, US-supported coup there. > > Then?as Joe will be Joe?Biden bragged publicly about getting Ukraine?s top prosecutor fired to the strains of Washington insider laughter. The Ukrainian prosecutor had been investigating that same company which Biden had arranged his son Hunter onto the board of. Biden?s conflict of interest was so obvious that Trump certainly believed he was onto something. Joe Biden, and media sympathetic to his claims, has predictably tried to cloud the issue, but the corruption is too obvious not to notice. This should, and may, have ended Joe Biden?s 2020 presidential bid. > > What happened in Ukraine was old-timey Smash & Grab, a reckless attack right on Russia?s western border. Joe Biden arrived to grab as much loot from Ukraine?s gas sector as he possibly could through a cut-out, his son. Biden used his leverage over Ukraine?s international ?loan guarantees? (which is money the coup leaders receive but don?t have to pay back) to finance their new illegitimate junta. > > Biden?s own quid pro quo, in his own words: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.? This is exactly the type of crime they now accuse Trump of perpetrating with his telephone. The hypocrisy is comical. > > The Obama Administration?s corruption, along with a bloody war and thirteen-thousand corpses, is what a real crime looks like. Hold onto that picture. > > Democrats were allegedly the good guys vis a vis Ukraine? > > Weren?t these international war crimes breaching the UN Charter, which demands exclusively peaceful actions between states, Article II? > > "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered." > ? United Nations Charter, a ratified Treaty, and the ?Supreme Law of the Land? > > Launching a proxy war on nuclear-armed Russia was a sane foreign policy? Sending even more arms to escalate that conflict was allegedly such a glorious idea that any delay in weapons shipments becomes an impeachable offense? > > This unserious charge leveled against Donald Trump distracts from all of his obvious corruption. Trump?s Emoluments violations have been impeachable for years, but the Democrats weren?t interested. Do Democrats long to cash in on the Office of the Presidency next time? > > Multiple deaths of refugee children in US federal custody at the southern border could be considered murders linked directly to official policies of harsh treatment and deliberate neglect. Are Democrats afraid of exposing Obama?s own caging of immigrant children? > > This current Ukrainegate impeachment charade appears to be motivated only by blind partisanship and the desire to insulate corrupt insiders like Joe Biden from any scrutiny of their actions. The farce has gone so over-the-top that even as Democratic partisan media heralded the testimony of Trump?s Ukraine Ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, Donald Trump?s allies have already used portions of her testimony as a video advertisement for his reelection! > > Yovanovitch blatantly lied in her introductory remarks and was caught admitting that Obama?s own State Department had groomed her to answer uncomfortable questions about Joe Biden?s son, Hunter, and his appointment inside Ukraine?s gas sector. This gift to Trump now undermines the entire endeavor. > > Are Democrats trying to hurt or to help Trump?s reelection? > > [Joe Giambrone has written for WhoWhatWhy, Foreign Policy Journal, International Policy Digest, Counterpunch, GlobalResearch, OpEdNews, and his fabulous new novel is DEMIGODS. > This article was posted on Friday, November 22nd, 2019 at 11:13pm and is filed under Barack Obama, Democrats, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Russia, Ukraine.] > _______________________________________________ > 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 davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Mon Nov 25 13:50:09 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 07:50:09 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Ukrainegate In-Reply-To: <920D48DD-41B5-4D3E-8695-6EB896123727@newsfromneptune.com> References: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> <920D48DD-41B5-4D3E-8695-6EB896123727@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: <002801d5a397$415b4f70$c411ee50$@comcast.net> Consortiumnews Volume 25, Number 328?Monday, November 25, 2019 Human Rights, Lost History, Media, Obama Administration, Right Wing Ukraine?s ?Dr. Strangelove? Reality May 5, 2014 Exclusive: The horrendous fire in Odessa, killing dozens of ethnic Russians protesting against the U.S.-backed coup regime in Kiev, has lurched the country closer to full-scale civil war and disrupted the American media?s efforts to deny the existence of pro-regime neo-Nazis, Robert Parry reports. By Robert Parry As much as the coup regime in Ukraine and its supporters want to project an image of Western moderation, there is a ?Dr. Strangelove? element that can?t stop the Nazism from popping up from time to time, like when the Peter Sellers character in the classic movie can?t keep his right arm from making a ?Heil Hitler? salute. This brutal Nazism surfaced again on Friday when right-wing toughs in Odessa attacked an encampment of ethnic Russian protesters driving them into a trade union building which was then set on fire with Molotov cocktails. As the building was engulfed in flames, some people who tried to flee were chased and beaten, while those trapped inside heard the Ukrainian nationalists liken them to black-and-red-striped potato beetles called Colorados, because those colors are used in pro-Russian ribbons. Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove as he struggles to control his right arm from making a Nazi salute. Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove as he struggles to control his right arm from making a Nazi salute. ?Burn, Colorado, burn? went the chant. As the fire worsened, those dying inside were serenaded with the taunting singing of the Ukrainian national anthem. The building also was spray-painted with Swastika-like symbols and graffiti reading ?Galician SS,? a reference to the Ukrainian nationalist army that fought alongside the German Nazi SS in World War II, killing Russians on the eastern front. The death by fire of dozens of people in Odessa recalled a World War II incident in 1944 when elements of a Galician SS police regiment took part in the massacre of the Polish village of Huta Pieniacka, which had been a refuge for Jews and was protected by Russian and Polish partisans. Attacked by a mixed force of Ukrainian police and German soldiers on Feb. 28, hundreds of townspeople were massacred, including many locked in barns that were set ablaze. The legacy of World War II especially the bitter fight between Ukrainian nationalists from the west and ethnic Russians from the east seven decades ago is never far from the surface in Ukrainian politics. One of the heroes celebrated during the Maidan protests in Kiev was Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, whose name was honored in many banners including one on a podium where Sen. John McCain voiced support for the uprising to oust elected President Viktor Yanukovych, whose political base was in eastern Ukraine. During World War II, Bandera headed the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists-B, a radical paramilitary movement that sought to transform Ukraine into a racially pure state. OUN-B took part in the expulsion and extermination of thousands of Jews and Poles. Though most of the Maidan protesters in 2013-14 appeared motivated by anger over political corruption and by a desire to join the European Union, neo-Nazis made up a significant number. These storm troopers from the Right Sektor and Svoboda party decked out some of the occupied government buildings with Nazi insignias and even a Confederate battle flag, the universal symbol of white supremacy. Then, as the protests turned violent from Feb. 20-22, the neo-Nazis surged to the forefront. Their well-trained militias, organized in 100-man brigades called ?the hundreds,? led the final assaults against police and forced Yanukovych and many of his officials to flee for their lives. In the days after the coup, as the neo-Nazi militias effectively controlled the government, European and U.S. diplomats scrambled to help the shaken parliament put together the semblance of a respectable regime, although four ministries, including national security, were awarded to the right-wing extremists in recognition of their crucial role in ousting Yanukovych. Seeing No Nazis Since February, virtually the entire U.S. news media has cooperated in the effort to play down the neo-Nazi role, dismissing any mention of this inconvenient truth as ?Russian propaganda.? Stories in the U.S. media delicately step around the neo-Nazi reality by keeping out relevant context, such as the background of national security chief Andriy Parubiy, who founded the Social-National Party of Ukraine in 1991, blending radical Ukrainian nationalism with neo-Nazi symbols. Parubiy was commandant of the Maidan?s ?self-defense forces.? When the neo-Nazi factor is mentioned in the mainstream U.S. press, it is usually to dismiss it as nonsense, such as an April 20 column by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof who visited his ancestral home, the western Ukrainian town of Karapchiv, and portrayed its residents as the true voice of the Ukrainian people. ?To understand why Ukrainians are risking war with Russia to try to pluck themselves from Moscow?s grip, I came to this village where my father grew up,? he wrote. ?Even here in the village, Ukrainians watch Russian television and loathe the propaganda portraying them as neo-Nazi thugs rampaging against Russian speakers. ??If you listen to them, we all carry assault rifles; we?re all beating people,? Ilya Moskal, a history teacher, said contemptuously.? In an April 17 column from Kiev, Kristof wrote that what the Ukrainians want is weapons from the West so they can to go ?bear-hunting,? i.e. killing Russians. ?People seem to feel a bit disappointed that the United States and Europe haven?t been more supportive, and they are humiliated that their own acting government hasn?t done more to confront Russian-backed militants. So, especially after a few drinks, people are ready to take down the Russian Army themselves.? Kristof also repeated the U.S. ?conventional wisdom? that the resistance to the coup regime among eastern Ukrainians was entirely the work of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who, Kristof wrote, ?warns that Ukraine is on the brink of civil war. But the chaos in eastern cities is his own creation, in part by sending provocateurs across the border.? However, when the New York Times finally sent two reporters to spend time with rebels from the east, they encountered an indigenous movement motivated by hostility to the Kiev regime and showing no signs of direction from Moscow. [See Consortiumnews.com?s ?Another NYT ?Sort of? Retraction on Ukraine.?] Beyond the journalistic risk of jumping to conclusions, Kristof, who fancies himself a great humanitarian, also should recognize that the clever depiction of human beings as animals, whether as ?bears? or ?Colorado beetles,? can have horrendous human consequences as is now apparent in Odessa. Reagan?s Nazis But the problem with some western Ukrainians expressing their inconvenient love for Nazis has not been limited to the current crisis. It bedeviled Ronald Reagan?s administration when it began heating up the Cold War in the 1980s. As part of that strategy, Reagan?s United States Information Agency, under his close friend Charles Wick, hired a cast of right-wing Ukrainian exiles who began showing up on U.S.-funded Radio Liberty praising the Galician SS. These commentaries included positive depictions of Ukrainian nationalists who had sided with the Nazis in World War II as the SS waged its ?final solution? against European Jews. The propaganda broadcasts provoked outrage from Jewish organizations, such as B?nai B?rith, and individuals including conservative academic Richard Pipes. According to an internal memo dated May 4, 1984, and written by James Critchlow, a research officer at the Board of International Broadcasting, which managed Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europe, one RL broadcast in particular was viewed as ?defending Ukrainians who fought in the ranks of the SS.? Critchlow wrote, ?An RL Ukrainian broadcast of Feb. 12, 1984 contains references to the Nazi-oriented Ukrainian-manned SS ?Galicia? Division of World War II which may have damaged RL?s reputation with Soviet listeners. The memoirs of a German diplomat are quoted in a way that seems to constitute endorsement by RL of praise for Ukrainian volunteers in the SS division, which during its existence fought side by side with the Germans against the Red Army.? Harvard Professor Pipes, who was an adviser to the Reagan administration, also inveighed against the Radio Liberty broadcasts, writing on Dec. 3, 1984 ?the Russian and Ukrainian services of RL have been transmitting this year blatantly anti-Semitic material to the Soviet Union which may cause the whole enterprise irreparable harm.? Though the Reagan administration publicly defended Radio Liberty against some of the public criticism, privately some senior officials agreed with the critics, according to documents in the archives of the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California. For instance, in a Jan. 4, 1985, memo, Walter Raymond Jr., a top official on the National Security Council, told his boss, National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane, that ?I would believe much of what Dick [Pipes] says is right.? What the Reagan administration apparently didn?t understand three decades ago and what the U.S. State Department still has not seemed to learn today is that there is a danger in stirring up the old animosities that divide Ukraine, east and west. Though clearly a minority, Ukraine?s neo-Nazis remain a potent force that is well-organized, well-motivated and prone to extreme violence, whether throwing firebombs at police in the Maidan or at ethnic Russians trapped in a building in Odessa. As vengeance now seeks vengeance across Ukraine, this Nazi imperative will be difficult to hold down, much as Dr. Strangelove struggled to stop his arm from making a ?Heil Hitler? salute. Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his new book, America?s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). For a limited time, you also can order Robert Parry?s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America?s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here. -----Original Message----- From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook via Peace Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2019 6:30 PM To: baldwinricky at yahoo.com Cc: peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate That the 2014 coup against an elected president in Ukraine was engineered by the sitting US administration (notably in the person of Victoria Nuland) is hardly in doubt. (Even Wikipedia admits it: .) The result was the first government in Europe containing explict nazis since 1945 - another accomplishment of the president who said, ?Turns out I'm really good at killing people. Didn't know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine? (WaPo). The government that Obama's administration installed killed thousands in the Ukrainian region of Donbass (Donetsk and Luhansk) who wouldn?t accept the coup government. But as my quondam colleague Ron Szoke said about the contemporary MSM accounts of those casualties of Obama?s policy, ?Donetsk? Don?t tell!? It?s not surprising that people as well informed as you don?t know about Obama?s accomplishments. That?s what Giambrone is talking about - more corpses piled around the White House. See our friend Francis Boyle?s account: . ?CGE > On Nov 24, 2019, at 1:49 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote: > > I've read suggestions that the Obama Administration did this, which I don't necessarily doubt any more than anything else that I don't know for sure. I certainly wouldn't put it past them. But most sources I'm able to scrounge seem to be adamant that this version - that the Obama Admin trained and funded it all - is either obviously true or clearly false. > > If I've missed something on this list that's more probative, I apologize, but to be blunt what evidence is there? (I'm aware of the circumstantial stuff, the hints, the signals, Biden's pressure in the former president of Ukraine to step down, but nothing definitive about this stringer claim about funding/training.) I tend to accept it to some degree, but I'd sure like more. > > Thanks, > Ricky > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 4:03 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: > Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think > by Joe Giambrone / November 22nd, 2019 > > Did you know that Donald Trump had the State Department, USAID, NED, and the CIA fund and train Neo-Nazi, fascist militias to overthrow the government of Ukraine? These riot mobs, primarily Svoboda and Right Sector, stormed the capital, firebombed and shot the police, and destroyed democracy inside Ukraine. When the legitimately elected president was forced out by the rioters, the population which had supported him in the east seceded from the country, tearing the entire nation into pieces and sparking a civil war. The Ukraine civil war has cost the lives of over 13,000 Ukrainians. There is so much blood on Donald Trump?s hands. > > Oh, wait a minute! That was Barack Obama. Change that paragraph, please. > > Since 2014, it?s been glaringly obvious to astute (and honest) observers that the Administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden supported the most vicious street mobs in Europe, people who considered themselves proud fascists. Western media routinely censored this part of the story. Obama?s Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, made deals with their leaders and was caught on an open phone line handpicking the next unelected leader of Ukraine, someone they could sell to the US public: ?Yats is the guy.? > > Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed outrage on Bill O?Reilly?s TV show that the Obama Administration had aided this bloody, illegitimate coup. The head of the CIA-linked STRATFOR called Ukraine ?the most blatant coup in history.? > > America?s proxy terrorists burned Kiev, seized power violently, and through the power of the purse strings, Obama?s Administration installed friendly-faced fascists, who immediately set about attacking their countrymen in the east, with a policy of mass murder and indiscriminate bombings. Eastern provinces of Crimea and Donetsk, which notably had supported the ousted president, held referenda. The people there voted overwhelmingly to secede from the illegitimate, unelected, foreign-sponsored coup regime in Kiev. > > The above is most certainly not the reason cited this week for Impeachment hearings. > > Aiding and abetting fascist militias to violently siege a foreign capital is not considered a crime in Washington DC, at all. Conversely, it is business as usual, as Bolivians and Venezuelans can attest to. > > Woody Allen directed a film entitled ?Crimes and Misdemeanors.? That pretty much sums up the DC circus unfolding in Congress. Everything above is completely true, and yet Barack Obama is heralded as someone in the neighborhood of saints and superheroes. To the belligerent American empire, Obama was a star quarterback. Let?s not even delve into Barack?s support for Al Qaeda in Syria, and another half-million dead there, or we?ll be here all day. > > Donald Trump made a phone call. In his phone call, he is said to have bullied the President of Ukraine a little. He may have even delayed some weapons transfers to that country, which was engaged in a proxy war with nuclear-armed Russia and its separatist allies in the east of Ukraine. > > That?s a crime? A real crime? In light of over thirteen thousand slaughtered and an illegal coup in broad daylight? Trump?s telephone call is the real crime? > > Other Presidents haven?t bullied other client-state puppet leaders, ever? > > And why exactly is the President of the United States of America required to send lethal weapons to foreign fascists at all? Has anyone located that section of the Constitution? > > This farce is so laughable on its face and so irrelevant to the American people?s interests, that it?s difficult to overstate the insanity?and outrageous hypocrisy?of the Democrats? contrived ?Ukrainegate? case. This impeachment charge has nothing whatsoever to do with right and wrong. > > In 2014, Barack Obama?s White House, ?refused to include weapons in an aid package? for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.? Obama didn?t send any weapons at all, which would have provoked Russia to an even greater degree, after overthrowing their legitimately elected next-door ally and tearing Ukraine apart. It was obvious that Russia wasn?t ?invading? Ukraine, as propaganda memes claimed, but simply responding to these international crimes and to the dangerous destabilization on its border. The US had already done quite enough damage, and they didn?t need to escalate a proxy war against Russia toward nuclear Armageddon. > > Which brings us now to Donald Trump, who became interested in Joe Biden?s obvious corruption inside Ukraine, installing his own son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma. Hunter Biden knew absolutely nothing about Ukraine or the natural gas industry. The nepotism was glaring. This was clear graft, payback, kickback, corruption, parasites descending after the violent seizure of the state. Biden the elder was in charge of US Ukraine policy, and specifically the big money spigot, after the illegal, US-supported coup there. > > Then?as Joe will be Joe?Biden bragged publicly about getting Ukraine?s top prosecutor fired to the strains of Washington insider laughter. The Ukrainian prosecutor had been investigating that same company which Biden had arranged his son Hunter onto the board of. Biden?s conflict of interest was so obvious that Trump certainly believed he was onto something. Joe Biden, and media sympathetic to his claims, has predictably tried to cloud the issue, but the corruption is too obvious not to notice. This should, and may, have ended Joe Biden?s 2020 presidential bid. > > What happened in Ukraine was old-timey Smash & Grab, a reckless attack right on Russia?s western border. Joe Biden arrived to grab as much loot from Ukraine?s gas sector as he possibly could through a cut-out, his son. Biden used his leverage over Ukraine?s international ?loan guarantees? (which is money the coup leaders receive but don?t have to pay back) to finance their new illegitimate junta. > > Biden?s own quid pro quo, in his own words: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.? This is exactly the type of crime they now accuse Trump of perpetrating with his telephone. The hypocrisy is comical. > > The Obama Administration?s corruption, along with a bloody war and thirteen-thousand corpses, is what a real crime looks like. Hold onto that picture. > > Democrats were allegedly the good guys vis a vis Ukraine? > > Weren?t these international war crimes breaching the UN Charter, which demands exclusively peaceful actions between states, Article II? > > "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered." > ? United Nations Charter, a ratified Treaty, and the ?Supreme Law of the Land? > > Launching a proxy war on nuclear-armed Russia was a sane foreign policy? Sending even more arms to escalate that conflict was allegedly such a glorious idea that any delay in weapons shipments becomes an impeachable offense? > > This unserious charge leveled against Donald Trump distracts from all of his obvious corruption. Trump?s Emoluments violations have been impeachable for years, but the Democrats weren?t interested. Do Democrats long to cash in on the Office of the Presidency next time? > > Multiple deaths of refugee children in US federal custody at the southern border could be considered murders linked directly to official policies of harsh treatment and deliberate neglect. Are Democrats afraid of exposing Obama?s own caging of immigrant children? > > This current Ukrainegate impeachment charade appears to be motivated only by blind partisanship and the desire to insulate corrupt insiders like Joe Biden from any scrutiny of their actions. The farce has gone so over-the-top that even as Democratic partisan media heralded the testimony of Trump?s Ukraine Ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, Donald Trump?s allies have already used portions of her testimony as a video advertisement for his reelection! > > Yovanovitch blatantly lied in her introductory remarks and was caught admitting that Obama?s own State Department had groomed her to answer uncomfortable questions about Joe Biden?s son, Hunter, and his appointment inside Ukraine?s gas sector. This gift to Trump now undermines the entire endeavor. > > Are Democrats trying to hurt or to help Trump?s reelection? > > [Joe Giambrone has written for WhoWhatWhy, Foreign Policy Journal, International Policy Digest, Counterpunch, GlobalResearch, OpEdNews, and his fabulous new novel is DEMIGODS. > This article was posted on Friday, November 22nd, 2019 at 11:13pm and is filed under Barack Obama, Democrats, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Russia, Ukraine.] > _______________________________________________ > 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 baldwinricky at yahoo.com Mon Nov 25 15:42:56 2019 From: baldwinricky at yahoo.com (Ricky Baldwin) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 15:42:56 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Ukrainegate In-Reply-To: <002801d5a397$415b4f70$c411ee50$@comcast.net> References: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> <920D48DD-41B5-4D3E-8695-6EB896123727@newsfromneptune.com> <002801d5a397$415b4f70$c411ee50$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <919608653.3282664.1574696576559@mail.yahoo.com> Thanks, really.? That was quick.? I don't mean to tie up everybody answering my quibbles, especially because, again, I wouldn't put it past them.? But I was aware that the Administration jumped in there at the end - some might say eagerly - to "broker" or "midwife" the "transition" ...? I had read the Global Research piece, and Boyle's suggestion that US backing "may" already be underway in the midst of the fray.? I hadn't seen Robert Parry's article, or read Wikipedia's account (I had avoided that one, but I appreciate your suggestion to read it, since it was more informative than I had anticipated). These still don't really argue that the US was behind it from the start, do they?? I mean, aside from the hints and signals US officials often send (and sometimes later turn away from, to be honest, leaving people who seem to be following such 'orders' high and dry), how do we know they were actually funding/training the goons??? To be clear, I'm satisfied that the Obama team was happy about the coup, that it was a coup, and that it was led or co-led by fascists, at least in the traditional fascist coalitionist style - and as Wikipedia et al have made clear that USG officials were there to "help" seal the deal. Yes.? Maybe I should have said all that from the start. What I thought you might have already dug up in your research was evidence of the "funding and training" of the coup by the US under Obama.? If you do have something like that, there's obviously no urgency now, but it would seem a good time to look back at it in light of recent attention in the area and Biden's unfortunate candidacy.?? Thanks for your time, either way.? I know I'm mostly an absent presence these days, but I do appreciate the work you guys are carrying on, and I read up when I can.? (And I appreciate being called "well informed," although I feel less so these days.) Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 7:50 AM, David Johnson wrote: Consortiumnews Volume 25, Number 328?Monday, November 25, 2019 Human Rights, Lost History, Media, Obama Administration, Right Wing Ukraine?s ?Dr. Strangelove? Reality May 5, 2014 Exclusive: The horrendous fire in Odessa, killing dozens of ethnic Russians protesting against the U.S.-backed coup regime in Kiev, has lurched the country closer to full-scale civil war and disrupted the American media?s efforts to deny the existence of pro-regime neo-Nazis, Robert Parry reports. By Robert Parry As much as the coup regime in Ukraine and its supporters want to project an image of Western moderation, there is a ?Dr. Strangelove? element that can?t stop the Nazism from popping up from time to time, like when the Peter Sellers character in the classic movie can?t keep his right arm from making a ?Heil Hitler? salute. This brutal Nazism surfaced again on Friday when right-wing toughs in Odessa attacked an encampment of ethnic Russian protesters driving them into a trade union building which was then set on fire with Molotov cocktails. As the building was engulfed in flames, some people who tried to flee were chased and beaten, while those trapped inside heard the Ukrainian nationalists liken them to black-and-red-striped potato beetles called Colorados, because those colors are used in pro-Russian ribbons. Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove as he struggles to control his right arm from making a Nazi salute. Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove as he struggles to control his right arm from making a Nazi salute. ?Burn, Colorado, burn? went the chant. As the fire worsened, those dying inside were serenaded with the taunting singing of the Ukrainian national anthem. The building also was spray-painted with Swastika-like symbols and graffiti reading ?Galician SS,? a reference to the Ukrainian nationalist army that fought alongside the German Nazi SS in World War II, killing Russians on the eastern front. The death by fire of dozens of people in Odessa recalled a World War II incident in 1944 when elements of a Galician SS police regiment took part in the massacre of the Polish village of Huta Pieniacka, which had been a refuge for Jews and was protected by Russian and Polish partisans. Attacked by a mixed force of Ukrainian police and German soldiers on Feb. 28, hundreds of townspeople were massacred, including many locked in barns that were set ablaze. The legacy of World War II especially the bitter fight between Ukrainian nationalists from the west and ethnic Russians from the east seven decades ago is never far from the surface in Ukrainian politics. One of the heroes celebrated during the Maidan protests in Kiev was Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, whose name was honored in many banners including one on a podium where Sen. John McCain voiced support for the uprising to oust elected President Viktor Yanukovych, whose political base was in eastern Ukraine. During World War II, Bandera headed the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists-B, a radical paramilitary movement that sought to transform Ukraine into a racially pure state. OUN-B took part in the expulsion and extermination of thousands of Jews and Poles. Though most of the Maidan protesters in 2013-14 appeared motivated by anger over political corruption and by a desire to join the European Union, neo-Nazis made up a significant number. These storm troopers from the Right Sektor and Svoboda party decked out some of the occupied government buildings with Nazi insignias and even a Confederate battle flag, the universal symbol of white supremacy. Then, as the protests turned violent from Feb. 20-22, the neo-Nazis surged to the forefront. Their well-trained militias, organized in 100-man brigades called ?the hundreds,? led the final assaults against police and forced Yanukovych and many of his officials to flee for their lives. In the days after the coup, as the neo-Nazi militias effectively controlled the government, European and U.S. diplomats scrambled to help the shaken parliament put together the semblance of a respectable regime, although four ministries, including national security, were awarded to the right-wing extremists in recognition of their crucial role in ousting Yanukovych. Seeing No Nazis Since February, virtually the entire U.S. news media has cooperated in the effort to play down the neo-Nazi role, dismissing any mention of this inconvenient truth as ?Russian propaganda.? Stories in the U.S. media delicately step around the neo-Nazi reality by keeping out relevant context, such as the background of national security chief Andriy Parubiy, who founded the Social-National Party of Ukraine in 1991, blending radical Ukrainian nationalism with neo-Nazi symbols. Parubiy was commandant of the Maidan?s ?self-defense forces.? When the neo-Nazi factor is mentioned in the mainstream U.S. press, it is usually to dismiss it as nonsense, such as an April 20 column by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof who visited his ancestral home, the western Ukrainian town of Karapchiv, and portrayed its residents as the true voice of the Ukrainian people. ?To understand why Ukrainians are risking war with Russia to try to pluck themselves from Moscow?s grip, I came to this village where my father grew up,? he wrote. ?Even here in the village, Ukrainians watch Russian television and loathe the propaganda portraying them as neo-Nazi thugs rampaging against Russian speakers. ??If you listen to them, we all carry assault rifles; we?re all beating people,? Ilya Moskal, a history teacher, said contemptuously.? In an April 17 column from Kiev, Kristof wrote that what the Ukrainians want is weapons from the West so they can to go ?bear-hunting,? i.e. killing Russians. ?People seem to feel a bit disappointed that the United States and Europe haven?t been more supportive, and they are humiliated that their own acting government hasn?t done more to confront Russian-backed militants. So, especially after a few drinks, people are ready to take down the Russian Army themselves.? Kristof also repeated the U.S. ?conventional wisdom? that the resistance to the coup regime among eastern Ukrainians was entirely the work of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who, Kristof wrote, ?warns that Ukraine is on the brink of civil war. But the chaos in eastern cities is his own creation, in part by sending provocateurs across the border.? However, when the New York Times finally sent two reporters to spend time with rebels from the east, they encountered an indigenous movement motivated by hostility to the Kiev regime and showing no signs of direction from Moscow. [See Consortiumnews.com?s ?Another NYT ?Sort of? Retraction on Ukraine.?] Beyond the journalistic risk of jumping to conclusions, Kristof, who fancies himself a great humanitarian, also should recognize that the clever depiction of human beings as animals, whether as ?bears? or ?Colorado beetles,? can have horrendous human consequences as is now apparent in Odessa. Reagan?s Nazis But the problem with some western Ukrainians expressing their inconvenient love for Nazis has not been limited to the current crisis. It bedeviled Ronald Reagan?s administration when it began heating up the Cold War in the 1980s. As part of that strategy, Reagan?s United States Information Agency, under his close friend Charles Wick, hired a cast of right-wing Ukrainian exiles who began showing up on U.S.-funded Radio Liberty praising the Galician SS. These commentaries included positive depictions of Ukrainian nationalists who had sided with the Nazis in World War II as the SS waged its ?final solution? against European Jews. The propaganda broadcasts provoked outrage from Jewish organizations, such as B?nai B?rith, and individuals including conservative academic Richard Pipes. According to an internal memo dated May 4, 1984, and written by James Critchlow, a research officer at the Board of International Broadcasting, which managed Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europe, one RL broadcast in particular was viewed as ?defending Ukrainians who fought in the ranks of the SS.? Critchlow wrote, ?An RL Ukrainian broadcast of Feb. 12, 1984 contains references to the Nazi-oriented Ukrainian-manned SS ?Galicia? Division of World War II which may have damaged RL?s reputation with Soviet listeners. The memoirs of a German diplomat are quoted in a way that seems to constitute endorsement by RL of praise for Ukrainian volunteers in the SS division, which during its existence fought side by side with the Germans against the Red Army.? Harvard Professor Pipes, who was an adviser to the Reagan administration, also inveighed against the Radio Liberty broadcasts, writing on Dec. 3, 1984 ?the Russian and Ukrainian services of RL have been transmitting this year blatantly anti-Semitic material to the Soviet Union which may cause the whole enterprise irreparable harm.? Though the Reagan administration publicly defended Radio Liberty against some of the public criticism, privately some senior officials agreed with the critics, according to documents in the archives of the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California. For instance, in a Jan. 4, 1985, memo, Walter Raymond Jr., a top official on the National Security Council, told his boss, National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane, that ?I would believe much of what Dick [Pipes] says is right.? What the Reagan administration apparently didn?t understand three decades ago and what the U.S. State Department still has not seemed to learn today is that there is a danger in stirring up the old animosities that divide Ukraine, east and west. Though clearly a minority, Ukraine?s neo-Nazis remain a potent force that is well-organized, well-motivated and prone to extreme violence, whether throwing firebombs at police in the Maidan or at ethnic Russians trapped in a building in Odessa. As vengeance now seeks vengeance across Ukraine, this Nazi imperative will be difficult to hold down, much as Dr. Strangelove struggled to stop his arm from making a ?Heil Hitler? salute. Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his new book, America?s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). For a limited time, you also can order Robert Parry?s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America?s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here. -----Original Message----- From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook via Peace Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2019 6:30 PM To: baldwinricky at yahoo.com Cc: peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate That the 2014 coup against an elected president in Ukraine was engineered by the sitting US administration (notably in the person of Victoria Nuland) is hardly in doubt. (Even Wikipedia admits it: .) The result was the first government in Europe containing explict nazis since 1945 - another accomplishment of the president who said, ?Turns out I'm really good at killing people. Didn't know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine? (WaPo). The government that Obama's administration installed killed thousands in the Ukrainian region of Donbass (Donetsk and Luhansk) who wouldn?t accept the coup government. But as my quondam colleague Ron Szoke said about the contemporary MSM accounts of those casualties of Obama?s policy, ?Donetsk? Don?t tell!? It?s not surprising that people as well informed as you don?t know about Obama?s accomplishments. That?s what Giambrone is talking about - more corpses piled around the White House. See our friend Francis Boyle?s account: . ?CGE > On Nov 24, 2019, at 1:49 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote: > > I've read suggestions that the Obama Administration did this, which I don't necessarily doubt any more than anything else that I don't know for sure.? I certainly wouldn't put it past them.? But most sources I'm able to scrounge seem to be adamant that this version - that the Obama Admin trained and funded it all - is either obviously true or clearly false.? > > If I've missed something on this list that's more probative, I apologize, but to be blunt what evidence is there?? (I'm aware of the circumstantial stuff, the hints, the signals, Biden's pressure in the former president of Ukraine to step down, but nothing definitive about this stringer claim about funding/training.) I tend to accept it to some degree, but I'd sure like more. > > Thanks, > Ricky > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 4:03 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: > Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think > by Joe Giambrone / November 22nd, 2019 > > Did you know that Donald Trump had the State Department, USAID, NED, and the CIA fund and train Neo-Nazi, fascist militias to overthrow the government of Ukraine? These riot mobs, primarily Svoboda and Right Sector, stormed the capital, firebombed and shot the police, and destroyed democracy inside Ukraine. When the legitimately elected president was forced out by the rioters, the population which had supported him in the east seceded from the country, tearing the entire nation into pieces and sparking a civil war. The Ukraine civil war has cost the lives of over 13,000 Ukrainians. There is so much blood on Donald Trump?s hands. > > Oh, wait a minute! That was Barack Obama. Change that paragraph, please. > > Since 2014, it?s been glaringly obvious to astute (and honest) observers that the Administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden supported the most vicious street mobs in Europe, people who considered themselves proud fascists. Western media routinely censored this part of the story. Obama?s Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, made deals with their leaders and was caught on an open phone line handpicking the next unelected leader of Ukraine, someone they could sell to the US public: ?Yats is the guy.? > > Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed outrage on Bill O?Reilly?s TV show that the Obama Administration had aided this bloody, illegitimate coup. The head of the CIA-linked STRATFOR called Ukraine ?the most blatant coup in history.? > > America?s proxy terrorists burned Kiev, seized power violently, and through the power of the purse strings, Obama?s Administration installed friendly-faced fascists, who immediately set about attacking their countrymen in the east, with a policy of mass murder and indiscriminate bombings. Eastern provinces of Crimea and Donetsk, which notably had supported the ousted president, held referenda. The people there voted overwhelmingly to secede from the illegitimate, unelected, foreign-sponsored coup regime in Kiev. > > The above is most certainly not the reason cited this week for Impeachment hearings. > > Aiding and abetting fascist militias to violently siege a foreign capital is not considered a crime in Washington DC, at all. Conversely, it is business as usual, as Bolivians and Venezuelans can attest to. > > Woody Allen directed a film entitled ?Crimes and Misdemeanors.? That pretty much sums up the DC circus unfolding in Congress. Everything above is completely true, and yet Barack Obama is heralded as someone in the neighborhood of saints and superheroes. To the belligerent American empire, Obama was a star quarterback. Let?s not even delve into Barack?s support for Al Qaeda in Syria, and another half-million dead there, or we?ll be here all day. > > Donald Trump made a phone call. In his phone call, he is said to have bullied the President of Ukraine a little. He may have even delayed some weapons transfers to that country, which was engaged in a proxy war with nuclear-armed Russia and its separatist allies in the east of Ukraine. > > That?s a crime? A real crime? In light of over thirteen thousand slaughtered and an illegal coup in broad daylight? Trump?s telephone call is the real crime? > > Other Presidents haven?t bullied other client-state puppet leaders, ever? > > And why exactly is the President of the United States of America required to send lethal weapons to foreign fascists at all? Has anyone located that section of the Constitution? > > This farce is so laughable on its face and so irrelevant to the American people?s interests, that it?s difficult to overstate the insanity?and outrageous hypocrisy?of the Democrats? contrived ?Ukrainegate? case. This impeachment charge has nothing whatsoever to do with right and wrong. > > In 2014, Barack Obama?s White House, ?refused to include weapons in an aid package? for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.? Obama didn?t send any weapons at all, which would have provoked Russia to an even greater degree, after overthrowing their legitimately elected next-door ally and tearing Ukraine apart. It was obvious that Russia wasn?t ?invading? Ukraine, as propaganda memes claimed, but simply responding to these international crimes and to the dangerous destabilization on its border. The US had already done quite enough damage, and they didn?t need to escalate a proxy war against Russia toward nuclear Armageddon. > > Which brings us now to Donald Trump, who became interested in Joe Biden?s obvious corruption inside Ukraine, installing his own son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma. Hunter Biden knew absolutely nothing about Ukraine or the natural gas industry. The nepotism was glaring. This was clear graft, payback, kickback, corruption, parasites descending after the violent seizure of the state. Biden the elder was in charge of US Ukraine policy, and specifically the big money spigot, after the illegal, US-supported coup there. > > Then?as Joe will be Joe?Biden bragged publicly about getting Ukraine?s top prosecutor fired to the strains of Washington insider laughter. The Ukrainian prosecutor had been investigating that same company which Biden had arranged his son Hunter onto the board of. Biden?s conflict of interest was so obvious that Trump certainly believed he was onto something. Joe Biden, and media sympathetic to his claims, has predictably tried to cloud the issue, but the corruption is too obvious not to notice. This should, and may, have ended Joe Biden?s 2020 presidential bid. > > What happened in Ukraine was old-timey Smash & Grab, a reckless attack right on Russia?s western border. Joe Biden arrived to grab as much loot from Ukraine?s gas sector as he possibly could through a cut-out, his son. Biden used his leverage over Ukraine?s international ?loan guarantees? (which is money the coup leaders receive but don?t have to pay back) to finance their new illegitimate junta. > > Biden?s own quid pro quo, in his own words: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.? This is exactly the type of crime they now accuse Trump of perpetrating with his telephone. The hypocrisy is comical. > > The Obama Administration?s corruption, along with a bloody war and thirteen-thousand corpses, is what a real crime looks like. Hold onto that picture. > > Democrats were allegedly the good guys vis a vis Ukraine? > > Weren?t these international war crimes breaching the UN Charter, which demands exclusively peaceful actions between states, Article II? > > "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered." > ? United Nations Charter, a ratified Treaty, and the ?Supreme Law of the Land? > > Launching a proxy war on nuclear-armed Russia was a sane foreign policy? Sending even more arms to escalate that conflict was allegedly such a glorious idea that any delay in weapons shipments becomes an impeachable offense? > > This unserious charge leveled against Donald Trump distracts from all of his obvious corruption. Trump?s Emoluments violations have been impeachable for years, but the Democrats weren?t interested. Do Democrats long to cash in on the Office of the Presidency next time? > > Multiple deaths of refugee children in US federal custody at the southern border could be considered murders linked directly to official policies of harsh treatment and deliberate neglect. Are Democrats afraid of exposing Obama?s own caging of immigrant children? > > This current Ukrainegate impeachment charade appears to be motivated only by blind partisanship and the desire to insulate corrupt insiders like Joe Biden from any scrutiny of their actions. The farce has gone so over-the-top that even as Democratic partisan media heralded the testimony of Trump?s Ukraine Ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, Donald Trump?s allies have already used portions of her testimony as a video advertisement for his reelection! > > Yovanovitch blatantly lied in her introductory remarks and was caught admitting that Obama?s own State Department had groomed her to answer uncomfortable questions about Joe Biden?s son, Hunter, and his appointment inside Ukraine?s gas sector. This gift to Trump now undermines the entire endeavor. > > Are Democrats trying to hurt or to help Trump?s reelection? > > [Joe Giambrone has written for WhoWhatWhy, Foreign Policy Journal, International Policy Digest, Counterpunch, GlobalResearch, OpEdNews, and his fabulous new novel is DEMIGODS. > This article was posted on Friday, November 22nd, 2019 at 11:13pm and is filed under Barack Obama, Democrats, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Russia, Ukraine.] > _______________________________________________ > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From baldwinricky at yahoo.com Mon Nov 25 15:42:56 2019 From: baldwinricky at yahoo.com (Ricky Baldwin) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 15:42:56 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Ukrainegate In-Reply-To: <002801d5a397$415b4f70$c411ee50$@comcast.net> References: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> <920D48DD-41B5-4D3E-8695-6EB896123727@newsfromneptune.com> <002801d5a397$415b4f70$c411ee50$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <919608653.3282664.1574696576559@mail.yahoo.com> Thanks, really.? That was quick.? I don't mean to tie up everybody answering my quibbles, especially because, again, I wouldn't put it past them.? But I was aware that the Administration jumped in there at the end - some might say eagerly - to "broker" or "midwife" the "transition" ...? I had read the Global Research piece, and Boyle's suggestion that US backing "may" already be underway in the midst of the fray.? I hadn't seen Robert Parry's article, or read Wikipedia's account (I had avoided that one, but I appreciate your suggestion to read it, since it was more informative than I had anticipated). These still don't really argue that the US was behind it from the start, do they?? I mean, aside from the hints and signals US officials often send (and sometimes later turn away from, to be honest, leaving people who seem to be following such 'orders' high and dry), how do we know they were actually funding/training the goons??? To be clear, I'm satisfied that the Obama team was happy about the coup, that it was a coup, and that it was led or co-led by fascists, at least in the traditional fascist coalitionist style - and as Wikipedia et al have made clear that USG officials were there to "help" seal the deal. Yes.? Maybe I should have said all that from the start. What I thought you might have already dug up in your research was evidence of the "funding and training" of the coup by the US under Obama.? If you do have something like that, there's obviously no urgency now, but it would seem a good time to look back at it in light of recent attention in the area and Biden's unfortunate candidacy.?? Thanks for your time, either way.? I know I'm mostly an absent presence these days, but I do appreciate the work you guys are carrying on, and I read up when I can.? (And I appreciate being called "well informed," although I feel less so these days.) Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 7:50 AM, David Johnson wrote: Consortiumnews Volume 25, Number 328?Monday, November 25, 2019 Human Rights, Lost History, Media, Obama Administration, Right Wing Ukraine?s ?Dr. Strangelove? Reality May 5, 2014 Exclusive: The horrendous fire in Odessa, killing dozens of ethnic Russians protesting against the U.S.-backed coup regime in Kiev, has lurched the country closer to full-scale civil war and disrupted the American media?s efforts to deny the existence of pro-regime neo-Nazis, Robert Parry reports. By Robert Parry As much as the coup regime in Ukraine and its supporters want to project an image of Western moderation, there is a ?Dr. Strangelove? element that can?t stop the Nazism from popping up from time to time, like when the Peter Sellers character in the classic movie can?t keep his right arm from making a ?Heil Hitler? salute. This brutal Nazism surfaced again on Friday when right-wing toughs in Odessa attacked an encampment of ethnic Russian protesters driving them into a trade union building which was then set on fire with Molotov cocktails. As the building was engulfed in flames, some people who tried to flee were chased and beaten, while those trapped inside heard the Ukrainian nationalists liken them to black-and-red-striped potato beetles called Colorados, because those colors are used in pro-Russian ribbons. Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove as he struggles to control his right arm from making a Nazi salute. Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove as he struggles to control his right arm from making a Nazi salute. ?Burn, Colorado, burn? went the chant. As the fire worsened, those dying inside were serenaded with the taunting singing of the Ukrainian national anthem. The building also was spray-painted with Swastika-like symbols and graffiti reading ?Galician SS,? a reference to the Ukrainian nationalist army that fought alongside the German Nazi SS in World War II, killing Russians on the eastern front. The death by fire of dozens of people in Odessa recalled a World War II incident in 1944 when elements of a Galician SS police regiment took part in the massacre of the Polish village of Huta Pieniacka, which had been a refuge for Jews and was protected by Russian and Polish partisans. Attacked by a mixed force of Ukrainian police and German soldiers on Feb. 28, hundreds of townspeople were massacred, including many locked in barns that were set ablaze. The legacy of World War II especially the bitter fight between Ukrainian nationalists from the west and ethnic Russians from the east seven decades ago is never far from the surface in Ukrainian politics. One of the heroes celebrated during the Maidan protests in Kiev was Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, whose name was honored in many banners including one on a podium where Sen. John McCain voiced support for the uprising to oust elected President Viktor Yanukovych, whose political base was in eastern Ukraine. During World War II, Bandera headed the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists-B, a radical paramilitary movement that sought to transform Ukraine into a racially pure state. OUN-B took part in the expulsion and extermination of thousands of Jews and Poles. Though most of the Maidan protesters in 2013-14 appeared motivated by anger over political corruption and by a desire to join the European Union, neo-Nazis made up a significant number. These storm troopers from the Right Sektor and Svoboda party decked out some of the occupied government buildings with Nazi insignias and even a Confederate battle flag, the universal symbol of white supremacy. Then, as the protests turned violent from Feb. 20-22, the neo-Nazis surged to the forefront. Their well-trained militias, organized in 100-man brigades called ?the hundreds,? led the final assaults against police and forced Yanukovych and many of his officials to flee for their lives. In the days after the coup, as the neo-Nazi militias effectively controlled the government, European and U.S. diplomats scrambled to help the shaken parliament put together the semblance of a respectable regime, although four ministries, including national security, were awarded to the right-wing extremists in recognition of their crucial role in ousting Yanukovych. Seeing No Nazis Since February, virtually the entire U.S. news media has cooperated in the effort to play down the neo-Nazi role, dismissing any mention of this inconvenient truth as ?Russian propaganda.? Stories in the U.S. media delicately step around the neo-Nazi reality by keeping out relevant context, such as the background of national security chief Andriy Parubiy, who founded the Social-National Party of Ukraine in 1991, blending radical Ukrainian nationalism with neo-Nazi symbols. Parubiy was commandant of the Maidan?s ?self-defense forces.? When the neo-Nazi factor is mentioned in the mainstream U.S. press, it is usually to dismiss it as nonsense, such as an April 20 column by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof who visited his ancestral home, the western Ukrainian town of Karapchiv, and portrayed its residents as the true voice of the Ukrainian people. ?To understand why Ukrainians are risking war with Russia to try to pluck themselves from Moscow?s grip, I came to this village where my father grew up,? he wrote. ?Even here in the village, Ukrainians watch Russian television and loathe the propaganda portraying them as neo-Nazi thugs rampaging against Russian speakers. ??If you listen to them, we all carry assault rifles; we?re all beating people,? Ilya Moskal, a history teacher, said contemptuously.? In an April 17 column from Kiev, Kristof wrote that what the Ukrainians want is weapons from the West so they can to go ?bear-hunting,? i.e. killing Russians. ?People seem to feel a bit disappointed that the United States and Europe haven?t been more supportive, and they are humiliated that their own acting government hasn?t done more to confront Russian-backed militants. So, especially after a few drinks, people are ready to take down the Russian Army themselves.? Kristof also repeated the U.S. ?conventional wisdom? that the resistance to the coup regime among eastern Ukrainians was entirely the work of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who, Kristof wrote, ?warns that Ukraine is on the brink of civil war. But the chaos in eastern cities is his own creation, in part by sending provocateurs across the border.? However, when the New York Times finally sent two reporters to spend time with rebels from the east, they encountered an indigenous movement motivated by hostility to the Kiev regime and showing no signs of direction from Moscow. [See Consortiumnews.com?s ?Another NYT ?Sort of? Retraction on Ukraine.?] Beyond the journalistic risk of jumping to conclusions, Kristof, who fancies himself a great humanitarian, also should recognize that the clever depiction of human beings as animals, whether as ?bears? or ?Colorado beetles,? can have horrendous human consequences as is now apparent in Odessa. Reagan?s Nazis But the problem with some western Ukrainians expressing their inconvenient love for Nazis has not been limited to the current crisis. It bedeviled Ronald Reagan?s administration when it began heating up the Cold War in the 1980s. As part of that strategy, Reagan?s United States Information Agency, under his close friend Charles Wick, hired a cast of right-wing Ukrainian exiles who began showing up on U.S.-funded Radio Liberty praising the Galician SS. These commentaries included positive depictions of Ukrainian nationalists who had sided with the Nazis in World War II as the SS waged its ?final solution? against European Jews. The propaganda broadcasts provoked outrage from Jewish organizations, such as B?nai B?rith, and individuals including conservative academic Richard Pipes. According to an internal memo dated May 4, 1984, and written by James Critchlow, a research officer at the Board of International Broadcasting, which managed Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europe, one RL broadcast in particular was viewed as ?defending Ukrainians who fought in the ranks of the SS.? Critchlow wrote, ?An RL Ukrainian broadcast of Feb. 12, 1984 contains references to the Nazi-oriented Ukrainian-manned SS ?Galicia? Division of World War II which may have damaged RL?s reputation with Soviet listeners. The memoirs of a German diplomat are quoted in a way that seems to constitute endorsement by RL of praise for Ukrainian volunteers in the SS division, which during its existence fought side by side with the Germans against the Red Army.? Harvard Professor Pipes, who was an adviser to the Reagan administration, also inveighed against the Radio Liberty broadcasts, writing on Dec. 3, 1984 ?the Russian and Ukrainian services of RL have been transmitting this year blatantly anti-Semitic material to the Soviet Union which may cause the whole enterprise irreparable harm.? Though the Reagan administration publicly defended Radio Liberty against some of the public criticism, privately some senior officials agreed with the critics, according to documents in the archives of the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California. For instance, in a Jan. 4, 1985, memo, Walter Raymond Jr., a top official on the National Security Council, told his boss, National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane, that ?I would believe much of what Dick [Pipes] says is right.? What the Reagan administration apparently didn?t understand three decades ago and what the U.S. State Department still has not seemed to learn today is that there is a danger in stirring up the old animosities that divide Ukraine, east and west. Though clearly a minority, Ukraine?s neo-Nazis remain a potent force that is well-organized, well-motivated and prone to extreme violence, whether throwing firebombs at police in the Maidan or at ethnic Russians trapped in a building in Odessa. As vengeance now seeks vengeance across Ukraine, this Nazi imperative will be difficult to hold down, much as Dr. Strangelove struggled to stop his arm from making a ?Heil Hitler? salute. Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his new book, America?s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). For a limited time, you also can order Robert Parry?s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America?s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here. -----Original Message----- From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook via Peace Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2019 6:30 PM To: baldwinricky at yahoo.com Cc: peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate That the 2014 coup against an elected president in Ukraine was engineered by the sitting US administration (notably in the person of Victoria Nuland) is hardly in doubt. (Even Wikipedia admits it: .) The result was the first government in Europe containing explict nazis since 1945 - another accomplishment of the president who said, ?Turns out I'm really good at killing people. Didn't know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine? (WaPo). The government that Obama's administration installed killed thousands in the Ukrainian region of Donbass (Donetsk and Luhansk) who wouldn?t accept the coup government. But as my quondam colleague Ron Szoke said about the contemporary MSM accounts of those casualties of Obama?s policy, ?Donetsk? Don?t tell!? It?s not surprising that people as well informed as you don?t know about Obama?s accomplishments. That?s what Giambrone is talking about - more corpses piled around the White House. See our friend Francis Boyle?s account: . ?CGE > On Nov 24, 2019, at 1:49 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote: > > I've read suggestions that the Obama Administration did this, which I don't necessarily doubt any more than anything else that I don't know for sure.? I certainly wouldn't put it past them.? But most sources I'm able to scrounge seem to be adamant that this version - that the Obama Admin trained and funded it all - is either obviously true or clearly false.? > > If I've missed something on this list that's more probative, I apologize, but to be blunt what evidence is there?? (I'm aware of the circumstantial stuff, the hints, the signals, Biden's pressure in the former president of Ukraine to step down, but nothing definitive about this stringer claim about funding/training.) I tend to accept it to some degree, but I'd sure like more. > > Thanks, > Ricky > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 4:03 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: > Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think > by Joe Giambrone / November 22nd, 2019 > > Did you know that Donald Trump had the State Department, USAID, NED, and the CIA fund and train Neo-Nazi, fascist militias to overthrow the government of Ukraine? These riot mobs, primarily Svoboda and Right Sector, stormed the capital, firebombed and shot the police, and destroyed democracy inside Ukraine. When the legitimately elected president was forced out by the rioters, the population which had supported him in the east seceded from the country, tearing the entire nation into pieces and sparking a civil war. The Ukraine civil war has cost the lives of over 13,000 Ukrainians. There is so much blood on Donald Trump?s hands. > > Oh, wait a minute! That was Barack Obama. Change that paragraph, please. > > Since 2014, it?s been glaringly obvious to astute (and honest) observers that the Administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden supported the most vicious street mobs in Europe, people who considered themselves proud fascists. Western media routinely censored this part of the story. Obama?s Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, made deals with their leaders and was caught on an open phone line handpicking the next unelected leader of Ukraine, someone they could sell to the US public: ?Yats is the guy.? > > Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed outrage on Bill O?Reilly?s TV show that the Obama Administration had aided this bloody, illegitimate coup. The head of the CIA-linked STRATFOR called Ukraine ?the most blatant coup in history.? > > America?s proxy terrorists burned Kiev, seized power violently, and through the power of the purse strings, Obama?s Administration installed friendly-faced fascists, who immediately set about attacking their countrymen in the east, with a policy of mass murder and indiscriminate bombings. Eastern provinces of Crimea and Donetsk, which notably had supported the ousted president, held referenda. The people there voted overwhelmingly to secede from the illegitimate, unelected, foreign-sponsored coup regime in Kiev. > > The above is most certainly not the reason cited this week for Impeachment hearings. > > Aiding and abetting fascist militias to violently siege a foreign capital is not considered a crime in Washington DC, at all. Conversely, it is business as usual, as Bolivians and Venezuelans can attest to. > > Woody Allen directed a film entitled ?Crimes and Misdemeanors.? That pretty much sums up the DC circus unfolding in Congress. Everything above is completely true, and yet Barack Obama is heralded as someone in the neighborhood of saints and superheroes. To the belligerent American empire, Obama was a star quarterback. Let?s not even delve into Barack?s support for Al Qaeda in Syria, and another half-million dead there, or we?ll be here all day. > > Donald Trump made a phone call. In his phone call, he is said to have bullied the President of Ukraine a little. He may have even delayed some weapons transfers to that country, which was engaged in a proxy war with nuclear-armed Russia and its separatist allies in the east of Ukraine. > > That?s a crime? A real crime? In light of over thirteen thousand slaughtered and an illegal coup in broad daylight? Trump?s telephone call is the real crime? > > Other Presidents haven?t bullied other client-state puppet leaders, ever? > > And why exactly is the President of the United States of America required to send lethal weapons to foreign fascists at all? Has anyone located that section of the Constitution? > > This farce is so laughable on its face and so irrelevant to the American people?s interests, that it?s difficult to overstate the insanity?and outrageous hypocrisy?of the Democrats? contrived ?Ukrainegate? case. This impeachment charge has nothing whatsoever to do with right and wrong. > > In 2014, Barack Obama?s White House, ?refused to include weapons in an aid package? for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.? Obama didn?t send any weapons at all, which would have provoked Russia to an even greater degree, after overthrowing their legitimately elected next-door ally and tearing Ukraine apart. It was obvious that Russia wasn?t ?invading? Ukraine, as propaganda memes claimed, but simply responding to these international crimes and to the dangerous destabilization on its border. The US had already done quite enough damage, and they didn?t need to escalate a proxy war against Russia toward nuclear Armageddon. > > Which brings us now to Donald Trump, who became interested in Joe Biden?s obvious corruption inside Ukraine, installing his own son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma. Hunter Biden knew absolutely nothing about Ukraine or the natural gas industry. The nepotism was glaring. This was clear graft, payback, kickback, corruption, parasites descending after the violent seizure of the state. Biden the elder was in charge of US Ukraine policy, and specifically the big money spigot, after the illegal, US-supported coup there. > > Then?as Joe will be Joe?Biden bragged publicly about getting Ukraine?s top prosecutor fired to the strains of Washington insider laughter. The Ukrainian prosecutor had been investigating that same company which Biden had arranged his son Hunter onto the board of. Biden?s conflict of interest was so obvious that Trump certainly believed he was onto something. Joe Biden, and media sympathetic to his claims, has predictably tried to cloud the issue, but the corruption is too obvious not to notice. This should, and may, have ended Joe Biden?s 2020 presidential bid. > > What happened in Ukraine was old-timey Smash & Grab, a reckless attack right on Russia?s western border. Joe Biden arrived to grab as much loot from Ukraine?s gas sector as he possibly could through a cut-out, his son. Biden used his leverage over Ukraine?s international ?loan guarantees? (which is money the coup leaders receive but don?t have to pay back) to finance their new illegitimate junta. > > Biden?s own quid pro quo, in his own words: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.? This is exactly the type of crime they now accuse Trump of perpetrating with his telephone. The hypocrisy is comical. > > The Obama Administration?s corruption, along with a bloody war and thirteen-thousand corpses, is what a real crime looks like. Hold onto that picture. > > Democrats were allegedly the good guys vis a vis Ukraine? > > Weren?t these international war crimes breaching the UN Charter, which demands exclusively peaceful actions between states, Article II? > > "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered." > ? United Nations Charter, a ratified Treaty, and the ?Supreme Law of the Land? > > Launching a proxy war on nuclear-armed Russia was a sane foreign policy? Sending even more arms to escalate that conflict was allegedly such a glorious idea that any delay in weapons shipments becomes an impeachable offense? > > This unserious charge leveled against Donald Trump distracts from all of his obvious corruption. Trump?s Emoluments violations have been impeachable for years, but the Democrats weren?t interested. Do Democrats long to cash in on the Office of the Presidency next time? > > Multiple deaths of refugee children in US federal custody at the southern border could be considered murders linked directly to official policies of harsh treatment and deliberate neglect. Are Democrats afraid of exposing Obama?s own caging of immigrant children? > > This current Ukrainegate impeachment charade appears to be motivated only by blind partisanship and the desire to insulate corrupt insiders like Joe Biden from any scrutiny of their actions. The farce has gone so over-the-top that even as Democratic partisan media heralded the testimony of Trump?s Ukraine Ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, Donald Trump?s allies have already used portions of her testimony as a video advertisement for his reelection! > > Yovanovitch blatantly lied in her introductory remarks and was caught admitting that Obama?s own State Department had groomed her to answer uncomfortable questions about Joe Biden?s son, Hunter, and his appointment inside Ukraine?s gas sector. This gift to Trump now undermines the entire endeavor. > > Are Democrats trying to hurt or to help Trump?s reelection? > > [Joe Giambrone has written for WhoWhatWhy, Foreign Policy Journal, International Policy Digest, Counterpunch, GlobalResearch, OpEdNews, and his fabulous new novel is DEMIGODS. > This article was posted on Friday, November 22nd, 2019 at 11:13pm and is filed under Barack Obama, Democrats, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Russia, Ukraine.] > _______________________________________________ > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Mon Nov 25 16:12:33 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 10:12:33 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Chronology of the Ukrainian Coup Message-ID: <003301d5a3ab$2555e920$7001bb60$@comcast.net> https://uziiw38pmyg1ai60732c4011-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/dropzone /2015/06/cp5.png March 5, 2014 Chronology of the Ukrainian Coup by Renee Parsons Listening to the US media, even the most diligent news junkie would find it difficult to know that the U.S. State Department played not only a vital role in the violence and chaos underway in Ukraine but was also complicit in creating the coup that ousted democratically elected President Viktor Yanuyovch. Given the Russian Parliament's approval of Putin's request for military troops to be moved into Crimea, Americans uninformed about the history of that region might also be persuaded that Russia is the aggressor and the sole perpetrator of the violence. Let's be clear about what is at stake here: NATO missiles on the adjacent Ukraine border aimed directly at Russia would make that country extremely vulnerable to Western goals and destabilization efforts while threatening Russia's only water access to its naval fleet in Crimean peninsula, the Balkans, the Mediterranean Sea and the Middle East - and not the least of which would allow world economic dominance by the US, the European Union, the IMF, World Bank and international financiers all of whom had already brought staggering suffering to millions around the globe. The fact is that democracy was not a demand on the streets of Kiev. The current record of events indicates that protests of civil dissatisfaction were organized by reactionary neo-Nazi forces intent on fomenting a major domestic crisis ousting Ukraine's legitimate government. As events continue to spiral out of control, here is the chronology of how the coup was engineered to install a government more favorable to EU and US goals. April 11, 2011 - A Kiev Post article entitled "Ukraine Hopes to Get $1.5 Billion from IMF in June" states that the loan is dependent on pension cuts while "maintaining cooperation with the IMF, since it influences the country's interaction with other international financial institutions and private investors" and further that the "attraction of $850 million from the World Bank in 2011, depended on cooperation with the IMF." Well, that about says it all - if Ukraine played ball. then the loan money would pour in. November 21, 2013 - fast forward to the EU summit in Lithuania when President Yanuyovch embarrassed the European Union by rejecting its Agreement in favor of joining Russia's Common Union with other Commonwealth Independent States. November 27, 2013 - it was not until February 23, 2014 when Anonymous Ukraine hackers released a series of emails from a Lithuanian government advisor to opposition leader and former boxer Vitaly Klitschko regarding plans to destabilize Ukraine; for example: "Our American friends promise to pay a visit in the coming days, we may even see Nuland or someone from the Congress." 12/7/2013 "Your colleague has arrived ..his services may be required even after the country is destabilized." 12/14/2013 "I think we've paved the way for more radical escalation of the situation. Isn't it time to proceed with more decisive action?" 1/9/2014 November 29, 2013 - well-orchestrated protestors were already in the streets of Kiev as European Commission President Jose Manual Barroso announced that the EU would " not accept Russia's veto" of the Agreement. December 13, 2013 - As if intent on providing incontrovertible evidence of US involvement in Ukraine, Assistant US Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia Victoria Nuland proudly told a meeting of the International Business Conference sponsored by the US-Ukrainian Foundation that the US had 'invested' more than $5 billion and 'five years worth of work and preparation" in achieving what she called Ukraine's 'European aspirations." Having just returned from her third trip to Ukraine in five weeks, Nuland boasted of her 'coordinated high level diplomacy' and a more than two hour 'tough conversation' with Yanukovych. Already familiar with Nuland as former Secretary Clinton's spokesperson at State, one can imagine her discourteous tone and manner when she says she made it "absolutely clear" to Yanukovych that the US required "immediate steps" .to "get back into conversation with Europe and the IMF." While Western media have portrayed Yanukovych as a 'weak' leader, Nuland's description of a 'tough' meeting can only mean that he resisted her threats and intimidations. In what must have been a touching moment, Nuland spoke about a show of force by government police on demonstrators who "sang hymns and prayed for peace." What Nuland did not reveal on December 13 was that her meetings with 'key Ukrainian stakeholders' included neo-Nazi Svoboda party leader Oleh Tyahnybok and prime minister wannabe Arsenly Yatsenyuk of the Fatherland Party. At about the same time Nuland was wooing fascist extremists, Sen. John McCain (R-Az) and Sen. Chris Murphy (D- Conn) shared the stage in Kiev with Tyahnybok offering their support and opposition to the sitting government. The Svoboda party which has roots with extreme vigilante and anti-semitic groups has since received at least three high level cabinet posts in the interim government including deputy prime minister. There is no doubt that the progenies of west Ukraine's historic neo-fascist thugs that fought with Hitler are now aligned with the US as represented by Victoria Nuland. January 24, 2014 - President Yanukoyvch identified foreign elements participating in Kiev protests warning that armed radicals were a danger to peaceful citizens . Independent news agencies also reported that "not all of Kiev's population backs opposition rule, which depends mainly on a group from the former Polish town of Lvov, which holds sway over Kiev downtown - but not the rest of the city." January 30, 2014 - The State Department's website Media Note announced Nuland's upcoming travel plans that "In Kyiv, Assistant Secretary Nuland will meet with government officials, opposition leaders, civil society and business leaders to encourage agreement on a new government and plan of action." In other words, almost a month before President Yanukovych was ousted, the US was planning to rid the world of another independently elected President. February 4, 2014 - More evidence of Ms. Nuland's meddling with extremist factions and the high level stakes of war and peace occurred in her taped conversation with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt discussing their calculations of who's in and who's out to replace Yanukovych. Note mention of Nazi leader Oleh Tyahnybok. Here are some selected excerpts: Nuland: "What do you think?" Pyatt: "I think we're in play. the [Vitali] Klitsch piece is obviously the complicated electron here especially the announcement of him as deputy prime minister. Your argument to him which you'll need to make, I think the next phone call we want to set up is exactly the one you made to Yats [Yatsenyuk]. And I'm glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario and I'm very glad he said what he said in response." Nuland: "I don't think Klitsch should go into government. I don't think its necessary. I don't think it's a good idea." Pyatt: "yeah.I mean I guess. You think.what.in terms of him not going into the government, just let him sort of stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I'm just thinking in terms of the process moving ahead, we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok and his guys. I'm sure that's what Yanukoyvch is calculating on all this." Nuland: "I think Yats is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience. What he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside and he needs to be talking to them four times a week you know.I think with Klitsch going in at that level working for Yats, it's not going to work." Nuland: "My understanding is that the big three [Yatsenyuk, Klitsch and Tyahnybok] were going in to their own meeting and that Yats was going to offer in that context a three plus one conversation with you." Pyatt: " That's what he proposed but knowing the dynamic that's been with them where Klitsch has been top dog; he's going to take a while to show up at a meeting, he's probably talking to his guys at this point so I think you reaching out to him will help with the personality management among the three and gives us a chance to move fast on all this stuff and put us behind it before they all sit down and he explains why he doesn't like it." Nuland: . "when I talked to Jeff Feltman this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy .Robert Serry - he's now gotten both Serry and Ban ki Moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. so that would be great I think to help glue this thing and have the UN help glue it and you know fuck the EU." Pyatt: "Exactly. I think we've got to do something to make it stick together because you can be pretty sure the Russians will be working behind the scenes. ..Let me work on Klitchko and I think we want to get somebody with an international personality to come out here and help midwife this thing." Nuland: ".Sullivan's come back to me saying you need Biden and I said probably tomorrow for an" 'atta' boy' and get the deeds to stick so Biden's willing." February 20, 2014 - Foreign ministers from Poland, Germany and France visiting Kiev secured President Yanukovych's agreement that would commit the government to an interim administration, constitutional reform and new parliamentary and presidential elections. With "no clear sign that EU or US pressure has achieved" the desired effect, opposition leaders rejected Yanukovych's compromise which would have ended the three month stand-off. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called on the German, French and Polish foreign ministers to step in and take responsibility for upholding the deal they helped forge and not let " armed extremists" directly threaten Ukrainian sovereignty. February 21, 2014 - At a special summit in Brussels, European foreign ministers agreed to adopt sanctions on Ukraine including visa bans and asset freezes. The EU decision followed "immense pressure from the US for the European powers to take punitive action against the Ukrainian regime." Washington had already imposed travel bans on 20 leading Ukrainians. February 22, 2014 - An hour after refusing to resign, the Ukrainian Parliament voted, according to Russian president Vladimir Putin, in an unconstitutional action to oust President Yanukovych and that pro-EU forces staged a 'coup'. Yanukovych departed Kiev in fear for his life. March 1, 2014 - During a conversation initiated by the vice president, Biden delivered his 'atta boy' with a phone call to newly installed prime minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk reaffirming US support for Ukraine's 'territorial integrity." All of the above machinations expose an incoherent and corrupt American foreign policy with a litany of US hypocrisy that might be hilarious if not for potentially grave global implications. The comment "you just don't behave by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext" might just win Secretary of State John Kerry the Hypocrisy of the Year Award. Kerry, of course, famously supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq seeking weapons of mass destruction. But then again, the President's own comments that "..countries have deep concerns and suspicions about this kind of meddling.." and that ".as long as none of us are inside Ukraine trying to meddle and intervene.. with decisions that properly belong to Ukrainian people." while announcing $1 billion aid package to Ukraine (but not Detroit) would be a close runner-up for the Award. Renee Parsons was a staffer in the U.S. House of Representatives and a lobbyist on nuclear energy issues with Friends of the Earth. in 2005, she was elected to the Durango City Council and served as Councilor and Mayor. Currently, she is a member of the Treasure Coast ACLU Board. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 6911 bytes Desc: not available URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Mon Nov 25 16:23:27 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 10:23:27 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Guardian - It's not Russia that's pushed Ukraine to the brink of war Message-ID: <004501d5a3ac$ab994a30$02cbde90$@comcast.net> The Guardian It's not Russia that's pushed Ukraine to the brink of war Seumas Milne The attempt to lever Kiev into the western camp by ousting an elected leader made conflict certain. It could be a threat to us all Wed 30 Apr 2014 'The reality is that after two decades of Nato expansion, this crisis was triggered by the west's attempt to pull Ukraine decisively into its orbit . ' Illustration: Matt Kenyon The threat of war in Ukraine is growing. As the unelected government in Kiev declares itself unable to control the rebellion in the country's east, John Kerry brands Russia a rogue state. The US and the European Union step up sanctions against the Kremlin, accusing it of destabilising Ukraine. The White House is reported to be set on a new cold war policy with the aim of turning Russia into a "pariah state". That might be more explicable if what is going on in eastern Ukraine now were not the mirror image of what took place in Kiev a couple of months ago. Then, it was armed protesters in Maidan Square seizing government buildings and demanding a change of government and constitution. US and European leaders championed the "masked militants" and denounced the elected government for its crackdown, just as they now back the unelected government's use of force against rebels occupying police stations and town halls in cities such as Slavyansk and Donetsk. "America is with you," Senator John McCain told demonstrators then, standing shoulder to shoulder with the leader of the far-right Svoboda party as the US ambassador haggled with the state department over who would make up the new Ukrainian government. When the Ukrainian president was replaced by a US-selected administration, in an entirely unconstitutional takeover, politicians such as William Hague brazenly misled parliament about the legality of what had taken place: the imposition of a pro-western government on Russia's most neuralgic and politically divided neighbour. Putin bit back, taking a leaf out of the US street-protest playbook - even though, as in Kiev, the protests that spread from Crimea to eastern Ukraine evidently have mass support. But what had been a glorious cry for freedom in Kiev became infiltration and insatiable aggression in Sevastopol and Luhansk. After Crimeans voted overwhelmingly to join Russia, the bulk of the western media abandoned any hint of even-handed coverage. So Putin is now routinely compared to Hitler, while the role of the fascistic right on the streets and in the new Ukrainian regime has been airbrushed out of most reporting as Putinist propaganda. So you don't hear much about the Ukrainian government's veneration of wartime Nazi collaborators and pogromists, or the arson attacks on the homes and offices of elected communist leaders, or the integration of the extreme Right Sector into the national guard, while the anti-semitism and white supremacism of the government's ultra-nationalists is assiduously played down, and false identifications of Russian special forces are relayed as fact. The reality is that, after two decades of eastward Nato expansion, this crisis was triggered by the west's attempt to pull Ukraine decisively into its orbit and defence structure, via an explicitly anti-Moscow EU association agreement. Its rejection led to the Maidan protests and the installation of an anti-Russian administration - rejected by half the country - that went on to sign the EU and International Monetary Fund agreements regardless. No Russian government could have acquiesced in such a threat from territory that was at the heart of both Russia and the Soviet Union. Putin's absorption of Crimea and support for the rebellion in eastern Ukraine is clearly defensive, and the red line now drawn: the east of Ukraine, at least, is not going to be swallowed up by Nato or the EU. But the dangers are also multiplying. Ukraine has shown itself to be barely a functioning state: the former government was unable to clear Maidan, and the western-backed regime is "helpless" against the protests in the Soviet-nostalgic industrial east. For all the talk about the paramilitary "green men" (who turn out to be overwhelmingly Ukrainian), the rebellion also has strong social and democratic demands: who would argue against a referendum on autonomy and elected governors? Meanwhile, the US and its European allies impose sanctions and dictate terms to Russia and its proteges in Kiev, encouraging the military crackdown on protesters after visits from Joe Biden and the CIA director, John Brennan. But by what right is the US involved at all, incorporating under its strategic umbrella a state that has never been a member of Nato, and whose last elected government came to power on a platform of explicit neutrality? It has none, of course - which is why the Ukraine crisis is seen in such a different light across most of the world. There may be few global takers for Putin's oligarchic conservatism and nationalism, but Russia's counterweight to US imperial expansion is welcomed, from China to Brazil. In fact, one outcome of the crisis is likely to be a closer alliance between China and Russia, as the US continues its anti-Chinese "pivot" to Asia. And despite growing violence, the cost in lives of Russia's arms-length involvement in Ukraine has so far been minimal compared with any significant western intervention you care to think of for decades. The risk of civil war is nevertheless growing, and with it the chances of outside powers being drawn into the conflict. Barack Obama has already sent token forces to eastern Europe and is under pressure, both from Republicans and Nato hawks such as Poland, to send many more. Both US and British troops are due to take part in Nato military exercises in Ukraine this summer. The US and EU have already overplayed their hand in Ukraine. Neither Russia nor the western powers may want to intervene directly, and the Ukrainian prime minister's conjuring up of a third world war presumably isn't authorised by his Washington sponsors. But a century after 1914, the risk of unintended consequences should be obvious enough - as the threat of a return of big-power conflict grows. Pressure for a negotiated end to the crisis is essential. Twitter @SeumasMilne -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Mon Nov 25 16:35:55 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 10:35:55 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] How and Why the US Government Perpetrated the 2014 Coup in Ukraine Message-ID: <006101d5a3ae$6982e280$3c88a780$@comcast.net> How and Why the US Government Perpetrated the 2014 Coup in Ukraine https://www.strategic-culture.org/wp-content/themes/strategic-culture/layout /static/acjHM66QQR5kCh1rvkLeUXWRoIw.png Eric Zuesse https://www.strategic-culture.org/wp-content/themes/strategic-culture/layout /static/4tonPx6ZVVE9r7ECg0qIKaFDElw.png June 3, 2018 C Photo: Public domain This will document that the 'new Cold War' between the US and Russia did not start, as the Western myth has it, with Russia's involvement in the breakaway of Crimea and Donbass from Ukraine, after Ukraine - next door to Russia - had suddenly turned rabidly hostile toward Russia in February 2014. Ukraine's replacing its democratically elected neutralist Government in February 2014, by a rabidly anti-Russian Government, was a violent event, which produced many corpses. It's presented in The West as having been a 'revolution' instead of a coup; but whatever it was, it certainly generated the 'new Cold War' (the economic sanctions and NATO buildup on Russia's borders); and, to know whether it was a coup, or instead a revolution, is to know what actually started the 'new Cold War', and why. So, this is historically very important. Incontrovertible proofs will be presented here not only that it was a coup, but that this coup was organized by the US Government - that the US Government initiated the 'new Cold War'; Russia's Government reacted to America's aggression, which aims to place nuclear missiles in Ukraine, less than ten minutes flight-time from Moscow. During the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, America had reason to fear Soviet nuclear missiles 103 miles from America's border. But, after America's Ukrainian coup in 2014, Russia has reason to fear NATO nuclear missiles not just near, but on, Russia's border. That would be catastrophic. If America's successful February 2014 overthrow and replacement of Ukraine's democratically elected neutralist Government doesn't soon produce a world-ending nuclear war (World War III), then there will be historical accounts of that overthrow, and the accounts are already increasingly trending and consolidating toward a historical consensus that it was a coup - that it was imposed by "somebody from the new coalition" - i.e., that the termination of the then-existing democratic (though like all its predecessors, corrupt) Ukrainian Government, wasn't authentically a 'revolution' such as the US Government has contended, and certainly wasn't at all democratic, but was instead a coup (and a very bloody one, at that), and totally illegal (though backed by The West). The purpose of the present article will be to focus attention on precisely whom the chief people are who were responsible for perpetrating this globally mega-dangerous ('Cold-War'-igniting) coup - and thus for creating the world's subsequent course increasingly toward global nuclear annihilation. If there will be future history, then these are the individuals who will be in the docks for that history's harshest and most damning judgments, even if there will be no legal proceedings brought against them. Who, then, are these people? Clearly, Victoria Nuland, US President Barack Obama's central agent overseeing the coup, at least during the month of February 2014 when it climaxed, was crucial not only in overthrowing the existing Ukrainian Government, but in selecting and installing its rabidly anti-Russian replacement. The 27 January 2014 phone-conversation between her and America's Ambassador in Ukraine, Jeffrey Pyatt was a particularly seminal event, and it was uploaded to youtube on 4 February 2014. I have discussed elsewhere that call and its significance. Nuland there and then abandoned the EU's hope for a still democratic but less corrupt future government for Ukraine, and Nuland famously said, on that call "Fuck the EU," and she instructed Pyatt to choose instead the rabidly anti-Russian, and far-right, Arseniy Yatsenyuk. This key event occurred 24 days before Ukraine's President Victor Yanukovych was overthrown on February 20th, and 30 days before the new person to head Ukraine's Government, Yatsenyuk, became officially appointed to rule the now clearly fascist country. He won that official designation on February 26th. However, this was only a formality: Obama's agent had already chosen him, on January 27th. The second landmark item of evidence that it had been a coup and nothing at all democratic or a 'revolution', was the 26 February 2014 phone-conversation between the EU's Foreign Minister Catherine Ashton and her agent in Ukraine investigating whether the overthrow had been a revolution or instead a coup; he was Estonia's Foreign Minister, Urmas Paet, and he told her that he found that it had been a coup, and that "somebody from the new coalition" had engineered it - but he didn't know whom that "somebody" was. Both Ashton and Paet were shocked at this finding, but they proceeded immediately to ignore that matter, and to discuss only the prospects for Europe's investors in Ukraine, to be able to get their money back - their obsession was Ukraine's corruption. Ashton told Paet that she had herself told the Maidan demonstrators, "you need to find ways in which you can establish a process that will have anti-corruption at its heart." So, though the EU was unhappy that this had been a coup, they were far more concerned to protect their investors. In any case, the EU clearly wasn't behind Ukraine's coup. Equally clearly, they didn't much care whether it was a coup or instead what the US Government said, a 'revolution'. The network behind this coup had actually started planning for the coup back in 2011. That's when Eric Schmidt of Google, and Jared Cohen, also now of Google but still continuing though unofficially as US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's chief person tasked to plan 'popular movements' to overthrow both Yanukovych in Ukraine, and Assad in Syria. Then, on 1 March 2013, the implementation of this plan started: the first "tech camp" to train far-right Ukrainians how to organize online the mass-demonstrations against Yanukovych, was held inside the US Embassy in Kiev on that date, which was over nine months before the Maidan demonstrations to overthrow Ukraine's democratically elected President started, on 20 November 2013. The American scholar Gordon M. Hahn has specialized in studying the evidence regarding whom the actual snipers were who committed the murders, but he focuses only on domestic Ukrainian snipers and ignores the foreign ones, who had been hired by the US regime indirectly through Georgian, Lithuanian and other anti-Russian CIA assets (such as via Mikheil Saakashvili, the ousted President of Georgia whom the US regime subsequently selected to become the Governor of the Odessa region of Ukraine). Hahn's 2018 book Ukraine Over the Edge states on pages 204-209: "Yet another pro-Maidan sniper, Ivan Bubenchik, emerged to acknowledge that he shot and killed Berkut [the Government's police who were protecting Government buildings] before any protesters were shot that day [February 20th]. In a print interview, Bubenchik previews his admission in Vladimir Tikhii's documentary film, Brantsy, that he shot ahd killed two Berkut commanders in the early morning hours of February 20 on the Maidan. . Bubenchik claims that [on February 20] the Yanukovich regime started the fire in the Trade Union House - where his and many other EuroMaidan fighters lived during the revolt - prompting the Maidan's next reaction. As noted above, however, pro-Maidan neofascists have revealed that the Right Sector started that fire. . Analysis of the snipers' massacre shows that the Maidan protesters initiated almost all - at least six out of a possible eight - of the pivotal escalatory moments of violence and/or coercion. . The 30 November 2013 nighttime assault on the Maidan demonstrators is the only clear exception from a conclusive pattern of escalating revolutionary violence led by the Maidan's relatively small but highly motivated and well-organized neofascist element." Although Hahn's book barely cites the first and most detailed academic study of the climactic coup period of late February, Ivan Katchanovski's poorly written "The 'Snipers' Massacre' on the Maidan in Ukraine", which was issued on 5 September 2015, Hahn's is consistent with that: both works conclude that the available evidence, as Katchanovski puts it, shows that: "The massacre was a false flag operation, which was rationally planned and carried out with a goal of the overthrow of the government and seizure of power. It [his investigation] found various evidence of the involvement of an alliance of the far right organizations, specifically the Right Sector and Svoboda, and oligarchic parties, such as Fatherland. Concealed shooters and spotters were located in at least 20 Maidan-controlled buildings or areas." Hahn downplays US heading of the coup. But shortly before the coup, the CIA secretly trained in Poland the Right Sector founder/leader Dmitriy Yarosh ("Dmytro Jarosz"), who headed Ukraine's snipers. So, even the Ukrainian ones were working for the US On 19 November 2017 was issued Gian Micalessin's "The hidden truth about Ukraine - Part 1" & Part 2 Summarizing them here: Two Georgian snipers say Saakashvili hired them in Tbilisi for a US-backed operation. But they know only about the "Georgian Legion" part. They think it was patterned on Georgia's Rose Revolution. They each got $1000 for the operation and flew to Kiev on 15 January and were promised $5000 on return. (9:00) "We had to provoke the 'Berkut' police so they would attack the people. By February 15th the situation [at the Maidan] was getting worse every day. Then the first shots were fired." It was February 15 or 16. Mamunashvili [Saakashvili's man] introduced them to "an American military guy, . Brian Christopher Boyenger" a former "sniper for the 101st Airborne Division" who "after Maidan he went to Donbass" to fight in the "Georgian Legion" but during the coup-climax, the far-right Andriy "Parubiy came very often," and "Brian always accompanied him" and also instructing there was Vladimir Parasyuk, one of the leaders of the Maidan. The snipers were told not to aim but just to kill people randomly, to create chaos. There were also two Lithuanian snipers in the room. Some went down from the Ukraine Hotel to the second floor of the Conservatory Building, balcony. "They started to take out the guns and distributed them to each group." "Then I heard shots from the next room" It lasted 15 minutes, then they were all ordered to escape. On 13 February 2015 was telecast a German documentary, "Maidan Snipers. German TV expose. ARD Monitor. Eng Subs" in which one of the demonstrators said that many of the bullets were fired from buildings controlled by the demonstrators, but that "We were also shot at from the other direction." However, at least before 21 February 2014, police (Berkut) were seized by demonstrators and at least the possibility exists that some of the Right Sector snipers were taking positions in and especially atop some of the government buildings so as to fire down into the crowd and seem to be firing from Yanukovych's side. Gordon Hahn hasn't been able to verify any firing in February 2014 by the Yanukovych government. Moreover: "they were the same snipers, killing people from both sides." On 1 February 2016 was posted to youtube a French documentary, "Ukraine - Masks of the Revolution" which shows, from a meeting at Davos, at 48:00, Victoria Nuland, the announcer trying to speak with her and saying to the audience, "The US diplomat who came to support the Revolution, could she really ignore the existence of the paramilitaries?"; 48:50 Larry Summers at a meeting in Kiev during 10-12 September 2015 and then later at the "12th YES Annual Meeting" saying, "Ukraine is an essential outpost of our fundamental military interests"; 49:25: Petraeus also shown there and the announcer says, "He also thinks that Ukraine is essential to block Putin." Petraeus urges investment in Ukraine to block Russia; 51:00 McChrystal there also urges arming Ukraine; 51:50 Nuland is there and the announcer says: "The country that is most invested in Ukraine's future is the US" "She is the architect of America's influence in Ukraine." Nuland says there at the "YES" meeting, "We had a significant impact on the battlefield." But the US regime blames Russia for that war. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 404 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 306 bytes Desc: not available URL: From carl at newsfromneptune.com Mon Nov 25 16:36:02 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 10:36:02 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Ukrainegate In-Reply-To: <919608653.3282664.1574696576559@mail.yahoo.com> References: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> <920D48DD-41B5-4D3E-8695-6EB896123727@newsfromneptune.com> <002801d5a397$415b4f70$c411ee50$@comcast.net> <919608653.3282664.1574696576559@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/06/03/how-why-us-government-perpetrated-2014-coup-ukraine/ > On Nov 25, 2019, at 9:42 AM, Ricky Baldwin wrote: > > Thanks, really. That was quick. I don't mean to tie up everybody answering my quibbles, especially because, again, I wouldn't put it past them. But I was aware that the Administration jumped in there at the end - some might say eagerly - to "broker" or "midwife" the "transition" ... I had read the Global Research piece, and Boyle's suggestion that US backing "may" already be underway in the midst of the fray. I hadn't seen Robert Parry's article, or read Wikipedia's account (I had avoided that one, but I appreciate your suggestion to read it, since it was more informative than I had anticipated). > > These still don't really argue that the US was behind it from the start, do they? I mean, aside from the hints and signals US officials often send (and sometimes later turn away from, to be honest, leaving people who seem to be following such 'orders' high and dry), how do we know they were actually funding/training the goons? > > To be clear, I'm satisfied that the Obama team was happy about the coup, that it was a coup, and that it was led or co-led by fascists, at least in the traditional fascist coalitionist style - and as Wikipedia et al have made clear that USG officials were there to "help" seal the deal. Yes. Maybe I should have said all that from the start. > > What I thought you might have already dug up in your research was evidence of the "funding and training" of the coup by the US under Obama. If you do have something like that, there's obviously no urgency now, but it would seem a good time to look back at it in light of recent attention in the area and Biden's unfortunate candidacy. > > Thanks for your time, either way. I know I'm mostly an absent presence these days, but I do appreciate the work you guys are carrying on, and I read up when I can. (And I appreciate being called "well informed," although I feel less so these days.) > > > > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 7:50 AM, David Johnson > wrote: > Consortiumnews > Volume 25, Number 328?Monday, November 25, 2019 > > Human Rights, Lost History, Media, Obama Administration, Right Wing > Ukraine?s ?Dr. Strangelove? Reality > May 5, 2014 > > Exclusive: The horrendous fire in Odessa, killing dozens of ethnic Russians protesting against the U.S.-backed coup regime in Kiev, has lurched the country closer to full-scale civil war and disrupted the American media?s efforts to deny the existence of pro-regime neo-Nazis, Robert Parry reports. > > By Robert Parry > > As much as the coup regime in Ukraine and its supporters want to project an image of Western moderation, there is a ?Dr. Strangelove? element that can?t stop the Nazism from popping up from time to time, like when the Peter Sellers character in the classic movie can?t keep his right arm from making a ?Heil Hitler? salute. > > This brutal Nazism surfaced again on Friday when right-wing toughs in Odessa attacked an encampment of ethnic Russian protesters driving them into a trade union building which was then set on fire with Molotov cocktails. As the building was engulfed in flames, some people who tried to flee were chased and beaten, while those trapped inside heard the Ukrainian nationalists liken them to black-and-red-striped potato beetles called Colorados, because those colors are used in pro-Russian ribbons. > Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove as he struggles to control his right arm from making a Nazi salute. > > Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove as he struggles to control his right arm from making a Nazi salute. > > ?Burn, Colorado, burn? went the chant. > > As the fire worsened, those dying inside were serenaded with the taunting singing of the Ukrainian national anthem. The building also was spray-painted with Swastika-like symbols and graffiti reading ?Galician SS,? a reference to the Ukrainian nationalist army that fought alongside the German Nazi SS in World War II, killing Russians on the eastern front. > > The death by fire of dozens of people in Odessa recalled a World War II incident in 1944 when elements of a Galician SS police regiment took part in the massacre of the Polish village of Huta Pieniacka, which had been a refuge for Jews and was protected by Russian and Polish partisans. Attacked by a mixed force of Ukrainian police and German soldiers on Feb. 28, hundreds of townspeople were massacred, including many locked in barns that were set ablaze. > > The legacy of World War II especially the bitter fight between Ukrainian nationalists from the west and ethnic Russians from the east seven decades ago is never far from the surface in Ukrainian politics. One of the heroes celebrated during the Maidan protests in Kiev was Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, whose name was honored in many banners including one on a podium where Sen. John McCain voiced support for the uprising to oust elected President Viktor Yanukovych, whose political base was in eastern Ukraine. > > During World War II, Bandera headed the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists-B, a radical paramilitary movement that sought to transform Ukraine into a racially pure state. OUN-B took part in the expulsion and extermination of thousands of Jews and Poles. > > Though most of the Maidan protesters in 2013-14 appeared motivated by anger over political corruption and by a desire to join the European Union, neo-Nazis made up a significant number. These storm troopers from the Right Sektor and Svoboda party decked out some of the occupied government buildings with Nazi insignias and even a Confederate battle flag, the universal symbol of white supremacy. > > Then, as the protests turned violent from Feb. 20-22, the neo-Nazis surged to the forefront. Their well-trained militias, organized in 100-man brigades called ?the hundreds,? led the final assaults against police and forced Yanukovych and many of his officials to flee for their lives. > > In the days after the coup, as the neo-Nazi militias effectively controlled the government, European and U.S. diplomats scrambled to help the shaken parliament put together the semblance of a respectable regime, although four ministries, including national security, were awarded to the right-wing extremists in recognition of their crucial role in ousting Yanukovych. > > Seeing No Nazis > > Since February, virtually the entire U.S. news media has cooperated in the effort to play down the neo-Nazi role, dismissing any mention of this inconvenient truth as ?Russian propaganda.? Stories in the U.S. media delicately step around the neo-Nazi reality by keeping out relevant context, such as the background of national security chief Andriy Parubiy, who founded the Social-National Party of Ukraine in 1991, blending radical Ukrainian nationalism with neo-Nazi symbols. Parubiy was commandant of the Maidan?s ?self-defense forces.? > > When the neo-Nazi factor is mentioned in the mainstream U.S. press, it is usually to dismiss it as nonsense, such as an April 20 column by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof who visited his ancestral home, the western Ukrainian town of Karapchiv, and portrayed its residents as the true voice of the Ukrainian people. > > ?To understand why Ukrainians are risking war with Russia to try to pluck themselves from Moscow?s grip, I came to this village where my father grew up,? he wrote. ?Even here in the village, Ukrainians watch Russian television and loathe the propaganda portraying them as neo-Nazi thugs rampaging against Russian speakers. > > ??If you listen to them, we all carry assault rifles; we?re all beating people,? Ilya Moskal, a history teacher, said contemptuously.? > > In an April 17 column from Kiev, Kristof wrote that what the Ukrainians want is weapons from the West so they can to go ?bear-hunting,? i.e. killing Russians. ?People seem to feel a bit disappointed that the United States and Europe haven?t been more supportive, and they are humiliated that their own acting government hasn?t done more to confront Russian-backed militants. So, especially after a few drinks, people are ready to take down the Russian Army themselves.? > > Kristof also repeated the U.S. ?conventional wisdom? that the resistance to the coup regime among eastern Ukrainians was entirely the work of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who, Kristof wrote, ?warns that Ukraine is on the brink of civil war. But the chaos in eastern cities is his own creation, in part by sending provocateurs across the border.? > > However, when the New York Times finally sent two reporters to spend time with rebels from the east, they encountered an indigenous movement motivated by hostility to the Kiev regime and showing no signs of direction from Moscow. [See Consortiumnews.com?s ?Another NYT ?Sort of? Retraction on Ukraine.?] > > Beyond the journalistic risk of jumping to conclusions, Kristof, who fancies himself a great humanitarian, also should recognize that the clever depiction of human beings as animals, whether as ?bears? or ?Colorado beetles,? can have horrendous human consequences as is now apparent in Odessa. > > Reagan?s Nazis > > But the problem with some western Ukrainians expressing their inconvenient love for Nazis has not been limited to the current crisis. It bedeviled Ronald Reagan?s administration when it began heating up the Cold War in the 1980s. > > As part of that strategy, Reagan?s United States Information Agency, under his close friend Charles Wick, hired a cast of right-wing Ukrainian exiles who began showing up on U.S.-funded Radio Liberty praising the Galician SS. > > These commentaries included positive depictions of Ukrainian nationalists who had sided with the Nazis in World War II as the SS waged its ?final solution? against European Jews. The propaganda broadcasts provoked outrage from Jewish organizations, such as B?nai B?rith, and individuals including conservative academic Richard Pipes. > > According to an internal memo dated May 4, 1984, and written by James Critchlow, a research officer at the Board of International Broadcasting, which managed Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europe, one RL broadcast in particular was viewed as ?defending Ukrainians who fought in the ranks of the SS.? > > Critchlow wrote, ?An RL Ukrainian broadcast of Feb. 12, 1984 contains references to the Nazi-oriented Ukrainian-manned SS ?Galicia? Division of World War II which may have damaged RL?s reputation with Soviet listeners. The memoirs of a German diplomat are quoted in a way that seems to constitute endorsement by RL of praise for Ukrainian volunteers in the SS division, which during its existence fought side by side with the Germans against the Red Army.? > > Harvard Professor Pipes, who was an adviser to the Reagan administration, also inveighed against the Radio Liberty broadcasts, writing on Dec. 3, 1984 ?the Russian and Ukrainian services of RL have been transmitting this year blatantly anti-Semitic material to the Soviet Union which may cause the whole enterprise irreparable harm.? > > Though the Reagan administration publicly defended Radio Liberty against some of the public criticism, privately some senior officials agreed with the critics, according to documents in the archives of the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California. For instance, in a Jan. 4, 1985, memo, Walter Raymond Jr., a top official on the National Security Council, told his boss, National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane, that ?I would believe much of what Dick [Pipes] says is right.? > > What the Reagan administration apparently didn?t understand three decades ago and what the U.S. State Department still has not seemed to learn today is that there is a danger in stirring up the old animosities that divide Ukraine, east and west. > > Though clearly a minority, Ukraine?s neo-Nazis remain a potent force that is well-organized, well-motivated and prone to extreme violence, whether throwing firebombs at police in the Maidan or at ethnic Russians trapped in a building in Odessa. > > As vengeance now seeks vengeance across Ukraine, this Nazi imperative will be difficult to hold down, much as Dr. Strangelove struggled to stop his arm from making a ?Heil Hitler? salute. > > Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his new book, America?s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). For a limited time, you also can order Robert Parry?s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America?s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook via Peace > Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2019 6:30 PM > To: baldwinricky at yahoo.com > Cc: peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss; Peace > Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate > > That the 2014 coup against an elected president in Ukraine was engineered by the sitting US administration (notably in the person of Victoria Nuland) is hardly in doubt. (Even Wikipedia admits it: .) > > The result was the first government in Europe containing explict nazis since 1945 - another accomplishment of the president who said, ?Turns out I'm really good at killing people. Didn't know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine? (WaPo). The government that Obama's administration installed killed thousands in the Ukrainian region of Donbass (Donetsk and Luhansk) who wouldn?t accept the coup government. > > But as my quondam colleague Ron Szoke said about the contemporary MSM accounts of those casualties of Obama?s policy, ?Donetsk? Don?t tell!? > > It?s not surprising that people as well informed as you don?t know about Obama?s accomplishments. That?s what Giambrone is talking about - more corpses piled around the White House. > > See our friend Francis Boyle?s account: . > > ?CGE > > > > On Nov 24, 2019, at 1:49 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote: > > > > I've read suggestions that the Obama Administration did this, which I don't necessarily doubt any more than anything else that I don't know for sure. I certainly wouldn't put it past them. But most sources I'm able to scrounge seem to be adamant that this version - that the Obama Admin trained and funded it all - is either obviously true or clearly false. > > > > If I've missed something on this list that's more probative, I apologize, but to be blunt what evidence is there? (I'm aware of the circumstantial stuff, the hints, the signals, Biden's pressure in the former president of Ukraine to step down, but nothing definitive about this stringer claim about funding/training.) I tend to accept it to some degree, but I'd sure like more. > > > > Thanks, > > Ricky > > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android > > > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 4:03 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > > wrote: > > Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think > > by Joe Giambrone / November 22nd, 2019 > > > > Did you know that Donald Trump had the State Department, USAID, NED, and the CIA fund and train Neo-Nazi, fascist militias to overthrow the government of Ukraine? These riot mobs, primarily Svoboda and Right Sector, stormed the capital, firebombed and shot the police, and destroyed democracy inside Ukraine. When the legitimately elected president was forced out by the rioters, the population which had supported him in the east seceded from the country, tearing the entire nation into pieces and sparking a civil war. The Ukraine civil war has cost the lives of over 13,000 Ukrainians. There is so much blood on Donald Trump?s hands. > > > > Oh, wait a minute! That was Barack Obama. Change that paragraph, please. > > > > Since 2014, it?s been glaringly obvious to astute (and honest) observers that the Administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden supported the most vicious street mobs in Europe, people who considered themselves proud fascists. Western media routinely censored this part of the story. Obama?s Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, made deals with their leaders and was caught on an open phone line handpicking the next unelected leader of Ukraine, someone they could sell to the US public: ?Yats is the guy.? > > > > Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed outrage on Bill O?Reilly?s TV show that the Obama Administration had aided this bloody, illegitimate coup. The head of the CIA-linked STRATFOR called Ukraine ?the most blatant coup in history.? > > > > America?s proxy terrorists burned Kiev, seized power violently, and through the power of the purse strings, Obama?s Administration installed friendly-faced fascists, who immediately set about attacking their countrymen in the east, with a policy of mass murder and indiscriminate bombings. Eastern provinces of Crimea and Donetsk, which notably had supported the ousted president, held referenda. The people there voted overwhelmingly to secede from the illegitimate, unelected, foreign-sponsored coup regime in Kiev. > > > > The above is most certainly not the reason cited this week for Impeachment hearings. > > > > Aiding and abetting fascist militias to violently siege a foreign capital is not considered a crime in Washington DC, at all. Conversely, it is business as usual, as Bolivians and Venezuelans can attest to. > > > > Woody Allen directed a film entitled ?Crimes and Misdemeanors.? That pretty much sums up the DC circus unfolding in Congress. Everything above is completely true, and yet Barack Obama is heralded as someone in the neighborhood of saints and superheroes. To the belligerent American empire, Obama was a star quarterback. Let?s not even delve into Barack?s support for Al Qaeda in Syria, and another half-million dead there, or we?ll be here all day. > > > > Donald Trump made a phone call. In his phone call, he is said to have bullied the President of Ukraine a little. He may have even delayed some weapons transfers to that country, which was engaged in a proxy war with nuclear-armed Russia and its separatist allies in the east of Ukraine. > > > > That?s a crime? A real crime? In light of over thirteen thousand slaughtered and an illegal coup in broad daylight? Trump?s telephone call is the real crime? > > > > Other Presidents haven?t bullied other client-state puppet leaders, ever? > > > > And why exactly is the President of the United States of America required to send lethal weapons to foreign fascists at all? Has anyone located that section of the Constitution? > > > > This farce is so laughable on its face and so irrelevant to the American people?s interests, that it?s difficult to overstate the insanity?and outrageous hypocrisy?of the Democrats? contrived ?Ukrainegate? case. This impeachment charge has nothing whatsoever to do with right and wrong. > > > > In 2014, Barack Obama?s White House, ?refused to include weapons in an aid package? for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.? Obama didn?t send any weapons at all, which would have provoked Russia to an even greater degree, after overthrowing their legitimately elected next-door ally and tearing Ukraine apart. It was obvious that Russia wasn?t ?invading? Ukraine, as propaganda memes claimed, but simply responding to these international crimes and to the dangerous destabilization on its border. The US had already done quite enough damage, and they didn?t need to escalate a proxy war against Russia toward nuclear Armageddon. > > > > Which brings us now to Donald Trump, who became interested in Joe Biden?s obvious corruption inside Ukraine, installing his own son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma. Hunter Biden knew absolutely nothing about Ukraine or the natural gas industry. The nepotism was glaring. This was clear graft, payback, kickback, corruption, parasites descending after the violent seizure of the state. Biden the elder was in charge of US Ukraine policy, and specifically the big money spigot, after the illegal, US-supported coup there. > > > > Then?as Joe will be Joe?Biden bragged publicly about getting Ukraine?s top prosecutor fired to the strains of Washington insider laughter. The Ukrainian prosecutor had been investigating that same company which Biden had arranged his son Hunter onto the board of. Biden?s conflict of interest was so obvious that Trump certainly believed he was onto something. Joe Biden, and media sympathetic to his claims, has predictably tried to cloud the issue, but the corruption is too obvious not to notice. This should, and may, have ended Joe Biden?s 2020 presidential bid. > > > > What happened in Ukraine was old-timey Smash & Grab, a reckless attack right on Russia?s western border. Joe Biden arrived to grab as much loot from Ukraine?s gas sector as he possibly could through a cut-out, his son. Biden used his leverage over Ukraine?s international ?loan guarantees? (which is money the coup leaders receive but don?t have to pay back) to finance their new illegitimate junta. > > > > Biden?s own quid pro quo, in his own words: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.? This is exactly the type of crime they now accuse Trump of perpetrating with his telephone. The hypocrisy is comical. > > > > The Obama Administration?s corruption, along with a bloody war and thirteen-thousand corpses, is what a real crime looks like. Hold onto that picture. > > > > Democrats were allegedly the good guys vis a vis Ukraine? > > > > Weren?t these international war crimes breaching the UN Charter, which demands exclusively peaceful actions between states, Article II? > > > > "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered." > > ? United Nations Charter, a ratified Treaty, and the ?Supreme Law of the Land? > > > > Launching a proxy war on nuclear-armed Russia was a sane foreign policy? Sending even more arms to escalate that conflict was allegedly such a glorious idea that any delay in weapons shipments becomes an impeachable offense? > > > > This unserious charge leveled against Donald Trump distracts from all of his obvious corruption. Trump?s Emoluments violations have been impeachable for years, but the Democrats weren?t interested. Do Democrats long to cash in on the Office of the Presidency next time? > > > > Multiple deaths of refugee children in US federal custody at the southern border could be considered murders linked directly to official policies of harsh treatment and deliberate neglect. Are Democrats afraid of exposing Obama?s own caging of immigrant children? > > > > This current Ukrainegate impeachment charade appears to be motivated only by blind partisanship and the desire to insulate corrupt insiders like Joe Biden from any scrutiny of their actions. The farce has gone so over-the-top that even as Democratic partisan media heralded the testimony of Trump?s Ukraine Ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, Donald Trump?s allies have already used portions of her testimony as a video advertisement for his reelection! > > > > Yovanovitch blatantly lied in her introductory remarks and was caught admitting that Obama?s own State Department had groomed her to answer uncomfortable questions about Joe Biden?s son, Hunter, and his appointment inside Ukraine?s gas sector. This gift to Trump now undermines the entire endeavor. > > > > Are Democrats trying to hurt or to help Trump?s reelection? > > > > [Joe Giambrone has written for WhoWhatWhy, Foreign Policy Journal, International Policy Digest, Counterpunch, GlobalResearch, OpEdNews, and his fabulous new novel is DEMIGODS. > > This article was posted on Friday, November 22nd, 2019 at 11:13pm and is filed under Barack Obama, Democrats, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Russia, Ukraine.] > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 carl at newsfromneptune.com Mon Nov 25 16:36:02 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 10:36:02 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Ukrainegate In-Reply-To: <919608653.3282664.1574696576559@mail.yahoo.com> References: <35EC190F-C698-4B8F-8411-D45A4689DCBC@newsfromneptune.com> <1636061961.3098616.1574624990396@mail.yahoo.com> <920D48DD-41B5-4D3E-8695-6EB896123727@newsfromneptune.com> <002801d5a397$415b4f70$c411ee50$@comcast.net> <919608653.3282664.1574696576559@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/06/03/how-why-us-government-perpetrated-2014-coup-ukraine/ > On Nov 25, 2019, at 9:42 AM, Ricky Baldwin wrote: > > Thanks, really. That was quick. I don't mean to tie up everybody answering my quibbles, especially because, again, I wouldn't put it past them. But I was aware that the Administration jumped in there at the end - some might say eagerly - to "broker" or "midwife" the "transition" ... I had read the Global Research piece, and Boyle's suggestion that US backing "may" already be underway in the midst of the fray. I hadn't seen Robert Parry's article, or read Wikipedia's account (I had avoided that one, but I appreciate your suggestion to read it, since it was more informative than I had anticipated). > > These still don't really argue that the US was behind it from the start, do they? I mean, aside from the hints and signals US officials often send (and sometimes later turn away from, to be honest, leaving people who seem to be following such 'orders' high and dry), how do we know they were actually funding/training the goons? > > To be clear, I'm satisfied that the Obama team was happy about the coup, that it was a coup, and that it was led or co-led by fascists, at least in the traditional fascist coalitionist style - and as Wikipedia et al have made clear that USG officials were there to "help" seal the deal. Yes. Maybe I should have said all that from the start. > > What I thought you might have already dug up in your research was evidence of the "funding and training" of the coup by the US under Obama. If you do have something like that, there's obviously no urgency now, but it would seem a good time to look back at it in light of recent attention in the area and Biden's unfortunate candidacy. > > Thanks for your time, either way. I know I'm mostly an absent presence these days, but I do appreciate the work you guys are carrying on, and I read up when I can. (And I appreciate being called "well informed," although I feel less so these days.) > > > > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 7:50 AM, David Johnson > wrote: > Consortiumnews > Volume 25, Number 328?Monday, November 25, 2019 > > Human Rights, Lost History, Media, Obama Administration, Right Wing > Ukraine?s ?Dr. Strangelove? Reality > May 5, 2014 > > Exclusive: The horrendous fire in Odessa, killing dozens of ethnic Russians protesting against the U.S.-backed coup regime in Kiev, has lurched the country closer to full-scale civil war and disrupted the American media?s efforts to deny the existence of pro-regime neo-Nazis, Robert Parry reports. > > By Robert Parry > > As much as the coup regime in Ukraine and its supporters want to project an image of Western moderation, there is a ?Dr. Strangelove? element that can?t stop the Nazism from popping up from time to time, like when the Peter Sellers character in the classic movie can?t keep his right arm from making a ?Heil Hitler? salute. > > This brutal Nazism surfaced again on Friday when right-wing toughs in Odessa attacked an encampment of ethnic Russian protesters driving them into a trade union building which was then set on fire with Molotov cocktails. As the building was engulfed in flames, some people who tried to flee were chased and beaten, while those trapped inside heard the Ukrainian nationalists liken them to black-and-red-striped potato beetles called Colorados, because those colors are used in pro-Russian ribbons. > Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove as he struggles to control his right arm from making a Nazi salute. > > Peter Sellers playing Dr. Strangelove as he struggles to control his right arm from making a Nazi salute. > > ?Burn, Colorado, burn? went the chant. > > As the fire worsened, those dying inside were serenaded with the taunting singing of the Ukrainian national anthem. The building also was spray-painted with Swastika-like symbols and graffiti reading ?Galician SS,? a reference to the Ukrainian nationalist army that fought alongside the German Nazi SS in World War II, killing Russians on the eastern front. > > The death by fire of dozens of people in Odessa recalled a World War II incident in 1944 when elements of a Galician SS police regiment took part in the massacre of the Polish village of Huta Pieniacka, which had been a refuge for Jews and was protected by Russian and Polish partisans. Attacked by a mixed force of Ukrainian police and German soldiers on Feb. 28, hundreds of townspeople were massacred, including many locked in barns that were set ablaze. > > The legacy of World War II especially the bitter fight between Ukrainian nationalists from the west and ethnic Russians from the east seven decades ago is never far from the surface in Ukrainian politics. One of the heroes celebrated during the Maidan protests in Kiev was Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, whose name was honored in many banners including one on a podium where Sen. John McCain voiced support for the uprising to oust elected President Viktor Yanukovych, whose political base was in eastern Ukraine. > > During World War II, Bandera headed the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists-B, a radical paramilitary movement that sought to transform Ukraine into a racially pure state. OUN-B took part in the expulsion and extermination of thousands of Jews and Poles. > > Though most of the Maidan protesters in 2013-14 appeared motivated by anger over political corruption and by a desire to join the European Union, neo-Nazis made up a significant number. These storm troopers from the Right Sektor and Svoboda party decked out some of the occupied government buildings with Nazi insignias and even a Confederate battle flag, the universal symbol of white supremacy. > > Then, as the protests turned violent from Feb. 20-22, the neo-Nazis surged to the forefront. Their well-trained militias, organized in 100-man brigades called ?the hundreds,? led the final assaults against police and forced Yanukovych and many of his officials to flee for their lives. > > In the days after the coup, as the neo-Nazi militias effectively controlled the government, European and U.S. diplomats scrambled to help the shaken parliament put together the semblance of a respectable regime, although four ministries, including national security, were awarded to the right-wing extremists in recognition of their crucial role in ousting Yanukovych. > > Seeing No Nazis > > Since February, virtually the entire U.S. news media has cooperated in the effort to play down the neo-Nazi role, dismissing any mention of this inconvenient truth as ?Russian propaganda.? Stories in the U.S. media delicately step around the neo-Nazi reality by keeping out relevant context, such as the background of national security chief Andriy Parubiy, who founded the Social-National Party of Ukraine in 1991, blending radical Ukrainian nationalism with neo-Nazi symbols. Parubiy was commandant of the Maidan?s ?self-defense forces.? > > When the neo-Nazi factor is mentioned in the mainstream U.S. press, it is usually to dismiss it as nonsense, such as an April 20 column by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof who visited his ancestral home, the western Ukrainian town of Karapchiv, and portrayed its residents as the true voice of the Ukrainian people. > > ?To understand why Ukrainians are risking war with Russia to try to pluck themselves from Moscow?s grip, I came to this village where my father grew up,? he wrote. ?Even here in the village, Ukrainians watch Russian television and loathe the propaganda portraying them as neo-Nazi thugs rampaging against Russian speakers. > > ??If you listen to them, we all carry assault rifles; we?re all beating people,? Ilya Moskal, a history teacher, said contemptuously.? > > In an April 17 column from Kiev, Kristof wrote that what the Ukrainians want is weapons from the West so they can to go ?bear-hunting,? i.e. killing Russians. ?People seem to feel a bit disappointed that the United States and Europe haven?t been more supportive, and they are humiliated that their own acting government hasn?t done more to confront Russian-backed militants. So, especially after a few drinks, people are ready to take down the Russian Army themselves.? > > Kristof also repeated the U.S. ?conventional wisdom? that the resistance to the coup regime among eastern Ukrainians was entirely the work of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who, Kristof wrote, ?warns that Ukraine is on the brink of civil war. But the chaos in eastern cities is his own creation, in part by sending provocateurs across the border.? > > However, when the New York Times finally sent two reporters to spend time with rebels from the east, they encountered an indigenous movement motivated by hostility to the Kiev regime and showing no signs of direction from Moscow. [See Consortiumnews.com?s ?Another NYT ?Sort of? Retraction on Ukraine.?] > > Beyond the journalistic risk of jumping to conclusions, Kristof, who fancies himself a great humanitarian, also should recognize that the clever depiction of human beings as animals, whether as ?bears? or ?Colorado beetles,? can have horrendous human consequences as is now apparent in Odessa. > > Reagan?s Nazis > > But the problem with some western Ukrainians expressing their inconvenient love for Nazis has not been limited to the current crisis. It bedeviled Ronald Reagan?s administration when it began heating up the Cold War in the 1980s. > > As part of that strategy, Reagan?s United States Information Agency, under his close friend Charles Wick, hired a cast of right-wing Ukrainian exiles who began showing up on U.S.-funded Radio Liberty praising the Galician SS. > > These commentaries included positive depictions of Ukrainian nationalists who had sided with the Nazis in World War II as the SS waged its ?final solution? against European Jews. The propaganda broadcasts provoked outrage from Jewish organizations, such as B?nai B?rith, and individuals including conservative academic Richard Pipes. > > According to an internal memo dated May 4, 1984, and written by James Critchlow, a research officer at the Board of International Broadcasting, which managed Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europe, one RL broadcast in particular was viewed as ?defending Ukrainians who fought in the ranks of the SS.? > > Critchlow wrote, ?An RL Ukrainian broadcast of Feb. 12, 1984 contains references to the Nazi-oriented Ukrainian-manned SS ?Galicia? Division of World War II which may have damaged RL?s reputation with Soviet listeners. The memoirs of a German diplomat are quoted in a way that seems to constitute endorsement by RL of praise for Ukrainian volunteers in the SS division, which during its existence fought side by side with the Germans against the Red Army.? > > Harvard Professor Pipes, who was an adviser to the Reagan administration, also inveighed against the Radio Liberty broadcasts, writing on Dec. 3, 1984 ?the Russian and Ukrainian services of RL have been transmitting this year blatantly anti-Semitic material to the Soviet Union which may cause the whole enterprise irreparable harm.? > > Though the Reagan administration publicly defended Radio Liberty against some of the public criticism, privately some senior officials agreed with the critics, according to documents in the archives of the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California. For instance, in a Jan. 4, 1985, memo, Walter Raymond Jr., a top official on the National Security Council, told his boss, National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane, that ?I would believe much of what Dick [Pipes] says is right.? > > What the Reagan administration apparently didn?t understand three decades ago and what the U.S. State Department still has not seemed to learn today is that there is a danger in stirring up the old animosities that divide Ukraine, east and west. > > Though clearly a minority, Ukraine?s neo-Nazis remain a potent force that is well-organized, well-motivated and prone to extreme violence, whether throwing firebombs at police in the Maidan or at ethnic Russians trapped in a building in Odessa. > > As vengeance now seeks vengeance across Ukraine, this Nazi imperative will be difficult to hold down, much as Dr. Strangelove struggled to stop his arm from making a ?Heil Hitler? salute. > > Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his new book, America?s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). For a limited time, you also can order Robert Parry?s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America?s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook via Peace > Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2019 6:30 PM > To: baldwinricky at yahoo.com > Cc: peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss; Peace > Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Ukrainegate > > That the 2014 coup against an elected president in Ukraine was engineered by the sitting US administration (notably in the person of Victoria Nuland) is hardly in doubt. (Even Wikipedia admits it: .) > > The result was the first government in Europe containing explict nazis since 1945 - another accomplishment of the president who said, ?Turns out I'm really good at killing people. Didn't know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine? (WaPo). The government that Obama's administration installed killed thousands in the Ukrainian region of Donbass (Donetsk and Luhansk) who wouldn?t accept the coup government. > > But as my quondam colleague Ron Szoke said about the contemporary MSM accounts of those casualties of Obama?s policy, ?Donetsk? Don?t tell!? > > It?s not surprising that people as well informed as you don?t know about Obama?s accomplishments. That?s what Giambrone is talking about - more corpses piled around the White House. > > See our friend Francis Boyle?s account: . > > ?CGE > > > > On Nov 24, 2019, at 1:49 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote: > > > > I've read suggestions that the Obama Administration did this, which I don't necessarily doubt any more than anything else that I don't know for sure. I certainly wouldn't put it past them. But most sources I'm able to scrounge seem to be adamant that this version - that the Obama Admin trained and funded it all - is either obviously true or clearly false. > > > > If I've missed something on this list that's more probative, I apologize, but to be blunt what evidence is there? (I'm aware of the circumstantial stuff, the hints, the signals, Biden's pressure in the former president of Ukraine to step down, but nothing definitive about this stringer claim about funding/training.) I tend to accept it to some degree, but I'd sure like more. > > > > Thanks, > > Ricky > > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android > > > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 4:03 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > > wrote: > > Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think > > by Joe Giambrone / November 22nd, 2019 > > > > Did you know that Donald Trump had the State Department, USAID, NED, and the CIA fund and train Neo-Nazi, fascist militias to overthrow the government of Ukraine? These riot mobs, primarily Svoboda and Right Sector, stormed the capital, firebombed and shot the police, and destroyed democracy inside Ukraine. When the legitimately elected president was forced out by the rioters, the population which had supported him in the east seceded from the country, tearing the entire nation into pieces and sparking a civil war. The Ukraine civil war has cost the lives of over 13,000 Ukrainians. There is so much blood on Donald Trump?s hands. > > > > Oh, wait a minute! That was Barack Obama. Change that paragraph, please. > > > > Since 2014, it?s been glaringly obvious to astute (and honest) observers that the Administration of Barack Obama and Joe Biden supported the most vicious street mobs in Europe, people who considered themselves proud fascists. Western media routinely censored this part of the story. Obama?s Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, made deals with their leaders and was caught on an open phone line handpicking the next unelected leader of Ukraine, someone they could sell to the US public: ?Yats is the guy.? > > > > Representative Dennis Kucinich expressed outrage on Bill O?Reilly?s TV show that the Obama Administration had aided this bloody, illegitimate coup. The head of the CIA-linked STRATFOR called Ukraine ?the most blatant coup in history.? > > > > America?s proxy terrorists burned Kiev, seized power violently, and through the power of the purse strings, Obama?s Administration installed friendly-faced fascists, who immediately set about attacking their countrymen in the east, with a policy of mass murder and indiscriminate bombings. Eastern provinces of Crimea and Donetsk, which notably had supported the ousted president, held referenda. The people there voted overwhelmingly to secede from the illegitimate, unelected, foreign-sponsored coup regime in Kiev. > > > > The above is most certainly not the reason cited this week for Impeachment hearings. > > > > Aiding and abetting fascist militias to violently siege a foreign capital is not considered a crime in Washington DC, at all. Conversely, it is business as usual, as Bolivians and Venezuelans can attest to. > > > > Woody Allen directed a film entitled ?Crimes and Misdemeanors.? That pretty much sums up the DC circus unfolding in Congress. Everything above is completely true, and yet Barack Obama is heralded as someone in the neighborhood of saints and superheroes. To the belligerent American empire, Obama was a star quarterback. Let?s not even delve into Barack?s support for Al Qaeda in Syria, and another half-million dead there, or we?ll be here all day. > > > > Donald Trump made a phone call. In his phone call, he is said to have bullied the President of Ukraine a little. He may have even delayed some weapons transfers to that country, which was engaged in a proxy war with nuclear-armed Russia and its separatist allies in the east of Ukraine. > > > > That?s a crime? A real crime? In light of over thirteen thousand slaughtered and an illegal coup in broad daylight? Trump?s telephone call is the real crime? > > > > Other Presidents haven?t bullied other client-state puppet leaders, ever? > > > > And why exactly is the President of the United States of America required to send lethal weapons to foreign fascists at all? Has anyone located that section of the Constitution? > > > > This farce is so laughable on its face and so irrelevant to the American people?s interests, that it?s difficult to overstate the insanity?and outrageous hypocrisy?of the Democrats? contrived ?Ukrainegate? case. This impeachment charge has nothing whatsoever to do with right and wrong. > > > > In 2014, Barack Obama?s White House, ?refused to include weapons in an aid package? for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.? Obama didn?t send any weapons at all, which would have provoked Russia to an even greater degree, after overthrowing their legitimately elected next-door ally and tearing Ukraine apart. It was obvious that Russia wasn?t ?invading? Ukraine, as propaganda memes claimed, but simply responding to these international crimes and to the dangerous destabilization on its border. The US had already done quite enough damage, and they didn?t need to escalate a proxy war against Russia toward nuclear Armageddon. > > > > Which brings us now to Donald Trump, who became interested in Joe Biden?s obvious corruption inside Ukraine, installing his own son on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma. Hunter Biden knew absolutely nothing about Ukraine or the natural gas industry. The nepotism was glaring. This was clear graft, payback, kickback, corruption, parasites descending after the violent seizure of the state. Biden the elder was in charge of US Ukraine policy, and specifically the big money spigot, after the illegal, US-supported coup there. > > > > Then?as Joe will be Joe?Biden bragged publicly about getting Ukraine?s top prosecutor fired to the strains of Washington insider laughter. The Ukrainian prosecutor had been investigating that same company which Biden had arranged his son Hunter onto the board of. Biden?s conflict of interest was so obvious that Trump certainly believed he was onto something. Joe Biden, and media sympathetic to his claims, has predictably tried to cloud the issue, but the corruption is too obvious not to notice. This should, and may, have ended Joe Biden?s 2020 presidential bid. > > > > What happened in Ukraine was old-timey Smash & Grab, a reckless attack right on Russia?s western border. Joe Biden arrived to grab as much loot from Ukraine?s gas sector as he possibly could through a cut-out, his son. Biden used his leverage over Ukraine?s international ?loan guarantees? (which is money the coup leaders receive but don?t have to pay back) to finance their new illegitimate junta. > > > > Biden?s own quid pro quo, in his own words: ?I?m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you?re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.? This is exactly the type of crime they now accuse Trump of perpetrating with his telephone. The hypocrisy is comical. > > > > The Obama Administration?s corruption, along with a bloody war and thirteen-thousand corpses, is what a real crime looks like. Hold onto that picture. > > > > Democrats were allegedly the good guys vis a vis Ukraine? > > > > Weren?t these international war crimes breaching the UN Charter, which demands exclusively peaceful actions between states, Article II? > > > > "All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered." > > ? United Nations Charter, a ratified Treaty, and the ?Supreme Law of the Land? > > > > Launching a proxy war on nuclear-armed Russia was a sane foreign policy? Sending even more arms to escalate that conflict was allegedly such a glorious idea that any delay in weapons shipments becomes an impeachable offense? > > > > This unserious charge leveled against Donald Trump distracts from all of his obvious corruption. Trump?s Emoluments violations have been impeachable for years, but the Democrats weren?t interested. Do Democrats long to cash in on the Office of the Presidency next time? > > > > Multiple deaths of refugee children in US federal custody at the southern border could be considered murders linked directly to official policies of harsh treatment and deliberate neglect. Are Democrats afraid of exposing Obama?s own caging of immigrant children? > > > > This current Ukrainegate impeachment charade appears to be motivated only by blind partisanship and the desire to insulate corrupt insiders like Joe Biden from any scrutiny of their actions. The farce has gone so over-the-top that even as Democratic partisan media heralded the testimony of Trump?s Ukraine Ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, Donald Trump?s allies have already used portions of her testimony as a video advertisement for his reelection! > > > > Yovanovitch blatantly lied in her introductory remarks and was caught admitting that Obama?s own State Department had groomed her to answer uncomfortable questions about Joe Biden?s son, Hunter, and his appointment inside Ukraine?s gas sector. This gift to Trump now undermines the entire endeavor. > > > > Are Democrats trying to hurt or to help Trump?s reelection? > > > > [Joe Giambrone has written for WhoWhatWhy, Foreign Policy Journal, International Policy Digest, Counterpunch, GlobalResearch, OpEdNews, and his fabulous new novel is DEMIGODS. > > This article was posted on Friday, November 22nd, 2019 at 11:13pm and is filed under Barack Obama, Democrats, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Russia, Ukraine.] > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Mon Nov 25 16:43:19 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 10:43:19 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Mess that Nuland Made Message-ID: <007001d5a3af$71eab870$55c02950$@comcast.net> Consortiumnews The Mess that Nuland Made July 13, 2015 Exclusive: Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland engineered Ukraine's "regime change" in early 2014 without weighing the likely chaos and consequences. Now, as neo-Nazis turn their guns on the government, it's hard to see how anyone can clean up the mess that Nuland made, writes Robert Parry. By Robert Parry As the Ukrainian army squares off against ultra-right and neo-Nazi militias in the west and violence against ethnic Russians continues in the east, the obvious folly of the Obama administration's Ukraine policy has come into focus even for many who tried to ignore the facts, or what you might call "the mess that Victoria Nuland made." Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs "Toria" Nuland was the "mastermind" behind the Feb. 22, 2014 "regime change" in Ukraine, plotting the overthrow of the democratically elected government of President Viktor Yanukovych while convincing the ever-gullible U.S. mainstream media that the coup wasn't really a coup but a victory for "democracy." Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, who pushed for the Ukraine coup and helped pick the post-coup leaders. Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, who pushed for the Ukraine coup and helped pick the post-coup leaders. To sell this latest neocon-driven "regime change" to the American people, the ugliness of the coup-makers had to be systematically airbrushed, particularly the key role of neo-Nazis and other ultra-nationalists from the Right Sektor. For the U.S.-organized propaganda campaign to work, the coup-makers had to wear white hats, not brown shirts. So, for nearly a year and a half, the West's mainstream media, especially The New York Times and The Washington Post, twisted their reporting into all kinds of contortions to avoid telling their readers that the new regime in Kiev was permeated by and dependent on neo-Nazi fighters and Ukrainian ultra-nationalists who wanted a pure-blood Ukraine, without ethnic Russians. Any mention of that sordid reality was deemed "Russian propaganda" and anyone who spoke this inconvenient truth was a "stooge of Moscow." It wasn't until July 7 that the Times admitted the importance of the neo-Nazis and other ultra-nationalists in waging war against ethnic Russian rebels in the east. The Times also reported that these far-right forces had been joined by Islamic militants. Some of those jihadists have been called "brothers" of the hyper-brutal Islamic State. Though the Times sought to spin this remarkable military alliance neo-Nazi militias and Islamic jihadists as a positive, the reality had to be jarring for readers who had bought into the Western propaganda about noble "pro-democracy" forces resisting evil "Russian aggression." Perhaps the Times sensed that it could no longer keep the lid on the troubling truth in Ukraine. For weeks, the Right Sektor militias and the neo-Nazi Azov battalion have been warning the civilian government in Kiev that they might turn on it and create a new order more to their liking. Clashes in the West Then, on Saturday, violent clashes broke out in the western Ukrainian town of Mukachevo, allegedly over the control of cigarette-smuggling routes. Right Sektor paramilitaries sprayed police officers with bullets from a belt-fed machinegun, and police backed by Ukrainian government troops returned fire. Several deaths and multiple injuries were reported. Tensions escalated on Monday with President Petro Poroshenko ordering national security forces to disarm "armed cells" of political movements. Meanwhile, the Right Sektor dispatched reinforcements to the area while other militiamen converged on the capital of Kiev. While President Poroshenko and Right Sektor leader Dmitry Yarosh may succeed in tamping down this latest flare-up of hostilities, they may be only postponing the inevitable: a conflict between the U.S.-backed authorities in Kiev and the neo-Nazis and other right-wing fighters who spearheaded last year's coup and have been at the front lines of the fighting against ethnic Russian rebels in the east. The Ukrainian right-wing extremists feel they have carried the heaviest burden in the war against the ethnic Russians and resent the politicians living in the relative safety and comfort of Kiev. In March, Poroshenko also fired thuggish oligarch Igor Kolomoisky as governor of the southeastern province of Dnipropetrovsk Oblast. Kolomoisky had been the primary benefactor of the Right Sektor militias. So, as has become apparent across Europe and even in Washington, the Ukraine crisis is spinning out of control, making the State Department's preferred narrative of the conflict that it's all Russian President Vladimir Putin's fault harder and harder to sell. How Ukraine is supposed to pull itself out of what looks like a death spiral a possible two-front war in the east and the west along with a crashing economy is hard to comprehend. The European Union, confronting budgetary crises over Greece and other EU members, has little money or patience for Ukraine, its neo-Nazis and its socio-political chaos. America's neocons at The Washington Post and elsewhere still rant about the need for the Obama administration to sink more billions upon billions of dollars into post-coup Ukraine because it "shares our values." But that argument, too, is collapsing as Americans see the heart of a racist nationalism beating inside Ukraine's new order. Another Neocon 'Regime Change' Much of what has happened, of course, was predictable and indeed was predicted, but neocon Nuland couldn't resist the temptation to pull off a "regime change" that she could call her own. Her husband (and arch-neocon) Robert Kagan had co-founded the Project for the New American Century in 1998 around a demand for "regime change" in Iraq, a project that was accomplished in 2003 with President George W. Bush's invasion. As with Nuland in Ukraine, Kagan and his fellow neocons thought they could engineer an easy invasion of Iraq, oust Saddam Hussein and install some hand-picked client in Iraq, Ahmed Chalabi was to be "the guy." But they failed to take into account the harsh realities of Iraq, such as the fissures between Sunnis and Shiites, exposed by the U.S.-led invasion and occupation. In Ukraine, Nuland and her neocon and liberal-interventionist friends saw the chance to poke Putin in the eye by encouraging violent protests to overthrow Russia-friendly President Yanukovych and put in place a new regime hostile to Moscow. Carl Gershman, the neocon president of the U.S.-taxpayer-funded National Endowment for Democracy, explained the plan in a Post op-ed on Sept. 26, 2013. Gershman called Ukraine "the biggest prize" and an important interim step toward toppling Putin, who "may find himself on the losing end not just in the near abroad but within Russia itself." For her part, Nuland passed out cookies to anti-Yanukovych demonstrators at the Maidan square, reminded Ukrainian business leaders that the U.S. had invested $5 billion in their "European aspirations," declared "fuck the EU" for its less aggressive approach, and discussed with U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt who the new leaders of Ukraine should be. "Yats is the guy," she said, referring to Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Nuland saw her big chance on Feb. 20, 2014, when a mysterious sniper apparently firing from a building controlled by the Right Sektor shot and killed both police and protesters, escalating the crisis. On Feb. 21, in a desperate bid to avert more violence, Yanukovych agreed to a European-guaranteed plan in which he accepted reduced powers and called for early elections so he could be voted out of office. But that wasn't enough for the anti-Yanukovych forces who led by Right Sektor and neo-Nazi militias overran government buildings on Feb. 22, forcing Yanukovych and many of his officials to flee for their lives. With armed thugs patrolling the corridors of power, the final path to "regime change" was clear. Instead of trying to salvage the Feb. 21 agreement, Nuland and European officials arranged for an unconstitutional procedure to strip Yanukovych of the presidency and declared the new regime "legitimate." Nuland's "guy" Yatsenyuk became prime minister. While Nuland and her neocon cohorts celebrated, their "regime change" prompted an obvious reaction from Putin, who recognized the strategic threat that this hostile new regime posed to the historic Russian naval base at Sevastopol in Crimea. On Feb. 23, he began to take steps to protect those Russian interests. Ethnic Hatreds What the coup also did was revive long pent-up antagonisms between the ethnic Ukrainians in the west, including elements that had supported Adolf Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union during World War Two, and ethnic Russians in the south and east who feared the anti-Russian sentiments emanating from Kiev. First, in Crimea and then in the so-called Donbas region, these ethnic Russians, who had been Yanukovych's political base, resisted what they viewed as the illegitimate overthrow of their elected president. Both areas held referenda seeking separation from Ukraine, a move that Russia accepted in Crimea but resisted with the Donbas. However, when the Kiev regime announced an "anti-terrorism operation" against the Donbas and dispatched neo-Nazi and other extremist militias to be the tip of the spear, Moscow began quietly assisting the embattled ethnic Russian rebels, a move that Nuland, the Obama administration and the mainstream news media called "Russian aggression." Amid the Western hysteria over Russia's supposedly "imperial designs" and the thorough demonizing of Putin, President Barack Obama essentially authorized a new Cold War against Russia, reflected now in new U.S. strategic planning that could cost the U.S. taxpayers trillions of dollars and risk a possible nuclear confrontation. Yet, despite the extraordinary costs and dangers, Nuland failed to appreciate the practical on-the-ground realities, much as her husband and other neocons did in Iraq. While Nuland got her hand-picked client Yatsenyuk installed and he did oversee a U.S.-demanded "neo-liberal" economic plan slashing pensions, heating assistance and other social programs the chaos that her "regime change" unleashed transformed Ukraine into a financial black hole. With few prospects for a clear-cut victory over the ethnic Russian resistance in the east and with the neo-Nazi/Islamist militias increasingly restless over the stalemate the chances to restore any meaningful sense of order in the country appear remote. Unemployment is soaring and the government is essentially bankrupt. The last best hope for some stability may have been the Minsk-2 agreement in February 2015, calling for a federalized system to give the Donbas more autonomy, but Nuland's Prime Minister Yatsenyuk sabotaged the deal in March by inserting a poison pill that essentially demanded that the ethnic Russian rebels first surrender. Now, the Ukraine chaos threatens to spiral even further out of control with the neo-Nazis and other right-wing militias supplied with a bounty of weapons to kill ethnic Russians in the east turning on the political leadership in Kiev. In other words, the neocons have struck again, dreaming up a "regime change" scheme that ignored practical realities, such as ethnic and religious fissures. Then, as the blood flowed and the suffering worsened, the neocons just sought out someone else to blame. Thus, it seems unlikely that Nuland, regarded by some in Washington as the new "star" in U.S. foreign policy, will be fired for her dangerous incompetence, just as most neocons who authored the Iraq disaster remain "respected" experts employed by major think tanks, given prized space on op-ed pages, and consulted at the highest levels of the U.S. government. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 15850 bytes Desc: not available URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Mon Nov 25 18:45:42 2019 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 18:45:42 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Cult of Trump ? Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Trump cult.rtfd.zip Type: application/zip Size: 3096 bytes Desc: Trump cult.rtfd.zip URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Mon Nov 25 18:45:42 2019 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 18:45:42 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Cult of Trump ? Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Trump cult.rtfd.zip Type: application/zip Size: 3096 bytes Desc: Trump cult.rtfd.zip URL: From carl at newsfromneptune.com Mon Nov 25 21:50:56 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 15:50:56 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Robert Reich to MoveOn Message-ID: Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? is an absolutely mad appeal by a self-proclaimed 'liberal' to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. Why is the political establishment so desperate not just to win the next election but to remove Trump now? I think that the answer is to be found in the US grand strategy , followed by all recent US administrations. That depends on maintaining the US control of the world economy by retarding the economic development of Eurasia. (Not a new idea - see the 'Open Door Policy' of 1899.) Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote clearly of the US government's need to prevent the emergence of "peer competitors," Russia and China. Trump was the first major party candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies of previous administrations, which were designed to do that. In office, Trump has been compelled or cajoled to acquiesce in those policies, but the political establishment can't be assured that will continue, given the rising populist wave that put him in office. The threat has to be suppressed as soon as possible, and a reliable neolib/neocon executive put in place (by a coup, if necessary, as Adm. McRaven recently argued in the NYT). The example of Obama - the first president to be at war throughout two presidential terms, who waged no less than eight wars to constrain Eurasia and protect the economic control of the US 1% and for whom stooges like Reich and McRaven are working, must be followed, insists that establishment. (Reich? McRaving? To avoid being Trumped? Do the gods of history have a sardonic sense of humor?) ?CGE ================ Dear MoveOn member, When I wrote to you last month, it seemed that?at long last, after years of us shouting it from the rooftops?Congress finally saw that Donald Trump was guilty of more than enough high crimes and misdemeanors to impeach, convict, and remove him from office. Finally, Trump looked to be in serious trouble. But I'm worried that, right now, we are falling short in our push to secure Trump's impeachment, conviction, and removal, in spite of blockbuster public testimony at the impeachment hearings and our best current efforts. I still think that we can win, but only if we turn things around?and fast. I'm going to explain why we're falling behind?and what we can do about it?below, and I will also ask you to donate to MoveOn. So if you want to donate before I launch into my explanation, here's the link to chip in $3. OK, so here's the situation: When last I wrote you, several moderate and soon-to-be-retired House Republicans had opened the door to Republicans voting for Trump's impeachment. Unfortunately, nearly a month later and even after a flurry of grassroots activity and truly damning testimony in the House, we are not a whole lot closer to breaking the Republican dam against Trump's impeachment. But I am hopeful: It's clear that Republicans in Congress know that Trump is guilty?and that they also know that they look like fools for protecting him. Every day, they are making a calculation of how far they can take their charade. And it's our job to push so hard that they have no choice but to support impeachment. Now, you may feel incredible frustration with just how immovable Republicans are. I know I do! Sometimes, it feels as through Republicans in Congress won't hold Trump accountable on anything, and we keep losing fights against them. It's true that we haven't won every fight. But we have had an impact?a big impact! We saved the Affordable Care Act by one vote in the Senate, and that happened only because of overwhelming grassroots pressure from us. I believe that without MoveOn, the Affordable Care Act would have been repealed. And we got congressional Republicans to stand up against Trump's heinous family separation policies with near unanimity, at least for a period of time. That only happened because of our grassroots energy and unprecedented protests that were all over the news. Here's my take on taking on Republicans and Trump, C.: We can't just focus on whether a fight is winnable. We can't afford to worry about winnability and back down from tough fights out of fear that we might lose. We have to fight no matter what, because what's at stake goes far beyond party politics. What's at stake is the very future of our democracy. Are we still a nation that respects the rule of law? Or, thanks to Trump and the GOP, are we so far gone that the only thing that matters is blind loyalty? That's why the impeachment fight is critical for our children's future?and for the future of our nation's democracy and the rule of law. Until the final vote is cast in the Senate, we cannot waiver. I believe if we give this fight our all, we can win. But let's say we do fall short, despite our best efforts. If the impeachment vote is bipartisan, rather than just along party lines, that will make a huge difference in the long run. Are you with me, C.? If so, please join me and chip in $3 to support MoveOn's impeachment work today. I want to be clear: It's not that Democrats are losing the public debate. And it's not that the public testimony against Trump and his administration isn't damning. We have known for years that Trump should be impeached. In their impeachment inquiry, Democrats have demonstrated clearly?again and again and again?that Trump committed bribery and extortion. The facts are indisputable. Any reasonable person realizes this. But the truth is not enough. The will to hold Trump accountable, on the Republican side, is not yet there. The political calculus does not yet force Republicans' hands. And the right-wing echo chamber is relentlessly peddling a false narrative to defend Trump. That's what we're up against. And that's why I'm asking: C., will you click this link and pitch in $3 to support MoveOn's all-hands-on-deck campaign to impeach, convict, and remove Donald Trump from office? Activists are working their tails off to push Republicans to find their backbones and take action. But we aren't yet moving the needle enough to build the overwhelming pressure on Republicans that we'll need to get Republican votes in the House and, if we play our cards right, convict Trump in the Senate. I've been following MoveOn's impeachment campaign closely the past few months. And it appears that while MoveOn has raised enough to do the most critical things to keep the campaign moving, their budget is falling short. There's not enough money to keep phones on Capitol Hill ringing off the hook every single day, and to expand billboards into more House and Senate districts, and to run TV ads in critical districts, and to follow every vulnerable lawmaker around the halls of Congress to capture their cowardice on camera, and to buy enough Facebook ads to promote protests across the country the day before the impeachment vote, and to blanket the media with ads to counteract the lies and misinformation coming from Trump's propaganda machine. The bottom line? There's a lot to do right at once right now, and MoveOn doesn't have the resources to do it all. Trump and his enablers don't have to make hard choices, because they're spending tens of millions of dollars given to them by millionaires and billionaires to spread lies and misinformation. And while we don't need to raise and spend as much as Trump's supporters do to win, we do have to raise enough to play ball. MoveOn's being forced to make hard choices right now, but $3, or whatever you can afford, will help them increase their budget and do what's needed to win the fight on impeachment. So how do we turn this around? It starts with our grassroots power. We've got to show how many people are engaged. That means we need to keep calling, and we've got to keep showing up to protest, and we've got to be louder and even more persistent than ever. And it takes money, too. Not a lot per person. But from a lot of people. If everyone receiving this email chipped in just a few bucks, MoveOn would raise more than enough to compete head-to-head with Donald Trump. But not everyone even opened this email. Fewer still have read it this far. And not everyone reading today can afford to pitch in even a little. Which is why, C., if you can afford to, then I hope you'll pitch in $3 to support MoveOn's impeachment work, so that we can go big and leave no stone unturned on impeachment?right now, when it matters most. And I hope that you'll stay in this fight, even though it's hard and upsetting. Remember, things won't be this hard forever. There is a light at the end of the tunnel. And if we fight with all our might, work really, really hard, and give this everything we've got, we can reach that light sooner. Thanks for all you do. ?Robert Reich =========== From carl at newsfromneptune.com Mon Nov 25 21:56:18 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 15:56:18 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Robert_Reich=E2=80=99s_letter_to_?= =?utf-8?b?4oCYTW92ZU9u4oCZIENPUlJFQ1RFRA==?= Message-ID: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? is an absolutely mad appeal by a self-proclaimed 'liberal' to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. Why is the political establishment so desperate not just to win the next election but to remove Trump now? I think that the answer is to be found in the US grand strategy , followed by all recent US administrations. That depends on maintaining the US control of the world economy by retarding the economic development of Eurasia. (Not a new idea - see the 'Open Door Policy' of 1899.) Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote clearly of the US government's need to prevent the emergence of "peer competitors," Russia and China. Trump was the first major party candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies of previous administrations, which were designed to do that. In office, Trump has been compelled or cajoled to acquiesce in those policies, but the political establishment can't be assured that will continue, given the rising populist wave that put him in office. The threat has to be suppressed as soon as possible, and a reliable neolib/neocon executive put in place (by a coup, if necessary, as Adm. McRaven recently argued in the NYT). The example of Obama - the first president to be at war throughout two presidential terms, who waged no less than eight wars to constrain Eurasia and protect the economic control of the US 1% and for whom stooges like Reich and McRaven are working, must be followed, insists that establishment. (Reich? McRaving? To avoid being Trumped? Do the gods of history have a sardonic sense of humor?) From carl at newsfromneptune.com Mon Nov 25 23:42:55 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 17:42:55 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Special Edition: Vote for which turkey President Trump pardons tomorrow! References: <4da4828d48b4efa4fc1138955.ddd4bee9e0.20191125232410.4269bafea7.c3312a51@mail67.sea61.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: <3BE329F8-9ECB-417E-80B9-BC2C268B585E@newsfromneptune.com> Pete Buttigieg > Begin forwarded message: > > The White House ? November 25, 2019 > Vote for which turkey President Trump should pardon tomorrow! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Tue Nov 26 00:23:48 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 18:23:48 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Surprise! MSM Spins OPCW Leak As Russian Disinfo - Caitlin Johnstone Message-ID: <00e601d5a3ef$c5fb0010$51f10030$@comcast.net> http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/12152988a68a6d4dae7506812444c18f?s=50&d=monster id&r=G Surprise! MSM Spins OPCW Leak As Russian Disinfo by Caitlin Johnstone So, you might want to sit down for this, but believe it or not the mainstream media is behaving in a way that seems somewhat untruthful. I know! I know. I'm just as astonished as you are. So you know that Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons scandal we've been talking a lot about lately? The one where evidence keeps piling up that the US, UK and France launched airstrikes against the Syrian government last year in retaliation for a poison gas attack which never took place, and then manipulated an ostensibly independent and international chemical weapons watchdog organization into covering it up? Well, it turns out that bigtime news media outlets haven't been all that interested for some strange and mysterious reason. But just today they broke the silence with a new report that mentioned the scandal, and they've totally spun it in a way that makes the US and its allies look good! Can you believe that? And you'll never guess what excuse they're using to spin it. Never in a million, billion years. Put a pillow down on the floor, because your jaw's about to drop like James Le Mesurier: believe it or not, they're blaming it on Russian disinformation. MSM has been steadfastly ignoring the OPCW scandal, but AFP briefly breaks the silence to inform us that the OPCW leaks are being "highlighted" by "Moscow", and that unnamed "Western diplomats" say "the Russians and Syrians are trying to muddy the waters". https://t.co/CYx6noOqHQ pic.twitter.com/VAVFugRoVc ? Caitlin Johnstone ?(@caitoz) November 25, 2019 AFP, which just as an aside is one of only three gigantic news agencies that are responsible for most of the stories you see in the mass media, has put out an article that has been picked up by multiple mainstream media outlets titled "Showdown looms over Syria chemical weapons probe". The article deliberately frames the issue as one which has been "highlighted" by "Moscow", and publishes a claim sourced to unnamed western officials that "the Russians and Syrians are trying to muddy the waters". "Moscow has consistently raised doubts over chemical attacks in Syria or insisted they were staged, and has recently highlighted a leaked report raising questions about a deadly chlorine attack in the Syrian town of Douma in April 2018," AFP reports. "Western diplomats however say the Russians and Syrians are trying to muddy the waters about alleged attacks by President Bashar al-Assad's forces." Never mind that the leaks themselves are intrinsically important and completely authentic, regardless of who's "highlighting" them. Never mind that the leaks have been "highlighted" by many non-Russian outlets, ranging from small alternative platforms like my own here in Melbourne all the way up to as mainstream as the UK's Daily Mail. All it takes is one Russian to talk about any issue of any kind and it can magically be spun as a talking point of Moscow, no matter how many westerners who have nothing to do with Russia are also talking about it. The report's author, Danny Kemp, has been spending time narrative managing about the OPCW scandal on Twitter as well. Kemp argues that WikiLeaks, who published a leaked internal email from the organisation on Sunday which challenges the establishment Douma narrative, doesn't have trustworthy publications because WikiLeaks is associated with (you guessed it) Russia. AFP?s Hague reporter downplays *leaks* from *whistleblowers* that likely clear Syria of a chemical attack & undermine rationale for US-UK-France strikes. Why? Because Russia. This was a goal of Russiagate: to smear any dissent from ?Western? party line, & enlist journos to do so: https://t.co/zaUmbGg3ww ? Aaron Mat? (@aaronjmate) November 25, 2019 "Western source notes Russians are particularly sensitive re Douma because happened close to where their own troops were operating," Kemp tweeted. "Also worth noting Mueller highlighted WikiLeaks role in publishing Russian-hacked DNC documents. Plus Russia was accused of hacking OPCW last year." Kemp's baseless Russia smear is invalidated by the fact that multiple other outlets have also published the email, including the Daily Mail, and by the fact that Reuters has independently verified the email's authenticity with a source in the OPCW. The OPCW's Director General Fernando Arias said during a convention at The Hague today that he fully supports the conclusions that were published in the OPCW's final report on the Douma incident this past March, which asserted, contrary to everything the OPCW whistleblowers claim, that there was enough evidence to believe that a chemical weapon was used. "On the first of March, 2019, the Fact Finding Mission issued its final report on the incident of alleged use of toxic chemical weapons in Douma on the seventh of April, 2018," Arias said. "The evaluation and analysis of all the information gathered by the Fact Finding Mission provide reasonable grounds that the use of a toxic chemical as a weapon had taken place." "It is in the nature of any thorough inquiry for individuals in a team to express subjective views," Arias added. "The overall conclusions of the inquiry, however, must be based on the preponderance of objective facts." ?While some of these diverging views continue to circulate in certain public discussion forums, I would like to reiterate that I stand by the independent, professional conclusions reached by the Fact Finding Mission,? Arias said. http://img.youtube.com/vi/MuU3OfAtnyM/0.jpg Again, everything Arias said is contradicted by what the whistleblowers from inside the aforementioned Fact Finding Mission have been saying: ? The leaked email says chlorinated organic chemicals on the scene were as low as one or two parts per billion, meaning they were trace background levels you'd find in any industrialized area, and that the symptoms of the victims were inconsistent with chlorine gas poisoning. ? The leaked Engineering Assessment signed by ballistics expert Ian Henderson states that the alleged chlorine cylinders were much more likely to have been manually placed on the ground than dropped from the air, meaning the incident would have been staged by the Jaysh al-Islam fighters occupying Douma and not the Syrian air force. ? The information given to journalist Jonathan Steele by the whistleblower "Alex" lists even more inconsistencies with the OPCW report, claims that dissent from the final drafts of the OPCW's Douma reports was a majority opinion within the team, and says investigators felt pressured both by OPCW management and an uncomfortable intercession by US government officials to come to a specific conclusion. Given all this, there is no reason for anyone to feel at all confident that "the use of a toxic chemical as a weapon had taken place" in Douma. In the hours since Arias finally gave them a denial of the OPCW scandal that they can use in their reporting, the mass media have suddenly broken their deafening silence on this important story. Reports have come out on Arias' defense of the official Douma reports from Reuters, AP and CBS explaining to readers that the OPCW's head honcho says all the naughty people sharing unauthorized narratives about Douma are wrong. In a story about Syria and The Hague, the CBS article mentions the words "Russia" or "Russian" no fewer than twelve times, spinning the entire affair as nothing more than a Moscow-orchestrated conspiracy theory. Here's an excerpt from the CBS article, just to give you a taste of the conspiratorial-lunatic spin job they're doing on something that amounts simply to authentic leaked information: Russia and Syria have alleged that the incident was staged since soon after it took place. Russia even attempted to bolster its case by bringing individuals who it identified as Syrians seen in "staged" videos after the attack to testify to the OPCW at The Hague. European OPCW members rejected the Russian-Syrian claims outright, and refused to attend the session at OPCW headquarters. "This obscene masquerade does not come as a surprise from the Syrian government, which has massacred and gassed its own people for the last seven years," France's ambassador to the Netherlands, Philippe Lalliot, said in response. New OPCW Leak Further Vindicates Skeptics Of Establishment Syria Narrative "We were right, they were wrong. Maybe going forward people should listen to us a bit more and listen to them a bit less." #Douma #Syria #OPCW https://t.co/yovSYeU14t ? Caitlin Johnstone ?(@caitoz) November 24, 2019 I guess it's nice to have some company on this important story after months and months of near-total silence, but man the spin's making me dizzy. Of course it's not the mass media's job to objectively report facts, it's the mass media's job to manufacture consent for the status quo upon which the media-owning plutocratic class is built. This status quo naturally includes the globe-spanning US-centralized empire and the endless war which glues the whole thing together. The narrative that this oligarchic power alliance has once again deceived the world about yet another military intervention in yet another Middle Eastern nation would do serious damage to people's trust in the imperial propaganda machine, so the story will be ignored for as long as possible and then attacked with extreme aggression when that fails. We're on attacking already. This is good. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2718 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 895 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 24145 bytes Desc: not available URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Tue Nov 26 00:24:58 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 18:24:58 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Cult of Trump ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00f501d5a3ef$efa50be0$ceef23a0$@comcast.net> Hey Ron, This file attachment you sent doesn't open. David J. From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss Sent: Monday, November 25, 2019 12:46 PM To: peace-discuss at anti-war.net Cc: peace-discuss Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Cult of Trump ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Tue Nov 26 00:38:49 2019 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 00:38:49 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Cult of Trump ? In-Reply-To: <00f501d5a3ef$efa50be0$ceef23a0$@comcast.net> References: , <00f501d5a3ef$efa50be0$ceef23a0$@comcast.net> Message-ID: ?Wake up!? Former Moonie says the ?Cult of Trump? needs ?deprogramming? By SHAWN LANGLOIS SOCIAL-MEDIA EDITOR WSJ Nov 25, 2019 Anthony Scaramucci said it. So did Dan Rather. Now, it?s Steve Hassan, a former Moonie who escaped the Unification Church cult in the 1970s, offering up this perspective on what he sees as a ?destructive cult? led by President Trump. ?Much of what they?re hearing is emotionally driven, loaded words, thought-stopping, and thought-terminating-type clich?s, like ?fake news,? ?build the wall,? ?make America great again.?? Hassan, who is out with a book titled, ?The Cult of Trump,? explained to CNN on Sunday why he thinks the president is using mind control as a way to build his power. [ Amazon: The Cult of Trump: A Leading Cult Expert Explains How the President Uses Mind Control by Steven Hassan and Simon & Schuster Audio, 3.9 out of 5 stars, 27 reviews, $16.98 ] ?We can start with the pathological lying, which is characteristic of destructive cult leaders,? Hassan told host Brian Stelter. ?The blaming others and never taking responsibility for his own failures and faults. Shunning and kicking out anyone who raises questions or concerns about his own behavior.? He also said that Trump?s use of ?fearmongering? is a ?horrible thing? that?s straight out of the cult leader?s playbook. ?Wake up! This is what?s happening,? Hassan said. ?Our Democracy is at stake here.? CNN political commentator and Trump supporter Steve Cortes took exception with the cult label being used often on his network and wrote a rebuttal on RealClearPolitics.com about the ?demonization? of the MAGA movement. The use of the word ?cult,? he explained, ?clearly represents the latest derisive narrative media elites are using to dismiss our cause as mentally disturbed.? Cortes claimed the recent ?cult? criticism flows ?directly from the inability, so far, of the Democrats to damage the president in the impeachment imbroglio.? Now, he said, with Trump?s detractors losing momentum on Capitol Hill, they have to fall back on ?dehumanizing? the president?s supporters. ?We are, according to their aspersions, a giant basket full of ?deplorables?: racists and other irredeemables. Now, it seems, we are also cult members,? Cortes wrote. ?But these smears will not work. In reality, such defamation will compel undecided voters to join up with the political outsiders...? ?? Shawn Langlois is an editor and writer for MarketWatch in Los Angeles. Follow him on Twitter @slangwise. > One of the biggest risks facing stocks, according to Goldman: Democrats WSJ Nov 25, 2019 # # # ________________________________________ From: David Johnson Sent: Monday, November 25, 2019 6:24 PM To: Szoke, Ron; peace-discuss at anti-war.net Subject: RE: [Peace-discuss] The Cult of Trump ? Hey Ron, This file attachment you sent doesn?t open. David J. From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss Sent: Monday, November 25, 2019 12:46 PM To: peace-discuss at anti-war.net Cc: peace-discuss Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Cult of Trump ? From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Tue Nov 26 02:42:23 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 20:42:23 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Cult of Trump ? In-Reply-To: References: , <00f501d5a3ef$efa50be0$ceef23a0$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <013d01d5a403$2206b620$66142260$@comcast.net> Considering this is from the Wall Street Journal, the newspaper that is the media pinnacle of the U.S. capitalist class, it doesn't surprise me in the least that their " social media editor " ( along with CNN ) would promote such an absurd book. AS Ralph Nader was quoted as saying years ago ; " The Wall Street Journal is a good source of information about corporate crime ". Otherwise it works great laid out on the bottom of bird cages. David J. -----Original Message----- From: Szoke, Ron [mailto:r-szoke at illinois.edu] Sent: Monday, November 25, 2019 6:39 PM To: David Johnson; peace-discuss at anti-war.net Cc: peace Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] The Cult of Trump ? ?Wake up!? Former Moonie says the ?Cult of Trump? needs ?deprogramming? By SHAWN LANGLOIS SOCIAL-MEDIA EDITOR WSJ Nov 25, 2019 Anthony Scaramucci said it. So did Dan Rather. Now, it?s Steve Hassan, a former Moonie who escaped the Unification Church cult in the 1970s, offering up this perspective on what he sees as a ?destructive cult? led by President Trump. ?Much of what they?re hearing is emotionally driven, loaded words, thought-stopping, and thought-terminating-type clich?s, like ?fake news,? ?build the wall,? ?make America great again.?? Hassan, who is out with a book titled, ?The Cult of Trump,? explained to CNN on Sunday why he thinks the president is using mind control as a way to build his power. [ Amazon: The Cult of Trump: A Leading Cult Expert Explains How the President Uses Mind Control by Steven Hassan and Simon & Schuster Audio, 3.9 out of 5 stars, 27 reviews, $16.98 ] ?We can start with the pathological lying, which is characteristic of destructive cult leaders,? Hassan told host Brian Stelter. ?The blaming others and never taking responsibility for his own failures and faults. Shunning and kicking out anyone who raises questions or concerns about his own behavior.? He also said that Trump?s use of ?fearmongering? is a ?horrible thing? that?s straight out of the cult leader?s playbook. ?Wake up! This is what?s happening,? Hassan said. ?Our Democracy is at stake here.? CNN political commentator and Trump supporter Steve Cortes took exception with the cult label being used often on his network and wrote a rebuttal on RealClearPolitics.com about the ?demonization? of the MAGA movement. The use of the word ?cult,? he explained, ?clearly represents the latest derisive narrative media elites are using to dismiss our cause as mentally disturbed.? Cortes claimed the recent ?cult? criticism flows ?directly from the inability, so far, of the Democrats to damage the president in the impeachment imbroglio.? Now, he said, with Trump?s detractors losing momentum on Capitol Hill, they have to fall back on ?dehumanizing? the president?s supporters. ?We are, according to their aspersions, a giant basket full of ?deplorables?: racists and other irredeemables. Now, it seems, we are also cult members,? Cortes wrote. ?But these smears will not work. In reality, such defamation will compel undecided voters to join up with the political outsiders...? ?? Shawn Langlois is an editor and writer for MarketWatch in Los Angeles. Follow him on Twitter @slangwise. > One of the biggest risks facing stocks, according to Goldman: Democrats WSJ Nov 25, 2019 # # # ________________________________________ From: David Johnson Sent: Monday, November 25, 2019 6:24 PM To: Szoke, Ron; peace-discuss at anti-war.net Subject: RE: [Peace-discuss] The Cult of Trump ? Hey Ron, This file attachment you sent doesn?t open. David J. From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss Sent: Monday, November 25, 2019 12:46 PM To: peace-discuss at anti-war.net Cc: peace-discuss Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Cult of Trump ? From rbaldwin at seiu73.org Tue Nov 26 15:49:33 2019 From: rbaldwin at seiu73.org (Ricky Baldwin) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 15:49:33 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Chronology of the Ukrainian Coup In-Reply-To: <003301d5a3ab$2555e920$7001bb60$@comcast.net> References: <003301d5a3ab$2555e920$7001bb60$@comcast.net> Message-ID: Thanks, David. This one certainly shows a deeper relationship between US officialdom and Ukrainian fascists. Clearly USG was comfortable, even welcoming, of fascist elements in the coup, reminiscent of "our man" pre-WW2. This should be deeply disturbing to all Americans and everyone else. It's not exactly a contra-style "funding and training" of the coup, though, is it? I mean, from this we have no idea where all the pro-EU money was spent - propaganda in favor if EU (which is not necessarily pro-coup)? Etc. In Haiti, for example, we know the US funded and trained the military - including specific putschists - involved in overthrowing Aristide. In Congo we know the CIA was working with (but not training) Mobutu and others when Lumumba was overthrown. But in Honduras it seems the Obama-Clinton involvement was supportive of the coup, even "enabling," but as far as we know not actually instigating. I wouldn't put it past their blood-soaked administration, but since accuracy is important to challenging them we'd want to be a little careful what we allege about that one. It's sort of like, we know Nixon prolonged the war in Vietnam by sandbagging peace talks surreptitiously when he was running for president, but we could never really prove Reagan prolonged the Iranian hostage crisis when he was running. It certainly seems likely, especially given his subsequent recklessly sociopathic lawbreaking exposed in the "Iran-Contra" moment. But it's hard to tell for sure. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID On Nov 25, 2019 10:28 AM, David Johnson wrote: [https://uziiw38pmyg1ai60732c4011-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/dropzone/2015/06/cp5.png] March 5, 2014 Chronology of the Ukrainian Coup by Renee Parsons Listening to the US media, even the most diligent news junkie would find it difficult to know that the U.S. State Department played not only a vital role in the violence and chaos underway in Ukraine but was also complicit in creating the coup that ousted democratically elected President Viktor Yanuyovch. Given the Russian Parliament?s approval of Putin?s request for military troops to be moved into Crimea, Americans uninformed about the history of that region might also be persuaded that Russia is the aggressor and the sole perpetrator of the violence. Let?s be clear about what is at stake here: NATO missiles on the adjacent Ukraine border aimed directly at Russia would make that country extremely vulnerable to Western goals and destabilization efforts while threatening Russia?s only water access to its naval fleet in Crimean peninsula, the Balkans, the Mediterranean Sea and the Middle East ? and not the least of which would allow world economic dominance by the US, the European Union, the IMF, World Bank and international financiers all of whom had already brought staggering suffering to millions around the globe. The fact is that democracy was not a demand on the streets of Kiev. The current record of events indicates that protests of civil dissatisfaction were organized by reactionary neo-Nazi forces intent on fomenting a major domestic crisis ousting Ukraine?s legitimate government. As events continue to spiral out of control, here is the chronology of how the coup was engineered to install a government more favorable to EU and US goals. April 11, 2011 ? A Kiev Post article entitled ?Ukraine Hopes to Get $1.5 Billion from IMF in June? states that the loan is dependent on pension cuts while ?maintaining cooperation with the IMF, since it influences the country?s interaction with other international financial institutions and private investors? and further that the ?attraction of $850 million from the World Bank in 2011, depended on cooperation with the IMF.? Well, that about says it all ? if Ukraine played ball. then the loan money would pour in. November 21, 2013 ? fast forward to the EU summit in Lithuania when President Yanuyovch embarrassed the European Union by rejecting its Agreement in favor of joining Russia?s Common Union with other Commonwealth Independent States. November 27, 2013 ? it was not until February 23, 2014 when Anonymous Ukraine hackers released a series of emails from a Lithuanian government advisor to opposition leader and former boxer Vitaly Klitschko regarding plans to destabilize Ukraine; for example: ?Our American friends promise to pay a visit in the coming days, we may even see Nuland or someone from the Congress.? 12/7/2013 ?Your colleague has arrived ?.his services may be required even after the country is destabilized.? 12/14/2013 ?I think we?ve paved the way for more radical escalation of the situation. Isn?t it time to proceed with more decisive action?? 1/9/2014 November 29, 2013 ? well-orchestrated protestors were already in the streets of Kiev as European Commission President Jose Manual Barroso announced that the EU would ?not accept Russia?s veto? of the Agreement. December 13, 2013 ? As if intent on providing incontrovertible evidence of US involvement in Ukraine, Assistant US Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia Victoria Nuland proudly told a meeting of the International Business Conference sponsored by the US-Ukrainian Foundation that the US had ?invested? more than $5 billion and ?five years worth of work and preparation? in achieving what she called Ukraine?s ?European aspirations.? Having just returned from her third trip to Ukraine in five weeks, Nuland boasted of her ?coordinated high level diplomacy? and a more than two hour ?tough conversation? with Yanukovych. Already familiar with Nuland as former Secretary Clinton?s spokesperson at State, one can imagine her discourteous tone and manner when she says she made it ?absolutely clear? to Yanukovych that the US required ?immediate steps? ?to ?get back into conversation with Europe and the IMF.? While Western media have portrayed Yanukovych as a ?weak? leader, Nuland?s description of a ?tough? meeting can only mean that he resisted her threats and intimidations. In what must have been a touching moment, Nuland spoke about a show of force by government police on demonstrators who ?sang hymns and prayed for peace.? What Nuland did not reveal on December 13 was that her meetings with ?key Ukrainian stakeholders? included neo-Nazi Svoboda party leader Oleh Tyahnybok and prime minister wannabe Arsenly Yatsenyuk of the Fatherland Party. At about the same time Nuland was wooing fascist extremists, Sen. John McCain (R-Az) and Sen. Chris Murphy (D- Conn) shared the stage in Kiev with Tyahnybok offering their support and opposition to the sitting government. The Svoboda party which has roots with extreme vigilante and anti-semitic groups has since received at least three high level cabinet posts in the interim government including deputy prime minister. There is no doubt that the progenies of west Ukraine?s historic neo-fascist thugs that fought with Hitler are now aligned with the US as represented by Victoria Nuland. January 24, 2014 ? President Yanukoyvch identified foreign elements participating in Kiev protests warning that armed radicals were a danger to peaceful citizens. Independent news agencies also reported that ?not all of Kiev?s population backs opposition rule, which depends mainly on a group from the former Polish town of Lvov, which holds sway over Kiev downtown ? but not the rest of the city.? January 30, 2014 ? The State Department?s website Media Note announced Nuland?s upcoming travel plans that ?In Kyiv, Assistant Secretary Nuland will meet with government officials, opposition leaders, civil society and business leaders to encourage agreement on a new government and plan of action.? In other words, almost a month before President Yanukovych was ousted, the US was planning to rid the world of another independently elected President. February 4, 2014 ? More evidence of Ms. Nuland?s meddling with extremist factions and the high level stakes of war and peace occurred in her taped conversation with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt discussing their calculations of who?s in and who?s out to replace Yanukovych. Note mention of Nazi leader Oleh Tyahnybok. Here are some selected excerpts: Nuland: ?What do you think?? Pyatt: ?I think we?re in play? the [Vitali] Klitsch piece is obviously the complicated electron here especially the announcement of him as deputy prime minister. Your argument to him which you?ll need to make, I think the next phone call we want to set up is exactly the one you made to Yats [Yatsenyuk]. And I?m glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario and I?m very glad he said what he said in response.? Nuland: ?I don?t think Klitsch should go into government. I don?t think its necessary. I don?t think it?s a good idea.? Pyatt: ?yeah?I mean I guess. You think?what?in terms of him not going into the government, just let him sort of stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I?m just thinking in terms of the process moving ahead, we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok and his guys. I?m sure that?s what Yanukoyvch is calculating on all this.? Nuland: ?I think Yats is the guy who?s got the economic experience, the governing experience. What he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside and he needs to be talking to them four times a week you know?I think with Klitsch going in at that level working for Yats, it?s not going to work.? Nuland: ?My understanding is that the big three [Yatsenyuk, Klitsch and Tyahnybok] were going in to their own meeting and that Yats was going to offer in that context a three plus one conversation with you.? Pyatt: ? That?s what he proposed but knowing the dynamic that?s been with them where Klitsch has been top dog; he?s going to take a while to show up at a meeting, he?s probably talking to his guys at this point so I think you reaching out to him will help with the personality management among the three and gives us a chance to move fast on all this stuff and put us behind it before they all sit down and he explains why he doesn?t like it.? Nuland: ? ?when I talked to Jeff Feltman this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy ?Robert Serry ? he?s now gotten both Serry and Ban ki Moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday? so that would be great I think to help glue this thing and have the UN help glue it and you know fuck the EU.? Pyatt: ?Exactly. I think we?ve got to do something to make it stick together because you can be pretty sure the Russians will be working behind the scenes. ?.Let me work on Klitchko and I think we want to get somebody with an international personality to come out here and help midwife this thing.? Nuland: ??Sullivan?s come back to me saying you need Biden and I said probably tomorrow for an? ?atta? boy? and get the deeds to stick so Biden?s willing.? February 20, 2014 ? Foreign ministers from Poland, Germany and France visiting Kiev secured President Yanukovych?s agreement that would commit the government to an interim administration, constitutional reform and new parliamentary and presidential elections. With ?no clear sign that EU or US pressure has achieved? the desired effect, opposition leaders rejected Yanukovych?s compromise which would have ended the three month stand-off. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called on the German, French and Polish foreign ministers to step in and take responsibility for upholding the deal they helped forge and not let ?armed extremists? directly threaten Ukrainian sovereignty. February 21, 2014 ? At a special summit in Brussels, European foreign ministers agreed to adopt sanctions on Ukraine including visa bans and asset freezes. The EU decision followed ?immense pressure from the US for the European powers to take punitive action against the Ukrainian regime.? Washington had already imposed travel bans on 20 leading Ukrainians. February 22, 2014 ? An hour after refusing to resign, the Ukrainian Parliament voted, according to Russian president Vladimir Putin, in an unconstitutional action to oust President Yanukovych and that pro-EU forces staged a ?coup?. Yanukovych departed Kiev in fear for his life. March 1, 2014 ? During a conversation initiated by the vice president, Biden delivered his ?atta boy? with a phone call to newly installed prime minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk reaffirming US support for Ukraine?s ?territorial integrity.? All of the above machinations expose an incoherent and corrupt American foreign policy with a litany of US hypocrisy that might be hilarious if not for potentially grave global implications. The comment ?you just don?t behave by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext? might just win Secretary of State John Kerry the Hypocrisy of the Year Award. Kerry, of course, famously supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq seeking weapons of mass destruction. But then again, the President?s own comments that ?..countries have deep concerns and suspicions about this kind of meddling..? and that ??as long as none of us are inside Ukraine trying to meddle and intervene.. with decisions that properly belong to Ukrainian people?? while announcing $1 billion aid package to Ukraine (but not Detroit) would be a close runner-up for the Award. Renee Parsons was a staffer in the U.S. House of Representatives and a lobbyist on nuclear energy issues with Friends of the Earth. in 2005, she was elected to the Durango City Council and served as Councilor and Mayor. Currently, she is a member of the Treasure Coast ACLU Board. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 6911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 6911 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From rbaldwin at seiu73.org Tue Nov 26 16:07:07 2019 From: rbaldwin at seiu73.org (Ricky Baldwin) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:07:07 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] How and Why the US Government Perpetrated the 2014 Coup in Ukraine In-Reply-To: <006101d5a3ae$6982e280$3c88a780$@comcast.net> References: <006101d5a3ae$6982e280$3c88a780$@comcast.net> Message-ID: Ok, thanks, David. This does seem to be the beginnings of a case that could be made for US "funding and training" the coup in Ukraine. Certainly the coup was welcomed by USG - and encouraged. And if this holds up, it looks like at least some of the putschists in Ukraine were US vectors. Bad, anyway, very bad. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID On Nov 25, 2019 10:52 AM, David Johnson wrote: How and Why the US Government Perpetrated the 2014 Coup in Ukraine [https://www.strategic-culture.org/wp-content/themes/strategic-culture/layout/static/acjHM66QQR5kCh1rvkLeUXWRoIw.png] Eric Zuesse [https://www.strategic-culture.org/wp-content/themes/strategic-culture/layout/static/4tonPx6ZVVE9r7ECg0qIKaFDElw.png] June 3, 2018 ? Photo: Public domain This will document that the ?new Cold War? between the US and Russia did not start, as the Western myth has it, with Russia?s involvement in the breakaway of Crimea and Donbass from Ukraine, after Ukraine ? next door to Russia ? had suddenly turned rabidly hostile toward Russia in February 2014. Ukraine?s replacing its democratically elected neutralist Government in February 2014, by a rabidly anti-Russian Government, was a violent event, which produced many corpses. It?s presented in The West as having been a ?revolution? instead of a coup; but whatever it was, it certainly generated the ?new Cold War? (the economic sanctions and NATO buildup on Russia?s borders); and, to know whether it was a coup, or instead a revolution, is to know what actually started the ?new Cold War?, and why. So, this is historically very important. Incontrovertible proofs will be presented here not only that it was a coup, but that this coup was organized by the US Government ? that the US Government initiated the ?new Cold War?; Russia?s Government reacted to America?s aggression, which aims to place nuclear missiles in Ukraine, less than ten minutes flight-time from Moscow. During the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, America had reason to fear Soviet nuclear missiles 103 miles from America?s border. But, after America?s Ukrainian coup in 2014, Russia has reason to fear NATO nuclear missiles not just near, but on, Russia?s border. That would be catastrophic. If America?s successful February 2014 overthrow and replacement of Ukraine?s democratically elected neutralist Government doesn?t soon produce a world-ending nuclear war (World War III), then there will be historical accounts of that overthrow, and the accounts are already increasingly trending and consolidating toward a historical consensus that it was a coup ? that it was imposed by ?somebody from the new coalition? ? i.e., that the termination of the then-existing democratic (though like all its predecessors, corrupt) Ukrainian Government, wasn?t authentically a ?revolution? such as the US Government has contended, and certainly wasn?t at all democratic, but was instead a coup (and a very bloody one, at that), and totally illegal (though backed by The West). The purpose of the present article will be to focus attention on precisely whom the chief people are who were responsible for perpetrating this globally mega-dangerous (?Cold-War?-igniting) coup ? and thus for creating the world?s subsequent course increasingly toward global nuclear annihilation. If there will be future history, then these are the individuals who will be in the docks for that history?s harshest and most damning judgments, even if there will be no legal proceedings brought against them. Who, then, are these people? Clearly, Victoria Nuland, US President Barack Obama?s central agent overseeing the coup, at least during the month of February 2014 when it climaxed, was crucial not only in overthrowing the existing Ukrainian Government, but in selecting and installing its rabidly anti-Russian replacement. The 27 January 2014 phone-conversation between her and America?s Ambassador in Ukraine, Jeffrey Pyatt was a particularly seminal event, and it was uploaded to youtube on 4 February 2014. I have discussed elsewhere that call and its significance. Nuland there and then abandoned the EU?s hope for a still democratic but less corrupt future government for Ukraine, and Nuland famously said, on that call ?Fuck the EU,? and she instructed Pyatt to choose instead the rabidly anti-Russian, and far-right, Arseniy Yatsenyuk. This key event occurred 24 days before Ukraine?s President Victor Yanukovych was overthrown on February 20th, and 30 days before the new person to head Ukraine?s Government, Yatsenyuk, became officially appointed to rule the now clearly fascist country. He won that official designation on February 26th. However, this was only a formality: Obama?s agent had already chosen him, on January 27th. The second landmark item of evidence that it had been a coup and nothing at all democratic or a ?revolution?, was the 26 February 2014 phone-conversation between the EU?s Foreign Minister Catherine Ashton and her agent in Ukraine investigating whether the overthrow had been a revolution or instead a coup; he was Estonia?s Foreign Minister, Urmas Paet, and he told her that he found that it had been a coup, and that ?somebody from the new coalition? had engineered it ? but he didn?t know whom that ?somebody? was. Both Ashton and Paet were shocked at this finding, but they proceeded immediately to ignore that matter, and to discuss only the prospects for Europe?s investors in Ukraine, to be able to get their money back ? their obsession was Ukraine's corruption. Ashton told Paet that she had herself told the Maidan demonstrators, ?you need to find ways in which you can establish a process that will have anti-corruption at its heart.? So, though the EU was unhappy that this had been a coup, they were far more concerned to protect their investors. In any case, the EU clearly wasn?t behind Ukraine's coup. Equally clearly, they didn?t much care whether it was a coup or instead what the US Government said, a ?revolution'. The network behind this coup had actually started planning for the coup back in 2011. That?s when Eric Schmidt of Google, and Jared Cohen, also now of Google but still continuing though unofficially as US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton?s chief person tasked to plan ?popular movements? to overthrow both Yanukovych in Ukraine, and Assad in Syria. Then, on 1 March 2013, the implementation of this plan started: the first ?tech camp? to train far-right Ukrainians how to organize online the mass-demonstrations against Yanukovych, was held inside the US Embassy in Kiev on that date, which was over nine months before the Maidan demonstrations to overthrow Ukraine?s democratically elected President started, on 20 November 2013. The American scholar Gordon M. Hahn has specialized in studying the evidence regarding whom the actual snipers were who committed the murders, but he focuses only on domestic Ukrainian snipers and ignores the foreign ones, who had been hired by the US regime indirectly through Georgian, Lithuanian and other anti-Russian CIA assets (such as via Mikheil Saakashvili, the ousted President of Georgia whom the US regime subsequently selected to become the Governor of the Odessa region of Ukraine). Hahn?s 2018 book Ukraine Over the Edge states on pages 204-209: "Yet another pro-Maidan sniper, Ivan Bubenchik, emerged to acknowledge that he shot and killed Berkut [the Government?s police who were protecting Government buildings] before any protesters were shot that day [February 20th]. In a print interview, Bubenchik previews his admission in Vladimir Tikhii?s documentary film, Brantsy, that he shot ahd killed two Berkut commanders in the early morning hours of February 20 on the Maidan. ? Bubenchik claims that [on February 20] the Yanukovich regime started the fire in the Trade Union House ? where his and many other EuroMaidan fighters lived during the revolt ? prompting the Maidan?s next reaction. As noted above, however, pro-Maidan neofascists have revealed that the Right Sector started that fire. ? Analysis of the snipers? massacre shows that the Maidan protesters initiated almost all ? at least six out of a possible eight ? of the pivotal escalatory moments of violence and/or coercion. ? The 30 November 2013 nighttime assault on the Maidan demonstrators is the only clear exception from a conclusive pattern of escalating revolutionary violence led by the Maidan?s relatively small but highly motivated and well-organized neofascist element." Although Hahn?s book barely cites the first and most detailed academic study of the climactic coup period of late February, Ivan Katchanovski?s poorly written ?The ?Snipers? Massacre? on the Maidan in Ukraine?, which was issued on 5 September 2015, Hahn?s is consistent with that: both works conclude that the available evidence, as Katchanovski puts it, shows that: ?The massacre was a false flag operation, which was rationally planned and carried out with a goal of the overthrow of the government and seizure of power. It [his investigation] found various evidence of the involvement of an alliance of the far right organizations, specifically the Right Sector and Svoboda, and oligarchic parties, such as Fatherland. Concealed shooters and spotters were located in at least 20 Maidan-controlled buildings or areas.? Hahn downplays US heading of the coup. But shortly before the coup, the CIA secretly trained in Poland the Right Sector founder/leader Dmitriy Yarosh ("Dmytro Jarosz"), who headed Ukraine?s snipers. So, even the Ukrainian ones were working for the US On 19 November 2017 was issued Gian Micalessin?s ?The hidden truth about Ukraine ? Part 1? & Part 2 Summarizing them here: Two Georgian snipers say Saakashvili hired them in Tbilisi for a US-backed operation. But they know only about the ?Georgian Legion? part. They think it was patterned on Georgia?s Rose Revolution. They each got $1000 for the operation and flew to Kiev on 15 January and were promised $5000 on return. (9:00) ?We had to provoke the ?Berkut? police so they would attack the people. By February 15th the situation [at the Maidan] was getting worse every day. Then the first shots were fired.? It was February 15 or 16. Mamunashvili [Saakashvili?s man] introduced them to ?an American military guy, ? Brian Christopher Boyenger? a former ?sniper for the 101st Airborne Division? who ?after Maidan he went to Donbass? to fight in the ?Georgian Legion? but during the coup-climax, the far-right Andriy ?Parubiy came very often,? and ?Brian always accompanied him? and also instructing there was Vladimir Parasyuk, one of the leaders of the Maidan. The snipers were told not to aim but just to kill people randomly, to create chaos. There were also two Lithuanian snipers in the room. Some went down from the Ukraine Hotel to the second floor of the Conservatory Building, balcony. ?They started to take out the guns and distributed them to each group.? ?Then I heard shots from the next room? It lasted 15 minutes, then they were all ordered to escape. On 13 February 2015 was telecast a German documentary, ?Maidan Snipers. German TV expose. ARD Monitor. Eng Subs? in which one of the demonstrators said that many of the bullets were fired from buildings controlled by the demonstrators, but that ?We were also shot at from the other direction.? However, at least before 21 February 2014, police (Berkut) were seized by demonstrators and at least the possibility exists that some of the Right Sector snipers were taking positions in and especially atop some of the government buildings so as to fire down into the crowd and seem to be firing from Yanukovych?s side. Gordon Hahn hasn?t been able to verify any firing in February 2014 by the Yanukovych government. Moreover: ?they were the same snipers, killing people from both sides.? On 1 February 2016 was posted to youtube a French documentary, ?Ukraine ? Masks of the Revolution? which shows, from a meeting at Davos, at 48:00, Victoria Nuland, the announcer trying to speak with her and saying to the audience, ?The US diplomat who came to support the Revolution, could she really ignore the existence of the paramilitaries??; 48:50 Larry Summers at a meeting in Kiev during 10-12 September 2015 and then later at the ?12th YES Annual Meeting? saying, ?Ukraine is an essential outpost of our fundamental military interests?; 49:25: Petraeus also shown there and the announcer says, ?He also thinks that Ukraine is essential to block Putin.? Petraeus urges investment in Ukraine to block Russia; 51:00 McChrystal there also urges arming Ukraine; 51:50 Nuland is there and the announcer says: ?The country that is most invested in Ukraine?s future is the US? ?She is the architect of America?s influence in Ukraine.? Nuland says there at the ?YES? meeting, ?We had a significant impact on the battlefield.? But the US regime blames Russia for that war. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 404 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 306 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 404 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 306 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Tue Nov 26 16:56:48 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 10:56:48 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Chronology of the Ukrainian Coup In-Reply-To: References: <003301d5a3ab$2555e920$7001bb60$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <003f01d5a47a$7ec4cdd0$7c4e6970$@comcast.net> Yes, not as blatant as in the 1980's and prior, and that is where the NED and " Color Revolutions " come in. Ukraine fits the pattern ( M.O. ) to a tee, in addition to the other evidence. Trojan Horses and Color Revolutions: The Role of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) By William Blum Global Research, August 07, 2017 This article is a chapter from Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower by William Blum published in 2005. How many Americans could identify the National Endowment for Democracy? An organization which often does exactly the opposite of what its name implies. The NED was set up in the early 1980s under President Reagan in the wake of all the negative revelations about the CIA in the second half of the 1970s. The latter was a remarkable period. Spurred by Watergate - the Church committee of the Senate, the Pike committee of the House, and the Rockefeller Commission, created by the president, were all busy investigating the CIA. Seemingly every other day there was a new headline about the discovery of some awful thing, even criminal conduct, the CIA had been mixed up in for years. The Agency was getting an exceedingly bad name, and it was causing the powers-that-be much embarrassment. Something had to be done. What was done was not to stop doing these awful things. Of course not. What was done was to shift many of these awful things to a new organization, with a nice sounding name - The National Endowment for Democracy. The idea was that the NED would do somewhat overtly what the CIA had been doing covertly for decades, and thus, hopefully, eliminate the stigma associated with CIA covert activities. It was a masterpiece. Of politics, of public relations, and of cynicism. Thus it was that in 1983, the National Endowment for Democracy was set up to "support democratic institutions throughout the world through private, nongovernmental efforts". Notice the "nongovernmental" - part of the image, part of the myth. In actuality, virtually every penny of its funding comes from the federal government, as is clearly indicated in the financial statement in each issue of its annual report. NED likes to refer to itself as an NGO (Non-governmental organization) because this helps to maintain a certain credibility abroad that an official US government agency might not have. But NGO is the wrong category. NED is a GO. "We should not have to do this kind of work covertly," said Carl Gershman in 1986, while he was president of the Endowment. "It would be terrible for democratic groups around the world to be seen as subsidized by the C.I.A. We saw that in the 60's, and that's why it has been discontinued. We have not had the capability of doing this, and that's why the endowment was created." And Allen Weinstein, who helped draft the legislation establishing NED, declared in 1991: "A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA." In effect, the CIA has been laundering money through NED. The Endowment has four principal initial recipients of funds: the International Republican Institute; the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs; an affiliate of the AFL-CIO (such as the American Center for International Labor Solidarity); and an affiliate of the Chamber of Commerce (such as the Center for International Private Enterprise). These institutions then disburse funds to other institutions in the US and all over the world, which then often disburse funds to yet other organizations. In a multitude of ways, NED meddles in the internal affairs of numerous foreign countries by supplying funds, technical know-how, training, educational materials, computers, faxes, copiers, automobiles, and so on, to selected political groups, civic organizations, labor unions, dissident movements, student groups, book publishers, newspapers, other media, etc. NED typically refers to the media it supports as "independent" despite the fact that these media are on the US payroll. NED programs generally impart the basic philosophy that working people and other citizens are best served under a system of free enterprise, class cooperation, collective bargaining, minimal government intervention in the economy, and opposition to socialism in any shape or form. A free-market economy is equated with democracy, reform, and growth; and the merits of foreign investment in their economy are emphasized. >From 1994 to 1996, NED awarded 15 grants, totaling more than $2,500,000, to the American Institute for Free Labor Development, an organization used by the CIA for decades to subvert progressive labor unions. AIFLD's work within Third World unions typically involved a considerable educational effort very similar to the basic NED philosophy described above. The description of one of the 1996 NED grants to AIFLD includes as one its objectives: "build union-management cooperation". Like many things that NED says, this sounds innocuous, if not positive, but these in fact are ideological code words meaning "keep the labor agitation down . don't rock the status-quo boat". The relationship between NED and AIFLD very well captures the CIA origins of the Endowment. The National Endowment for Democracy (NED): The Legal Window of the CIA NED has funded centrist and rightist labor organizations to help them oppose those unions which were too militantly pro-worker. This has taken place in France, Portugal and Spain amongst many other places. In France, during the 1983-4 period, NED supported a "trade union-like organization for professors and students" to counter "left-wing organizations of professors". To this end it funded a series of seminars and the publication of posters, books and pamphlets such as "Subversion and the Theology of Revolution" and "Neutralism or Liberty". ("Neutralism" here refers to being unaligned in the cold war.) NED describes one of its 1997-98 programs thusly: "To identify barriers to private sector development at the local and federal levels in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and to push for legislative change . [and] to develop strategies for private sector growth." Critics of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, a socialist, were supported by NED grants for years. In short, NED's programs are in sync with the basic needs and objectives of the New World Order's economic globalization, just as the programs have for years been on the same wavelength as US foreign policy. Interference in elections NED's Statement of Principles and Objectives, adopted in 1984, asserts that "No Endowment funds may be used to finance the campaigns of candidates for public office." But the ways to circumvent the spirit of such a prohibition are not difficult to come up with; as with American elections, there's "hard money" and there's "soft money". As described in the "Elections" and "Interventions" chapters, NED successfully manipulated elections in Nicaragua in 1990 and Mongolia in 1996; helped to overthrow democratically elected governments in Bulgaria in 1990 and Albania in 1991 and 1992; and worked to defeat the candidate for prime minister of Slovakia in 2002 who was out of favor in Washington. And from 1999 to 2004, NED heavily funded members of the opposition to President Hugo Chavez in Venezuela to subvert his rule and to support a referendum to unseat him. Additionally, in the 1990s and afterward, NED supported a coalition of groups in Haiti known as the Democratic Convergence, who were united in their opposition to Jean-Bertrand Aristide and his progressive ideology, while he was in and out of the office of the president. The Endowment has made its weight felt in the electoral-political process in numerous other countries. NED would have the world believe that it's only teaching the ABCs of democracy and elections to people who don't know them, but in virtually all the countries named above, in whose electoral process NED intervened, there had already been free and fair elections held. The problem, from NED's point of view, is that the elections had been won by political parties not on NED's favorites list. The Endowment maintains that it's engaged in "opposition building" and "encouraging pluralism". "We support people who otherwise do not have a voice in their political system," said Louisa Coan, a NED program officer. But NED hasn't provided aid to foster progressive or leftist opposition in Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, or Eastern Europe - or, for that matter, in the United States - even though these groups are hard pressed for funds and to make themselves heard. Cuban dissident groups and media are heavily supported however. NED's reports carry on endlessly about "democracy", but at best it's a modest measure of mechanical political democracy they have in mind, not economic democracy; nothing that aims to threaten the powers-that-be or the way-things-are, unless of course it's in a place like Cuba. The Endowment played an important role in the Iran-Contra affair of the 1980s, funding key components of Oliver North's shadowy "Project Democracy" network, which privatized US foreign policy, waged war, ran arms and drugs, and engaged in other equally charming activities. At one point in 1987, a White House spokesman stated that those at NED "run Project Democracy". This was an exaggeration; it would have been more correct to say that NED was the public arm of Project Democracy, while North ran the covert end of things. In any event, the statement caused much less of a stir than if - as in an earlier period - it had been revealed that it was the CIA which was behind such an unscrupulous operation. NED also mounted a multi-level campaign to fight the leftist insurgency in the Philippines in the mid-1980s, funding a host of private organizations, including unions and the media. This was a replica of a typical CIA operation of pre-NED days. And between 1990 and 1992, the Endowment donated a quarter-million dollars of taxpayers' money to the Cuban-American National Foundation, the ultra-fanatic anti-Castro Miami group. The CANF, in turn, financed Luis Posada Carriles, one of the most prolific and pitiless terrorists of modern times, who had been involved in the blowing up of a Cuban airplane in 1976, which killed 73 people. In 1997, he was involved in a series of bomb explosions in Havana hotels, and in 2000 imprisoned in Panama when he was part of a group planning to assassinate Fidel Castro with explosives while the Cuban leader was speaking before a large crowd, although eventually, the group was tried on lesser charges. The NED, like the CIA before it, calls what it does supporting democracy. The governments and movements whom the NED targets call it destabilization. -----Original Message----- From: Ricky Baldwin [mailto:rbaldwin at seiu73.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2019 9:50 AM To: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Cc: Ricky Baldwin; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Subject: Re: Chronology of the Ukrainian Coup Thanks, David. This one certainly shows a deeper relationship between US officialdom and Ukrainian fascists. Clearly USG was comfortable, even welcoming, of fascist elements in the coup, reminiscent of "our man" pre-WW2. This should be deeply disturbing to all Americans and everyone else. It's not exactly a contra-style "funding and training" of the coup, though, is it? I mean, from this we have no idea where all the pro-EU money was spent - propaganda in favor if EU (which is not necessarily pro-coup)? Etc. In Haiti, for example, we know the US funded and trained the military - including specific putschists - involved in overthrowing Aristide. In Congo we know the CIA was working with (but not training) Mobutu and others when Lumumba was overthrown. But in Honduras it seems the Obama-Clinton involvement was supportive of the coup, even "enabling," but as far as we know not actually instigating. I wouldn't put it past their blood-soaked administration, but since accuracy is important to challenging them we'd want to be a little careful what we allege about that one. It's sort of like, we know Nixon prolonged the war in Vietnam by sandbagging peace talks surreptitiously when he was running for president, but we could never really prove Reagan prolonged the Iranian hostage crisis when he was running. It certainly seems likely, especially given his subsequent recklessly sociopathic lawbreaking exposed in the "Iran-Contra" moment. But it's hard to tell for sure. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID On Nov 25, 2019 10:28 AM, David Johnson wrote: [https://uziiw38pmyg1ai60732c4011-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/dropzon e/2015/06/cp5.png] March 5, 2014 Chronology of the Ukrainian Coup by Renee Parsons Listening to the US media, even the most diligent news junkie would find it difficult to know that the U.S. State Department played not only a vital role in the violence and chaos underway in Ukraine but was also complicit in creating the coup that ousted democratically elected President Viktor Yanuyovch. Given the Russian Parliament's approval of Putin's request for military troops to be moved into Crimea, Americans uninformed about the history of that region might also be persuaded that Russia is the aggressor and the sole perpetrator of the violence. Let's be clear about what is at stake here: NATO missiles on the adjacent Ukraine border aimed directly at Russia would make that country extremely vulnerable to Western goals and destabilization efforts while threatening Russia's only water access to its naval fleet in Crimean peninsula, the Balkans, the Mediterranean Sea and the Middle East - and not the least of which would allow world economic dominance by the US, the European Union, the IMF, World Bank and international financiers all of whom had already brought staggering suffering to millions around the globe. The fact is that democracy was not a demand on the streets of Kiev. The current record of events indicates that protests of civil dissatisfaction were organized by reactionary neo-Nazi forces intent on fomenting a major domestic crisis ousting Ukraine's legitimate government. As events continue to spiral out of control, here is the chronology of how the coup was engineered to install a government more favorable to EU and US goals. April 11, 2011 - A Kiev Post article entitled "Ukraine Hopes to Get $1.5 Billion from IMF in June" states that the loan is dependent on pension cuts while "maintaining cooperation with the IMF, since it influences the country's interaction with other international financial institutions and private investors" and further that the "attraction of $850 million from the World Bank in 2011, depended on cooperation with the IMF." Well, that about says it all - if Ukraine played ball. then the loan money would pour in. November 21, 2013 - fast forward to the EU summit in Lithuania when President Yanuyovch embarrassed the European Union by rejecting its Agreement in favor of joining Russia's Common Union with other Commonwealth Independent States. November 27, 2013 - it was not until February 23, 2014 when Anonymous Ukraine hackers released a series of emails from a Lithuanian government advisor to opposition leader and former boxer Vitaly Klitschko regarding plans to destabilize Ukraine; for example: "Our American friends promise to pay a visit in the coming days, we may even see Nuland or someone from the Congress." 12/7/2013 "Your colleague has arrived ..his services may be required even after the country is destabilized." 12/14/2013 "I think we've paved the way for more radical escalation of the situation. Isn't it time to proceed with more decisive action?" 1/9/2014 November 29, 2013 - well-orchestrated protestors were already in the streets of Kiev as European Commission President Jose Manual Barroso announced that the EU would "not accept Russia's veto" of the Agreement. December 13, 2013 - As if intent on providing incontrovertible evidence of US involvement in Ukraine, Assistant US Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia Victoria Nuland proudly told a meeting of the International Business Conference sponsored by the US-Ukrainian Foundation that the US had 'invested' more than $5 billion and 'five years worth of work and preparation" in achieving what she called Ukraine's 'European aspirations." Having just returned from her third trip to Ukraine in five weeks, Nuland boasted of her 'coordinated high level diplomacy' and a more than two hour 'tough conversation' with Yanukovych. Already familiar with Nuland as former Secretary Clinton's spokesperson at State, one can imagine her discourteous tone and manner when she says she made it "absolutely clear" to Yanukovych that the US required "immediate steps" .to "get back into conversation with Europe and the IMF." While Western media have portrayed Yanukovych as a 'weak' leader, Nuland's description of a 'tough' meeting can only mean that he resisted her threats and intimidations. In what must have been a touching moment, Nuland spoke about a show of force by government police on demonstrators who "sang hymns and prayed for peace." What Nuland did not reveal on December 13 was that her meetings with 'key Ukrainian stakeholders' included neo-Nazi Svoboda party leader Oleh Tyahnybok and prime minister wannabe Arsenly Yatsenyuk of the Fatherland Party. At about the same time Nuland was wooing fascist extremists, Sen. John McCain (R-Az) and Sen. Chris Murphy (D- Conn) shared the stage in Kiev with Tyahnybok offering their support and opposition to the sitting government. The Svoboda party which has roots with extreme vigilante and anti-semitic groups has since received at least three high level cabinet posts in the interim government including deputy prime minister. There is no doubt that the progenies of west Ukraine's historic neo-fascist thugs that fought with Hitler are now aligned with the US as represented by Victoria Nuland. January 24, 2014 - President Yanukoyvch identified foreign elements participating in Kiev protests warning that armed radicals were a danger to peaceful citizens. Independent news agencies also reported that "not all of Kiev's population backs opposition rule, which depends mainly on a group from the former Polish town of Lvov, which holds sway over Kiev downtown - but not the rest of the city." January 30, 2014 - The State Department's website Media Note announced Nuland's upcoming travel plans that "In Kyiv, Assistant Secretary Nuland will meet with government officials, opposition leaders, civil society and business leaders to encourage agreement on a new government and plan of action." In other words, almost a month before President Yanukovych was ousted, the US was planning to rid the world of another independently elected President. February 4, 2014 - More evidence of Ms. Nuland's meddling with extremist factions and the high level stakes of war and peace occurred in her taped conversation with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt discussing their calculations of who's in and who's out to replace Yanukovych. Note mention of Nazi leader Oleh Tyahnybok. Here are some selected excerpts: Nuland: "What do you think?" Pyatt: "I think we're in play. the [Vitali] Klitsch piece is obviously the complicated electron here especially the announcement of him as deputy prime minister. Your argument to him which you'll need to make, I think the next phone call we want to set up is exactly the one you made to Yats [Yatsenyuk]. And I'm glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario and I'm very glad he said what he said in response." Nuland: "I don't think Klitsch should go into government. I don't think its necessary. I don't think it's a good idea." Pyatt: "yeah.I mean I guess. You think.what.in terms of him not going into the government, just let him sort of stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I'm just thinking in terms of the process moving ahead, we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok and his guys. I'm sure that's what Yanukoyvch is calculating on all this." Nuland: "I think Yats is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience. What he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside and he needs to be talking to them four times a week you know.I think with Klitsch going in at that level working for Yats, it's not going to work." Nuland: "My understanding is that the big three [Yatsenyuk, Klitsch and Tyahnybok] were going in to their own meeting and that Yats was going to offer in that context a three plus one conversation with you." Pyatt: " That's what he proposed but knowing the dynamic that's been with them where Klitsch has been top dog; he's going to take a while to show up at a meeting, he's probably talking to his guys at this point so I think you reaching out to him will help with the personality management among the three and gives us a chance to move fast on all this stuff and put us behind it before they all sit down and he explains why he doesn't like it." Nuland: . "when I talked to Jeff Feltman this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy .Robert Serry - he's now gotten both Serry and Ban ki Moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. so that would be great I think to help glue this thing and have the UN help glue it and you know fuck the EU." Pyatt: "Exactly. I think we've got to do something to make it stick together because you can be pretty sure the Russians will be working behind the scenes. ..Let me work on Klitchko and I think we want to get somebody with an international personality to come out here and help midwife this thing." Nuland: ".Sullivan's come back to me saying you need Biden and I said probably tomorrow for an" 'atta' boy' and get the deeds to stick so Biden's willing." February 20, 2014 - Foreign ministers from Poland, Germany and France visiting Kiev secured President Yanukovych's agreement that would commit the government to an interim administration, constitutional reform and new parliamentary and presidential elections. With "no clear sign that EU or US pressure has achieved" the desired effect, opposition leaders rejected Yanukovych's compromise which would have ended the three month stand-off. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called on the German, French and Polish foreign ministers to step in and take responsibility for upholding the deal they helped forge and not let "armed extremists" directly threaten Ukrainian sovereignty. February 21, 2014 - At a special summit in Brussels, European foreign ministers agreed to adopt sanctions on Ukraine including visa bans and asset freezes. The EU decision followed "immense pressure from the US for the European powers to take punitive action against the Ukrainian regime." Washington had already imposed travel bans on 20 leading Ukrainians. February 22, 2014 - An hour after refusing to resign, the Ukrainian Parliament voted, according to Russian president Vladimir Putin, in an unconstitutional action to oust President Yanukovych and that pro-EU forces staged a 'coup'. Yanukovych departed Kiev in fear for his life. March 1, 2014 - During a conversation initiated by the vice president, Biden delivered his 'atta boy' with a phone call to newly installed prime minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk reaffirming US support for Ukraine's 'territorial integrity." All of the above machinations expose an incoherent and corrupt American foreign policy with a litany of US hypocrisy that might be hilarious if not for potentially grave global implications. The comment "you just don't behave by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext" might just win Secretary of State John Kerry the Hypocrisy of the Year Award. Kerry, of course, famously supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq seeking weapons of mass destruction. But then again, the President's own comments that "..countries have deep concerns and suspicions about this kind of meddling.." and that ".as long as none of us are inside Ukraine trying to meddle and intervene.. with decisions that properly belong to Ukrainian people." while announcing $1 billion aid package to Ukraine (but not Detroit) would be a close runner-up for the Award. Renee Parsons was a staffer in the U.S. House of Representatives and a lobbyist on nuclear energy issues with Friends of the Earth. in 2005, she was elected to the Durango City Council and served as Councilor and Mayor. Currently, she is a member of the Treasure Coast ACLU Board. From jbn at forestfield.org Wed Nov 27 04:43:27 2019 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 22:43:27 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] AWARE on the Air #498 notes Message-ID: <402436de-8c58-9639-0a9d-bfb959921ce5@forestfield.org> AWARE on the Air #498 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ar95AX094as A list of links to items referenced on the show. "Those Who Served" series in the News-Gazette https://usveterans.news-gazette.com/ C. G. Estabrook on News-Gazette?s feature ?Those Who Served? weekly feature in a letter to the News-Gazette https://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/letter-to-the-editor-u-s-has-killed-millions-in/article_87b213e5-9f21-5acf-8f54-df41b18d026d.html "Human Smoke: The Beginnings of World War II, the End of Civilization" by Nicholson Baker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Smoke ISBN: 9781416572466 T.S. Eliot's "Murder in the Cathedral" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_in_the_Cathedral War of Aggression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_aggression Noam Chomsky on "If the Nuremberg Laws were Applied?" https://chomsky.info/1990____-2/ Joe Giambrone on "Ukrainegate 13,000 Times Worse Than You Think" https://dissidentvoice.org/2019/11/ukrainegate-13000-times-worse-than-you-think/ https://alethonews.com/2019/11/23/ukrainegate-13000-times-worse-than-you-think/ https://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Ukrainegate-13-000-Times-W-by-Joe-Giambrone-Democrats_Farce_Impeach-Trump_Impeachment-191124-505.html?f=Ukrainegate-13-000-Times-W-by-Joe-Giambrone-Democrats_Farce_Impeach-Trump_Impeachment-191124-505.html https://www.greanvillepost.com/2019/11/23/ukrainegate-13000-times-worse-than-you-think/ C.J. Hopkins on "Reclaiming Your Inner Fascist" https://dissidentvoice.org/2019/11/reclaiming-your-inner-fascist/ https://www.greanvillepost.com/2019/11/21/reclaiming-your-inner-fascist/ https://nationandstate.com/2019/11/19/c-j-hopkins-reclaiming-your-inner-fascist/ https://straightlinelogic.com/2019/11/20/reclaiming-your-inner-fascist-by-c-j-hopkins/ https://www.opednews.com/articles/Reclaiming-Your-Inner-Fasc-by-CJ-Hopkins-Fascist_Fascist-Americans-191121-65.html Stephen F. Cohen on "Inconvenient Truths: Alarming things we have learned under Trump, but not always about him." https://www.thenation.com/article/inconvenient-truths-2/ https://on.rt.com/a4xh https://www.sott.net/article/423497-Inconvenient-truths-Alarming-things-we-have-learned-under-Trump-but-not-always-about-him https://www.sgtreport.com/2019/11/inconvenient-truths/ Gary Olson on "The Empire, Trump and Intra-Ruling Class Conflict" https://dissidentvoice.org/2019/11/the-empire-trump-and-intra-ruling-class-conflict/ C. G. Estabrook on "Robert Reich to MoveOn" on peace-discuss mailing list https://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/2019-November/051552.html -J From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Wed Nov 27 10:06:29 2019 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 04:06:29 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?=5BPeace=5D_Robert_Reich=E2=80=99s_let?= =?utf-8?b?dGVyIHRvIOKAmE1vdmVPbuKAmSBDT1JSRUNURUQ=?= In-Reply-To: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> References: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: Or maybe it is because Trump is a lawless, bald-faced liar, cheater (in every sense of the term), underhanded, self-serving (and self-dealing), misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic racist with no core principles other than his own advancement and that of his cronies. On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 3:57 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace < peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? is an absolutely mad appeal by a > self-proclaimed 'liberal' to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. > > Why is the political establishment so desperate not just to win the next > election but to remove Trump now? > > I think that the answer is to be found in the US grand strategy , followed > by all recent US administrations. That depends on maintaining the US > control of the world economy by retarding the economic development of > Eurasia. (Not a new idea - see the 'Open Door Policy' of 1899.) Zbigniew > Brzezinski wrote clearly of the US government's need to prevent the > emergence of "peer competitors," Russia and China. > > Trump was the first major party candidate in 40 years to attack the > neoliberal and neoconservative policies of previous administrations, which > were designed to do that. > > In office, Trump has been compelled or cajoled to acquiesce in those > policies, but the political establishment can't be assured that will > continue, given the rising populist wave that put him in office. The threat > has to be suppressed as soon as possible, and a reliable neolib/neocon > executive put in place (by a coup, if necessary, as Adm. McRaven recently > argued in the NYT). > > The example of Obama - the first president to be at war throughout two > presidential terms, who waged no less than eight wars to constrain Eurasia > and protect the economic control of the US 1% and for whom stooges like > Reich and McRaven are working, must be followed, insists that establishment. > > (Reich? McRaving? To avoid being Trumped? Do the gods of history have a > sardonic sense of humor?) > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carl at newsfromneptune.com Wed Nov 27 10:47:45 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 04:47:45 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?=5BPeace=5D_Robert_Reich=E2=80=99s_let?= =?utf-8?b?dGVyIHRvIOKAmE1vdmVPbuKAmSBDT1JSRUNURUQ=?= In-Reply-To: References: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: <6DF02DD3-441F-4248-8169-778409EB318F@newsfromneptune.com> And e.g. Kennedy and Clinton weren?t? One of the most disastrous presidencies of recent times was Carter?s - it ushered in neoliberalism - while Carter himself by all accounts is a man of decent character. The issue is US policy, not the character of the chief magistrate (as Sally Hemings might say). > On Nov 27, 2019, at 4:06 AM, Debra Schrishuhn wrote: > > Or maybe it is because Trump is a lawless, bald-faced liar, cheater (in every sense of the term), underhanded, self-serving (and self-dealing), misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic racist with no core principles other than his own advancement and that of his cronies. > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 3:57 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace wrote: > Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? is an absolutely mad appeal by a self-proclaimed 'liberal' to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. > > Why is the political establishment so desperate not just to win the next election but to remove Trump now? > > I think that the answer is to be found in the US grand strategy , followed by all recent US administrations. That depends on maintaining the US control of the world economy by retarding the economic development of Eurasia. (Not a new idea - see the 'Open Door Policy' of 1899.) Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote clearly of the US government's need to prevent the emergence of "peer competitors," Russia and China. > > Trump was the first major party candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies of previous administrations, which were designed to do that. > > In office, Trump has been compelled or cajoled to acquiesce in those policies, but the political establishment can't be assured that will continue, given the rising populist wave that put him in office. The threat has to be suppressed as soon as possible, and a reliable neolib/neocon executive put in place (by a coup, if necessary, as Adm. McRaven recently argued in the NYT). > > The example of Obama - the first president to be at war throughout two presidential terms, who waged no less than eight wars to constrain Eurasia and protect the economic control of the US 1% and for whom stooges like Reich and McRaven are working, must be followed, insists that establishment. > > (Reich? McRaving? To avoid being Trumped? Do the gods of history have a sardonic sense of humor?) > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Wed Nov 27 13:15:04 2019 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 07:15:04 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?=5BPeace=5D_Robert_Reich=E2=80=99s_let?= =?utf-8?b?dGVyIHRvIOKAmE1vdmVPbuKAmSBDT1JSRUNURUQ=?= In-Reply-To: <6DF02DD3-441F-4248-8169-778409EB318F@newsfromneptune.com> References: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> <6DF02DD3-441F-4248-8169-778409EB318F@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: First, I won't be drawn into a round of "whataboutism." Second, to insist that the issues of U.S. policy by and character of the chief elected officer are mutually exclusive is both naive and disingenuous. On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 4:47 AM C. G. Estabrook wrote: > And e.g. Kennedy and Clinton weren?t? > > One of the most disastrous presidencies of recent times was Carter?s - it > ushered in neoliberalism - while Carter himself by all accounts is a man of > decent character. > > The issue is US policy, not the character of the chief magistrate (as > Sally Hemings might say). > > > > On Nov 27, 2019, at 4:06 AM, Debra Schrishuhn > wrote: > > > > Or maybe it is because Trump is a lawless, bald-faced liar, cheater (in > every sense of the term), underhanded, self-serving (and self-dealing), > misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic racist with no core principles other > than his own advancement and that of his cronies. > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 3:57 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace < > peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? is an absolutely mad appeal by a > self-proclaimed 'liberal' to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. > > > > Why is the political establishment so desperate not just to win the next > election but to remove Trump now? > > > > I think that the answer is to be found in the US grand strategy , > followed by all recent US administrations. That depends on maintaining the > US control of the world economy by retarding the economic development of > Eurasia. (Not a new idea - see the 'Open Door Policy' of 1899.) Zbigniew > Brzezinski wrote clearly of the US government's need to prevent the > emergence of "peer competitors," Russia and China. > > > > Trump was the first major party candidate in 40 years to attack the > neoliberal and neoconservative policies of previous administrations, which > were designed to do that. > > > > In office, Trump has been compelled or cajoled to acquiesce in those > policies, but the political establishment can't be assured that will > continue, given the rising populist wave that put him in office. The threat > has to be suppressed as soon as possible, and a reliable neolib/neocon > executive put in place (by a coup, if necessary, as Adm. McRaven recently > argued in the NYT). > > > > The example of Obama - the first president to be at war throughout two > presidential terms, who waged no less than eight wars to constrain Eurasia > and protect the economic control of the US 1% and for whom stooges like > Reich and McRaven are working, must be followed, insists that establishment. > > > > (Reich? McRaving? To avoid being Trumped? Do the gods of history have a > sardonic sense of humor?) > > _______________________________________________ > > Peace mailing list > > Peace at lists.chambana.net > > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Wed Nov 27 14:42:10 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 08:42:10 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?b?W1BlYWNlXSAJUm9iZXJ0IFJlaWNo4oCZcyBs?= =?utf-8?q?etter_to_=E2=80=98MoveOn=E2=80=99_CORRECTED?= In-Reply-To: References: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> <6DF02DD3-441F-4248-8169-778409EB318F@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: <003b01d5a530$da2f3dc0$8e8db940$@comcast.net> Deb, The problems we have currently in this country did not begin with Trump in Jan. 2017. AS the democratically elected President of Honduras ( Manuel Zelaya ) who was deposed in a military coup by Hillary Clinton and Obama in 2009 because he was implementing increased taxes on the wealthy and foreign corporations , increasing the minimum wage , and democratizing the constitutional system of governance in Honduras, said in an interview on Democracy Now several years ago when he was asked about Obama?s foreign policies as ? boss ( Jefe ) ? of the American empire, Zelaya?s immediate response was ; ? The President of the United States is NOT the Jefe ( boss ) of the American empire. Ever wonder why nothing changes for the better regardless which political party wins the presidency ? Same bipartisan belligerent foreign policy, same focus on privatization and austerity, same expansion of corporate and police powers. Same erosion of individual rights, privacy, and freedom of speech. The problem the majority of the ruling class ( not the tiny group that helped Trump get elected ? Adelson, Mercer, etc. ) has with Trump is that they wanted Hillary Clinton to win because she has a proven track record of being a loyal and dependable servant of the ruling class. Trump on the other hand is an uncertain ? wild card ? who is a pure opportunist with no other ideology than that, and Trump was campaigning on issues ( that he had no intention of executing ) that was a threat to neo-liberal austerity and neo-conservative foreign policy. The POTUS has power, but not as much as most people think. The corporate plutocracy ( the ruling class ) is the real power. In particular ; The financial sector, the military industrial complex, The oil / gas / energy sector, and the corporate owned media. Below is a recent study that proves this point ( from the BBC ) ? The US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite. So concludes a recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page. This is not news, you say. Perhaps, but the two professors have conducted exhaustive research to try to present data-driven support for this conclusion. Here's how they explain it: Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. In English: the wealthy few move policy, while the average American has little power. Eric Zuess, writing in Counterpunch, isn't surprised by the survey's results. "American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation's "news" media)," he writes. "The US, in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious 'electoral' 'democratic' countries. We weren't formerly, but we clearly are now." From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Debra Schrishuhn via Peace Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 7:15 AM To: C. G. Estabrook Cc: Peace Discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED First, I won't be drawn into a round of "whataboutism." Second, to insist that the issues of U.S. policy by and character of the chief elected officer are mutually exclusive is both naive and disingenuous. On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 4:47 AM C. G. Estabrook wrote: And e.g. Kennedy and Clinton weren?t? One of the most disastrous presidencies of recent times was Carter?s - it ushered in neoliberalism - while Carter himself by all accounts is a man of decent character. The issue is US policy, not the character of the chief magistrate (as Sally Hemings might say). > On Nov 27, 2019, at 4:06 AM, Debra Schrishuhn wrote: > > Or maybe it is because Trump is a lawless, bald-faced liar, cheater (in every sense of the term), underhanded, self-serving (and self-dealing), misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic racist with no core principles other than his own advancement and that of his cronies. > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 3:57 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace wrote: > Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? is an absolutely mad appeal by a self-proclaimed 'liberal' to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. > > Why is the political establishment so desperate not just to win the next election but to remove Trump now? > > I think that the answer is to be found in the US grand strategy , followed by all recent US administrations. That depends on maintaining the US control of the world economy by retarding the economic development of Eurasia. (Not a new idea - see the 'Open Door Policy' of 1899.) Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote clearly of the US government's need to prevent the emergence of "peer competitors," Russia and China. > > Trump was the first major party candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies of previous administrations, which were designed to do that. > > In office, Trump has been compelled or cajoled to acquiesce in those policies, but the political establishment can't be assured that will continue, given the rising populist wave that put him in office. The threat has to be suppressed as soon as possible, and a reliable neolib/neocon executive put in place (by a coup, if necessary, as Adm. McRaven recently argued in the NYT). > > The example of Obama - the first president to be at war throughout two presidential terms, who waged no less than eight wars to constrain Eurasia and protect the economic control of the US 1% and for whom stooges like Reich and McRaven are working, must be followed, insists that establishment. > > (Reich? McRaving? To avoid being Trumped? Do the gods of history have a sardonic sense of humor?) > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Wed Nov 27 15:30:26 2019 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 09:30:26 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?b?W1BlYWNlXSAJUm9iZXJ0IFJlaWNo4oCZcyBs?= =?utf-8?q?etter_to_=E2=80=98MoveOn=E2=80=99_CORRECTED?= In-Reply-To: <003b01d5a530$da2f3dc0$8e8db940$@comcast.net> References: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> <6DF02DD3-441F-4248-8169-778409EB318F@newsfromneptune.com> <003b01d5a530$da2f3dc0$8e8db940$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <81F445A5-D0CD-4FDA-A8D0-4E3757C75574@gmail.com> David I understand what you are saying and generally agree with the historical context you provide. However, the entire presidential succession is not the issue here. The issue is that President Donald Trump has behaved in a number of situations badly, illegally, and unconstitutionally, and for those actions the Constitution prescribes the remedy of impeachment. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 27, 2019, at 8:42 AM, David Johnson wrote: > > Deb, > > The problems we have currently in this country did not begin with Trump in Jan. 2017. AS the democratically elected President of Honduras ( Manuel Zelaya ) who was deposed in a military coup by Hillary Clinton and Obama in 2009 because he was implementing increased taxes on the wealthy and foreign corporations , increasing the minimum wage , and democratizing the constitutional system of governance in Honduras, said in an interview on Democracy Now several years ago when he was asked about Obama?s foreign policies as ? boss ( Jefe ) ? of the American empire, Zelaya?s immediate response was ; ? The President of the United States is NOT the Jefe ( boss ) of the American empire. > Ever wonder why nothing changes for the better regardless which political party wins the presidency ? Same bipartisan belligerent foreign policy, same focus on privatization and austerity, same expansion of corporate and police powers. Same erosion of individual rights, privacy, and freedom of speech. > > The problem the majority of the ruling class ( not the tiny group that helped Trump get elected ? Adelson, Mercer, etc. ) has with Trump is that they wanted Hillary Clinton to win because she has a proven track record of being a loyal and dependable servant of the ruling class. Trump on the other hand is an uncertain ? wild card ? who is a pure opportunist with no other ideology than that, and Trump was campaigning on issues ( that he had no intention of executing ) that was a threat to neo-liberal austerity and neo-conservative foreign policy. > > The POTUS has power, but not as much as most people think. The corporate plutocracy ( the ruling class ) is the real power. In particular ; The financial sector, the military industrial complex, The oil / gas / energy sector, and the corporate owned media. > > > Below is a recent study that proves this point ( from the BBC ) ? > > The US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite. > > So concludes a recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page. > > This is not news, you say. > > Perhaps, but the two professors have conducted exhaustive research to try to present data-driven support for this conclusion. Here's how they explain it: > > Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. > > In English: the wealthy few move policy, while the average American has little power. > > Eric Zuess, writing in Counterpunch, isn't surprised by the survey's results. > > "American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation's "news" media)," he writes. "The US, in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious 'electoral' 'democratic' countries. We weren't formerly, but we clearly are now." > > > > From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Debra Schrishuhn via Peace > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 7:15 AM > To: C. G. Estabrook > Cc: Peace Discuss; Peace > Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED > > First, I won't be drawn into a round of "whataboutism." Second, to insist that the issues of U.S. policy by and character of the chief elected officer are mutually exclusive is both naive and disingenuous. > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 4:47 AM C. G. Estabrook wrote: > And e.g. Kennedy and Clinton weren?t? > > One of the most disastrous presidencies of recent times was Carter?s - it ushered in neoliberalism - while Carter himself by all accounts is a man of decent character. > > The issue is US policy, not the character of the chief magistrate (as Sally Hemings might say). > > > > On Nov 27, 2019, at 4:06 AM, Debra Schrishuhn wrote: > > > > Or maybe it is because Trump is a lawless, bald-faced liar, cheater (in every sense of the term), underhanded, self-serving (and self-dealing), misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic racist with no core principles other than his own advancement and that of his cronies. > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 3:57 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace wrote: > > Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? is an absolutely mad appeal by a self-proclaimed 'liberal' to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. > > > > Why is the political establishment so desperate not just to win the next election but to remove Trump now? > > > > I think that the answer is to be found in the US grand strategy , followed by all recent US administrations. That depends on maintaining the US control of the world economy by retarding the economic development of Eurasia. (Not a new idea - see the 'Open Door Policy' of 1899.) Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote clearly of the US government's need to prevent the emergence of "peer competitors," Russia and China. > > > > Trump was the first major party candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies of previous administrations, which were designed to do that. > > > > In office, Trump has been compelled or cajoled to acquiesce in those policies, but the political establishment can't be assured that will continue, given the rising populist wave that put him in office. The threat has to be suppressed as soon as possible, and a reliable neolib/neocon executive put in place (by a coup, if necessary, as Adm. McRaven recently argued in the NYT). > > > > The example of Obama - the first president to be at war throughout two presidential terms, who waged no less than eight wars to constrain Eurasia and protect the economic control of the US 1% and for whom stooges like Reich and McRaven are working, must be followed, insists that establishment. > > > > (Reich? McRaving? To avoid being Trumped? Do the gods of history have a sardonic sense of humor?) > > _______________________________________________ > > Peace mailing list > > Peace at lists.chambana.net > > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Wed Nov 27 16:08:28 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:08:28 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?b?W1BlYWNlXSAJUm9iZXJ0IFJlaWNo4oCZcyBs?= =?utf-8?q?etter_to_=E2=80=98MoveOn=E2=80=99_CORRECTED?= In-Reply-To: <81F445A5-D0CD-4FDA-A8D0-4E3757C75574@gmail.com> References: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> <6DF02DD3-441F-4248-8169-778409EB318F@newsfromneptune.com> <003b01d5a530$da2f3dc0$8e8db940$@comcast.net> <81F445A5-D0CD-4FDA-A8D0-4E3757C75574@gmail.com> Message-ID: <006001d5a53c$e8ba6c50$ba2f44f0$@comcast.net> Deb, As bad as Trump is, is he really worse than the Presidency of G.W. Bush ? I say nowhere near as bad as GW, who by the way if you haven?t noticed, the ruling class and their corporate owned media has been working overtime to improve his PR image, including Ellen DeGeneres?s promotion and JOE BIDEN pinning a ? Medal of Freedom ? on him at a huge public ceremony. All crimes are forgiven if it is in the service of the ruling class. After thousands of voter referendums passed across the U.S. supporting the impeachment of GW Bush in 2005 / 2006 for WAR CRIMES, including in Champaign and Urbana, what are the first words out of Nancy Pelosi?s mouth when in November 2006 it was announced that the Democrats had won both the House and Senate ?.....? Impeachment is off the table, impeachment is off the table ? ! Like the Russia gate conspiracy hoax that floundered for lack of real evidence, this latest Ukraine Gate action is also nothing but a dog and pony show distraction. Distraction away from the Democrats having to actually oppose Trump?s policies by advocating for issues that would improve the lives of the vast majority of the American people. But the DNC won?t do that because it will threaten their gravy train of corporate donations. In the meantime, if Trump is such a threat to our country, why is it the vast majority of Democrats have given him almost everything he wants and then some. They made a public spectacle of opposing Brent Kavenaugh but proceeded to approve all of his right wing judge appointments to the federal bench. They did next to nothing to oppose Trump?s tax bill, with even Chuckie Schumer saying ; ? WE agree with the principal of this bill, we just wish we were consulted. ?. Then there was Trump?s request for increased WAR budget. What did the Democrats do ? They approved it and added even more money to it. And more recently the Democrats gave Trump expanded powers under the Patriot Act, which only ; AOC, Ihlan Omar, Presley, and Talibi ( The Squad ) voted against. So if Trump is such a danger, the supposed opposition party ( Democrats ) have a funny way of opposing. To quote George Carlin Deb, ; ? It is a big club and WE are not members. ? Lastly, funny how Trump?s briefly delaying military assistance to the FASCIST government of Ukraine is a ? security threat ? to the U.S. ? Instead of NOT supplying any weapons to Ukraine, which even Obama refused to do. The best way to defeat Trump is to elect a candidate in the Democratic primary who will advocate for issues that are popular with and will benefit the American people. Like Bernie Sanders. But you watch what happens. If they don?t rig the democratic primary again with voter disenfranchisement and outright ELECTION FRAUD or the use of Super Delegates at the convention, the ruling class and the corporate owned media, who supposedly hates Trump so bad, will instantly turn their propaganda campaign against Sanders and will support the re-election of Trump. David J. From: Debra Schrishuhn [mailto:deb.pdamerica at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 9:30 AM To: David Johnson Cc: C. G. Estabrook; Peace Discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED David I understand what you are saying and generally agree with the historical context you provide. However, the entire presidential succession is not the issue here. The issue is that President Donald Trump has behaved in a number of situations badly, illegally, and unconstitutionally, and for those actions the Constitution prescribes the remedy of impeachment. Sent from my iPhone On Nov 27, 2019, at 8:42 AM, David Johnson wrote: Deb, The problems we have currently in this country did not begin with Trump in Jan. 2017. AS the democratically elected President of Honduras ( Manuel Zelaya ) who was deposed in a military coup by Hillary Clinton and Obama in 2009 because he was implementing increased taxes on the wealthy and foreign corporations , increasing the minimum wage , and democratizing the constitutional system of governance in Honduras, said in an interview on Democracy Now several years ago when he was asked about Obama?s foreign policies as ? boss ( Jefe ) ? of the American empire, Zelaya?s immediate response was ; ? The President of the United States is NOT the Jefe ( boss ) of the American empire. Ever wonder why nothing changes for the better regardless which political party wins the presidency ? Same bipartisan belligerent foreign policy, same focus on privatization and austerity, same expansion of corporate and police powers. Same erosion of individual rights, privacy, and freedom of speech. The problem the majority of the ruling class ( not the tiny group that helped Trump get elected ? Adelson, Mercer, etc. ) has with Trump is that they wanted Hillary Clinton to win because she has a proven track record of being a loyal and dependable servant of the ruling class. Trump on the other hand is an uncertain ? wild card ? who is a pure opportunist with no other ideology than that, and Trump was campaigning on issues ( that he had no intention of executing ) that was a threat to neo-liberal austerity and neo-conservative foreign policy. The POTUS has power, but not as much as most people think. The corporate plutocracy ( the ruling class ) is the real power. In particular ; The financial sector, the military industrial complex, The oil / gas / energy sector, and the corporate owned media. Below is a recent study that proves this point ( from the BBC ) ? The US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite. So concludes a recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page. This is not news, you say. Perhaps, but the two professors have conducted exhaustive research to try to present data-driven support for this conclusion. Here's how they explain it: Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. In English: the wealthy few move policy, while the average American has little power. Eric Zuess, writing in Counterpunch, isn't surprised by the survey's results. "American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation's "news" media)," he writes. "The US, in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious 'electoral' 'democratic' countries. We weren't formerly, but we clearly are now." From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Debra Schrishuhn via Peace Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 7:15 AM To: C. G. Estabrook Cc: Peace Discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED First, I won't be drawn into a round of "whataboutism." Second, to insist that the issues of U.S. policy by and character of the chief elected officer are mutually exclusive is both naive and disingenuous. On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 4:47 AM C. G. Estabrook wrote: And e.g. Kennedy and Clinton weren?t? One of the most disastrous presidencies of recent times was Carter?s - it ushered in neoliberalism - while Carter himself by all accounts is a man of decent character. The issue is US policy, not the character of the chief magistrate (as Sally Hemings might say). > On Nov 27, 2019, at 4:06 AM, Debra Schrishuhn wrote: > > Or maybe it is because Trump is a lawless, bald-faced liar, cheater (in every sense of the term), underhanded, self-serving (and self-dealing), misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic racist with no core principles other than his own advancement and that of his cronies. > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 3:57 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace wrote: > Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? is an absolutely mad appeal by a self-proclaimed 'liberal' to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. > > Why is the political establishment so desperate not just to win the next election but to remove Trump now? > > I think that the answer is to be found in the US grand strategy , followed by all recent US administrations. That depends on maintaining the US control of the world economy by retarding the economic development of Eurasia. (Not a new idea - see the 'Open Door Policy' of 1899.) Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote clearly of the US government's need to prevent the emergence of "peer competitors," Russia and China. > > Trump was the first major party candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies of previous administrations, which were designed to do that. > > In office, Trump has been compelled or cajoled to acquiesce in those policies, but the political establishment can't be assured that will continue, given the rising populist wave that put him in office. The threat has to be suppressed as soon as possible, and a reliable neolib/neocon executive put in place (by a coup, if necessary, as Adm. McRaven recently argued in the NYT). > > The example of Obama - the first president to be at war throughout two presidential terms, who waged no less than eight wars to constrain Eurasia and protect the economic control of the US 1% and for whom stooges like Reich and McRaven are working, must be followed, insists that establishment. > > (Reich? McRaving? To avoid being Trumped? Do the gods of history have a sardonic sense of humor?) > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Wed Nov 27 16:30:37 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 10:30:37 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?How_America=E2=80=99s_Elites_Lost_Thei?= =?utf-8?q?r_Grip?= Message-ID: <008901d5a540$00d27460$02775d20$@comcast.net> I read this article in Time magazine ( which I normally hate ) at the Barber Shop yesterday because of a lack of available reading material. But I am glad I did. I was actually shocked that such an article appeared in Time. There were only a few minor points I disagreed with. This indicates to me that the ruling class in the U.S. are getting scared. Which is a good sign, however like any wild animal when they begin to feel cornered is when they will become especially dangerous. David J. How America?s Elites Lost Their Grip Illustration by Shout for TIME By Anand Giridharadas November 21, 2019 IDEAS Giridharadas is a TIME editor-at-large and the author of Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World, The True American and India Calling. He is also a political analyst for NBC News and teaches writing at NYU. On March 29, 2003, at a wedding reception in the Harvard Faculty Club, Lawrence W. Reed gave a toast in honor of the friend whom he was serving as best man?one Joseph P. Overton. Overton had worked at Dow Chemical; he had since become an executive at a free-market, small?government think tank in central Michigan. Among his duties at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy was raising money, and in doing so, he had made a brochure that would become his legacy. Overton was trying to describe the role of think tanks in a society, and he posited an idea that would come to be called the Overton window. In a given society, at a given moment, there is a range of policies politically acceptable to the mainstream. (A 70% top tax rate and a 20% top tax rate are both within this window in America today; abolishing taxes is not.) Generally, the theory went, politicians will only propose ideas that fall within the window. It falls to think tanks (and others) to propose unpopular things outside of the window in the hope of shifting the window and making the previously unthinkable achievable. Overton was an ardent libertarian who pushed ideas like school choice?and, according to Reed?s wedding toast, he had on occasion resorted to more extreme methods of moving the window of the possible, ?including the time,? Reed recounted that day, ?we flew in a Cessna 172 in broad daylight at treetop level 150 miles into war-torn Mozambique to assist armed rebels fighting the Marxist regime there.? Overton died just weeks after his wedding. Were Overton still alive, he would be pushing 60?and might be aghast to learn that his ?window,? having become famous after his death, is now invoked to describe America?s great, unlikely backlash against the system he defended so ardently: capitalism. Art by Delcan & Company for TIME, photographed by Jamie Chung A democratic socialist? Bernie Sanders?is among the top contenders to be the next Democratic nominee for U.S. President. His rival and fellow Senator, Elizabeth Warren, is also among the top tier of candidates, declaring herself a capitalist who wishes to transform American capitalism as we know it, with a wealth tax, a Green New Deal and the elimination of private health insurance. A more centrist candidate, Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., illustrated the shifting winds when he recently declared that ?neo-liberalism is the political?economic consensus that has governed the last 40 years of policy in the U.S. and U.K. Its failure helped to produce the Trump moment. Now we have to replace it with something better.? In 2016, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) had 5,000 members; since then, its dues-paying membership has multiplied more than tenfold. This new energy on the left terrifies chief executives and billionaires, and yet many of them have been voicing similar alarms about a crisis of capitalism. Ray Dalio, the billionaire co-chairman of the investment firm Bridgewater Associates, warned in April that America faced a ?national emergency? in capitalism?s failure to benefit more people, and he pronounced the American Dream lost. The anti-capitalist impulse has some purchase on the right too. Before he pushed a tax cut that lined the capitalists? pockets, Donald Trump ran, most improbably, as a Republican skeptical of the financial elite?s loyalty to Americans. On Fox News, Tucker Carlson has entertained a surprising skepticism of capitalist doctrines and said positive things about Warren. America Relies Too Much Upon the Generosity of the Rich By many measures, we live in an era of extreme generosity. But is it enough? America loves a capitalist reckoning the way the NFL loves Colin Kaepernick. But it is having one anyway. And if this year that reckoning seemed to reach new intensity, it was because the economic precariousness, stalled mobility and gaping social divides that have for years fueled the backlash now had an improbable sidekick: plutocracy itself and the win-win ideology that has governed the past few decades. This year, America?s ultra-elites seemed to bend over backward to lend support to the idea that maybe the system they superintend needs gut renovating. As a political movement bubbled up to challenge their wealth and power, the elite?s own misbehavior trickled down. And where the two met, ideas that once seemed unutterable started, to many, to sound like the future. History is the story of conditions that long seem reasonable until they begin to seem ridiculous. So it is with America?s present manic hyper-capitalism. Until recently, it seemed normal that a technological revolution that began with promises of leveled playing fields had culminated in an age of platform monopolies. Normal that businesspeople should try to make as much money as possible by paying as little as possible in taxes and wages, then donate a fraction of the spoils to PR-friendly social causes. Normal that economic security for most Americans was becoming a relic of the past. Normal that people in the street-level marijuana business go to prison while people in the business of selling ads to Russian intelligence go on magazine covers. Normal that bankers could shatter the world economy with their speculating, and that they would be among the few to be made whole after the crisis. For years, there have been voices trying to denormalize this state. There were protests in Seattle in 1999, there was Occupy in 2011, there was the DSA, there was the World Social Forum to rival the World Economic Forum, there was, eternally, Bernie Sanders saying the exact stuff he is still saying today, there were civic groups trying to organize workers and poor communities, there were outcasts in Silicon Valley warning that Mark Zuckerberg wasn?t really about human connection. But America was in the grips of the ideological consensus that Buttigieg described. Hyper-capitalism was the intellectual stadium in which the country played. There was a left side of the field, more wary of capitalism?s extremes, and a right side of the field, prone to capitalist boosting. But the stadium, as Overton understood, demarcated the boundaries of the debate for most people: Capitalism, more or less as we practice it, is our system, and it is the best system, so how do we tweak it to make it better? Then, in 2016, something happened. Sanders ran for President. He built a formidable national movement, powered by small donations, and won 22 states?mind you, as a democratic socialist in the United States of America. Sometimes the thing that could never happen happens, and it makes people doubt their sense of reality. And in that election cycle, if Sanders discredited capitalism as a conscious project, his cause received unexpected, unintentional help from the man who would become President. Trump ran as a flamboyant capitalist, wary of certain aspects of capitalism, but promising that his capitalist mind and his capitalist fortune would make him a uniquely gifted, uniquely incorruptible President. When that turned out not to be the case, Trump not only damaged himself but the idea of the selfless billionaire savior too. The Overton window was moving. Then came the 2018 midterms and a new wave of Democratic -candidates?most prominently, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York?questioning capitalism?as?capitalism in a way that seemed unfamiliar and fresh. As the 2020 campaign approached, Warren jumped into the race, a beneficiary of the opening Sanders had helped carve for capitalist?critical aspirants to America?s highest office. With her now famous litany of ?plans,? Warren detailed an agenda that would put American business in a headlock. That she and Sanders, both veritable enemies of Big Business, are among the top candidates shows how much the politics of capitalism has changed. But, politics can be abstract; it can be complicated; people are busy living. Politics often benefits from scandal, from prominent misbehavior, from a dramatization of the discourse. And this was what was so remarkable about 2019: because of the coming election in these populist times, it was already a year potentially full of trouble for the plutocrats?or plutes, as I like to call them (to save space and, thus, paper and, therefore, trees). But, almost as if to assist the cause, the plutes seemed this year to put on an extended exhibit of performance art whose plain, if unstated, thesis is that plutocracy is maybe a bad idea. Exhibit A: Early in the year, Amazon, run by one of the world?s richest people, Jeff Bezos, announced it was pulling out of its planned Hydra-like ?second headquarters? in New York City. It seemed to come as a surprise to Bezos that in a city where a significant number of people struggle to keep up with rising costs and stagnant pay, many weren?t excited by the idea of the state and city giving his company a few billion dollars in tax breaks that wouldn?t be available to a regular Joe starting a business. In the debate that erupted, the conventional wisdom that it is always better to attract jobs, even by offering companies major incentives, came to be questioned. Exhibit B: The college-bribery scandal. Wealth and privilege are already great guarantors of securing a spot in a university. What the scandal unearthed by federal prosecutors illustrated is that many very rich people are not satisfied with the general advantage of hyper-privilege, nor even with the specific advantage of donations to universities that give you an edge but not a guarantee. The ascendant critics of capitalism in American politics have called the system ?rigged? for years. But here was a biopsy of the rigging. The most revealing subplot of the college scandal was the arrest of Bill McGlashan. Many others ensnared in the scheme had bolder-faced names, but McGlashan was significant because he had become a symbol of the hope, promoted by so many of the winners of our age, that they would lead the charge toward a fairer society. McGlashan, through the Rise Fund that he helped create and is managed by his private-equity firm, TPG Growth, had helped popularize the growing field of ?impact investing??in which a fund pursues not only economic returns but also the betterment of the world. He was charged with?and pleaded not guilty to?trying to bribe his son into the University of Southern California, thus depriving the people whom he supposedly helped for a living of a fair shot at that college seat. Exhibit C: In July, Facebook, on account of just one of the scandals hovering over it, this one involving privacy violations, received a $5 billion fine from the Federal Trade Commission. Now, for you, that may be a big fine. For Facebook, it was such a feathery tickle that the company?s stock surged on the news, reaching its highest price in nearly a year. Facebook?s massive market power, its dubious behavior in the face of Russian intelligence activities, its fueling of polarization and its enabling of mis-information and even violence were unaffected by the FTC fine?a penalty that, if anything, left the impression that companies like Facebook enjoy near?total impunity. Still, in response to these scandals and outrages, many in the business world declared themselves newly interested in reform. The most prominent and heralded instance this past year was a statement by the Business Roundtable, an umbrella organization whose members are the chief executives of many of America?s largest companies. For decades, the roundtable has clung to a particular interpretation of the purpose of a business?that it is solely to make money for shareholders. With its new statement, issued in August, the roundtable updated its view: ?Business Roundtable Redefines the Purpose of a Corporation to Promote ?An Economy That Serves All Americans.?? It was inspiring, limited stuff. What it really revealed was how hard it will be for the old-guard capitalists to change at all. The statement was a call for every corporate signatory to decide, voluntarily, to behave in ways more supportive of people and the planet. As far as I know, no company, because of the statement, announced the cessation of practices in lobbying, tax avoidance, employment or other realms. When I publicly questioned the teeth of a pledge that reminded me of my own pledges not to eat fries, Jamie Dimon, the chief executive of JPMorgan Chase and chairman of the roundtable, contacted me. We talked on the phone for half an hour. He was incredulous that I didn?t trust that the pledge would mean action. I challenged him to give the pledge teeth. Why not begin to lobby for proposals in Congress that would make ?stakeholder capitalism? the law, not just an airy promise? Why not excommunicate companies that lobby for things contrary to the stated values of the roundtable? He said the roundtable wasn?t a ?police force.? When I put to him that many signatories of this pledge to treat people better were known to be fairly exploitative of workers, he pushed back with words that illustrate that self-reformed capitalism is a lot like unreformed capitalism, but with better public relations. He said that he knew the chief executives I was talking about, and that he liked them; they were good people; he was sure they were kind to employees. Plus, he said, ?A lot of people just don?t like to work.? (A spokes-person for Dimon later said to the Washington Post, ?These quotes don?t reflect the conversation.?) In public relations, an important term of art is ?getting out ahead of the story.? If bad news about you is coming, pre-empt it by telling the story on your terms. The Business Roundtable?s move, long on rhetoric, short on support for any actual reforms with teeth, seemed very much in that tradition: get out in front of the backlash to extreme capitalism by proposing an optional Capitalism Lite. Then there is the other classic way in which the plutes get out in front of such backlashes: philanthropy. If you?re Goldman Sachs, contribute to a financial crisis that costs millions of men and women their homes and livelihoods, then give back (and scrub your name) through something like the ?10,000 Women? program to mentor entrepreneurs. Yet this year more people seemed to see through this take-and-give playbook. A striking moment came in late March when New York State, led by its new attorney general, Letitia James, filed a lawsuit against members of the Sackler family and others whom it accused of abetting the opioid crisis. In addition to alleging malfeasance in selling the drugs, the complaint made a claim about the use of philanthropy to lubricate wrongdoing. ?Ultimately, the Sacklers used their ill-gotten wealth to cover up their misconduct with a philanthropic campaign to whitewash their decades-long success in profiting at New Yorkers? expense.? The suit cited donations to many arts institutions, resulting in Sackler wings and institutes and centers, while also serving to cleanse their name in a way that allowed the grim machinery of drug peddling to grind on for years. Then there was the Jeffrey Epstein case. Epstein, the late sexual predator and maybe tycoon, gave endless ammunition to plutocracy?s critics. Here was a man who had allegedly trafficked and raped children; who had been convicted of serious offenses; and who managed, through deftly arranged philanthropy and social climbing, to re-establish himself in high society. Epstein ingratiated himself with Harvard. He gave money to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and was given the chance to meddle in its research?a phenomenon that one writer aptly called ?sugar-daddy science.? He even spent a surprising amount of time with Bill Gates, a children?s advocate who has since apologized for his lapse in judgment. Yet what Epstein revealed was less individual lapses than systemic rot in our culture?especially at our universities, which have become drive-through reputational laundromats. As the chances have increased that a candidate outside the neoliberal consensus will win the nomination, we have begun to see the Great Plute Freakout of 2019. A wave of plutes have weighed in about the dangers of a Sanders or Warren presidency. Although their obvious motivation is clear?not wanting to lose their money to the federal government?that?s seldom how they argue it. Instead, they engage in economic concern trolling?framing their self?preservational worries as being, in fact, worries about you and yours. Zuckerberg of Facebook warned us that taxing wealth would limit the diversity of philanthropic efforts in medical research. Leon Cooperman, a hedge-fund billionaire, warned us that taxing wealth would curb the good works that he and his friends do. And then, in the cherry on top, Michael Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor and media billionaire, made moves to launch his own bid for the Democratic nomination. Peak billionaire may be a billionaire deciding to possibly attempt to purchase a party nomination because of his fear that some candidates in the race aren?t plutophilic enough?and then running against a maybe?billionaire who promised that being a billionaire would make him specially incorruptible and now is in impeachment proceedings over his alleged corruption. America?s crisis of capitalism has cousins abroad. In Chile, an increase in subway fares triggered massive antigovernment, pro-reform protests in recent months, killing at least 20 and injuring more than 1,000. A slogan of the protests has been ?Neoliberalism was born in Chile and will die in Chile.? The protesters have been demanding that education and health care be established as rights under the Chilean constitution. Argentina has also been rocked by protests, as it grapples with an economic crisis, rising hunger, and the angry fallout from an International Monetary Fund bailout last year. In Britain, the chaos of Brexit drags on, fueled by feelings that the economy wasn?t working for enough people and questions about whether billionaires should exist. The mercy of all this elite failure and backlash is this: the ongoing collapse of any pretense of selflessness among the winners of our new Gilded Age. If a single cultural idea has upheld the disproportionate power of this class, it has been the idea of the ?win-win.? They could get rich and then ?give back? to you: win-win. They could run a fund that made them sizable returns and offered you social returns too: win-win. They could sell sugary drinks to children in schools and work on public-private partnerships to improve children?s health: win-win. They could build cutthroat technology monopolies and get credit for serving to connect humanity and foster community: win-win. As this seductive idea fizzles out, it raises the possibility that this age of capital, in which money was the ultimate organizing principle of American life, could actually end. Something could actually replace it. After all, a century ago, America was firmly planted in the first Gilded Age?and then it found its way into the Progressive Era and the New Deal, an era of great public ambition. Business didn?t go away; it wasn?t abolished; capitalists didn?t go into gulags. It was just that the emphasis of the society shifted. Money was no longer the lodestar of all pursuits. The choice facing Americans is whether we want to be a society organized around money?s thirsts, a playground for the whims of billionaires, or whether we wish to be a democracy. The second Gilded Age will end at some point. The question is what comes next: What Trump offers is tribal nationalism, strongman politics and plutocrat?friendly policy greased by populist rhetoric. The other possibility is that, as occurred a century ago, a gilded age collapses into an age of reform: an era defined culturally by renewed public purpose and politically by the restoration of the state in areas where people are too powerless to solve problems of their own?defined by the use of shared institutions to solve shared problems. You can already see glimpses of how an age of reform is being dreamed up. Higher taxes on the very fortunate, to be sure; more regulation and worker protections and the like. An attack on climate change almost as dramatic as climate change itself. Programs to give workers greater security. It would be an age in which it was cooler, more thrilling, more admired, more viable to change the world democratically. If there is one thing that could hasten the end of the age of capital and accelerate the coming of an age of reform, it is a vigorous new culture of joining in American life. Not clicking, not liking, not retweeting, not TikTokking, not screaming at MSNBC/Fox, but actually joining: political movements and civic organizations with memberships so vast that politicians cannot ignore them. The age of capital has been facilitated by a remarkable solidarity among the ultra-fortunate. Putting that period in the museum will take other, broader solidarities. Giridharadas is a TIME editor at large and the author of Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Wed Nov 27 18:43:05 2019 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 18:43:05 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Burn Down the System! Message-ID: Political nihilism is one of the president?s strongest weapons. By Thomas B. Edsall Mr. Edsall contributes a weekly column from Washington, D.C. on politics, demographics and inequality. NYT Sept. 4, 2019 Over the four years during which he has dominated American political life, nearly three of them as president, Donald Trump has set a match again and again to chaos-inducing issues like racial hostility, authoritarianism and white identity politics. Last week, at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, the winner of the best paper award in the Political Psychology division was ?A ?Need for Chaos? and the Sharing of Hostile Political Rumors in Advanced Democracies.? The paper, which the award panel commended for its ?ambitious scope, rigor, and creativity,? is the work of Michael Bang Petersen and Mathias Osmundsen, both political scientists at Aarhus University in Denmark, and Kevin Arceneaux, a political scientist at Temple. It argues that a segment of the American electorate that was once peripheral is drawn to ?chaos incitement? and that this segment has gained decisive influence through the rise of social media. ?THE RISE OF SOCIAL MEDIA PROVIDES THE PUBLIC WITH UNPRECEDENTED POWER TO CRAFT AND SHARE NEW INFORMATION WITH EACH OTHER,? THEY WRITE. IN THE POLITICAL ARENA, THIS TECHNOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION ALLOWS THE TRANSMISSION OF A TYPE OF INFORMATION THAT PORTRAYS ?POLITICAL CANDIDATES OR GROUPS NEGATIVELY? AND HAS ?A LOW EVIDENTIAL BASIS.? THE ?NEW INFORMATION? TRANSMITTED ON SOCIAL MEDIA INCLUDES ?CONSPIRACY THEORIES, FAKE NEWS, DISCUSSIONS OF POLITICAL SCANDALS AND NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNS.? THE CIRCULATION OF THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION (WHICH THE AUTHORS LABEL ?HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS?) HAS BEEN ?LINKED TO LARGE-SCALE POLITICAL OUTCOMES WITHIN RECENT YEARS SUCH AS THE 2016 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.? THE PERFECT GIFT FOR EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST. GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE TIMES. STARTING AT $25. ON A LESS CATACLYSMIC LEVEL, THE AUTHORS? ANALYSIS HELPS EXPLAIN THE INTENSITY OF ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT VOTING THAT DROVE TRUMP?S SUCCESSFUL TAKEOVER OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN THE 2016 PRIMARIES. THE AUTHORS DESCRIBE ?CHAOS INCITEMENT? AS A ?STRATEGY OF LAST RESORT BY MARGINALIZED STATUS- SEEKERS,? WILLING TO ADOPT DISRUPTIVE TACTICS. TRUMP, IN TURN, HAS CONSISTENTLY SOUGHT TO STRENGTHEN THE PERCEPTION THAT AMERICA IS IN CHAOS, A PERCEPTION THAT HAS ENHANCED HIS SUPPORT WHILE SEEMING TO REINFORCE HIS CLAIM THAT HIS PREDECESSORS, ESPECIALLY PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, WERE FAILURES. PETERSEN, OSMUNDSEN AND ARCENEAUX FIND THAT THOSE WHO MEET THEIR DEFINITION OF HAVING A ?NEED FOR CHAOS? EXPRESS THAT NEED BY WILLINGLY SPREADING DISINFORMATION. THEIR GOAL IS NOT TO ADVANCE THEIR OWN IDEOLOGY BUT TO UNDERMINE POLITICAL ELITES, LEFT AND RIGHT, AND TO ?MOBILIZE OTHERS AGAINST POLITICIANS IN GENERAL.? THESE DISRUPTERS DO NOT ?SHARE RUMORS BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THEM TO BE TRUE. FOR THE CORE GROUP, HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS ARE SIMPLY A TOOL TO CREATE HAVOC.? In the past, chaos-seekers were on outer edges of politics, unable to exercise influence. Contemporary social media ? Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and so on ? has empowered this constituency, providing a bullhorn to disseminate false news, conspiracy theories and allegations of scandal to a broad audience. Examples include the lunacy of the Comet Pizza story (a.k.a. Pizzagate), the various anti-Obama birther conspiracies and Alex Jones?s claim that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting that left 20 children dead was a ?complete fake? staged by the government to promote gun control. How do Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux measure this ?need for chaos"? They conducted six surveys, four in the United States, in which they interviewed 5157 participants, and two in Denmark, with 1336. They identified those who are ?drawn to chaos? through their affirmative responses to the following statements: I fantasize about a natural disaster wiping out most of humanity such that a small group of people can start all over. I think society should be burned to the ground. When I think about our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn.? We cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over. Sometimes I just feel like destroying beautiful things. In an email, Petersen wrote that preliminary examination of the data shows ?that the ?need for chaos? correlates positively with sympathy for Trump but also ? although less strongly ? with sympathy for Sanders. It correlates negatively with sympathy for Hillary Clinton.? (After publication of this column, Petersen asked to clarify his comment. ?The information given in the above quote,? he said, ?solely reflected an initial interpretation of a preliminary analysis, which is not part of the research on which the column is based.?) In their paper, Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux contend that ?the extreme discontent expressed in the ?Need for Chaos? scale is a minority view but it is a minority view with incredible amounts of support.? The responses to three of the statements in particular were ?staggering,? the paper says: 24 percent agreed that society should be burned to the ground; 40 percent concurred with the thought that ?When it comes to our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn? ?; and 40 percent also agreed that ?we cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over.? The authors expressly caution that there ?is a limitation of the study,? pointedly noting that ?we cannot claim? that substantial numbers of ?American citizens are ready to go into actual fights with the police or commit other forms of political violence.? Instead, they write, this study provides insights into the kinds of thoughts and behaviors that people are motivated to entertain when they sit alone (and lonely) in front of the computer, answering surveys or surfing social media platforms. In these circumstances, ?a few chaotic thoughts that lead to a few clicks to retweet or share is enough. When the echoes of similar processes across multiple individuals reinforce each other, it can add up to cascades of hostile political rumors,? conspiracy theories and fake news. The intense hostility to political establishments of all kinds among what could be called ?chaos voters? helps explain what Pew Research and others have found: a growing distrust among Republican voters of higher education as well as empirically based science, both of which are increasingly seen as allied with the liberal establishment. A political leader who thrives on chaos, relishes disorder and governs on the principle of narcissistic self-interest is virtually certain to find defeat intolerable. If voters deny Trump a second term, how many of his most ardent supporters, especially those with a ?need for chaos,? will find defeat unbearable? ?? The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We?d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters at nytimes.com. From r-szoke at illinois.edu Wed Nov 27 18:43:05 2019 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 18:43:05 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Burn Down the System! Message-ID: Political nihilism is one of the president?s strongest weapons. By Thomas B. Edsall Mr. Edsall contributes a weekly column from Washington, D.C. on politics, demographics and inequality. NYT Sept. 4, 2019 Over the four years during which he has dominated American political life, nearly three of them as president, Donald Trump has set a match again and again to chaos-inducing issues like racial hostility, authoritarianism and white identity politics. Last week, at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, the winner of the best paper award in the Political Psychology division was ?A ?Need for Chaos? and the Sharing of Hostile Political Rumors in Advanced Democracies.? The paper, which the award panel commended for its ?ambitious scope, rigor, and creativity,? is the work of Michael Bang Petersen and Mathias Osmundsen, both political scientists at Aarhus University in Denmark, and Kevin Arceneaux, a political scientist at Temple. It argues that a segment of the American electorate that was once peripheral is drawn to ?chaos incitement? and that this segment has gained decisive influence through the rise of social media. ?THE RISE OF SOCIAL MEDIA PROVIDES THE PUBLIC WITH UNPRECEDENTED POWER TO CRAFT AND SHARE NEW INFORMATION WITH EACH OTHER,? THEY WRITE. IN THE POLITICAL ARENA, THIS TECHNOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION ALLOWS THE TRANSMISSION OF A TYPE OF INFORMATION THAT PORTRAYS ?POLITICAL CANDIDATES OR GROUPS NEGATIVELY? AND HAS ?A LOW EVIDENTIAL BASIS.? THE ?NEW INFORMATION? TRANSMITTED ON SOCIAL MEDIA INCLUDES ?CONSPIRACY THEORIES, FAKE NEWS, DISCUSSIONS OF POLITICAL SCANDALS AND NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNS.? THE CIRCULATION OF THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION (WHICH THE AUTHORS LABEL ?HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS?) HAS BEEN ?LINKED TO LARGE-SCALE POLITICAL OUTCOMES WITHIN RECENT YEARS SUCH AS THE 2016 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.? THE PERFECT GIFT FOR EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST. GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE TIMES. STARTING AT $25. ON A LESS CATACLYSMIC LEVEL, THE AUTHORS? ANALYSIS HELPS EXPLAIN THE INTENSITY OF ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT VOTING THAT DROVE TRUMP?S SUCCESSFUL TAKEOVER OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN THE 2016 PRIMARIES. THE AUTHORS DESCRIBE ?CHAOS INCITEMENT? AS A ?STRATEGY OF LAST RESORT BY MARGINALIZED STATUS- SEEKERS,? WILLING TO ADOPT DISRUPTIVE TACTICS. TRUMP, IN TURN, HAS CONSISTENTLY SOUGHT TO STRENGTHEN THE PERCEPTION THAT AMERICA IS IN CHAOS, A PERCEPTION THAT HAS ENHANCED HIS SUPPORT WHILE SEEMING TO REINFORCE HIS CLAIM THAT HIS PREDECESSORS, ESPECIALLY PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, WERE FAILURES. PETERSEN, OSMUNDSEN AND ARCENEAUX FIND THAT THOSE WHO MEET THEIR DEFINITION OF HAVING A ?NEED FOR CHAOS? EXPRESS THAT NEED BY WILLINGLY SPREADING DISINFORMATION. THEIR GOAL IS NOT TO ADVANCE THEIR OWN IDEOLOGY BUT TO UNDERMINE POLITICAL ELITES, LEFT AND RIGHT, AND TO ?MOBILIZE OTHERS AGAINST POLITICIANS IN GENERAL.? THESE DISRUPTERS DO NOT ?SHARE RUMORS BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THEM TO BE TRUE. FOR THE CORE GROUP, HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS ARE SIMPLY A TOOL TO CREATE HAVOC.? In the past, chaos-seekers were on outer edges of politics, unable to exercise influence. Contemporary social media ? Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and so on ? has empowered this constituency, providing a bullhorn to disseminate false news, conspiracy theories and allegations of scandal to a broad audience. Examples include the lunacy of the Comet Pizza story (a.k.a. Pizzagate), the various anti-Obama birther conspiracies and Alex Jones?s claim that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting that left 20 children dead was a ?complete fake? staged by the government to promote gun control. How do Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux measure this ?need for chaos"? They conducted six surveys, four in the United States, in which they interviewed 5157 participants, and two in Denmark, with 1336. They identified those who are ?drawn to chaos? through their affirmative responses to the following statements: I fantasize about a natural disaster wiping out most of humanity such that a small group of people can start all over. I think society should be burned to the ground. When I think about our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn.? We cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over. Sometimes I just feel like destroying beautiful things. In an email, Petersen wrote that preliminary examination of the data shows ?that the ?need for chaos? correlates positively with sympathy for Trump but also ? although less strongly ? with sympathy for Sanders. It correlates negatively with sympathy for Hillary Clinton.? (After publication of this column, Petersen asked to clarify his comment. ?The information given in the above quote,? he said, ?solely reflected an initial interpretation of a preliminary analysis, which is not part of the research on which the column is based.?) In their paper, Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux contend that ?the extreme discontent expressed in the ?Need for Chaos? scale is a minority view but it is a minority view with incredible amounts of support.? The responses to three of the statements in particular were ?staggering,? the paper says: 24 percent agreed that society should be burned to the ground; 40 percent concurred with the thought that ?When it comes to our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn? ?; and 40 percent also agreed that ?we cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over.? The authors expressly caution that there ?is a limitation of the study,? pointedly noting that ?we cannot claim? that substantial numbers of ?American citizens are ready to go into actual fights with the police or commit other forms of political violence.? Instead, they write, this study provides insights into the kinds of thoughts and behaviors that people are motivated to entertain when they sit alone (and lonely) in front of the computer, answering surveys or surfing social media platforms. In these circumstances, ?a few chaotic thoughts that lead to a few clicks to retweet or share is enough. When the echoes of similar processes across multiple individuals reinforce each other, it can add up to cascades of hostile political rumors,? conspiracy theories and fake news. The intense hostility to political establishments of all kinds among what could be called ?chaos voters? helps explain what Pew Research and others have found: a growing distrust among Republican voters of higher education as well as empirically based science, both of which are increasingly seen as allied with the liberal establishment. A political leader who thrives on chaos, relishes disorder and governs on the principle of narcissistic self-interest is virtually certain to find defeat intolerable. If voters deny Trump a second term, how many of his most ardent supporters, especially those with a ?need for chaos,? will find defeat unbearable? ?? The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We?d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters at nytimes.com. From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Wed Nov 27 18:48:42 2019 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 12:48:42 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?b?W1BlYWNlXSAJUm9iZXJ0IFJlaWNo4oCZcyBs?= =?utf-8?q?etter_to_=E2=80=98MoveOn=E2=80=99_CORRECTED?= In-Reply-To: <006001d5a53c$e8ba6c50$ba2f44f0$@comcast.net> References: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> <6DF02DD3-441F-4248-8169-778409EB318F@newsfromneptune.com> <003b01d5a530$da2f3dc0$8e8db940$@comcast.net> <81F445A5-D0CD-4FDA-A8D0-4E3757C75574@gmail.com> <006001d5a53c$e8ba6c50$ba2f44f0$@comcast.net> Message-ID: I agree that W should have been impeached but that is irrelevant to the impeachment of Trump who has flagrantly flaunted the Constitution, ignored laws, and enriched himself and his cronies ?not to mention being responsible for a lot of deaths on our southern border and throughout the nation through bogus immigration policy and destruction of the meager protections of the ACA ?repeatedly over the past 3 years. Regardless of what other Presidents have done, he has done more than enough damage and perpetrated more than enough corruption to warrant impeachment all on his own. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 27, 2019, at 10:08 AM, David Johnson wrote: > > Deb, > > As bad as Trump is, is he really worse than the Presidency of G.W. Bush ? > I say nowhere near as bad as GW, who by the way if you haven?t noticed, the ruling class and their corporate owned media has been working overtime to improve his PR image, including Ellen DeGeneres?s promotion and JOE BIDEN pinning a ? Medal of Freedom ? on him at a huge public ceremony. All crimes are forgiven if it is in the service of the ruling class. > > After thousands of voter referendums passed across the U.S. supporting the impeachment of GW Bush in 2005 / 2006 for WAR CRIMES, including in Champaign and Urbana, what are the first words out of Nancy Pelosi?s mouth when in November 2006 it was announced that the Democrats had won both the House and Senate ?.....? Impeachment is off the table, impeachment is off the table ? ! > > Like the Russia gate conspiracy hoax that floundered for lack of real evidence, this latest Ukraine Gate action is also nothing but a dog and pony show distraction. Distraction away from the Democrats having to actually oppose Trump?s policies by advocating for issues that would improve the lives of the vast majority of the American people. But the DNC won?t do that because it will threaten their gravy train of corporate donations. > > In the meantime, if Trump is such a threat to our country, why is it the vast majority of Democrats have given him almost everything he wants and then some. They made a public spectacle of opposing Brent Kavenaugh but proceeded to approve all of his right wing judge appointments to the federal bench. They did next to nothing to oppose Trump?s tax bill, with even Chuckie Schumer saying ; ? WE agree with the principal of this bill, we just wish we were consulted. ?. Then there was Trump?s request for increased WAR budget. What did the Democrats do ? They approved it and added even more money to it. And more recently the Democrats gave Trump expanded powers under the Patriot Act, which only ; AOC, Ihlan Omar, Presley, and Talibi ( The Squad ) voted against. > So if Trump is such a danger, the supposed opposition party ( Democrats ) have a funny way of opposing. > > To quote George Carlin Deb, ; ? It is a big club and WE are not members. ? > > Lastly, funny how Trump?s briefly delaying military assistance to the FASCIST government of Ukraine is a ? security threat ? to the U.S. ? > Instead of NOT supplying any weapons to Ukraine, which even Obama refused to do. > > The best way to defeat Trump is to elect a candidate in the Democratic primary who will advocate for issues that are popular with and will benefit the American people. Like Bernie Sanders. But you watch what happens. If they don?t rig the democratic primary again with voter disenfranchisement and outright ELECTION FRAUD or the use of Super Delegates at the convention, the ruling class and the corporate owned media, who supposedly hates Trump so bad, will instantly turn their propaganda campaign against Sanders and will support the re-election of Trump. > > David J. > > From: Debra Schrishuhn [mailto:deb.pdamerica at gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 9:30 AM > To: David Johnson > Cc: C. G. Estabrook; Peace Discuss; Peace > Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED > > David > I understand what you are saying and generally agree with the historical context you provide. However, the entire presidential succession is not the issue here. The issue is that President Donald Trump has behaved in a number of situations badly, illegally, and unconstitutionally, and for those actions the Constitution prescribes the remedy of impeachment. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Nov 27, 2019, at 8:42 AM, David Johnson wrote: > > Deb, > > The problems we have currently in this country did not begin with Trump in Jan. 2017. AS the democratically elected President of Honduras ( Manuel Zelaya ) who was deposed in a military coup by Hillary Clinton and Obama in 2009 because he was implementing increased taxes on the wealthy and foreign corporations , increasing the minimum wage , and democratizing the constitutional system of governance in Honduras, said in an interview on Democracy Now several years ago when he was asked about Obama?s foreign policies as ? boss ( Jefe ) ? of the American empire, Zelaya?s immediate response was ; ? The President of the United States is NOT the Jefe ( boss ) of the American empire. > Ever wonder why nothing changes for the better regardless which political party wins the presidency ? Same bipartisan belligerent foreign policy, same focus on privatization and austerity, same expansion of corporate and police powers. Same erosion of individual rights, privacy, and freedom of speech. > > The problem the majority of the ruling class ( not the tiny group that helped Trump get elected ? Adelson, Mercer, etc. ) has with Trump is that they wanted Hillary Clinton to win because she has a proven track record of being a loyal and dependable servant of the ruling class. Trump on the other hand is an uncertain ? wild card ? who is a pure opportunist with no other ideology than that, and Trump was campaigning on issues ( that he had no intention of executing ) that was a threat to neo-liberal austerity and neo-conservative foreign policy. > > The POTUS has power, but not as much as most people think. The corporate plutocracy ( the ruling class ) is the real power. In particular ; The financial sector, the military industrial complex, The oil / gas / energy sector, and the corporate owned media. > > > Below is a recent study that proves this point ( from the BBC ) ? > > The US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite. > > So concludes a recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page. > > This is not news, you say. > > Perhaps, but the two professors have conducted exhaustive research to try to present data-driven support for this conclusion. Here's how they explain it: > > Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. > > In English: the wealthy few move policy, while the average American has little power. > > Eric Zuess, writing in Counterpunch, isn't surprised by the survey's results. > > "American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation's "news" media)," he writes. "The US, in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious 'electoral' 'democratic' countries. We weren't formerly, but we clearly are now." > > > > From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Debra Schrishuhn via Peace > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 7:15 AM > To: C. G. Estabrook > Cc: Peace Discuss; Peace > Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED > > First, I won't be drawn into a round of "whataboutism." Second, to insist that the issues of U.S. policy by and character of the chief elected officer are mutually exclusive is both naive and disingenuous. > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 4:47 AM C. G. Estabrook wrote: > And e.g. Kennedy and Clinton weren?t? > > One of the most disastrous presidencies of recent times was Carter?s - it ushered in neoliberalism - while Carter himself by all accounts is a man of decent character. > > The issue is US policy, not the character of the chief magistrate (as Sally Hemings might say). > > > > On Nov 27, 2019, at 4:06 AM, Debra Schrishuhn wrote: > > > > Or maybe it is because Trump is a lawless, bald-faced liar, cheater (in every sense of the term), underhanded, self-serving (and self-dealing), misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic racist with no core principles other than his own advancement and that of his cronies. > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 3:57 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace wrote: > > Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? is an absolutely mad appeal by a self-proclaimed 'liberal' to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. > > > > Why is the political establishment so desperate not just to win the next election but to remove Trump now? > > > > I think that the answer is to be found in the US grand strategy , followed by all recent US administrations. That depends on maintaining the US control of the world economy by retarding the economic development of Eurasia. (Not a new idea - see the 'Open Door Policy' of 1899.) Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote clearly of the US government's need to prevent the emergence of "peer competitors," Russia and China. > > > > Trump was the first major party candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies of previous administrations, which were designed to do that. > > > > In office, Trump has been compelled or cajoled to acquiesce in those policies, but the political establishment can't be assured that will continue, given the rising populist wave that put him in office. The threat has to be suppressed as soon as possible, and a reliable neolib/neocon executive put in place (by a coup, if necessary, as Adm. McRaven recently argued in the NYT). > > > > The example of Obama - the first president to be at war throughout two presidential terms, who waged no less than eight wars to constrain Eurasia and protect the economic control of the US 1% and for whom stooges like Reich and McRaven are working, must be followed, insists that establishment. > > > > (Reich? McRaving? To avoid being Trumped? Do the gods of history have a sardonic sense of humor?) > > _______________________________________________ > > Peace mailing list > > Peace at lists.chambana.net > > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Wed Nov 27 18:49:35 2019 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 12:49:35 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?b?W1BlYWNlXSAJUm9iZXJ0IFJlaWNo4oCZcyBs?= =?utf-8?q?etter_to_=E2=80=98MoveOn=E2=80=99_CORRECTED?= In-Reply-To: <006001d5a53c$e8ba6c50$ba2f44f0$@comcast.net> References: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> <6DF02DD3-441F-4248-8169-778409EB318F@newsfromneptune.com> <003b01d5a530$da2f3dc0$8e8db940$@comcast.net> <81F445A5-D0CD-4FDA-A8D0-4E3757C75574@gmail.com> <006001d5a53c$e8ba6c50$ba2f44f0$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <763582EA-1FD9-4EF9-8D15-106DE54AA4E8@gmail.com> On the good side, Bernie is surging. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 27, 2019, at 10:08 AM, David Johnson wrote: > > Deb, > > As bad as Trump is, is he really worse than the Presidency of G.W. Bush ? > I say nowhere near as bad as GW, who by the way if you haven?t noticed, the ruling class and their corporate owned media has been working overtime to improve his PR image, including Ellen DeGeneres?s promotion and JOE BIDEN pinning a ? Medal of Freedom ? on him at a huge public ceremony. All crimes are forgiven if it is in the service of the ruling class. > > After thousands of voter referendums passed across the U.S. supporting the impeachment of GW Bush in 2005 / 2006 for WAR CRIMES, including in Champaign and Urbana, what are the first words out of Nancy Pelosi?s mouth when in November 2006 it was announced that the Democrats had won both the House and Senate ?.....? Impeachment is off the table, impeachment is off the table ? ! > > Like the Russia gate conspiracy hoax that floundered for lack of real evidence, this latest Ukraine Gate action is also nothing but a dog and pony show distraction. Distraction away from the Democrats having to actually oppose Trump?s policies by advocating for issues that would improve the lives of the vast majority of the American people. But the DNC won?t do that because it will threaten their gravy train of corporate donations. > > In the meantime, if Trump is such a threat to our country, why is it the vast majority of Democrats have given him almost everything he wants and then some. They made a public spectacle of opposing Brent Kavenaugh but proceeded to approve all of his right wing judge appointments to the federal bench. They did next to nothing to oppose Trump?s tax bill, with even Chuckie Schumer saying ; ? WE agree with the principal of this bill, we just wish we were consulted. ?. Then there was Trump?s request for increased WAR budget. What did the Democrats do ? They approved it and added even more money to it. And more recently the Democrats gave Trump expanded powers under the Patriot Act, which only ; AOC, Ihlan Omar, Presley, and Talibi ( The Squad ) voted against. > So if Trump is such a danger, the supposed opposition party ( Democrats ) have a funny way of opposing. > > To quote George Carlin Deb, ; ? It is a big club and WE are not members. ? > > Lastly, funny how Trump?s briefly delaying military assistance to the FASCIST government of Ukraine is a ? security threat ? to the U.S. ? > Instead of NOT supplying any weapons to Ukraine, which even Obama refused to do. > > The best way to defeat Trump is to elect a candidate in the Democratic primary who will advocate for issues that are popular with and will benefit the American people. Like Bernie Sanders. But you watch what happens. If they don?t rig the democratic primary again with voter disenfranchisement and outright ELECTION FRAUD or the use of Super Delegates at the convention, the ruling class and the corporate owned media, who supposedly hates Trump so bad, will instantly turn their propaganda campaign against Sanders and will support the re-election of Trump. > > David J. > > From: Debra Schrishuhn [mailto:deb.pdamerica at gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 9:30 AM > To: David Johnson > Cc: C. G. Estabrook; Peace Discuss; Peace > Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED > > David > I understand what you are saying and generally agree with the historical context you provide. However, the entire presidential succession is not the issue here. The issue is that President Donald Trump has behaved in a number of situations badly, illegally, and unconstitutionally, and for those actions the Constitution prescribes the remedy of impeachment. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Nov 27, 2019, at 8:42 AM, David Johnson wrote: > > Deb, > > The problems we have currently in this country did not begin with Trump in Jan. 2017. AS the democratically elected President of Honduras ( Manuel Zelaya ) who was deposed in a military coup by Hillary Clinton and Obama in 2009 because he was implementing increased taxes on the wealthy and foreign corporations , increasing the minimum wage , and democratizing the constitutional system of governance in Honduras, said in an interview on Democracy Now several years ago when he was asked about Obama?s foreign policies as ? boss ( Jefe ) ? of the American empire, Zelaya?s immediate response was ; ? The President of the United States is NOT the Jefe ( boss ) of the American empire. > Ever wonder why nothing changes for the better regardless which political party wins the presidency ? Same bipartisan belligerent foreign policy, same focus on privatization and austerity, same expansion of corporate and police powers. Same erosion of individual rights, privacy, and freedom of speech. > > The problem the majority of the ruling class ( not the tiny group that helped Trump get elected ? Adelson, Mercer, etc. ) has with Trump is that they wanted Hillary Clinton to win because she has a proven track record of being a loyal and dependable servant of the ruling class. Trump on the other hand is an uncertain ? wild card ? who is a pure opportunist with no other ideology than that, and Trump was campaigning on issues ( that he had no intention of executing ) that was a threat to neo-liberal austerity and neo-conservative foreign policy. > > The POTUS has power, but not as much as most people think. The corporate plutocracy ( the ruling class ) is the real power. In particular ; The financial sector, the military industrial complex, The oil / gas / energy sector, and the corporate owned media. > > > Below is a recent study that proves this point ( from the BBC ) ? > > The US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite. > > So concludes a recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page. > > This is not news, you say. > > Perhaps, but the two professors have conducted exhaustive research to try to present data-driven support for this conclusion. Here's how they explain it: > > Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. > > In English: the wealthy few move policy, while the average American has little power. > > Eric Zuess, writing in Counterpunch, isn't surprised by the survey's results. > > "American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation's "news" media)," he writes. "The US, in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious 'electoral' 'democratic' countries. We weren't formerly, but we clearly are now." > > > > From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Debra Schrishuhn via Peace > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 7:15 AM > To: C. G. Estabrook > Cc: Peace Discuss; Peace > Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED > > First, I won't be drawn into a round of "whataboutism." Second, to insist that the issues of U.S. policy by and character of the chief elected officer are mutually exclusive is both naive and disingenuous. > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 4:47 AM C. G. Estabrook wrote: > And e.g. Kennedy and Clinton weren?t? > > One of the most disastrous presidencies of recent times was Carter?s - it ushered in neoliberalism - while Carter himself by all accounts is a man of decent character. > > The issue is US policy, not the character of the chief magistrate (as Sally Hemings might say). > > > > On Nov 27, 2019, at 4:06 AM, Debra Schrishuhn wrote: > > > > Or maybe it is because Trump is a lawless, bald-faced liar, cheater (in every sense of the term), underhanded, self-serving (and self-dealing), misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic racist with no core principles other than his own advancement and that of his cronies. > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 3:57 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace wrote: > > Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? is an absolutely mad appeal by a self-proclaimed 'liberal' to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. > > > > Why is the political establishment so desperate not just to win the next election but to remove Trump now? > > > > I think that the answer is to be found in the US grand strategy , followed by all recent US administrations. That depends on maintaining the US control of the world economy by retarding the economic development of Eurasia. (Not a new idea - see the 'Open Door Policy' of 1899.) Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote clearly of the US government's need to prevent the emergence of "peer competitors," Russia and China. > > > > Trump was the first major party candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies of previous administrations, which were designed to do that. > > > > In office, Trump has been compelled or cajoled to acquiesce in those policies, but the political establishment can't be assured that will continue, given the rising populist wave that put him in office. The threat has to be suppressed as soon as possible, and a reliable neolib/neocon executive put in place (by a coup, if necessary, as Adm. McRaven recently argued in the NYT). > > > > The example of Obama - the first president to be at war throughout two presidential terms, who waged no less than eight wars to constrain Eurasia and protect the economic control of the US 1% and for whom stooges like Reich and McRaven are working, must be followed, insists that establishment. > > > > (Reich? McRaving? To avoid being Trumped? Do the gods of history have a sardonic sense of humor?) > > _______________________________________________ > > Peace mailing list > > Peace at lists.chambana.net > > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Wed Nov 27 21:20:41 2019 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 21:20:41 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Burn Down the System! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <619724B6-B94C-49C6-89F4-B76C4DD9F1DC@illinois.edu> Pretty dubious stuff to get a prize: Is political ?science? science? > On Nov 27, 2019, at 12:43 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Political nihilism is one of the president?s strongest weapons. > > By Thomas B. Edsall > Mr. Edsall contributes a weekly column from Washington, D.C. on politics, demographics and inequality. > NYT Sept. 4, 2019 > > Over the four years during which he has dominated American political life, nearly three of them as president, Donald Trump has set a match again and again to chaos-inducing issues like racial hostility, authoritarianism and white identity politics. > > Last week, at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, the winner of the best paper award in the Political Psychology division was ?A ?Need for Chaos? and the Sharing of Hostile Political Rumors in Advanced Democracies.? > The paper, which the award panel commended for its ?ambitious scope, rigor, and creativity,? is the work of Michael Bang Petersen and Mathias Osmundsen, both political scientists at Aarhus University in Denmark, and Kevin Arceneaux, a political scientist at Temple. > It argues that a segment of the American electorate that was once peripheral is drawn to ?chaos incitement? and that this segment has gained decisive influence through the rise of social media. > > ?THE RISE OF SOCIAL MEDIA PROVIDES THE PUBLIC WITH UNPRECEDENTED POWER TO CRAFT AND SHARE NEW INFORMATION WITH EACH OTHER,? THEY WRITE. IN THE POLITICAL ARENA, THIS TECHNOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION ALLOWS THE TRANSMISSION OF A TYPE OF INFORMATION THAT PORTRAYS ?POLITICAL CANDIDATES OR GROUPS NEGATIVELY? AND HAS ?A LOW EVIDENTIAL BASIS.? THE ?NEW INFORMATION? TRANSMITTED ON SOCIAL MEDIA INCLUDES ?CONSPIRACY THEORIES, FAKE NEWS, DISCUSSIONS OF POLITICAL SCANDALS AND NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNS.? > THE CIRCULATION OF THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION (WHICH THE AUTHORS LABEL ?HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS?) HAS BEEN ?LINKED TO LARGE-SCALE POLITICAL OUTCOMES > > WITHIN RECENT YEARS SUCH AS THE 2016 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.? > THE PERFECT GIFT FOR EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST. GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE TIMES. STARTING AT $25. > ON A LESS CATACLYSMIC LEVEL, THE AUTHORS? ANALYSIS HELPS EXPLAIN THE INTENSITY OF ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT VOTING THAT DROVE TRUMP?S SUCCESSFUL TAKEOVER OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN THE 2016 PRIMARIES. > THE AUTHORS DESCRIBE ?CHAOS INCITEMENT? AS A ?STRATEGY OF LAST RESORT BY MARGINALIZED STATUS- SEEKERS,? WILLING TO ADOPT DISRUPTIVE TACTICS. TRUMP, IN TURN, HAS CONSISTENTLY SOUGHT TO STRENGTHEN THE PERCEPTION THAT AMERICA IS IN CHAOS, A PERCEPTION THAT HAS ENHANCED HIS SUPPORT WHILE SEEMING TO REINFORCE HIS CLAIM THAT HIS PREDECESSORS, ESPECIALLY PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, WERE FAILURES. > PETERSEN, OSMUNDSEN AND ARCENEAUX FIND THAT THOSE WHO MEET THEIR DEFINITION OF HAVING A ?NEED FOR CHAOS? EXPRESS THAT NEED BY WILLINGLY SPREADING DISINFORMATION. THEIR GOAL IS NOT TO ADVANCE THEIR OWN IDEOLOGY BUT TO UNDERMINE POLITICAL ELITES, LEFT AND RIGHT, AND TO ?MOBILIZE OTHERS AGAINST POLITICIANS IN GENERAL.? THESE DISRUPTERS DO NOT ?SHARE RUMORS BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THEM TO BE TRUE. FOR THE CORE GROUP, HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS ARE SIMPLY A TOOL TO CREATE HAVOC.? > > In the past, chaos-seekers were on outer edges of politics, unable to exercise influence. Contemporary social media ? Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and so on ? has empowered this constituency, providing a bullhorn to disseminate false news, conspiracy theories and allegations of scandal to a broad audience. Examples include the lunacy of the Comet Pizza story (a.k.a. Pizzagate), the various anti-Obama birther conspiracies and Alex Jones?s claim that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting that left 20 children dead was a ?complete fake? staged by the government to promote gun control. > > How do Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux measure this ?need for chaos"? They conducted six surveys, four in the United States, in which they interviewed 5157 participants, and two in Denmark, with 1336. They identified those who are ?drawn to chaos? through their affirmative responses to the following statements: > I fantasize about a natural disaster wiping out most of humanity such that a small group of people can start all over. > I think society should be burned to the ground. > When I think about our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn.? > We cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over. > Sometimes I just feel like destroying beautiful things. > > In an email, Petersen wrote that preliminary examination of the data shows ?that the ?need for chaos? correlates positively with sympathy for Trump but also ? although less strongly ? with sympathy for Sanders. It correlates negatively with sympathy for Hillary Clinton.? (After publication of this column, Petersen asked to clarify his comment. ?The information given in the above quote,? he said, ?solely reflected an initial interpretation of a preliminary analysis, which is not part of the research on which the column is based.?) > In their paper, Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux contend that ?the extreme discontent expressed in the ?Need for Chaos? scale is a minority view but it is a minority view with incredible amounts of support.? > The responses to three of the statements in particular were ?staggering,? the paper says: 24 percent agreed that society should be burned to the ground; 40 percent concurred with the thought that ?When it comes to our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn? ?; and 40 percent also agreed that ?we cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over.? > The authors expressly caution that there ?is a limitation of the study,? pointedly noting that ?we cannot claim? that substantial numbers of ?American citizens are ready to go into actual fights with the police or commit other forms of political violence.? Instead, they write, this study provides insights into the kinds of thoughts and behaviors that people are motivated to entertain when they sit alone (and lonely) in front of the computer, answering surveys or surfing social media platforms. > In these circumstances, ?a few chaotic thoughts that lead to a few clicks to retweet or share is enough. When the echoes of similar processes across multiple individuals reinforce each other, it can add up to cascades of hostile political rumors,? conspiracy theories and fake news. > > The intense hostility to political establishments of all kinds among what could be called ?chaos voters? helps explain what Pew Research and others have found: a growing distrust among Republican voters of higher education as well as empirically based science, both of which are increasingly seen as allied with the liberal establishment. > A political leader who thrives on chaos, relishes disorder and governs on the principle of narcissistic self-interest is virtually certain to find defeat intolerable. If voters deny Trump a second term, how many of his most ardent supporters, especially those with a ?need for chaos,? will find defeat unbearable? > ?? > The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We?d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters at nytimes.com. > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From brussel at illinois.edu Wed Nov 27 21:20:41 2019 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 21:20:41 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Burn Down the System! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <619724B6-B94C-49C6-89F4-B76C4DD9F1DC@illinois.edu> Pretty dubious stuff to get a prize: Is political ?science? science? > On Nov 27, 2019, at 12:43 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Political nihilism is one of the president?s strongest weapons. > > By Thomas B. Edsall > Mr. Edsall contributes a weekly column from Washington, D.C. on politics, demographics and inequality. > NYT Sept. 4, 2019 > > Over the four years during which he has dominated American political life, nearly three of them as president, Donald Trump has set a match again and again to chaos-inducing issues like racial hostility, authoritarianism and white identity politics. > > Last week, at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, the winner of the best paper award in the Political Psychology division was ?A ?Need for Chaos? and the Sharing of Hostile Political Rumors in Advanced Democracies.? > The paper, which the award panel commended for its ?ambitious scope, rigor, and creativity,? is the work of Michael Bang Petersen and Mathias Osmundsen, both political scientists at Aarhus University in Denmark, and Kevin Arceneaux, a political scientist at Temple. > It argues that a segment of the American electorate that was once peripheral is drawn to ?chaos incitement? and that this segment has gained decisive influence through the rise of social media. > > ?THE RISE OF SOCIAL MEDIA PROVIDES THE PUBLIC WITH UNPRECEDENTED POWER TO CRAFT AND SHARE NEW INFORMATION WITH EACH OTHER,? THEY WRITE. IN THE POLITICAL ARENA, THIS TECHNOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION ALLOWS THE TRANSMISSION OF A TYPE OF INFORMATION THAT PORTRAYS ?POLITICAL CANDIDATES OR GROUPS NEGATIVELY? AND HAS ?A LOW EVIDENTIAL BASIS.? THE ?NEW INFORMATION? TRANSMITTED ON SOCIAL MEDIA INCLUDES ?CONSPIRACY THEORIES, FAKE NEWS, DISCUSSIONS OF POLITICAL SCANDALS AND NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNS.? > THE CIRCULATION OF THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION (WHICH THE AUTHORS LABEL ?HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS?) HAS BEEN ?LINKED TO LARGE-SCALE POLITICAL OUTCOMES > > WITHIN RECENT YEARS SUCH AS THE 2016 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.? > THE PERFECT GIFT FOR EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST. GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE TIMES. STARTING AT $25. > ON A LESS CATACLYSMIC LEVEL, THE AUTHORS? ANALYSIS HELPS EXPLAIN THE INTENSITY OF ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT VOTING THAT DROVE TRUMP?S SUCCESSFUL TAKEOVER OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN THE 2016 PRIMARIES. > THE AUTHORS DESCRIBE ?CHAOS INCITEMENT? AS A ?STRATEGY OF LAST RESORT BY MARGINALIZED STATUS- SEEKERS,? WILLING TO ADOPT DISRUPTIVE TACTICS. TRUMP, IN TURN, HAS CONSISTENTLY SOUGHT TO STRENGTHEN THE PERCEPTION THAT AMERICA IS IN CHAOS, A PERCEPTION THAT HAS ENHANCED HIS SUPPORT WHILE SEEMING TO REINFORCE HIS CLAIM THAT HIS PREDECESSORS, ESPECIALLY PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, WERE FAILURES. > PETERSEN, OSMUNDSEN AND ARCENEAUX FIND THAT THOSE WHO MEET THEIR DEFINITION OF HAVING A ?NEED FOR CHAOS? EXPRESS THAT NEED BY WILLINGLY SPREADING DISINFORMATION. THEIR GOAL IS NOT TO ADVANCE THEIR OWN IDEOLOGY BUT TO UNDERMINE POLITICAL ELITES, LEFT AND RIGHT, AND TO ?MOBILIZE OTHERS AGAINST POLITICIANS IN GENERAL.? THESE DISRUPTERS DO NOT ?SHARE RUMORS BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THEM TO BE TRUE. FOR THE CORE GROUP, HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS ARE SIMPLY A TOOL TO CREATE HAVOC.? > > In the past, chaos-seekers were on outer edges of politics, unable to exercise influence. Contemporary social media ? Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and so on ? has empowered this constituency, providing a bullhorn to disseminate false news, conspiracy theories and allegations of scandal to a broad audience. Examples include the lunacy of the Comet Pizza story (a.k.a. Pizzagate), the various anti-Obama birther conspiracies and Alex Jones?s claim that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting that left 20 children dead was a ?complete fake? staged by the government to promote gun control. > > How do Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux measure this ?need for chaos"? They conducted six surveys, four in the United States, in which they interviewed 5157 participants, and two in Denmark, with 1336. They identified those who are ?drawn to chaos? through their affirmative responses to the following statements: > I fantasize about a natural disaster wiping out most of humanity such that a small group of people can start all over. > I think society should be burned to the ground. > When I think about our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn.? > We cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over. > Sometimes I just feel like destroying beautiful things. > > In an email, Petersen wrote that preliminary examination of the data shows ?that the ?need for chaos? correlates positively with sympathy for Trump but also ? although less strongly ? with sympathy for Sanders. It correlates negatively with sympathy for Hillary Clinton.? (After publication of this column, Petersen asked to clarify his comment. ?The information given in the above quote,? he said, ?solely reflected an initial interpretation of a preliminary analysis, which is not part of the research on which the column is based.?) > In their paper, Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux contend that ?the extreme discontent expressed in the ?Need for Chaos? scale is a minority view but it is a minority view with incredible amounts of support.? > The responses to three of the statements in particular were ?staggering,? the paper says: 24 percent agreed that society should be burned to the ground; 40 percent concurred with the thought that ?When it comes to our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn? ?; and 40 percent also agreed that ?we cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over.? > The authors expressly caution that there ?is a limitation of the study,? pointedly noting that ?we cannot claim? that substantial numbers of ?American citizens are ready to go into actual fights with the police or commit other forms of political violence.? Instead, they write, this study provides insights into the kinds of thoughts and behaviors that people are motivated to entertain when they sit alone (and lonely) in front of the computer, answering surveys or surfing social media platforms. > In these circumstances, ?a few chaotic thoughts that lead to a few clicks to retweet or share is enough. When the echoes of similar processes across multiple individuals reinforce each other, it can add up to cascades of hostile political rumors,? conspiracy theories and fake news. > > The intense hostility to political establishments of all kinds among what could be called ?chaos voters? helps explain what Pew Research and others have found: a growing distrust among Republican voters of higher education as well as empirically based science, both of which are increasingly seen as allied with the liberal establishment. > A political leader who thrives on chaos, relishes disorder and governs on the principle of narcissistic self-interest is virtually certain to find defeat intolerable. If voters deny Trump a second term, how many of his most ardent supporters, especially those with a ?need for chaos,? will find defeat unbearable? > ?? > The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We?d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters at nytimes.com. > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Nov 27 21:41:16 2019 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 21:41:16 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?=5BPeace=5D__Robert_Reich=E2=80=99s_le?= =?utf-8?b?dHRlciB0byDigJhNb3ZlT27igJkgQ09SUkVDVEVE?= In-Reply-To: <763582EA-1FD9-4EF9-8D15-106DE54AA4E8@gmail.com> References: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> <6DF02DD3-441F-4248-8169-778409EB318F@newsfromneptune.com> <003b01d5a530$da2f3dc0$8e8db940$@comcast.net> <81F445A5-D0CD-4FDA-A8D0-4E3757C75574@gmail.com> <006001d5a53c$e8ba6c50$ba2f44f0$@comcast.net> <763582EA-1FD9-4EF9-8D15-106DE54AA4E8@gmail.com> Message-ID: Deb Bernie maybe surging, but so is Trump. When one is a victim, their supporters will often then provide more support than previous. The Impeachment, according to many, was nothing more than condemnation and further vilification of Putin/ Russia, and a white wash of the current fascist regime of the Ukraine that we/the US is responsible for putting in power, as our ?good? allies. I would suggest Ukraine is in good company with Israel and Saudi Arabia as one more provocation to war with Russia. To be clear, I don?t support Trump or his attempt to supply more weapons to Ukraine, but impeachment was a shot in the foot by the Democrats. Anyone doubting Carl?s assessment of US goals in respect to Russia/Eurasia and eventually China, not wishing to read Zbigniew?s ?The Grand Chessboard,? might wish to listen to the Grayzone Projects podcast ?Management of Savagery,? in which Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton, cover in detail what is in Max?s book of the same name. On Nov 27, 2019, at 10:49, Debra Schrishuhn via Peace > wrote: On the good side, Bernie is surging. Sent from my iPhone On Nov 27, 2019, at 10:08 AM, David Johnson > wrote: Deb, As bad as Trump is, is he really worse than the Presidency of G.W. Bush ? I say nowhere near as bad as GW, who by the way if you haven?t noticed, the ruling class and their corporate owned media has been working overtime to improve his PR image, including Ellen DeGeneres?s promotion and JOE BIDEN pinning a ? Medal of Freedom ? on him at a huge public ceremony. All crimes are forgiven if it is in the service of the ruling class. After thousands of voter referendums passed across the U.S. supporting the impeachment of GW Bush in 2005 / 2006 for WAR CRIMES, including in Champaign and Urbana, what are the first words out of Nancy Pelosi?s mouth when in November 2006 it was announced that the Democrats had won both the House and Senate ?.....? Impeachment is off the table, impeachment is off the table ? ! Like the Russia gate conspiracy hoax that floundered for lack of real evidence, this latest Ukraine Gate action is also nothing but a dog and pony show distraction. Distraction away from the Democrats having to actually oppose Trump?s policies by advocating for issues that would improve the lives of the vast majority of the American people. But the DNC won?t do that because it will threaten their gravy train of corporate donations. In the meantime, if Trump is such a threat to our country, why is it the vast majority of Democrats have given him almost everything he wants and then some. They made a public spectacle of opposing Brent Kavenaugh but proceeded to approve all of his right wing judge appointments to the federal bench. They did next to nothing to oppose Trump?s tax bill, with even Chuckie Schumer saying ; ? WE agree with the principal of this bill, we just wish we were consulted. ?. Then there was Trump?s request for increased WAR budget. What did the Democrats do ? They approved it and added even more money to it. And more recently the Democrats gave Trump expanded powers under the Patriot Act, which only ; AOC, Ihlan Omar, Presley, and Talibi ( The Squad ) voted against. So if Trump is such a danger, the supposed opposition party ( Democrats ) have a funny way of opposing. To quote George Carlin Deb, ; ? It is a big club and WE are not members. ? Lastly, funny how Trump?s briefly delaying military assistance to the FASCIST government of Ukraine is a ? security threat ? to the U.S. ? Instead of NOT supplying any weapons to Ukraine, which even Obama refused to do. The best way to defeat Trump is to elect a candidate in the Democratic primary who will advocate for issues that are popular with and will benefit the American people. Like Bernie Sanders. But you watch what happens. If they don?t rig the democratic primary again with voter disenfranchisement and outright ELECTION FRAUD or the use of Super Delegates at the convention, the ruling class and the corporate owned media, who supposedly hates Trump so bad, will instantly turn their propaganda campaign against Sanders and will support the re-election of Trump. David J. From: Debra Schrishuhn [mailto:deb.pdamerica at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 9:30 AM To: David Johnson Cc: C. G. Estabrook; Peace Discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED David I understand what you are saying and generally agree with the historical context you provide. However, the entire presidential succession is not the issue here. The issue is that President Donald Trump has behaved in a number of situations badly, illegally, and unconstitutionally, and for those actions the Constitution prescribes the remedy of impeachment. Sent from my iPhone On Nov 27, 2019, at 8:42 AM, David Johnson > wrote: Deb, The problems we have currently in this country did not begin with Trump in Jan. 2017. AS the democratically elected President of Honduras ( Manuel Zelaya ) who was deposed in a military coup by Hillary Clinton and Obama in 2009 because he was implementing increased taxes on the wealthy and foreign corporations , increasing the minimum wage , and democratizing the constitutional system of governance in Honduras, said in an interview on Democracy Now several years ago when he was asked about Obama?s foreign policies as ? boss ( Jefe ) ? of the American empire, Zelaya?s immediate response was ; ? The President of the United States is NOT the Jefe ( boss ) of the American empire. Ever wonder why nothing changes for the better regardless which political party wins the presidency ? Same bipartisan belligerent foreign policy, same focus on privatization and austerity, same expansion of corporate and police powers. Same erosion of individual rights, privacy, and freedom of speech. The problem the majority of the ruling class ( not the tiny group that helped Trump get elected ? Adelson, Mercer, etc. ) has with Trump is that they wanted Hillary Clinton to win because she has a proven track record of being a loyal and dependable servant of the ruling class. Trump on the other hand is an uncertain ? wild card ? who is a pure opportunist with no other ideology than that, and Trump was campaigning on issues ( that he had no intention of executing ) that was a threat to neo-liberal austerity and neo-conservative foreign policy. The POTUS has power, but not as much as most people think. The corporate plutocracy ( the ruling class ) is the real power. In particular ; The financial sector, the military industrial complex, The oil / gas / energy sector, and the corporate owned media. Below is a recent study that proves this point ( from the BBC ) ? The US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite. So concludes a recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page. This is not news, you say. Perhaps, but the two professors have conducted exhaustive research to try to present data-driven support for this conclusion. Here's how they explain it: Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. In English: the wealthy few move policy, while the average American has little power. Eric Zuess, writing in Counterpunch, isn't surprised by the survey's results. "American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation's "news" media)," he writes. "The US, in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious 'electoral' 'democratic' countries. We weren't formerly, but we clearly are now." From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Debra Schrishuhn via Peace Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 7:15 AM To: C. G. Estabrook Cc: Peace Discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED First, I won't be drawn into a round of "whataboutism." Second, to insist that the issues of U.S. policy by and character of the chief elected officer are mutually exclusive is both naive and disingenuous. On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 4:47 AM C. G. Estabrook > wrote: And e.g. Kennedy and Clinton weren?t? One of the most disastrous presidencies of recent times was Carter?s - it ushered in neoliberalism - while Carter himself by all accounts is a man of decent character. The issue is US policy, not the character of the chief magistrate (as Sally Hemings might say). > On Nov 27, 2019, at 4:06 AM, Debra Schrishuhn > wrote: > > Or maybe it is because Trump is a lawless, bald-faced liar, cheater (in every sense of the term), underhanded, self-serving (and self-dealing), misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic racist with no core principles other than his own advancement and that of his cronies. > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 3:57 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace > wrote: > Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? is an absolutely mad appeal by a self-proclaimed 'liberal' to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. > > Why is the political establishment so desperate not just to win the next election but to remove Trump now? > > I think that the answer is to be found in the US grand strategy , followed by all recent US administrations. That depends on maintaining the US control of the world economy by retarding the economic development of Eurasia. (Not a new idea - see the 'Open Door Policy' of 1899.) Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote clearly of the US government's need to prevent the emergence of "peer competitors," Russia and China. > > Trump was the first major party candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies of previous administrations, which were designed to do that. > > In office, Trump has been compelled or cajoled to acquiesce in those policies, but the political establishment can't be assured that will continue, given the rising populist wave that put him in office. The threat has to be suppressed as soon as possible, and a reliable neolib/neocon executive put in place (by a coup, if necessary, as Adm. McRaven recently argued in the NYT). > > The example of Obama - the first president to be at war throughout two presidential terms, who waged no less than eight wars to constrain Eurasia and protect the economic control of the US 1% and for whom stooges like Reich and McRaven are working, must be followed, insists that establishment. > > (Reich? McRaving? To avoid being Trumped? Do the gods of history have a sardonic sense of humor?) > _______________________________________________ > 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 davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Wed Nov 27 22:01:38 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 16:01:38 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Burn Down the System! In-Reply-To: <619724B6-B94C-49C6-89F4-B76C4DD9F1DC@illinois.edu> References: <619724B6-B94C-49C6-89F4-B76C4DD9F1DC@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <00e801d5a56e$3eb8c620$bc2a5260$@comcast.net> I 100 % agree with you Mort ! Typical New York Times Neo Liberal trash. David J. -----Original Message----- From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 3:21 PM To: Szoke, Ron Cc: Brussel, Morton K; peace-discuss; peace-discuss at anti-war.net Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Burn Down the System! Pretty dubious stuff to get a prize: Is political ?science? science? > On Nov 27, 2019, at 12:43 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Political nihilism is one of the president?s strongest weapons. > > By Thomas B. Edsall > Mr. Edsall contributes a weekly column from Washington, D.C. on politics, demographics and inequality. > NYT Sept. 4, 2019 > > Over the four years during which he has dominated American political life, nearly three of them as president, Donald Trump has set a match again and again to chaos-inducing issues like racial hostility, authoritarianism and white identity politics. > > Last week, at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, the winner of the best paper award in the Political Psychology division was ?A ?Need for Chaos? and the Sharing of Hostile Political Rumors in Advanced Democracies.? > The paper, which the award panel commended for its ?ambitious scope, rigor, and creativity,? is the work of Michael Bang Petersen and Mathias Osmundsen, both political scientists at Aarhus University in Denmark, and Kevin Arceneaux, a political scientist at Temple. > It argues that a segment of the American electorate that was once peripheral is drawn to ?chaos incitement? and that this segment has gained decisive influence through the rise of social media. > > ?THE RISE OF SOCIAL MEDIA PROVIDES THE PUBLIC WITH UNPRECEDENTED POWER TO CRAFT AND SHARE NEW INFORMATION WITH EACH OTHER,? THEY WRITE. IN THE POLITICAL ARENA, THIS TECHNOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION ALLOWS THE TRANSMISSION OF A TYPE OF INFORMATION THAT PORTRAYS ?POLITICAL CANDIDATES OR GROUPS NEGATIVELY? AND HAS ?A LOW EVIDENTIAL BASIS.? THE ?NEW INFORMATION? TRANSMITTED ON SOCIAL MEDIA INCLUDES ?CONSPIRACY THEORIES, FAKE NEWS, DISCUSSIONS OF POLITICAL SCANDALS AND NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNS.? > THE CIRCULATION OF THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION (WHICH THE AUTHORS LABEL ?HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS?) HAS BEEN ?LINKED TO LARGE-SCALE POLITICAL OUTCOMES > > WITHIN RECENT YEARS SUCH AS THE 2016 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.? > THE PERFECT GIFT FOR EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST. GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE TIMES. STARTING AT $25. > ON A LESS CATACLYSMIC LEVEL, THE AUTHORS? ANALYSIS HELPS EXPLAIN THE INTENSITY OF ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT VOTING THAT DROVE TRUMP?S SUCCESSFUL TAKEOVER OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN THE 2016 PRIMARIES. > THE AUTHORS DESCRIBE ?CHAOS INCITEMENT? AS A ?STRATEGY OF LAST RESORT BY MARGINALIZED STATUS- SEEKERS,? WILLING TO ADOPT DISRUPTIVE TACTICS. TRUMP, IN TURN, HAS CONSISTENTLY SOUGHT TO STRENGTHEN THE PERCEPTION THAT AMERICA IS IN CHAOS, A PERCEPTION THAT HAS ENHANCED HIS SUPPORT WHILE SEEMING TO REINFORCE HIS CLAIM THAT HIS PREDECESSORS, ESPECIALLY PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, WERE FAILURES. > PETERSEN, OSMUNDSEN AND ARCENEAUX FIND THAT THOSE WHO MEET THEIR DEFINITION OF HAVING A ?NEED FOR CHAOS? EXPRESS THAT NEED BY WILLINGLY SPREADING DISINFORMATION. THEIR GOAL IS NOT TO ADVANCE THEIR OWN IDEOLOGY BUT TO UNDERMINE POLITICAL ELITES, LEFT AND RIGHT, AND TO ?MOBILIZE OTHERS AGAINST POLITICIANS IN GENERAL.? THESE DISRUPTERS DO NOT ?SHARE RUMORS BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THEM TO BE TRUE. FOR THE CORE GROUP, HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS ARE SIMPLY A TOOL TO CREATE HAVOC.? > > In the past, chaos-seekers were on outer edges of politics, unable to exercise influence. Contemporary social media ? Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and so on ? has empowered this constituency, providing a bullhorn to disseminate false news, conspiracy theories and allegations of scandal to a broad audience. Examples include the lunacy of the Comet Pizza story (a.k.a. Pizzagate), the various anti-Obama birther conspiracies and Alex Jones?s claim that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting that left 20 children dead was a ?complete fake? staged by the government to promote gun control. > > How do Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux measure this ?need for chaos"? They conducted six surveys, four in the United States, in which they interviewed 5157 participants, and two in Denmark, with 1336. They identified those who are ?drawn to chaos? through their affirmative responses to the following statements: > I fantasize about a natural disaster wiping out most of humanity such that a small group of people can start all over. > I think society should be burned to the ground. > When I think about our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn.? > We cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over. > Sometimes I just feel like destroying beautiful things. > > In an email, Petersen wrote that preliminary examination of the data shows ?that the ?need for chaos? correlates positively with sympathy for Trump but also ? although less strongly ? with sympathy for Sanders. It correlates negatively with sympathy for Hillary Clinton.? (After publication of this column, Petersen asked to clarify his comment. ?The information given in the above quote,? he said, ?solely reflected an initial interpretation of a preliminary analysis, which is not part of the research on which the column is based.?) > In their paper, Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux contend that ?the extreme discontent expressed in the ?Need for Chaos? scale is a minority view but it is a minority view with incredible amounts of support.? > The responses to three of the statements in particular were ?staggering,? the paper says: 24 percent agreed that society should be burned to the ground; 40 percent concurred with the thought that ?When it comes to our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn? ?; and 40 percent also agreed that ?we cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over.? > The authors expressly caution that there ?is a limitation of the study,? pointedly noting that ?we cannot claim? that substantial numbers of ?American citizens are ready to go into actual fights with the police or commit other forms of political violence.? Instead, they write, this study provides insights into the kinds of thoughts and behaviors that people are motivated to entertain when they sit alone (and lonely) in front of the computer, answering surveys or surfing social media platforms. > In these circumstances, ?a few chaotic thoughts that lead to a few clicks to retweet or share is enough. When the echoes of similar processes across multiple individuals reinforce each other, it can add up to cascades of hostile political rumors,? conspiracy theories and fake news. > > The intense hostility to political establishments of all kinds among what could be called ?chaos voters? helps explain what Pew Research and others have found: a growing distrust among Republican voters of higher education as well as empirically based science, both of which are increasingly seen as allied with the liberal establishment. > A political leader who thrives on chaos, relishes disorder and governs on the principle of narcissistic self-interest is virtually certain to find defeat intolerable. If voters deny Trump a second term, how many of his most ardent supporters, especially those with a ?need for chaos,? will find defeat unbearable? > ?? > The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We?d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters at nytimes.com. > _______________________________________________ > 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 From carl at newsfromneptune.com Thu Nov 28 00:09:13 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 18:09:13 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] IP distorts history of structural inequality Message-ID: <47C8E3F9-2428-4852-A4E4-4D984956C730@newsfromneptune.com> https://newrepublic.com/article/155704/new-deal-wasnt-intrinsically-racist From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Thu Nov 28 00:13:15 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 18:13:15 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?b?W1BlYWNlXSAJUm9iZXJ0IFJlaWNo4oCZcyBs?= =?utf-8?q?etter_to_=E2=80=98MoveOn=E2=80=99_CORRECTED?= In-Reply-To: <763582EA-1FD9-4EF9-8D15-106DE54AA4E8@gmail.com> References: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> <6DF02DD3-441F-4248-8169-778409EB318F@newsfromneptune.com> <003b01d5a530$da2f3dc0$8e8db940$@comcast.net> <81F445A5-D0CD-4FDA-A8D0-4E3757C75574@gmail.com> <006001d5a53c$e8ba6c50$ba2f44f0$@comcast.net> <763582EA-1FD9-4EF9-8D15-106DE54AA4E8@gmail.com> Message-ID: <00f301d5a580$a1b33190$e51994b0$@comcast.net> Yes, If a person only consumes corporate media as their sole info source, then one would tend to believe that Bernie Sanders is behind in the polls and has no chance of winning. Of course polls are supposed to reflect public opinion, but in reality they are used to manipulate public opinion. The fact that Sanders has over 4-million individual donors at the average donation amount of $ 18.00, has him with not only the most money of all of the candidates but also the most donors which also includes his huge grassroots network. WE will see what happens in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada. Sanders - Gabbard 2020 ! David J. From: Debra Schrishuhn [mailto:deb.pdamerica at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 12:50 PM To: David Johnson Cc: C. G. Estabrook; Peace Discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED On the good side, Bernie is surging. Sent from my iPhone On Nov 27, 2019, at 10:08 AM, David Johnson wrote: Deb, As bad as Trump is, is he really worse than the Presidency of G.W. Bush ? I say nowhere near as bad as GW, who by the way if you haven?t noticed, the ruling class and their corporate owned media has been working overtime to improve his PR image, including Ellen DeGeneres?s promotion and JOE BIDEN pinning a ? Medal of Freedom ? on him at a huge public ceremony. All crimes are forgiven if it is in the service of the ruling class. After thousands of voter referendums passed across the U.S. supporting the impeachment of GW Bush in 2005 / 2006 for WAR CRIMES, including in Champaign and Urbana, what are the first words out of Nancy Pelosi?s mouth when in November 2006 it was announced that the Democrats had won both the House and Senate ?.....? Impeachment is off the table, impeachment is off the table ? ! Like the Russia gate conspiracy hoax that floundered for lack of real evidence, this latest Ukraine Gate action is also nothing but a dog and pony show distraction. Distraction away from the Democrats having to actually oppose Trump?s policies by advocating for issues that would improve the lives of the vast majority of the American people. But the DNC won?t do that because it will threaten their gravy train of corporate donations. In the meantime, if Trump is such a threat to our country, why is it the vast majority of Democrats have given him almost everything he wants and then some. They made a public spectacle of opposing Brent Kavenaugh but proceeded to approve all of his right wing judge appointments to the federal bench. They did next to nothing to oppose Trump?s tax bill, with even Chuckie Schumer saying ; ? WE agree with the principal of this bill, we just wish we were consulted. ?. Then there was Trump?s request for increased WAR budget. What did the Democrats do ? They approved it and added even more money to it. And more recently the Democrats gave Trump expanded powers under the Patriot Act, which only ; AOC, Ihlan Omar, Presley, and Talibi ( The Squad ) voted against. So if Trump is such a danger, the supposed opposition party ( Democrats ) have a funny way of opposing. To quote George Carlin Deb, ; ? It is a big club and WE are not members. ? Lastly, funny how Trump?s briefly delaying military assistance to the FASCIST government of Ukraine is a ? security threat ? to the U.S. ? Instead of NOT supplying any weapons to Ukraine, which even Obama refused to do. The best way to defeat Trump is to elect a candidate in the Democratic primary who will advocate for issues that are popular with and will benefit the American people. Like Bernie Sanders. But you watch what happens. If they don?t rig the democratic primary again with voter disenfranchisement and outright ELECTION FRAUD or the use of Super Delegates at the convention, the ruling class and the corporate owned media, who supposedly hates Trump so bad, will instantly turn their propaganda campaign against Sanders and will support the re-election of Trump. David J. From: Debra Schrishuhn [mailto:deb.pdamerica at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 9:30 AM To: David Johnson Cc: C. G. Estabrook; Peace Discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED David I understand what you are saying and generally agree with the historical context you provide. However, the entire presidential succession is not the issue here. The issue is that President Donald Trump has behaved in a number of situations badly, illegally, and unconstitutionally, and for those actions the Constitution prescribes the remedy of impeachment. Sent from my iPhone On Nov 27, 2019, at 8:42 AM, David Johnson wrote: Deb, The problems we have currently in this country did not begin with Trump in Jan. 2017. AS the democratically elected President of Honduras ( Manuel Zelaya ) who was deposed in a military coup by Hillary Clinton and Obama in 2009 because he was implementing increased taxes on the wealthy and foreign corporations , increasing the minimum wage , and democratizing the constitutional system of governance in Honduras, said in an interview on Democracy Now several years ago when he was asked about Obama?s foreign policies as ? boss ( Jefe ) ? of the American empire, Zelaya?s immediate response was ; ? The President of the United States is NOT the Jefe ( boss ) of the American empire. Ever wonder why nothing changes for the better regardless which political party wins the presidency ? Same bipartisan belligerent foreign policy, same focus on privatization and austerity, same expansion of corporate and police powers. Same erosion of individual rights, privacy, and freedom of speech. The problem the majority of the ruling class ( not the tiny group that helped Trump get elected ? Adelson, Mercer, etc. ) has with Trump is that they wanted Hillary Clinton to win because she has a proven track record of being a loyal and dependable servant of the ruling class. Trump on the other hand is an uncertain ? wild card ? who is a pure opportunist with no other ideology than that, and Trump was campaigning on issues ( that he had no intention of executing ) that was a threat to neo-liberal austerity and neo-conservative foreign policy. The POTUS has power, but not as much as most people think. The corporate plutocracy ( the ruling class ) is the real power. In particular ; The financial sector, the military industrial complex, The oil / gas / energy sector, and the corporate owned media. Below is a recent study that proves this point ( from the BBC ) ? The US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite. So concludes a recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page. This is not news, you say. Perhaps, but the two professors have conducted exhaustive research to try to present data-driven support for this conclusion. Here's how they explain it: Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. In English: the wealthy few move policy, while the average American has little power. Eric Zuess, writing in Counterpunch, isn't surprised by the survey's results. "American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation's "news" media)," he writes. "The US, in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious 'electoral' 'democratic' countries. We weren't formerly, but we clearly are now." From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Debra Schrishuhn via Peace Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 7:15 AM To: C. G. Estabrook Cc: Peace Discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED First, I won't be drawn into a round of "whataboutism." Second, to insist that the issues of U.S. policy by and character of the chief elected officer are mutually exclusive is both naive and disingenuous. On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 4:47 AM C. G. Estabrook wrote: And e.g. Kennedy and Clinton weren?t? One of the most disastrous presidencies of recent times was Carter?s - it ushered in neoliberalism - while Carter himself by all accounts is a man of decent character. The issue is US policy, not the character of the chief magistrate (as Sally Hemings might say). > On Nov 27, 2019, at 4:06 AM, Debra Schrishuhn wrote: > > Or maybe it is because Trump is a lawless, bald-faced liar, cheater (in every sense of the term), underhanded, self-serving (and self-dealing), misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic racist with no core principles other than his own advancement and that of his cronies. > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 3:57 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace wrote: > Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? is an absolutely mad appeal by a self-proclaimed 'liberal' to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. > > Why is the political establishment so desperate not just to win the next election but to remove Trump now? > > I think that the answer is to be found in the US grand strategy , followed by all recent US administrations. That depends on maintaining the US control of the world economy by retarding the economic development of Eurasia. (Not a new idea - see the 'Open Door Policy' of 1899.) Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote clearly of the US government's need to prevent the emergence of "peer competitors," Russia and China. > > Trump was the first major party candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies of previous administrations, which were designed to do that. > > In office, Trump has been compelled or cajoled to acquiesce in those policies, but the political establishment can't be assured that will continue, given the rising populist wave that put him in office. The threat has to be suppressed as soon as possible, and a reliable neolib/neocon executive put in place (by a coup, if necessary, as Adm. McRaven recently argued in the NYT). > > The example of Obama - the first president to be at war throughout two presidential terms, who waged no less than eight wars to constrain Eurasia and protect the economic control of the US 1% and for whom stooges like Reich and McRaven are working, must be followed, insists that establishment. > > (Reich? McRaving? To avoid being Trumped? Do the gods of history have a sardonic sense of humor?) > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Thu Nov 28 03:39:07 2019 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 03:39:07 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?b?W1BlYWNlXSAJUm9iZXJ0IFJlaWNo4oCZcyBs?= =?utf-8?q?etter_to_=E2=80=98MoveOn=E2=80=99_CORRECTED?= In-Reply-To: <006001d5a53c$e8ba6c50$ba2f44f0$@comcast.net> References: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> <6DF02DD3-441F-4248-8169-778409EB318F@newsfromneptune.com> <003b01d5a530$da2f3dc0$8e8db940$@comcast.net> <81F445A5-D0CD-4FDA-A8D0-4E3757C75574@gmail.com> <006001d5a53c$e8ba6c50$ba2f44f0$@comcast.net> Message-ID: My 2 bits reaction to all this: I?m mostly concerned about Trump on the issues of nuclear war, climate change and the environment. Some say that at least Trump desires agreement with Russia, but on the nuclear issue his policies have been dangerous. He continues the cold war policies of Obama, with trillion dollar upgrades to nuclear weaponry and by withdrawing from past nuclear weapons treaties. (What does he have in mind?) Moreover, incitement of proxy elements with their provocations near the borders of Russia and around the middle east can lead to unpredictable, if unintentional(?), fatal mistakes. Stephen Cohen has discussed all this [e.g., https://piirs.princeton.edu/news/historian-stephen-cohen-discusses-war-russia]. On climate change and environmental issues, his policies could hardly have been more destructive, and will be hard to remedy. It is important to get rid of him and his cohort on these existential issues alone. Yet, perhaps all this is futile argument; Trump is unlikely to be removed from office, except possibly in the 2020 election. Obviously, there are many other reasons to get rid of Trump, the most fatuoius being the "quid pro quo? Ukraine/Biden affair. On Nov 27, 2019, at 10:08 AM, David Johnson via Peace-discuss > wrote: Deb, As bad as Trump is, is he really worse than the Presidency of G.W. Bush ? I say nowhere near as bad as GW, who by the way if you haven?t noticed, the ruling class and their corporate owned media has been working overtime to improve his PR image, including Ellen DeGeneres?s promotion and JOE BIDEN pinning a ? Medal of Freedom ? on him at a huge public ceremony. All crimes are forgiven if it is in the service of the ruling class. After thousands of voter referendums passed across the U.S. supporting the impeachment of GW Bush in 2005 / 2006 for WAR CRIMES, including in Champaign and Urbana, what are the first words out of Nancy Pelosi?s mouth when in November 2006 it was announced that the Democrats had won both the House and Senate ?.....? Impeachment is off the table, impeachment is off the table ? ! Like the Russia gate conspiracy hoax that floundered for lack of real evidence, this latest Ukraine Gate action is also nothing but a dog and pony show distraction. Distraction away from the Democrats having to actually oppose Trump?s policies by advocating for issues that would improve the lives of the vast majority of the American people. But the DNC won?t do that because it will threaten their gravy train of corporate donations. In the meantime, if Trump is such a threat to our country, why is it the vast majority of Democrats have given him almost everything he wants and then some. They made a public spectacle of opposing Brent Kavenaugh but proceeded to approve all of his right wing judge appointments to the federal bench. They did next to nothing to oppose Trump?s tax bill, with even Chuckie Schumer saying ; ? WE agree with the principal of this bill, we just wish we were consulted. ?. Then there was Trump?s request for increased WAR budget. What did the Democrats do ? They approved it and added even more money to it. And more recently the Democrats gave Trump expanded powers under the Patriot Act, which only ; AOC, Ihlan Omar, Presley, and Talibi ( The Squad ) voted against. So if Trump is such a danger, the supposed opposition party ( Democrats ) have a funny way of opposing. To quote George Carlin Deb, ; ? It is a big club and WE are not members. ? Lastly, funny how Trump?s briefly delaying military assistance to the FASCIST government of Ukraine is a ? security threat ? to the U.S. ? Instead of NOT supplying any weapons to Ukraine, which even Obama refused to do. The best way to defeat Trump is to elect a candidate in the Democratic primary who will advocate for issues that are popular with and will benefit the American people. Like Bernie Sanders. But you watch what happens. If they don?t rig the democratic primary again with voter disenfranchisement and outright ELECTION FRAUD or the use of Super Delegates at the convention, the ruling class and the corporate owned media, who supposedly hates Trump so bad, will instantly turn their propaganda campaign against Sanders and will support the re-election of Trump. David J. From: Debra Schrishuhn [mailto:deb.pdamerica at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 9:30 AM To: David Johnson Cc: C. G. Estabrook; Peace Discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED David I understand what you are saying and generally agree with the historical context you provide. However, the entire presidential succession is not the issue here. The issue is that President Donald Trump has behaved in a number of situations badly, illegally, and unconstitutionally, and for those actions the Constitution prescribes the remedy of impeachment. Sent from my iPhone On Nov 27, 2019, at 8:42 AM, David Johnson > wrote: Deb, The problems we have currently in this country did not begin with Trump in Jan. 2017. AS the democratically elected President of Honduras ( Manuel Zelaya ) who was deposed in a military coup by Hillary Clinton and Obama in 2009 because he was implementing increased taxes on the wealthy and foreign corporations , increasing the minimum wage , and democratizing the constitutional system of governance in Honduras, said in an interview on Democracy Now several years ago when he was asked about Obama?s foreign policies as ? boss ( Jefe ) ? of the American empire, Zelaya?s immediate response was ; ? The President of the United States is NOT the Jefe ( boss ) of the American empire. Ever wonder why nothing changes for the better regardless which political party wins the presidency ? Same bipartisan belligerent foreign policy, same focus on privatization and austerity, same expansion of corporate and police powers. Same erosion of individual rights, privacy, and freedom of speech. The problem the majority of the ruling class ( not the tiny group that helped Trump get elected ? Adelson, Mercer, etc. ) has with Trump is that they wanted Hillary Clinton to win because she has a proven track record of being a loyal and dependable servant of the ruling class. Trump on the other hand is an uncertain ? wild card ? who is a pure opportunist with no other ideology than that, and Trump was campaigning on issues ( that he had no intention of executing ) that was a threat to neo-liberal austerity and neo-conservative foreign policy. The POTUS has power, but not as much as most people think. The corporate plutocracy ( the ruling class ) is the real power. In particular ; The financial sector, the military industrial complex, The oil / gas / energy sector, and the corporate owned media. Below is a recent study that proves this point ( from the BBC ) ? The US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite. So concludes a recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page. This is not news, you say. Perhaps, but the two professors have conducted exhaustive research to try to present data-driven support for this conclusion. Here's how they explain it: Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. In English: the wealthy few move policy, while the average American has little power. Eric Zuess, writing in Counterpunch, isn't surprised by the survey's results. "American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it's pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation's "news" media)," he writes. "The US, in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious 'electoral' 'democratic' countries. We weren't formerly, but we clearly are now." From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Debra Schrishuhn via Peace Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 7:15 AM To: C. G. Estabrook Cc: Peace Discuss; Peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? CORRECTED First, I won't be drawn into a round of "whataboutism." Second, to insist that the issues of U.S. policy by and character of the chief elected officer are mutually exclusive is both naive and disingenuous. On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 4:47 AM C. G. Estabrook > wrote: And e.g. Kennedy and Clinton weren?t? One of the most disastrous presidencies of recent times was Carter?s - it ushered in neoliberalism - while Carter himself by all accounts is a man of decent character. The issue is US policy, not the character of the chief magistrate (as Sally Hemings might say). > On Nov 27, 2019, at 4:06 AM, Debra Schrishuhn > wrote: > > Or maybe it is because Trump is a lawless, bald-faced liar, cheater (in every sense of the term), underhanded, self-serving (and self-dealing), misogynistic, homophobic, xenophobic racist with no core principles other than his own advancement and that of his cronies. > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 3:57 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace > wrote: > Robert Reich?s letter to ?MoveOn? is an absolutely mad appeal by a self-proclaimed 'liberal' to get Trump out of office as soon as possible. > > Why is the political establishment so desperate not just to win the next election but to remove Trump now? > > I think that the answer is to be found in the US grand strategy , followed by all recent US administrations. That depends on maintaining the US control of the world economy by retarding the economic development of Eurasia. (Not a new idea - see the 'Open Door Policy' of 1899.) Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote clearly of the US government's need to prevent the emergence of "peer competitors," Russia and China. > > Trump was the first major party candidate in 40 years to attack the neoliberal and neoconservative policies of previous administrations, which were designed to do that. > > In office, Trump has been compelled or cajoled to acquiesce in those policies, but the political establishment can't be assured that will continue, given the rising populist wave that put him in office. The threat has to be suppressed as soon as possible, and a reliable neolib/neocon executive put in place (by a coup, if necessary, as Adm. McRaven recently argued in the NYT). > > The example of Obama - the first president to be at war throughout two presidential terms, who waged no less than eight wars to constrain Eurasia and protect the economic control of the US 1% and for whom stooges like Reich and McRaven are working, must be followed, insists that establishment. > > (Reich? McRaving? To avoid being Trumped? Do the gods of history have a sardonic sense of humor?) > _______________________________________________ > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kmedina67 at gmail.com Thu Nov 28 06:11:27 2019 From: kmedina67 at gmail.com (Karen Medina) Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:11:27 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Robert_Reich=E2=80=99s_letter_to_?= =?utf-8?b?4oCYTW92ZU9u4oCZIENPUlJFQ1RFRA==?= In-Reply-To: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> References: <3AF248DC-2DDA-46AB-9D70-DBE8476C7709@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: "Impeach them all." - Carl Estabrook, 1970 "Impeach them all." - Carl Estabrook, 1980 "Impeach them all." - Carl Estabrook, 1990 "Impeach them all." - Carl Estabrook, 2000 "Impeach them all." - Carl Estabrook, 2010 "Impeach them all." - Carl Estabrook, 2011 "Impeach them all." - Carl Estabrook, 2012 "Impeach them all." - Carl Estabrook, 2013 "Impeach them all." - Carl Estabrook, 2014 "Impeach them all." - Carl Estabrook, 2015. [Full stop.] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Nov 28 13:07:04 2019 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 13:07:04 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Operation Condor 2.0 Nicaragua then Mexico Message-ID: While we focus on Impeachment??. https://thegrayzone.com/2019/11/27/operation-condor-2-coup-trump-nicaragua-mexico MEXICO, NICARAGUANovember 27, 2019 Operation Condor 2.0: After Bolivia coup, Trump dubs Nicaragua ?national security threat? and targets Mexico ShareTweet After presiding over a far-right coup in Bolivia, the US dubbed Nicaragua a ?national security threat? and announced new sanctions, while Trump designated drug cartels in Mexico as ?terrorists? and refused to rule out military intervention. By Ben Norton One successful coup against a democratically elected socialist president is not enough, it seems. . Immediately after overseeing a far-right military in Bolivia on November 10, the Trump administration set its sights once again Nicaragua, whose democratically elected Sandinista government defeated a violent right-wing coup attempt in 2018. Washington dubbed Nicaragua a threat to US national security, and announced that it will be expanding its suffocating sanctions on the tiny Central American nation. Trump is also turning up the heat on Mexico, baselessly linking the country to terrorism and even hinting at potential military intervention. The moves come as the country?s left-leaning President Andr?s Manuel L?pez Obrador warns of right-wing attempts at a coup. As Washington?s rightist allies in Colombia, Brazil, Chile, and Ecuador are desperately beating back massive grassroots uprisings against neoliberal austerity policies and yawning inequality gaps, the United States is ramping up its aggression against the region?s few remaining progressive governments. These moves have led left-wing forces in Latin America to warn of a 21st-century revival of Operation Condor, the Cold War era campaign of violent subterfuge and US support for right-wing dictatorships across the region. Trump admin declares Nicaragua a ?national security threat? A day after the US-backed far-right coup in Bolivia, the Trump White House released a statement applauding the military putsch and making it clear that two countries were next on Washington?s target list: ?These events send a strong signal to the illegitimate regimes in Venezuela and Nicaragua,? Trump declared. On November 25, the Trump White House quietly issued a statement characterizing Nicaragua as an ?unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.? This prolonged an executive order Trump had signed in 2018 declaring a state of ?national emergency? on the Central American country for an additional year. Trump?s 2018 declaration came after a failed violent right-wing coup attempt in Nicaragua. The US government funded and supported many of the opposition groups that sought to topple democratically elected Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega, and cheered them on as they sought to overthrow him. Trump?s new 2019 statement spewed outlandish propaganda against Nicaragua, referring to its democratically elected government ? which for decades has been targeted for overthrow by Washington ? as a supposedly violent and corrupt ?regime.? [Trump White House Nicaragua emergency national security threat] This executive order is similar to one made by President Barack Obama in 2015, which designated Venezuela as a threat to US national security. Both orders were used to justify the unilateral imposition of suffocating economic sanctions. And Trump?s renewal of the order paves the way for an escalated economic attack on Nicaragua. The extension received negligible coverage in mainstream English-language corporate media, but right-wing Spanish-language outlets in Latin America heavily amplified it. And opposition activists are gleefully cheering on the intensification of Washington?s hybrid warfare against Managua. More aggressive US sanctions against Nicaragua Voice of America (VOA), the US government?s main foreign broadcasting service, noted that the extension of the executive order will be followed with more economic attacks. As Washington?s ambassador to the Organization of American States (OAS), Carlos Trujillo, told VOA, ?The pressure against Nicaragua is going to continue.? The OAS representative added that Trump will be announcing new sanctions against the Nicaraguan government in the coming weeks. VOA stated clearly that ?Nicaragua, along with Cuba and Venezuela, is one of the Latin American countries whose government Trump has made a priority to put diplomatic and economic pressure on to bring about regime change.? VOA?s report quoted several right-wing Nicaraguans who called for even more US pressure against their country. Bianca Jagger, a celebrity opposition activist formerly married to Rolling Stones frontman Mick Jagger, called on the US to impose sanctions on Nicaragua?s military in particular. ?The Nicaraguan military has not been touched because they [US officials] are hoping that the military will like act the military in Bolivia,? Jagger said, referring to the military officials who violently overthrew Bolivia?s democratically elected president. Many of these military leaders had been trained at the US government?s School of the Americas, a notorious base of subversion dating back to Operation Condor. Latin American media has been filled in recent days with reports that Bolivian soldiers were paid $50,000 and generals were paid up to $1 million to carry out the putsch. [https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1062787214361411596/drhhnW5d_normal.jpg] Voz de Am?rica ?@VOANoticias [??]No se ha sancionado el ej?rcito de #Nicaragua "porque tal vez tienen esperanza de que el ej?rcito se va a conducir como el de Bolivia", @BiancaJagger. https://bit.ly/35Gd97t [Embedded video] 10 9:54 AM - Nov 26, 2019 Twitter Ads info and privacy See Voz de Am?rica's other Tweets VOA added that ?in the case of the Central American government [of Nicaragua], the effect that sanctions can have can be greater because it is a more economically vulnerable country.? VOA quoted Roberto Courtney, a prominent exiled right-wing activist and executive director of the opposition group Ethics and Transparency, which monitors elections in Nicaragua and is supported by the US government?s regime-change arm, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Courtney, who claims to be a human rights activist, salivated over the prospects of US economic war on his country, telling VOA, ?There is a bit of a difference [between Nicaragua and Bolivia] ? the economic vulnerability makes it more likely that the sanctions will have an effect.? Courtney, who was described by VOA as an ?expert on the electoral process,? added, ?If there is a stick, there must also be a carrot.? He said the OAS could help apply diplomatic and political pressure against Nicaragua?s government. These unilateral American sanctions are illegal under international law, and considered an act of war. Iran?s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, has characterized US economic warfare ?financial terrorism,? explaining that it disproportionately targets civilians in order to turn them against their government. Top right-wing Nicaraguan opposition groups applauded Trump for extending the executive order and for pledging new sanctions against their country. [https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1144342195564175361/olJpvNY7_normal.png] Alianza C?vica Nicaragua ?@AlianzaCivicaNi Estados Unidos ampli? por un a?o m?s la vigencia de la Declaraci?n de Emergencia Nacional con respecto a la Situaci?n en Nicaragua. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/text-notice-continuation-national-emergency-respect-situation-nicaragua/ ? [https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1197615965476798464/IpoyfWGq?format=jpg&name=600x314] Text of a Notice on the Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to the Situation in... On November 27, 2018, by Executive Order 13851, I declared a national emergency pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706) to deal with the unusual and extrao... whitehouse.gov 165 11:56 AM - Nov 25, 2019 Twitter Ads info and privacy 95 people are talking about this The Nicaraguan Civic Alliance for Justice and Democracy, an opposition front group that brings together numerous opposition groups, several of which are also funded by the US government?s NED, welcomed the order. Trump dubs drug cartels in Mexico ?terrorists,? refuses to rule out drone strikes While the US targeting of Nicaragua and Venezuela?s governments is nothing new, Donald Trump is setting his sights on a longtime US ally in Mexico. In 2018, Mexican voters made history when they elected Andr?s Manuel L?pez Obrador as president in a landslide. L?pez Obrador, who is often referred to with his initials AMLO, is Mexico?s first left-wing president in more than five decades. He ran on a progressive campaign pledging to boost social spending, cut poverty, combat corruption, and even decriminalize drugs. AMLO is wildly popular in Mexico. In February, he had a record-breaking 86 percent approval rating. And he has earned this widespread support by pledging to combat neoliberal capitalist orthodoxy. ?The neoliberal economic model has been a disaster, a calamity for the public life of the country,? AMLO has declared. ?The child of neoliberalism is corruption.? When he unveiled his multibillion-dollar National Development Plan, L?pez Obrador announced the end to ?the long night of neoliberalism.? AMLO?s left-wing policies have caused shockwaves in Washington, which has long relied on neoliberal Mexican leaders ensuring a steady cheap exploitable labor base and maintaining a reliable market for US goods and open borders for US capital and corporations. On November 27 ? a day after declaring Nicaragua a ?national security threat? ? Trump announced that the US government will be designated Mexican drug cartels as ?terrorist organizations.? Such a designation could pave the way for direct US military intervention in Mexico. Trump revealed this new policy in an interview with right-wing Fox News host Bill O?Reilly. ?Are you going to designate those cartels in Mexico as terror groups and start hitting them with drones and things like that?? O?Reilly asked. The US president refused to rule out drone strikes or other military action against drug cartels in Mexico. [https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1124085945530298370/x9EsUs56_normal.png] Bill O'Reilly ?@BillOReilly President @realDonaldTrump tells me he is 90 days into the process of designating Mexican drug cartels as Foreign Terrorist Organizations - which would give US forces more leverage in taking them out. [Embedded video] 16.8K 6:15 PM - Nov 26, 2019 Twitter Ads info and privacy 4,897 people are talking about this Trump?s announcement seemed to surprise the Mexican government, which immediately called for a meeting with the US State Department. The designation was particularly ironic considering some top drug cartel leaders in Mexico have long-standing ties to the US government. For instance, the leaders of the notoriously brutal cartel the Zetas were originally trained in counter-insurgency tactics by the US military. Throughout the Cold War, the US government armed, trained, and funded right-wing death squads throughout Latin America, many of which were involved in drug trafficking. The CIA also used drug money to fund far-right counter-insurgency paramilitary groups in Central America. These tactics were also employed in the Middle East and South Asia. The United States armed, trained, and funded far-right Islamist extremists in Afghanistan in the 1980s in order to fight the Soviet Union. These same US-backed Salafi-jihadists then founded al-Qaeda and the Taliban. This strategy was later repeated in the US wars on Libya and Syria. ISIS commander Omar al-Shishani, for instance, had been trained by the US military and enjoyed direct support from Washington when he was fighting against Russia. The Barack Obama administration also oversaw a campaign called Project Gunrunner and Operation Fast and Furious, in which the US government helped send thousands of guns to cartels in Mexico. Mexican journalist Alina Duarte explained that, with the Trump administration?s designation of cartels as terrorists, ?They are creating the idea that Mexico represents a threat to their national security.? ?Should we start talking about the possibility of a coup against Lopez Obrador in Mexico?? Duarte asked. She noted that the US corporate media has embarked on an increasingly ferocious campaign to demonize AMLO, portraying the democratically elected president as a power-hungry aspiring dictator who is supposedly wrecking Mexico?s economy. Duarte discussed the issue of US interference in Mexican politics in an interview with The Grayzone?s Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton, on their podcast Moderate Rebels: Now, a whisper campaign over fears that the right-wing opposition may try to overthrow President Andr?s Manuel L?pez Obrador is spreading across Mexico. AMLO himself has publicly addressed the rumors, making it clear that he will not tolerate any discussion of coups. ?How wrong the conservatives and their hawks are,? L?pez Obrador tweeted on November 2. Referencing the 1913 assassination of progressive President Francisco Madero, who had been a leader of the Mexican Revolution, AMLO wrote, ?Now is different.? ?Another coup d??tat will now be allowed,? he declared. [https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1182076186719068162/94J_g-X2_normal.jpg] Andr?s Manuel ?@lopezobrador_ ? Nov 2, 2019 ?Qu? equivocados est?n los conservadores y sus halcones! Pudieron cometer la felon?a de derrocar y asesinar a Madero porque este hombre bueno, Ap?stol de la Democracia, no supo, o las circunstancias no se lo permitieron, apoyarse en una base social que lo protegiera y respaldara [https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1182076186719068162/94J_g-X2_normal.jpg] Andr?s Manuel ?@lopezobrador_ Ahora es distinto. Aunque son otras realidades y no debe caerse en la simplicidad de las comparaciones, la transformaci?n que encabezo cuenta con el respaldo de una mayor?a libre y consciente, justa y amante de la legalidad y de la paz, que no permitir?a otro golpe de Estado. 18.4K 9:29 AM - Nov 2, 2019 Twitter Ads info and privacy 10.1K people are talking about this In recent months, as fears of a coup intensify, L?pez Obrador has swung even further to the left, directly challenging the US government and asserting an independent foreign policy that contrasts starkly to the subservience of his predecessors. AMLO?s government has rejected US efforts to delegitimize Venezuela?s leftist government, throwing a wrench in Washington?s efforts to impose right-wing activist Juan Guaid? as coup leader. AMLO has welcomed Ecuador?s ousted socialist leader Rafael Correa and hosted Argentina?s left-leaning Alberto Fern?ndez for his first foreign trip after winning the presidency. In October, L?pez Obrador even welcomed Cuban President D?az-Canel to Mexico for a historic visit. Trump?s Operation Condor 2.0 For Washington, an independent and left-wing Mexico is intolerable. In a speech for right-wing, MAGA hat-wearing Venezuelans in Miami, Florida in February, Trump ranted against socialism for nearly an hour, threatened the remaining leftist countries in Latin America with regime change. ?The days of socialism and communism are numbered not only in Venezuela, but in Nicaragua and in Cuba as well,? he declared, adding that socialism would never be allowed to take root in heart of capitalism in the United States. While Trump has claimed he seeks to withdraw from wars in the Middle East (when he is not occupying its oil fields), he has ramped up aggressive US intervention in Latin America. Though the neoconservative war hawk John Bolton is no longer overseeing US foreign policy, Elliott Abrams remains firmly embedded in the State Department, dusting off his Iran-Contra playbook to decimate socialism in Latin America all over again. During the height of the Cold War, Operation Condor thousands of dissidents were murdered, and hundreds of thousands more were disappeared, tortured, or imprisoned with the assistance of the US intelligence apparatus. Today, as Latin America is increasingly viewed through the lens of a new Cold War, Operation Condor is being reignited with new mechanisms of sabotage and subversion in play. The mayhem has only begun. [https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/40ad4a64a080721dc49904ef8ff87138?s=100&d=blank&r=g] Ben Norton Ben Norton is a journalist, writer, and filmmaker. He is the assistant editor of The Grayzone, and the producer of the Moderate Rebels podcast, which he co-hosts with editor Max Blumenthal. His website is BenNorton.com and he tweets at @BenjaminNorton. https://bennorton.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From moboct1 at aim.com Thu Nov 28 14:09:39 2019 From: moboct1 at aim.com (Mildred O'brien) Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 14:09:39 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Burn Down the System! In-Reply-To: <00e801d5a56e$3eb8c620$bc2a5260$@comcast.net> References: <619724B6-B94C-49C6-89F4-B76C4DD9F1DC@illinois.edu> <00e801d5a56e$3eb8c620$bc2a5260$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <1643288366.646814.1574950179806@mail.yahoo.com> The purpose of Edsal/NYT's silly report on the American Political Science Association's prize winner, "The Need for Chaos," is betrayed in quoting the conclusions of Peterson (et al): ? ? ?"...the 'need for chaos' correlates positively with sympathy for Trump but also...for Sanders... [but]?negatively for Hilary Clinton.? ? ?[The need for chaos is]...a minority view but with incredible amounts of support." They just had to throw the innuendo? associating Sanders with Trump, with a plug for Hilary the darling of DNC, who may join Blumberg (he pronounces his name "blum--rhymes with plum--berg") as a late joiner, leaving no doubt who Peterson, NYT and Edsall (and probably the elite) support for POTUS.?? "All the News That's [Un]Fit to Print"... Midge -----Original Message----- From: David Johnson via Peace-discuss To: 'Brussel, Morton K' ; 'Szoke, Ron' Cc: peace-discuss Sent: Wed, Nov 27, 2019 4:01 pm Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Burn Down the System! I 100 % agree with you Mort ! Typical New York Times Neo Liberal trash. David J. -----Original Message----- From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 3:21 PM To: Szoke, Ron Cc: Brussel, Morton K; peace-discuss; peace-discuss at anti-war.net Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Burn Down the System! Pretty dubious stuff to get a prize: Is political ?science? science? > On Nov 27, 2019, at 12:43 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Political nihilism is one of the president?s strongest weapons. > > By Thomas B. Edsall > Mr. Edsall contributes a weekly column from Washington, D.C. on politics, demographics and inequality. > NYT Sept. 4, 2019 > > Over the four years during which he has dominated American political life, nearly three of them as president, Donald Trump has set a match again and again to chaos-inducing issues like racial hostility, authoritarianism and white identity politics. > > Last week, at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, the winner of the best paper award in the Political Psychology division was ?A ?Need for Chaos? and the Sharing of Hostile Political Rumors in Advanced Democracies.? > The paper, which the award panel commended for its ?ambitious scope, rigor, and creativity,? is the work of Michael Bang Petersen and Mathias Osmundsen, both political scientists at Aarhus University in Denmark, and Kevin Arceneaux, a political scientist at Temple. > It argues that a segment of the American electorate that was once peripheral is drawn to ?chaos incitement? and that this segment has gained decisive influence through the rise of social media. > > ?THE RISE OF SOCIAL MEDIA PROVIDES THE PUBLIC WITH UNPRECEDENTED POWER TO CRAFT AND SHARE NEW INFORMATION WITH EACH OTHER,? THEY WRITE. IN THE POLITICAL ARENA, THIS TECHNOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION ALLOWS THE TRANSMISSION OF A TYPE OF INFORMATION THAT PORTRAYS ?POLITICAL CANDIDATES OR GROUPS NEGATIVELY? AND HAS ?A LOW EVIDENTIAL BASIS.? THE ?NEW INFORMATION? TRANSMITTED ON SOCIAL MEDIA INCLUDES ?CONSPIRACY THEORIES, FAKE NEWS, DISCUSSIONS OF POLITICAL SCANDALS AND NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNS.? > THE CIRCULATION OF THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION (WHICH THE AUTHORS LABEL ?HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS?) HAS BEEN ?LINKED TO LARGE-SCALE POLITICAL OUTCOMES > > WITHIN RECENT YEARS SUCH AS THE 2016 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.? > THE PERFECT GIFT FOR EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST. GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE TIMES. STARTING AT $25. > ON A LESS CATACLYSMIC LEVEL, THE AUTHORS? ANALYSIS HELPS EXPLAIN THE INTENSITY OF ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT VOTING THAT DROVE TRUMP?S SUCCESSFUL TAKEOVER OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN THE 2016 PRIMARIES. > THE AUTHORS DESCRIBE ?CHAOS INCITEMENT? AS A ?STRATEGY OF LAST RESORT BY MARGINALIZED STATUS- SEEKERS,? WILLING TO ADOPT DISRUPTIVE TACTICS. TRUMP, IN TURN, HAS CONSISTENTLY SOUGHT TO STRENGTHEN THE PERCEPTION THAT AMERICA IS IN CHAOS, A PERCEPTION THAT HAS ENHANCED HIS SUPPORT WHILE SEEMING TO REINFORCE HIS CLAIM THAT HIS PREDECESSORS, ESPECIALLY PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, WERE FAILURES. > PETERSEN, OSMUNDSEN AND ARCENEAUX FIND THAT THOSE WHO MEET THEIR DEFINITION OF HAVING A ?NEED FOR CHAOS? EXPRESS THAT NEED BY WILLINGLY SPREADING DISINFORMATION. THEIR GOAL IS NOT TO ADVANCE THEIR OWN IDEOLOGY BUT TO UNDERMINE POLITICAL ELITES, LEFT AND RIGHT, AND TO ?MOBILIZE OTHERS AGAINST POLITICIANS IN GENERAL.? THESE DISRUPTERS DO NOT ?SHARE RUMORS BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THEM TO BE TRUE. FOR THE CORE GROUP, HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS ARE SIMPLY A TOOL TO CREATE HAVOC.? > > In the past, chaos-seekers were on outer edges of politics, unable to exercise influence. Contemporary social media ? Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and so on ? has empowered this constituency, providing a bullhorn to disseminate false news, conspiracy theories and allegations of scandal to a broad audience. Examples include the lunacy of the Comet Pizza story (a.k.a. Pizzagate), the various anti-Obama birther conspiracies and Alex Jones?s claim that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting that left 20 children dead was a ?complete fake? staged by the government to promote gun control. > > How do Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux measure this ?need for chaos"? They conducted six surveys, four in the United States, in which they interviewed 5157 participants, and two in Denmark, with 1336. They identified those who are ?drawn to chaos? through their affirmative responses to the following statements: > I fantasize about a natural disaster wiping out most of humanity such that a small group of people can start all over. > I think society should be burned to the ground. > When I think about our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn.? > We cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over. > Sometimes I just feel like destroying beautiful things. > > In an email, Petersen wrote that preliminary examination of the data shows ?that the ?need for chaos? correlates positively with sympathy for Trump but also ? although less strongly ? with sympathy for Sanders. It correlates negatively with sympathy for Hillary Clinton.? (After publication of this column, Petersen asked to clarify his comment. ?The information given in the above quote,? he said, ?solely reflected an initial interpretation of a preliminary analysis, which is not part of the research on which the column is based.?) > In their paper, Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux contend that ?the extreme discontent expressed in the ?Need for Chaos? scale is a minority view but it is a minority view with incredible amounts of support.? > The responses to three of the statements in particular were ?staggering,? the paper says: 24 percent agreed that society should be burned to the ground; 40 percent concurred with the thought that ?When it comes to our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn? ?; and 40 percent also agreed that ?we cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over.? > The authors expressly caution that there ?is a limitation of the study,? pointedly noting that ?we cannot claim? that substantial numbers of ?American citizens are ready to go into actual fights with the police or commit other forms of political violence.? Instead, they write, this study provides insights into the kinds of thoughts and behaviors that people are motivated to entertain when they sit alone (and lonely) in front of the computer, answering surveys or surfing social media platforms. > In these circumstances, ?a few chaotic thoughts that lead to a few clicks to retweet or share is enough. When the echoes of similar processes across multiple individuals reinforce each other, it can add up to cascades of hostile political rumors,? conspiracy theories and fake news. > > The intense hostility to political establishments of all kinds among what could be called ?chaos voters? helps explain what Pew Research and others have found: a growing distrust among Republican voters of higher education as well as empirically based science, both of which are increasingly seen as allied with the liberal establishment. > A political leader who thrives on chaos, relishes disorder and governs on the principle of narcissistic self-interest is virtually certain to find defeat intolerable. If voters deny Trump a second term, how many of his most ardent supporters, especially those with a ?need for chaos,? will find defeat unbearable? > ?? > The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We?d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters at nytimes.com. > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ 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 davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Thu Nov 28 15:03:52 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 09:03:52 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Burn Down the System! In-Reply-To: <1643288366.646814.1574950179806@mail.yahoo.com> References: <619724B6-B94C-49C6-89F4-B76C4DD9F1DC@illinois.edu> <00e801d5a56e$3eb8c620$bc2a5260$@comcast.net> <1643288366.646814.1574950179806@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005801d5a5fd$0eb7e7a0$2c27b6e0$@comcast.net> ? the 'need for chaos' correlates positively with sympathy for _____________ ? What would one fill in the blank ( in place of Trump ) if this was applied to other places and time periods, like ; 2011 Occupy Movement !960?s Civil Rights and anti-war movement Current general strikes / protests in ; Haiti, Ecuador, Chile, Colombia, Iraq, etc.. Of course the article makes no attempt to discover WHY this situation exists currently. As if this all just appeared magically from a vacuum the moment Trump announced his run for President. That everything prior was absolutely marvelous. That there were / are no real problems that Working people have to struggle with, and that in essence it is just a bunch of bored malcontents. David J. From: Mildred O'brien [mailto:moboct1 at aim.com] Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2019 8:10 AM To: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net; brussel at illinois.edu; r-szoke at illinois.edu Cc: peace-discuss at anti-war.net Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Burn Down the System! The purpose of Edsal/NYT's silly report on the American Political Science Association's prize winner, "The Need for Chaos," is betrayed in quoting the conclusions of Peterson (et al): "...the 'need for chaos' correlates positively with sympathy for Trump but also...for Sanders... [but] negatively for Hilary Clinton. [The need for chaos is]...a minority view but with incredible amounts of support." They just had to throw the innuendo associating Sanders with Trump, with a plug for Hilary the darling of DNC, who may join Blumberg (he pronounces his name "blum--rhymes with plum--berg") as a late joiner, leaving no doubt who Peterson, NYT and Edsall (and probably the elite) support for POTUS. "All the News That's [Un]Fit to Print"... Midge -----Original Message----- From: David Johnson via Peace-discuss To: 'Brussel, Morton K' ; 'Szoke, Ron' Cc: peace-discuss Sent: Wed, Nov 27, 2019 4:01 pm Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Burn Down the System! I 100 % agree with you Mort ! Typical New York Times Neo Liberal trash. David J. -----Original Message----- From: Peace-discuss [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 3:21 PM To: Szoke, Ron Cc: Brussel, Morton K; peace-discuss; peace-discuss at anti-war.net Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Burn Down the System! Pretty dubious stuff to get a prize: Is political ?science? science? > On Nov 27, 2019, at 12:43 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Political nihilism is one of the president?s strongest weapons. > > By Thomas B. Edsall > Mr. Edsall contributes a weekly column from Washington, D.C. on politics, demographics and inequality. > NYT Sept. 4, 2019 > > Over the four years during which he has dominated American political life, nearly three of them as president, Donald Trump has set a match again and again to chaos-inducing issues like racial hostility, authoritarianism and white identity politics. > > Last week, at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, the winner of the best paper award in the Political Psychology division was ?A ?Need for Chaos? and the Sharing of Hostile Political Rumors in Advanced Democracies.? > The paper, which the award panel commended for its ?ambitious scope, rigor, and creativity,? is the work of Michael Bang Petersen and Mathias Osmundsen, both political scientists at Aarhus University in Denmark, and Kevin Arceneaux, a political scientist at Temple. > It argues that a segment of the American electorate that was once peripheral is drawn to ?chaos incitement? and that this segment has gained decisive influence through the rise of social media. > > ?THE RISE OF SOCIAL MEDIA PROVIDES THE PUBLIC WITH UNPRECEDENTED POWER TO CRAFT AND SHARE NEW INFORMATION WITH EACH OTHER,? THEY WRITE. IN THE POLITICAL ARENA, THIS TECHNOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION ALLOWS THE TRANSMISSION OF A TYPE OF INFORMATION THAT PORTRAYS ?POLITICAL CANDIDATES OR GROUPS NEGATIVELY? AND HAS ?A LOW EVIDENTIAL BASIS.? THE ?NEW INFORMATION? TRANSMITTED ON SOCIAL MEDIA INCLUDES ?CONSPIRACY THEORIES, FAKE NEWS, DISCUSSIONS OF POLITICAL SCANDALS AND NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNS.? > THE CIRCULATION OF THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION (WHICH THE AUTHORS LABEL ?HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS?) HAS BEEN ?LINKED TO LARGE-SCALE POLITICAL OUTCOMES > > WITHIN RECENT YEARS SUCH AS THE 2016 U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.? > THE PERFECT GIFT FOR EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST. GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE TIMES. STARTING AT $25. > ON A LESS CATACLYSMIC LEVEL, THE AUTHORS? ANALYSIS HELPS EXPLAIN THE INTENSITY OF ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT VOTING THAT DROVE TRUMP?S SUCCESSFUL TAKEOVER OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN THE 2016 PRIMARIES. > THE AUTHORS DESCRIBE ?CHAOS INCITEMENT? AS A ?STRATEGY OF LAST RESORT BY MARGINALIZED STATUS- SEEKERS,? WILLING TO ADOPT DISRUPTIVE TACTICS. TRUMP, IN TURN, HAS CONSISTENTLY SOUGHT TO STRENGTHEN THE PERCEPTION THAT AMERICA IS IN CHAOS, A PERCEPTION THAT HAS ENHANCED HIS SUPPORT WHILE SEEMING TO REINFORCE HIS CLAIM THAT HIS PREDECESSORS, ESPECIALLY PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, WERE FAILURES. > PETERSEN, OSMUNDSEN AND ARCENEAUX FIND THAT THOSE WHO MEET THEIR DEFINITION OF HAVING A ?NEED FOR CHAOS? EXPRESS THAT NEED BY WILLINGLY SPREADING DISINFORMATION. THEIR GOAL IS NOT TO ADVANCE THEIR OWN IDEOLOGY BUT TO UNDERMINE POLITICAL ELITES, LEFT AND RIGHT, AND TO ?MOBILIZE OTHERS AGAINST POLITICIANS IN GENERAL.? THESE DISRUPTERS DO NOT ?SHARE RUMORS BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THEM TO BE TRUE. FOR THE CORE GROUP, HOSTILE POLITICAL RUMORS ARE SIMPLY A TOOL TO CREATE HAVOC.? > > In the past, chaos-seekers were on outer edges of politics, unable to exercise influence. Contemporary social media ? Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and so on ? has empowered this constituency, providing a bullhorn to disseminate false news, conspiracy theories and allegations of scandal to a broad audience. Examples include the lunacy of the Comet Pizza story (a.k.a. Pizzagate), the various anti-Obama birther conspiracies and Alex Jones?s claim that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting that left 20 children dead was a ?complete fake? staged by the government to promote gun control. > > How do Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux measure this ?need for chaos"? They conducted six surveys, four in the United States, in which they interviewed 5157 participants, and two in Denmark, with 1336. They identified those who are ?drawn to chaos? through their affirmative responses to the following statements: > I fantasize about a natural disaster wiping out most of humanity such that a small group of people can start all over. > I think society should be burned to the ground. > When I think about our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn.? > We cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over. > Sometimes I just feel like destroying beautiful things. > > In an email, Petersen wrote that preliminary examination of the data shows ?that the ?need for chaos? correlates positively with sympathy for Trump but also ? although less strongly ? with sympathy for Sanders. It correlates negatively with sympathy for Hillary Clinton.? (After publication of this column, Petersen asked to clarify his comment. ?The information given in the above quote,? he said, ?solely reflected an initial interpretation of a preliminary analysis, which is not part of the research on which the column is based.?) > In their paper, Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux contend that ?the extreme discontent expressed in the ?Need for Chaos? scale is a minority view but it is a minority view with incredible amounts of support.? > The responses to three of the statements in particular were ?staggering,? the paper says: 24 percent agreed that society should be burned to the ground; 40 percent concurred with the thought that ?When it comes to our political and social institutions, I cannot help thinking ?just let them all burn? ?; and 40 percent also agreed that ?we cannot fix the problems in our social institutions, we need to tear them down and start over.? > The authors expressly caution that there ?is a limitation of the study,? pointedly noting that ?we cannot claim? that substantial numbers of ?American citizens are ready to go into actual fights with the police or commit other forms of political violence.? Instead, they write, this study provides insights into the kinds of thoughts and behaviors that people are motivated to entertain when they sit alone (and lonely) in front of the computer, answering surveys or surfing social media platforms. > In these circumstances, ?a few chaotic thoughts that lead to a few clicks to retweet or share is enough. When the echoes of similar processes across multiple individuals reinforce each other, it can add up to cascades of hostile political rumors,? conspiracy theories and fake news. > > The intense hostility to political establishments of all kinds among what could be called ?chaos voters? helps explain what Pew Research and others have found: a growing distrust among Republican voters of higher education as well as empirically based science, both of which are increasingly seen as allied with the liberal establishment. > A political leader who thrives on chaos, relishes disorder and governs on the principle of narcissistic self-interest is virtually certain to find defeat intolerable. If voters deny Trump a second term, how many of his most ardent supporters, especially those with a ?need for chaos,? will find defeat unbearable? > ?? > The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We?d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters at nytimes.com. > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ 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 carl at newsfromneptune.com Fri Nov 29 01:41:02 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 19:41:02 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump in Afghanistan Message-ID: <043D5F41-5B10-41B2-BBB7-2B5F794A5545@newsfromneptune.com> WSJ: "Trump Says Taliban Peace Talks to Resume During Surprise Afghanistan Visit? In the early 1960's, some US military would say of Kennedy's attack on South Vietnam, "It's a dirty little war - but it's the only war we've got.? Today, thanks most recently to Obama - the first US president to be at war throughout two presidential terms - they needn't say that about Afghanistan: he's left seven others to choose from, having attacked Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen as well. But the permanent government (notably Democrat ?liberals?) insist on removing Trump for fear he'll end the killing in Afghanistan and elsewhere? ?CGE From carl at newsfromneptune.com Fri Nov 29 01:44:40 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 19:44:40 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump in Afghanistan In-Reply-To: <043D5F41-5B10-41B2-BBB7-2B5F794A5545@newsfromneptune.com> References: <043D5F41-5B10-41B2-BBB7-2B5F794A5545@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: <9A5EBB06-CD12-4425-8647-7BB686CA84F5@newsfromneptune.com> [FT] Trump says talks with Taliban have resumed US president Donald Trump said peace talks with the Taliban had resumed as he made an unannounced visit to Afghanistan on Thanksgiving, appearing at a US air force base alongside Afghan president Ashraf Ghani. Following a meeting with Mr Ghani, Mr Trump told reporters that the Taliban ?wants to make a deal? and that US officials were ?meeting with them?. > On Nov 28, 2019, at 7:41 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote: > > WSJ: "Trump Says Taliban Peace Talks to Resume During Surprise Afghanistan Visit? > > > In the early 1960's, some US military would say of Kennedy's attack on South Vietnam, "It's a dirty little war - but it's the only war we've got.? > > Today, thanks most recently to Obama - the first US president to be at war throughout two presidential terms - they needn't say that about Afghanistan: he's left seven others to choose from, having attacked Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen as well. > > But the permanent government (notably Democrat ?liberals?) insist on removing Trump for fear he'll end the killing in Afghanistan and elsewhere? > > ?CGE > From jbw292002 at gmail.com Fri Nov 29 02:05:07 2019 From: jbw292002 at gmail.com (John W.) Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 20:05:07 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Trump in Afghanistan In-Reply-To: <9A5EBB06-CD12-4425-8647-7BB686CA84F5@newsfromneptune.com> References: <043D5F41-5B10-41B2-BBB7-2B5F794A5545@newsfromneptune.com> <9A5EBB06-CD12-4425-8647-7BB686CA84F5@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 7:45 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace < peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: [FT] Trump says talks with Taliban have resumed > US president Donald Trump said peace talks with the Taliban had resumed > as he made an unannounced visit to Afghanistan on Thanksgiving, > appearing at a US air force base alongside Afghan president Ashraf Ghani. > > Following a meeting with Mr Ghani, Mr Trump told reporters that the Taliban > ?wants to make a deal? and that US officials were ?meeting with them?. > Yes, our bold, intrepid Commander in Chief was his usual articulate self today. "The Taliban want to make a deal. But I'm not sure I want to make a deal. It may not be a good deal. On the other hand, it could be a good deal. It'll all depends on what kind of deal they want to make. We'll have to see what happens." The troops, discerning what a bold, intrepid Commander in Chief now leads them so fearlessly, were heard to applaud wildly and thankfully. > > On Nov 28, 2019, at 7:41 PM, C. G. Estabrook > wrote: > > > > WSJ: "Trump Says Taliban Peace Talks to Resume During Surprise > Afghanistan Visit? > > < > https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-makes-surprise-visit-to-afghanistan-11574968770?mod=hp_lead_pos1 > > > > > > In the early 1960's, some US military would say of Kennedy's attack on > South Vietnam, "It's a dirty little war - but it's the only war we've got.? > > > > Today, thanks most recently to Obama - the first US president to be at > war throughout two presidential terms - they needn't say that about > Afghanistan: he's left seven others to choose from, having attacked Iraq, > Libya, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen as well. > > > > But the permanent government (notably Democrat ?liberals?) insist on > removing Trump for fear he'll end the killing in Afghanistan and elsewhere? > > > > ?CGE > > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carl at newsfromneptune.com Fri Nov 29 11:39:40 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 05:39:40 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Trump in Afghanistan In-Reply-To: References: <043D5F41-5B10-41B2-BBB7-2B5F794A5545@newsfromneptune.com> <9A5EBB06-CD12-4425-8647-7BB686CA84F5@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: <0260A127-1D96-47F4-A950-8CB4514A5C8B@newsfromneptune.com> You?ve bought the entire subtle establishment political strategy, designed to maintain US killing around the world: ?ORANGE MAN BAD!? > On Nov 28, 2019, at 8:05 PM, John W. wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 7:45 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace wrote: > > [FT] Trump says talks with Taliban have resumed > US president Donald Trump said peace talks with the Taliban had resumed > as he made an unannounced visit to Afghanistan on Thanksgiving, > appearing at a US air force base alongside Afghan president Ashraf Ghani. > > Following a meeting with Mr Ghani, Mr Trump told reporters that the Taliban > ?wants to make a deal? and that US officials were ?meeting with them?. > > Yes, our bold, intrepid Commander in Chief was his usual articulate self today. "The Taliban want to make a deal. But I'm not sure I want to make a deal. It may not be a good deal. On the other hand, it could be a good deal. It'll all depends on what kind of deal they want to make. We'll have to see what happens." The troops, discerning what a bold, intrepid Commander in Chief now leads them so fearlessly, were heard to applaud wildly and thankfully. > > > > > On Nov 28, 2019, at 7:41 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote: > > > > WSJ: "Trump Says Taliban Peace Talks to Resume During Surprise Afghanistan Visit? > > > > > > In the early 1960's, some US military would say of Kennedy's attack on South Vietnam, "It's a dirty little war - but it's the only war we've got.? > > > > Today, thanks most recently to Obama - the first US president to be at war throughout two presidential terms - they needn't say that about Afghanistan: he's left seven others to choose from, having attacked Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen as well. > > > > But the permanent government (notably Democrat ?liberals?) insist on removing Trump for fear he'll end the killing in Afghanistan and elsewhere? > > > > ?CGE > > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace From naiman.uiuc at gmail.com Fri Nov 29 11:46:54 2019 From: naiman.uiuc at gmail.com (Robert Naiman) Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 06:46:54 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Trump in Afghanistan In-Reply-To: <0260A127-1D96-47F4-A950-8CB4514A5C8B@newsfromneptune.com> References: <043D5F41-5B10-41B2-BBB7-2B5F794A5545@newsfromneptune.com> <9A5EBB06-CD12-4425-8647-7BB686CA84F5@newsfromneptune.com> <0260A127-1D96-47F4-A950-8CB4514A5C8B@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: Carl is right that Trump wants to end the war in Afghanistan. That is a good thing. U.S. anti-war activists should support ending the war in Afghanistan, regardless of what they think of Trump otherwise. "Democrats" didn't democratically decide that impeaching Trump would be about the temporary suspension of lethal military aid to Ukraine. Nancy Pelosi decided that, all by her little lonesome. If we don't want to be at junctures like this in the future, we need to boot Nancy Pelosi from the Speaker's chair or curb her dictatorial power. Here's a proposal. Let's set a public deadline for any Member of the House who is not named Tulsi Gabbard to introduce articles of impeachment on Trump for unconstitutional war. When the deadline passes, let's ask Tulsi to do it. When the "well-intentioned but frightened" "anti-war" groups in DC that are afraid to cross Dem leadership concern-troll us that Tulsi is "the wrong messenger," we say to them: you knew what the deadline was. We publicly announced it. If you couldn't get any of the other 434 Members of the House to do this, you only have yourselves to blame. On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 6:40 AM C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > You?ve bought the entire subtle establishment political strategy, designed > to maintain US killing around the world: ?ORANGE MAN BAD!? > > > > On Nov 28, 2019, at 8:05 PM, John W. wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 7:45 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace < > peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > > > [FT] Trump says talks with Taliban have resumed > > US president Donald Trump said peace talks with the Taliban had resumed > > as he made an unannounced visit to Afghanistan on Thanksgiving, > > appearing at a US air force base alongside Afghan president Ashraf Ghani. > > > > Following a meeting with Mr Ghani, Mr Trump told reporters that the > Taliban > > ?wants to make a deal? and that US officials were ?meeting with them?. > > > > Yes, our bold, intrepid Commander in Chief was his usual articulate self > today. "The Taliban want to make a deal. But I'm not sure I want to make > a deal. It may not be a good deal. On the other hand, it could be a good > deal. It'll all depends on what kind of deal they want to make. We'll > have to see what happens." The troops, discerning what a bold, intrepid > Commander in Chief now leads them so fearlessly, were heard to applaud > wildly and thankfully. > > > > > > > > > On Nov 28, 2019, at 7:41 PM, C. G. Estabrook > wrote: > > > > > > WSJ: "Trump Says Taliban Peace Talks to Resume During Surprise > Afghanistan Visit? > > > < > https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-makes-surprise-visit-to-afghanistan-11574968770?mod=hp_lead_pos1 > > > > > > > > In the early 1960's, some US military would say of Kennedy's attack on > South Vietnam, "It's a dirty little war - but it's the only war we've got.? > > > > > > Today, thanks most recently to Obama - the first US president to be at > war throughout two presidential terms - they needn't say that about > Afghanistan: he's left seven others to choose from, having attacked Iraq, > Libya, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen as well. > > > > > > But the permanent government (notably Democrat ?liberals?) insist on > removing Trump for fear he'll end the killing in Afghanistan and elsewhere? > > > > > > ?CGE > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carl at newsfromneptune.com Fri Nov 29 12:01:33 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 06:01:33 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Trump in Afghanistan In-Reply-To: References: <043D5F41-5B10-41B2-BBB7-2B5F794A5545@newsfromneptune.com> <9A5EBB06-CD12-4425-8647-7BB686CA84F5@newsfromneptune.com> <0260A127-1D96-47F4-A950-8CB4514A5C8B@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: <2891E1FE-FDEB-4772-8B9E-7EA7A56CC12F@newsfromneptune.com> Impeach Trump not for war-making but for not making war where Obama did (Ukraine)? "The last temptation is the greatest treason: To do the right deed for the wrong reason." > On Nov 29, 2019, at 5:46 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Carl is right that Trump wants to end the war in Afghanistan. That is a good thing. U.S. anti-war activists should support ending the war in Afghanistan, regardless of what they think of Trump otherwise. > > "Democrats" didn't democratically decide that impeaching Trump would be about the temporary suspension of lethal military aid to Ukraine. Nancy Pelosi decided that, all by her little lonesome. If we don't want to be at junctures like this in the future, we need to boot Nancy Pelosi from the Speaker's chair or curb her dictatorial power. > > Here's a proposal. Let's set a public deadline for any Member of the House who is not named Tulsi Gabbard to introduce articles of impeachment on Trump for unconstitutional war. When the deadline passes, let's ask Tulsi to do it. When the "well-intentioned but frightened" "anti-war" groups in DC that are afraid to cross Dem leadership concern-troll us that Tulsi is "the wrong messenger," we say to them: you knew what the deadline was. We publicly announced it. If you couldn't get any of the other 434 Members of the House to do this, you only have yourselves to blame. > > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 6:40 AM C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: > You?ve bought the entire subtle establishment political strategy, designed to maintain US killing around the world: ?ORANGE MAN BAD!? > > > > On Nov 28, 2019, at 8:05 PM, John W. wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 7:45 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace wrote: > > > > [FT] Trump says talks with Taliban have resumed > > US president Donald Trump said peace talks with the Taliban had resumed > > as he made an unannounced visit to Afghanistan on Thanksgiving, > > appearing at a US air force base alongside Afghan president Ashraf Ghani. > > > > Following a meeting with Mr Ghani, Mr Trump told reporters that the Taliban > > ?wants to make a deal? and that US officials were ?meeting with them?. > > > > Yes, our bold, intrepid Commander in Chief was his usual articulate self today. "The Taliban want to make a deal. But I'm not sure I want to make a deal. It may not be a good deal. On the other hand, it could be a good deal. It'll all depends on what kind of deal they want to make. We'll have to see what happens." The troops, discerning what a bold, intrepid Commander in Chief now leads them so fearlessly, were heard to applaud wildly and thankfully. > > > > > > > > > On Nov 28, 2019, at 7:41 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote: > > > > > > WSJ: "Trump Says Taliban Peace Talks to Resume During Surprise Afghanistan Visit? > > > > > > > > > In the early 1960's, some US military would say of Kennedy's attack on South Vietnam, "It's a dirty little war - but it's the only war we've got.? > > > > > > Today, thanks most recently to Obama - the first US president to be at war throughout two presidential terms - they needn't say that about Afghanistan: he's left seven others to choose from, having attacked Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen as well. > > > > > > But the permanent government (notably Democrat ?liberals?) insist on removing Trump for fear he'll end the killing in Afghanistan and elsewhere? > > > > > > ?CGE > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 From moboct1 at aim.com Fri Nov 29 12:49:24 2019 From: moboct1 at aim.com (Mildred O'brien) Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 12:49:24 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump in Afghanistan In-Reply-To: <9A5EBB06-CD12-4425-8647-7BB686CA84F5@newsfromneptune.com> References: <043D5F41-5B10-41B2-BBB7-2B5F794A5545@newsfromneptune.com> <9A5EBB06-CD12-4425-8647-7BB686CA84F5@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: <812799532.894664.1575031764114@mail.yahoo.com> I'm sick of? "let's make a deal."? The only "deal" the wheeler-dealer wants to make is HIS deal--which he will re-neg whenever he feel's like it (and then deny he ever did the deal in the first place). mo'b -----Original Message----- From: C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss To: peace-discuss Cc: Peace Sent: Thu, Nov 28, 2019 7:45 pm Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Trump in Afghanistan [FT] Trump says talks with Taliban have resumed US president Donald Trump said peace talks with the Taliban had resumed as he made an unannounced visit to Afghanistan on Thanksgiving, appearing at a US air force base alongside Afghan president Ashraf Ghani. Following a meeting with Mr Ghani, Mr Trump told reporters that the Taliban ?wants to make a deal? and that US officials were ?meeting with them?. > On Nov 28, 2019, at 7:41 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote: > > WSJ: "Trump Says Taliban Peace Talks to Resume During Surprise Afghanistan Visit? > > > In the early 1960's, some US military would say of Kennedy's attack on South Vietnam, "It's a dirty little war - but it's the only war we've got.? > > Today, thanks most recently to Obama - the first US president to be at war throughout two presidential terms - they needn't say that about Afghanistan: he's left seven others to choose from, having attacked Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen as well. > > But the permanent government (notably Democrat ?liberals?) insist on removing Trump for fear he'll end the killing in Afghanistan and elsewhere? > > ?CGE > _______________________________________________ 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 moboct1 at aim.com Fri Nov 29 13:21:30 2019 From: moboct1 at aim.com (Mildred O'brien) Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 13:21:30 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump in Afghanistan In-Reply-To: <043D5F41-5B10-41B2-BBB7-2B5F794A5545@newsfromneptune.com> References: <043D5F41-5B10-41B2-BBB7-2B5F794A5545@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: <1864817671.969633.1575033690840@mail.yahoo.com> "...It's the only war we've got" sounds like a LBJ quote.? Can't say that nowadays...Besides, the conditions for war on Vietnam were established in the Eisenhower admin (Dulles bros) with partition of the country and promise of elections which never took place. mo'b? -----Original Message----- From: C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss To: peace-discuss Cc: Peace Sent: Thu, Nov 28, 2019 7:41 pm Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump in Afghanistan WSJ: "Trump Says Taliban Peace Talks to Resume During Surprise Afghanistan Visit? In the early 1960's, some US military would say of Kennedy's attack on South Vietnam, "It's a dirty little war - but it's the only war we've got.? Today, thanks most recently to Obama - the first US president to be at war throughout two presidential terms - they needn't say that about Afghanistan: he's left seven others to choose from, having attacked Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen as well. But the permanent government (notably Democrat ?liberals?) insist on removing Trump for fear he'll end the killing in Afghanistan and elsewhere? ?CGE _______________________________________________ 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 carl at newsfromneptune.com Fri Nov 29 22:21:35 2019 From: carl at newsfromneptune.com (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 16:21:35 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump in Afghanistan In-Reply-To: <1864817671.969633.1575033690840@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1864817671.969633.1575033690840@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8F6C5D1A-69B8-4DFB-9211-E25313320322@newsfromneptune.com> Not LBJ I think but his officer corps, CIA, and State Dept. His inability to get out ended his presidency. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 29, 2019, at 7:21 AM, Mildred O'brien wrote: > > ? > "...It's the only war we've got" sounds like a LBJ quote. Can't say that nowadays...Besides, the conditions for war on Vietnam were established in the Eisenhower admin (Dulles bros) with partition of the country and promise of elections which never took place. > > mo'b > > > -----Original Message----- > From: C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > To: peace-discuss > Cc: Peace > Sent: Thu, Nov 28, 2019 7:41 pm > Subject: [Peace-discuss] Trump in Afghanistan > > WSJ: "Trump Says Taliban Peace Talks to Resume During Surprise Afghanistan Visit? > > > In the early 1960's, some US military would say of Kennedy's attack on South Vietnam, "It's a dirty little war - but it's the only war we've got.? > > Today, thanks most recently to Obama - the first US president to be at war throughout two presidential terms - they needn't say that about Afghanistan: he's left seven others to choose from, having attacked Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen as well. > > But the permanent government (notably Democrat ?liberals?) insist on removing Trump for fear he'll end the killing in Afghanistan and elsewhere? > > ?CGE > > _______________________________________________ > 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 jbw292002 at gmail.com Sat Nov 30 06:38:34 2019 From: jbw292002 at gmail.com (John W.) Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2019 00:38:34 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Trump in Afghanistan In-Reply-To: <0260A127-1D96-47F4-A950-8CB4514A5C8B@newsfromneptune.com> References: <043D5F41-5B10-41B2-BBB7-2B5F794A5545@newsfromneptune.com> <9A5EBB06-CD12-4425-8647-7BB686CA84F5@newsfromneptune.com> <0260A127-1D96-47F4-A950-8CB4514A5C8B@newsfromneptune.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 5:39 AM C. G. Estabrook wrote: You?ve bought the entire subtle establishment political strategy, designed > to maintain US killing around the world: ?ORANGE MAN BAD!? > And what have YOU bought, mon cher? > > On Nov 28, 2019, at 8:05 PM, John W. wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 7:45 PM C. G. Estabrook via Peace < > peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > > > [FT] Trump says talks with Taliban have resumed > > US president Donald Trump said peace talks with the Taliban had resumed > > as he made an unannounced visit to Afghanistan on Thanksgiving, > > appearing at a US air force base alongside Afghan president Ashraf Ghani. > > > > Following a meeting with Mr Ghani, Mr Trump told reporters that the > Taliban > > ?wants to make a deal? and that US officials were ?meeting with them?. > > > > Yes, our bold, intrepid Commander in Chief was his usual articulate self > today. "The Taliban want to make a deal. But I'm not sure I want to make > a deal. It may not be a good deal. On the other hand, it could be a good > deal. It'll all depends on what kind of deal they want to make. We'll > have to see what happens." The troops, discerning what a bold, intrepid > Commander in Chief now leads them so fearlessly, were heard to applaud > wildly and thankfully. > > > > > > > > > On Nov 28, 2019, at 7:41 PM, C. G. Estabrook > wrote: > > > > > > WSJ: "Trump Says Taliban Peace Talks to Resume During Surprise > Afghanistan Visit? > > > < > https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-makes-surprise-visit-to-afghanistan-11574968770?mod=hp_lead_pos1 > > > > > > > > In the early 1960's, some US military would say of Kennedy's attack on > South Vietnam, "It's a dirty little war - but it's the only war we've got.? > > > > > > Today, thanks most recently to Obama - the first US president to be at > war throughout two presidential terms - they needn't say that about > Afghanistan: he's left seven others to choose from, having attacked Iraq, > Libya, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen as well. > > > > > > But the permanent government (notably Democrat ?liberals?) insist on > removing Trump for fear he'll end the killing in Afghanistan and elsewhere? > > > > > > ?CGE > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Peace mailing list > > Peace at lists.chambana.net > > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jbw292002 at gmail.com Sat Nov 30 06:39:53 2019 From: jbw292002 at gmail.com (John W.) Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2019 00:39:53 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Trump in Afghanistan In-Reply-To: <812799532.894664.1575031764114@mail.yahoo.com> References: <043D5F41-5B10-41B2-BBB7-2B5F794A5545@newsfromneptune.com> <9A5EBB06-CD12-4425-8647-7BB686CA84F5@newsfromneptune.com> <812799532.894664.1575031764114@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 6:49 AM Mildred O'brien via Peace < peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: I'm sick of "let's make a deal." The only "deal" the wheeler-dealer wants > to make is HIS deal--which he will re-neg whenever he feel's like it (and > then deny he ever did the deal in the first place). > > mo'b > Amen, mo'b!! > -----Original Message----- > From: C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > To: peace-discuss > Cc: Peace > Sent: Thu, Nov 28, 2019 7:45 pm > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Trump in Afghanistan > > [FT] Trump says talks with Taliban have resumed > US president Donald Trump said peace talks with the Taliban had resumed > as he made an unannounced visit to Afghanistan on Thanksgiving, > appearing at a US air force base alongside Afghan president Ashraf Ghani. > > Following a meeting with Mr Ghani, Mr Trump told reporters that the Taliban > ?wants to make a deal? and that US officials were ?meeting with them?. > > > > On Nov 28, 2019, at 7:41 PM, C. G. Estabrook > wrote: > > > > WSJ: "Trump Says Taliban Peace Talks to Resume During Surprise > Afghanistan Visit? > > < > https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-makes-surprise-visit-to-afghanistan-11574968770?mod=hp_lead_pos1 > > > > > > In the early 1960's, some US military would say of Kennedy's attack on > South Vietnam, "It's a dirty little war - but it's the only war we've got.? > > > > Today, thanks most recently to Obama - the first US president to be at > war throughout two presidential terms - they needn't say that about > Afghanistan: he's left seven others to choose from, having attacked Iraq, > Libya, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen as well. > > > > But the permanent government (notably Democrat ?liberals?) insist on > removing Trump for fear he'll end the killing in Afghanistan and elsewhere? > > > > ?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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Sat Nov 30 22:26:00 2019 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2019 16:26:00 -0600 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Impunity Doctrine: The Meek Shall be Buried Beneath the Earth Message-ID: <002301d5a7cd$254bb330$6fe31990$@comcast.net> https://uziiw38pmyg1ai60732c4011-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/dropzone /2015/06/cp5.png November 29, 2019 The Impunity Doctrine: The Meek Shall be Buried Beneath the Earth by Jennifer Matsui https://www.counterpunch.org/wp-content/dropzone/2017/09/atoa-print-icon.png The ruling class are feeling the heat. By feeling the heat, I mean they are disproportionately perturbed by toothless condemnation of their tax-avoiding wealth accumulation by presidential hopefuls looking to shore up "progressive" support during the primaries. Never mind that this highly scripted spectacle is underwritten by Wall Street, and its executive producers are the military/tech/industrial complex, the plutocracy will no longer countenance ANY ruptures or least resistance to the neoliberal dragnet it has cast over the earth. Thus they have decided that impunity - as opposed to stealth avoidance of being detected at their crime scenes - is the only way to fortify the "borderless", garrisoned, surveillance state against the huddled masses. The lucky few experience this heavily stratified, toxic biosphere as their own private pleasure dome, while the luckless majority, with their heads barely above water, are slowly being boiled alive. Impunity is the tactical weaponry favored by the ruling class; a bipartisan, multinational entity that exclusively serves the interests of the world's 2,064 billionaires. The immediate results afforded by impunity with its high-powered, shorter-range capabilities has proven more effective at relieving the pain and root causes of rich person suffering: Poor people being mean and totally unreasonable with their demands, resulting in the social unrest that has erupted into mass protests worldwide. Why treat a condition when you can lob tear gas at it, or smash it with a truncheon? Stealth measures, long-range in scope with consequences that take more time to profitably reap, are insufficient for the task at hand: Stamp out all impediments to capitalism. "Step an inch away from the demarcated line that your chain gang is instructed to keep within, and you will be shot. If you are indigenous and Bolivian, better stay in the mountains or face a firing squad. Indigenous and Brazilian? We will run you over with a logging truck. Venezuelan? Good luck trying to survive without an economy. If you are Palestinian, you will spend the rest of your life in a wheelchair. If you are Saudi and dissident, we will come at you with a bone saw. If you live on a reservation in North America, we will shove a pipeline up your ass. If you are black and American, we will stop, frisk and execute you in your own home. Yemeni? You are already dead. Hong Kong rioter? We will give you a Congressional Medal of Freedom, and further instructions. Contrast the identical foreign policy objectives of the Obama administration (stealth, long-range drone operators) with the Trump/Kushner regime (clowns wielding assault weapons at close range) to give you some idea of how so-called international diplomacy has shed its Ninja-like complicity with fascists in favor of overt support for their peasant-murdering objectives. Where the former President's State Department tip-toed around Israel's illegal settlements, hoping some vaguely worded condemnation would allow it to proceed under the radar, the current government just plows ahead, with Mike Pompeo in a hard hat, taking control of the bulldozers slated for Palestinian home demolitions. "This is totally legit under international law coz I say so". Where the old Jesus wept, the new Jesus takes the wheel, stomps on the accelerator and proclaims, "The Meek Shall Be Buried Beneath The Earth". Impunity, on one hand, normalizes state-sponsored child abductions at the southern border and codifies white supremacy into law. With the other, it makes identity politics the centerpiece of a bourgeois struggle that seeks to elevate a few select candidates from a 'diverse' field in order to legitimize the same institutions that continue to benefit from the color and gender-based aspects of class stratification. They call this selective, highly conditional membership into their ranks "equality", and recognition of its benefits to the few "woke". Not surprisingly, Canada's own "woke" refugee-hugging, pipeline enabling Prime Minister offers his support for a self-proclaimed interim president of Bolivia (chosen by Jesus and Tesla's shareholders) whose political support stands somewhere between the corpse of Lyndon LaRouche and an equally dead squirrel in a drainpipe. Justin Trudeau talks from the left side of his mouth while screwing progressives with his right fist. Impunity allows a serial offender of 'blackface' with a Haida raven tattoo to legitimize a white-faced fascist as her unelected government mows down indigenous protesters in La Paz. Speaking of Tesla, impunity makes it possible for its CEO to take a sledge hammer to his own nuts (and net worth) while launching a brutalist, testosterone-powered vehicle. Elon's latest Muskmobile leaves no doubt that it's designed not to transport children to school, but to run them over in the driveway. Impunity isn't the chosen weapon of any one political party, but an instrument wielded by the donor class to consolidate their claims on resources competitors in China and Russia might otherwise procure. Their savagery is evident, while the savages themselves despair the "lack of civility" in public discourse, and bemoan the contempt and ridicule leveled at them by jealous plebs. Even Microsoft's milquetoast founder is baring his tiny yellow fangs at Elizabeth Warren and her tax plan, which is sort of like cutting off your nose to spite your bank account. What will he cut off if Bernie Sanders becomes his party's nominee? Where politicians and statesmen resort to impunity, private sector profiteers opt for unmitigated gall, literally shedding tears at the prospect having to sacrifice a yacht in the near future to ensure their own survival as a class in the longer term. Most would call this 'New-er, Better Deal' for the one-percent a win-win-win for capitalism. The capitalists, however, see it as a pitchfork aimed squarely at their gonads. "Radicals", it seems, are defined by a desire to regulate industries, provide medical insurance universally, and levy taxes against the wealthiest members of society to allow more investment in the social sphere. In the not-so-distant past, this was the 'centrist' approach, favored by even right-leaning leaders in much of Europe, and even Japan. Today, such modest goals are regarded as "extremist ideology", disseminated by Russian bots on Facebook, and justification for toppling democratically elected leaders who prioritize the needs of the poor over the desires of a global cabal of billionaires. Steroid Centrists, like most violent offenders in this day and age, having realized that forensics and surveillance get them in the end, (so why bother even trying to evade punishment?) have opted to go out in an inglorious blaze of nothing-to-lose nihilism. The 'smart' solution is now the nuclear option. Consequences be damned for each blowback-inducing item on their bucket list: Give Israel carte blanche to carry out its final solution to the problem of still existing Palestinians. Further destabilize the Middle East. Fuck with China. Make all wildlife "functionally extinct". Melt more ice-caps! Currently at the top of their list: Recognize right-wing coup plotters as the legitimate leaders of a country whose elected president is brown and socialist. Never mind that your self-appointed "interim president" is a genocidal half wit Avon lady in an ammo belt - all the better to convey your balls out agenda and leaving no ambiguity as to one's own fate in a world order based on a spree killer's 'to do' list before swallowing a bullet. Our overlords are re-defining their ruthless predator role as a "moderate" and stabilizing force albeit one that will crush all resistance to its planet-destroying objectives. "Only we can provide the necessary bulwarks against school lunch programs and Islamic jihad alike". Achieving these ends with brute force, often in front of a news camera, signals to us all that any resistance will be met with the same impunity that tortured and murdered a secular Libyan leader in broad daylight, and still shoots children when they wander too close to an apartheid wall. Neoliberalism is hardly a rational (or as some would say, inevitable) progression from the diverse and disconnected economies of the Soviet-era to universal acceptance of a consumerist, market-driven monoculture once hailed by Frances Fukuyama as "the common ideological heritage of all mankind". Nor can it be implemented without violent coercion or military force. Traditionally, it has relied less on the latter, and more heavily on propaganda provided by a wholly controlled media-apparatus (now calling its pundit panel of spooks 'The Resistance' in yet another Orwellian assault on the dictionary). This elite squadron of Deep State squids have appointed themselves the gatekeepers of information, protecting us all from 'fake news' through a steady regime of obfuscation and Party agitprop to ensure the duopoly remains stalwart to its fundraising goals, and wholly beholden to the donor class. If you are the British establishment tabloid press, make Jeremy Corbyn worse than Hitler. Just replace his picture at a recent debate with images of desecrated Jewish cemeteries, while providing a platform for tear-strained Blair-ites to conjure up the coming holocaust under his leadership. While you are dredging up history to realign it with your own beliefs, why not reincarnate Joe McCarthy to defend liberal establishment plutocrats against Russian oligarchs? Enlist an elite cadre of lesbians to make the case for endless war and the lovability of war criminals. Elevate wheezing old apparatchik Josef Bidenevsky to replace the doddering nazi the party's central committee "elected" while drunk on Grey Goose vodka. Hybrid warfare, which usually provides cover for the aggressor nation or multinational, allowing it to avoid detection in the 'grey zone' it operates within, is no longer a covert strategy, but an openly waged campaign against humanity itself, with both the establishment left and the hard right steering its neoliberal course. Their propaganda efforts, rather than subtle tweaks on neutral-sounding terms like "human rights" so that they apply exclusively to oil companies, have now abandoned all attempts to disguise either authorship (the plutocracy and its Deep State subsidiaries) or intent (eliminate all competition from the international playing field). The Impunity Doctrine is the blunt force expression of what was once called 'soft power'. We are subjected daily to a relentless pummeling against reason, whether it's Donald Trump's Twitter feed or Rachel Maddow's nightly (mis)infomercials for her corporate sponsors. Either way we toe party line, (Collusion! or 'Covefef') the result is a cry of "Banzai!" (and the sound of "Ka-Ching") from the trading floors of Goldman Sachs. Just as the Corporate State tightens its oxygen-depleting chokehold across the globe, destroying all resistance with the speed and force of a flesh-eating superbug pandemic, its media organizations deliberately transmit this particularly deadly strain of the Capitalist Virus. Impunity takes many forms, most of them almost comic in the audacity and willingness of the ruling class to push the proverbial envelope, and the rest of us down an elevator shaft. In case you missed the memo (Die now, stinking peasant!) our aggrieved overlords even made a movie. A dancing jackass in clown makeup kills everyone who was ever mean to him and ultimately widens his scope to take down ordinary folk standing in the way of his genius. Tragically, it's a film that plays out whenever a billionaire is spooked by the possibility of a peasant's publicly funded visit to the dentist. As we navigate the charred, corpse-strewn terrain left in the wake of the plutocracy's answered prayers (obliterating the Bolivarians, serving Palestine with an eviction notice, and weakening the Chinese government to name just a few items on its checked off wish list) it might be worth remembering that impunity offers encouraging signs of desperation on the part of the offenders who resort to it. Their short-term, ultimately self-destructive aims might suggest an awareness of their own declining power, and foreknowledge of their own demise. Having consigned the rubble of Empire to Donald Trump, the stateless superpower aka The Axis of Wealth that has replaced the old 'America First' Imperial order can only tilt so far in its own favor before losing all equilibrium. Peak Greed is an indication that the structural hold of present hierarchies is about to flip. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 6911 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 256 bytes Desc: not available URL: