This episode of Cross Talk was an absolute delight to watch.
“There is no innocent explanation for the sudden disappearance of MH17 from the media and political spotlight. The plane’s black box has been held in Britain for examination for weeks, and US and Russian spy satellites and military radar were intensively scanning east Ukraine at the time of the crash. The claim that Washington does not have detailed knowledge of the circumstances of the crash and the various forces involved is not credible.”
– Niles Williamson, “Why have the media and Obama administration gone silent on MH17?”, World Socialist Web Site
See: 11 minute you tube “MH17 – We know with 99% certainty who shot down MH17“
The Obama administration has failed to produce any hard evidence that pro-Russia separatists were responsible for the downing of Malaysia Flight 17. The administration’s theory– that the jetliner was downed by a surface-to-air missile launched from rebel territory in east Ukraine– is not supported by radar data, satellite imagery, eyewitness testimony or forensic evidence. In fact, there is no factual basis for the hypothesis at all. It’s merely politically-motivated speculation that’s been repeated endlessly in the media to shape public opinion. The preponderance of evidence suggests a different scenario altogether, that is, that MH17 was shot down by Ukrainian fighters in an effort to frame the pro-Russia separatists and demonize Russia by implication. This is precisely why the MH17 story has vanished from all the major media for the last three weeks. It’s because the bloody fingerprints point to Obama’s puppet-government in Kiev.
So what are the facts?
[Please Click Below to read more]
To study the effects of political propaganda in what used to be called the ‘free world’ there could hardly be a better time than now. We are living through an instance of insidious propaganda that has clean contours. It fills a common need. In a period of large-scale slaughter and other man-made disaster the morally conscious person can do with some clear categories of good and bad, desirable and despicable. Political certainty, in other words. You can even sell wars using ‘moral clarity’ as a sales pitch, as happened with Iraq and Afghanistan.
Good-evil classification is easy enough when we have imprisoned journalists decapitated by jihadis. Those who “will do something about that” are automatically placed in the ‘good guys’ category. But there is a problem of murkiness in this sample. Syria’s Assad has been listed for years at the top of the bad guy list, and yet he appears to be changing into something of an ally of those who are intent now on setting things straight. On top of which, the fact that the radical islamists out of which ISIS emerged were funded and encouraged by the United States and its Arab allies is not a deep secret, and the fact that none of this mayhem would now exist were it not for the sorcerer’s apprentice effect of the decapitation of the Iraqi state in 2003 has been pretty much agreed on.
[Please click below to continue reading]
This is not an easy essay to write. I have been postponing it for several weeks. But I have many readers all over the world who trust me, and they encourage me to tell the truth, as I perceive it. And I will continue doing so, for them, even when the topic is complex and somehow uncomfortable.
Let me begin by saying that I fully support freedom for Palestine; I demand that the Palestinian people be allowed to have their own state, and to have their pride and dignity restored. Not ‘soon’ but now, and even ‘now’ is too late!
I condemn Israel, for being the Rottweiler of the West in the Middle East, for its bellicose approach in the region, for its brutality towards Palestinian people, and for its endemic dishonesty.
I have stood by the Palestinian people on several occasions: In Gaza and the West Bank, in Hebron and Bethlehem, in the Rafah Refugee Camp. I stood by them physically, not just in an abstract way, fighting, at least verbally, with the Israeli border guards, having rubber-coated bullets flying all around me, dashing illegally from Jerusalem to Bethlehem with my Israeli activists and Marxist friends.
[Please click below to continue reading]
Continue reading Freedom For Palestine! And Papua! And Congo!, by André Vltchek
This is a well researched and humorous article written with a very exciting flow. A real treat to read such comprehensive work and witt at play.
There has been a lot of political maneuvering these past few days. Will there be a united Ukraine with a federal government or a divided Ukraine. While we believe that the ship for federal state has sailed it is important to know the economic factors both in Russia and Ukraine.
The work below explores economics on the Russian side with its brilliant food ban.
Originally published on : 44 Days Blog
A funny thing happened on the way to 500 years of Western Empire and colonialism. Russia just boycotted Eurangoland’s (The EU, US, Canada, Australia, less New Zealand, which was spared) food and agricultural products, which in itself is very telling about ongoing trends. But there’s more. The oppressed are biting back. Until recently, the ongoing reaction of the world’s non-Eurangloland governments to Russia’s stand (those which represent the 85% of our planet’s people), would have been unimaginable. So, sit back and enjoy the show.
In all fairness to this proud, global majority, you must add the peoples of Japan and South Korea to Eurangloland’s empire. They are militarily occupied, supine satraps to the Princes of Power in Washington. Groveling like dogs, they actually take their barking orders from the West seriously. Throw in a few more countries that cower at the feet of Western Empire and we can say that about 20% of the world’s people rule the remaining 80%, not much differently than the pharaohs did over their subjects and slaves in Ancient Egypt. The Pareto principle applies here too. This secondary list of client states waxes and wanes, depending on how recently the CIA/MI6/DGSE deep state has installed a whore government in their puppet, local halls of power, or as in the Philippines recently, which prostrated itself to America’s Worldwide Wehrmacht. Ukraine is the most recent prom slut for Western servitude and so far, Venezuela is holding out admirably against the West’s internal efforts at regime change.
Kudos to Russia for its genius to pick ag products as a punch in the solar plexus of power. As Deena Stryker recently pointed out in a recent article,
[Please click below to read further.]
While the news of the Junta defeat is abound on all front pages of the alternative press, the following report is not fresh off the press but illustrates the reality of war.
Brothers were pitted against brothers, pumped up by foreign capital, armed by NATO and told they were protecting their land against a non-existent enemy. Lunacy has been a cornerstone of western military intervention.
We should not hate the ordinary people who, until the US/EU decided to use for profit, were just a year ago desperately trying to survive in a failing state. Now they retreat on farm vehicles, it is a tragic sight to see ordinary men and women reduced to insignificant play things for the oligarchy.
Originally published: http://golos.zp.ua/novosti/item/9067-fo
Translation by Anton.
Around 400 soldiers from the 5th territorial defence battalion, on broken school busses, stopped at a roadblock on the Orehovskaya road at the entrance to Zaporojie. The soldiers demanded that they be let through to go home to Ivano-Frankovsk. The battalion from the start of July has been surrounded in Amvrosivka 5km from the Russian border and only this Sunday has been able to get out of the shelling. After this they have been moving west. Trying to save their own lives, the soldiers, without orders, left the positions in which they were under fire for a long time from the territory of the neighbouring country.
From the words of the soldiers, they left the battleground last. With them there were also the 24th, 72nd, and 79th brigades around Amvrosivka, these left several weeks ago to other ATO areas or went on leave. Apart from this, calling what happened to them when they were surrounded a battle wasn’t accurate. The shelling only came from one side, from Russia. The soldiers were ordered to wait it out in the trenches.
The soldiers were getting around on half broken school busses and agricultural vehicles. Sometimes they had to go through roadblocks in grain trucks.
The soldiers were not being let through into Zaporojie. They were being offered to pass only if they left their weapons. A military enlistment officer from Zaporojie came to see what was going on. He tried to convince the soldier to wait for their commanders, but the soldiers were firm.
The entire 5th territorial defence battalion were mobilised in the second wave of mobilisation, there are also volunteers among them. Everybody is equipped exclusively through volunteer contributions. Now the column of the vehicles has started moving towards Ivano-Frankovsk.
In this well timed piece veteran journalist Karel van Wolferen talks about and summarises the factors that allow for a categorically false narrative to survive. He points out the unwillingness of the Dutch to point the finger of blame for this whole mess where it should rest, Washington.
This phenomenon of Washington somehow being the “lesser of two evils” is utter non sense. Either intentional or unintentional, the “forgetfulness” and the misleading image of a “benign” superpower when analysing American action has meant that many more continue to die in Washington’s quest to subdue the planet.
Apparently, murdering millions, the irony of overthrowing democracies, thousands of military bases, usage of nuclear & chemical weapons on civilians and continual lying has not “earned” Washington a place as a destructive and evil force. Instead it is Putin who is the reincarnation of supreme soviet evil. Such is the power of the Deep State and propaganda.
Karel, has made an excellent case for the ongoing tragedy to stop and for Europeans to reflect and push back the war that is being put on them. Will Europe awaken from its slumber?
The European Union is not (anymore) guided by politicians with a grasp of history, a sober assessment of global reality, or simple common sense connected with the long term interests of what they are guiding. If any more evidence was needed, it has certainly been supplied by the sanctions they have agreed on last week aimed at punishing Russia.
One way to fathom their foolishness is to start with the media, since whatever understanding or concern these politicians may have personally they must be seen to be doing the right thing, which is taken care of by TV and newspapers.
In much of the European Union the general understanding of global reality since the horrible fate of the people on board the Malaysian Airliner comes from mainstream newspapers and TV which have copied the approach of Anglo-American mainstream media, and have presented ‘news’ in which insinuation and vilification substitute for proper reporting. Respected publications, like the Financial Times or the once respected NRC Handelsblad of The Netherlands for which I worked sixteen years as East Asia Correspondent, not only joined in with this corrupted journalism but helped guide it to mad conclusions. The punditry and editorials that have grown out of this have gone further than anything among earlier examples of sustained media hysteria stoked for political purposes that I can remember. The most flagrant example I have come across, an anti-Putin leader in the (July 26) Economist Magazine, had the tone of Shakespeare’s Henry V exhorting his troops before the battle of Agincourt as he invaded France.
One should keep in mind that there are no European-wide newspapers or publications to sustain a European public sphere, in the sense of a means for politically interested Europeans to ponder and debate with each other big international developments. Because those interested in world affairs usually read the international edition of the New York Times or the Financial Times, questions and answers on geopolitical matters are routinely shaped or strongly influenced by what editors in New York and London have determined as being important. Thinking that may deviate significantly as can now be found in Der Spiegel, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Die Zeit and Handelsblatt, does not travel across German borders. Hence we do not see anything like a European opinion evolving on global affairs, even when these have a direct impact on the interests of the European Union itself.
The Dutch population was rudely shaken out of a general complacency with respect to world events that could affect it, through the death of 193 fellow nationals (along with a 105 people of other nationalities) in the downed plane, and its media were hasty in following the American-initiated fingerpointing at Moscow. Explanations that did not in some way involve culpability of the Russian president seemed to be out of bounds. This was at odds right away with statements of a sober Dutch prime minister, who was under considerable pressure to join the fingerpointing but who insisted on waiting for a thorough examination of what precisely had happened.
The TV news programs I saw in the days immediately afterwards had invited, among other anti–Russian expositors, American neocon-linked talking heads to do the disclosing to a puzzled and truly shaken up audience. A Dutch foreign policy specialist explained that the foreign minister or his deputy could not go to the site of the crash (as Malaysian officials did) to recover the remains of Dutch citizens, because that would amount to an implicit recognition of diplomatic status for the “separatists”. When the European Union en bloc recognizes a regime that has come into existence through an American initiated coup d’état, you are diplomatically stuck with it.
The inhabitants and anti-Kiev fighters at the crash site were portrayed, with images from youtube, as uncooperative criminals, which for many viewers amounted to a confirmation of their guilt. This changed when later reports from actual journalists showed shocked and deeply concerned villagers, but the discrepancy was not explained, and earlier assumptions of villainy did not make way for any objective analysis of why these people might be fighting at all. Tendentious twitter and youtube ‘news’ had become the basis for official Dutch indignation with the East Ukrainians, and a general opinion arose that something had to be set straight, which was, again in general opinion, accomplished by a grand nationally televised reception of the human remains (released through Malaysian mediation) in a dignified sober martial ceremony.
Nothing that I have seen or read even intimated that the Ukraine crisis – which led to coup and civil war – was created by neoconservatives and a few R2P (“Responsibility to Protect”) fanatics in the State Department and the White House, apparently given a free hand by President Obama. The Dutch media also appeared unaware that the catastrophe was immediately turned into a political football for White House and State Department purposes. The likelihood that Putin was right when he said that the catastrophe would not have happened if his insistence on a cease-fire had been accepted, was not entertained.
As it was, Kiev broke the cease-fire – on the 10th of June – in its civil war against Russian speaking East Ukrainians who do not wish to be governed by a collection of thugs, progeny of Ukrainian nazis, and oligarchs enamored of the IMF and the European Union. The supposed ‘rebels’ have been responding to the beginnings of ethnic cleansing operations (systematic terror bombing and atrocities – 30 or more Ukrainians burned alive) committed by Kiev forces, of which little or nothing has penetrated into European news reports.
It is unlikely that the American NGOs, which by official admission spent 5 billion dollars in political destabilization efforts prior to the February putsch in Kiev, have suddenly disappeared from the Ukraine, or that America’s military advisors and specialized troops have sat idly by as Kiev’s military and militias mapped their civil war strategy; after all, the new thugs are as a regime on financial life-support provided by Washington, the European Union and IMF. What we know is that Washington is encouraging the ongoing killing in the civil war it helped trigger.
But Washington has constantly had the winning hand in a propaganda war against, entirely contrary to what mainstream media would have us believe, an essentially unwilling opponent. Waves of propaganda come from Washington and are made to fit assumptions of a Putin, driven and assisted by a nationalism heightened by the loss of the Soviet empire, who is trying to expand the Russian Federation up to the borders of that defunct empire. The more adventurous punditry, infected by neocon fever, has Russia threatening to envelop the West. Hence Europeans are made to believe that Putin refuses diplomacy, while he has been urging this all along. Hence prevailing propaganda has had the effect that not Washington’s but Putin’s actions are seen as dangerous and extreme. Anyone with a personal story that places Putin or Russia in a bad light must move right now; Dutch editors seem insatiable at the moment.
There is no doubt that the frequently referred to Moscow propaganda exists. But there are ways for serious journalists to weigh competing propaganda and discern how much veracity or lies and bullshit they contain. Within my field of vision this has only taken place a bit in Germany. For the rest we must piece political reality together relying on the now more than ever indispensable American websites hospitable to whistleblowers and old-fashioned investigative journalism, which especially since the onset of the ‘war on terrorism’ and the Iraq invasion have formed a steady form of samizdat publishing.
In The Netherlands almost anything that comes from the State Department is taken at face value. America’s history, since the demise of the Soviet Union, of truly breathtaking lies: on Panama, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Venezuela, Libya and North Korea; its record of overthrown governments; its black-op and false flag operations; and its stealthily garrisoning of the planet with some thousand military bases, is conveniently left out of consideration. The near hysteria throughout a week following the downed airliner prevented people with some knowledge of relevant history from opening their mouths. Job security in the current world of journalism is quite shaky, and going against the tide would be almost akin to siding with the devil, as it would damage one’s journalistic ‘credibility’.
What strikes an older generation of serious journalists as questionable about the mainstream media’s credibility is editorial indifference to potential clues that would undermine or destroy the official story line; a story line that has already permeated popular culture as is evident in throwaway remarks embellishing book and film reviews along with much else. In The Netherlands the official story is already carved in stone, which is to be expected when it is repeated ten-thousand times. It cannot be discounted, of course, but it is based on not a shred of evidence.
The presence of two Ukrainian fighter planes near the Malaysian airliner on Russian radar would be a potential clue I would be very interested in if I were investigating either as journalist or member of the investigation team that The Netherlands has officially been put in charge of. This appeared to be corroborated by a BBC Report with eyewitness accounts from the ground by villagers who clearly saw another plane, a fighter, close to the airliner, near the time of its crash, and heard explosions coming from the sky. This report has recently drawn attention because it was removed from the BBC’s archive. I would want to talk with Michael Bociurkiw, one of the first inspectors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to reach the crash site who spent more than a week examining the wreckage and has described on CBC World News two or three “really pock-marked” pieces of fuselage. “It almost looks like machine gun fire; very, very strong machine gun fire that has left these unique marks that we haven’t seen anywhere else.”
I would certainly also want to have a look at the allegedly confiscated radar and voice records of the Kiev Air Control Tower to understand why the Malaysian pilot veered off course and rapidly descended shortly before his plane crashed, and find out whether foreign air controllers in Kiev were indeed sent packing immediately after the crash. Like the “Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity”, I would certainly urge the American authorities with access to satellite images to show the evidence they claim to have of BUK missile batteries in ‘rebel’ hands as well as of Russian involvement, and ask them why they have not done so already. Until now Washington has acted like a driver who refuses a breathalyzer test. Since intelligence officials have leaked to some American newspapers their lesser certainty about the American certainties as brought to the world by the Secretary of State, my curiosity would be unrelenting.
To place European media loyalty to Washington in the Ukraine case as well as the slavish conduct of European politicians in perspective, we must know about and understand Atlanticism. It is a European faith. It has not given rise to an official doctrine, of course, but it functions like one. It is well summed up by the Dutch slogan at the time of the Iraq invasion: “zonder Amerika gaat het niet” (without the United States [things] [it] won’t work). Needless to say, the Cold War gave birth to Atlanticism. Ironically, it gained strength as the threat from the Soviet Union became less persuasive for increasing numbers among European political elites. That probably was a matter of generational change: the farther away from World War II, the less European governments remembered what it means to have an independent foreign policy on global-sized issues. Current heads of government of the European Union are unfamiliar with practical strategic deliberations. Routine thought on international relations and global politics is deeply entrenched in Cold War epistemology.
This inevitably also informs ‘responsible’ editorial policies. Atlanticism is now a terrible affliction for Europe: it fosters historical amnesia, willful blindness and dangerously misconceived political anger. But it thrives on a mixture of lingering unquestioned Cold War era certainties about protection, Cold War loyalties embedded in popular culture, sheer European ignorance, and an understandable reluctance to concede that one has even for a little bit been brainwashed. Washington can do outrageous things while leaving Atlanticism intact because of everyone’s forgetfulness, which the media do little or nothing to cure. I know Dutch people who have become disgusted with the vilification of Putin, but the idea that in the context of Ukraine the fingerpointing should be toward Washington is well-nigh unacceptable. Hence, Dutch publications, along with many others in Europe, cannot bring themselves to place the Ukraine crisis in proper perspective by acknowledging that Washington started it all, and that Washington rather than Putin has the key to its solution. It would impel a renunciation of Atlanticism.
Atlanticism derives much of its strength through NATO, its institutional embodiment. The reason for NATO’s existence, which disappeard with the demise of the Soviet Union, has been largely forgotten. Formed in 1949, it was based on the idea that transatlantic cooperation for security and defense had become necessary after World War II in the face of a communism, orchestrated by Moscow, intent on taking over the entire planet. Much less talked about was European internal distrust, as the Europeans set off on their first moves towards economic integration. NATO constituted a kind of American guarantee that no power in Europe would ever try to dominate the others.
NATO has for some time now been a liability for the European Union, as it prevents development of concerted European foreign and defense policies, and has forced the member states to become instruments serving American militarism.
It is also a moral liability because the governments participating in the ‘coalition of the willing’ have had to sell the lie to their citizens that European soldiers dying in Iraq and Afghanistan have been a necessary sacrifice to keep Europe safe from terrorists. Governments that have supplied troops to areas occupied by the United States have generally done this with considerable reluctance, earning the reproach from a succession of American officials that Europeans do too little for the collective purpose of defending democracy and freedom.
As is the mark of an ideology, Atlanticism is ahistorical. As horse medicine against the torment of fundamental political ambiguity it supplies its own history: one that may be rewritten by American mainstream media as they assist in spreading the word from Washington. There could hardly be a better demonstration of this than the Dutch experience at the moment. In conversations these past three weeks I have encountered genuine surprise when reminding friends that the Cold War ended through diplomacy with a deal made on Malta between Gorbachev and the elder Bush in December 1989, in which James Baker got Gorbachev to accept the reunification of Germany and withdrawal of Warsaw Pact troops with a promise that NATO would not be extended even one inch to the East. Gorbachev pledged not to use force in Eastern Europe where the Russians had some 350,000 troops in East Germany alone, in return for Bush’s promise that Washington would not take advantage of a Soviet withdrawal from Eastern Europe. Bill Clinton reneged on those American promises when, for purely electoral reasons, he boasted about an enlargement of NATO and in 1999 made the Czech Republic and Hungary full members. Ten years later another nine countries became members, at which point the number of NATO countries was double the number during the Cold War. The famous American specialist on Russia, Ambassador George Kennan, originator of Cold War containment policy, called Clinton’s move “the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold-war era.”
Historical ignorance abetted by Atlanticism is poignantly on display in the contention that the ultimate proof in the case against Vladimir Putin is his invasion of Crimea. Again, political reality here was created by America’s mainstream media. There was no invasion, as the Russian sailors and soldiers were already there since it is home to the ‘warm water’ Black Sea base for the Russian navy. Crimea has been a part of Russia for as long as the United States has existed. In 1954 Khrushchev, who himself came from the Ukraine, gave it to the Ukrainian Socialist Republic, which came down to moving a region to a different province, since Russia and Ukraine still belonged to the same country. The Russian speaking Crimean population was happy enough, as it voted in a referendum first for independence from the Kiev regime that resulted from the coup d’état, and subsequently for reunification with Russia.
Those who maintain that Putin had no right to do such a thing are unaware of another strand of history in which the United States has been moving (Star Wars) missile defense systems ever closer to Russian borders, supposedly to intercept hostile missiles from Iran, which do not exist. Sanctimonious talk about territorial integrity and sovereignty makes no sense under these circumstances, and coming from a Washington that has done away with the concept of sovereignty in its own foreign policy it is downright ludicrous.
A detestable Atlanticist move was the exclusion of Putin from the meetings and other events connected with the commemoration of the Normandy landings, for the first time in 17 years. The G8 became the G7 as a result. Amnesia and ignorance have made the Dutch blind to a history that directly concerned them, since the Soviet Union took the heart out of the Nazi war machine (that occupied The Netherlands) at a cost of incomparable and unimaginable numbers of military dead; without that there would not have been a Normandy invasion.
Not so long ago, the complete military disasters of Iraq and Afghanistan appeared to be moving NATO to a point where its inevitable demise could not to be too far off. But the Ukraine crisis and Putin’s decisiveness in preventing the Crimea with its Russian Navy base from possibly falling into the hands of the American-owned alliance, has been a godsend to this earlier faltering institution.
NATO leadership has already been moving troops to strengthen their presence in the Baltic states, sending missiles and attack aircraft to Poland and Lithuania, and since the downing of the Malaysian airliner it has been preparing further military moves that may turn into dangerous provocations of Russia. It has become clear that the Polish foreign minister together with the Baltic countries, none of which partook in NATO when its reason for being could still be defended, have become a strong driving force behind it. A mood of mobilisation has spread in the past week. The ventriloquist dummies Anders Fogh Rasmussen and Jaap de Hoop Scheffer can be relied upon to take to TV screens inveighing against NATO member state backsliding. Rasmussen, the current Secretary General, declared on August 7 in Kiev that NATO’s “support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine is unwavering” and that he is looking to strengthen partnership with the country at the Alliance’s summit in Wales in September. That partnership is already strong, so he said, “and in response to Russia’s aggression, NATO is working even more closely with Ukraine to reform its armed forces and defence institutions.”
In the meantime, in the American Congress 23 Senate Republicans have sponsored legislation, the “Russian Aggression Prevention Act”, which is meant to allow Washington to make the Ukraine a non-NATO ally and could set the stage for a direct military conflict with Russia. We will probably have to wait until after America’s midterm elections to see what will become of it, but it already helps provide a political excuse for those in Washington who want to take next steps in the Ukraine.
In September last year Putin helped Obama by making it possible for him to stop a bombing campaign against Syria pushed by the neocons, and had also helped in defusing the nuclear dispute with Iran, another neocon project. This led to a neocon commitment to break the Putin-Obama link. It is hardly a secret that the neoconservatives desire the overthrow of Putin and eventual dismemberment of the Russian Federation. Less known in Europe is the existence of numerous NGO’s at work in Russia, which will help them with this. Vladimir Putin could strike now or soon, to preempt NATO and the American Congress, by taking Eastern Ukraine, something he probably should have done right after the Crimean referendum. That would, of course, be proof of his evil intentions in European editorial eyes.
In the light of all this, one of the most fateful questions to ask in current global affairs is: what has to happen for Europeans to wake up to the fact that Washington is playing with fire and has ceased being the protector they counted on, and is instead now endangering their security? Will the moment come when it becomes clear that the Ukraine crisis is, most of all, about placing Star Wars missile batteries along an extensive stretch of Russian border, which gives Washington – in the insane lingo of nuclear strategists – ‘first strike’ capacity?
It is beginning to sink in among older Europeans that the United States has enemies who are not Europe’s enemies because it needs them for domestic political reasons; to keep an economically hugely important war industry going and to test by shorthand the political bona fides of contenders for public office. But while using rogue states and terrorists as targets for ‘just wars’ has never been convincing, Putin’s Russia as demonized by a militaristic NATO could help prolong the transatlantic status quo. The truth behind the fate of the Malaysian airliner, I thought from the moment that I heard about it, would be politically determined. Its black boxes are in London. In NATO hands?
Other hindrances to an awakening remain huge; financialization and neoliberal policies have produced an intimate transatlantic entwining of plutocratic interests. Together with the Atlanticist faith these have helped stymie the political development of the European Union, and with that Europe’s ability to proceed with independent political decisions. Since Tony Blair, Great Britain has been in Washington’s pocket, and since Nicolas Sarkozy one can say more or less the same of France.
That leaves Germany. Angela Merkel was clearly unhappy with the sanctions, but in the end went along because she wants to remain on the good side of the American president, and the United States as the conqueror in World War II does still have leverage through a variety of agreements. Germany’s foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, quoted in newspapers and appearing on TV, repudiated the sanctions and points at Iraq and Libya as examples of the results brought by escalation and ultimatums, yet he too swings round and in the end goes along with them.
Der Spiegel is one of the German publications that offer hope. One of its columnists, Jakob Augstein, attacks the “sleepwalkers” who have agreed to sanctions, and censures his colleagues’ fingerpointing at Moscow. Gabor Steingart, who publishes Handelsblatt, inveighs against the “American tendency to verbal and then to military escalation, the isolation, demonization, and attacking of enemies” and concludes that also German journalism “has switched from level-headed to agitated in a matter of weeks. The spectrum of opinions has been narrowed to the field of vision of a sniper scope.” There must be more journalists in other parts of Europe who say things like this, but their voices do not carry through the din of vilification.
History is being made, once again. What may well determine Europe’s fate is that also outside the defenders of the Atlanticist faith, decent Europeans cannot bring themselves to believe in the dysfunction and utter irresponsibility of the American state.
Karel van Wolferen (born 1941, Rotterdam) is a Dutch journalist, writer and professor, who is particularly recognised for his knowledge of Japanese politics,economics, history and culture. He is the author of over 20 books and most well known for his 1989 book “The Enigma of Japanese Power” which has been translated in 12 languages.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Oceania Saker.
It’s my contention that the alleged race-based police shooting in Ferguson, Mo.. is, in fact, a concoction exploited by politicians and their paid rabble rousers to expand police powers and create a state of quasi-martial-law in the U.S. based on fear in the general population—on one hand—and rage on the part of paid provocateurs, gangs, and easily-misled black citizens.
This is part of an ongoing process of terrorizing the population to accept greater restrictions in return for “saftey”—much as the drug menace was used to create public acceptance for the war on drugs. This war cost people a great deal of personal and financial freedom but failed to solve any of the underlying problems.
Part of this skepticism may be due to the fact that the vast majority of violent interracial crime in the U.S.—more than 80%–is perpetrated against whites. For of the 20% of violent crimes that are interracial, 15% involve black offenders and white victims; 2% involve white offenders and black victims. There is, in fact, an epidemic of such crime fueled by a large number of black youth in the U.S. with below-average IQ’s. Instead of being given vocational training in line with their abilities they are told by educators they cannot compete because of “white racism.” This produces great hostility against whites, the vast majority of whom never did anything to harm blacks or even had a distant ancestor who held slaves. (Much more black crime is directed at other blacks—perhaps indicating a concern of the voters of Ferguson who outnumber white voters by more than 2:1 and could easily have had a mostly black police force if they so desired.)
Whites, in fact, are the victims of systematic official discrimination in work, housing, and education. Many whites do not get a job, get promoted, get subsidized housing or attend the school of their choice because of their race. These benefits go to less-qualified blacks. This is euphemistically called “affirmative action.”
While the large number of blacks in the prison population is held up as an example of race-based justice, the reality is that blacks commit an inordinate amount of crime per capita—whatever the reason. In practice, it is white victims that get the short end of the stick. For instance, in a horrific rape-torture-murder of a white couple in Tennessee several years back, the black perpetrators used the defense that the female victim wanted to be killed this way and had hired them! All got light sentences and the Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole is now considering releasing one of these criminals.
In the mid-1990s, the Center for Equal Opportunity analyzed 55,512 felony cases filed in state courts for the 75 largest counties, representing 37% of the U.S. population. The weighted data revealed that juries actually acquit blacks at a higher rate than whites for 12 of the 14 types of crime studied—including murder, rape, robbery and assault. The only category that had a higher conviction rate for African-Americans was felony traffic offenses.
Contrary to the numerous inflammatory public statements claiming Brown was either running away from Officer Wilson with his hands up or on his knees with hands up—shot execution style by the “racist cop (hence the slogan: “Hands up, don’t shoot.”)—Brown was shot all times in the front, with his hands down, and was apparently running towards the officer. The last shot, to the top of his head, was apparently fired as the suspect was falling after the other 5-6 shots had likely failed to stop his charge.
Obviously, Barack Obama, Eric Holder, the media and the outside agitators were well aware that Brown had NOT been shot in the back or kneeling with his hands up as his body was lying in plain view inside the police lines and was likely seen by dozens of eyewitnesses. Yet these people—aided and abetted (by their silence) incitement to riot, which included chants calling for the death of officer Wilson. Ample proof can be seen in the following excerpt from an autopsy of Mike Brown by former NYC Medical Examiner Michael M. Baden (N.Y. Times, Aug. 17, 2014):
There were no wounds on the back or powder burns on Brown’s body, indicating that he had not been shot at close range, execution style. A recently released audio recording of Wilson firing 11 shots in rapid succession does not—as the media indicates—show recklessness. It indicates an officer, in fear of his life, attempting to stop a massive suspect (who had already beaten him, fractured an eye socket, and attempted to take his service revolver.)
While Brown’s alleged accomplice in the assault and robbery of the convenience store—Dorian Johnson–has since recanted his story after the autopsy results were released, several other accounts have surfaced confirming that Brown, a former school football linebacker, turned on the officer and rushed toward him, causing the officer to fire.
A local radio station, KFTK, recently broadcast what is claimed to be the officer’s account of the event as told to his “significant other”.
According to this statement, Brown and his friend Dorian Johnson were walking in the middle of the street, refusing to get out of the street after Wilson asked them to do so. At that point, Wilson got a call about a “strong-arm” robbery, and saw the cigars (a $50 pack of “Tiparillos” cigars) that Brown allegedly stole from a convenience store. When Wilson opened the door to get out of the police car, Brown pushed the door shut and punched Wilson in the face and attempted to get the officer’s sidearm. The gun went off once in the struggle. Brown and Johnson started running away and, following protocol, Wilson pursued them and yelled, “Freeze.” The caller alleges Brown then started taunting Wilson and daring him to shoot. Brown reportedly turned and rushed the cop again.
The aftermath of this event is equally suspect and is fraught with outside agitators, possibly paid gang organizers and suspicious arsons and “spontaneous” gatherings. The latest installment on the Nodisinfo website—which deals with false-flag events—asserts the subsequent fire at the QT convenience store where Brown allegedly stole his cigarillos was staged using pyrotechnics and propane cylinders:
Concludes Nodisinfo: “The use of (a) flare gun is hard proof of the hoax. The QT riots and looting were fully staged. It was not a spontaneous act at all. Rather, it was a pre-planned part of the Ferguson scam known, here, as the Ferguson Martial Law hoax. There was nothing spontaneous about it. Rather, it was all plotted and planned under the auspices of the Zionist-controlled military-police apparatus, with full knowledge and coordination of the Ferguson police force.”
Tom Mysiewicz is best known as the founder and editor of BioEngineering News, first weekly news service covering the biotechnology field from 1980 through 1993. Winner of award for excellence in spot news reporting from Newsletter Association of America (1981).
He has been quoted as an expert on biotechnology in publications such as: Chemical Week, Business Week, The New York Times, The L.A. Times, San Jose Mercury Messenger, the Economist, San Francisco Examiner, Venture Magazine, etc.
For the past 10 years he has devoted himself to a correct (often controversial) analysis of Middle Eastern affairs and is looking with greater interest at Eurasia, where he sees Russia as a necessary counterbalance in a monopolar world, and South America.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Oceania Saker.
There is a petition “Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole: Deny Parole to Vanessa Coleman, Offender #473393” on Change.org:
Audio of friend of Officer Wilson relating officer’s version of the incident (based on her conversation with Wilson’s “significant other”:
In the name of Allah, the …beneficent, the merciful…
For 40 years, or was it longer, I can’t remember, I did all I could to give people houses, hospitals, schools, and when they were hungry, I gave them food. I even made Benghazi into farmland from the desert, I stood up to attacks from that cowboy Ronald Reagan, when he killed my adopted orphaned daughter, he was trying to kill me, instead he killed that poor innocent child. Then I helped my brothers and sisters from Africa with money for the African Union.
I did all I could to help people Understand the concept of real democracy, where people’s committees ran our country. But that was never enough, as some told me, even people who had 10 room homes, new suits and furniture, were never satisfied, as selfish as they were they wanted more. They told Americans and other visitors, that they needed “democracy” and “freedom” never realizing it was a cut throat system, where the biggest dog eats the rest, but they were enchanted with those words, never realizing that in America, there was no free medicine, no free hospitals, no free housing, no free education and no free food, except when people had to beg or go to long lines to get soup.
No, no matter what I did, it was never enough for some, but for others, they knew I was the son of Gamal Abdel Nasser, the only true Arab and Muslim leader we’ve had since Salah-al-Deen, when he claimed the Suez Canal for his people, as I claimed Libya, for my people, it was his footsteps I tried to follow, to keep my people free from colonial domination – from thieves who would steal from us.
Now, I am under attack by the biggest force in military history, my little African son, Obama wants to kill me, to take away the freedom of our country, to take away our free housing, our free medicine, our free education, our free food, and replace it with American style thievery, called “capitalism” ,but all of us in the Third World know what that means, it means corporations run the countries, run the world, and the people suffer.
So, there is no alternative for me, I must make my stand, and if Allah
wishes, I shall die by following His path, the path that has made our
country rich with farmland, with food and health, and even allowed us to help our African and Arab brothers and sisters.
I do not wish to die, but if it comes to that, to save this land, my people, all the thousands who are all my children, then so be it.
Let this testament be my voice to the world, that I stood up to crusader attacks of NATO, stood up to cruelty, stoop up to betrayal, stood up to the West and its colonialist ambitions, and that I stood with my African brothers, my true Arab and Muslim brothers, as a beacon of light.
When others were building castles, I lived in a modest house, and in a tent. I never forgot my youth in Sirte, I did not spend our national treasury foolishly, and like Salah-al-Deen, our great Muslim leader, who rescued Jerusalem for Islam, I took little for myself…
In the West, some have called me “mad”, “crazy”, but they know the truth yet continue to lie, they know that our land is independent and free, not in the colonial grip, that my vision, my path, is, and has been clear and for my people and that I will fight to my last breath to keep us free, may Allah almighty help us to remain faithful and free.