Under Empire, All Life is IMPERILED: Capitalism’s COLONIZATION of the Life-World
Post Categories: France

JAVIER SETHNESS CASTRO / The 4th Media News | Saturday, May 25, 2013, 14:37 Beijing


“After the catastrophes that have happened, and in view of the catastrophes to come, it would be cynical to say that a plan for a better world is manifested in history and unites it.” – Theodor W. Adorno, Negative Dialectics

Channeling Adorno, it would I think prove difficult today to characterize the prevailing world-situation as anything other than highly negative. Such an interpretation is arguably seen most readily in reflection on environmental matters—specifically, the ever-worsening climate emergency, not to mention other worrying signs of the ecological devastation wrought by the capitalist system.

Perhaps a short summary of key recent findings on the state of the environment is here in order. Less than two weeks ago, the Mauna Loa observatory in Hawai’i confirmed that the average global carbon dioxide concentration had reached 400 parts per million (ppm)—more than 50 ppm higher than James Hansen and the eponymous 350.org movement claim to be a safe level, and approximately 120 ppm higher than pre-industrial (or pre-capitalist) concentrations.

According to the Guardian,such CO2 concentrations have not been seen on Earth for the last 3-5 million years, during the Pliocene geological era, which saw an ice-free Arctic, savannahs in northern Africa (where currently the Sahara resides), and sea levels between 25 and 40 meters higher than those which obtain today.

In Professor Andrew Glikson’s estimation, the annual rise of 3 ppm in atmospheric CO2 seen last year (2012-2013) is entirely unprecedented during the past 65 million years; as he writes, “regular river flow conditions such as allowed cultivation and along river valleys since about 7000 years ago, and temperate Mediterranean-type climates allowing extensive farming, could hardly exist under the intense hydrological cycle and heat wave conditions of the Pliocene.”

This should hardly be surprising, given that such atmospheric CO2 levels as those we suffer today have never been seen in the entire history (and prehistory) of Homo sapiens sapiens, though our ancestral Homo habilis arguably did endure them.

Indeed, the Earth’s current average global temperature—a slightly different matter than the atmospheric CO2level, given lags in the latter’s contribution to the former, in addition to the masking effect of aerosols (SO2 et al.) emitted by industry—has recently been found to surpass 90% of all average global temperatures experienced since the emergence of agriculture some 12,000 years ago—and hence also of “civilization.”

Arguably most worrying is Nafeez Ahmad’s recent citation of a 2011 Science paper which projects that, given the current, unprecedented rate of increase in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, global average temperatures could rise a full 16°C by the end of the century—that is to say, nearly three times the worst-case scenario considered by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its 2007 report (a 6°C increase).


Such considerations are no doubt horrific; they are nonetheless reality.

Some other truths manifested of late that can be associated with these trends include the following climatological news and reports:

the 260,000 persons, half of them young children, who the UN recently announced to have perished during the 2011 famine in Somalia, itself catalyzed by the region’s worst drought in the past 7 decades;

the hundreds of millions who Lord Stern has recently reported can soon be expected to be forcibly displaced from their homelands due to unchecked global warming;

the millions who will face starvation in Africa and Asia as agriculture withers under unprecedented heat;

the numerous people of Bangladesh who are losing access to freshwater as rising sea levels cause saltwater to intrude into aquifers, or the millions of Bangladeshis, Sri Lankans, Burmese, and Rohingya threatened by cyclones like Mahasen;

the innumerable species, plant and animal, that face destruction and extinction under the projected average global temperature increases promised by climate catastrophe… The nauseating list goes on indefinitely.

Consideration of these problematics is the focus of my Imperiled Life: Revolution against Climate Catastrophe, published a year ago now by AK Press in collaboration with the Institute for Anarchist Studies.

Strangely enough, this one-year anniversary of publication is, unlike the case with more joyous occasions, hardly one to be celebrated, for the problems considered within the volume unsurprisingly have only worsened over that time, in keeping with the laws of physics and chemistry.

I would nonetheless continue to vouch for the work’s conclusions: its “diagnosis, prognosis, and remedies,” as mentioned in the preface by my editor Paul Messersmith-Glavin, stem from a social anarchist, anti-systemic perspective on the ecological crisis that I believe to be rational and helpful—insofar as such standards have a place today within political and environmental thought, as I should hope they might.

In structural terms, it should be clear to all honest observers that the climate crisis is the result of the dominance of the capitalist mode of production over the entirety of planet Earth; basing itself fundamentally on ceaseless expansion, the imperatives of capital profoundly contradict the modes of living—cooperative and competitive—observed throughout the world’s various ecosystems.

Capital’s “grow-or-die” maxim resembles that of the cancer cell or a deadly virus more than it does human, animal, or plant life, as theorists from Murray Bookchin to John McMurtry have rightly noted.

As against liberal analyses, then, the State has proved itself to be a mere facilitator of capital’s ecocidal project: consider Obama’s recent profession of enthusiasm for the “development” of the substantial hydrocarbon resources that are believed to reside below the Arctic ice cap, once capitalism has melted that away entirely.

In this vein, David Schwartman is right to cite Michael Klare in his formulation of the U.S. military as constituting the “oil protection service” of transnational capital: imperialism’s long and sordid history of accommodation with its autocratic Gulf petrol-enablers—and its various intrigues and interventions targeting those, from Mossadegh to Qadhafi, who might seek alternative uses of such resources—is well-known. Recall the Iraq War.


So we cannot look to the State for meaningful assistance in the struggle to overturn the trends which are delivering humanity and Earth’s systems into ruin—as John Holloway notes rightly, the State is “their organization,” referring to the capitalist class. What of the putative non-governmental organizations which espouse environmental concerns?

Clearly, Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and company rightly merit the label of “Gang Green,” in light of their toxic incrementalism and their related willingness to accommodate the very structures which are perpetuating environmental destruction.

Similarly, Cory Morningstar has recently written a legitimate denunciation of Bill McKibben and 350.org on these pages, declaring McKibben’s world-famous yet entirely reformist and thus inadequate organization to represent little more than the “soma of the 21st century,” given its papering over of any critique of capitalism, productivism, militarism, or imperialism.

Essentially, then, what we are faced with is the omnicidal steamroll of the capitalist machine as oiled by the world’s rich and their State, and then the anemic responses from the official “opposition” which has taken it upon itself to attempt to resolve the various environmental crises by doing essentially nothing of substance to achieve those ends.

Thankfully, of course, the story does not end there. Humanity, as I write in the penultimate paragraph of Imperiled Life, cannot be reduced to the forms of capital and the State; these “do not have the final word.” We are, then, on a desperate search for radical groupings among the subordinated, or l@s de abajo (“those from below”).

In strategic terms, it would seem that generally to diffuse anti-systemic ecological analyses—assuming these be tied together with humanistic, emancipatory concern for social oppression—remains a crucial task at the present juncture: the counter-hegemonic war of position today retains all of its relevance!

As should be self-evident, of course, efforts seeking merely to “raise consciousness” and metaphorically arm the populace with critical perspectives on the present multi-dimensional crisis should hardly be taken as the end of organizing; rather, such should serve as means to the “happy end” (Ernst Bloch) of a world freed from capitalist and State control, and the attendant looming risk of climate apocalypse. How these two trends might inter-relate—and whether we can even theoretically hope that they will, this late in the game—is the question on everyone’s minds (or, at least, it should be).


As Allan Stoekl closes his recent review of Adrian Parr’s The Wrath of Capital: Neoliberalism and Climate Change Politics, summing up the struggle to achieve a post-capitalist ecological society: “But how to get from here to there?” The question is a burning one. In this vein, we can turn to Max Horkheimer’s obvious yet crucial point that “[t]he revolution is no good” insofar as it “is not victorious.”[1]

Horkheimer is right: it would indeed seem problematic for thought merely to appeal to airy philosophical abstractions amidst the decidedly pressing matter of capital’s destruction of the world—to speak of the promise of the Hegelian Geist, say, or the inevitable triumph of the proletariat, as managed by an enlightened Leninist vanguard—but I would argue that Hannah Arendt’s conception of natality could prove particularly useful at the present moment.

As I understand, she first introduces this idea at the close of her Origins of Totalitarianism (1951), when she counterposes the possibilities of birth to inherited tradition and history, particularly of the imperialist and fascist varieties: “With each new birth, a new beginning is born into the world, a new world has potentially come into being […]. Freedom as an inner capacity of [humanity] is identical with the capacity to begin.”[2]

Arendt expands upon these fragmentary comments on interruption and beginning in her 1958 magnus opus The Human Condition. Largely repudiating the repressive, fatalistic philosophy of her former mentor Martin Heidegger, she writes the following:

“If left to themselves, human affairs can only follow the law of mortality, which is the most certain and the only reliable law of a life spent between birth and death. It is the faculty of action that interferes with this law because it interrupts the inexorable automatic course of daily life, which in its turn, as we saw, interrupted and interfered with the cycle of the biological life process. The life span of man [sic] running toward death would inevitably carry everything human to ruin and destruction if it were not for the faculty of interrupting it and beginning something new, a faculty which is inherent in action like an ever-present reminder that [humans], though they must die, are not born in order to die but in order to begin. Yet just as, from the standpoint of nature, the rectilinear movement of [humanity]‘s life-span between birth and death looks like a peculiar deviation from the common natural rule of cyclical movement, thus action, seen from the viewpoint of the automatic processes which seem to determine the course of the world, looks like a miracle […]. The miracle that saves the world, the realm of human affairs, from its normal, ‘natural’ ruin is ultimately the fact of natality, in which the faculty of action is ontologically rooted. It is, in other words, the birth of new [people] and the new beginning, the action they are capable of by virtue of being born. Only the full experience of this capacity can bestow upon human affairs faith and hope.”[3]


This hope for new beginnings—essentially, for a multiplicity of interventions which, à la Albert Camus and his Rebel, assert to power that it has transgressed vital bright lines, and hence cannot be allowed to continue on its path of destruction (“thus far, and no further”)—accords well with Walter Benjamin’s vision of a “leap into the open sky of history,” or Adorno’s contemplation of “a praxis which could explode the infamous continuum.”[4]

Each of us likely has similar visions, whether waking or unconscious—“fuck the police,” “world peace,” “fire to Babylon,” “there is no planet B.” It is crucial that we somehow coalesce these anti-systemic passions into a generalized movement to overthrow the totalitarian systems that degrade and abuse humanity and, in a most final sense, threaten to destroy future human generations as well as much of the rest of life—millions of species—on the only planetary system that we know is amenable to its emergence and evolution. Hope today, then, is not passivity and sedation (as with religion) but rather radical struggle (as in revolution).

While there indeed have been positive signs in the past few years in the direction of the development of what dissident historian George Katsiaficas terms a “global people’s uprising,” clearly such developments have met with distressing limitations, many of them indeed emanating from constituted power—think of the police’s dismantling of the Occupy/Decolonize encampments in the U.S., or the various imperial manipulations of and interventions against the numerous uprisings in the Arab-majority world.


The preferred approach, in my view, remains what György Lukács saw as a “mass rising on behalf of reason,” an idea he took from the 500 million signatures to the 1950 Stockholm Agreement calling for unconditional nuclear disarmament—a tradition we have seen well-illustrated throughout the streets and squares of much of the world in recent memory.[5]

The point, in sum—as well as the hope—is to radicalize and intensify these encouraging social strides from below against the system, to help along the birth of the new—or, as Bloch termed it, the “Not-Yet.” It is past time to sound the tocsin, whether physically like Jean Paul Marat did to defend the Great French Revolution, or musically like Dmitriy Shostakovich did in defense of the memory and future promise of the 1905 Russian Revolution (as well as other revolutions).

The alarm must be continuous, not so that we grow accustomed to it, but rather so that we never lose sight of the substantial tasks with which we are confronted today, and the anarchist means by which we would most likely best respond to these.

Positively and concretely, I would here reiterate some of the proposals for action made by my comrade Cristian Guerrero nearly a year ago in the run-up to planned counter-protests against the G-20 summit in Los Cabos, México: agitation, indignation, mobilization, direct action, occupation, blockade of capital, popular assembly.

Particularly promising, I would say, is the Industrial Workers of the World’s new conception of the ecological general strike, whereby environmental sanity is to be achieved through the disruption of capitalism’s colonization of the life-world and its replacement with participatory economic models.

Javier Sethness Castro is author of Imperiled Life: Revolution against Climate Catastrophe and For a Free Nature: Critical Theory, Social Ecology, and Post-Developmentalism. His essays and articles have appeared in Truthout, Climate and Capitalism, Dissident Voice, MRZine, Countercurrents, and Perspectives on Anarchist Theory. He is currently working on writing a political and intellectual biography of Herbert Marcuse.


[1] Max Horkheimer, Dawn and Decline: Notes, 1926-1931 and 1959-1969, trans. Michael Shaw (New York: Seabury Press, 1978), 39.

[2] Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (San Diego: Harvest, 1968 [1951]), 465, 473.

[3] Ibid, The Human Condition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958), 246-7.

[4] Theodor W. Adorno, Prisms (trans. Samuel and Shierry Weber, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1967), 117.

[5] György Lukács, The Destruction of Reason (Torfaen, Wales: Merlin Press, 1980), 850.

Tags: death law life movement
Related articles:

US and UK Drowned Iraq in Blood: Barbarian Rhapsody, Ten Years Deeper Into Hell

Israel’s Coming “Civil War”: The Haredi Jews Confront the Militarized Secular Zionist State

Evolution of State Terror: State Terrorists Who Control CIA, Mossad Not Yet Rolled Up Sleeves

The 1963 Struggle: Lessons on Role of Mass Mobilization and Need for Militant Direction against Oppression, State Repression, …

fritz said o

Posted in 4th Media, Capitalism, CAPITALISM AND ENVIRONMENT, Capitalism and Psycho-Sociopathy, Decline of the American Imperium, Economic Development, ELITES AND NEW WORLD ORDER, IMPERIAL HUBRIS AND INTRIGUE, Imperial Hypocrisy and Intrigue, International Law and Nuremberg Precedents, Logic of Capitalism and Imperialism, Neoliberalism as Neoimperialism, New World Order, Political Economy, Science and Method, Social Systems Engineering Campaigns, Statistics on the Decline of USA, U.S. IMPERIAL DECLINE, U.S. Terrorism | Leave a comment




Let Us Mourn The Millions America Has Slaughtered, Then MOURN US Soldiers
Post Categories: China
Jay Janson | Monday, May 27, 2013, 18:03 Beijing

This veteran is waiting for the year in which the Veterans For Peace, in its Memorial Day Press Release, states that Veterans mourn first, the lives America took in poor countries, both the civilian men, women and children and the patriots that fought our illegal and criminal invasions since 1945.

Only then should come bitterly mourning GIs who were duped by our elected officials and the CIA and Pentagon fed, corporate-controlled war-promoting media cartel fooling them with lies, misinformation, disinformation and psyop techniques that deceived them into proudly following homicidal criminal orders.

Orders given, as Martin Luther King Jr. cried out, “for atrocity wars and covert homicide meant to maintain unjust predatory investments overseas.” – [see Beyond Vietnam – a Time to Break Silence]

Your writer’s four buddies from basic training, whose corpses are somewhere in North Korea, would have wanted this kind of a press release. They were normal guys, still kids really.

We thought going into the army was just something everyone had to do. They would have been pissed off to see cruelly ignorant Americans praising them on Memorial Day for their sacrifice.

Jesus knows they did not want to die for any reason, let alone while killing others for lies. They loved waking up in the morning, loved children, all children, cute Korean children, especially.

They were asking themselves, why are we killing Koreans in their own country?

If these four young men knew what I know now, whew!

If they could rise up, they would surely be going after those high ranking military with lots of colorful ribbons on their smart uniforms, surrounded by flags and glorifying the US war in Korea and in all the dozens of countries since.


In 1945, the US Army landed in a Korea that America had recognized as Japanese territory since 1905 and during a forty year brutal occupation, in return for Japan’s acceptance of the US claim to own the Philippines and other islands in Asian waters. [see Diplomacy That Will Live in Infamy, New York Times, James Bradley, 12/5/2009. See also the Taft-Katsura Agreement.]

Two F-15K fighter jets drop bombs on a mountain target during air and ground military exercises on the Seungjin Fire Training Field, in mountainous Pocheon

State Department officials quickly shut down the democratic all-Korea government the Japanese commanding general had allowed Koreans to form, once Japan was defeated.

Knowing this Korean government would not be pro-US, they set up in its place, a US Army military government; cut the nation in two and installed a brutal Korean from Washington as President.

His special services and secret police would account for massacres totaling up to nearly 200,000 men, women and their children, in the years before the army of North Korea invaded and united the peninsula in five short weeks as the army of the Southern dictator defected or went home.

These massacres of communists, socialists, unionists and people that did not accept the US partition of their country kept secret by American media have now been fully document by a Truth and Reconciliation Commission set up by the South Korean Congress. [Korean Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Wikipedia] The US has recently officially apologized for its own massacres of civilians in the South.

North Korea today is the most militarized nation on the planet because it was leveled twice by merciless bombing, threatened with atom bombs, and for sixty-three years has suffered US arranged international sanctions meant to cripple it, and a continual campaign of slanderous attack in US media and never ending threats from Washington, while twice a year, great war game exercises go on so near its coast that the booms of US naval ships’ cannon and missiles are clearly heard in its capital city.

Last month saw the largest naval live-fire exercise in history, reportedly with North Korean flags painted on targets.

What else could be the explanation of its leader threatening to hit the US with the few nuclear weapons it has, knowing the America that menaces it has 20,000, and the most powerful armed force in the history of the world.

But we have seen ‘the crazy North Korean leader story’ on prime time for a month. Last year right after US-South Korean war games, a South Korea warship was blown in two, probably by a US mine, but what is believed all over the Western media dominated world is that was an old North Korean torpedo.

Who knows or cares that the Chinese, the Russian Navy and a Japanese investigation found the accusation not credible, that the US and its UN Secretary General stooge refused to consider a North Korea request for a UN investigation of what it was accused of. [see N. Korean Torpedo Accusation Fizzles: Strong Probability of US Mine Strike Investigated, Counter Currents 6/11/2010]

No, the torpedo story was featured for weeks to justify tighter that ever sanctions and stronger threats than before, and Libya was a frightening example of what may be awaiting it.


Search Donkey Ad

If the media features for nine months, weaponized pick-up trucks run by tough looking hombres as peaceful demonstrators against the government of oil wealthy Libya, a nation with a living standard higher than nine European countries, it becomes ‘truth,’ and the liberator of what was the poorest country in Africa, and leader of African Unity against continuing European exploitation, winds up with a blade up his backside, after being cornered by British and French warplanes. No matter the president of Italy told media, “Gadaffi is loved by his people.”

Not until US world hegemony is overthrown, will ordinary people come to know that almost one million Libyans, out of a total country population of six, were desperately demonstrating for their government and leader outside Tripoli as British and French high tech war planes were finishing off their nation’s army.

[http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1dc_1314116137 or google for many articles and videos]

Note to US media personalities: Among the generals who were imprisoned or hung after trail at Nuremberg, were five media celebrities.

There are either similar absurd media concocted stories, or no story at all, that excuse US crimes against humanity in the dozens of nations US designated local bad guys have been mass murdered to help a little country out, and protect the American way of life in the US.

America is so good to invade and bomb and overthrow violently governments all for the benefit of nearly a billion people.

Greece, Korea, Guatemala, Congo, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Iran, Dominican Republic, Indonesia, Lebanon, Cuba, Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Pakistan, Serbia/Kosovo, Bosnia, Libya; the list of countries covertly attacked and government overthrown is longer and contains almost every nation in Latin America, many times over if crimes against peace Nuremberg Principle VI are included

Note that remember, invading little countries was nothing new for the US before World War II – Mexico, Nicaragua, Haiti, Philippines, China, Puerto Rico, Cuba, and more.

Again, this veteran is hoping that the Veterans For Peace Memorial Day Statement Press Release will say that VFP, or at least many if not all VFP, mourn the patriots of US invaded countries that fell fighting against overwhelming odds, and their civilian countrymen and children who also fell in harms way of those US invading forces.


To be polite, we mourn them first before mourning our own soldiers who were killed in the line of duty following our government’s criminal orders. Otherwise how can anyone believe VFP condemns the taking of all these millions of lives of poor people overseas in illegal criminal military action; an illegal use of military that Representative from Texas, Congressman and Republican candidate for president, denounced (but did not call for prosecution).

Nothing less than this can possibly dent the usual Memorial Day adulation for dying for what Martin Luther King called “atrocity wars for maintaining unjust predatory investments on three continents.”

Here is what this veteran would have Veterans For Peace to say to Americans on Memorial Day.

Dear Fellow Americans,

No Americans knows more about US Wars than your veterans, who fought alongside buddies who did not make it home alive and will be mourned throughout the nation this weekend.

This Memorial Day 2012, Veterans For Peace is asking their fellow Americans to morn quietly at home. We ask that all sincerely patriotic citizens not take part in military parades and festive open-air observances under flags flying military colors. It anyone asks you why, say you don’t like selective mourning, that is, mourning our dead but not those our soldiers killed.

Memorial Day has been hijacked, just as our nation has been hijacked, by the investment banks of the Military-Industrial-Complex. Its corporate owned media promotes and hails an indiscriminate celebration of all US wars as heroic.

These Memorial Day festive celebrations have become a tradition of praising those of us who followed orders to kill designated enemies unquestioningly in more than a dozen nations since 1945 – and of military commanders, politicians and media anchors solemnly professing gratitude for the supreme sacrifice of those who died as a result.

We, your fellow Americans, who were trained to kill, and later fell in love with the dear people of the countries we were sent to kill, strongly suggest, for the protection of your children, that you tune out network news coverage of Memorial Day.

Corporate owned commercial media, with an unrelenting agenda of deceitful war propaganda has taken the lives of many of your loved ones, luring them into serving a shameful use of military power, while your sons and daughters, in all good faith, sought only to serve their country.

These wars were undeclared and illegal and resulted in the terrible deaths of millions of fellow human beings in their own small and beloved countries – often as not, dying in their very own homes. Last year one of the three present candidates for president firmly denounced these wars as having been illegal, unconstitutional, criminal and a monstrous disaster for America.

Veterans For Peace endorses the Martin-Luther-King-Jr.-Condemened-US-Wars-for-Predatory-Investments-International-Awareness-Campaign. Most members believe Martin Luther King Jr. was shot dead because he would have awakened public responsibility and our capability to make such illegal wars unacceptable and inoperable through non-participation, non-support and conscientious objection. That would have crippled investor profits. King is mourned as a victim of US wars for profit.

Rev. King, was dangerous for the elite investing community that rules the 99% of us. He condemned all US wars and clandestinely organized violence “all around the world “created to maintain “unfair predatory overseas investments.” King had the charisma to have prosecuted successfully what he called atrocity wars and crimes against humanity in the street and in the court of public opinion as he prosecuted successfully racist crimes against humanity at home.

Veterans condemn the Militarization of Memorial Day that originally was a sacred day of mourning the civil war that took loved ones of both sides who once passed to the afterlife are reunited in brotherhood.

Veterans For Peace sincerely wishes everyone a peaceful, loving and contemplative Memorial Day.

The above was a draft submitted to Veterans For Peace upon the request of last year’s Veterans For Peace President, but not published.

Members of the Memorial Day Press Release Drafting Committee should realize, if not worrisomely, that there are very few people who believe that Veterans For Peace will bring these wars to a end or intends to do so, even though, logically, those who willing did the killing are the Americans who should most be able to lead their being made unacceptable and eventually inoperable.

Leadership of its largest chapters have even opposed the national office statement of support for the impeachment proposal presented by Rep. Dennis Kucinich and others in the House of Representatives. At the same time former VFP president Elliot Adams was in court after indicting President Obama everyone following his criminal orders at the US Air Force Drone base at Hancock, New York.

I am absolutely convinced eventually a renegade faction of Veterans For Peace will constitute itself, and on a future Memorial Day, publish a Memorial Day press release of its own along going further, and calling for the prosecution of not only the government, but war investors, war promoters in media and clergy and the war crimes committed by military personnel. [see Prosecute US Crimes Against Humanity Now]

Prosecute our own before our victims unite and prosecute all of us.

Jay Janson is an archival research peoples historian activist, musician and writer; has lived and worked on all continents; articles on media published in China, Italy, UK, India and the US; now resides in NYC; -( Please visit http://prosecuteuscrimesagainsthumanitynow.blogspot.com/ featuring a country by country history of US crimes and laws pertaining.) Studied history at CCNY, Columbia U., U. Puerto Rico, Dolmetscher Institut München, Germany. (Musician grassroots activist dedicated firstly to ending colonial power “genocide in maintenance of unjust predatory investments,” [Martin Luther King Jr.])

Posted in 4th Media, CIA past, CIA Terrorism, Decline of the American Imperium, DPRK AND U.S., ELITES AND NEW WORLD ORDER, Faces of Fascism, Legal Actions on Genocide, Logic of Capitalism and Imperialism, Meme Warfare and Imperialism, NED and other Fronts of Imperialism, Neoclassical Economics and Neoliberalism as Neo-Imperialism, Neoliberalism and Neoclassical Theory, Neoliberalism as Neoimperialism, Nuremberg Precedents, U.S. Govt and Al Qaeda, U.S. IMPERIAL DECLINE, U.S. Terrorism | 1 Comment



My friend Stand Goff has been many places and seen and done a lot of things. But that is not the only reason he needs to be read and listened to. The skills and insights and capabilities that got him accepted into “elite” Special Operations Forces of the U.S. also led him to eventually see the myriad contradictions of the U.S. Imperium and the lies it was handing out not only to its military forces but also to its citizenry.

Stan Goff A Christian Soldier on Veteran’s Day

Like all of us, Stan is a work in progress from what we were to what we hope to be. Stan is worth reading and his arguments worth considering.

It is the spirit and intent of this blog to bring together serious voices from a variety of perspectives on the critical issues of our times.


Capitalism and Christianity Part I Motive for the Series

Capitalism and Christianity Part 2 The Crusades: The Grandfather of Capitalism

Capitalism and Christianity Part 3 War and Reformation

Capitalism and Christianity Part 4 Great Transformation

Capitalism and Christianity Part 5 Contingency and Disenchantment

Capitalism and Christianity Part 6 Money the Solvent

Capitalism and Christianity Part 7 Thermodynamic Dissipation and Economics

Capitalism and Christianity Part 8 The Social Relations of of Entropic Capitalism

Capitalism and Christianity Part 9 The Power of the Machine

Capitalism and Christianity Part 10 Philosophy and Capitalism



Nazi Belt Buckle




Posted in CAPITALISM AND RELIGION, Economic Development, Feral Scholar, MEMEONOMICS: Economics and EconomistS;: Capitalism and its Theories, NED and other Fronts of Imperialism, Neoclassical Economics and Neoliberalism as Neo-Imperialism, Neoliberalism and Neoclassical Theory, Neoliberalism as Neoimperialism, New World Order, Social Systems Engineering Campaigns, U.S. IMPERIAL DECLINE | 1 Comment



Massive Disinformation Propaganda Works in US
Post Categories: Israel
Paul Craig Roberts / The 4th Media News | Saturday, May 25, 2013, 16:13 Beijing

Paul Craig Roberts-big

Why Disinformation Works

Have you ever wondered how the government’s misinformation gains traction?
What I have noticed is that whenever a stunning episode occurs, such as 9/11 or the Boston Marathon bombing, most everyone whether on the right or left goes along with the government’s explanation, because they can hook their agenda to the government’s account.

The leftwing likes the official stories of Muslims creating terrorist mayhem in America, because it proves their blowback theory and satisfies them that the dispossessed and oppressed can fight back against imperialism.

The patriotic rightwing likes the official story, because it proves America is attacked for its goodness or because terrorists were allowed in by immigration authorities and nurtured by welfare, or because the government, which can’t do anything right, ignored plentiful warnings.

Whatever the government says, no matter how problematical, the official story gets its traction from its compatibility with existing predispositions and agendas.
In such a country, truth has no relevance. Only agendas are important.

propaganda works tv_media_giants (1)

A person can see this everywhere. I could write volumes illustrating how agenda-driven writers across the spectrum will support the most improbable government stories despite the absence of any evidence simply because the government’s line can be used to support their agendas.

For example, a conservative writer in the June issue of Chronicles uses the government’s story about the alleged Boston Marathon bombers, Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, to argue against immigration, amnesty for illegals, and political asylum for Muslims. He writes: “Even the most high-tech security systems imaginable will inevitably fail as they are overwhelmed by a flood of often hostile and dangerous immigrants.”

The writer accepts all of the improbable government statements as proof that the brothers were guilty. The wounded brother who was unable to respond to the boat owner who discovered him and had to be put on life support somehow managed to write a confession on the inside of the boat.

As soon as the authorities have the brother locked up in a hospital on life support, “unnamed officials” and “authorities who remain anonymous” are planting the story in the media that the suspect is signing written confessions of his guilt while on life support. No one has seen any of these written confessions. But we know that they exist, because the government and media say so.

The conservative writer knows that Dzhokhar is guilty because he is Muslim and a Chechen. Therefore, it does not occur to the writer to wonder about the agenda of the unnamed sources who are busy at work creating belief in the brothers’ guilt. This insures that no juror would dare vote for acquittal and have to explain it to family and friends. Innocent until proven guilty in a court has been thrown out the window. This should disturb the conservative writer, but doesn’t.

The conservative writer sees Chechen ethnicity as an indication of guilt even though the brothers grew up in the US as normal Americans, because Chechens are “engaged in anti-Russian jihad.” But Chechens have no reason for hostility against the US. As evidence indicates, Washington supports the Chechens in their conflict with Russia.

By supporting Chechen terrorism, Washington violates all of the laws that it ruthlessly applies to compassionate Americans who give donations to Palestinian charities that Washington alleges are run by Hamas, a Washington-declared terrorist organization.

It doesn’t occur to the conservative writer that something is amiss when martial law is established over one of America’s main cities and its metropolitan area, 10,000 heavily armed troops are put on the streets with tanks, and citizens are ordered out of their homes with their hands over their heads, all of this just to search for one wounded 19-year old suspect.

Instead the writer blames the “surveillance state” on “the inevitable consequences of suicidal liberalism” which has embraced “the oldest sin in the world: rebellion against authority.”

The writer is so pleased to use the government’s story line as a way of indulging the conservative’s romance with authority and striking a blow at liberalism that he does not notice that he has lined up against the Founding Fathers who signed the Declaration of Independence and rebelled against authority.

I could just as easily have used a left-wing writer to illustrate the point that improbable explanations are acceptable if they fit with predispositions and can be employed in behalf of an agenda.

Think about it. Do you not think that it is extraordinary that the only investigations we have of such events as 9/11 and the Boston Marathon bombing are private investigations, such as this investigation of the backpacks:

There was no investigation of 9/11. Indeed, the White House resisted any inquiry at all for one year despite the insistent demands from the 9/11 families. NIST did not investigate anything. NIST simply constructed a computer model that was consistent with the government’s story. The 9/11 Commission simply sat and listened to the government’s explanation and wrote it down. These are not investigations.

The only investigations have come from a physicist who proved that WTC 7 came down at free fall and was thus the result of controlled demolition, from a team of scientists who examined dust from the WTC towers and found nano-thermite, from high-rise architects and structural engineers with decades of experience, and from first responders and firefighters who were in the towers and experienced explosions throughout the towers, even in the sub-basements.

We have reached the point where evidence is no longer required. The government’s statements suffice. Only conspiracy kooks produce real evidence.

propaganda works 4218196-305636-social-problem-of-being-tv-zombies-due-to-media-lying-graphic-creative-concept

In America, government statements have a unique authority. This authority comes from the white hat that the US wore in World War II and in the subsequent Cold War. It was easy to demonize Nazi Germany, Soviet Communism and Maoist China.

Even today when Russian publications interview me about the perilous state of civil liberty in the US and Washington’s endless illegal military attacks abroad, I sometimes receive reports that some Russians believe that it was an impostor who was interviewed, not the real Paul Craig Roberts.

There are Russians who believe that it was President Reagan who brought freedom to Russia, and as I served in the Reagan administration these Russians associate me with their vision of America as a light unto the world. Some Russians actually believe that Washington’s wars are truly wars of liberation.

The same illusions reign among Chinese dissidents. Chen Guangcheng is the Chinese dissident who sought refuge in the US Embassy in China.

Recently he was interviewed by the BBC World Service. Chen Guangcheng believes that the US protects human rights while China suppresses human rights. He complained to the BBC that in China police can arrest citizens and detain them for as long as six months without accounting for their detainment. He thought that the US and UK should publicly protest this violation of due process, a human right.

Apparently, Chen Guangcheng is unaware that US citizens are subject to indefinite detention without due process and even to assassination without due process.

The Chinese government allowed Chen Guangcheng safe passage to leave China and live in the US. Chen Guangcheng is so dazzled by his illusions of America as a human rights beacon that it has never occurred to him that the oppressive, human rights-violating Chinese government gave him safe passage, but that Julian Assange, after being given political asylum by Ecuador is still confined to the Ecuadoran embassy in London, because Washington will not allow its UK puppet state to permit his safe passage to Ecuador.

Perhaps Chen Guangcheng and the Chinese and Russian dissidents who are so enamored of the US could gain some needed perspective if they were to read US soldier Terry Holdbrooks’ book about the treatment given to the Guantanamo prisoners.

Holdbrooks was there on the scene, part of the process, and this is what he told RT:
“The torture and information extraction methods that we used certainly created a great deal of doubt and questions in my mind to whether or not this was my America.

But when I thought about what we were doing there and how we go about doing it, it did not seem like the America I signed up to defend. It did not seem like the America I grew up in. And that in itself was a very disillusioning experience.” http://rt.com/news/guantanamo-guard-islam-torture-608/

In a May 17 Wall Street Journal.com article, Peggy Noonan wrote that President Obama has lost his patina of high-mindedness. What did Obama do that brought this loss upon himself? Is it because he sits in the Oval Office approving lists of US citizens to be assassinated without due process of law?

Is it because he detains US citizens indefinitely in violation of habeas corpus? Is it because he has kept open the torture prison at Guantanamo? Is it because he continued the war that the neoconservatives started, despite his promise to end it, and started new wars?

Is it because he attacks with drones people in their homes, medical centers, and work places in countries with which the US is not at war? Is it because his corrupt administration spies on American citizens without warrants and without cause?

No. It is none of these reasons. In Noonan’s view these are not offenses for which presidents, even Democratic ones, lose their high-minded patina. Obama can no longer be trusted, because the IRS hassled some conservative political activists.

Noonan is a Republican, and what Obama did wrong was to use the IRS against some Republicans. Apparently, it has not occurred to Noonan that if Obama–or any president–can use the IRS against opponents, he can use Homeland Security and the police state against them. He can use indefinite detention against them. He can use drones against them.

All of these are much more drastic measures. Why isn’t Peggy Noonan concerned? Because she thinks these measures will only be used against terrorists, just as the IRS is only supposed to be used against tax evaders.

When a public and the commentators who inform it accept the collapse of the Constitution’s authority and the demise of their civil liberties, to complain about the IRS is pointless.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. His latest book, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West is now available.



patriotism and propaganda





Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment



A Chinese View on the LEAST Understood Issue, i.e., the “North Korea,” the Most/Worst DEMONIZED Nation on Earth (I-IIV)
Post Categories: Editorial

HanDongping / The 4th Media News | Thursday, May 23, 2013, 15:14 Beijing

Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on printShare on gmailShare on stumbleuponShare on favoritesMore Sharing Services0Print

[The 4th Media’s editorial note: The following 7 articles are written by Prof. Han Dongping, a Chinese-American scholar. At present he’s teaching at Warren Wilson College in the US. He seems to have begun to publish the following series of DPRKorea-related articles since the start of newly revived and the most recent Korean War Crisis when DPRK successfully launched their 3rd Satlelite into the orbit on December 12, 2012. The articles have been published at several different Chinese online/offline media outlets, including the China Daily, the English CPC Party Organ. The 4th Media believes Prof. Han’s approaches, perspectives and prospects on the DPRK issue as a whole seem terribly important for their very insightful analyses, ideas, and propositions on the said issue. The kind of perspectives and views Dr. Han presents in his articles seem very rare and unique, therefore his articles seem fresh, very fresh! For the most part, it seems most global populations, including many Chinese and Russians, might have not been properly guided, encouraged or led to understand probably the least understood thereby the most/worst demonized nation on earth. This is the very reason why The 4th Media decided to compile his most recent Korea-related articles and edited them into a single and unified artile. FYI, the sequence of the number before each article is the editorial work done by The 4th Media, not by the author. Some of the original titles of the articles are also a bit modified or changed. The compilation of photos are the work of The 4th Media.]


I. The DPRK Needs Nuclear Weapons for Self Defense [as long as nations threatening the DPRK are nuclear armed and threaten to use their weapons]

After the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea announced that it would test some new and more advanced nuclear devices, the U.S. Japan and South Korea all threatened to put more sanctions against the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea. Ding Gang of People’s Daily published an article, entitled: Nuclear Bomb Does Not Bring Security. He argued that PDRK should not test any more nuclear devices and accept the UN Security Council Resolution No 2087 which bans any nuclear test and launching of rockets by PDRK. In his belief, this is the only way PDRK would improve its security environment.

Ding Gang’s argument ignored the brutal reality of Korea situation, which forces the PDRK to test its nuclear devices. It was the U.S. who labeled the PDRK as part of the “ Axis of Evil,” together with Iraq, Iran and Syria. It is the United State of America that has more than two hundred military bases in South Korea and Japan, and it is the United States with its allies of Japan and South Korea that constantly carried provocative military exercise around PDRK. It is against these constant threats that the PDRK needs to test its nuclear devices.

Saddam Hussein of Iraq abandoned his nuclear program and other suspected mass weapon programs in an effort to avoid a confrontation with the U.S. But that did not bring any national security to Iraqi people. The United States blatantly violated the UN Charter and invaded the sovereign nation of Iraq, causing tremendous human suffering and physical destruction to the people of Iraq. The powerful nations of the UN Security Council watched the ongoing injustice in Iraq, did nothing and said nothing.

Kaddafi of Libya, in an effort to pacify Western Nations hostility toward his country, gave up his nuclear program as well. But that did not bring about any security to Libya. The two former colonial empires, France and Britain, with the help of the United States, bombed Libya so wantonly, destroyed Libyan military, and decimated Libyan infrastructure with a large civilian casualty as well. The powerful members of UN Security Council watched the injustice going on in Libya, did nothing and said nothing.

People who witnessed what happened to Iraq and Libya can not help wonder if it would make any difference if Saddam Hussein and Kaddafi had nuclear weapons. Would the U.S. have invaded Iraq like it did if Saddam Hussein had had nuclear weapons? If Kaddafi did not surrender to the Western pressure, and had nuclear weapons, would France, Britain and U.S. still bomb the Libya the way it did?

If the people and government of PDRK wants to avoid the fate of Libya and Iraq befalling on them, what should be their option? The answer should be clear to anyone who is clear headed.

The real threat in this world is not PDRK’s small nuclear program, but the big nuclear arsenals of the permanent members of the UN Security Council. They used their powerful military to bully other small nations. Small nations like PDRK has no choice but to develop their own nuclear program to defend their way of life and defend their national sovereignty.

If the U.S. and other so called peaceful nations really care about our environment, they need to stop the provocative military exercises around the PDRK, and lift the barbaric sanctions against the people and government of the People Democratic Republic of Korea. Nations regardless of its size should enjoy equal rights in this world. That is the only way for all nations to coexist peacefully.

North Korean woman and soldiers look at a Chinese tour boat from the banks of the Yalu River near the North Korean town of Sinuiju

II. There Won’t Be a War in Korea

Much has been going on in the Korea Peninsula over the past few weeks. In light of Joint Military Exercises by the U.S. and South Korea, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea declared null a 60-year-old cease-fire. The terms of the cease-fire hold both sides to make an effort for peace. In the eyes of the DPRK, the military exercises are anything but peaceful, and it would be pointless to honor the treaty as such. In response, the U.S. flew two Missori-based stealth bombers to South Korea, hoping to intimidate the DPRK, who has “pushed back” by declaring that any further provocative action will result in nuclear war.

Many of my American students are troubled by these tensions. I affirmed them that there would be no war in that part of the world: the U.S. cannot afford another war. The U.S., South Korea, the DPRK know this – it is no secret to anyone. This is why PDRK has been able to respond to the U.S. and South Korea’s provocation the fearless way it did.

The war in Iraq has significantly changed our world. The Bush Administration, wanting war, was confident that with U.S. military supremacy in the world, they could do whatever they pleased, wherever they pleased. Third-World nations would have to put up any and all U.S. impositions. The outcomes of Iraq War and Afghanistan War demonstrated, however, that for all its military capabilities, the U.S. cannot do whatever it pleases in this world any more. As long as the Third-World countries refuse to give up, they can bleed the superpower to its collapse in the end.

John Kerry, the new U.S. Secretary of State, lectured the Iraqi government for its collaboration with Iranian Government in his recent visit to Iraq. Kerry said that the U.S. would not allow Iraq to become an Iranian ally after making so much sacrifices in money and blood in Iraq. What can U.S. do with this situation? Can it afford to start another war there? I have doubts if the Iraqi Government would even respond to John Kerry: Iraq is an independent country and will do what it pleases. If the CIA can arm the rebels in Syria, why could not Iraq help Iran arm its own friends in Syria? The U.S. and its allies have very recently imposed many sanctions and threats against the DPRK. Why cannot the PDRK do the same to its opponents?

I do not think that the DPRK has anything to fear. If the U.S. could not pacify Iraq and Afghanistan, it will have a much harder time with the DPRK, where the citizens are much organized and more coherent than in Iraq and Afghanistan. More importantly, China and Russia will not allow the U.S. to assume any military “jurisdiction” in the Korean peninsula. Neither nation may support the DPRK’s nuclear aspirations, but they will certainly not allow the U.S. (or South Korea) to wield dominance in the area.

The U.S has provoked the DPRK in order to justify its presence in South Korea and as well as its prerogative in East Asia. As such, their prerogative has been the source of considerable tension in the region. It is time for the U.S. to leave South Korea and Japan, for its own sake as well as the sake of peace. The UN’s Security Council and General Assembly should discuss the eventual withdraws of all overseas U.S. troops in order to truly promote peace in the world.


III. The People’s Democratic Republic of Korea (PDRK) Is Critical for China’s National Security

Many people in China, including some important Chinese officials on Foreign Affairs, have been upset with PDRK’s continued effort to develop nuclear weapon capabilities. Facing constant threats of joint military exercises by the US and South Korea, it is quite understandable for the PDRK to want to develop its own nuclear weapon capabilities in order to act as a deterrent against possible military attack.

These Chinese officials worry that the PDRK’s nuclear weapons could in the end become a threat to China. They demand that China cut its foreign aid to PDRK to teach it a lesson for failing to act according to China’s wishes. These people fail to see the geopolitical significance of the PDRK. They do not realize that the PDRK is crucial to China’s national security. Indeed, China needs the PDRK more than the other way round.

It has been the U.S.’s objective in the last two decades since the collapse of former Soviet Union to isolate the PDRK. The ultimately goal that the U.S. hopes to accomplish by undermining the PDRK is in fact to undermine China. After the collapse of former Soviet Union, the U.S. became the only remaining superpower in the world. George H.W Bush, the first President Bush, and the inner circle of his administration began to conceptualize for a new post-Cold War World Order, in which the U.S. would use its unprecedented military power to remake the world in its own image. Fortunately for the world, the Bush Senior was defeated by the young challenger, the then obscure Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton.

The new world order group, Bush Senior’s inner circle like Dick Cheney, Donald H. Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz got a second chance when George W. Bush got elected in 2000. On January 29, 2002, George W. Bush pinpointed Iran, Iraq and PDRK as the Axis of Evil in his State of the Union Address. Later, Bush’s ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton labeled Syria, Cuba and Libya as Beyond the Axis of Evil.

Bush’s National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice listed Burma, Belarus and Zimbabwe as the Outposts of Tyranny. The New World Order group was preparing the world public opinion to justify its future military attack against these countries.

When the U.S. unilaterally invaded Iraq using the lie that Saddam’s had weapons of mass destruction as an excuse, I knew that the next target would be Iran, and after Iran, it would be the PDRK. If the Axis of Evil were taken care of, China would move onto the agenda. The U.S. would provoke China by openly supporting Taiwan’s Independence. If China responded to Taiwan’s independence militarily, China would have to face a two front attack from both North and South.

Fortunately for China and the rest of the world, the fierce resistance of the Iraqi and Afghan people engulfed the U.S. in a quagmire. The U.S. apparently underestimated the Iraqi and Afghan people’s determination to defend their motherlands and their own way of life. The problem is that the U.S. and many other imperialist nations often fail to learn lessons from their past wrongs.

They did not learn a lesson from the Korean War of the 1950s, and they did not learn a lesson from Vietnam. They will not learn their lessons from their mistakes in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that is why PDRK needs to develop its nuclear capacity to avoid the fate of the Iraqi people, the fate of the Afghan people, and the fate of Libya and Syria.
One of my American colleagues argued with me about PDRK. He said that if the PDRK fell, only a small number of the elite would suffer, and the majority of the people would benefit from the fall.

That is the argument many Chinese scholars want people to believe.

Look what happened in Iraq and Libya. The U.S. did not like Saddam Hussein, and wanted to get rid of him. But more than one million innocent Iraqis paid the price of their lives during the process to remove Saddam from power.

The U.S. and West had grudges against Kaddafi, and they wanted to get back at him for his anti-colonialism career. But in the process, the western nations decimated Libya’s infrastructure, and hundreds and thousands of innocent Libyan people were killed.

On top of that, these countries who carried out the bombing billed Libya over fifty billion dollars for their “bombing services,” which equals Libya’s oil revenue for the next 50 years.

When Kaddafi was in power, he used some of the oil revenue to provide free education and free medical care for his people. The people in Libya enjoyed the best living standards in Africa then. I wonder if the post Kaddafi Libyan authorities would ever be able to provide the Libyan people the same free education and medical without the oil revenue.

Many people in China fail to see the fact that the U.S. perceives China to be its biggest threat despite China’s constant reiteration of its peaceful rise in the world. Nobody would be fooled by China’s rhetoric of peaceful rise. There is no doubt that China wants to rise peacefully.

But to the U.S. who wants to remain number one in the world, China’s rise whether peaceful or not is seen as a threat. Indeed, not long ago a senior State Department official stated very bluntly at a talk on William and Mary campus that China was the biggest threat in the world and that the U.S.’s number one goal was to pursue all avenues available to undermine China’s growing influence in the world. The logic is simple, when you are at the top, you want to stay there, and any entity that can endanger you position at the top is viewed as a threat to your hegemony.

In this context, China must do everything it can to support the PDRK, Iran and Syria, and improve relations with Russia so that China will never need to face the U.S alone. If we view the current geopolitical situation as a game of Go (Wei Qi), with China and the US as the opposing sides, China is slowly finding itself surrounded on all sides by allies of the US. South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, and India are all close allies with the US. If war was to break out between China and the US, China would face possible attacks from all sides. For this reason, it is all the more crucial that China maintain its strong alliance with the PDRK.

China should never join the sanctions against the PDRK. Instead, China should increase aid to the PDRK, like what the U.S. has been doing to support its strategic ally of Israel.

The PDRK is more important to China than Israel is to the U.S. The PDRK is not China’s liability. It is China’s most crucial friend in the world as far as China’s national security is concerned. The two nations have a bond cemented by blood, and China should value that bond as much as it can because its national security is at the stake, and it should never allow anybody to hurt its bonds with the PDRK. Anybody who advocates abandoning China’s bonds with PDRK is bordering on treason.


IV. What is Good about Rule of Law?

According to a World.Huanqiu.com report, U.S. Ambassador Gary Locke made a comment at the Philip C. Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition held at People University, Beijing on February 25, that China’s success in the future will depend on the rule of law.

The rule of law has been a catchy phrase in Chinese politics in the last few decades. But very few people examine what the rule of law really means. Many people privately uphold the U.S. as the example of rule by law out of ignorance. As a graduate of Boston University Law School in 1975, Gary Locke’s rule of law must be based off the U.S. legal system as well.

What has been the consequence of rule of law in the United States? The American population accounts for five percent of the world total, but American prison population account for 25 percent of the world total, which means the rule of law in the U.S. locks up five times more people in prison than the world average.

In other words, crimes rate in the U.S. is five times higher than the world average. Of course, this does not mean that the American people are more likely to commit crimes by any means. It simply means that the U.S. has more police officers and these police officers are better trained and equipped to catch “criminals.”

We live in a class society, and our legal system and our laws are bound to reflect those class distinctions. In the U.S. the people who are locked up in the prison system are more likely to be the poor and minorities, because they cannot afford to hire lawyers to get themselves out of legal trouble. One out of 90 white people are in prison, but one out of nine African American young people are in prison in the U.S. The racial difference among the prison population in the world is shocking.

When I was teaching in Illinois in late 1990s, a law professor and his students did a study of twenty death roll inmates in Illinois. They were shocked to find out that out of the twenty death roll inmates, twelve were actually convicted of crimes they had nothing to do with. In the end, Governor Ryan, a Republican, decided to pardon all the death roll inmates, more than 150 of them, on a Sunday, right before he left office. He said that his conscience would not allow these death roll inmates to be executed knowing that more than sixty percent of them were convicted wrongly.

If this is rule of law, what is good about it?

In New York City, over 600,000 people are stopped and frisked by police each year, and over eighty percent of these people were let go, but a significant percentage of these people were arrested for resisting arrest. I did not know the word “frisk” before, and by looking up the dictionary I discovered that it was a police procedure of patting a suspect down to see if he or she was carrying anything illegal on the body.

If a police officer finds a person suspicious, he can stop the person and frisk him. Of course, the people who are stopped and frisked are mostly the poor and minorities. This practice reminded me of the scenes I saw mostly in the Chinese movies, when the Japanese invaders stopped and frisked the Chinese in the occupied regions to arrest people who were engaged in some kind of resistances against the Japanese Occupation.

If this the rule by law, what is good about it?

For more than three decades, the Chinese Government has been stressing the importance of rule of law or rule by law. Each new session of the People’s Congress has passed some new laws …….. Chinese people tend to assume rule of law or rule by law is a good thing. But what has been the result of rule of law or rule by law in China in the last three decades? The crime rate has gone up several folds since the beginning of the economic reform. To deal with crimes, the number of police officers has gone up by several folds, but still the police are overwhelmed by the increase of crimes in China.

I have studied a village in Henan. This village of over two thousand people had no crimes before the economic reforms. Nobody was ever arrested by the police. If somebody made a mistake in the village, he was publicly criticized and let go. But during the last three decades of the rule of law, over two hundred villagers were arrested and sentenced to prison. Two of them were even executed during a campaign of Yanda in 1983.

There are about two thousand people in my village as well. From when I was nine until I was 23 when I left the village to go to college, there had been no crimes in the village. In the town where my village was part of the administrative unit, I seldom heard of any crimes take place either. Since I left the village, a couple dozen of people in my village have ended up in prison, and hundreds of people in the town have found themselves in trouble with the law.

I hope that the Chinese people can more critically examine the so called rule of law and understand its implications for their lives.


V. US Meddling is Causing Surge in Extremism

President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, speaking at the United Nations General Assembly, recently condemned the recent demonstrations and protests against the US in the Middle East and elsewhere. It seems that both President Obama and Secretary Clinton still don’t get it.

Yes, there are extremists in this world. But it takes more than extremists to hold such large scale demonstrations and protests against the US presence in the Middle East. US leaders are blinded by their own arrogance. And as result, they can’t see the connections between these demonstrations and its foreign policies toward third world countries and their involvement in other countries’ internal affairs.

During his speech at the UN General Assembly, Obama also defended freedom of speech to justify his government’s refusal to ban the internet movie The Innocence of the Muslim. Yes, freedom of speech is a fundamental right that the American Constitution endows in its citizens. But freedom of speech is not limitless. One needs to exercise one’s freedom of speech wisely and prudently.

To defend the American freedom of speech amid wide spread demonstrations and protests by the Muslim population in the world is sheer American arrogance.
President Obama, in his speech to the UN, also vowed to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

This is yet another example of American arrogance. The US was the first to develop nuclear weapons, and was the only country to use nuclear weapons against another country.

The US developed ten plans to attack the former Soviet Union between 1945 and 1949.

The US only gave up its plans after the USSR acquired its own nuclear bombs in 1949.

Before China developed its nuclear bombs in 1964, the US threatened to use nuclear weapons against China eight times. Many countries have found it necessary to develop nuclear weapons solely because if they do not have them, they would forever have to face threats by those countries that do have them. Today, there are close to twenty countries that officially and unofficially have nuclear weapons.

The US needs to explain to the world why some countries can have nuclear weapons, and why other countries cannot have them.


Why it is reasonable for the US and its allies to have them, while at the same time, it is unacceptable for other countries to have them? How can the US and the UN preach the ideals of fairness for all countries, while still advocating this exclusionary measure? Does the moral principle of fairness to all mean anything in the UN General Assembly?

The devastating destruction caused by the US Invasion of Iraq, by its fighting in Afghanistan and Pakistan, by the American involvement in Libya and Syria is the real reason behind the mass protests that are occurring around the world, and not the existence of extremists.

The people in the Muslim world have felt and seen the impact of US foreign policy and military action.

It can be argued that it is exactly US foreign policy and military action in the Muslim world that has generated the phenomenon of so called extremists. It is time for US leaders to pause and reflect.

Why do Muslims hold such strong anti-US sentiments? Who are these extremists?

And why do they feel so strongly about this issue that many are willing to sacrifice their lives for its cause? The US has military bases in more than 120 countries, and stations over four hundred thousand troops on foreign soil.

The US does this in the name of national security. Apparently, these military bases and large scale military spending have not made Americans any more secure. Since Sept 11, 2001, Americans have constantly been under the threat of terrorist attacks overseas and at home.

Libya’s Deputy Prime Minister was quoted as saying that he was surprised to see the scale of CIA operations in Libya when he saw the large number of Americans that had to be evacuated at the airport when Ambassador Stevens and his bodyguards were killed.

The huge amounts of money that the US has spent on its military in the past 60 years has not necessarily equated to a level of security you might otherwise expect from such a large military budget. On the contrary the biggest effect of such a large military budget has been its negative effects on the US domestic infrastructure and the well-being of its own people.

One former Chinese leader said before that every time the American government builds an overseas military base, it ties a knot around its own neck, and in the end, it would strangle itself.

It is really tragic that the US government cannot see this for themselves, and continue to involve itself with other countries’ internal affairs, and continues to build more military bases overseas.

These overseas military bases and CIA operations messing with other countries’ internal affairs are not only a big burden for the US government and the American people, but it also generates anti-American sentiment around the world as demonstrated by the recent demonstrations and protests.

The US should not forget that Iran has become one of the deadly enemies of the US exactly because of the CIA’s involvement in Iran’s internal affairs and its support for the Shah of Iran at the expense of its people.

It is time for the US to have a general discussion about why there has been such anti-US sentiment around the world. It is time for the American people to see that military muscle does not necessarily generate security for the US. But goodwill toward other people can.


VI. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) Has Been A Rational Actor

Since the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea tested its nuclear bomb, launched its satellite, and threatened to retaliate eye-for-an-eye if the U.S. or South Korea attacked, many media commentators, including Fenghuang TV of Hong Kong, called the DPRK a contemporary “madman”: delusional and unpredictable.

In the eyes of these so-called foreign affairs experts, small nations like the DPRK should take abuses quietly. If they try to talk back to a powerful country, they are denounced as mad, unpredictable and delusional. Thus, the logic of Western-inclined mainstream commentary.

But the DPRK has learned lessons from Hussein and Kaddafi, and they know the only way to deal with the bully in this world, is to be prepared to fight as hard as you can, and fight to the end.

Faced with the threat of American invasion, Saddam chickened out, allowing UN monitors to come in and inspect his nuclear facilities and give in to the demands of the US. Saddam was willing to surrender, but the U.S. would not allow it: they wanted to take over Iraq and to control their national resources.

After weakening Saddam, the U.S. invaded Iraq (without an UN sanction), toppled the government, captured Saddam, humiliated and then hanged him in the end. In the process, hundred and thousand Iraqi innocent people became the collateral damages of the U.S. vision for Iraq and the Middle East.

Under the concerted U.S. sanctions, Kaddafi backed down as well. He abandoned Libya’s nuclear program, and made great concessions to the West. But it was not enough for the U.S., who did not want to deal with Kaddafi if they could simply get rid of him.

According to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the U. S. sent Christopher Smith, former U.S. Ambassador to Benghazi to coordinate a rebellion against Kaddafi.

Amidst rebellion and chaos, the West imposed and enforced a no-fly-zone over Libya, then bombed them with a free hand. High-tech weaponry of American, British and French fighter jets decimated Libyan’s military and infrastructure, and again, the western Nations accomplished its political objective of toppling the Kaddafi Government… But at what cost? Sadly, thousands of innocent (and not-so-innocent) Libyans were simply collateral damage.

With these recent precedents of U.S.-Third World relations, can the PDRK afford to appease America? Do you think the people of the DPRK would allow themselves (and their hard-built livelihoods) to become collateral damage for the U.S.?

The Chinese people have an old saying called Bishang liangshan (to be forced to go up the Liang mountain to fight back for survival); it would seem that the DPRK has now been forced to take such drastic measures for their own survival.

They cannot afford to show any signs of weakness at this juncture – any concessions would be suicidal. They cannot trust anybody to come to their aid any longer. They are in a corner. The U.S. and its Western allies have imposed sanctions after sanction upon the DPRK, hoping to strangle the small nation into a quiet death.

Yet apparently, the U.S. and the rest of the world did not expect the people and government of the PDRK to have such great resolve and determination to defend their dignity and what they have in this world.

The Korean people are a brave people; though they may not have as many lethal weapons as the U.S. and its allies, if they are determined to fight to the end, they will be able to inflict enough damages on an opponent to make them think twice before they venture into war. Seen from this angle, the strategy of the DPRK has been very rational and calculated.

The people and the government of DPRK do not want war, but they are certainly prepared to avert conflict with their determination to fight to the end.

The mainstream commentators have called the PDRK delusional and unpredictable simply because the DPRK did not play the U.S.’ game according to the U.S.’ rules. In this jungle of a world, the weak nations can simply not afford to play games: they’ll have to fight their own way in order to survive.

I think that the DPRK has fought to its advantage this time. It has very little to lose.

But the U.S. and its allies have a great deal more at stake in a war with DPRK.


VII. DPRK (aka, “North Korea”) Has Stood the Test and Made History: The Lesson Is Invaluable for the People of the World

A couple of weeks ago, amid the heightened belligerence against the DPRK by both the U.S. and its allies, I wrote a blog entry for China Daily assuring my students and others that there would not be war in Korea.

To me, it was very clear that the people and the government of DPRK never wanted war. What they wanted is very simple: the right to self-determination, and to pursue their own way of life without outside interference.

The U.S., controlling the most powerful war machine in human history, wanted to use war to scare the people and the government into line, but cannot afford to do so any longer. In other words, this American posturing was mostly blackmail. If the PDRK refuses to be intimidated, the U.S. blackmail can only backfire.

Because the DPRK has stood their ground, the U.S. and its allies has had to back down, now willing to resort to diplomacy to solve their issues.

However, I doubt that U.S. and its allies will be able to get what it wants with diplomacy what it could not get with military threats. In most people’s eyes, the U.S. is the most powerful nation in the world. It has repeatedly used its military forces to interfere in external affairs, in complete disregard of UN Charters and causing tremendous harms upon human lives and the environment.

Since the end of WWII, the U.S. fought more wars than anybody else, both overtly and covertly. It interfered in the Korea civil war with UN mantel, and lost miserably both in terms of human casualties and resources, and the U.S. still has close to one hundred bases in South Korea.

It has illegally interfered in Vietnamese Civil War for over ten years, dropping more bombs than both sides of WWII combined, without breaking the will of the Vietnamese people, but bringing about popular anti-war sentiments.

Consequently, the U.S. began to suffer from “Vietnam syndrome”, a term used to describe loss of self-confidence in waging wars in third world countries.

However, after having lured former ally Saddam Hussein into Kuwait and rallying its allies to drive him out, the victorious, senior George Bush thought that the U.S. had finally beat Vietnam Syndrome.

But the subsequent U.S. invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, despite initial successes, turned out to be disastrous in the end. After trillions of dollars and hundred and thousands of casualties, the U.S. failed to pacify the resistance of the Iraqi and Afghan peoples.

If the U.S. could not pacify Iraq or Afghanistan, it could never dare to attack the DPRK. The western media has portrayed the DPRK as a poor, starving country.

But I know what the western media is capable of, from my own life experiences:

I lived through socialist China of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. When I first came to the U.S., I was shocked to read how the western media described Chinese people’s life at that time.

I have never been to the DPRK myself. But I talked to two people who have, and whom I would rather trust than the western media. One is my former village chief and one is my former college teacher.

I grew up with my former village chief. Before he went there, he heard rumors about livelihoods in the DPRK, and prepared two bags of dried shrimps and other staple food from my hometown.

But once there, he saw no hunger and starvation, and that the DPRK was just like China in 1970s. I immediately knew what he meant, because we shared a common past. In the end, he gave the two bags of dried foods to an elevator operator in the hotel, who accepted the gift with a smile, saying “You heard that we were starving, right?”

My former college professor told me that Pyongyang was the greatest capital in the world; where there was few cars, and people used buses or bikes. It was clean and orderly. People were disciplined and in high spirit.

In the 1960’s-70’s, socialist China was able to withhold both American and Soviet embargo and sanctions and hostility without giving up any ground because the nation was united and the state had the support overwhelming majority of the people.

If any country in the world could defy today’s U.S. sanctions and hostilities, that country has to be the DPRK.

Some people claim the U.S. could easily destroy the DPRK with its powerful arsenal. People forget that the U.S. has the military capability to destroy the whole world several times over including itself – but that does not mean that the U.S. will do it.

Only crazy people fight wars simply to destroy.

Wise people only fight to accomplish a political objective.

I strongly believe that the U.S. will be able to inflict tremendous material damage to the life and environment of DPRK, but would also need to be prepared to sacrifice close to one hundred military bases in South Korea and over one hundred bases in Japan, which would endanger one hundred thousand American military and non-military personnel.

What is more, the peace loving people in the world, including the American people, will not stand idle if the U.S. provokes a war in Korea. If the U.S. provoked the war in Korea, it will most probably be the end of American empire in Asia.

That was why I was able to affirm that there would not be war in Korea. America would have so much to lose and so little to gain.

In a different blog for China Daily, I said that the people and the Government of DPRK was a rational actor. They are calculated and doing their best to avoid harm in dealing with the pressure and threat the U.S. and its allies imposed on them.

I and all the peace loving people in the world should congratulate them for their courage, their determination to defend their way of life and their right for self determination.

They have withheld the U.S. blackmail, and in doing so they are making history. They are demonstrating to the people of the world. They do not need to bow to a bully, and the best way to deal with the bullies in this world is to be prepared to fight with them.

That lesson will be invaluable for the people of the world.


Dr. HanDongping, a Chinese-American, is Professor of Warren Wilson College in the US.

Posted in 4th Media, China, China-U.S. Relations, CIA past, CIA Terrorism, DPRK AND U.S., DPRK AND WAR WITH US, Faces of Fascism, FALSE FLAGS, IMPERIAL HUBRIS AND INTRIGUE, Imperial Hypocrisy and Intrigue, International Law and Nuremberg Precedents, Korean Issues, Logic of Capitalism and Imperialism, Mainstream Media (MSM) Shills, Meme Warfare and Imperialism, MIND CONTROL AND PROPAGANDA, MSM Mainstream Media Sycophancy, NED and other Fronts of Imperialism, Neoclassical Economics and Neoliberalism as Neo-Imperialism, Neoliberalism and Neoclassical Theory, Neoliberalism as Neoimperialism, New World Order, Nuremberg Precedents, U.S. IMPERIAL DECLINE, U.S. Terrorism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment



More Americans Commit Suicide than During Great Depression
Post Categories: Society
The Washingtonsblog / The 4th Media News | Monday, May 20, 2013, 10:54 Beijing
Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on printShare on gmailShare on stumbleuponShare on favoritesMore Sharing Services1Print

More Americans Committing Suicide than During the Great Depression


Higher Numbers of Americans Take Their Lives than During the Depths of the Great Depression

Suicide rates are tied to the economy.

The Boston Globe reported in 2011:

A new report issued today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention finds that the overall suicide rate rises and falls with the state of the economy — dating all the way back to the Great Depression.

The report, published in the American Journal of Public Health, found that suicide rates increased in times of economic crisis: the Great Depression (1929-1933), the end of the New Deal (1937-1938), the Oil Crisis (1973-1975), and the Double-Dip Recession (1980-1982). Those rates tended to fall during strong economic times — with fast growth and low unemployment — like right after World War II and during the 1990s.

During the depths of the Great Depression, suicide rates in America significantly increased. As the Globe notes:

The largest increase in the US suicide rate occurred during the Great Depression surging from 18 in 100,000 up to 22 in 100,000 …

We’ve previously pointed out that suicide rates have skyrocketed recently:

The number of deaths by suicide has also surpassed car crashes, and many connect the increase in suicides to the downturn in the economy. Around 35,000 Americans kill themselves each year (and more American soldiers die by suicide than combat; the number of veterans committing suicide is astronomical and under-reported). So you’re 2,059 times more likely to kill yourself than die at the hand of a terrorist.

NBC News reported in March:

Suicide rates are up alarmingly among middle-aged Americans, according to the latest federal government statistics.

They show a 28 percent rise in suicide rates for people aged 35 to 64 between 1999 and 2010.

RT reports:

In a letter to The Lancet medical journal, scientists from Britain, Hong Kong and United States said an analysis of data from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicated that while suicide rates increased slowly between 1999 and 2007, the rate of increase more than quadrupled from 2008 to 2010, Reuters reported.

Earlier this month, NY Daily News wrote:

The Great Recession may have been at the root of a great depression that caused suicides to soar among middle-aged Americans, a government report speculates.

The annual suicide rate for adults ages 35 to 64 spiked in the past decade, according to a study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

And a shaky economy that nose-dived into the worst financial crisis since the Depression may be the biggest reason why.


The CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report said the annual suicide rate jumped 28.4% from 1999-2010.

It was the biggest increase of any age group, said the CDC, citing “the recent economic downturn” as one of the “possible contributing factors” for the increase.

“Historically, suicide rates tend to correlate with business cycles, with higher rates observed during times of economic hardship,” the report said.

David Stuckler (a senior research leader in sociology at Oxford), and Sanjay Basu (an assistant professor of medicine and an epidemiologist in the Prevention Research Center at Stanford), write in the New York Times:

The correlation between unemployment and suicide has been observed since the 19th century.

(And see these articles by the Wall Street Journal and the Los Angeles Times. This is obviously true world-wide. For example, last year the New York Times reported:

The economic downturn that has shaken Europe for the last three years has also swept away the foundations of once-sturdy lives, leading to an alarming spike in suicide rates. Especially in the most fragile nations like Greece, Ireland and Italy, small-business owners and entrepreneurs are increasingly taking their own lives in a phenomenon some European newspapers have started calling “suicide by economic crisis.”


In Greece, the suicide rate among men increased more than 24 percent from 2007 to 2009, government statistics show. In Ireland during the same period, suicides among men rose more than 16 percent. In Italy, suicides motivated by economic difficulties have increased 52 percent, to 187 in 2010 — the most recent year for which statistics were available — from 123 in 2005.)

Indeed, more Americans are killing themselves today than during the Great Depression. Specifically, there were 123 million Americans in 1930. The maximum suicide rate during the depths of the Great Depression was 22 out of 100,000 Americans. That means that up to 27,060 Americans killed themselves each year.
In contrast, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control reports that 38,364 Americans committed suicide in 2010. In other words, 2010 suicides were approximately 142% of suicides during the depths of the Great Depression. (The suicide rate is lower today than during the Great Depression, but – given that there are more Americans – there are more suicides each year.)

The head of my local county’s mental health services confirmed to me today that there are now more suicides now than during the Great Depression.

suicidesth (2)

The Root Causes: Unemployment and Foreclosure

Why do more people kill themselves during severe downturns? It’s not just a downturn in the business cycle in some general sense. It’s more specific than that.
Unemployment and foreclosure are the largest triggers in increased suicide risk.
David Stuckler and Sanjay Basu write:

People looking for work are about twice as likely to end their lives as those who have jobs.
Unemployment is a leading cause of depression, anxiety, alcoholism and suicidal thinking.

ABC News points out:

“Joblessness is a risk factor for suicide,” said Nadine Kaslow, professor of psychology in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Emory University in Atlanta. “The stress is just overwhelming. … People are freaked out.”

Bloomberg reports:

“The suicide rate started accelerating in 2008, 2009 and 2010 — someone might still be working, but their house is underwater, or they’re working but they’re working part-time,” Eric Caine, the director of the CDC’s Injury Control Research Center for Suicide Prevention, said by telephone. “These things ripple into families. There’s an economic stress.”

NY Daily News writes:

“Most people who commit suicide tend to suffer from major depression, and this vulnerability tends to be brought forth by very stressful situations like losing one’s home or job,” [Dr. Dan Iosifescu, director of mood and anxiety disorders program at Mount Sinai Hospita] said.

NBC News reports:

The American Association for Suicidology says economic recessions don’t normally affect suicide rates.

“Although US suicide rates did increase slightly during the years of the Great Depression, reaching a peak rate of 17.4/100,000 in 1933, subsequent US recessions have not been found to lead to increased national rates of suicide in the period of or immediately following each recession,” the group says.

The latest numbers suggest suicide rates for middle-aged Americans now surpass the peak during the Depression. And there’s another possible explanation.

“There is a clear and direct relationship between rates of unemployment and suicide,” the suicidology group says in its statement.

“The peak rate of suicide in 1933 occurred one year after the total US unemployment rate reached 25 percent of the labor force. Similar findings have been documented internationally. At the individual level, unemployed individuals have between two and four times the suicide rate of those employed.”

The group also raises concern about the home foreclosure rate.

Indeed, it is likely that more people have lost their jobs during this “Great Recession” than during the Great Depression … especially when you look at the masses of people who have given up altogether and dropped out of the work force.

And it is possible that more people have lost their homes through foreclosure than during the Great Depression as well.

No wonder there are so many suicides …

A related news from the Washington’s Blog

Home Foreclosure Rates are Comparable to the Great Depression

suicides th (2)

Have As Many People Lost their Homes as During the Great Depression?

The San Francisco Chronicle notes that it is difficult to keep track of foreclosure rates now … let alone during the Great Depression:

Foreclosure rates of the late 2000s are often compared with those of the Great Depression, which took place through the first half of the 1930s. However, there were no public or private agencies keeping track of foreclosure rates at that time. Indeed, the government still does not keep an official statistic on the number of homes in foreclosure or repossessed by banks and lenders.

But the Chronicle provides estimates of foreclosures during the 1930s:

A 2008 article by David C. Wheelock, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, cited annual reports issued by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board during the 1930s. These reports reveal that the foreclosure rate exceeded 1 percent from 1931 until 1935. At the worst point in the Depression-era economic crisis, in 1933, about 1,000 home loans were being placed in foreclosure by banks every day.

How does that compare to the last 5 years?

RealtyTrac notes (via North Carolina State University) that:

From January 2007 to December 2011 there were more than four million completed foreclosures and more than 8.2 million foreclosure starts ….
CoreLogic reported a year ago:

Approximately 1.4 million homes, or 3.4 percent of all homes with a mortgage, were in the national foreclosure inventory as of May 2012 compared to 1.5 million, or 3.5 percent, in May 2011 and 1.4 million, or 3.4 percent, in April 2012. The foreclosure inventory is the share of all mortgaged homes in some stage of the foreclosure process.

Given that there are currently around 316 million Americans – more than twice the number during the Great Depression – such high foreclosure rates mean that there may well be as many people suffering foreclosure than during the Great Depression … or more.

And NBC News reported this month:

Already some 5 million homes have been lost to foreclosure; estimates of future foreclosures range widely. [Moody’s Analytics chief economist Mark Zandi], who has followed the mortgage mess since the housing market began to crack in 2006, figures foreclosures will strike another three million homes in the next three or four years.
For more comparisons of the Great Depression and today, see:

Housing Prices Have Already Fallen More than During the Great Depression … How Much Lower Will They Go?
Have the Last 5 Years Been Worse than the Great Depression?
British Economy Is WORSE than During the Great Depression

Tags: Great Depression rate suicide Washington’s Blog

Posted in 4th Media, Capitalism, Capitalism and Psycho-Sociopathy, MEMEONOMICS: Economics and EconomistS;: Capitalism and its Theories, MIND CONTROL AND PROPAGANDA, MSM Mainstream Media Sycophancy, NED and other Fronts of Imperialism, Neoclassical Economics and Neoliberalism as Neo-Imperialism, Neoliberalism and Neoclassical Theory, New World Order, U.S. IMPERIAL DECLINE | Leave a comment


A Nuclear Apartheid: US’s Flawed Korea Policies ever since Korean Nuclear Crisis

Post Categories: Asia
Conn Hallinan / The 4th Media News | Saturday, April 27, 2013, 17:34 Beijing

North Korea should get rid of its nuclear weapons, but then so should the US/Israel, Britain, France, Russia, China, Pakistan, and India.

obama 101203_korea_trade_ap_605

In the current crisis on the Korean Peninsula the Obama administration is virtually repeating the 2004 Bush playbook, one that derailed a successful diplomatic agreement forged by the Clinton administration to prevent North Korea from acquiring nuclear weapons? While the acute tensions of the past month appear to be receding—all of the parties involved seem to be taking a step back— the problem is not going to disappear and, unless Washington and its allies re-examine their strategy, another crisis is certain to develop.

A little history.

In the spring of 1994, the Clinton administration came very close to a war with North Korea over Pyongyang’s threat to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, expel international inspectors, and extract plutonium from reactor fuel rods. Washington moved to beef up its military in South Korea, and, according to Fred Kaplan in the Washington Monthly, there were plans to bomb the Yongbyon reactor.

Kaplan is Slate Magazine’s War Stories columnist and author of “The Insurgents: David Petraeus and the Plot to Change the American Way of War.”

“Yet at the same time,” writes Kaplan, “Clinton set up a diplomatic back-channel to end the crisis peacefully.” Former President Jimmy Carter was sent to the Democratic Peoples’ Republic of North Korea (DPRK) and the Agreed Framework pact was signed, allowing the parties to back off without losing face.

In return for shipping their fuel rods out of the country, the U.S., South Korea and Japan agreed to finance two light-water nuclear reactors, normalize diplomatic relations, and supply the DPRK with fuel. The U.S. pledged not to invade the North. “Initially, North Korea kept to its side of the bargain,” say Kaplan, “The same cannot be said for our side.”

The reactors were never funded and diplomatic relations went into a deep freeze. From North Korea’s point of view, it had been stiffed, and it reacted with public bombast and a secret deal with Pakistan to exchange missile technology for centrifuges to make nuclear fuel.

However, the North was still willing to deal, and DPRK leader Kim Jong-il told the Clinton administration that, in exchange for a non-aggression pact, North Korea would agree to shelve its long-range missile program and stop exporting missile technology.

nuke apart 20130119_FBD001_0

North Korea was still adhering to the 1994 agreement not to process its nuclear fuel rods. But time ran out and the incoming Bush administration torpedoed the talks, instead declaring North Korea, along with Iran and Iraq, a member of an “axis of evil.”

Nine days after the U.S. Senate passed the Iraq war resolution on Oct. 11, 2002, the White House disavowed the 1994 Agreed Framework, halted fuel supplies, and sharpened the economic embargo the U.S. had imposed on the North since the 1950-53 Korean War.

It was hardly a surprise when Pyongyang’s reaction was to toss out the arms inspectors, fire up the Yongbyon reactor, and take the fuel rods out of storage.

Kaplan points out, however, that even when Pyongyang withdrew from the Non-Proliferation Treaty in early 2003, the North Koreans “also said they would reverse their actions and retract their declarations if the United States resumed its obligations under the Agreed Framework and signed a non-aggression pledge.”

But Bush, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, and Vice-President Dick Cheney, banking that increased sanctions would eventually bring down the Kim regime, were not interested in negotiations.

Ignoring North Korea, however, did not sit well with Japan and South Korea. So the White House sent U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs James Kelly to Pyongyang, where the North Koreans told him they were willing to give up nuclear weapons development in return for a non-aggression pact.

Bush, however, dismissed the proposal as “blackmail” and refused to negotiate with the North Koreans unless they first agreed to give up the bomb, a posture disturbingly similar to the one currently being taken by the Obama administration.

But “the bomb” was the only chip the North Koreans had, and giving it up defied logic. Hadn’t NATO and the U.S. used the threat of nuclear weapons to checkmate a supposed Soviet invasion of Europe during the Cold War?

Wasn’t that the rationale behind the Israeli bomb vis-à-vis the Arabs? Pakistan’s ace in the hole to keep the vastly superior Indian army at bay?

Why would Pyongyang make such an agreement with a country that made no secret of its intention to destabilize the North Korean regime?

North Korea is not a nice place to live and work, but its reputation as a nuclear-armed loony bin is hardly accurate. Every attempt by the North Koreans to sign a non-aggression pact has been either rebuffed or come at a price—specifically giving up nuclear weapons—Pyongyang is unwilling to pay without such a pledge.

The North is well aware of the fate of the “axis of evil”: Iraq was invaded and occupied, and Iran is suffocating under the weight of economic sanctions and facing a possible Israeli or U.S. attack. From North Korea’s point of view, the only thing that Iraq and Iran have in common is that neither of them developed nuclear weapons.

Indeed, when the U.S. and NATO overthrew the Gadaffi regime in Libya, a North Korean Foreign Ministry official told the Korean Central News Agency that the war had taught “the international community a grave lesson: the truth that one should have the power to defend peace.” Libya had voluntarily given up nuclear weapons research, and the North Koreans were essentially saying, “We told you so.”

There are a number of dangers the current crisis pose. The most unlikely among them is a North Korean attack on the U.S. or South Korea, although an “incident” like the 2010 shelling of Yeonpyeong Island and the sinking of South Korean warship, the Cheonan, is not out of the question. Moreore likely is a missile test.

All of the parties—including China and Russia— know that North Korea is not a serious danger to the U.S. or its allies, Japan and South Korea.

Which is why China is so unhappy with the U.S.’s response to Pyongyang’s bombast: deploying yet more anti-missile systems in the U.S. and Guam, systems that appear suspiciously like yet another dimension of Washington’s “Asia pivot” to beef up America’s military footprint in the region.

Russia and China believe those ABM systems are aimed at them, not North Korea, which explains an April 15 accusation by the Chinese Defense Ministry that “hostile western forces” were using tensions to “contain and control our country’s development.”

While the western media interpreted a recent statement by Chinese President Xi Jinping as demonstrating China’s growing impatience with North Korea, according to Zackary Keck, assistant editor of the Asian-pacific focused publication The Diplomat, the speech was more likely aimed at the U.S. than at Pyongyang. Keck argues that China is far more worried about growing U.S. military might in the region than rhetorical blasts from North Korea.

nuke apart 34b4aa44fcaaf127278b32932611a803

The Russians have also complained about “unilateral actions…being taken around North Korea.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, “We believe it is necessary for all not to build up military muscle and not to use the current situation as an excuse to solve certain geopolitical tasks in the region through military means.”

Tension between nuclear powers is always disconcerting, but the most immediate threat is the possibility of some kind of attack on North Korea by the U.S. or South Korea.

Conservative South Korean President Park Geun-hye told her military to respond to any attack from the North without “political considerations,” and the U.S. has reaffirmed that it will come to Seoul’s defense in the event of war. It is not a war the North would survive, and therein lays the danger.

According to Keir Lieber of Georgetown University and Daryl Press, coordinator of Dartmouth’s War and Peace Studies, current U.S. military tactics could trigger a nuclear war. “The core of U.S. conventional strategy, refined during recent wars, is to incapacitate the enemy by disabling its central nervous system…leadership bunkers, military command sites, and means of communication.”

While such tactics were effective in Yugoslavia and Iraq, they could prove counterproductive “if directed at a nuclear-armed opponent.” Faced with an overwhelming military assault there would be a strong incentive for North Korea to try and halt the attacks, “a job for which nuclear weapons are well suited.”

Council of Foreign Relation’s Korea expert Scott Snyder says, “The primary danger is really related to the potential for miscalculation between the two sides, and in this kind of atmosphere of tensions, that miscalculation could have deadly consequences.”

The demand by the Obama administration that North Korea must denuclearize before serious talks can begin is a non-starter, particularly when the Washington and its allies refuse to first agree to a non-aggression pledge. And the White House will have to jettison its “strategic patience” policy, a fancy term for regime change. Both strategies have been utter failures.

There are level heads at work.

South Korea recently praised China for helping to manage the crisis, and Seoul has dialed back some of its own bombast. The U.S. canceled a military maneuver, and a “senior administration” official warned about “misperception” and “miscalculation,” remarks that seemed aimed more at South Korea than at the North. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry also says Washington is open to talks with China and North Korea.

But such talks are predicated, according to the U.S. State Department, on Pyongyang proving “its seriousness by taking meaningful steps to abide by its international obligations.” In short, dismantling its nuclear program and missile research. Neither of those will happen as long as the North feels militarily threatened and economically besieged.

In a way, the Korean crisis is a case of the nuclear powers being hoist on their own petard. The 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was not aimed at just stopping the spread of nuclear weapons, but, according to Article VI, at eliminating those weapons and instituting general disarmament.

But today’s world is essentially a nuclear apartheid, with the nuclear powers threatening any countries that try to join the club—unless those countries happen to be allies.

North Korea should get rid of its nuclear weapons, but then so should China, Russia, the U.S., Britain, France, Israel, Pakistan, and India.

As far as ending the current crisis, one could do worse than follow up on what basketball great Dennis Rodman said North Korean leader Kim Jong-un told him: “Obama should call me.”

Good place to start.

Conn Hallinan can be read at dispatchesfromtheedgeblog.wordpress.com and middleempireseries.wordpress.com

Posted in 4th Media, Decline of the American Imperium, DPRK AND U.S., DPRK AND WAR WITH US, ELITES AND NEW WORLD ORDER, IMPERIAL HUBRIS AND INTRIGUE, Imperial Hypocrisy and Intrigue, International Law and Nuremberg Precedents, Korean Issues, Psyops, U.S. IMPERIAL DECLINE, U.S. Terrorism | 1 Comment


A Blackfoot’s perspective on Zionism
7th December 2006, 08:33 am by Stan Goff

FROM The Feral Scholar Blog of Stan Goff

Jim Craven (Omahkohkiaayo i’poyi) teaches economics in Vancouver. He is a veteran and long-time activist on behalf of anti-imperialism, which includes the ongoing imperial predations of the US and Canada against the First Nations. We (virtually) met on the former “Crashlist” hosted by Mark Jones, to whom Jim refers in this post pasted in below.

Here he posts some cmprehensive thoughts on Zionism from his unique perspective as an American “Palestinian” living among the settlers, in the settlers’ state (PalestIndian, he calls himself).

* * *

Mark Jones’ Crashlist

One of Mark’s [Jones] ideas for the [former “Crashlist”] list, one the moderators share I’m sure, is that the list could be used to share weapons of struggle. Anyone who has done serious mass work, I mean the kind away from the keyboard, knows that sometimes a pithy quote, an uncovered source, an irrefutable fact, a way of phrasing, a piece of reasoning, hypocrisy exposed, an infiltrator outed, a great “expert” really grilled, etc., can cause a kind of critical mass and cause all sorts of people from all sorts of backgrounds to take a quantum leap in consciousness or at least take a fork in the road on a whole new direction. That is the spirit and intent of this Crashlist.

I have been invited several times to debate Zionists on Palestine (usually in the role of a “PalestIndian” as we see Palestinians as the Indians of the Middle East and American Indians as “the Palestinians” of North America). By debatng Zionists, I mean, the official kind; as in working in paid positions for open Zionist organizations clearly tied in with Israel, in the capacity of roving and officially designated “Speakers”. It is Palestinian friends who invite me to join them.

The Holocaust Card

I have found that taking away “The Holocaust Card” right off the bat throws the Zionists into fits and throws them off for the rest of the debate. By taking away the “Holocaust Card” I mean only taking away the typical cynical and contrived Zionist use of the Nazi Holocaust by Zionists; a cynical use of the Nazi Holocaust that actually desecrates the memory of the Jewish and non-Jewish victims, in many Nazi-like ways, of the Nazi Holocaust, under the banner of “honoring” their memory and “Never Again”.

How might this be done? I have had the most success working in three phases.

First, when the immediate and pro-forma reference is made to “Six Million Jews” and to “Holocaust Denial and Deniers” I start there. Let us really get into the Nazi Holocaust and what real Holocaust Denial is all about. What does “Holocaust Denial” really mean?

First of all it usually means denying that: 1) the Nazi Holocaust ever happened; and/or 2) the Nazi Holocaust happened as is usually portrayed in history books; and/or 3) it occurred with the scope and depth of barbarism and murder as is commonly portrayed in the history books. That is what most people who are not “Holocaust Deniers” consider “Holocaust Denial”. I start there.

But is “Holocaust Denial” also not the denying and/or ranking ordering of other genocides and/or even the denying that other genocides could or should be considered “Holocausts” so as to promote the rank-ordering of human beings and victims (which is what Nazis do) into “worthy” or “unworthy” of remembrance? And isn’t “Holocaust Denial” also involved when victims of ANY genocide or Holocaust are given special mention and focus to the detriment of mention and focus of others?

How is it possibly a desecration of the memories of the Jewish victims of the Nazi Holocaust to mention also, as targeted victims of Nazism, Sinti-Roma, Homosexuals, Trade Unionists, “Righteous Gentiles”, “Slavs”, Communists, Socialists, POWs of some select nations, “Disabled” People; in other words ALL the targeted and actual victims of any given genocide? Or, how is it a desecration of the memories of the Jewish victims to use the term “Holocaust” in reference to other genocides in order to show the parallels in methods used against and scopes and common humanity of all victims? This is especially the case with the American and Canadian Holocausts and the Anglo-German-American Eugenics Movements that spawned them that were the inspiration for Hitler and the Nazis.

No, those who rank-order any genocide or any victims of a given genocide are doing exactly not only what Nazis do, but also what allowed the Nazis to do what they did/still do: dividing and rank-ordering human beings and victims into worthy of being remembered and not worthy of being remembered–in order to ultimately exterminate various populations and segments within them (called “Lebensunwertes leben” or “Life unworthy of life” by the Nazis).

Anti-Semitism is real and does sometimes hide under the mask of Anti-Zionism:

But I also note immediately that it is an absolute and irrefutable FACT that there are real anti-Semites (in the usual sense of that term who are haters of Jews and all that is Jewish and who do want the total destruction of Jewish People); that they wear many masks; that they do indeed dress-up their anti-Semitism under the banner of “anti-Zionism”; and they do use selective mention or non-mention of other victims of the Nazi Holocaust or other Holocausts to try to dilute, diffuse or distract away from, any mention or focus or sensitivity on Jews or Jewish victims of historical forms of anti-Semitism and of the Nazi Holocaust.

But, is that (selective remembrance and mention of some but not all victims) also not exactly what the Zionists are doing? Are they also not trying to “deny” and distract any attention or sensitivity to certain victims of the Nazi Holocaust and/or other Holocausts for their own chauvinistic, exceptionalist, exclusionary and racist interests, agenda and paradigms?

Zionism has a long history of Collaboration With and Use of anti-Semitism and anti-Semites

Next, Phase Two, I get into Zionists even daring to raise and use the Nazi Holocaust because of Zionism’s own collaboration with and even celebration of, Nazism, anti-Semitism, Nazi eugenics, ranking-ordering “acceptable” versus “unacceptable” victims of Nazism to be saved (see below) etc. I tell a true story.

Victor Ostrovsky is a former Mossad officer who not only left Mossad but was the subject of several assassination attempts by Mossad. He wrote several books (“By Way of Deception” and “Another Side of Deception”) and had a radio show called “Spytalk” in Arizona. One time he had a program on the USS Liberty, a US NSA [National Security Agency] Spy ship attacked and sunk and repeatedly strafed to try to kill all on board. Israeli aircraft, unmarked and of the same type as used by the Egyptian Air Force, along with PT boats repeatedly attacked the USS Liberty and strafed crewmen in the water over a protracted period of time.

I called his program to add the point made in James Bamford’s book “Body of Secrets”, which was that the real reason for the Israeli attack on the Liberty Bamford claimed he found in documents to which he had access while at NSA as a visiting scholar, was that Israel was doing mass executions (exactly like the Nazi SS Einsatzgruppen) of Egyptian and other prisoners in the Sinai (forcing them to dig their own graves before being lined up to be shot) under the leadership of General Ariel Sharon, and the Israelis thought that their radio communications admitting and facilitating the mass executions had been intercepted by the Liberty.

They therefore wanted the ship sunk and all crew dead which is why they strafed the ship over almost five hours. The Israelis did not know that those same radio communications had also been intercepted by a NSA EC-121 also in the area picking up SIGINT [Signals Intelligence].

[Note here and Addendum: since this was written in 2006, I have found new information on the USS Liberty the U.S. NSA spy ship that was sunk by the Israelis. According to a documentary on the sinking of the U.S.S.Liberty, the story of the mass killings of Egyptian POWs in the Sinai Desert being uncovered by the U.S. Liberty as horrible and damaging as that story is to Israel, this documentary says the real story and intentions behind the attack are even worse.

The claim made in this documentary is that the real “real reason” was that the Israeli aircraft were a False Flag operation with no markings designed to make the appearance of an Egyptian attack against a U.S. ship that would bring the U.S. into the war and with nuclear weapons; such weapons that were in fact brought in and almost used from two strike aircraft launched from the U.S. aircraft carrier group in the area. see “Dead in the Water: The Sinking of the U.S.S. Liberty”]


Well Mr. Ostrovksy not only did not try to silence what I was getting at, he encouraged more. So I began to discuss the fact that while Israel was selling cluster bombs and training the internal security forces of Pinochet in Chile, the main “Internal Security Advisor” to Pinochet was none other than Walter Rauff, the high-level Nazi and designer of the first mobile gas vans (dressed up as Red Cross ambulances) who had been sentenced to death in absentia as a major war criminal in the second Nuremberg trials.

So here is Israeli and other Zionists, cynically using the Nazi Holocaust and memory for SOME selected victims for their own purposes, and they are actively collaborating with actual wanted Nazis. I also mentioned South Africa where Israel not only openly supported the Apartheid regimes and even collaborated with them in making nuclear weapons, but also, when they did, along with Nazi-like activities as using poor Blacks of Soweto and other “Bantustans” for medical experiments for Israeli pharmaceutical firms doing research but prohibited on Israelis in Israel by law, Israel’s dealings were with South African regimes run by former members of the South African Nazi Party who had been interned by the British as outright Nazi agents.

Well Ostrovsky joined in to top that one. He said on the air, and I have it on tape, that when he was in the Israeli Navy (a former Commander), and later in Mossad, he saw evidence that in 1949, Otto Skorzeny, while still officially a wanted war criminal, was in Israel training Israeli commandos. For those who might not know or remember, Otto Skorzeny, SS was known as “Hitler’s Commando”. He led the assault team that rescued Mussolini. He led the forces that put down the July 20, 1944 plot to kill Hitler and executed some 5,000 participants.

After the War, Skorzeny in addition to being recruited by CIA (like many wanted Japanese and German war criminals while on a wanted list of war criminals by the US Army’s Counter Intelligence Corps), Skorzeny was an active Nazi (the rest of his life). He was the head of the infamous ODESSA (organization for helping wanted Nazis escape and to prepare new Nazis to build a “Fourth Reich”) and an ally/advisor to several fascist and pro-Nazi parties of several different countries.

From the entry on him in Wikipedia:

Skorzeny later provided intelligence to Mossad, Israel’s external intelligence service, on ex-Nazi scientists working for the Egyptian government. Skorzeny agreed to cooperate with Israel on condition that Simon Wiesenthal erase his name from the list of wanted Nazi war criminals and act to have an arrest warrant against him cancelled. Though Wiesenthal rejected this request, Skorzeny decided in the end to cooperate with Mossad anyway.[26][27]

Die Spinne [edit]

Using the cover names of Robert Steinbacher and Otto Steinbauer, and supported by either Nazi funds (or according to some sources Austrian Intelligence), he set up a secret organization named Die Spinne[28][29] which helped as many as 600 former SS men escape from Germany to Spain, Argentina, Paraguay, Chile, Bolivia, and other countries. As the years went by, Skorzeny, Gehlen, and their network of collaborators gained enormous influence in Europe and Latin America. Skorzeny traveled between Franquist Spain and Argentina, where he acted as an advisor to President Juan Perón and bodyguard of Eva Perón,[25] while fostering an ambition for the “Fourth Reich” centered in Latin America.[30][31][32]

Zionism as Racism and Fascism

I then get into the present-day EXACT parallels between Nazi practices and ideology and Zionist practices and Ideology and show not only parallels or analogs, but actual PRESENT-DAY connections and alliances between PRESENT-DAY Zionists and outright NAZIS including even present-day Holocaust Deniers of the really overt and covert anti-Semitic varieties. I will include for example, medical experimentation, the Nes Ziiyona facility near Tel Aviv for “ABC” (Atomic, Biological, Chemical) Warfare and where kidnapped and captured Palestinians are used for medical experiments–fatal ones.

Hope it is useful for someone in some concrete actions. At all meetings, below is what I pass out from my website to audiences (which got me a talking to by the Vice-president of Instruction at my college the other day when someone in a “Mature Learning” course complained.)

From Dissident Voice on Zionism and anti-Semitism

see also The Iron Wall by Lennie Brenner

What is surprising is that the Zionists appealed to the anti-Semites on the basis of a shared ideological outlook. Nowhere is this clearer than in the memo from the Zionist Federation of Germany to the Nazis (21. 6. 1933).( “Anti-Semitism and its Zionist Shadow,” by Tony Greenstein, (Self published Pamphlet, 1987) p. 2. [↩])

Lenni Brenner quotes from the Zionist Memorandum to the Nazis.

… An answer to the Jewish question truly satisfying to the national state can be brought about only with the collaboration of the Jewish movement that aims at a social, cultural, and moral renewal of Jewry … a rebirth of national life, such as is occurring in German life through adhesion to Christian and national values, must also take place in the Jewish national group. For the Jew, too, origin, religion, community of fate and group consciousness must be of decisive significance in the shaping of his life …

On the foundation of the new state, which has established the principle of race, we wish so to fit our community into the total structure so that for us too, in the sphere assigned to us, fruitful activity for the Fatherland is possible … Our acknowledgement of Jewish nationality provides for a clear and sincere relationship to the German people and its national and racial realities…

an answer to the Jewish Question truly satisfying to the national state can be brought about only with the collaboration of the Jewish movement that aims at a social, cultural and moral renewal of Jewry… Precisely because we do not wish to falsify these fundamentals, because we too, are against mixed marriages and are for maintaining the purity of the Jewish group.(Joachim Prinz, Zionism under the Nazi Government, Young Zionist (London, November 1937.) Quoted in Lenni Brenner, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators, (London: Croom Helm, 1983), p. 48-49 citing Lucy Dawidowicz, A Holocaust Reader, p. 150-155. [↩])

Further evidence of the collaboration between Nazis and the Zionists is a “Nazi-Zionist” medallion issued by Goebbel’s daily Der Angriff to commemorate a joint visit to Zionist Palestine by SS officer Leopold von Mildenstein and Zionist Federation official Kurt Tuchler. A series on their tour was published, “A Nazi Travels to Palestine,” and appeared in Der Angriff in late 1934. (8.See Jacob Boas, “A Nazi Travels to Palestine,” History Today 30.1 (1980). The original article by Leopold von Mildstein, “A Nazi Voyages to Palestine,” appeared in Der Angriff (Attack), Berlin (27 September 1934). A photograph of the commemorative medallion is available online. [↩])

Greenstein writes further:

… Zionism, far from being the anti thesis of anti-Semitism, is its ‘twin in Jewish Garb’ to quote an early pamphlet of the German Anti Zionist Committee. That far from representing a challenge to anti-Semitism, Zionism represents the complete abandonment of any fight against it. That Zionism accepts the main thesis of the anti-Semites, namely that the Jews do not belong in the societies they were born and grew up in. That they are in ‘exile’ (Galut) and hence the mission of the Israeli state is the ‘ingathering of the exiles’.(“Anti-Semitism and its Zionist Shadow,” by Tony Greenstein, (Self published Pamphlet, 1987) p. 3. [↩])

As David Ben Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel and the third major figure in Zionist history after Herzl and Weizmann, noted in respect of the Zionist Organisation: “implicit in their ideology was that the Jews were a foreign element in the countries where they lived.”10

One more thing: If you know yourself and know what you really are about and intend, then one need neither fear nor make any accommodation to the charge of “anti-Semitism.

The “Spirit” of “Dr.” Josef Mengele Alive and Well in Israel The Spirit of “Dr.” Josef Mengele Alive and Well in Israel

From: “The Other Side of Deception” by Victor Ostrovsky (former Mossad), Harper Collins, N.Y. 1994

” That was where I would come in as a military police officer; my job was to take the prisoners to a holding facility in Nes Ziyyona, a small town south of Tel Aviv. I’d always assumed that it was an interrogation facility for the Shaback. We all knew that a prisoner brought there would probably never get out alive, but the brainwashing we’d gone through in our short lifetimes had convinced us that it was them or us; there was no gray area.

It was Uri who enlightened me regarding the Nes Ziyyona facility. It was, he said, an ABC warfare laboratory–ABC standing for atomic, bacteriological, and chemical. It was where our top epidemiological scientists were developing various doomsday machines. Because we were so vulnerable and would not have a second chance should there be an all-out war in which this type of weapon would be needed, there was no room for error.

The Palestinian infiltrators came in handy in this regard. As human guinea pigs, they could make sure the weapons the scientists were developing worked properly and could verify how fast they worked and make them even more efficient. What scares me today, looking back at that revelation, is not the fact that it was taking place but rather the calmness and understanding with which I accepted it.

Years later, I met Uri again. This time he was in the Mossad, a veteran ‘katsa’ in the Al department, and I was a rookie. He had come back from an assignment in South Africa. I was then a temporary desk man in the Dardasim department in liaison helping him prepare for a large shipment of medication to South Africa to accompany several Israeli doctors who were headed for some humanitarian work in Soweto, a black township outside Johannesburg.

The doctors were to assist in treating patients at an outpatient clinic for the Baragwanath hospital in Soweto, a few blocks away from the houses of Winnie Mandela and bishop Desmond Tutu. The hospital and clinic were supported by a hospital in Baltimore, which served as a cut-out for the Mossad. Uri was on a cooling-off period from the United States.

‘What is the Mossad doing giving humanitarian assistance to blacks in Soweto?’ I remember asking him. There was no logic to it; no short-term political gain (which was the way the Mossad operated) or any visible monetary advantage.

‘Do you remember Nes Ziyyona?’ His question sent shivers up my spine. I nodded. ‘ This is very much the same. We’re testing both new infectious diseases and new medication that can’t be tested on humans in Israel, for several of the Israeli medicine manufacturers. This will tell them whether they’re on the right track, saving them millions in research.’

‘ What do you think about all of this?’ I had to ask.

‘ It’s not my job to think about it.’ (pp. 188-89)

The Ringworm Children: How the Israeli Government Irradiated 100,000 Israeli Kids Israel Insider October 28 2005 By Barry Chamish

On August 14, at 9 PM, Israel’s Channel Ten television screened a documentary film which exposes the ugliest secret of Israel’s Labor party founders: the deliberate mass radiation poisoning of nearly all Sephardi youths of a generation.

“The Ringworm Children” (translated in Hebrew as “100,000 Rays”), directed by David Belhassen and Asher Hemias, recently won the prize for “best documentary” at the Haifa International film festival, and in the past year has made the rounds of Jewish and Israeli film festivals around the world. But it had yet to come to Israeli television screens. The subject is the mass irradiation of hundreds of thousands of young Israeli immigrants from Middle Eastern countries — Sephardim, as they are called today. The story goes like this:

In 1951, the director general of the Israeli Health Ministry, Dr. Chaim Sheba, flew to America and returned with seven x-ray machines, supplied to him by the American army.

They were to be used in a mass atomic experiment with an entire generation of Sephardi youths to be used as guinea pigs. Every Sephardi child was to be given 35,000 times the maximum dose of x-rays through his head. For doing so, the American government paid the Israeli government 300 million Israeli liras a year. The entire Health budget was 60 million liras. The money paid by the Americans is equivalent to billions of dollars today.

To fool the parents of the victims, the children were taken away on “school trips” and their parents were later told the x-rays were a treatment for the scourge of scalpal ringworm. 6,000 of the children died shortly after their doses were given, while many of the rest developed cancers that killed thousands over time and are still killing them now. While living, the victims suffered from disorders such as epilepsy, amnesia, Alzheimer’s disease, chronic headaches and psychosis.

That is the subject of the documentary in cold terms. It is another matter to see the victims on the screen.

To watch the Moroccan lady describe what getting 35,000 times the dose of allowable x-rays in her head feels like. “I screamed make the headache go away. Make the headache go away. Make the headache go away. But it never went away.”

To watch the bearded man walk hunched down the street. “I’m in my fifties and everyone thinks I’m in my seventies. I have to stoop when I walk so I won’t fall over. They took my youth away with those x-rays.”

To watch the old lady who administered the doses to thousands of children: “They brought them in lines. First their heads were shaved and smeared in burning gel. Then a ball was put between their legs and the children were ordered not to drop it, so they wouldn’t move. The children weren’t protected over the rest of their bodies.

There were no lead vests for them. I was told I was doing good by helping to remove ringworm. If I knew what dangers the children were facing, I would never have cooperated. Never!”

Because the whole body was exposed to the rays, the genetic makeup of the children was often altered, affecting the next generation. We watch the woman with the distorted face explain, “All three of my children have the same cancers my family suffered. Are you going to tell me that’s a coincidence?”

The majority of the victims were Moroccan because they were the most numerous of the Sephardi immigrants. The generation that was poisoned became the country’s perpetual poor and criminal class. It didn’t make sense. The Moroccans who fled to France became prosperous and highly educated. The common explanation was that France got the rich, thus smart ones. The real explanation is that every French Moroccan child didn’t have his brain cells fried with gamma rays.

The film made it perfectly plain that this operation was no accident. The dangers of x-rays had been known for over forty years. We read the official guidelines for x-ray treatment in 1952. The maximum dose to be given a child in Israel was .5 rad. There was no mistake made. The children were deliberately poisoned.

David Deri makes the point that only Sephardi children received the x-rays: “I was in class and the men came to take us on a tour. They asked our names. The Ashkenazi children were told to return to their seats. The dark children were put on the bus.”

The film presents a historian who first gives a potted history of the eugenics movement. In a later sound bite, he declares that the ringworm operation was a eugenics program aimed at weeding out the perceived weak strains of society. The Moroccan lady is back on the screen. “It was a Holocaust, a Sephardi Holocaust. And what I want to know is why no one stood up to stop it.”

David Deri, on film and then as a panel member, relates the frustration he encountered when trying to find his childhood medical records. “All I wanted to know was what they did to me. I wanted to know who authorized it. I wanted to trace the chain of command. But the Health Ministry told me my records were missing.” Boaz Lev, the Health Ministry’s spokesman chimes in: “Almost all the records were burned in a fire.”

We are told that a US law in the late ’40s put a stop to the human radiation experiments conducted on prisoners, the mentally feeble and the like. The American atomic program needed a new source of human lab rats and the Israeli government supplied it. Here was the government cabinet at the time of the ringworm atrocities:

Prime Minister – David Ben Gurion; Finance Minister – Eliezer Kaplan; Settlement Minister – Levi Eshkol; Foreign Minister – Moshe Sharrett; Health Minister – Yosef Burg; Labor Minister – Golda Meir; Police Minister – Amos Ben Gurion.

The highest ranking non-cabinet post belonged to the Director General of the Defence Ministry, Shimon Peres.

That a program involving the equivalent of billions of dollars of American government funds should be unknown to the Prime Minister of cash-strapped Israel is ridiculous. Ben Gurion had to have been in on the horrors and undoubtedly chose his son to be Police Minister in case anyone interfered with them.

Finance Minister Eliezer Kaplan was rewarded for eternity with a hospital named after him near Rehovot. But he’s not alone in this honor. Chaim Sheba, who ran Ringworm Incorporated, had a whole medical complex named after him. Needless to say, if there is an ounce of decency in the local medical profession, those hospital names will have to change.

After the film ended, there was a panel discussion which included a Moroccan singer, David Edri, head of the Compensation Committee for Ringworm X-Ray Victims, and Boaz Lev, a spokesman for the Ministry Of Health.

TV host Dan Margalit tried to put a better face on what he’d witnessed. He explained meekly that “the state was poor. It was a matter of day to day survival.” Then he stopped. He knew there was no excusing the atrocities which the Sephardi children endured.

But it was the Moroccan singer who summed up the experience best. “It’s going to hurt, but the truth has to be told. If not, the wounds will never heal.”

There is one person alive who knows the truth: Shimon Peres. The only way to get to the truth and start the healing is to investigate him for his role in the mass poisoning of over 100,000 Sephardi children and youth.

But here is why that won’t happen. The film was aired at the same time as the highest-rated TV show of the year, the finale of Israel’s talent-hunt show: “A Star Is Born.” The next day, the newly-born star’s photo took up half the front pages. There was not a word about “The Ringworm Children” in any paper, nor on the Internet. Until now.

Zionism and Anti-Semitism

From Tom Segev, “The Seventh Million: Israelis and the Holocaust” Hill and Wang, NY, 1993

” On January 31, 1933, the day after Hitler became chancellor, the independent liberal daily ‘Haaretz’ decried this ‘hugely negative historical event’. Ten days later it ran a headline that read, ‘BLACK DAYS IN GERMANY.’ The paper followed the ongoing ‘anti-Semitic horror’, but during those first weeks it, like the British press, generally aimed at reassuring its readers:

‘One must suppose that Hitlerism will now renounce terrorist methods: government brings responsibility.’ the right-wing ‘Doar Hayom’ agreed: ‘There can be no doubt that Hitler the chancellor will be different from the Hitler of the public rallies.’

But from the start, ‘Davar’–the left-wing daily published by the Histadrut (Labor Federation)–was more pessimistic: ‘It was a bitter and ill-fated day when the New Vandal came to power’, the newspaper wrote the day after the change of government in Germany. It described Hitler as a man of hate and demagoguery who would ‘tear Jews out by their roots.’ ” (p 17)

“More than anything else, though, the rise of the Nazis was seen as confirming the historical prognosis of Zionist ideology. ‘Hapoel Hatsair’ described the Nazi persecution of the Jews as ‘punishment for their having tried to integrate into German society instead of leaving for Palestine while it was still possible to do so.’ Now they would have to run in a panic ‘like mice in flight’, the paper said:

‘The Jews of Germany are being persecuted now not despite their efforts to be part of their country but because of those efforts.’ The holocaust would later be the primary argument fro the establishment of the State of Israel and for its wars of survival.” (p. 18)

“Ben-Gurion hoped that the Nazis victory would become ‘a fertile force’ for Zionism.” (p. 18) “The ‘haavara’ (‘transfer’) agreement–the Hebrew term was used in the Nazi documents as well–was based on the complementary interests of the German government and the Zionist movement: the Nazis wanted the Jews out of Germany; the Zionists wanted them to come to Palestine. But there was no such mutuality of interests between the Zionists and German Jewry. Most German Jews would have preferred to stay in their country. The tension between the interests of the ‘yishuv’ [Jewish community in Palestine] (and, in time, the State of Israel) and those of world Jewry was to become a central motif in the story of the Israelis’ attitude to the Holocaust.” (p.20)

“The revisionist right, by contrast, had long been sympathetic to Benito Mussolini’s Fascism and now and then even to Adolf Hitler’s Naziism–except, of course, his anti-Semitism. Betar, Jabotinsky’s youth movement, fostered classic Fascist ideas and forms. In 1928, Abba Ahimeir, a well-known Revisionist journalist, had a regular column, ‘From the Notebook of a Fascist’, in the newspaper ‘Doar Hayom’.

In anticipation of Jabotinsky’s arrival in Palestine, he wrote an article titled ‘On the Arrival of Our Duce’ ” (p. 23)

“Four years later, in early 1932, Ahimeir was among those brought to trial for disrupting a public lecture at Hebrew University. The incident and the resulting trial are worthy of note only because of a declaration by defense attorney Zvi Eliahu Cohen in response to a speech by the prosecutor comparing the disruption of the lecture with the Nazi disturbances in Germany:

‘The comment on the Nazis’, Cohen said, ‘went too far. Were it not for Hitler’s anti-Semitism, we would not oppose his ideology. Hitler saved Germany.’ This was not an unconsidered outburst; the Revisionist paper ‘Hazit Haam’ praised Cohen’s ‘brilliant speech.’ ” (p. 23)

“…[from Hazit Haam] ‘Social Democrats of all stripes believe that Hitler’s movement is an empty shell.’, the newspaper explained, but ‘we believe that there is both a shell and a kernel. The anti-Semitic shell is to be discarded, but not the anti-Marxist kernel. The Revisionists, the newspaper wrote, would fight the Nazis only to the extent that they were anti-Semites.” (p. 23)

“The haavara agreement was a central issue in the elections in the summer of 1933 for representatives to the Eighteenth Zionist Congress. The Revisionists rejected [in a turnabout] any contact with Nazi Germany. It was inconsistent with the honor of the Jewish people, they said; Jabotinsky declared it ‘ignoble, disgraceful and also contemptible’.”

“The Revisionist press now castigated the Zionist Organization and the Jewish Agency as ‘Hitler’s allies’, people ‘who have trampled roughshod on Jewish honor, on Jewish conscience, and on Jewish ethics…dark characters who have come to trade on the troubles of the Jews and on the land of Israel…low types who have accepted the role of Hitler’s agents in Palestine and in the entire Near East…traitors…deceivers who lust after Hitler’s government.’ ” (p.24)

“After reading the Nazi Party newspaper, Ben-Gurion wrote, it seemed to him that he was reading the words of Zeev Jabotinsky in Doar Hayom: ‘the same thing, the same style, and the same spirit.’ ” (p. 24)

“In his impassioned speech, Ben-Gurion called for the rescue of German Jewry, ‘a tribe of Israel’, and their transfer to Palestine, rather than action against Hitler:

‘ I do not believe that we can oust him and I am not interested in anything other than saving these 500,000 Jews,’ he said. Ben-Gurion saw the debate between rescue and boycott as a debate between Zionism and assimilation, between the nationalist interests of Jewish settlement in Palestine and the international war against anti-Semitism. The assumption implicit in his words was that the war against anti-Semitism was not a part of the Zionist mission.” (pp. 24-25)

“To make his point, Ben-Gurion used harsh language that would in time be employed by anti-Zionists:

” ‘If I knew that it was possible to save all the children in Germany by transporting them to England, but only half of them by transporting them to Palestine, I would choose the second–because we face not only the reckoning of those children, but the historical reckoning of the Jewish people.’ In the wake of the Kristallnacht pogroms, Ben-Gurion commented that the ‘human conscience’ might bring various countries to open their doors to Jewish refugees from Germany. He saw this as a threat and warned: ‘Zionism is in danger.’ ” (p 28)

“Nevertheless, the pragmatists were convinced that the boycott of Germany could not advance the interests of Palestine, that their ends could best be accomplished through contact with the Nazis. Thus the leaders sought to keep relations with Nazi Germany as normal as possible:”

“Two months after Hitler came to power the Jewish Agency executive in Jerusalem had sent a telegram straight to the Fuhrer in Berlin, assuring him that the Yishuv had not declared a boycott against his country; the telegram was sent at the request of German Jewry in the hope of halting their persecution, but it reflected the Jewish Agency’s inclination to maintain correct relations with the Nazi Government. Many years later, Menachem Begin revealed that the Zionist Organization had sent Hitler a cable of condolence on the death of President Hindenburg.” (p. 29)

“Traveling on to Cairo, he [Eichmann] summoned a Jew from Jerusalem, one Fiebl Folkes. A report from Eichmann wrote of his trip and the record of his interrogation by the Israeli police decades later indicate[s] that Folkes was a member of the Haganah–the clandestine Jewish defense force–and a Nazi agent. On one occasion he even met with Eichmann in Berlin.

The Nazis paid him for his information, mostly rather general political and economic evaluations. Among other things, Eichmann quoted Folkes to the effect that Zionist leaders were pleased by the persecution of German Jewry, since it would encourage immigration to Palestine.” (p.30)

“Ironically the Revisionists also had fairly wide-ranging links with the Nazis. The Betar youth movement was active in Berlin and several other German cities. About half a year before the Nazis came to power, the movement’s leadership distributed a memorandum to its members that was both commonsensical and cautious.

The Nazis should be treated politely and with reserve, the memorandum instructed. Whenever Betar members were in public, they should remain quiet and refrain from vocal debates and critical comments. Under no circumstances should anyone say anything that could be interpreted as an insult to the German people, to its institutions, or to its prevailing ideology.” (p. 31)

The Nazis allowed Betar to continue its activities–meetings, conventions, summer camps hikes, sports, sailing, and agricultural training. Members were allowed to wear their uniforms, which included brown shirts, and they were allowed to publish mimeographed pamphlets, including Zionist articles in a nationalistic, para-Fascist tone, in the spirit of the times.

The German Betar pamphlets focused on events in Palestine, and their exuberant nationalism targeted the British, the Arabs, and the Zionist left. The contained no references to the political situation in Germany. With this exception, they were similar to the nationalist German youth publications, including those published by the Nazis. Jabotinsky decried the influence Hitlerism was having on the members of Betar.” (pp. 32)

In the second half of 1940, a few members of the Irgun Zvai Leumi (National Military Organization)–the anti-British terrorist group sponsored by the Revisionists and known by its acronym Etzel, and to the British simply as the Irgun–made contact with representatives of Fascist Italy, offering to cooperate against the British.

Soon the Etzel split, and the group headed by Avraham “Yair” Stern formed itself into the Lehi (from the initials of its Hebrew name, Lohamei Herut Yisrael–Fighters for the Freedom of Israel), also known as the Stern Gang. A representative of this group met with a German foreign ministry official and offered to help Nazi Germany in its war against the British.

The Germans understood that the group aimed to establish an independent state based on the totalitarian principles of the Fascist and Nazi regimes. Many years after he tried to forge this link with Nazis, a former Lehi leader explained what had guided his men at the time: ‘Our obligation was to fight the enemy. We were justified in taking aid from the Nazi oppressor, who was in this case the enemy of our enemy–the British.’ ” (p. 33)

“The question was what to do with those refugees who were neither Zionist nor fit to help build the new society in Palestine. ‘Only God knows how the poor little land of Israel can take in this stream of people and emerge with a healthy social structure’, Chaim Weizmann wrote.

The German Immigrants Association complained that the Jewish Agency’s representatives in Berlin were giving immigration certificates to invalids. ‘ The human material [direct quote and their words] coming from Germany is getting worse and worse’, the association charged after almost a year of Nazi rule. ‘They are not able and not willing to work, and they need social assistance.’ A year later the association sent to Berlin a list of names of people who should not have been sent. Henrietta Szold, who headed the Jewish Agency’s social-work division, also frequently protested about the sick and needy among the immigrants. From time to time Szold demanded that certain of such ‘cases’ be returned to Nazi Germany so that they would not be a burden on the Yishuv.” (p. 43)

“In 1937 the Joint Distribution Committee, an American organization that assisted needy Jews, negotiated with the German authorities for the release of 120 Jewish prisoners from the Dachau concentration camp. ‘I am not so sure that from a political point of view it is desirable that all those released come to Palestine’, a Jewish Agency official wrote to one of his colleagues. Most were not Zionists; and there may even have been Communists among them.” (pp 43-44)

“Senator [Werner Senator of the Jewish Agency] who was active in bringing German Jews to Palestine, warned the Jewish Agency office in Berlin that if it did not improve the quality of the ‘human material’ it was sending, the agency was liable to cut back the number of certificates set aside for the German capital. The immigrants from Germany enjoyed all sorts of special benefits, Senator wrote.

They received immigration certificates after only six months of agricultural training, while in other countries up to two years was required. Requests for family reunification from Germans with relatives in Palestine were also quickly approved. All this required special attention to the quality of immigrants, who should be true pioneers. Senator was not referring to occasional errors in judgment, he assured his colleagues; he was talking about a trend.

More and more ‘ welfare cases’ were arriving from Germany, as well as too many ‘businessmen with children’ rather than single men and women. At one point it was decided that candidates above the age of thirty-five would receive immigration certificates ‘only if there is no reason to believe that they might become a burden here.’ Accordingly they had to have a profession. ‘Anyone who was a merchant’, the decision stated, or of similar employment, will not receive a certificate under any circumstances, except in the case of veteran Zionists.’

This was in 1935.‘In days of plenty,it was possible to handle this material [emphasis added]‘, explained Yitzhak Gruenbaum.‘In days of shortages and unemployment, this material [emphasis added] will cause us many problems…We must be allowed to choose from among the refugees those worthy of immigration and not accept them all.’”(p. 44)

Footnote: “In 1939 the world press followed the drama of the St Louis, a boat carrying several hundred Jewish refugees from Germany. No country would give them asylum. The Joint Distribution Committee asked the Jewish Agency to allot the passengers several hundred immigration certificates from the quota. The Jewish Agency refused. In the end the refugees were allowed into Antwerp. [note where many were exterminated after the takeover of Belgium by the Nazis.]. (p. 44)

” German Jews who were given immigration permits ‘merely as refugees’ were also considered ‘undesirable human material’
by Eliahu Dobkin, a Mapai member of the Jewish Agency executive. ‘I understand very well the special situation in which the overseas institutions dealing with German refugees find themselves, but I would like to believe that you would agree with me that we must approach this question not from a philanthropic point of view but from the point of view of the country’s needs’, Dobkin wrote to one of his colleagues. ‘My opinion is that from among the refugees we must bring only those who meet this condition.’ Leaders of the German immigrants agreed. ‘As I see it, 90 percent of them are not indispensible here’, one of them wrote to another.” (pp 44-45)

“It was an incomparably cruel reality: every Jew who received an immigration certificate during those years lived in Palestine knowing that some other Jew who had not received that certificate had been murdered. This was the basis for the sense of guilt that would later trouble so many Israelis who escaped the Holocaust.” (p 45)

From Lenni Brenner’s 55 Documents on Zionist Collaboration with Nazis: and The Iron Wall by Lenni Brenner

Zionism convicts itself. On June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation sent a secret memorandum to the Nazis:

“Zionism has no illusions about the difficulty of the Jewish condition, which consists above all in an abnormal occupational pattern and in the fault of an intellectual and moral posture not rooted in one’s own tradition. Zionism recognized decades ago that as a result of the assimilationist trend, symptoms of deterioration were bound to appear, which it seeks to overcome by carrying out its challenge to transform Jewish life completely.

“It is our opinion that an answer to the Jewish question truly satisfying to the national state can be brought about only with the collaboration of the Jewish movement that aims at a social, cultural and moral renewal of Jewry–indeed, that such a national renewal must first create the decisive social and spiritual premises for all solutions.

“Zionism believes that a rebirth of national life, such as is occurring in German life through adhesion to Christian and national values, must also take place in the Jewish national group. For the Jew, too, origin, religion, community of fate and group consciousness must be of decisive significance in the shaping of his life. This means that the egotistic individualism which arose in the liberal era must be overcome by public spiritedness and by willingness to accept responsibility.

By 1936, the Post ran a news flash, “German Zionists Seek Recognition”:

“A bold demand that the German Zionist Federation be given recognition by the Government as the only instrument for the exclusive control of German Jewish life was made by the Executive of that body in a proclamation today. All German Jewish organizations, it was declared, should be dominated by the Zionist spirit.”

Zionist factions competed for the honor of allying to Hitler. By 1940-41, the “Stern Gang,” among them Yitzhak Shamir, later Prime Minister of Israel, presented the Nazis with the “Fundamental Features of the Proposal of the National Military Organization in Palestine (Irgun Zvai Leumi) Concerning the Solution of the Jewish Question in Europe and the Participation of the NMO in the War on the Side of Germany.”

Avraham Stern and his followers announced that

“The NMO, which is well-acquainted with the goodwill of the German Reich government and its authorities towards Zionist activity inside Germany and towards Zionist emigration plans, is of the opinion that:

1. Common interests could exist between the establishment of a new order in Europe in conformity with the German concept, and the true national aspirations of the Jewish people as they are embodied by the NMO.

2. Cooperation between the new Germany and a renewed folkish-national Hebraium would be possible and,

3. The establishment of the historic Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, bound by a treaty with the German Reich, would be in the interest of a maintained and strengthened future German position of power in the Near East.

Proceeding from these considerations, the NMO in Palestine, under the condition the above-mentioned national aspirations of the Israeli freedom movement are recognized on the side of the German Reich, offers to actively take part in the war on Germany’s side.”

They hanged people all over Europe after WW II for notes to the Nazis like these. But these treasons against the Jews were virtually unknown in the run up to the creation of the Zionist state in May 1948. Ninety percent of America’s Jews suddenly became emotional pro-Zionists. With Democrats, Republicans and even the Communist-organized Progressive Party competing for Jewish votes in the November Presidential election, Harry Truman’s monetary aid bought arms from pro-Soviet Czechoslovakia, and an Israel was born, run by the German Zionists’ co-thinkers in Jerusalem.

From Zionism in the Age of the Dictators by Lenni Brenner:

In June of 1895, the first entry into his new journal on Zionism, Theodor Hertzl wrote: “In Paris, as I have said, I achieved a freer attitude toward anti-Semitism, which I now began to understand historically and to pardon. Above all, I recognized the emptiness and futility of trying to ‘combat’ anti-Semitism.”

To be a Good Zionist one must be Somewhat of an Anti-Semite: Although blut was a recurrent theme in pre-Holocaust Zionist literature, it was not as central to its message as boden. As long as America’s shores remained open, Europe’s Jews asked: if anti-Semitism could not be fought on its home ground, why should they not just follow the crowd to America?

The Zionist response was double-barrelled: anti-Semitism would accompany the Jews wherever they went and, what was more, it was the Jews who had created anti-Semitism by their own characteristics. The root cause of anti-Semitism, Zionists insisted, was the Jews’ exile existence. Jews lived parasitically off their ‘hosts’…

These tenets combined were known as ‘shelilat ha’galut (the Negation of the Diaspora),and were held by the entire spectrum of Zionists who varied only on matters of detail. They were argued vigorously in the Zionist press, where the distinctive quality of many articles was their hostility to the entire Jewish people. Anyone reading these pieces without knowing their source would have automatically assumed that they came from the Anti-Semitic press.

The Weltanschauung of the youth organization Hashomer Hatzair (Young Watchmen), originally composed in 1917, but republished again as late as 1936, was typical of these effusions: The Jew is a caricature of a normal, natural human being, both pysically and spiritually. As an individual in society he revolts and throws off the harness of social obligations, knows no order nor discipline. (pp 22-23)

Similarly, in 1935 an American Ben Frommer, a writer for the ultra-right Zionist-Revisionists, could declare of no less than 16 million of his fellow Jews that: The fact is undeniable that the Jews collectively are unhealthy and neurotic. Those professional Jews who, wounded to the quick, indignantly deny this truth are the greatest enemies of their race, for they thereby lead them to search for false solutions, or at most palliatives.” (p. 23)

And: In 1925 the most vehement protagonist of total abstentionism, Jacob Klatzkin, the co-editor of the massive “Encyclopedia Judaica”, laid down the full implications of the Zionist approach to anti-Semitism:

“If we do not admit the rightfulness of antisemitism, we deny the rightfulness of our own nationalism. If our people is deserving and willing to live its own national life, then it is an alien body thrust into the nations among whom it lives, an alien body that insists on its own distinctive identity, reducing the domain of their life. It is right therefore, that they should fight against us for their national integrity Instead of establishing societies for defense against anti-Semites, who want to reduce our rights, we should establish societies for defense against our friends who desire to defend our rights.” (p. 30)


Since what follows is STILL GOING ON, perhaps a Rez/Casino few miles up the road from some, once reading this, cognitive dissonance will make forgetting about what is going on a few miles up the road at the nearest Rez, in lieu of what is going on at some exotic locale on the other side of the world, more and more problematic and perhaps even physiologically and psychologically disturbing.

What Inspired Hitler

The third phase is to document who and what directly inspired the German Nazis and their scopes, methods and instruments of genocide (including how to hide it and/or get mass acceptance of it) which was the Eugenics Laws and other historical practices and forms of genocide–past and PRESENT– of the US and Canada against Indigenous Peoples (which Hitler openly declared to be his inspiration–from the “Wild West” novels of Karl May).

“It is readily acknowledged that Indian children lose their natural resistance to illness by habitating so closely in these schools, and that they die at a much higher rate than in their villages. But this alone does not justify a change in the policy of this Department, which is geared towards the FINAL SOLUTION OF OUR INDIAN PROBLEM.” (Department of Indian Affairs Superintendent D.C. Scott to B.C. Indian Agent-General Major D. McKay, DIA Archives, RG 10 series). April 12, 1910 (emphasis added))

According to James Pool in his “Hitler and His Secret Partners”:

Hitler drew another example of mass murder from American history. Since his youth he had been obsessed with the Wild West stories of Karl May. He viewed the fighting between cowboys and Indians in racial terms. In many of his speeches he referred with admiration to the victory of the white race in settling the American continent and driving out the inferior peoples, the Indians. With great fascination he listened to stories, which some of his associates who had been in America told him about the massacres of the Indians by the U.S. Calvary.

He was very interested in the way the Indian population had rapidly declined due to epidemics and starvation when the United States government forced them to live on the reservations. He thought the American government’s forced migrations of the Indians over great distances to barren reservation land was a deliberate policy of extermination.

Just how much Hitler took from the American example of the destruction of the Indian nations his hard to say; however, frightening parallels can be drawn. For some time Hitler considered deporting the Jews to a large ‘reservation’ in the Lubin area where their numbers would be reduced through starvation and disease. (p. 273-274).


The next morning Hitler’s ‘plan’ was put in writing and sent out to the German occupation authorities as ‘The Fuehrer’s Guidelines for the Government of the Eastern Territories: ‘ the Slavs are to work for us. Insofar as we don’t need them, they may die. Therefore compulsory vaccination and German health services are superfluous. The fertility of the Slavs is undesirable.

They may use contraceptives And practice abortion, the more the better. Education is dangerous. It is sufficient… if they can count up to a hundred. At best an education is admissible which produces useful servants for us. Every educated person is a future enemy. Religion we leave to them as a means of diversion. As to food, they are not to get more than necessary. We are the masters, we come first.’

Always contemptuous of the Russians, Hitler said: ‘For them the word ‘liberty’ means the right to wash only on feast-days. If we arrive bringing soft soap, we’ll obtain no sympathy… There’s only one duty: to Germanize this country by the immigration of Germans, and to look upon the natives as Redskins.’

Having been a devoted reader of Karl May’s books on the American West as a youth, Hitler frequently referred to the Russians as ‘Redskins’. He saw a parallel between his effort to conquer and colonize land in Russia with the conquest of the American West by the white man and the subjugation of the Indians or ‘Redskins’. ‘I don’t see why’, he said, ‘a German who eats a piece of bread should torment himself with the idea that the soil that produces this bread has been won by the sword. When we eat from Canada, we don’t think about the despoiled Indians.” (James Pool, Ibid, pp. 254-255)

And from a speech by Heinrich Himmler (date not given):

I consider that in dealing with members of a foreign country, especially some Slav nationality…in such a mixture of peoples there will always be some racially good types. Therefore I think that it is our duty to take their children with us, to remove them from their environment, if necessary, by robbing or stealing them… (Telford Taylor “Anatomy of the Nuremberg Trials”, Alfred A Knopf, N.Y. 1992, p. 203)

And from John Toland, preeminent biographer of Adolf Hitler

Hitler’s concept of concentration camps as well as the practicality of genocide owed much, so he claimed, to his studies of English and United States history. He admired the camps for Boer prisoners in South Africa And for the Indians in the Wild West; and often praised to his inner circle the efficiency of America’s extermination-by starvation and uneven combat-of the ‘Red Savages’ who could not be tamed by captivity. (John Toland, “Adolf Hitler” Vol II, p 802, Doubleday & Co, 1976)

“Set the blood-quantum at one-quarter, hold to it as a rigid definition of Indians, let intermarriage proceed…and eventually Indians will be defined out of existence. When that happens,the federal government will finally be freed from its persistent Indian problem.” (Patricia Nelson Limerick, “The Legacy of Conquest: The Unbroken Past of the American West” p338)

Government paper warns of risks of apologizing for residential schools WENDY COX July 27, 1998 from Ottawa Citizen

OTTAWA (CP) – Government officials were urged two years ago to provide a compensation package to aboriginal people who suffered in residential schools as an attempt to control the potentially explosive costs of lawsuits, an internal document shows. The report, stamped Secret and obtained by The Canadian Press, compares the pros and cons of forcing claimants to go to court with offering financial redress to victims. It concludes that in the long run, compensation would be cheaper.

“The number of individual claims as well as any negative implications for the federal government in defending such actions (lawsuits) would likely be minimized if a government policy, including some form of redress package, were adapted,” says the 20-page report. The document also warns against using the word “apology,” preferring instead “an acknowledgment or expression of regret.” “It could be worded in such a fashion so as to not lay blame on anyone.”

Government officials confirmed the report, which is titled simply Residential Schools Discussion Paper, was written in late 1995 or early 1996 for Ron Irwin, then the minister of Indian Affairs. It may also have been prepared for the Justice Department.

The report never reached current Indian Affairs Minister Jane Stewart and the advice in it never formed the basis for actions she later took, officials say. Earlier this year, Stewart issued a Statement of Reconciliation, saying the government was “deeply sorry” for those who suffered the “tragedy” of physical and sexual abuse at the schools.

The statement also included a $350-million healing fund. “It was critical that the apology meant something to us,” said Shawn Tupper, spokesman for the minister on the residential schools file. “We can point to (the $350-million healing fund) and say we’re actually doing something substantive to back it up.” The statement has been accepted by national Chief Phil Fontaine, however other native leaders said at the time that it wasn’t good enough.

But critics who have read the 1996 document say the federal government has followed the advice to the letter. They say it’s evidence the statement is not an apology at all but merely an attempt to control costs. Ovide Mercredi, a former national chief, said the document shows “the minister didn’t follow her heart or her sense of justice.” “She followed legal advice and the advice was to reduce legal liability at all costs and the government measure is designed to do that.” Fontaine was unavailable for comment.

The document advises that forcing former students to take the government to court would ensure they would have to prove their claims. As an added advantage, it would also limit lawsuits, the report states.

“There is a general disinclination by persons who have suffered abuse to testify on such a personal and painful matter in a public and adversarial forum,” the report says.

“A litigation approach may well keep the number of claimants down to a minimum.”

However, going to court would cost the government dearly in money and in bad press, the report concludes. The author, who is unnamed, recommends a compensation package instead. Since the report was written, thousands of former students have joined class action suits or have filed individual lawsuits against the federal government.

A landmark B.C. court ruling last month declared for the first time that both the federal government and the United Church are legally liable for widespread sexual and physical abuse at a Port Alberni, B.C., school and ordered them to compensate about 30 former students. A figure for the compensation has not yet been decided. The mounting lawsuits are anticipated in the 1996 report, but the document also cautions that apologizing is dangerous territory.

“Whatever it is called, the department will want to ensure that the statement cannot subsequently be used to establish a cause of action against the Crown in any particular individual cause,” it states.

“It would appear that this government is committed to looking ahead and in these tough economic times, it would not want to be involved in anything that is too expensive or linked to the past.”

Tupper said the department’s thinking has evolved since the report. When asked at a news conference last January if the statement of reconciliation was an apology, Stewart responded yes.“In our view, the statement of reconciliation is not an acknowledgment of guilt in a court of law,” Tupper said. It is an acknowledgment of a historic policy and the negative impacts of that policy and it is a commitment to do something about it.”

However, John McKiggan, a lawyer for about 800 former students at the Shubenacadie Indian Residential School in Nova Scotia, said the internal document reveals the federal government’s strategy. “There is an amazing similarity between the present and suggestions made in the paper,” he said. “The statement of reconciliation does not apologize for government actions. It recognizes the pain. It doesn’t admit responsibility for that pain.” -The Canadian Press, 1998

Alberta sterilization victims also used as guinea pigs

Revelation comes as 40 victims win $4M settlement Marina Jimenez National Post 10/28/98

As many as 100 of the children at the centre of the Alberta sterilization scandal of the late 1960s and early 1970s were also used as guinea pigs in drug trials, the National Post has learned. The children lived at the Provincial Training School in Red Deer. Some were wards of the province and others were placed in the school by their parents, who did not consent to the sterilization or medical experimentation, which included the administration of powerful steroids and anti-psychotic drugs.

Experts say one of the drugs used, the anabolic steroid norbolethone, is illegal today. The anti-psychotic tranquilizer haloperidol was also used. Its effect on children is said to be akin to hitting them over the head with a sledge hammer.

Yesterday, 40 people who were sterilized against their will reached a settlement totalling $4-million with the government of Alberta. This brings to 540 the number of people who have settled with the province for being sterilized under the now-defunct Alberta Sterilization Act, which was in effect from 1928 to 1972.

The operations were ordered by Alberta’s eugenics board to prevent the mentally disabled from passing on their defects to offspring. Lawyers say they want more money from the government for victims who had to endure being tested with powerful drugs in addition to being sterilized. “Invading people’s rights in the form of unauthorized research and taking advantage of people who couldn’t look after themselves is the kind of thing that courts award punitive damages for,” said Jon Faulds, an Edmonton lawyer representing 109 sterilization victims still negotiating settlements.

Allan Garber, another Edmonton lawyer acting for the former training school residents, said they were treated like cattle. “The experimental drug treatment only compounds the evil that was done to our clients.” Dr. Leonard J. LeVann, medical superintendent from 1949 to 1974 at the Red Deer school, published the results of his drug experiments in scholarly journals, which were recently turned over to lawyers for the victims.

The articles show that Dr.LeVann, who is dead, gave 100 undersized children the anabolic steroid norbolethone over a 12-month period in 1971. The drug — now illegal in Canada — made the children gain weight. But it also produced some side effects: the genitals of two boys increased in size and one girl’s voice deepened.”The treatment of retarded growth in children with anabolic agents is controversial,” he wrote in the September 1971 edition of the International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, Therapy and Toxicology. Nonetheless, he called the drug study “entirely satisfactory.”

Norbolethone is illegal today because of its powerful side effects – damage to the liver and negative psychological symptoms. Anabolic steroids can also increase aggressive sexual behaviour in men and cause secondary sexual characteristics, for example, facial hair in girls. Dr. LeVann also gave 100 children haloperidol, an anti-psychotic tranquilizer, over a period of 40 days in the late 1960s to counter hyperactivity and excitability.

Dr. Louis Pagliaro, a professor of educational psychology and the associate director of the substance abusology research unit at the University of Alberta, says haloperidol “would essentially knock (children) out. (It) generally decreases people’s ability to learn and adversely affects memory and behaviour.” Dr. LeVann’s studies are “full of half-truths, assumptions and by today’s standards, lack proper research methodology,” says Dr. Pagliaro.

About 2,800 people were sterilized in Alberta before the Sexual Sterilization Act was finally repealed. Documents now show that many of the people sterilized were not mentally disabled. In 1996, the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench ordered the provincial government to pay Leilani Muirer $740,000 for being wrongfully confined in the Red Deer school and sterilized.

Her landmark victory opened a floodgate of litigation. In June, 1998, the government agreed to pay 500 more sterilization claimants up to $100,000. Many continue to live in the Red Deer facility, known today as the Michener Centre. The province has spent $54 million on settlements to date. The compensation deal for the sterilizaiton victims announced yesterday, much the same as those announced last June, gives claimants $75,000 now and another $25,000 after three years, if they are then living outside institutions.

Here is one more that shows a nexus between US/Canadian genocide actually directly inspiring Nazi genocide (methods, possible scope, depth, techniques of concealment, techniques of engineering mass acceptance, eugenics the whole lot) on the Nazis, as evidenced by the Nazis own words, and then the influence of the Nazis on Zionists including active collaboration. And then you have Bush and his family not only early financial supporters of Hitler and the Nazis from 1924 onward, caught selling Nazi bonds AFTER Pearl Harbor, co-investors with Fritz Thyssen in a synfuel plant at Auschwitz which was liquidated and created George H.W. Bush’s $1.5 million trust fund.

But also, the Bushes were involved in eugenics and pioneered the race and sterilization laws that were models for the Nazis, plus they helped to hide a bunch of wanted Nazi war criminals in the CIA and on the Ethnic Heritage Council of the Republican Party. And now you have Bush pimping for the Israelis (can you spell blackmail maybe?) who have used and are using human beings for medical experiments, while the South Africans have given up the nuclear weapons they co-developed with the Israelis, the Israelis keep them with a Samson Option of Doomsday for the whole world (lighting off some 200 nukes) if Israel sense Armageddon…

No one could make this shit up it is just too fantastic and it is all true and carefully sourced.

This all reminds me of a passage in John Le Carre’s “The Russia House” where Barley Scott Blair, a drunken Englishman who has inherited a failing publishing house that he is further running into the ground. and British intelligence corners him to work for them because a Soviet dissident has covertly sent a book to be published by Blair’s company and Blair goes to the USSR all the time and is sent to find out who the dissident scientist is and urge him to defect. Well this Barley Scott Blair is drunk at some Dacha, and seeing nothing but treachery everywhere around him, says the following:

Barley Scott Blair: “If there is to be hope, we must all ‘betray’ our country. We have to save each other because all victims are equal and none is more equal than others. It is everone’s duty to start the avalanche.

Unidentified woman: “Oh Barley you want everyone to act like a hero.”

Barley Scott Blair: “Listen, Nowadays you have to think like a hero just to behave like a merely decent human being.”

Of course the ones really “betraying” this country and its People are the likes of Bush and his types along with a lot of spineless Dems.

Category: Class, Corporate Press, Ecology & Env Justice, Empire, Energy War, Gender, General, Military, Race & Nation, Repression & Resistance | Comment (RSS)

Posted in Faces of Fascism, Feral Scholar, IMPERIAL HUBRIS AND INTRIGUE, Imperial Hypocrisy and Intrigue, International Law and Nuremberg Precedents, Zionism and Anti-Semitism, Zionism as Racism and Fascism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments


U.S. Currently Fighting 74 Different Wars … That It Will Publicly Admit
Post Categories: Canada
The Washington’s Blog | Sunday, May 12, 2013, 18:28 Beijing

WARS 74 1 us-military-bases-around-the-world (2)

WARS 74 2 CG-map-3

WARS 74 3 b52_2 (1)

WARS 74 4 b-2 (1)

WARS 74 5 th

WARS 74 6 aircraft-carrier2 (1)

And Many More Covert Wars Without Congressional Oversight … Let Alone Public Knowledge

Fire Dog Lake’s Kevin Gosztola notes:

Linda J. Bilmes and Michael D. Intriligator, ask in a recent paper, “How many wars is the US fighting today?”

Today US military operations are involved in scores of countries across all the five continents. The US military is the world’s largest landlord, with significant military facilities in nations around the world, and with a significant presence in Bahrain, Djibouti,Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo, and Kyrgyzstan, in addition to long-established bases in Germany, Japan, South Korea, Italy, and the UK. Some of these are vast, such as the Al Udeid Air Force Base in Qatar, the forward headquarters of the United States Central Command, which has recently been expanded to accommodate up to 10,000 troops and 120 aircraft.

Citing a page at US Central Command’s (CENTCOM) website, they highlight the “areas of responsibility” publicly listed:

The US Central Command (CENTCOM) is active in 20 countries across the Middle Eastern region, and is actively ramping-up military training, counterterrorism programs, logistical support, and funding to the military in various nations. At this point, the US has some kind of military presence in Afghanistan, Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, U.A.E., Uzbekistan, and Yemen.

US Africa Command (AFRICOM), according to the paper, “supports military-to-military relationships with 54 African nations.”

[Gosztola points out that the U.S. military is also conducting operations of one kind or another in Syrian, Jordan, South Sudan, Kosovo, Libya, Yemen, the Congo, Uganda, Mali, Niger and other countries.]

Altogether, that makes 74 nations where the US is fighting or “helping” some force in some proxy struggle that has been deemed beneficial by the nation’s masters of war.


wars 74 8 us-soldiers-iraq-war

Iraq didn’t want U.S.troops in the country …

wars 74 9 Military1

A Congressional Research Service (CRS) provides an accounting of all the publicly acknowledged deployments of US military forces

But those are just the public operations.

Gosztola notes that the covert operations are uncountable:

Beyond that, there are Special Operations forces in countries. Jeremy Scahill in Dirty Wars: The World is a Battlefield, writes,“By mid-2010, the Obama administration had increased the presence of Special Operations forces from sixty countries to seventy-five countries.


Scahill also reports, based on his own “well-placed special operations sources”:
…[A]mong the countries where [Joint Special Operations Command] teams had been deployed under the Obama administration were: Iran, Georgia, Ukraine, Bolivia, Paraguay, Ecuador, Peru, Yemen, Pakistan (including in Baluchistan) and the Philippines. These teams also at times deployed in Turkey, Belgium, France and Spain. JSOC was also supporting US Drug Enforcement Agency operations in Colombia and Mexico…

Since President Barack Obama has been willing to give the go ahead to operations that President George W. Bush would not have approved, operations have been much more aggressive and, presumably, JSOC has been able to fan out and work in way more countries than ever expected.

Global assassinations have been embraced by the current administration, opening the door to night raids, drone strikes, missile attacks where cluster bombs are used, etc.Each of these operations, as witnessed or experienced by the civilian populations of countries, potentially inflame and increase the number of areas in the world where there are conflict zones.


The world is literally a battlefield with conflicts being waged by the US (or with the “help” of the US). And, no country is off-limits to US military forces.
Of course, JSOC is not accountable to Congress … let alone the public:

JSOC operates outside the confines of the traditional military and even beyond what the CIA is able to do.


wars 74 11 th

wars 74 12 th

But it goes well beyond the war zones. In concert with the Executive’s new claims on extra-judicial assassinations via drone strikes, even if the target is an American citizen, JSOC goes around the world murdering suspects without the oversight of a judge or, god forbid, granting those unfortunate souls the right to defend themselves in court against secret, evidence-less government decrees about their guilt.

As Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh said at a speaking event in 2009:
Congress has no oversight of it. It’s an executive assassination ring essentially, and it’s been going on and on and on.


There are legal restrictions on what the CIA can do in terms of covert operations. There has to be a finding, the president has to notify at least the “Gang of Eight” [leaders of the intelligence oversight committees] in Congress. JSOC doesn’t have to do any of that. There is very little accountability for their actions. What’s weird is that many in congress who’d be very sensitive to CIA operations almost treat JSOC as an entity that doesn’t have to submit to oversight. It’s almost like this is the president’s private army, we’ll let the president do what he needs to do.

The Washington’s Blog

Tags: Iraq Qatar Turkey US Yemen

Related articles:
US Weapons Deliveries to “Terrorists in Syria” a Systematic Violation of the Convention against the Use of Mercenaries
Forbidden Alliance: Turkey & Israel Friends Again: Nuremberg Trials? Let’s Sell Them a Few AWACS!
Will There Be A World War Three?
Syrian President Assad Speech: “There Is Not a Chance of a Further Western Intervention”

Posted in 4th Media, CIA past, CIA Terrorism, Corruption and Intrigue in Government, Decline of the American Imperium, Dialectics, ELITES AND NEW WORLD ORDER, Faces of Fascism, FALSE FLAGS, Fascism in America, Genocide in and From America, Government Corruption, IMPERIAL HUBRIS AND INTRIGUE, Imperial Hypocrisy and Intrigue, International Law and Nuremberg Precedents, JSOC and SOC, MEMEONOMICS: Economics and EconomistS;: Capitalism and its Theories, NED and other Fronts of Imperialism, Neoclassical Economics and Neoliberalism as Neo-Imperialism, Neoliberalism and Neoclassical Theory, Neoliberalism as Neoimperialism, New World Order, Psyops, Social Systems Engineering Campaigns, U.S. Govt and Al Qaeda, U.S. IMPERIAL DECLINE, U.S. Terrorism, Uncategorized, US and Candian Holocausts | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment


Hillary autobiography exposes bisexual having an affair with the beautiful woman in the White House

Xinmin Evening News at 10:43 on May 16, 2013 I have something to say (participation)

According to U.S. media reported on the 15th, she will write a new autobiography, to come clean and her political scandals or sex scandal insider.

In addition to admit there is bisexual, revenge Obamas “insulting”, Hillary Clinton will also disclosed the Obama administration all the dark political insider Obamas little-known family scandal!

The insider said, Hillary move to clear the way, do not let any privacy scandals competitors attacked her as “Lethal Weapon” in order to run for president in 2016.

Confidential 1

Exposes Bi-sexuality: Was having an affair with a beautiful woman while in the White House

The insider disclosed in Hillary Clinton publicly for the first time in his autobiography blockbuster decades, she has been hiding her authentic sexual orientation; she is actually a bisexual!

As early as 2000, the U.S. media quoted a veterinarian that Hillary has a tendency to be “gay”. The Veterinarian revealed to a journalist to the White House an incident when he was called to give the Clinton’s pet cat “Socks” medical treatment after an accident and claimed he saw Hillary in the hallway with another woman hugging in more than a friendly embrace among friends.

It is reported that Hillary Clinton would like to take in the 2016 presidential election, winning more support and vote of homosexuals.

Confidential 2

“Little Three” provocation against Clinton’s Health and child

The second blockbuster, Hillary will disclose for the first time in 17 years that she hid the secret of Lewinsky wanting one child from Bill Clinton and that she viewed Bill Clinton as having been completely taken away from her.

As early as 1996, when being involved with her husband, “Lewinsky actually blatantly told Hillary, his wife, that she had called Clinton and that he had claimed that he really loved her, not Hillary, and that Clinton has been contemplating divorce, and then she and Clinton would marry and have children to start a family!

This “fact” left Hillary shocked, and caused her to rush into the White House bathroom, vomiting.

Confidential 3

The Obama insurance and Clinton fight

The insider said, Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, was frequently betrayed, ‘insulted’ and ‘treated like a dog’ by Obama and his wife. Bill Clinton at the time, was suffering from a serious heart condition; but he was regardless of his health and physical safety everywhere for Obama’s presidential campaign.

The Obamas were determined to win re-election; they began openly or secretly to attack Hillary and Bill Clinton! It is said that Obama told aides he has no further need for Hillary and that he hoped that she could go out the door as quickly as possible.

The insider said: In 2011 at the Andrews Air Force Base golf course, Clinton and Obama had an argument, Clinton said Obama is the worst president in the history of the United States, the two men almost got into a fist-fight, and finally the Secret Service agents had to forcibly separate them. ”

Confidential 4

Powerless in the face of the Obamas “humiliation”

Hillary suffered “humiliation” by Obama and his wife giving numerous examples of where Michelle allegedly banned Hillary Clinton from attending White House dinners several times; Hillary was even blocked at the door of the Oval Office, and forbade her to participate in the meetings with Obama and several foreign heads of state who were meeting.

A source said: “Michelle was very jealous of Hillary, she could not bear to see Hillary Clinton going beyond her own inner desire to represent the posture of a strong woman on the world stage. Obama, she said to Hillary’s senior staff, is not willing, but he must appoint her to be Secretary of State in order to garner the support of her constituents’ and their opinions. ”

The insider said: “Hillary plans to disclosed in the book that the Obamas put a knife in her back secretly behind everything.”

Confidential 5

The first couple often quarreled, dubious

Hillary will also disclose that the Obama family represent a scandal of crazy alcoholics in the White House and that he and Michelle’s relationship is dubious, and they often quarrel in the White House!

There was a time she said when Obama said to her some do not agree with her and her husband, then Michelle Hillary said, saw Michelle kicking the President under the table with her feet on his thigh. She said the only times they show loving moments, is in the face of the media camera lens!

The insider said: “This book will undoubtedly anger Obama and his wife; but Hillary believes she will be very popular in the 2016 election, [and] do not need Obama’s support.”

Bill Clinton said: “Americans need to know these things!” Clinton also boasted a friend saying: “My wife is more popular than the current president and will be welcomed by the people!”

Hillary will get the high price of royalties of $ 25 million; although she has not yet decided when to begin, she has yet to get $ 14 million in pre-paid royalties. (Want)

Original Article:

希拉里自传自曝是双性恋 与美女白宫偷情
2013年05月16日10:43 新民晚报 我有话说(7人参与)
  自曝是双性恋 曾与美女白宫偷情
  希拉里将获得2500万美元的天价稿酬,尽管尚未动笔,她已拿到了预付的1400万美元稿酬。 (旺旺)

Posted in Corruption and Intrigue in Government, Decline of the American Imperium, Government Corruption, IMPERIAL HUBRIS AND INTRIGUE, Imperial Hypocrisy and Intrigue, Psychopaths in Management, U.S. IMPERIAL DECLINE | 1 Comment