Thursday, December 03, 2015

Turning the Knife: How Russia's Terror Victims Are Honoured in the West

Obama Ignores Russian Terror Victims

by Robert Parry - Consortium News



Normally, when a country is hit by an act of terrorism, there is universal sympathy even if the country has engaged in actions that may have made it a target of the terrorists.

After 9/11, for instance, any discussion of whether U.S. violent meddling in the Middle East may have precipitated the attack was ruled out of the public debate.


President Barack Obama uncomfortably accepting 
the Nobel Peace Prize from Committee Chairman 
Thorbjorn Jagland in Oslo, Norway, Dec. 10, 2009
(White House photo)

Similarly, the 7/7 attacks against London’s Underground in 2005 were not excused because the United Kingdom had joined in President George W. Bush’s aggressive war in Iraq. The same with the more recent terror strikes in Paris. No respectable politician or pundit gloated about the French getting what they deserved for their long history of imperialism in the Muslim world.

But a different set of rules apply to Russia. Along with other prominent Americans, President Barack Obama and New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman have expressed smug satisfaction over the murder of 224 people aboard a Russian charter flight blown up over the Sinai and in the slaying of a Russian pilot who had been shot down by a Turkish warplane and the killing of a Russian marine on a rescue mission.

Apparently, the political imperative to display disdain for Russian President Vladimir Putin trumps any normal sense of humanity. Both Obama on Tuesday and Friedman on Wednesday treated those Russian deaths at the hands of the Islamic State or other jihadists as Putin’s comeuppance for intervening against terrorist/jihadist gains in Syria.

At a news conference in Paris, Obama expressed his lack of sympathy as part of a bizarre comment in which he faulted Putin for somehow not turning around the Syrian conflict during the past month – when Obama and his allies have been floundering in their “war” against the Islamic State and its parent, Al Qaeda, for years, if not decades.

“The Russians now have been there for several weeks, over a month, and I think fair-minded reporters who looked at the situation would say that the situation hasn’t changed significantly,” Obama said. 
“In the interim, Russia has lost a commercial passenger jet. You’ve seen another jet shot down. There have been losses in terms of Russian personnel. And I think Mr. Putin understands that, with Afghanistan fresh in the memory, for him to simply get bogged down in a inconclusive and paralyzing civil conflict is not the outcome that he’s looking for.”

In examining that one paragraph, a “fair-minded” reporter could find a great deal to dispute. Indeed, the comments suggest that President Obama has crossed some line into either believing his own propaganda or thinking that everyone who listens to him is an idiot and will believe whatever he says.

But what was perhaps most disturbing was Obama’s graceless manner of discussing the tragedy of the Sinai bombing, followed by his seeming pleasure over Turkey shooting down a Russian SU-24 last week, leading to the killing of two Russian military men, one the pilot who was targeted while parachuting to the ground and the other a marine after his search-and-rescue helicopter was downed by a TOW missile.

Even more troubling, the key weapon systems used – the Turkish F-16 fighter jet and the TOW missile – were U.S.-manufactured and apparently U.S. supplied, in the case of the TOW missile either directly or indirectly to Sunni jihadists deemed “moderate” by the Obama administration.

The Ever-Smug Friedman


Columnist Friedman was equally unfeeling about the Russian deaths. In a column entitled “Putin’s Great Syrian Adventure,” Friedman offered a mocking assessment of Russia’s intervention against Sunni jihadists and terrorists seeking to take control of Syria.

While ridiculing anyone who praised Putin’s initiative or who just thought the Russian president was “crazy like a fox,” Friedman wrote: “Some of us thought he was just crazy.

“Well, two months later, let’s do the math: So far, Putin’s Syrian adventure has resulted in a Russian civilian airliner carrying 224 people being blown up, apparently by pro-ISIS militants in Sinai. Turkey shot down a Russian bomber after it strayed into Turkish territory. And then Syrian rebels killed one of the pilots as he parachuted to earth and one of the Russian marines sent to rescue him.”

Ha-ha, very funny! And, by the way, it has not been established that the Russian SU-24 did stray into Turkish air space but if it did, according to the Turkish account, it passed over a sliver of Turkish territory for all of 17 seconds.

The evidence is quite clear that the SU-24 was ambushed in a reckless act by Turkey’s autocratic President Recep Tayyip Erdogan who has been collaborating with Syrian and foreign jihadists for the past four years to overthrow Syria’s secular government. And the murder of the pilot after he bailed out of the plane is not some reason to smirk; it is a war crime.

Even uglier is the lack of any sympathy or outrage over the terrorist bombing that killed 224 innocent people, mostly tourists, aboard a Russian charter flight in Egypt. If the victims had been American and a similar callous reaction had come from President Putin and a columnist for a major Russian newspaper, one can only imagine the outrage. However, in Official Washington, any recognition of a common humanity with Russians makes you a “Moscow stooge.”

The other wacky part of both Obama’s comments and Friedman’s echoes of the same themes is this quick assessment that the Russian intervention in support of the Syrian government has been some abject failure – as if the U.S.-led coalition has been doing so wonderfully.

First, as a “fair-minded” reporter, I would say that it appears the Russian-backed Syrian offensive has at least stopped the advances of the Islamic State, Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front and its jihadist allies, including Ahrar al-Sham (which technically separates itself from Al Qaeda and thus qualifies for U.S.-supplied weaponry even though it fights side-by-side with Nusra in the Saudi-backed Army of Conquest).

The Afghan Memories


Obama’s reference to Afghanistan was also startling. He was suggesting that Putin should have learned a lesson from Moscow’s intervention in the 1980s in support of a secular, pro-Soviet regime in Kabul, which came under attack by CIA-organized-and-armed Islamic jihadists known then as mujahedeen.

Wielding sophisticated surface-to-air missiles and benefiting from $1 billion a year in Saudi-U.S.-supplied weapons, the Afghan fundamentalist mujahedeen and their allies, including Saudi Osama bin Laden, eventually drove Soviet troops out in 1989 and – several years later behind the Taliban – completed the reversion of Afghanistan back to the Seventh Century. Women in Kabul went from dressing any way they liked in public, including wearing mini-skirts, to being covered in chadors and kept at home.

Obama’s bringing up Afghanistan in the Syrian context and Putin’s supposed one-month Syrian failure was ironic in another way. After Al Qaeda’s 9/11 attacks, the United States invaded Afghanistan in pursuit of bin Laden and has been bogged down in a quagmire there for 14 years, including nearly seven years under Obama.

So, Obama may not be on the firmest ground when he suggests that Putin recall Moscow’s experience in Afghanistan a few decades ago. After all, Obama has many more recent memories.

Further, what is different about Putin’s Syrian strategy – compared with Obama’s – is that the Russians are targeting all the terrorists and jihadists, not just the Islamic State (also known as ISIS, ISIL or Daesh). While U.S. propaganda tries to present the non-ISIS jihadists as “moderates” (somehow pretending that Al Qaeda is no longer a terrorist organization), there is, in reality, very little distinction between ISIS and the alliance of Nusra/Ahrar al-Sham.

And, as for Official Washington’s new “group think” about the Syrian government’s lack of progress in the war, there is the discordant news that the last of rebel forces have agreed to abandon the central city of Homs, which had been dubbed the “capital of the revolution.” The Associated Press reported on Tuesday that “thousands of insurgents will leave the last opposition-held neighborhood in” Homs, with the withdrawal beginning next week.

Al-Jazeera added the additional fact that the remaining 4,000 insurgents are “from al-Nusra Front, Ahrar al-Sham and the Free Syrian Army.” In other words, the “moderate” Free Syrian Army was operating in collusion with Al Qaeda’s affiliate and its major jihadist partner.

While it’s hard to get reliable up-to-date information from inside Syria, one intelligence source familiar with the military situation told me that the Syrian government offensive, backed by Iranian troops and Russian air power, had been surprisingly successful in putting the jihadists, including ISIS and Nusra, on the defensive, with additional gains around the key city of Aleppo.

The Belated Oil Bombings


Also, in the past week, Putin shamed Obama into joining in a bombing operation to destroy hundreds of trucks carrying ISIS oil to Turkey. Why that valuable business was allowed to continue during the U.S.-led war on ISIS since summer 2014 has not been adequately explained. It apparently was being protected by Turkish President Erdogan.

Another irony of Obama’s (and Friedman’s) critical assessment of Putin’s one-month military campaign came in Obama’s recounting of his meeting during the Paris climate summit with Erdogan. Obama said he was still appealing to Erdogan to close the Turkish-Syrian border although radical jihadists have been crossing it since the start of the Syrian civil war in 2011.

“With respect to Turkey, I have had repeated conversations with President Erdogan about the need to close the border between Turkey and Syria,” Obama said. 
“We’ve seen some serious progress on that front, but there are still some gaps. In particular, there’s about 98 kilometers that are still used as a transit point for foreign fighters, ISIL shipping out fuel for sale that helps finance their terrorist activities.”

In other words, all these years into the conflict – and about 1½ years since Obama specifically targeted ISIS – Turkey has not closed its borders to prevent ISIS from reinforcing itself with foreign fighters and trafficking in illicit oil sales to fund its terror operations. One might suspect that Erdogan has no intention of really stopping the Sunni jihadists from ravaging Syria.

Erdogan still seems set on violent “regime change” in Syria after allowing his intelligence services to provide extensive help to ISIS, Al Qaeda’s Nusra and other extremists. The Russians claim that politically well-connected Turkish businessmen also have been profiting off the ISIS oil sales.

But Obama’s acknowledgement that he has not even been able to get NATO “ally” Turkey to seal its border and that ISIS still remains a potent fighting force makes a mockery of his mocking Putin for not “significantly” changing the situation on the ground in Syria in one month.

Obama also slid into propaganda speak when he blamed Assad for all the deaths that have occurred during the Syrian conflict. “I consider somebody who kills hundreds of thousands of his own people illegitimate,” Obama said.

But again Obama is applying double standards. For instance, he would not blame President George W. Bush for the hundreds of thousands (possibly more than a million) dead Iraqis, yet Bush was arguably more responsible for those deaths by launching an unprovoked invasion of Iraq than Assad was in battling a jihadist-led insurgency.

Plus, the death toll of Syrians, estimated to exceed a quarter million, includes many soldiers and police as well as armed jihadists. That does not excuse Assad or his regime for excessively heavy-handed tactics that have inflicted civilian casualties, but Obama and his predecessor both have plenty of innocent blood on their hands, too.

After watching Obama’s news conference, one perhaps can hope that he is just speaking out of multiple sides of his mouth as he is wont to do. Maybe, he’s playing his usual game of “above-the-table/below-the-table,” praising Erdogan above the table while chastising him below the table and disparaging Putin in public while cooperating with the Russian president in private.

Or maybe President Obama has simply lost touch with reality – and with common human decency.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). You also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America’s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here.

Wednesday, December 02, 2015

Regime Change - Chicago: Murder and Cover-Ups in High Places

Regime Change - Chicago: Cover-ups In Police Murder Requires Resignation of Chicago Mayor Emanuel

by Linn Washington - This Can't Be Happening


December 2, 2015

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel made a bold yet belated move when he fired his embattled police superintendent in the wake of a national uproar surrounding the release of a chilling video that captured the police killing of a teen.

Included in that uproar is anger over mounting evidence of a cover-up connected to the flawed shooting graphically displayed on that video. Political and civic leaders in Chicago had demanded the removal of Chicago top cop Garry McCarthy months before Emanuel's uproar triggered ouster.

If Mayor Emanuel is really serious about his stated desire to rebuild “public trust” he needs to do two other things and do those two things quickly.

The first thing Emanuel needs to do is issue a strong public rebuke of Chicago’s top prosecutor, Anita Alvarez.

This prosecutor dragged her feet for over a year on indicting the policeman shown in that video firing 16-shots into Laquan McDonald. That police video clearly shows the 17-year-old McDonald walking away from police not lurching towards officers as Chicago’s Police Department and its police union had maintained falsely since McDonald’s fatal shooting in October 2014.

Alvarez did not charge Officer Jason Van Dyke with murder until after the release of the police video that captured McDonald’s wrongful death. Mayor Emanuel had fought against release of that video claiming it would undermine ongoing investigations into McDonald’s death – a stance Alvarez embraced as her explanation for not filing charges against Van Dyke earlier.

Hispanic leaders in Chicago – political and civic – are among those calling for the resignation of Alvarez, the first Hispanic to hold that post in Chicago.

The second thing Emanuel needs to do is resign. The mounting evidence of a multi-layer cover-up surrounding the killing of McDonald includes actions by Emmanuel.

Chicago’s mayor contends he did not view the McDonald murder video until hours before its release – a release ordered by a Chicago judge over Emmanuel’s objection. Yet, months ago Emanuel approved a $5-million payout to McDonald’s estranged family. Emanuel authorized that payout before that family even filed a lawsuit.

If Emanuel approved that payout without seeing the video that contradicted the official ‘justified shooting’ posture of his Police Department then he was irresponsible with the purse strings of cash-strapped Chicago.

If Emanuel was aware of the contents of that video and approved the payout that occurred at the time of his struggle to beat back a strong electoral challenge to unseat him then that payout is arguably a payoff to lessen public uproar over the true details of McDonald’s death. Withholding that video helped Emanuel win reelection.

Emanuel’s actions/inactions in the McDonald matter, rather through his irresponsible mismanaging of Chicago’s money or through mendacious efforts to maintain his post as mayor, have displayed convincing evidence that Chicago’s Mayor and former Chief of Staff to President Obama is unfit to hold elected office.

Shortly before Emanuel sacked top cop McCarthy from his $260,000 salary post, the Mayor announced formation of a task force to review all aspects of the Chicago Police Department – a police force with a decades long history of brutality and corruption.

If the announced task force review is not a ploy to provide political cover for Emanuel, why didn’t the Mayor set up a task force earlier this year in the wake of news reports that Chicago paid out $521-million between 2004-2014 due to police misconduct that ranged from false arrests to excessive force? Misconduct by Chicago police cost $50-million in 2014 – a sum that news reports stated totaled more than the combined budgets of Chicago’s mayor office, city treasurer office, city council and its department of human services.

Why didn’t Emanuel establish a review in September 2013 when he made an unprecedented apology for a two-decades long reign of torture and terror by a secret unit inside the CPD that cost the city over $85-million in payouts to victims – some of whom spent years on death row falsely?

Payouts for police misconduct have real-time consequences for cash-strapped Chicago. In 2012 Mayor Emanuel cited lack of funds as justification for his closure of six mental health clinics in low-income areas. In 2013 Emanuel cited lack of funds as justification for his closure of 4 public schools in low-income areas. The closures of those clinics and schools have had adverse impacts on the communities where they were located. Some in Chicago track increases in crime to the closures of the mental health clinics.

The same Mayor Emanuel who cuts needed services for the neediest citizens of his city is the same mayor who presides over the payments of multi-million dollar settlements in police misconduct cases where the offending police keep their jobs. Officer Van Dyke who is now facing murder charges for killing McDonald had over a dozen brutality complaints lodged against him that included a $350,000 payout and the $5-million payout to McDonald’s family.

The cost of payouts in police misconduct cases does not include the tens of millions of dollars Chicago has paid to private law firms to fight those police abuse cases ($63-million from 2002-2012 according to news reports). And that payout figure does not include the continued salaries of the police officers cited in lawsuits for brutality but still kept on the CPD payroll.

The Chicago police killing of Laquan McDonald again dramatizes the duplicity and complicity surrounding unjustified police brutality that extends from patrol officers to the highest reaches of government.

Chicago has an epidemic of civilians murdering each other and a low rate of police solving those murders. Now ousted Chicago top cop McCarthy once declared that the biggest reason for why so few of Chicago’s murders are solved is the “no-snitch” code of silence among residents in too many communities.

Top cops like McCarthy rarely address the Code of Silence operative in police forces across America. That police "snitch code"e is on display in the McDonald shooting case. Over six officers at the scene of McDonald’s shooting followed the Code of Silence when they filed reports falsely stating that McDonald lunged at Van Dyke thus certifying McDonald’s wrongful death as justified -- and when they reportedly chased eye-witnesses from the scene after the shooting, instead of taking down their names as witnesses, as they should have done.

Those officers that filed false reports supporting Van Dyke’s killing violated Illinois law on accomplice liability. According to that law, knowingly assisting or helping someone commit a crime –- before, during or after the crime –- is an offense punishable with imprisonment.

Chicago top prosecutor Alvarez has yet to arrest any of those law-breaking law enforcers who aided and abetted Van Dyke’s [alleged] crime. This inaction by Alvarez evidences duplicity in the form of double standards of justice: one standard for errant cops another standard for errant civilians.

Chicago is definitely in need of ‘regime change’ beginning with the removal of Mayor Emanuel and prosecutor Alvarez.

It is pathetic that the same politicians, presidential candidates, pundits and preachers that loudly demand ‘regime change’ in places like Syria remain silent on crimes against humanity in Chicago.

The End of America's Blue-Collar White

Dead, White, and Blue: The Great Die-Off of America's Blue Collar Whites

by Barbara Ehrenreich  - TomDispatch


The white working class, which usually inspires liberal concern only for its paradoxical, Republican-leaning voting habits, has recently become newsworthy for something else: according to economist Anne Case and Angus Deaton, the winner of the latest Nobel Prize in economics, its members in the 45- to 54-year-old age group are dying at an immoderate rate. While the lifespan of affluent whites continues to lengthen, the lifespan of poor whites has been shrinking. As a result, in just the last four years, the gap between poor white men and wealthier ones has widened by up to four years.

The New York Times summed up the Deaton and Case study with this headline: “Income Gap, Meet the Longevity Gap.”

This was not supposed to happen. For almost a century, the comforting American narrative was that better nutrition and medical care would guarantee longer lives for all. So the great blue-collar die-off has come out of the blue and is, as the Wall Street Journal says, “startling.”

It was especially not supposed to happen to whites who, in relation to people of color, have long had the advantage of higher earnings, better access to health care, safer neighborhoods, and of course freedom from the daily insults and harms inflicted on the darker-skinned. 
Tomgram: Barbara Ehrenreich, America to Working Class Whites: Drop Dead!

[Note for TomDispatch readers: Who knew? Not me, but there’s now something called “Giving Tuesday” -- this very day, no less. It’s meant to be a response to the commercialism of Black Friday and to spur your impulse to put your money where your non-commercial mouth is during a holiday season increasingly devoted to private gift-giving of an extravagant nature. So if you’re in a Giving Tuesday, or Wednesday, or Thursday, or even a Giving December mood, we wanted to remind you not to forget TomDispatch. To keep our analytical heads above water, we rely to a remarkable extent on the generosity of our readers, so check out our donation page where, for a contribution of $100, you can get signed, personalized books from a number of TomDispatch regulars, including Nick Turse and me. Tom]

It’s the American mean season. No question about it. Racism. Xenophobia. Refugee bashing. Seemingly endless blatant police killings (and other kinds of mistreatment) of black citizens. All of it out in the open for anyone to see and denounce -- or cheer. And at rallies nationwide, Republican candidates, especially Donald Trump, are indeed being cheered (and protestors ejected, spit upon, or beaten up) by large, almost totally white crowds for saying whatever comes next on the downward slope to hell. Even on the right, a few commentators and pundits are starting to raise the ugly word “fascism” when it comes to prospective federal registries of Muslim Americans and the like.

We know now that election 2016 is increasingly an open portal into an age-old American dark side of slavery, repression, internment, and know-nothing-ism that couldn’t be grimmer. And behind it all, running like an interstate highway through our history, is a powerful sense of white skin privilege that has traditionally extended even to those who were relatively powerless. Much attention these days is being given to the next outrageous statement, whatever it might be, from Donald Trump, Ben Carson, or Ted Cruz. Far less attention is being paid to those cheering them on in their collective folly or to the media which is, post-Paris, pounding the drums, 24/7-style, when it comes to the threat of Islamic terrorism, which has since 9/11 been one of the lesser dangers in American life. The "news" has become, in essence, a fear-creation machine and so, despite all Donald Trump's attacks on it, a promotion machine for the likes of him.

Of course, in the 2016 campaign season, it couldn’t be clearer that the billionaire version of white privilege is going great guns, but as for working class whites, not so much. As Barbara Ehrenreich, founding editor of the Economic Hardship Reporting Project, notes today, the sense of white privilege has taken a hit in America and that’s not surprising. A recent study she cites suggests that middle-aged whites with no more than a high-school degree now have death rates that, in developed countries, come close only to those last seen among Russian men after the collapse of the Soviet Union. In other words, whole cohorts of white Americans have ever less to cheer about in their lives, which may help explain all those public cheers for Trump et al. Tom

Dead, White, and Blue: The Great Die-Off 

of America's Blue Collar Whites

by Barbara Ehrenreich

There has also been a major racial gap in longevity -- 5.3 years between white and black men and 3.8 years between white and black women -- though, hardly noticed, it has been narrowing for the last two decades. Only whites, however, are now dying off in unexpectedly large numbers in middle age, their excess deaths accounted for by suicide, alcoholism, and drug (usually opiate) addiction.

There are some practical reasons why whites are likely to be more efficient than blacks at killing themselves. For one thing, they are more likely to be gun-owners, and white men favor gunshots as a means of suicide. For another, doctors, undoubtedly acting in part on stereotypes of non-whites as drug addicts, are more likely to prescribe powerful opiate painkillers to whites than to people of color. (I’ve been offered enough oxycodone prescriptions over the years to stock a small illegal business.)

Manual labor -- from waitressing to construction work -- tends to wear the body down quickly, from knees to back and rotator cuffs, and when Tylenol fails, the doctor may opt for an opiate just to get you through the day.

The Wages of Despair


But something more profound is going on here, too. As New York Times columnist Paul Krugman puts it, the “diseases” leading to excess white working class deaths are those of “despair,” and some of the obvious causes are economic. In the last few decades, things have not been going well for working class people of any color.

I grew up in an America where a man with a strong back -- and better yet, a strong union -- could reasonably expect to support a family on his own without a college degree. In 2015, those jobs are long gone, leaving only the kind of work once relegated to women and people of color available in areas like retail, landscaping, and delivery-truck driving. This means that those in the bottom 20% of white income distribution face material circumstances like those long familiar to poor blacks, including erratic employment and crowded, hazardous living spaces.

White privilege was never, however, simply a matter of economic advantage. As the great African-American scholar W.E.B. Du Bois wrote in 1935, “It must be remembered that the white group of laborers, while they received a low wage, were compensated in part by a sort of public and psychological wage.”

Some of the elements of this invisible wage sound almost quaint today, like Du Bois’s assertion that white working class people were “admitted freely with all classes of white people to public functions, public parks, and the best schools.” Today, there are few public spaces that are not open, at least legally speaking, to blacks, while the “best” schools are reserved for the affluent -- mostly white and Asian American along with a sprinkling of other people of color to provide the fairy dust of “diversity.” While whites have lost ground economically, blacks have made gains, at least in the de jure sense. As a result, the “psychological wage” awarded to white people has been shrinking.

For most of American history, government could be counted on to maintain white power and privilege by enforcing slavery and later segregation. When the federal government finally weighed in on the side of desegregation, working class whites were left to defend their own diminishing privilege by moving rightward toward the likes of Alabama Governor (and later presidential candidate) George Wallace and his many white pseudo-populist successors down to Donald Trump.

At the same time, the day-to-day task of upholding white power devolved from the federal government to the state and then local level, specifically to local police forces, which, as we know, have taken it up with such enthusiasm as to become both a national and international scandal. The Guardian, for instance, now keeps a running tally of the number of Americans (mostly black) killed by cops (as of this moment, 1,209 for 2015), while black protest, in the form of the Black Lives Matter movement and a wave of on-campus demonstrations, has largely recaptured the moral high ground formerly occupied by the civil rights movement.

The culture, too, has been inching bit by bit toward racial equality, if not, in some limited areas, black ascendency. If the stock image of the early twentieth century “Negro” was the minstrel, the role of rural simpleton in popular culture has been taken over in this century by the characters in Duck Dynasty and Here Comes Honey Boo Boo. At least in the entertainment world, working class whites are now regularly portrayed as moronic, while blacks are often hyper-articulate, street-smart, and sometimes as wealthy as Kanye West. It’s not easy to maintain the usual sense of white superiority when parts of the media are squeezing laughs from the contrast between savvy blacks and rural white bumpkins, as in the Tina Fey comedy Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt. White, presumably upper-middle class people generally conceive of these characters and plot lines, which, to a child of white working class parents like myself, sting with condescension.

Of course, there was also the election of the first black president. White, native-born Americans began to talk of “taking our country back.” The more affluent ones formed the Tea Party; less affluent ones often contented themselves with affixing Confederate flag decals to their trucks.

On the American Downward Slope


All of this means that the maintenance of white privilege, especially among the least privileged whites, has become more difficult and so, for some, more urgent than ever. Poor whites always had the comfort of knowing that someone was worse off and more despised than they were; racial subjugation was the ground under their feet, the rock they stood upon, even when their own situation was deteriorating.

If the government, especially at the federal level, is no longer as reliable an enforcer of white privilege, then it’s grassroots initiatives by individuals and small groups that are helping to fill the gap -- perpetrating the micro-aggressions that roil college campuses, the racial slurs yelled from pickup trucks, or, at a deadly extreme, the shooting up of a black church renowned for its efforts in the Civil Rights era. Dylann Roof, the Charleston killer who did just that, was a jobless high school dropout and reportedly a heavy user of alcohol and opiates. Even without a death sentence hanging over him, Roof was surely headed toward an early demise.

Acts of racial aggression may provide their white perpetrators with a fleeting sense of triumph, but they also take a special kind of effort. It takes effort, for instance, to target a black runner and swerve over to insult her from your truck; it takes such effort -- and a strong stomach -- to paint a racial slur in excrement on a dormitory bathroom wall. College students may do such things in part out of a sense of economic vulnerability, the knowledge that as soon as school is over their college-debt payments will come due. No matter the effort expended, however, it is especially hard to maintain a feeling of racial superiority while struggling to hold onto one’s own place near the bottom of an undependable economy.

While there is no medical evidence that racism is toxic to those who express it -- after all, generations of wealthy slave owners survived quite nicely -- the combination of downward mobility and racial resentment may be a potent invitation to the kind of despair that leads to suicide in one form or another, whether by gunshots or drugs. You can’t break a glass ceiling if you’re standing on ice.

It’s easy for the liberal intelligentsia to feel righteous in their disgust for lower-class white racism, but the college-educated elite that produces the intelligentsia is in trouble, too, with diminishing prospects and an ever-slipperier slope for the young. Whole professions have fallen on hard times, from college teaching to journalism and the law. One of the worst mistakes this relative elite could make is to try to pump up its own pride by hating on those -- of any color or ethnicity -- who are falling even faster.

Barbara Ehrenreich, a TomDispatch regular and founding editor of the Economic Hardship Reporting Project, is the author of Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America (now in a 10th anniversary edition with a new afterword) and most recently the autobiographical Living with a Wild God: A Nonbeliever's Search for the Truth about Everything.

Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook. Check out the newest Dispatch Book, Nick Turse’s Tomorrow’s Battlefield: U.S. Proxy Wars and Secret Ops in Africa, and Tom Engelhardt's latest book, Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a Single-Superpower World.

Copyright 2015 Barbara Ehrenreich

Attention Captain Obermeyer: Stop These Oil Tankers!

Letter to Captain Kevin Obermeyer, CEO of the Pacific Pilotage Authority, Responsible for all shipping plying the BC Coast

by Ingmar Lee - 10,000 Ton Tanker


Hello Kevin; I have written a short note to your new boss, federal Transport Minister Marc Garneau regarding the ever-growing swarm of USA ATB's and tow barges carrying petroleum products between Alaska and Washington via the entire BC Coast Inside Passage, but I recognize he will need some time to clear out all the Big Oil-lackey corruption that so previously defiled his office, so I am patiently awaiting a reply.

Nevertheless I am hopeful that he will see the importance of getting this dangerous, risky traffic out of the Salish Sea, Johnstone and Hecate Straits, and the "protected" waterways of the Inside Passage, - and make it go out through Juan de Fuca and 20 miles offshore where it belongs with all the other tanker traffic.

I am hopeful that Transport Minister Garneau will see it as reasonable that this dangerous, risky, entirely American business, will upgrade their tanker fleet so that they may safely travel offshore to their Alaska customers and stop threatening these precious waters.

I'm hoping that he will see that this business offers utterly nothing whatsoever of benefit to Canada, - no jobs, - not even a single BC Pilot's job -, no tariff, no duty, no remuneration of any kind, no service at all to a single one of the BC coastal communities it passes, no First Nation's protocol permission, - nothing at all but the dreadful risk of imminent ecological disaster.

I am hoping that he will agree that it is outrageous that even the goods that this traffic is transporting is kept secret, - so secret that even you, the senior person responsible for all shipping on the BC coast has to wait on bended knee for three weeks to get that information, as happened earlier this year.

Actually, - and speaking on behalf of a rapidly increasing number of concerned coastal residents, we are DONE with hoping, we are expecting, - nay DEMANDING - big, immediate changes.

Please do something with your power and responsibility over this coast, to help us help Minister Garneau get this scourge out of the precious, "protected" waters of the BC Inside Passage.

Sincerely, Ingmar

Tuesday, December 01, 2015

Gorilla Radio with Chris Cook, Robert Tercek, Ingmar Lee, Janine Bandcroft Dec. 2, 2015

This Week on GR

by C. L. Cook - Gorilla-Radio.com


Do you ever get the feeling things are disappearing around you? Afraid to turn your attention away for a moment, in case you look back to see the world you knew irreparably altered; gone forever?

You're not mad. Our world has become ever more ephemeral; a lot less "reality" based lately. Whether "the cloud," or other digital technologies emerging to nudge our familiar hardware existence aside, it's all a part of what my first guest calls being, "Vapourized."

And, this is not only happening in media, where the last decade has seen the newspaper, magazine, and music business rocked by new digital habits, but is also moving into the electronics industries.

Listen. Hear.

Robert Tercek is a 21st Century Renaissance man whose nearly 23 year career pre-dates most of what makes up our modern world.

Tercek has created breakthrough entertainment experiences across digital platforms, including: satellite television, game consoles, broadband Internet, interactive teevee, and mobile networks. His expertise includes too working the executive suites; most recently serving as President of Digital Media at OWN: The Oprah Winfrey Network, a Senior Vice President of Digital Media at Sony Pictures, and as Creative Director at MTV. Robert also co-founded five startup ventures, including 7th Level, Inc, and is the author of the book, 'Vaporized: Solid Strategies for Success In A Dematerialized World.'

Robert Tercek in the first half.


And; last month, barely a week into his mandate, Canada's new prime minister, Justin Trudeau ordered Transport Canada coordinate with the Fisheries, Natural Resources, and Environment Ministries to put in place an oil tanker moratorium along BC's north coast. It's a stunning reversal of federal policy; but what does it mean in real terms?

Ingmar Lee is a long-time, BC-based environment defender whose latest effort is '10,000 Ton Tanker' campaign to clear BC's inside passage of dangerous tanker traffic currently flying under the radar. His past efforts to save the forests and watershed ecosystems of Vancouver Island include being among the few who took to the trees in the iconic Cathedral Grove, and remaining for two years while the law, loggers, and
Weyerhaeuser threatened them every day in every way they could. The fact the Grove remains at all is due in great part to he and his "outlaw" cohorts.

Between campaigns like Cathedral Grove, fighting the destruction of the suburban forest to make way for highways in Langford, scaling the BC Legislature flag pole to garner press in opposition to the Enbridge pipeline scheme, and dismantling seismic explosives in the heart of Sandhill Crane nesting grounds, Ingmar earned an Asia Studies degree from the University of Victoria, with a minor in Environmental Studies.

Ingmar Lee and a tanker by another name in the second segment.

And; Victoria Street Newz publisher emeritus and CFUV Radio broadcaster, Janine Bandcroft will join us at the bottom of the hour to bring us news of good doings and otherwise planned for the streets of our town in the coming week; and beyond there too. But first, Robert Tercek and 'Vaporized: Solid Strategies for Success In A Dematerialized World.'

Chris Cook hosts Gorilla Radio, airing live every Wednesday, 1-2pm Pacific Time. In Victoria at 101.9FM, and on the internet at: http://cfuv.uvic.ca.  He also serves as a contributing editor to the web news site, http://www.pacificfreepress.com. Check out the GR blog at: http://gorillaradioblog.blogspot.ca/
G-Radio is dedicated to social justice, the environment, community, and providing a forum for people and issues not covered in the corporate media.

Monday, November 30, 2015

Teaching Unwell Your Children: Bill McRaven's Delusion Direction on National Strategy

McRaven’s delusional, dangerous national security strategy

by Robert Jensen


Bill McRaven is a highly respected retired admiral and popular chancellor of the University of Texas System.

But his remarks at a recent conference on national security left me doubting his intellectual and moral fitness to lead institutions of higher education.

While my lack of deference to a boss who is a decorated veteran may seem uppity, it’s important — especially for professors at highly respected public universities — to contest McRaven’s ahistorical analysis, which offers a deluded account of the past and prescribes a dangerous course for the future of U.S. foreign policy.

This statement of McRaven’s captures his main points:

“In the end, we know the right strategy: It is continuous and direct action on the extremists until they have no more capacity and no more reach. It will be a generational fight. But if we don’t take it on now, then we should not be surprised when the barbarians are at the gate and we’re wondering how they got here.”

Before worrying about whether the extremists in this case, the Islamic State or ISIS, might one day be at our gate, we should reflect on how they got where they already are, in Iraq and Syria. McRaven spent no time in this talk pondering the role of barbaric levels of violence, past and present, used by U.S. military forces and our allies in the region. To assess honestly that history doesn’t justify anyone’s terrorism but simply takes seriously the task of creating the conditions for stability and peace. Anyone wanting to stop brutal attacks on innocents should want to understand the context for the violence.

To avoid that inquiry and claim that we all agree on the “right strategy” is typical of those who spout the conventional wisdom and hope to close off critique. I am a U.S. citizen and one of the professors under McRaven’s supervision — part of the “we” to which he refers, I hope — but I believe his strategy is doomed to fail, as is typically the case with imperial strategies, especially at the end of an empire’s period of dominance.

That assessment — that the United States attempts to undermine the sovereignty of other nations in pursuit of power and profit — no doubt puts me on the opposite side of the political fence from McRaven, a career military officer who long served the U.S. empire. For those opposed to U.S. imperial policies, the right strategy starts with a recognition that this longstanding bipartisan foreign policy of seeking dominance is morally indefensible, and an awareness that — whatever one’s moral evaluation — the United States no longer can project the same power it once did in regions such as the Middle East. For both principled and pragmatic reasons, U.S. leaders should abandon their arrogance and accept a role as part of the international community, seeking real diplomatic solutions rather than compounding past mistakes with more terrorist-generating military action. Instead, McRaven doubles down on imperial violence.

Although U.S. pundits and politicians like to ignore history that is inconvenient, a sensible policy in the Middle East would recognize how often our policy of undermining democratic regimes and propping up dictatorships has indeed created terrorists. We should recall that our main “enemy” in the region, Iran, suffered under the barbarism of the Shah for more than two decades, a direct result of U.S. support for his tyranny. Meanwhile our key “ally” Saudi Arabia is at the center, both intellectually and financially, of the Islamic fundamentalist political ideology that we claim to be fighting. And our wanton destruction of Iraq in 2003 created the traumatic conditions in which ISIS has flourished.

In these cases, a desire to control the flow of oil and oil profits, not humanitarian principles, dictated U.S. policy. That’s what we mean by imperialism. Throughout the post-WWII period in which the United States has dominated global politics, the United States has consistently ignored the legitimate democratic aspirations of the people of the developing world, including the Middle East, in favor of support for regimes that cooperated with U.S. planners’ goals.

ISIS doesn’t represent those legitimate aspirations, of course, but we aren’t likely to formulate a coherent strategy without an awareness of how the people of the Middle East view the United States. The success of U.S. pop culture around the world — the spread of blue jeans and hip hop music — should not be confused with support for U.S. policies. Even after the abject failures of the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq — again, on both principled and pragmatic criteria — U.S. politicians and pundits seem unable to grasp that these failures were tied to the United States’ delusional dreams of dominance. The right strategy is to reverse that course and renounce the unilateralism that folks such as McRaven euphemistically refer to as “leadership.”

I’m neither a military strategist nor a diplomat. I do not pretend to have a foolproof strategy for contributing to stable democratic regimes in the Middle East, and I would doubt the sanity of anyone who at this point claimed to have a magical formula. But a good starting place is an honest accounting: The United States has failed to act in accordance with the moral principles on which we claim our government is based — the rule of law, the inherent dignity of all people, the right of self-determination — and the result has been failed policies that sacrifice people all over the world.

McRaven unintentionally acknowledged past U.S. violations of moral and legal principles during the Q&A following his prepared remarks. Defending U.S. drone strikes, McRaven claimed that they minimize civilian casualties, noting that “in the old days — you know, go back to Vietnam, Korea, World War II, any of those wars — we’d of just leveled the whole place.”

“Leveling the whole place” means indiscriminate bombing, a staple U.S. tactic not only in the wars he mentions but notably in both the 1991 invasion of Iraq and the even more brutal “shock and awe” devastation unleashed in 2003. Such attacks, which kill large numbers of civilians and destroy civilian infrastructure, are indeed war crimes, as McRaven seemed to recognize when he continued, “We don’t do that anymore because we believe in the law of armed conflict, we believe in rules of engagement, we believe in protecting civilians, for that exact reason.”

I’m not sure how McRaven squares that acknowledgment of past U.S. war crimes with his call for the United States to lead “civilized” nations in the struggle against terrorism, a task he said is made more difficult by our opponents willingness to “lie, lie, lie” about us. But whatever McRaven’s explanation, he might consider whether instead of continuing to use our military power to try to shore up our morally bankrupt empire, we should start to tell the truth and take those moral principles seriously before we repeat our mistakes once again.

The UT conference at which McRaven spoke was titled “Great Powers, Failed States, and New Frontiers: National Security Challenges in the 21st Century.” Let’s meet those challenges by admitting that the greatest of the current great powers — the United States of America — is also a failed state of sorts, both abroad where U.S. leaders are responsible for crimes against peace and war crimes, and increasingly at home where our affluent nation ignores the needs of our most vulnerable citizens.

That would be the civilized thing to do and would make possible real leadership.


Robert Jensen is a professor in the School of Journalism at the University of Texas at Austin and board member of the Third Coast Activist Resource Center in Austin. He is the author of Plain Radical: Living, Loving, and Learning to Leave the Planet Gracefully (Counterpoint/Soft Skull, 2015). Jensen’s other books include Arguing for Our Lives: A User’s Guide to Constructive Dialogue (City Lights, 2013); All My Bones Shake: Seeking a Progressive Path to the Prophetic Voice, (Soft Skull Press, 2009); Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity (South End Press, 2007); The Heart of Whiteness: Confronting Race, Racism and White Privilege (City Lights, 2005); Citizens of the Empire: The Struggle to Claim Our Humanity (City Lights, 2004); and Writing Dissent: Taking Radical Ideas from the Margins to the Mainstream (Peter Lang, 2002). Jensen is also co-producer of the documentary film “Abe Osheroff: One Foot in the Grave, the Other Still Dancing” (Media Education Foundation, 2009), which chronicles the life and philosophy of the longtime radical activist.
Jensen can be reached at rjensen@austin.utexas.edu and his articles can be found online at http://robertwjensen.org/. To join an email list to receive articles by Jensen, go to http://www.thirdcoastactivist.org/jensenupdates-info.html. Twitter: @jensenrobertw.

Meeting Tough Torture Standards: Turkey, as American as Apple Pie

Torture And Other Abuses Makes Turkey American As Apple Pie: Mumia aids Turkish inmate

by Linn Washington - This Can't Be Happening


November 30, 2015

 
On the topic of torture the nation of Turkey could teach some gruesome techniques to ISIS, the terrorist movement executing a savage reign across Syria and beyond (reportedly with Turkish government support).

That reality of brutality in Turkey – another problematic American ally – is a fact known all too well by Turgay Ulu, a Turkish journalist who endured a 15-year imprisonment in Turkey, where he was tortured.

During Ulu’s long imprisonment, Turkish authorities justified his conviction on their claim that they had evidence against him –- evidence authorities obtained from two other victims of torture.


Turgay Ulu, Turkish dissident and
political prisoner caught in a
Kafkaesque trap between
Turkey and Germany

“I was tortured with electro shocks,” Ulu said during an interview earlier this year in Berlin, Germany where he is a leading figure in a movement for refugee rights. Ulu’s long imprisonment in Turkey led many, including Amnesty International, to consider him a political prisoner. Ulu was released from a Turkish prison in 2011 and he immediately fled to Europe.

Ulu was initially arrested in 1996 when Turkish authorities accused the then 23-year-old of belonging to two communist organizations. Ulu admits being a “Marxist” activist in Turkey but denies membership in those two organizations. A report Amnesty International released in 2006 examining serious flaws in Turkey’s justice system cited Ulu’s case. That AI report noted it was “highly improbable” that Ulu would be involved in “two ideologically unrelated” armed organizations.

“They tortured me but I still would not talk to the police,” Ulu said.
“When I did not talk to the police they said that was proof that I was a terrorist because I did not talk.”

Ulu received a death sentence for one of the many charges Turkish authorities filed against him. That death sentence was converted to a life sentence in 2002. Twenty-days after Ulu’s release from prison in 2011, Turkish authorities reinstated the life sentence. If Ulu returns to Turkey he faces a return to prison.

The U.S. State Department’s most recent “Human Rights Practices” report noted the existence of “torture” in Turkey despite torture being prohibited by Turkish law. That State Department report, released in June 2015, also stated the Turkish “government or its agents allegedly committed arbitrary or unlawful killings.” Prison conditions in Turkey are “poor” that report stated, noting “brutality” by guards -- including brutality against children.

Turkey made international news recently when it shot down a Russian jet bomber that it alleged had briefly entered Turkish airspace near the border with Syria (Russia, and even some US government sources, say the Russian plane did not enter Turkey, and in fact say the Turkish jet that downed it fired its missile while in Syrian airspace). A few months ago Russia began bombing opponents of Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad. For the past few years Turkey’s president, Recep Erdogan, has actively worked to overthrow Syria’s president.

Some experts contend Turkey downed that jet as retaliation against Russia for Russia’s bombing of anti-Syrian-government rebels supported by Turkey, and even for bombing tanker trucks delivering embargoes ISIS fuel oil for sale and transhippment inside Turkey.

However, experts also see the shoot-down as yet another attempt by Turkey to drag the U.S. deeper into the Syrian conflict. In 2013 Turkey urged a U.S. attack on Syrian government forces as retaliation for a deadly poison gas incident initially blamed by Turkey and the US on al-Assad forces. That incident, evidence later indicated, was actually a covert "false flag" operation by Turkish intelligence operatives devised to provoke a strong American military response against al-Assad. Russia brokered a deal back then that averted a U.S. aerial attack on al-Assad –- a deal that angered Turkey’s Erdogan.

Shortly after Turkey shot down that Russian jet, U.S. President Obama declared publicly that Turkey – a member of NATO – had a right to defend its territory. In 2014 when the U.S. began bombing ISIS targets in Syria, U.S. news coverage at that time stated Obama Administration personnel expressed frustration over Turkey’s failures to do more “militarily” against ISIS. After the shoot-down, Obama announced sending more special ops troops into Syria and increased bombing in Syria.

Some funding for ISIS comes from selling oil on the black market. ISIS gets that oil from Syrian oil fields that ISIS controls. ISIS ships that oil through Turkey. Entities in Turkey, including, allegedly, a son of President Erdogan, purchase some of that ISIS oil, according to reliable reports.

ISIS also receives funding from entities and individuals in Saudi Arabia, another American ally and another nation working to overthrow Syria’s al-Assad. That 2015 U.S. State Department human rights report also criticized authorities in Saudi Arabia for jailing “non-violent critics” and clamping down on “free and open media.”

The U.S. government justifies ‘regime change’ in Syria based on al-Assad’s violations of democratic rights – rights routinely violated by American allies Turkey and Saudi Arabia according to the U.S. State Department and other human rights monitors like Amnesty International.

The Kafkaesque arrest and long imprisonment of Turgay Ulu is now compounded by actions of another American ally, Germany.

German courts have denied Ulu’s request for asylum. German courts adopted the posture of Turkish authorities that Ulu is a terrorist and is thus not a politically persecuted person entitled to asylum in Germany.

“Currently, I can’t get asylum in Germany but t [they Germans] won’t deport me because they know I would be tortured in Turkey,” a perplexed Ulu said.

Charges lodged against Ulu by Turkish authorities included the claim that he physically attempted to help a terror group leader escape from a hospital. Authorities said three policemen saw Ulu participate in that failed escape that occurred at a time when Ulu was virtually blind from eye problems. Ulu said his impaired vision made it impossible for him to participate in such a daring escape attempt.

During a court proceeding years after his arrest two of those three policemen stated Ulu was not the person they observed. Turkish authorities refused to produce the third policeman in court yet constantly cited that policeman’s claims against Ulu to continue Ulu’s incarceration. During another court proceeding, a Turkish prosecutor admitted that evidence “does not exist” against Ulu on any of the charges against him, but Turkish courts nonetheless continued his imprisonment.

Ulu said he maintained his sanity inside Turkish prisons by reading the works of American political prisoner – Mumia Abu-Jamal. Some newspapers in Turkey publish Abu-Jamal’s writings. Abu-Jamal remains in a Pennsylvania prison serving a life sentence since his death penalty was overturned. Amnesty International states that Abu-Jamal’s conviction for killing a Philadelphia policeman rests on a fundamentally unfair trial and appeals process.

“I tried to be disciplined in prison so I would not go crazy,” Ulu said. “I read books. I wrote books. I kept by sanity the same way Mumia has kept his sanity.”

Sunday, November 29, 2015

Israel Celebrates International Solidarity with Palestine Day with Kindergarten Raid

Dozens Injured in Clashes Across West Bank, Kindergarten Raided

by IMEMC News and Agencies


November 29, 2015

At least 29 kidnapped overnight.

Dozens of Palestinians were injured Sunday, during clashes with Israeli forces across the occupied West Bank, while at least 29 Palestinians were kidnapped by Israeli forces, overnight.

Dozens were injured by rubber-coated metal bullets at the northern entrance of al-Bireh, according to WAFA Palestinian News & Info Agency.

Following a peaceful rally called for by the Fateh movement and national factions, which took off from the center of Ramallah to commemorate the International Day of Solidarity with Palestinians, clashes broke out between protestors and Israeli forces.

The Secretary of Fateh in Ramallah and al-Bireh, Mwaffaq Suhwahil, asserted that the event is a clear message to Israel that 'Fateh’ and the Palestinian people will continue to fight against the occupation until the establishment of independent state of Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital.'

Meanwhile, Israeli forces raided a kindergarten in Beit Ummar, to the south of Hebron, according to a local official.

Spokesperson of the anti settlement popular committee in Beit Ummar, Mohammed Awad, said that armed Israeli soldiers raided the kindergarten at dawn, after breaking down its main front door and windows.

He said that forces further destroyed the furniture, computers, and children’s belongings, and ripped up the tiles from one of the classrooms before withdrawing from the area.

The Israeli army has previously carried out numerous such attacks, with deliberate and reckless use of force, against schools and educational facilities across the West Bank, in a serious violation of international law and students’ right to pursue education in a safe environment.

To be noted, Defense for Children International (DCI) described the year 2014 as the most difficult year for Palestinian children, due to ongoing Israeli violations, mainly the 2014 summer aggression on the Gaza Strip.

See video: Gaza City's Devastated Al-Shuja'eyya Suburb

The Global Coalition to protect Education from Attack also said, “During situations of armed conflict, attacks on education may violate international humanitarian and criminal law and constitute war crimes (or crimes against humanity during war or peacetime) as set out in the 1907 Hague Regulations, the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and customary international humanitarian law.”

Mohammad Awad, the coordinator of the popular committee against settlements and the Apartheid Wall in Beit Ummar, said that clashes also broke out in the al-Thaher area, near the illegal settlement of Karmei Tzur, where Israeli soldiers fired teargas canisters in the direction of Palestinian houses, resulting in suffocation cases.

At least five Palestinian students were injured by live fire, while dozens others suffocated due to teargas inhalation during renewed clashes with Israeli troops at the campus of Palestine Technical University (Kadoorie) in Tulkarem, on Sunday, according to medical sources.

The Palestinian Red Crescent (PRC) said that five students were injured by live ammunition and dozens others suffocated due to inhaling teargas, as Israeli forces raided the university’s campus. Other students were also injured by rubber-coated rounds, and were treated at the scene.

PRC reported that three students lost consciousness due to excessive tear gas inhalation, which necessitated their transfer to hospital for treatment.

Since the beginning of unrest in October 2015, the university has been a scene of renewing clashes between Israeli troops and Palestinians students, which have resulted in numerous injury cases and affected daily classes.

Israeli forces, overnight, abducted at least 29 Palestinians, including minors, from across various West Bank districts, according to the Palestinian Prisoner’s Society (PPS).

PPS said that at least 15 Palestinians were detained from the Hebron area, 11 of whom were identified as Turkey al-A’lami, 37, Mohammed Abu Jhaisheh, 21, Mohammed Swaiti, Mo’ath Masalmeh, Mohammed Masharqa, Ayman and Mohammed Masharqa, Khalil Dasseh, 23, 26-year-old Ashraf and Amjad, 26, al-Qadi, in addition to Mohammed, 19, and Mohannad,17, Awad. The identity of the remaining four remains unknown until the moment.

In al-Bireh and Ramallah, forces kidnapped five Palestinians, including a 52-year-old mother of a Palestinian detainee held in Israeli jails, as she was on her way to visit her imprisoned son.

The five were identified as Nada Shokeh, 52, and Fadi Atallah, 17, in addition to three brothers identified as Ahmad, 19, Mahmoud, 21, and Mohannad, 17, Salahat.

Forces further took two more Palestinians from the Nablus area. They were identified as Mohammed Khader, and Ja’afar Ramadan.

In Tulkarem, army soldiers detained minor Ismail I’tair from the village of Faro’un.

In the meantime, forces served a number of Palestinian youths from Qabatiya, to the south of Jenin, with notices ordering them to appear before Israeli intelligence, at Salem military camp, in Jenin.

PPS said that, during the past two days, Israeli forces have detained at least 34 Palestinians, including a young women identified as Maryam Sawafteh, 21, from Tubas.

Saturday, November 28, 2015

Bank Crime Pays (Big Time!): Life Under the Mafiocracy

Bank Crimes Pay: Under the Thumb of the Global Financial Mafiocracy

by Andrew Gavin Marshall - Dissident Voice


November 27th, 2015

November 13, the United Kingdom’s Serious Fraud Office (SFO) announced it was charging 10 individual bankers, working for two separate banks, Deutsche Bank and Barclays, with fraud over their rigging of the Euribor rates. The latest announcement shines the spotlight once again on the scandals and criminal behavior that have come to define the world of global banking.

To date, only a handful of the world’s largest banks have been repeatedly investigated, charged, fined or settled in relation to a succession of large financial scams, starting with mortgage fraud and the Libor scandal in 2012, the Euribor scandal and the Forex (foreign exchange) rate rigging. At the heart of these scandals, which involve the manipulation of interest rates on trillions of dollars in transactions, lie a handful of banks that collectively form a cartel in control of global financial markets – and the source of worldwide economic and financial crises.

Banks such as HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, Barclays, Bank of America, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank, Royal Bank of Scotland and UBS anchor the global financial power we have come to recognize as fraud. The two, after all, are not mutually exclusive. In more explicit terms, this cartel of banks functions as a type of global financial Mafia, manipulating markets and defrauding investors, consumers and countries while demanding their pound of flesh in the form of interest payments. The banks force nations to impose austerity measures and structural reforms under the threat of cutting off funding; meanwhile they launder drug money for other cartels and organized crime syndicates.

Call them the global Mafiocracy


In May, six major global banks were fined nearly $6 billion for manipulation of the foreign exchange market, which handles over $5 trillion in daily transactions. Four of the six banks pleaded guilty to charges of “conspiring to manipulate the price of U.S. dollars and euros exchanged.”

Those banks were Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Barclays and Royal Bank of Scotland, while two additional banks, UBS and Bank of America, were fined but did not plead guilty to the specific charges. Forex traders at Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase and other banks conspired to manipulate currency prices through chat room groups they established, where they arrogantly used names like “The Mafia” and “The Cartel.”

The FBI said the investigations and charges against the big banks revealed criminal behavior “on a massive scale.” The British bank Barclays paid the largest individual fine at around $2.3 billion. But as one trader at the bank wrote in a chat room conversation back in 2010, “If you aint cheating, you aint trying.” The total fines, while numerically large, were but a small fraction of the overall market capitalization of each bank – though the fine on Barclays amounted to some 3.4% of the bank’s market capitalization, the highest percentage by far among the group.

Despite the criminal conspiracy charges covering the years 2007 through 2013, the banks and their top officials continue to lay the blame squarely at the feet of individual traders. Axel Weber, the former president of the German Bundesbank (the central bank of Germany), who is now chairman of Switzerland’s largest bank, UBS, commented that “the conduct of a small number of employees was unacceptable and we have taken appropriate disciplinary actions.”

Looking at the larger scale of bank fines and fraud in the roughly eight years since the global financial crisis, the numbers increase substantially. In addition to a 2012 settlement for mortgage-related fraud in the U.S. housing market, which amounted to some $25 billion, several large banks paid individual fines related to mortgage and foreclosure fraud – including a $16 billion fine for Bank of America, and $13 billion for JPMorgan Chase. Added to these are fines related to the rigging of the Libor rate (the interest rate at which banks lend to each other) and the Forex rigging, as well as money laundering, violating sanctions, manipulating the price of gold, manipulating the U.S. electricity market and assisting tax evasion, among other crimes.

According to a research paper published in June, the total cost of litigation (fines, penalties, settlements, etc.) paid by 16 major global banks since 2010 has reached more than $300 billion. Bank of America paid the most, amounting to more than $66 billion, followed by JPMorgan Chase, Lloyds, Citigroup, Barclays, RBS, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, BNP Paribas, Santander, Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse, UBS, National Australia Bank, Standard Chartered and Société Générale.

Virtually all of these banks also appear on a list of data, compiled through 2007, revealing them to be among the most interconnected and powerful financial institutions in the world. This core group of corporations forms part of a network of 147 financial institutions that Swiss scientists refer to as the “super-entity,” which, through their various shareholdings, collectively control and own each other and roughly 40% of the world’s 43,000 largest transnational corporations.

In other words, the big banks – along with large insurance companies and asset management firms – do not simply act as a cartel in terms of engaging in criminal activities, but they form a functionally interdependent network of global financial and corporate control. Further, the banks work together in various industry associations and lobbying groups where they officially represent their collective interests.

The largest European banks and financial institutions are represented by the European Financial Services Round Table (EFR), whose membership consists of the CEOs or Chairmen of roughly 25 of the top financial institutions on the continent, including Deutsche Bank, AXA, HSBC, Allianz, RBS, ING, Barclays, BNP Paribas, UBS, and Credit Suisse, among others.

In the United States, the Financial Services Forum (FSF) represents the largest American along with some European banks and financial institutions. The Forum’s membership consists of less than 20 executives, including the CEOs or Chairmen of such firms as Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, UBS, HSBC, AIG, Bank of New York Mellon, State Street Corporation, Deutsche Bank and Wells Fargo, among others.

In addition to these various groups and associations, many of the same large banks and their top executives also serve as members, leaders or participants in much more secretive groups and forums – for example, the International Monetary Conference (IMC), a yearly meeting of hundreds of the world’s top bankers hosted by the American Bankers Association, which invites selected politicians, central bankers and finance ministers to attend their off-the-record discussions. In addition, there is the Institut International d’Etudes Bancaires (International Institute of Banking Studies), or IIEB, which brings together the top officials from dozens of Europe’s major financial institutions for discussions with central bankers, presidents and prime ministers in “closed sessions” with virtually no coverage in the media.

These financial institutions are major owners of government debt, which gives them even greater leverage over the policies and priorities of governments. Exercising this power, they typically demand the same thing: austerity measures and “structural reforms” designed to advance a neoliberal market economy that ultimately benefits those same banks and corporations. The banks in turn create the very crises that require governments to bail them out, racking up large debts that banks turn into further crises, pressuring economic reforms in return for further loans. The cycle of crisis and control continues, and all the while, the big banks and financial institutions engage in criminal conspiracies, fraud, manipulation and money-laundering on a massive scale, including acting as the financial services arm of the world’s largest drug cartels and terrorists organizations.

Welcome to the world governed by the global financial Mafiocracy – because if you’re not concerned, you’re not paying attention.

Andrew Gavin Marshall is an independent researcher and writer based in Montreal, Canada, writing on a number of social, political, economic, and historical issues. He is co-editor of the book, The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century.
Read other articles by Andrew Gavin, or visit Andrew Gavin's website.

International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People: Past Time the World Protected Acts for Palestine

EU Official Martina Anderson Calls for International Protection of Palestinians

by IMEMC News and Agencies 


November 28, 2015

On the occasion of the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, a European Union official, Friday, called for placing Palestine and the Palestinian people under international protection.

photo: Al Ray Palestinian Media Agency
 
“Ahead of International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian people I would like to reiterate my call to place Palestine and its people under international protection, ” said Chair of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with Palestine, MEP Martina Anderson.

“The occupiers will not protect the occupied,” stressed the EU official, according to WAFA.


Commenting on the latest Israeli spree of killings perpetrated against Palestinians, Anderson stated:

“Today Palestinians face as much as hardships as they have throughout their history. The escalation of violence in the region following the Israeli decision to restrict access to Jerusalem holy city on a sectarian basis has resulted in almost one hundred Palestinians losing their lives with thousands more being wounded by police and army’s brutality and indiscriminate settlers’ attacks.”

Anderson also called upon states all over the world to recognize Palestine, and called for the Israeli blockade on Gaza to be lifted, Israeli settler activity and terror, as well as the collective punishment of the Palestinian people and occupation to be ended.

“The collective punishment of Palestinian youths must end and in order to secure peace and stability in the region the occupation must end,” said the EU official.

She also called for the release of Palestinian political prisoners held in Israeli detention centers.

“Genuine progress towards a peaceful two-state solution cannot be made in a climate of fear and intimidation,” she concluded.

The United Nations observes the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People on November 29 each year, a very meaningful and significant day to the Palestinian people.

On that day in 1947, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 181, which provided for the establishment of an “Arab State” and a “Jewish state” with Jerusalem as a corpus separatum under a special international regime.

According to the United Nations Information System on the Question of Palestine (UNISPAL) website, the Solidarity Day is meant to provide an opportunity for the international community to “focus its attention on the fact that the question of Palestine is still unresolved and that the Palestinian people is yet to attain their inalienable rights as defined by the GA, namely the right to self-determination without external influence, the right to national independence and sovereignty and the right to return to their homes and property from which they had been displaced.”

This day features worldwide events, such as the issuance of special messages of solidarity with the Palestinian people, the organization of meetings and photo exhibitions and the screenings of films.

In its resolution A/68/12 of 26 November 2013, the General Assembly decided to proclaim 2014 the International Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People (IYSPP).

“The continuation of the Israeli occupation and its persistence with colonial settlement activities, cruel arrests and detention of civilians, affirm Israel's arrogance and intransigence, its violations of international law, its rejection of peace and its adherence instead to the ideology of colonial expansion, subjugation and greed,” Anderson was also quoted in a statement on the official website of Sinn Fein.

“Ending the injustice inflicted on the people of Palestine is a moral and humanitarian responsibility. The international community should compel Israel, the occupying power, to abide by international law to put an end to its violations and its illegal, aggressive and destructive practices.”

She adds, “The status quo under occupation and the Israeli iron fist is unsustainable as it keeps the region in a constant spiral of violence, bloodshed and conflict.

“The Palestine people have the right to enjoy freedom, dignity, sovereignty and independence in their Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital.”

Friday, November 27, 2015

Word Games and False Pretense Frame Syria Bombing "Debate"


Word Games: False Premises Fuel Bogus Debate on Bombing Syria 

by Chris Floyd  - Empire Burlesque


27 November 2015

The debate over bombing ISIS in Syria rests on what one can only assume is a deliberate misapprehension. The imputation of this "debate" is that we "must do something" to quell and defeat ISIS; and the essential, imperative thing we must do to accomplish this vital goal is to bomb Syria. But of course the UK is already bombing ISIS. It bombs ISIS nearly every day -- in the group's heartland, Iraq. It has flown "thousands of missions" against ISIS, dropped tons of bombs, killed many people. Has this quelled or defeated ISIS, or curtailed its reach? Obviously not.

The origins, core strength and power centers of ISIS are all in Iraq. Syria, for all its inherent horrors, is a sideshow, a minor front for ISIS. As Patrick Cockburn notes, in Syria ISIS holds large tracts of desert territory but only one substantial city; in Iraq, it controls several major cities, rich oil fields, and strategic routes that make it a constant threat to the capital itself. The UK has been bombing ISIS in this core for some time: "thousands of missions," Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said this summer. Obviously, these continual bombings in the group's core have not affected its ability to wage war in the region or strike elsewhere in Europe. Why would bombing its hinterland in Syria have any effect?

The rush to bomb Syria is a cynical ploy to exploit the murderous tragedy in Paris for the benefit of the Washington-led agenda of regime change in Damascus. Bombing ISIS can help clear the way for the other militant Islamist rebels (including al Qaeda affiliates, now miraculously transformed into "moderates") whom the West and its Saudi allies favor.

What is wanted is an acquiescent regime in Damascus, unaligned with Iran and Russia, and controlled by Sunnis. The West wants the former, the Saudis want the latter. It's part of their "long war" to finally vanquish Shiite Islam. This was the explicit statement of Prince Bandar, the long-time Saudi ambassador to the US (who grew so close to one of America's ruling family that he was affectionately known as "Bandar Bush") and later head of Saudi intelligence. Here is what he told Richard Dearlove, the then-head of the UK's intelligence agency, MI6:

"The time is not far off in the Middle East, Richard, when it will be literally 'God help the Shia'. More than a billion Sunnis have simply had enough of them."

This "chilling" conversation took place before 9/11, Dearlove notes.

The strident call to "bomb Syria" -- without any genuine strategic plan or aim behind it -- thus dovetails with geopolitical and theopolitical agendas that have absolutely nothing to do with the "safety and security of the British people" or "defeating terrorism" or "securing the freedom of the Syrian people to determine their own destiny" or "bringing peace and stability to the strife-torn Middle East." These are demonstrably NOT the overriding strategic concerns of Western leaders and their Middle Eastern allies. (Nor of the Russians, who are intervening in Syria to counter the West's geopolitical moves there and advance their own.)

Thus the "debate" over bombing Syria -- like all the other earnest public broils over government policy in the "War on Terror" -- is based on false premises. There are indeed an array of contentious factors in play, but these have to do with more mundane concerns: the struggle over control of the production and distribution of oil, gas and other natural and economic resources; attempts by various national governments and corporate interests to extend influence and exercise dominance over strategically important regions and markets; and the preservation and extension of power structures in various national governments. (The latter includes the vast and ever-expanding military-security-war profiteering complexes that now play such a commanding role in the politics and economies of major nations.) These are the enduring priorities of our power players, to be pursued by any means available.

Concerns about the safety, security and freedom of ordinary people play little or no role in the actual decisions of the policymakers involved -- unless those concerns can be usefully exploited to advance elite agendas. Abject fear -- or dulled, distracted indifference: these are the preferred states for public opinion. Any attempts at actual engagement, at genuine debate are swiftly marginalized, mocked and crippled, with the policing done by the establishment media and members of the dissenters' own party, eager to prove their loyalty to the greater power structure. This is what we are seeing in the UK right now, as Labour rips its own leader to shreds over his resistance to more war, fear, terror and exploitation.

So there is little point in earnest disquisitions over whether the bellicose policies being proposed will be effective in "confronting the scourge of terrorism." We know they won't. But that is not their intention.

Shootdown: Why NATO Would Use Turkey to Provoke Russia

NATO Attack on Russian Air Forces: Reasons and Consequences

by Christopher Black - NEO


The NATO attack on a Russian military jet on Tuesday November 24, using the Turkish air force to do its dirty work, is a dangerous act of war against Russia with very dangerous consequences for the world. The murder of one of the pilots, shot by ISIS terrorists while parachuting to the ground, is a war crime for which Turkey and the NATO countries are collectively responsible.

President Putin has rightly called it a stab in the back by Turkey, a betrayal that cannot be forgiven and will forever be remembered.

If anyone ever doubted that the joint criminal enterprise called NATO was supporting and directing the terrorist groups in Syria, the same groups, they claim, that conducted the attacks in Paris and on the Russian airliner over Sinai, they now have the proof. Can there be any doubt that this attack on Russian forces in Syria is intended to disrupt the Russian-Syrian campaign against those NATO supported terrorist groups? Can there be any doubt that if they are willing to shoot down one Russian aircraft they are willing to shoot down more? Can there be any doubt that this attack is intended to push Russia to react with counter force against Turkey resulting in a claim by NATO that it is under attack, resulting in a general war?

This attack is intended to both test Russian resolve in Syria and to provoke it into a reaction that will be used to justify further military actions by the Turkish and US military forces against the Russian forces. It was preceded by hysterical claims by NATO leaders that Russia and the Syrian government are the reasons ISIS exists and calling for action against both. It was preceded by the sudden appearance of the refugee crisis in Europe and then the attacks in Sinai and Paris and the constant fear raising alerts in Belgium, Germany, Britain and the United States.

Just days before this attack, Russia was subjected to the sabotage of the electric power lines connecting Crimea with the Ukraine electricity grid that the Kiev regime has not attempted to repair, cutting off power to Crimea at the same time as shelling of the Donbass republics increased, accompanied by a build up of Kiev forces in the region. Who would be surprised if Crimea also found itself subject to further sabotage and then shelling by the Kiev forces pushing Russia on this front as well, to react to defend its territory, again testing its resolve?

The only reaction from the NATO countries on Tuesday was to call an emergency meeting and it has to be asked if they knew this attack was coming since none of the NATO leaders has so far condemned Turkey’s action and it is logical to assume that the order for the attack came from Washington, desperate to save its terrorist proxy forces in Syria from being annihilated by the joint Syrian-Russian campaign against ISIS. No doubt the order was to seek a target of opportunity, bring it down, and see what happens, what Russia will do in response.

Whatever Russia does it will be serious but necessarily measured in order to avoid a general war in the Middle East. But act it will.

The New York Times, the journal that speaks for the American ruling class and intelligence services on the same day as the shoot down ran an opinion piece by their former ambassador to the United Nations, the aggressive John Bolton, who clearly defined the American strategy in Syria and Iraq. He wrote:

“Today’s reality is that Iraq and Syria as we have known them are gone. The Islamic State has carved out a new entity from the post-Ottoman Empire settlement, mobilizing Sunni opposition to the regime of President Bashar al-Assad and the Iran-dominated government of Iraq. Also emerging, after years of effort, is a de facto independent Kurdistan. If, in this context, defeating the Islamic State means restoring to power Mr. Assad in Syria and Iran’s puppets in Iraq, that outcome is neither feasible nor desirable. Rather than striving to recreate the post-World War I map, Washington should recognize the new geopolitics. The best alternative to the Islamic State in northeastern Syria and western Iraq is a new, independent Sunni state.”

And,

“Creating an American-led anti-Islamic State alliance instead of Moscow’s proposed coalition will require considerable diplomatic and political effort. American ground combat forces will have to be deployed to provide cohesion and leadership. But this would be necessary to defeat the Islamic State even if the objective were simply to recreate the status quo ante.”

And,

“This Sunni state proposal differs sharply from the vision of the Russian-Iranian axis and its proxies (Hezbollah, Mr. Assad and Tehran-backed Baghdad). Their aim of restoring Iraqi and Syrian governments to their former borders is a goal fundamentally contrary to American, Israeli and friendly Arab state interests. Notions, therefore, of an American-Russian coalition against the Islamic State are as undesirable as they are glib.

In Syria, Moscow wants to dominate the regime (with or without Mr. Assad) and safeguard Russia’s Tartus naval base and its new Latakia air base. Tehran wants a continuing Alawite supremacy, with full protection for Hezbollah in Lebanon and Syria.

As for Iraq, Russia and Iran want the Sunni territories returned to Baghdad’s control, reinforcing Iran’s regional influence. They may wish for the same in Kurdistan, but they lack the capability there. Sunnis today support the Islamic State for many of the same reasons they once supported Al Qaeda in Iraq — as a bulwark against being ruled by Tehran via Baghdad. Telling these Sunni people that their reward for rising against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq will be to put them back in thrall to Mr. Assad and his ilk, or to Shiite-dominated Baghdad, will simply intensify their support for the jihadists. Why would they switch sides? This is why, after destroying the Islamic State, America should pursue the far-reaching goal of creating a new Sunni state. Though difficult in the near term, over time this is more conducive to regional order and stability.”

So there we have it, the plan by Washington and its dependencies to continue their aggression against Syria and Iraq in order to create a new state serving its interests and wrecking the strategic interests of Russia and Iran. This is a statement of intent to carry out a war of aggression against sovereign states, members of the United Nations, in complete defiance of and contempt for the United Nations Charter, and all international law and humanity. It matters not to them how many innocents are slaughtered in the process. They know no morality, have no conscience.

The shooting down of the Russian jet, the murder of its officers is in the logic of this madness. And how long will it be before a French fighter jet shoots down a Russian jet as well, claiming it was too close to them and further escalating the situation?

Can Russia trust the French after the Mistral Affair, the refusal by the French, to deliver two naval ships bought and paid for by Russia in order to sabotage Russian strategic interests, and after they learned that the French aircraft carrier was already on its way to the region before the Paris attack; giving credence to the strong possibility that the attack in Paris, and the bombing of the Russian airliner, were Gladio style NATO operations with the blame shifted to their assets in ISIS? No one in NATO can be trusted except to commit every crime and to cut every thread that
weaves civilization together.

The world watches and waits for the next phase of this war, a war which is developing with breathtaking rapidity into a world war in which all of us will suffer. Hopes for peace in our time have vanished along with the humanity required to achieve it. The anti-NATO, anti-war movement has not developed as we hoped and those who are engaged in the effort now risk arrest and worse as accomplices of ‘terrorism.” All I can say is prepare yourselves as best you can for what is coming, and try to resist, try to speak out, and try to hold the flame of civilization aloft as long as you can.

Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto, he is a member of the Law Society of Upper Canada and he is known for a number of high-profile cases involving human rights and war crimes, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.