Home country: Canada
Member since: Sat Jul 9, 2005, 11:46 PM
Number of posts: 11,543
Home country: Canada
Member since: Sat Jul 9, 2005, 11:46 PM
Number of posts: 11,543
- 2014 (302)
- 2013 (315)
- 2012 (101)
- 2011 (8)
- December (8)
- Older Archives
West scrambles to cover up Syria false flag revelations as Pulitzer Prize-winner & Syria's Electronic Army expose all.
By Tony Cartalucci
December 11, 2013 "Information Clearing House - Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh, who had warned as early as 2007 of US-Israeli-Saudi plans to use Al Qaeda as proxies to overthrow the Syrian government, has published another groundbreaking report titled, "Whose Sarin?" In it, Hersh states (emphasis added):
Barack Obama did not tell the whole story this autumn when he tried to make the case that Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack near Damascus on 21 August. In some instances, he omitted important intelligence, and in others he presented assumptions as facts. Most significant, he failed to acknowledge something known to the US intelligence community: that the Syrian army is not the only party in the country’s civil war with access to sarin, the nerve agent that a UN study concluded – without assessing responsibility – had been used in the rocket attack. In the months before the attack, the American intelligence agencies produced a series of highly classified reports, culminating in a formal Operations Order – a planning document that precedes a ground invasion – citing evidence that the al-Nusra Front, a jihadi group affiliated with al-Qaida, had mastered the mechanics of creating sarin and was capable of manufacturing it in quantity. When the attack occurred al-Nusra should have been a suspect, but the administration cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad.
The lengthy report goes on in detail, covering the manner in which Western leaders intentionally manipulated or even outright fabricated intelligence to justify military intervention in Syria - eerily similar to the lies told to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq, and the escalation of the war in Vietnam after the Gulf of Tonkin incident.
Thank God cooler heads prevailed!
Posted by polly7 | Wed Dec 11, 2013, 07:55 PM (1 replies)
Perfluorotributylamine is an unregulated, long-living industrial chemical that breaks all records for potential climate impacts.
—By Suzanne Goldenberg | Wed Dec. 11, 2013 3:00 AM GMT
A new greenhouse gas that is 7,000 times more powerful than carbon dioxide at warming the Earth has been discovered by researchers in Toronto.
PFTBA has been in use since the mid-20th century for various applications in electrical equipment, such as transistors and capacitors. The researchers said it was unclear how widespread its use was today.
It belongs to an entire class of chemicals used for industrial applications whose effects on the atmosphere remain unknown.
"PFTBA is just one example of an industrial chemical that is produced but there are no policies that control its production, use or emission," Hong said. "It is not being regulated by any type of climate policy."
Full article: http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/12/discovered-greenhouse-gas-7000-powerful-carbon-dioxide
I don't know much about any of this, but it appears, more every day ..... we're *'d.
Posted by polly7 | Wed Dec 11, 2013, 09:16 AM (0 replies)
Beware of strangers bearing gifts. The “gift” is the ongoing, frantic canonization of Nelson Mandela. The “strangers” are the 0.0001 percent, that fraction of the global elite that’s really in control (media naturally included).
Among the cataracts of emotional tributes and the crass marketization of the icon, there’s barely a peep in Western corporate media about Mandela’s firm refusal to ditch armed struggle against apartheid (if he had done so, he would not have been jailed for 27 years); his gratitude towards Fidel Castro’s Cuba – which always supported the people of Angola, Namibia and South Africa fighting apartheid; and his perennial support for the liberation struggle in Palestine.
The same applied to a then-Republican Congressman from Wyoming who later would turn into a Darth Vader replicant, Dick Cheney. As for Israel, it even offered one of its nuclear weapons to the Afrikaners in Pretoria – presumably to wipe assorted African commies off the map.
In his notorious 1990 visit to the US, now as a free man, Mandela duly praised Fidel, PLO chairman Yasser Arafat and Col. Gaddafi as his “comrades in arms”: “There is no reason whatsoever why we should have any hesitation about hailing their commitment to human rights.” Washington/Wall Street was livid.
Full article: http://dissidentvoice.org/2013/12/the-hijacking-of-mandelas-legacy/
Posted by polly7 | Wed Dec 11, 2013, 09:11 AM (0 replies)
Posted by polly7 | Tue Dec 10, 2013, 08:37 AM (2 replies)
Seven Stories / By Danny Schechter
The issue of who and what is a terrorist remains a hotly contested one. Nelson Mandela’s success and emergence as a global icon has not changed that.
What’s the difference between a liberation movement and a band of terrorists? The simple answer . . . is point of view. Consider the African National Congress (ANC). During the long struggle against apartheid, what the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) saw as a liberation movement the racist minority government of South Africa labeled as terrorists. Ask one person in Washington and another in Riyadh today about Al Qaeda and you’re bound to get the same diversity of opinion. —South African Institute of International Relations, 2004
Nelson Mandela was not always loved; for years, many right-wingers and defenders of apartheid defamed and detested him as a terrorist, and several politicians went on record expressing such views:
Full article: http://www.alternet.org/activism/how-right-wingers-attempted-defame-nelson-mandela-terrorist?paging=off¤t_page=1#bookmark
Posted by polly7 | Mon Dec 9, 2013, 09:54 AM (1 replies)
By Sasha Polakow-Suransky
Monday, December 09, 2013
Editor’s note: An excerpt from Sasha Polakow-Suransky’s book “The Unspoken Alliance: Israel’s Secret Relationship with Apartheid South Africa” (2010).
On April 9, 1976, South African prime minister Balthazar Johannes Vorster arrived at the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem with full diplomatic entourage in tow. After passing solemnly through the corridors commemorating those gassed in Auschwitz and Dachau, he entered the dimly lit Hall of Remembrance, where a memorial flame burned alongside a crypt filled with the ashes of Holocaust victims. Vorster bowed his head as a South African minister read a psalm in Afrikaans, the haunting melody of the Jewish prayer for the dead filling the room. He then kneeled and laid a wreath, containing the colors of the South African flag, in memory of Hitler’s victims. Cameras snapped, dignitaries applauded, and Israeli officials quickly ferried the prime minister away to his next destination. Back in Johannesburg, the opposition journalist Benjamin Pogrund was sickened as he watched the spectacle on television. Thousands of South African Jews shared Pogrund’s disgust; they knew all too well that Vorster had another, darker past.
Prior to 1967, Israel was a celebrated cause of the left. The nascent Jewish state, since its creation amid the ashes of Auschwitz, was widely recognized as a triumph for justice and human rights. Leftists across the world, with the notable exception of those in Muslim nations, identified with the socialist pioneering spirit of the new nation. Africans welcomed Israeli development aid and voted in Israel’s favor at the United Nations. Europeans for the most part supported the Jewish state, often out of socialist idealism or sheer guilt. Even Britain, which fought Jewish guerrilla organizations until the eve of Israel’s independence in 1948, recognized the state of Israel in January 1949. Although the South African Jewish community became the largest per capita financial contributor to Israel after 1948, relations between the two countries’ governments were cordial but chilly for much of the 1950s.
Things began to change with Israel’s stunning victory over its Arab neighbors in the Six-Day War of 1967, which tripled the size of the Jewish state in less than a week. The post-1967 military occupation of Egyptian, Jordanian, and Syrian territory and the settlement project that soon followed planted hundreds of thousands of Jews on hilltops and in urban centers throughout the newly conquered West Bank and Gaza Strip, saddling Israel with the stigma of occupation and forever tarring it with the colonialist brush.
Indeed, much of Israel’s top brass and Likud Party leadership felt an affinity with South Africa’s white government, and unlike Peres and Rabin they did not feel a need to publicly denounce apartheid while secretly supporting Pretoria. Powerful military figures, such as Ariel Sharon and Rafael (Raful) Eitan, drew inspiration from the political tradition of Revisionist Zionism—a school of thought that favored the use of military force to defend Jewish sovereignty and encouraged settlement of the biblical lands of Greater Israel, including the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Sharon, Eitan, and many of their contemporaries were convinced that both nations faced a fundamentally similar predicament as embattled minorities under siege, fighting for their survival against what they saw as a common terrorist enemy epitomized by Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC) and Yasser Arafat’s Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The ANC may have never employed indiscriminate violence to the extent that the PLO did, but in the eyes of the generals in Tel Aviv and Pretoria, Mandela and Arafat were one and the same: terrorist leaders who wished to push them into the sea. And for the top brass in both countries, the only possible solution was tight control and overwhelming force.
Full article: http://www.zcommunications.org/the-unspoken-alliance-israel-s-secret-relationship-with-apartheid-south-africa-by-sasha-polakow-suransky.html
Posted by polly7 | Mon Dec 9, 2013, 09:49 AM (2 replies)
By Amira Hass
Sunday, December 08, 2013
"Only days before the Netherlands-Israel Cooperation Forum kicks off in Herzliya, the Dutch government is being pushed to publically clarify its policies against cooperation with Israeli businesses in the settlements - or those who are connected to Israeli rule in the West Bank - and to declare that such businesses will not be invited to participate in the Forum seminars.
The forum is intended to deepen the economic relations between Holland and Israel, with a focus on the fields of agricultural technology, water and energy. Senior government officials from both countries – including the prime ministers, the Dutch foreign minister and other Israeli ministers – are due to attend, evidencing the importance each nation attributes to the forum.
But the Dutch government now finds itself facing a severe conflict of interests. Their Israeli peers - Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman and Economy Minister Naftali Bennett - are pushing the economic interests of the settlements, while Holland has promised its public that it will avoid any economic cooperation with West Bank settlement entities.
Last week, Dutch journalists, members of parliament and law professors commented in various ways on the contradiction between the Dutch government's stated policy and its activities with the Cooperation Forum: The website of the Dutch Embassy in Tel Aviv recently included names of factories located in the settlements or who operate in the West Bank in a list of parties interested in meeting with Dutch businessmen who are coming to the forum as part of the official delegation.
In addition, the Dutch did not plan on including a “Territorial Clause,” which would stipulate that the forum only covers sovereign Israel, in a joint statement that is being formulated for the event."
Full Article: http://www.zcommunications.org/west-bank-settlement-firms-not-invited-to-dutch-israeli-cooperation-forum-by-amira-hass.html
Posted by polly7 | Mon Dec 9, 2013, 09:45 AM (0 replies)
By Gina Spigarelli
Source: Upside Down World
Monday, December 09, 2013
The International Day of No Violence Against Women, kicked off 16 days of Public Actions in Medellin, Colombia on November 25 to raise awareness and mobilize support for combating violence against women. Organized locally by a caolition of human rights organizations including student groups, women’s groups, human rights NGOs, anti-war groups, and other local grass roots organizations, the campaign named, ‘For the right to exist, think and make decisions: 16 days of public action for women, dignity and peace’ is part of an international initiative started by the United Nations which runs until International Human Rights Day on December 10.
Violence against women is on the rise in Colombia and was one of the concerns raised at the United Nations Universal Periodic Review of Colombia in April of this year. The Colombian state agreed to, “prioritize policy to protect women’s rights, prevent sexual violence and continue to promote the women’s rights.” Even so, the Ombudsman’s office affirms there have been 15,640 cases of domestic violence against women, 5,545 cases of sexual abuse, and 514 homicides with female victims in the first semester of 2013. For organizations that work in women’s rights, the impunity for crimes against women is alarming. Catalina Vásquez of Medellin-based Vamos Mujer explained in a recent interview that there are many cases, like those of domestic violence, where the aggressors are known, but the state and the laws fail to investigate or seek justice for the women.
In addition to the machista and patriarchal society, Colombia is a country at war. Armed parties in the Colombian conflict continue to use sexual violence as a strategy of war and terror. According to Anti-imperialist Brigades, every six hours a women is abused within the context of the armed conflict. In non-direct conflict zones, the National Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences, using statistics from reported violence from the complete year of 2012, reports that every 11 minutes a women in Colombia is abused by her partner and every three days a woman in Colombia is killed by her partner. The Feminist and Anti-Militarist Network Red uses this grim reality in their awareness campaign, ‘love kills women.’ In the march, one rhyming outcry was, ‘Who killed them, who raped them? These are state crimes and nobody saw anything.’
Full article: http://www.zcommunications.org/building-a-movement-to-fight-femicide-and-impunity-in-medellin-by-gina-spigarelli.html
Posted by polly7 | Mon Dec 9, 2013, 09:43 AM (2 replies)
By Noam Chomsky
Monday, December 09, 2013
This is a shorter and slightly revised version of an interview with Noam Chomsky which appeared on Sunday, Dec. 8 in the Syriza-aligned paper Avgi in Greece.
One of the biggest problems facing many parts of the advanced capitalist world today is the debt burden, public and private. In the peripheral nations of the eurozone, in particular, debt is having catastrophic social effects as the "people always pay," as you have pointedly argued in the past. For the benefit of today's activists, would you explain in what sense debt is "a social and ideological construct?"
There are many reasons. One was captured well by a phrase of the US executive director of the IMF, Karen Lissakers, who described the institution as "the credit community's enforcer." In a capitalist economy, if you lend me money and I can't pay you back, it's your problem: You cannot demand that my neighbors pay the debt. But since the rich and powerful protect themselves from market discipline, matters work differently when a big bank lends money to risky borrowers, hence at high interest and profit, and at some point they cannot pay. Then the "the credit community's enforcer" rides to the rescue, ensuring that the debt is paid, with liability transferred to the general public by structural adjustment programs, austerity and the like. When the rich don't like to pay such debts, they can declare them to be "odious," hence invalid: imposed on the weak by unfair means. A huge amount of debt is "odious" in this sense, but few can appeal to powerful institutions to rescue them from the rigors of capitalism.
There are plenty of other devices. J.P. Morgan Chase has just been fined $13 billion (half of it tax-deductible) for what should be regarded as criminal behavior in fraudulent mortgage schemes, from which the usual victims suffer under hopeless burdens of debt.
The inspector-general of the US government bailout program, Neil Barofsky, pointed out that it was officially a legislative bargain: the banks that were the culprits were to be bailed out, and their victims, people losing their homes, were to be given some limited protection and support. As he explains, only the first part of the bargain was seriously honored, and the plan became a "giveaway to Wall Street executives" - to the surprise of no one who understands "really existing capitalism."
Full article: http://www.zcommunications.org/chomsky-it-is-all-working-quite-well-for-the-rich-powerful-by-noam-chomsky.html
Posted by polly7 | Mon Dec 9, 2013, 09:35 AM (3 replies)
December is a time of many holiday feasts - which makes it a good time to remember family farmers and the tremendous contributions they make to our country, culture, taste buds and tummies. But not all farmers contribute equally, which is why I'm sending out this special holiday sentiment to one group of unique agriculturalists: Thbbllllttttt!
That raspberry goes out to 50 billionaires who've been farming the U.S. farm subsidy program for years, harvesting a cornucopia of taxpayer cash for themselves or their corporate empires. They include top executives or owners of such diverse entities as Chase Manhattan Bank, Chick-fil-A, DISH Network, Fiji Water, Hyatt Hotels, Microsoft and Victoria's Secret. The diligent watchdogs of the Environmental Working Group matched the "Forbes 400" list of richest Americans with a farm subsidy database to unmask these Gucci-wearing Old MacDonalds. E-I-E-I-O, what a rip-off!
Among the richest of these faux-farmers are three Walmart heirs, whose personal wealth totals $100 billion. Then there's investment huckster Charles Schwab, sitting on a $5 billion wad of wealth, yet pumping half-a-million dollars worth of rice subsidies into his California duck hunting resort. Also, corporate take-over artist Henry Kravis, who has amassed some $5 billion in wealth, took more than a million dollars from us to subsidize safflower, sunflower and other crops raised on two of his ranches.
Especially jarring is the presence of such multibillionaire right-wingers such as oil and entertainment tycoon Philip Anschutz and nuclear waste mogul Harold Simmons. They've expressed disdain for government spending on poor people and other "takers," yet they've gladly taken more than $500,000 each in farm payments.
Full Article: http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18348-jim-hightower-billionaires-reap-a-cornucopia-of-farm-subsidy-cash
Posted by polly7 | Sat Dec 7, 2013, 10:19 AM (5 replies)