Friday, December 12, 2014

Kerry's Kontradictions

U.S. Secretary of State John “Horseface” Kerry is bragging about the melange he assembled of “62 countries and organizations” in what passes for an anti-”Islamic State” front. The “Islamic State” (aka ISIL, aka ISIS, aka Daesh; I sure wish those Islamonazi nihilists would settle on a name already!) has been stopped from further advances in Iraq but not in Syria. Meanwhile it holds Yezidi and other women and girl captives as sex slaves. [1]

Kerry says over 1,000 airstrikes have left IS exposed.

But Kerry says it will take “years” to defeat IS.

You see any contradictions there? I do.

Maybe the U.S. should take its leash off the Kurds. The U.S. almost let the “Islamic State” take Kobani, Syria, on the Turkish border, a Kurdish city. And they are blocking the Kurds from selling their oil. Right now tankers carrying crude oil from the Kurdish region in Northern Iraq are stuck at sea because of U.S. threats against anyone daring to purchase the oil. (And since oil is traded in U.S. dollars, and the U.S. controls the world financial apparatus, it can seize anyone's dollars at will.)

And one of the most important enemies of IS and backers of the Iraqi government is Iran, which is persona non grata in the U.S. “coalition.”

Yeah, the U.S. is real serious about defeating IS. But at least it's more serious than it was about aiding the Syrian people's rebellion against the monstrous tyrant Assad.
                                                                 

“I just LOVE being important!”

"ISIS issues guidelines for sex slavery," CBS News, same day; 
UK female jihadists run ISIS sex-slave brothels," Al Arabiya, September 12, 2014; 

Tuesday, November 25, 2014

Why Diehards In Love With Bill Cosby's Image Who Refuse to Believe He's a Serial Rapist Don't Have a Leg to Stand On

We now know that many people for years had at least an inkling of Bill Cosby's criminal behavior of drugging and raping women.

Fifteen (and counting) women have now come forward and said he raped them.

Years ago, he settled a lawsuit in which 13 other victims were prepared to provide corroborating testimony for the victim suing him, in order to avoid going to trial.

One of his gofers has now said he passed hush money to some victims.

The diehards incurably in love with the longtime media IMAGE Cosby created (with help of major corporations of course, all for money) smear the victims by claiming they're after money. Only problem with that "theory" is that the allegations date from years ago, so statutes of limitations would preclude suing Cosby at this late date. Likewise criminal charges would be barred by statutes of limitations.

If the charges were false, the accusers would be exposing themselves to libel lawsuits by Cosby.

Finally, Cosby's own behavior is incredibly damning. He refuses to deny the charges. In fact, he literally refuses to utter a single word in response to them. During now at least two interviews, he has refused to answer a question about the matter at all. Would he not be loudly protesting his innocence if he was innocent?

Yes, he would.

People who fall in love with celebrities are idiots, at any rate. Serves them right to fall in love with a serial rapist. Hopefully they'll now be disillusioned. IT WAS ONLY AN ACT! HE'S A PERFORMER! A PROFESSIONAL ENTERTAINER! AND THE TV PROGRAMS WERE MAKE-BELIEVE! YOU IDIOTS!

Sheesh!

Saturday, November 22, 2014

Serial Rapist Bill Cosby's Moral Fulminations Against the Black Underclass

Some years ago Cosby took it upon himself to embark on a hectoring tour to fulminate and condemn the black underclass for their immorality and bad attitudes. In light of what he himself is, that now looks particularly rich.

Of course the pathologies of the black underclass are really the result of systematic oppression and repression. Their psychological distortions arise from the environments of extreme stress they are born into and are trapped in. There has been a degeneration of the coherency of the black community over the last few generations. This is a complex phenomenon which I cannot adequately address here at the moment.

If a Bill Cosby, with all this career and social success, and the kudos and embrace of the white establishment, can't resist drugging and raping numerous women (over a dozen at least), what does he expect from people who have to deal with the despair of a dead-end existence without proper nurturance or social support?

Blaming the poor for their own problems has long been a tactic of the rich and the privileged. It blames the victims, and absolves both the social system and the privileged themselves (who benefit from the system and thus wish to preserve it unchanged) from responsibility for the poor. Thus freed of all obligation to those suffering under the socioeconomic structure, the well-off can eat their steaks and drink their fine wines with a free conscience, and guard every penny of their wealth.

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Bill Cosby Finally Outed as Rapist, Jian Ghomeshi Exposed As Sexual Sadist, and I'm OD-ing on Schadenfreude

Serial rapist Bill Cosby has finally been exposed as a serial rapist. Like most rapists, he didn't do it just once. (Which raises an interesting question about Bill Clinton. We know he raped Juanita Broaddrick when he was state attorney general of Arkansas. How many other women has he raped? I suppose it's too much to ask for “the” media to look into that.) The “stories” of Cosby's rapes were apparently “out there” for years, but suppressed by the “mainstream media,” which loves to mock “the Internet” as untrustworthy trash (although these same corporations have websites and are attempting to corral the web- which, come to think of it, creates a self-fulfilling prophecy of making a lot of the Internet untrustworthy trash!), until the Internet itself made it impossible to suppress the matter any longer. The known rapes asserted by named victims who have spoken out span the years from 1969 through 2004- so far. As of November 19th, six women have spoken out publicly and by name and described Cosby's assaults on them. 

The media jabber about the matter reflexively refers to Cosby as “beloved.” It's this alleged universal love for Cosby that made “people” unwilling to accept/believe the victims' “stories” (crime accounts), we are told, despite the fact that Cosby paid off one of his victims years ago to make her civil suit go away. Which surely should have raised suspicions, at the least, and prompted questions. Sometimes the U.S. corporate propaganda system is remarkably incurious for an alleged “news” system. (It's a system which refers to itself as “the media,” as if it's the one and only media and not particular media controlled by particular interests. It is a very dangerous term to accept, as so many “progressives” unthinkingly do, as it fosters a false consciousness that accepts this particular propaganda system as just a neutral and “objective” seeker of facts and reliable purveyor of truth, indeed as the ultimate arbiter of reality. It should be properly labeled and called by its right name- the American corporate propaganda system.)

But as for Cosby being universally beloved: I for one have never “loved” Cosby. Indeed, I never even found him funny (that's a matter of taste, as humor is totally subjective), and his Big Daddy Teddy Bear shtick struck me as cloying, manipulative, and borderline precious, not endearing. To me he was not someone to glorify and lionize, as the propaganda system always did, but rather he was just some entertainment industry celebrity doing product endorsements, a typical careerist, as far as I could see, one whose various products (comedy and TV series) I only saw intermittently since I did not care for them. His first notable career milestone was the CIA glorification TV show “I Spy.” These kind of shows and movies that glamorize the secret police (and grossly misrepresent them too, obviously), are highly vulgar morally, and shameful in that they effectively aid and abet the massive crimes against humanity of the CIA and its ilk by providing a cover image for the criminals. (The James Bond propaganda business is a particularly egregious example of this glorification of state terrorists through total fiction and a glamorization of their violence. The progenitor of Bond, Ian Fleming, was actually a British secret police agent himself.)

This noxious stuff genuinely brainwashes people. The alibi that it's “just entertainment” and fictional is specious and obtuse. Obviously people's attitudes, impressions, and ideas about the world are greatly affected by the “entertainment” they are exposed to. In fact, the entertainment propaganda is far more impactful than the alleged non-fictional propaganda (“news”) since people watch and read so much more of it, AND mentally their intellectual guards are down while imbibing it into their brains. It might be okay if “the” media assiduously informed people of the truth in the “news” side of the propaganda industry. But of course they don't. After all, it's a propaganda industry.

Prior to Cosby's rapes becoming general public knowledge, there were already known incidents in which Cosby bullied people, (hardly unusual for a Big Deal entertainment industry figure- people with power tend to abuse it), and I remember one incident in which he put a chokehold on a man while at work.

Now Cosby is behaving in his most arrogant manner, refusing literally to speak one word on the matter. When Scott Simon, on the U.S. government, corporate-funded radio propaganda network NPR, interviewed Cosby, he very apologetically asked for Cosby's comment on the matter (Simon wouldn't even say the word “rape.”) Simon had to narrate that Cosby was shaking his head in non-response. Cosby wouldn't even say “no comment” or “I'm not going to talk about that.”

So Bill Cosby is a selfish creep and felon who drugged women to rape them. He even used his rape M.O. (modus operandi, meaning his criminal method of operation) in his comedy. (Ha-ha.) [1]

Of course a Big Deal celebrity like Cosby could have gotten laid without having to resort to rape. Obviously he preferred to rape women. He enjoyed rendering them helpless and violating them. Probably if he'd had consent, he couldn't have gotten an erection.


At my age, I might have to drug myself just to get it up!


Then there's the case of Jian Ghomeshi, a Canadian celebrity and certified Cool Dude (in Canada, anyway) who got his sexual kicks out of luring women to his lairs (or into stairwells or other convenient spots where he could enjoy some privacy with his prey) and suddenly choking, biting, slapping, and pummeling them with his fists, without so much as a “Pardon me, Ma'am, while I pleasure myself by abusing your flesh.” His victims uniformly describe being stunned into physical and mental paralysis by the abrupt shift of Ghomeshi, without any warning, from seemingly normal, charming, and pleasant enough guy into violently angry sadist physically attacking them. He used his fame and charm as bait to lure his victims, obviously. Ghomeshi was a media “star,” a Hip Cat who led a band, “wrote” books, and was a radio “personality” until his criminal sexual proclivities caught up with him. Now he's a fired radio personality who's under police investigation. (In case you're wondering about his name, he's the son of Iranian immigrants to Canada.)

Eclectic or opportunistic in his choice of victims, depending on how you look at it, some of those who experienced his violent ministrations included a CBC producer, an author, an actress, and a fan he latched onto at one of his book signings.

This Ghomeshi guy, one of those types who hungers for fame, first got people to pay attention to him in a band called Moxy Früvous, which I surmise is an ultrahip name for a band. Turns out he was assaulting women back then in the 1990s too. He managed to worm his way up the media hierarchy into prominence inside the Canadian government propaganda system, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, or CBC, with his very own shows, Play, a TV show, and the very With-It, Superhip radio show “Q.” (Man, I'm just too out-of-it and stuck in Squaresville to know what Q is supposed to reference.)

I've had the misfortune to hear Q a few times, because it's imported into some U.S. media markets via “public” radio stations. I had no idea who this “Jian Ghomeshi” guy was, but he came off as a slick, smug hipster, good at glib patter. His show combined pop cultural chatter with reactionary politics, which I chalked up to the reactionary regime of Canadian prime minister Harper. I figured CBC and the jackass I was hearing on the radio were just enthusiastically toeing the party line. Every show I happened to hear had some Russia-bashing segment near the beginning, revolving around either Ukraine (Russia the Bad Guys, the Big Lie of western media these days) or scoring points on Russia over examples of harassment and repression (none of which were anything that doesn't happen routinely in both Canada and the U.S.)

That's all I knew about this jackal until he was exposed as a predator and I read up on him online.

Here's the gist of how the air got let out of Ghomeshi's balloon.

A freelance reporter had collected stories from some of Ghomeshi's victims and took what he had to the Toronto Star newspaper. In preparing to break the story, the paper contacted Ghomeshi for comment. Ghomeshi had a lawyer tell the paper the accusations were crap.

Go-Go-Ghomeshi, clever fellow that he thinks he is, then tried to head the brewing scandal off at the pass. He went to CBC management and showed them videos of Himself beating up women and explained to them that it was all quite innocent, consensual, sadomasochistic sex “play,” the sort of stuff a groovy unconventional swinger like Himself engages in and that's no big deal, even if a bit kinky for stuffy straight-arrow types. He figured showing them the videos would put the matter to rest.

But then the strangest thing happened- and how could Jian-dude have seen this one coming? Far from being reassured, the CBC brass found the videos of his violent attacks disturbing and fired him. Typical killjoy squares.

Poor misunderstood Jian The G then had no choice but to sue the CBC for $55 million (Canadian, presumably), on grounds of wrongful termination and defamation.

As Smooth JG has patiently explained on Facebook, (before going into hiding), he had “done nothing wrong,” merely engaged in “adventurous forms of sex that included role-play, dominance and submission.” With consent of the lucky gals He designated as subs, of course. [2]

Yeah, I guess you could say it was an “adventure” for his victims, if you add the word “harrowing.”

Ghomeshi spun the problem as some kind of judgmental, puritanical violation of his sacred sexual privacy.

After about 9 victims fingered him, people apparently had a hard time buying his story. Even the “crisis management” firm he hired, Navigator, (there's a straight-to-the-point name), dumped him.

It turns out that now people in Canadian media and music circles are nodding knowingly at one another- they knew (or suspected) it all along.

That's typical in cases of celebrity criminality. The signs, even specific knowledge, are there for years before the pot finally boils over and the celebrity is cooked (sometimes). Until his comeback. (Isn't it always a male?)

So I suppose CBC will need a replacement Russian-bashing Hep Cat now. [3] 


Man, if a Cat as Cool and Hip as ME chokes and beats women, it must be cool and hip! Dig?




There goes two people I didn't particularly like, down for the count (or there careers are, anyway). 

Anybody got an antidote for a schadenfreude overdose?

1] See “Here's the 1969 Bill Cosby Routine About Wanting to Drug Women's Drinks,” Village Voice, Nov. 17, 2014.

2]CBC fires Jian Ghomeshi over sex allegations,” Toronto Star, October 26, 2014.

3] If you feel the need to delve into the details of Ghomeshi's twists and turns and how it's all unfolded, the Toronto Star has run a series on the case. You can go there and search “Ghomeshi.” For details of some of Ghomeshi's attacks on women, see “Jian Ghomeshi: 8 women accuse former CBC host of violence, sexual abuse or harassment,” October 29, 2014.

The Huffington Post ran a useful overview, “Ask A Canadian: Explaining The Jian Ghomeshi Scandal To Americans,” November 1, 2014.

Schadenfreude is a German word meaning taking pleasure in the misfortune of others. [Literally "harm-joy."] I'm being tongue-in-cheek as I'm not actually enjoying the public exposure of the malfeasance of these characters- and it's too soon to say they've gotten their comeuppance, which still won't give me pleasure. And anyone who reads my essays knows that the misfortunes of most people pains and outrages me. No pleasure there. I wish I could take pleasure when some asshole suffers a fall of their own making. What I feel is aggravation that they were put on pedestals in the first place, and protected.

The worst recent case is Jimmy Savile, the very industrious British pedophile and BBC star. A much more grotesque case than these two, and one in which major British institutions are implicated. He was effectively aided and abetted in his crimes by the BBC, which quashed an expose of him, a hospital, and the police, for many years. Only after he was DEAD did these gutless accomplices get up the nerve to stop covering for him.

Interestingly, like Cosby, Savile styled himself as a comedian, although he wasn't funny at all, which apparently didn't prevent many from thinking otherwise. That may have been from the power of suggestion. If something is put on TV as “funny,” with a laugh track added, the average sheeplike humanoid is likely to believe it so, both by the conformist, herdlike nature of the species, and by conditioning. “Laughter is infectious” has been proven literally true by the study of the effect of adding laugh tracks to programming.

Or maybe a lot of people just have a lousy sense of humor.

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

Cuba Shames Itself In UN, Votes Against Referring North Korean Tyranny To World Court For Human Rights Crimes

Gee, just when Cuba distinguished itself by sending more doctors to west African to treat Ebola patients than any other country, Cuba had to go and do this.

The UN General Assembly* voted 119 to 19, (55 chickenshit nations abstained) to refer the loathsome North Korea cult regime to the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity, after a UN investigation (years late) found grounds for prosecution of NK's rulers for murder, torture, and starving people.

Cuba was one of the 19 voting to protect the North Korean cult tyranny. Why Cuba wants to be identified with a pariah state is truly baffling. It only plays into the hands of U.S. propagandists, who portray Cuba as a pariah.

This was the “reasoning” Cuba offered for its vote: the measure seeking prosecution is a "tool to sanction and condemn developing countries."

Oh get off it!

The (now Raul) Castro regime should really avoid doing things that make it harder for decent people to defend it.


*The General Assembly is where most of the member nations sit and has virtually no power, as opposed to the Security Council, with 15 member nations, five of them permanent (the U.S. UK, Russia, China, and France, any one of which can veto any measure the SC votes for) and 10 rotating ones chosen by behind the scenes politicking. The Security Council can impose obligations on all UN members, such as forcing them to participate in economic sanctions against target nations (like Iran currently, and Iraq between 1990 and 2003).

Monday, November 10, 2014

Five Reactionary GOP Apparatchiks on U.S. Supreme Court Sharpening Knives For Another Attack on Obamacare

What Republicans in Congress have been unable to do, Republicans on the Supreme Court are doing. They are carving chunks out of the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare. They already hacked out a key slab of the law by ruling that states didn't have to take more Federal funds to expand Medicaid to more poor people (a long-existing government health insurance program).

Now they're preparing to block the Federal subsidies for low-income people that Obama's law forces to buy health insurance. The GOP operatives in robes on the high court have accepted an appeal of a case that lower courts already found meritless. It's obviously their intention to reverse the lower courts that have unanimously rejected the frivolous challenge to the law and void yet another key part of the law. This will force poor people who don't qualify for Medicaid or can't get it in their reactionary GOP-controlled states and who don't have employer health insurance to either impoverish themselves further to pay a fine to the IRS, a cute whip Obama installed in his law to force compliance. The fine escalates over the years and becomes quite onerous.

There are 9 judges, called “Justices,” on the U.S. Supreme Court, the highest Federal government court which can also overrule the judicial systems of the 50 individual states, as indeed can the two levels of the Federal judiciary below it, the District Courts, of which there are 94, each with several judges, and the next higher level, the Appeals Courts, of which there are 12, against with several judges apiece. The District Courts are organized in Circuits, with an Appeals Court for each Circuit. (There are also separate specialized Federal courts to hear certain kinds of civil cases. There is also a fake “court,” the so-called FISA court, for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which consists of a few right-wing judges personally selected by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who has been a reactionary starting with Warren Burger, Earl Warren's successor, in 1969. This “court” until recently actually sat in a windowless room inside the Department of “Justice,” not even in an actual court building. Its job is to rubber-stamp warrant requests from U.S. secret police agencies for surreptitious burglaries, wiretaps, bugs, etc. It has approved over 40,000 such warrants and rejected 11 in its history, since 1978 when it was established. The 11 had paperwork mistakes.)

The Supreme Court refuses to even hear about 90% of appeals directed to it. The lucky 10% are granted “certiorari,” a Latin word which they use as part of their arcane legal jargon. It takes 4 “Justices” to grant certiorari, that is, to agree to hear an appeal. The Justices only work 8 months out of the year, by the way, for which they are paid fat six-figure salaries and all kinds of lush benefits most American workers can only dream of.

Friday, September 19, 2014

Tough-On-Terrorism Tony Abbott Unleashes 800 Australian Police to Arrest Man With Sword

Well stop the presses. I kid you not. In raids by those 800 heavily-armed, militarized cops, with helicopters, 15 people were arrested- of whom ONE was actually charged, and others released already- and the evidence seized at 16 (or 25- the BBC aired different numbers) locations raided consisted of- a sword. A radioactive atomic bomb terrorist sword maybe, a sword like swords used by Islamic terrorists to behead people in those “gruesome” videos the media can't seem to get enough of. A sword! He had a sword! The guy they charged had a sword!! Do you know how much damage he could have done with that? Why, he could have KILLED someone! This is a NATIONAL EMERGENCY!! TERROR ALERT!! TERROR ALERT!!

Oh yeah, there were some online threats. The usual bluster. Better to nip these things in the bud. With 800 cops to break down doors and strip bare the abodes of “suspects.”

The cheap hysteria the rulers of “Western” countries keep ginning up over “terrorism” has descended into farce and burlesque with this overwrought spectacle.

Of course, regime's like Abbott's in Australia want to enforce a state of Western impunity in their exercise of power. They fear retaliation by Islamofascists for Western attacks on the so-called “Islamic State,” those demented nihilists in Iraq and Syria. Abbott has announced the dispatch of Australian military forces to the region, doing his usual thing of walking loyally in the U.S.' footsteps, as close behind as he can.

Taking a page from the regimes of Bush the Younger and Adolf Hitler, Abbott tried to inspire fear in Australian parliamentarians by saying they were targets of Islamofascist killers and instituting new “security” measures for the legislature. This is similar, if much milder, than the anthrax letters mailed to key U.S. senators to get them to drop their opposition to the PATRIOT ACT, which established the current extremely repressive U.S. police state, and Hitler's torching of the Reichstag (the German legislative building) which the Nazis blamed on Communists, using it as a pretext to imprison the Socialist and Communist legislators in concentration camps and “vote” Hitler dictatorial powers. The anthrax letters were mailed as part of the same Deep State conspiracy by the fascists embedded inside the secret police and military arms of the U.S. power structure that arranged demolition charges to be placed inside the three (not two) buildings demolished in lower Manhattan on September 11, 2001. [1]

Oh, did I mention? There's some draconian “anti-terrorism” legislation coming up for a vote in the Australian parliament. Just a coincidence, I'm sure. (Let's imagine: Abbott to secret police bosses; What terrorist plots do you have on tap that we can smash in a splashy public way?) [2]

For more on Abbott's malign antics, see “America, the Ingrate Nation,” September 1, and “Tony Abbott Is An Insufferable Jackass,” August 18.


1] Specifically, Abbott said there were “reports” of legislators being targeted. That is, some secret policemen whispered this factoid. Great thing about secrecy- you can say anything you want, and people can't check to see if it's true. It only has to be possible, and people are forced to go along with you. Cushy deal, Gestapo-boys!

For the demolition of the three buildings on 9/11/01 (Sept. 11, 2001) in Manhattan, see for example “9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out (Free 1-hour version) AE911 Truth.org.” A 2-hour version with more details is “ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS FOR 911 TRUTH (full unreleased version).” Richard Gage, an architect leading a group of over 1,000 architects and structural engineers who say it is impossible for those plane crashes to have caused the suddenly collapse of the twin towers (and nothing hit the third building) has a long presentation with additional details, “9/11: Blueprint for Truth-The Architecture of Destruction-114min.” These are all on youtube.com (search “911 architects for truth” if these links malfunction). 

2] Just a footnote: the U.S. government's national radio propaganda network, NPR, made a passing reference to this legislation, sans any details about its content, referring to it as “controversial.” That's a euphemism for “repressive,” in this context.

Monday, August 18, 2014

Tony Abbott Is An Insufferable Jackass

Right-wing Australian Prime minister and demagogue Tony Abbott just put in in his unsolicited two cents on the Scottish secession vote, saying an independent Scotland won’t do “the world” any good. [1]

Well it’s not about doing the entire world any good, or ill, for that matter. It’s for the Scottish people. Whether or not it will do them any good or not, is for them to decide. And that is the only relevant question. Who asked YOU, Abbott? [BBC radio report 8/16/14 5 am.]

Speaking of doing the world good- how does the world benefit from your cancellation of the carbon tax, Anthony?

Abbott added that those for Scottish independence are not for “freedom” and “justice.” So it follows they must be for enslavement and injustice, presumably.

Speaking of freedom and justice, I would draw Mr. Abbott’s attention to the treatment of the native Australians, the aborigines, by his ilk, in particular by his party. It’s a horrific record of oppression, inhumanity, atrocities, and murder, that continues to this day. [2]

Here’s how Abbott is doing good for the world: His first act in office was repealing Australia’s carbon tax. Which means more global warming. Thanks, mate!

Abbott decided to meddle in an internal matter of the UK AFTER the Emperor, Barack Obama, opined the U.S. had a “deep interest” is having the United Kingdom keep Scotland.

Abbott put his puny finger on the referendum scale in an interview with the elite ruling class UK newspaper, the Times of London, owned by the Australian international propaganda czar Rupert Murdoch. Abbott was quoted thusly:

“What the Scots do is a matter for the Scots and not for a moment do I presume to tell Scottish voters which way they should vote.

“But as a friend of Britain, as an observer from afar, it’s hard to see how the world would be helped by an independent Scotland.

“I think that the people who would like to see the break-up of the United Kingdom are not the friends of justice, not the friends of freedom, and that the countries that would cheer at the prospect of the break-up with the United Kingdom are not the countries whose company one would like to keep.” [3]

I guess very literally that first sentence was true. He didn’t “for a moment” “presume to tell Scottish voters which way they should vote.” It took him MORE than just a moment to tell them how to vote.

What an asshole, talking out of both sides of his mouth simultaneously!

And notice his demonization of people pushing for the “wrong” vote. But what a smarmy way he does it. They’re “not the friends” of freedom and justice, a backhanded way of calling them the enemies of freedom and justice. And he puts them in the company of enemy countries, pariah states, again being smarmily indirect in his phrasing. Like he’s saying No Offense to those I’m smearing! He wants to slip his knife between their ribs without a political cost of causing a backlash which would drive the vote the “wrong” way. (And what he means by “Britain” is the UK government and ruling class.)

This business of smearing and hating people who vote “wrong” is typical of the attitude of bourgeois rulers towards what they call democracy. Voting is fine, as long as it comes out the way they want. This is an old attitude. Nixon was quite cynical in this regard. His top henchman in international crimes and atrocities, put it this way when the voters of Chile had the effrontery to elect Salvador Allende president: “I don’t see why we have to let a country go communist [sic- Allende was a democratic socialist] due to the irresponsibility of its own people.” Therefore IMPOSE FASCISM on the country. Nice.

Abbott also jumped into the U.S. bloc’s push to drive Russia out of Ukraine, immediately branding the accidental shooting down of a Malaysian airliner over a war zone in eastern Ukraine a crime. No doubt he’d be defending the shooters if they’d been working for the Kiev regime.

Australia has been a source of cannon fodder for both British imperialism and U.S. imperialism, sending troops into U.S. wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Right-wingers in its political establishment, and its secret police, helped the CIA overthrow the Whitlam government when prime minister Gough Whitlam “meddled” in U.S. secret police spy bases in Australia run by the NSA and CIA. (Whitlam actually acted as if Australia were a sovereign nation, and its prime minister had a right to know what was going on inside Australia. The nerve!)

Abbott is conforming sycophantically to the expected role of an Australian prime minister, behaving as a subaltern to his British and American masters. Give that dog a bone!

The vote is September 18th.
                                                                                
Ooh, Tony, you're so clever!
1] I might be wrong about Abbott’s squawking being “unsolicited.” Perhaps the British prime minister, the Tory David Cameron, privately solicited it. But they both obviously want us to think the remarks were unsolicited; that is, that Cameron didn’t put Abbott up to it. So be it, boys. If that’s what you want me to think, I’ll give you what you want. Not that a subimperialist dog like Abbott needs his masters to tell him when to bark. He can follow their cues like any well-trained dog.

My own position is that the Scots should have the right of self-determination, which they are exercising by the secession vote. It’s up to them to decide. I don’t know if it would be “better” or “worse” for them to become an independent nation. There will be advantages and disadvantages, which are unpredictable, and evaluating which outweighs the others will be subjective to a great deal, if indeed Scotland becomes independent.

The British ruling class obviously wants to hold onto the territory and population. But it’s not a “left” or “right” issue. George Galloway, who most observers would categorize as a leftist, opposes Scottish independence, for example. Nationalism and sentimentality are much greater factors than left or right ideologies are in terms of where people come down on the issue.

2] A good primer to get yourselves up to speed on the genocidal policies of the Anglo conquerors of Australia is the John Pilger documentary “Welcome to Australia” [1999]. More recently the aborigines got an “apology” from an Australian prime minister (not Abbott).

3] The greedy fascistic bastard billionaire Murdoch keeps all his “news”papers behind pay walls, so I got Tacky Tony’s remarks from the Guardian, “Tony Abbott tells Scotland a yes vote for independence is 'not in world's interest,'” August 16, 2014.

Tuesday, August 5, 2014

U.S. General Bites the Dust in Afghanistan

An Afghan army soldier, for reasons yet to be determined, opened fire inside the Afghan army's premiere
training center, just outside the capital of Kabul, killing a U.S. major general (2-star), wounding a German brigadier general (one-star) and 14 or more other soldiers, before being killed himself. Generally in these situation, it's a case of a (very badly!) disgruntled Afghan, or a Taliban sympathizer/infiltrator/recruit. Sometimes they really are Afghan army soldiers, sometimes enemies dressed in Afghan army uniforms. Score a big one for the Taliban (even if they didn't do it).

The Taliban hasn't been wasting any time showing that they intend to make mayhem in the country, not even waiting until the Americans leave. They have launched aggressive offensives and attacks, taking back territory, and striking inside the capital city. It's clear that the Afghan government has no chance without large amounts of foreign money, weapons, equipment, and backing for years to come, and even with that, the country will be riddled with constant terrorism and large swaths of territory effectively under the control of the Mafia-like Taliban, ruled by them through intimidation.

Hey, but you bloodied the Soviets' noses there, U.S.! You won!

So one set of ideological fanatics- the apparatchiks and managers of the U.S. imperial system- begat another set of ideological fanatics, or at least hugely empowered them- the Islamofascists.

Saturday, July 26, 2014

Those Who Serve (The Ruling Class) At the Top Get Their Reward

The way ex-Presidents of the U.S. see it, they who served the class interests of multimillionaire and billionaire corporate bosses and parasitic speculators deserve to be multimillionaires themselves. They sacrificed by going into “public service,” having to scrape by on six figure salaries year after year and free taxpayer-paid-for health care (and not that crappy Medicaid or Medicare either), and guaranteed pensions, and paid-for staff they can (illegally) use for personal errands and reelection campaign work on the side. Why, maybe they could have made hundreds of millions in “the private sector”!

Let’s hear a couple of them telling us how rough they had it. Here’s Bill Clinton, the mass murderer of Haiti, Rwanda, Sudan, and Waco, Texas, on the hardship he endured:

"I never had any money until I got out of the White House, you know, but I've done reasonably well since then." He never had ANY money his WHOLE LIFE until AFTER he was president. All those years spent in homeless shelters...it must have been tough. His wife also claims they were “dead broke” after “serving the nation,” as the cliche goes, for 8 years in Washington. (I sure hope they didn’t have to go on welfare, after Clinton gutted it.) [1]

Here’s a bit of what Clinton means by “I’ve done reasonably well since then:” $65 million just in speaking fees from 2001 to 2009. (Now the total is over $100 million.) Then there’s book income and etc. Oh, plus there’s hundreds of millions he’s raised for his “foundation,” which also supports him in his various vague endeavors and pays for his staff of lackeys and bag carriers. (Free bodyguards for life courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer. The Secret Service does that. And his pensions from being president and from being governor of Arkansas- pocket change for a guy like him these days, but maybe just enough to keep him from having to sleep on park benches if he falls on hard times again. His wife is pulling in big bucks too. Maybe she can give him an allowance, if he’ll stop sleeping around.)

George W. Bush is another guy who sacrificed big time for us to be our (elected by stealing elections) president. Discussing his post-presidential plans, Bush described his urgent priority to “replenish the ol’ coffers.” With a reported net worth of a paltry $6.5 to $20 million* by the time he was done saving the nation from terrorists, Bush barely had two nickels to rub together. Fortunately the gentlemen who are the audiences on the corporate oligarchy rubber chicken circuit (more like a filet mignon circuit) have big hearts and are willing to cough up six figure “honoraria” to hear Bush stumble his way through his banal, canned speeches. As of Spring 2011, Bush managed to add a little something to his coffers; $15 million from speeches, plus his book deal, plus whatever secret Bush family schemes hidden in the background with the Saudis and rich Texans and whoever else. It’s not much, but at least it keeps the wolf from the door.

You must understand, presidents are forced to pay zero rent to live in the White House. They only get a six figure salary, and free health care for themselves and their families, and all-expenses-paid travel and lodgings, and paid-for staff. It gets mighty expensive living for free, so one can see how Bush’s coffers were drained by his eight years of sacrifice for us. YOU try living an all-expenses-paid existence some time! It’s harder than it sounds! (Well, maybe it isn’t, but don’t think about that. You’re not supposed to think about such things. Just drink the propaganda Kool-Aid.)

In a heartwarming development, Bush and Clinton have taken to doing speeches (for money, of course) together, sort of a politicians-cashing-in-together duet novelty act. Apparently their shared sacrifice created a bond, like men who have been in combat together. We should all be inspired by their example.

*U.S. financial disclosure forms required by law mandate very broad ranges only, to avoid, I don’t know, embarrassing our rich overlords? Violating their privacy? (They sure have no respect for OUR privacy.)

1] Hillary did manage to eke out a living after laying down her heavy burden of being “First Lady,” a “job” with no actual identifiable duties, running for president herself, and being Secretary of State in the regime of Barack “I’m Pretty Good At Killing” Obama, scraping together $5 million in “speaking fees” and a book “advance” (non-refundable to the publisher, a special privilege political poohbahs get, unlike ordinary writers who have to pay back whatever part of their advances they don’t earn back in royalties from sales) of $14 million. It was calculated that Simon & Schuster would need to sell the book for $70 a pop to recoup that. Obviously it’s really a bribe or payoff of some kind, for past or future favors. I’m talking about this year’s book deal. She had another book deal with S & S in 2000 for an $8 million advance. Hopefully that alleviated her dead brokeness.

S & S is owned by media conglomerate CBS, which is controlled by billionaire Sumner Wellstone, who also controls Viacom, another media goliath.

But then, why should poohbahs have to pay back their advances like ordinary writers? It’s not as if they actually write “their” books, anyway. [“Hillary Clinton: ‘We Came Out Of The White House Dead Broke.’” Of course, Diane Sawyer, who asked Hillary C. about this, is one to talk. Just once, I’d like to hear someone ask these multimillion-dollar-a-year TV teleprompter/script-reading propagandists about their incomes.]



  
Two smug bastards who know the
score. Be the manager of a global
system of exploitation enforced by
violence, cash in big afterwards for
services rendered.

Monday, July 21, 2014

Do UFO’s Exist?

A UFO is an Unidentified Flying Object. And they definitely exist. That is, pilots and people on the ground have often seen flying objects (or what appear to be objects, like blobs of light) in the sky. Pilots and others at times have reported these objects to change from a seemingly stationary state to moving at a very high rate of speed.

Now, most people automatically equate “UFO” with “flying saucer,” that is, an alien space ship. While it is undeniable that UFO’s exist, we can’t say that space craft from somewhere other than the earth have been here. But nor can we say definitely they have not. Here’s why:

Our star is called the “sun” (in English). Nine planets orbit it. Biological entities (life forms) exist on at least one of those planets.

The sun is one star in a galaxy, the Milky Way galaxy. There are billions of stars in this galaxy. Many of those stars also have planets orbiting them. A number of those planets have been identified by astronomers. So in the Milky Way, there must be billions of planets. (A billion is a thousand millions, by the way.)

The Milky Way, in turn, is only one of BILLIONS of GALAXIES. Each of those galaxies has billions of stars.

So in the universe there are billions TIMES billions of planets! You’ve got nine zeros for a billion. Multiply by billions is adding nine more zeros. So it’s a number with eighteen zeros- very huge, beyond everyday comprehension.) Maybe like, a number similar to all the grains of sand on all the beaches in the world?

Is it at all plausible that of all these planets, the only one on which life exists is THIS one?? I rather doubt it. That is, if one accepts a scientific explanation for the existence of life, a chemical, molecular, biological explanation.

If one is religious, which is to say, a mystic with a dogma, most of which posit the existence of supernatural, omnipotent beings that “made” the entire universe, and were apparently too lazy to create life on more than one of their planets, then one can argue, based on nothing but pure fantasy (aka “belief” or “faith”) that life exists only on earth. (I’m using “life” to refer to earthly organisms. Presumably the imaginary supernatural beings, the “gods,” are also alive.)

Rationally, it seems certain that life exists elsewhere in the universe.

The universe is currently dated at 13.8 billion years old. The earth is about 4.54 billion years- only about a third as old as the universe itself. The earliest possible date for life on earth is about 3.5 billion years ago.

There are older stars and planets in the universe than ours. Much older.

We have to assume that life has existed millions of years, and probably billions of years, earlier than on earth, somewhere in the universe.

Our species, which thinks itself so smart and “advanced,” is 160,000 years old, depending on how you define and date it. (That’s for “modern” homo sapiens. “Archaic” homo sapiens goes back about 300,000 years.)

It seems there must be some species of life out there very far ahead of us. Beyond our comprehension, in fact.

So is it possible that some of them are traveling through space in vehicles? Definitely.

Have any of them been to earth? We can’t rule it out definitively, it would seem.

So it’s possible that aliens (real aliens, not humans from another country) have been to earth.

HAVE they been? I cannot say.

The stories of “UFO abductees” have always struck me as implausible, for at least two reasons- the stories are always about the same, and there seems to be an obsession with our sex organs on the part of the aliens.

Maybe these are alien perverts? You know, like people who have sex with animals? Beings into some kind of extraterrestrial interspecies kinkiness? Maybe they got bored performing sex acts on other species on their own planets so they set off in search of new thrills? And these perverts from another planet don't seem very considerate of their kidnapped molestees. Do they even ask, when it's over, "Was it good for you too?"

But seriously, I suppose one explanation could be that the sexual examination part was most traumatic to the “abductees” and so that stuck most vividly in their minds. We do call our sex organs our “private parts.” We have a hard time accepting as natural and being comfortable with our sexuality. This seems due to the pathological (unhealthy and unnatural) nature of the societies and cultures we have evolved, our so-called “civilizations.” (I like Gandhi’s quip, when asked what he thought of Western civilization: “I think it would be a good idea.” One could say the same of Indian civilization too.)


Note to future abductees: next time, take a cellphone pic of the aliens. And ask for their phone number.

Thursday, July 17, 2014

Bad History: The Myth that the Versailles Treaty Caused Nazism and World War II

One of the pernicious myths of “history” as created by ideologues called historians is that the blame for the rise of Hitler and the ensuing Second World War is down to the “unjust” and “harsh and punitive” Treaty of Versailles. That is to say, when dealing with obvious criminal psychotics like the Germans, if you are only NICER to them, they’ll leave you alone.

But who made Germany attack an invade France in 1890? Who made the Germans ravage and lay waste to France from 1914-1918? They won the previous war with France, and got what they wanted. Wasn’t that “fair” and “generous” enough for them? No, they went on and did it again in 1914, on the pretext of some Austrian aristocrat getting bumped off by a Serb nationalist! (“Grand Duke Ferdinand,” was the puffed-up title of the imperialist parasite who bit the dust.)

Does appeasing aggressive psychopaths placate them? I think the evidence of concession after concession handed to Hitler disproves that. And the Germans only paid a small fraction of the reparations they agreed to pay for the destruction they wreaked when they signed the Treaty.

Remember that in World War I Germany invaded neutral Belgium, to carry out the Schlieffen plan, a grand flanking maneuver aimed at annihilating the French army. While in Belgium, they busied themselves committing atrocities, murdering civilians, and committing cultural genocide But the Germans were “provoked,” you see. The Belgian army had the effrontery to resist the invasion of their country. What arrogance! Why, the Germans HAD to kill Belgian civilians and burn a historic library down, destroying irreplaceable manuscripts, to teach the Belgians a lesson. The lesson being, don’t resist invasions by psychopaths.

The fact that British propagandists during the war invented fake atrocity stories has for years been trotted out by U.S. (and other) “historians” to discredit the FACT that Germany committed REAL atrocities in Belgium- not to mention the crime of aggression by invading a neutral country in the first place. This is mendacity disguised as history. People who do that should be called propagandists, NOT historians. When you deliberately falsify history to advance a covert political and ideological agenda, that makes you a propagandist, not a historian. Unfortunately, most well-known “historians” seem to fall into this camp to some degree. This creates a huge burden on people who want an accurate understanding of the world. You have to read so much, and study for years, just to find out more or less what really happened. Needless to say, the average person does not do this and is thus an easy mark for the professional brainwashers to dupe. And professional brainwashers are what propagandists really are.

And what about the Holocaust? Did the Treaty of Versailles cause the Holocaust? I guess the “historians” should say yes- although few seem to have the nerve to do so. But if the Treaty “caused” the rise of Hitler, and "caused" the Second World War, then it must follow that it is to blame for all of Hitler’s works, including the Holocaust. Now you truly enter the arena of ludicrousness.

But it has been in the interest of Zionists to lay the blame for the Holocaust on historical anti-Semitism (obviously appropriately, but that isn’t sufficient explanation by itself), and the Zionists have dibs on Holocaust-causation. And there’s the uncomfortable fact that the “Western democracies” barely lifted a finger to save Jews, and in fact blocked their escape from the Nazis’ clutches for the most part.

Now what was the motive for the distortion of history claiming Versailles as causative for World War II? It is to exonerate Germany, because Germany after World War II was part of the U.S.-bossed anti-Soviet bloc in Western Europe. The former German enemy had to have a heavy coating of ideological make-up applied to make it attractive to Western publics who had been put through two major, costly wars by Germany. (The Soviet Union, on the other hand, NEVER invaded Western Europe, NEVER declared war on the U.S. or bombed its ships at anchor as Japan did- another rehabilitated foe turned subaltern nation to the U.S. The Soviet Union was invaded by two dozen western nations right after the Bolshevik revolution, in a failed attempt to reverse that revolution. And of course Germany invaded in 1941 and caused horrendous carnage and wreckage. But the Soviet Union was the Bad Guy.)

The end of the Cold War has changed nothing, since now Russia is still viewed as an adversary- apparently because it won’t let itself to be so reduced in power that its influence ends at its own national boundaries. For this it is faulted for “behaving like the Soviet Union” and “restarting the Cold War” or “acting like the Cold War never ended.” (Hey, Western imperialist propagandists, would you like me to lend you a mirror?)

In fact, to accept the Versailles Treaty as leading to World War II, because it embittered fanatical German nationalists like Hitler, is to imply Germany had a legitimate grievance to start World War II.
Well then, given that Germany suffered far worse destruction in World War II (its cities weren’t systematically bombed into rubble in the First World War, nor was it occupied), plus Germany was shrunk in size, permanently lost Prussia (the heartland of its militarism), Danzig, and more, and the truncated remainder was divided into two, logically Germany had an even BIGGER grievance after World War II than after WW I. So they should have armed themselves with nuclear weapons and started World War III!

The thing is, taking the irrational grievances of fanatical German nationalists at face value is like taking their stated grievances against Jews as having “caused” the Holocaust. I don’t hear those historians who blame World War II on Versailles (because German fascists used it to rile people up) blaming the Jews for the Holocaust. But by the same logic, they could. The point is, Versailles was just an excuse, used as agitprop by the Nazis, the same way they used anti-Semitic propaganda as agitprop. Quite simply, the Germans (many or most of them) were pathological people with burning imperialist ambitions combined with a virulent sense of “racial” superiority. They dehumanized most of the rest of humanity and had no compunction about slaughtering and enslaving most everybody else on the planet. Versailles had NOTHING to do with it. If there had been NO Versailles Treaty, Hitler would STILL have risen to power, and STILL have started World War Two in Europe. It’s idiotic to argue otherwise if one has read deeply about Germany between the wars (as I have). Who could seriously believe that the Versailles Treaty made Germany invade Russia yet again, killing twenty million of the people there, with the intention to ultimately annihilated fully THREE QUARTERS of the “subhuman” Slavs and make slaves of the rest, working on giant German plantations? Russia didn’t impose the Versailles conditions on Germany. Germany defeated Russia in World War I, and imposed onerous peace terms on it! So by the logic of “Versailles made Germany do it,” the Soviet Union should have invaded Germany in World War II, not the other way around. After all, Germany imposed an unfair peace treaty on Russia. Whereas the Versailles Treaty was fair, and should have been enforced. Hitler should not have been allowed to break it by increasing the size of the German army and by remilitarizing the Rhineland in violation of the Treaty. [1]

No, the fault lay in the pathological German character. Thankfully that character has changed to a large degree, mainly in the younger generations.


1] World War I started in 1914. Russia was defeated in 1917. The U.S. then entered the war, because New York bankers fretted about getting their war loans to Britain and France repaid if Germany won. With fresh U.S. troops on the Western front, Germany sued for peace in fall 1918. The slimy and cowardly German general staff, headed by Field Marshals von Hindenberg (who appointed Hitler chancellor in 1933, opening the door to Nazi dictatordship) and von Ludendorff (who participated in the 1923 coup attempt by Hitler to overthrow the Weimar Republic government, for which he was not prosecuted for treason and subversion, not imprisoned or shot- as Hitler should have been) pulled the weaselly and cunning move of making civilians take the rap for the defeat, claiming the military was never really defeated and promulgating the “stab in the back” canard, that traitors at home (in a dictatorship- remember Germany was a monarchy headed by the Kaiser, or “king,”) made Germany surrender. The Nazis heaped a lot of the blame for the “betrayal” and “treason” on “the Jews.” In World War II this was a big factor in the Allies insistence on unconditional surrender, and occupation, so the Germans wouldn’t once again pretend that they weren’t actually defeated.

Thursday, July 3, 2014

Governor Vetoes Gun Control Bill Because “Hey, I’m Running for President as a Republican!”

New Jersey Governor Chris “Bully-Boy” Christie quite predictably vetoed a state gun control bill that would have limited magazine capacities. Because of some blah-blah-blah bullshit excuse he offered. The real reason is in the facetious quote in the title.

“Catastrophic Decline In Human Rights in Egypt” says Amnesty International

Maybe the new boss isn’t the same as the old boss. Maybe he’s worse. That seems to be the judgment of Amnesty International. (The quote above is from the BBC.)

Amnesty International calculates that the number of people rounded up and imprisoned in political repression since the military coup one year ago, led by new dictator Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, overthrew Mohamed Morsi (the first democratically elected president in all the thousands of years of Egypt’s existence) is at least 16,000, of whom a minimum of 80 have died in prison.

Human rights in Egypt are now said to be as bad as during the worst of the Mubarak reign.


Not a problem for the U.S. and Israel. Both governments are secretly relieved to be rid of Muslim Brotherhood president Mohamed Morsi. Indeed, Egyptian democracy is regarded by those governments as a threat. Because Israel isn’t popular with the Egyptian masses, and the Egyptian people have no reason to aid the repression of the Palestinians imprisoned in the Gaza open air concentration camp. So democracy in Egypt poses a threat to the Egyptian-Israeli de facto alliance, an alliance underwritten by billions of dollars in military equipment given to the Egyptian military every year by the U.S.

It's rather a shame that the U.S. doesn't use its immense power for the benefit of humanity. Of course, it acquired that power in the first place by being an enemy of humanity. But were it to be a leader in improving the level of global civilization, that would be a way for atoning for how it acquired its power. But its elites show no inclination to do any such thing. They are utterly lacking in moral and existential clarity, so they won't be doing that.

Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Homeless Man Murdered By New York City Government Was in Rigor Mortis

I’ve written earlier about this case. See “New York City Government Kills Man For Sleeping In Stairwell” to get up to speed. In brief, a homeless, mentally ill man was arrested for sleeping in a stairwell and thrown in jail to await trial (!) and since the solitary confinement cell he was dumped in was over 100 degrees Fahrenheit (over 38 degrees Celsius) he died in the cell with nobody noticing.

Now to turns out that the victim was already in rigor mortis when his corpse was noticed in its cell. Rigor mortis generally doesn’t start to set in until several hours after death, taking 12-24 hours to set in fully, then reversing after 72 hours. (Rigor mortis is the condition in which the corpse becomes extremely stiff.) That means he may have been dead for longer before his demise was discovered than previously asserted by “the authorities” (the people in power).

Still not a peep from the local media- and not just the establishment media but, shamefully, the “alternative” media too [1]- about the culpability of police for arresting a helpless, destitute, mentally ill homeless man for the “crime” of sleeping in a stairwell of a public housing project (warehouse for poor people) instead of moving him along or taking him to a homeless shelter. Still not a peep about the even more culpable judge who set BAIL for the man, at $2,500, which was the same as setting no bail, meaning the judge effectively sentenced the man to an indeterminate jail time until the case would be resolved (which unless the man immediately pled guilty could drag on for months- there have been people imprisoned at Rikers Island, the city’s main jail complex, for years awaiting resolution of their cases). So the judge imposed a punishment on a defendant (whose crime was sleeping in a stairwell, officially “disorderly conduct,” a catch-all the police use to arrest people for anything they don’t like- absurdly, here sleep is “disorderly”) before any conviction. Imprisoned for sleeping where sleeping isn’t allowed. Well, that’ll teach the mentally ill to shape up and act right! Get a job and rent an exorbitantly expensive apartment, you bum!

The unrealism of the tacit demands placed on people, even mentally ill people, in the brutal, dog-eat-dog, winner-take-all economic system of the U.S., is matched by the cruelty revealed in this case. The cruelty is not an accidental byproduct, or an endless series of “lapses.” Nor it is merely an inevitable result of “human nature,” “man’s inhumanity to man,” the classic fallback alibi of cruel systems, in cluding the American one. Cruelty is in fact part of the structure of the social/political/economic structure. A ruthless economic system needs a callous and cruel enforcement system, which it has in spades. In a normal human society, sleeping wouldn’t be a crime just because someone is homeless and mentally ill. Police wouldn’t arrest people for such a “crime.” And a judge that threw a man in jail for such a “crime” would be removed from the bench.

In the U.S., none of this is even seen as unusual, much less wrong. The only issue here is why the man was allowed to die in his cell, and nobody noticed. Only the jail guards are subject to rebuke, for dereliction of duty. They allowed a public relations problem for their masters to arise.

Particular cases like this, which are NOT aberrations but rather ubiquitous and continuous, put the lie to U.S. propaganda that America is the “freest nation in the world.” This permanent propaganda campaign, a founding edifice of the U.S. ideological system going all the way back to the rebellion against the British crown, has been so effective that not only do most Americans believe it, but apparently people all over the world believe it. The facts belie it.

And even some people who should know better believe it. For example, Noam Chomsky, about as scathing a critic of U.S. imperialism (although he doesn’t use the word “imperialism,” generally) as there is, over the years has repeatedly asserted in speeches that the U.S. is “the freest country in the world.” It’s an assertion he makes without offering evidence- assertion without evidence being a practice he excoriates others for, ironically. (The speeches are on youtube.com.)

1] And the most prominent dissident American media organ, the television and Internet broadcaster Democracy Now! (democracynow.org), which does much excellent and vital work, is based in New York City. It reported the death in the same narrow framework as the ruling class media did.




Friday, June 27, 2014

Egypt Wins Prize for Most Journalists in Prison- Arab Division

Egypt currently has 14 journalists in its dungeons. Syria came in second, with 12. Close but not enough- a heartbreaker for fans of Syrian repression.

Germany Dumps Verizon for Government Communications- Damn You Edward Snowden!

The German government, a year after Edward Snowden informed the world that the NSA taps their chancellor’s cellphone and steals massive amounts of electronic data from German citizens (with the invaluable assistance of German secret police agencies) has finally bestirred itself to do something about it, after bleating ineffectually all this time for the U.S. to please promise to stop. [1]

It’s canceling a contract with U.S. telecom company Verizon for providing service to German government agencies.

No doubt U.S. police state apparatchiks and their politician enablers will be fuming at Edward Snowden for this- as if the Germans would have never figured out sooner or later that the NSA was stealing all their communications.

While the Germans are at it, may I suggest they purge their secret police agencies of disloyal types who would rather serve a foreign power than Germany? And physically expel the NSA spyposts from their soil? Otherwise they won’t be accomplishing much.

And don’t listen to U.S. guff about “counterintelligence” and “the war on terror” and “protecting lives.”

You can’t free yourselves if you don’t free your minds first.

But the plodding political hack Merkel won’t do these things, I predict. Let’s see if I’m right.

1] Which the U.S. refused to do. The one tiny concession made by Emperor Obama, who after stonewalling, finally said Chancellor Merkel’s personal cellphone wasn’t currently being tapped. He refused to apologize or even to admit to the tapping. Nor did he rule her office and home phones off limits. Anyway, Obama is a congenital liar, so his word is worthless in any event. He has lied repeatedly about NSA spying; he lied literally dozens of times about his health care act- “If you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan,” an obvious falsehood since his law mandated requirements for health insurance that millions of plans did not meet; he lied about being committed to so-called “network neutrality;” as a Senator running for president in 2008 he lied about intending to filibuster a bill immunizing telecoms from civil suits for illegally tapping phone and internet traffic for the NSA without warrants; indeed he has lied numerous times both running for office and while in power.



Monday, June 23, 2014

Egyptian Military Dictatorship Convicts Journalists in “Court” of the Absurd

A so-called “court” in Egypt handed down utterly predictable and preordained guilty verdicts of “terrorism” against three Al-Jazeera journalists who have been imprisoned for six months already in one of Egypt’s hellhole jails. The “evidence” consisted of the journalists’ family photos and old news videos of horses and such. (I’m not making that up.) According to foreign journalist witnesses, literally no evidence supporting the baseless accusation was presented, leading them to pronounce themselves “shocked” by the guilty verdict. The sentences were a minimum of seven years. The three are an Egyptian, a Canadian, and an Australian. The Australian, Peter Greste, had been in Egypt for a week on temporary duty when he was seized. The Australian formerly worked for the BBC. For good measure, other Al-Jazeera journalists were “convicted” “in absentia” and “sentenced.” [1]

Their actual “crime” was reporting on Muslim Brotherhood protest rallies.

The “verdict” should have surprised no one. After all, in two recent mass “trials,” close to 2,000 people were “convicted” in a few minutes, and hundreds “sentenced” (condemned) to death, for alleged rioting and for the death of a single policeman.

Thus has Egypt under its newest military dictator, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, sunk lower than ever. Lower even than under his predecessors Nasser, Sadat, and Mubarak. Thus does an authoritarian system degenerate into more and more grotesque forms of oppressiveness and detachment from reality. Lurid assertions and false consciousness replace acknowledgment of actual facts. [2]

Sisi’s pathetic, cruel farce doesn’t even rise to the level of a show trial. In Stalin’s show trials, the “defendants” read out “confessions” after they’d been tortured into submission. In Nazi political trials, “evidence” was also presented to “prove” the charges. In Sisi’s Egypt, there is no longer even a simulacrum of anything resembling an actual judicial process. There is not even a crude imitation of a trial, just a nonsensical burlesque called a “trial.”

The Sisi dictatorship can’t even be bothered to fabricate fake evidence, coach lying witnesses, or torture false confessions out of their victims. They just accuse and convict. And in a demonstration of just how complicit and supine a privately-owned media can be to state power, the Egyptian media has screamed abuse at the victims and taken their “guilt” as established fact since their arrests in December 2013. This is good enough to make the victims appear guilty for internal Egyptian purposes. Confident of continued U.S. backing for the permanent Egyptian military state, Sisi apparently has concluded that he can contemptuously dismiss international opinion. And he’s right, unfortunately. For one thing, Israel wants a military dictatorship in Egypt that will continue the policy of avoiding conflict with Israel and helping Israel oppress the Palestinians by maintaining the blockade of the Gaza Strip (which borders Egypt on the west of the Strip) to maintain the territory as the world’s largest open-air concentration camp, imprisoning over a million human beings. (Yes, Palestinians are actually human beings, not subhuman “terrorists,” as the American public has been brainwashed into feeling.) That alone would be enough to induce the U.S. to support the Sisi regime, since the U.S. is Israel’s bitch, but it is not the only U.S. “interest” driving the U.S. to back successive Egyptian military dictatorships since Sadat’s rapproachement with Israel. [3]

Because of American establishment hatred of Al-Jazeera, most of the U.S. media has covered the “verdict” very superficially or not at all. Remember, U.S. cable networks refuse to allow Al-Jazeera television to BUY access to American homes, the U.S. military has repeatedly bombed Al-Jazeera offices in Afghanistan and Iraq, murdered Al-Jazeera journalists, taken Al-Jazeera workers captive (one was held for six years in the U.S. military gulag/torture center at Guantanamo Bay on U.S.-occupied Cuban territory, where his captors tried to force him to agree to be a spy inside Al-Jazeera for them), and the U.S. government has repeatedly threatened Al-Jazeera. Al-J has been demonized as “terrorist propaganda” for refusing to be a parrot of the U.S. government and military and to act as cheerleaders for the U.S. aggression in Iraq, as the “loyal” American media did.

And still does to this day. Now the U.S. media, whitewashing history, pretends that the U.S. invaded Iraq out of altruism, not after whipping up hysteria with false claims of “weapons of mass destruction” aimed at the U.S., imminent danger of nuclear, chemical, or biological attack on the American people by terrorists armed with such weaponry. Just yesterday, on ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos,” one of the Sunday morning political propaganda shows that the political elite uses for self-brainwashing, the program ended with a breathtakingly mendacious Iraq segment by Martha Raddatz, who recycled old, discredited U.S. military propaganda claiming that “Iraqis pulled down this statue of Saddam Hussein,” a U.S. military stunt thoroughly debunked, yet Raddatz ignores the facts. Even more egregiously, Raddatz erases the U.S. siege and destruction of Fallujah, substituting a fairy tale of U.S. military humanitarian care and service for the people there! Unbelievably cynical, shameless, immoral, unethical, and a textbook example of how American establishment “journalism” is propaganda.

1] In a bad sign for the Australian journalist in Sisi’s clutches, it was the “opposition” party (the bourgeois party currently out of power) in Australia, not the government, that strongly denounced the “verdict.” (Typical of “western democracies,” Australia has “legitimate” establishment parties that play a game of musical chairs called “elections” in which they compete to sit in the seats of power. But the system can never be voted out of power or changed. That is called “freedom of choice.”) The Australian Foreign Minister issued a mushy, weak, mealy-mouthed statement with the usual bromides about journalistic freedom and blah blah. Tellingly, the statement indicates that until now, the Australian government hadn’t lifted a finger to help their citizen in captivity.

“...we will now initiate contact at the highest levels in the new Egyptian government to see whether we can gain some kind of intervention from the new government and find out whether intervention is indeed possible at this stage.” (My emphasis.) They’re just NOW initiating contact with Sisi over this?? Amazing.*

Australia has an ugly history of abandoning Australian journalists. When the horrible Indonesian military dictatorship of Suharto invaded East Timor back in the 1970s, after getting the green light to do so from U.S. president (and Warren Commissioner cover-up conspirator) Gerald Ford and Henry Kissinger in person (the two visited Suharto in Jakarta just before the invasion), among the ultimately hundreds of thousands of East Timorese slaughtered by the Indonesian army was an Australian TV crew, who were murdered by the Indonesians to block their reporting on the crimes of the Indonesians. The Australian government at the time, headed by Malcolm Frasier, helpfully looked the other way, ignoring the overwhelming evidence of the blatant murders of Australian citizens. Oh yes, and U.S. weapons and munitions were used, in violation of U.S. law, in this act of aggression, and in the years of brutal occupation and mass murder that followed. So what? Israel does it all the time. And so do the various terror regimes armed by the U.S., which use U.S. weapons to murder their own citizens, whereas U.S. law requires they be used only in defense from foreign aggression. American law in this case is just for show. Such laws are in fact acts of propaganda, and nothing more. The other main use of U.S. law is to oppress people.

2] Sisi, the latest military dictator, is a former field marshal and head of the Egyptian military. Trained, mentored, and groomed for years in American military “schools,” as is typical of military tyrants and criminals in U.S.-backed regimes, he has long ties with the U.S. military hierarchy. “Officially,” Sisi is a “president,” since he doffed his uniform for a business suit (the uniform of political bosses these days) and staged an “election” (uncontested) in which he “won” 97%. He’s no more a “democratically elected president” than these farcical “trials” he stages are actual trials or these “courts” are really courts. They’re Theaters of the Absurd, political demonstrations of raw power designed to terrorize people into submission to an utterly oppressive reign.

The only reason for a six month delay between “arrest” and “conviction” was so the Egyptian propaganda system (a privately-owned media that has behaved exactly as a military-controlled media would) could firmly brainwash the Egyptian populace in the idea that the journalists are guilty of “terrorism” merely by repeating the lie over and over, repetition being a standard propaganda technique. Thus the dictatorship would in fact have put itself in a bind if it had ultimately acquitted the journalists, since it had already worked so assiduously to create the “fact” of their “guilt.”

Yet another journalist was released after a year in prison with his arm permanently disabled thanks to the brutality and deliberate medical neglect of Sisi’s goons. The same goons who were Mubarak’s goons. The same goons who subject female protesters to “virginity tests,” manual rapes by male military “doctors” while other goons stand around and mock the victims.

Egypt! It’s a great tourist destination! Come see the pyramids! So much local color. Here, take a brochure.

3] In a serendipitous coincidence, after I wrote this this morning, the U.S. government radio propaganda network NPR put on Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu, the remorseless, brutal promoter of Israeli expansionism, to propagandize at length on the danger of Islamic extremists getting nuclear weapons, etc. The NPR propagandist Steve Inskeep, co-host of NPR’s morning “news” program “Morning Edition,” performed the usual dutiful fawning, as is customary and required for US "journalists" to do with Israeli power personages if they want to keep their jobs, and sat at the feet of the Great One as he spewed his hawkish agitprop. Netanyahu was also on U.S. TV yesterday, on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” one of the self-brainwashing shows of the U.S. political elite, where he attacked the vote of the American Presbyterian Church to sell stock in three criminal U.S. corporations that supply the means of Israeli repression: Caterpillar, Motorola “Solutions” (to the “problem” of political opposition) and Hewlett-Packard. Caterpillar is probably the most notorious of the three. It provides the armored bulldozers that the Israelis have used to demolish tens of thousands of Palestinian homes, and uproot thousands of Palestinian orchard trees. Oh, and one was used to murder American Rachel Corrie. Netanyahu sickeningly couched his mendacious propaganda in terms of morality.

In a last ditch attempt to quash the Presbyterians’ divestment vote, American Zionist agents offered the Presbyterians a meeting with Netanyahu in return for canceling the vote. How’s that for arrogance? Like meeting with Netanyahu to be browbeaten by him and subjected to his agitprop is such a great privilege, a gift, a huge favor! Come, sell out your moral and humanitarian principles for the privilege of being allowed in Netanyahu’s presence. I’m sure the Israelites and their American fifth columnists don’t have the slightest inkling of what a crass insult that was. (The Presbyterians may not have been quite as clueless. The New York Times quoted one of their officials gently saying the “offer” probably had the reverse effect of what the Israelites intended. Gee, I wonder why.)

* Here’s the full statement of Australian FM JULIE BISHOP:

“Peter Greste is a well-respected Australian journalist. He was in Egypt to report on the political situation. He was not there to support the Muslim Brotherhood. We respect the outcome of the recent elections in Egypt, and we will now initiate contact at the highest levels in the new Egyptian government to see whether we can gain some kind of intervention from the new government and find out whether intervention is indeed possible at this stage. I have spoken at length with Peter Greste’s parents. They are considering their legal options, including appeal options. We do not know how long an appeal process would take. But in the meantime, we will provide whatever consular assistance we can to Mr. Greste and, of course, to his family.


“We understand that Egypt has been through some very difficult times and there has been a great deal of turmoil in Egypt, but this kind of verdict does nothing to support Egypt’s claim to be on a transition to democracy, and the Australian government urges the new government of Egypt to reflect on what message is being sent to the world about the situation in Egypt. Freedom and freedom of the press is fundamental to a democracy. And we are deeply concerned that this verdict is part of a broader attempt to muzzle the media freedom that upholds democracies around the world.”

Friday, June 20, 2014

Chinese Swoop In and Buy Up Greece for a Song

You have to hand it to the Chinese. They have a lot of strategic savvy in pursuing their economic interests.

Greece, desperate for foreign money, passed a law allowing foreigners who buy real estate worth at least 250,000 Euros to come live there. So well-heeled Chinese have been doing just that.


The Chinese also bought up Greek government debt on the cheap. And why not? The European Union and European Central Bank are enforcing repayment, loaning the Greeks money to do so while the mass of the Greek people have been driven into economic desperation.

Monday, June 16, 2014

U.S. Political Elite “Shocked” and “Stunned” by Election Defeat of House Poohbah

Republican creep Eric Cantor, the U.S. House of Representatives Majority Leader (second highest House post below the Speaker of the House) lost the GOP primary in his Virginia Congressional district to an ideological “economics” professor who opposes the minimum wage and who ran against immigration law reform and “crony capitalism.” This fellow, named David Brat, was promoted by right-wing media extremists such as Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham.

The U.S. media establishment and political elite pronounced itself “stunned” by Cantor’s defeat in an election with a very low turnout (the kind susceptible to victories by motivated cadres of ideologues and small political movements). The words “stunned” and “stunning” have been repeated innumerable times by the corporate broadcast and print media in the U.S. in stories about Cantor’s fall (and on U.S. government radio propaganda network NPR). One factoid they keep mentioning is that it “is the first time since the Majority Leader post was created in 1899 that a Majority Leader lost an election.” Well, if that’s so, it’s about time.

The “stunned” reaction of the elites is a symptom of their smugness. They really believe their grip on power is unassailable, or should be, which is an even worse attitude. They think entrenched members of the political nomenklatura should never suffer the indignity of being voted out of office by mere citizens. Having proclaimed the Tea Party movement dead, defeated by “establishment” Republicans, to the great relief of the establishment, now they’ve changed their tune, and once again see the Tea Party (not an actual party, but a movement with a faction within the Republican Party) as a threat to “establishment” (sometimes called, absurdly, “moderate.”) Republicans. They identify Brat as a Tea Partyer, although Brat himself eschews the label.

The split between “establishment” Republicans and Tea Party types is partly a small capitalist vs. big capitalist split. Turns out that not all capitalists have the same interests. (It’s long overdue that small capitalists realized this. Big capitalists have been playing them for saps for decades.) Cantor’s biggest donors were Wall Street high finance firms. [1]

The Tea Party types, who partly reflect the resentments of small capitalists, hate deficit spending and social programs, and feel the “establishment” Republicans are phonies in their stated opposition to big government debt. But they go farther. They see the massive tax breaks and government subsidies and sweetheart contracts for large corporations, and the indulgence of finance capital and its massive bailout by the government, as causes of the large government debt (which undeniably they are) and as examples of corruption and favoritism that is antithetical to true free enterprise. Tellingly, the very next day after Cantor’s defeat, the stock of Boeing, a large war corporation, plunged, wiping out its gains year to date. The New York Times ran a lengthy article about big business and their lobbyists breaking out in cold sweats over Cantor’s defeat, and rushing money to help reactionary Mississippi Senator Thad Cochran beat back a Tea Party challenger for the GOP Senate nomination in that state. After Cantor’s primary defeat, Washington lobbyists for big corporation held a snap fundraiser for Cockran, raising $800,000 on the spot. (Spare change for their corporate masters.) And Michael Bloomberg Billionaire gave Cockran $250,000 in May, the article reported. [2]

The usual GOP scapegoat for government deficits and debt is social programs that actually help people. These too are bete noires of the Tea Party ideologues. But the TPers aren’t committed to walling off corporate welfare from scrutiny, cuts, and elimination, unlike “establishment” Republicans, nor are they so hot on endless U.S. imperialist aggression, not because they are anti-imperialist (i.e. morally principled) but because they don’t want to pay for it. As colossal military spending is a pillar of the U.S. power structure, this attitude is another “threat” from the perspective of establishment scum.

The “stunning” and “shocking” unseating of Cantor from his Congressional perch (don’t worry about him, he’ll go on to magnificently munificent sinecures, still securely nestled in the bosom of the corporate oligarchic power structure) should be an occasion of glee and joy for the rest of us. Shed not a tear for this hitman for the ruling classes in their endless class warfare against the rest of us. And it’s a class war the U.S. wages globally.

There’s another current event that is discombobulating the U.S. political elite- the sudden seizure of Mosul and other Iraqi cities by the “Islamic State of Iraq and Syria,” a vicious Islamofascist armed organization. But that’s a topic for another essay.

1] The boss of Goldman Sachs, Lloyd Blankfein, went on CNBC, a cable TV channel devoted to fawning over Wall Street executives and acting as a platform for stock shilling, to praise Cantor and call his loss- yes- “stunning.” See “For Business And the GOP, A Cantor Effect,” New York Times, June 15, 2014, page 1.

Goldman Sachs is the preeminent parasitic finance capital firm, and it controls the U.S. Treasury Department. And I mean directly; for example Bush the Younger made the then-chairman of Goldman, Henry Paulson, a man who had amassed a fortune of $700 million while contributing nothing to the human race, Treasury Secretary, from which position he made sure the government made good Goldman’s losses in the financial calamity of 2008 caused by the unregulated mega-speculating and mortgage frauds Goldman itself engaged in and aided and abetted, and helped stampede Congress into voting for the $700 billion bailout for high finance to save it from itself. Both the regimes of Bill Clinton and Bush the Younger filled the power positions in the Treasury Department with corporatchiks from Goldman Sachs.



Goldman Sachs executives planted in key U.S. government positions in the Bush II regime.


2] NY Times, ibid