Archive | November 9th, 2016

War in BiH Continues With Other Means

Adelina Marini

Winter is coming to the Balkans, judging by the anxiety in media from the former Yugoslavia. The week begins with a multitude of commentaries on the exceedingly serious situation between Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, caused by the arrest of ten Croatian veterans in the Bosnian town of Orašje. This is also the main topic in today’s press review. In it, you can also read about a very interesting interview of the former Serbian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Vuk Drašković for the Montenegro daily newspaper Pobjeda. And more – who do Serbs prefer – Trump or Clinton.

Croatian member of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Presidency Dragan Čović is in Zagreb today for an official visit. He has meetings with President Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović and Prime Minister Andrej Plenković. In a large interview for the Croatian Nova television channel last night Mr Čović claims that undoubtedly we are dealing with some kind of political gain, aiming to hinder Bosnia and Herzegovina’s European path. His revelations are more than worrying. According to Mr Čović, BiH cannot step onto the European path until relations are cleared up in a BiH led by law, which is still too distant. He claims that there are para-agencies acting in BiH.

“Most influential people in political life today are saying that we have a state-owned mafia in BiH. Our Chairwoman of the Court of BiH has also in the last half year said that there is a judicial mafia. Not a single of our chief prosecutors has finished their term. You probably do not know this. Even the last got replaced last month. Every single one of his predecessors was suspended. This is the picture in BiH, relationships and the para-system in BiH”, said Čović. Jutarnji list reports today on its front page that Defence Minister Damir Krstičević has postponed his trip to Sarajevo, scheduled for this week. He was supposed to participate on Tuesday in a meeting of the ministers of defence of the countries from the Central European Defence Cooperation. Jutarnji says that the minister’s not going to Sarajevo could be interpreted as a political message from the Croatian government to BiH authorities, but also as a defensive measure.

In general, all government members are entitled to diplomatic immunity, but the newspaper reminds the case of the former Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who was threatened with arrest in Belgium because of his role in the massacre in Palestinian camps. The situation is extremely unpleasant for the Croatian government, because it cannot be foreseen whether and when the BiH prosecution might pull out of a drawer the case against Krstičević, reports Jutarnji. In a commentary, the journalist from the newspaper Ivanka Toma writes that charges with war crimes are a new tool to continuing the war.

“Threats and manipulations with charges of war crimes have turned into a mighty weapon in the hands of BiH and Serbia. Sometimes it is sufficient to simply run a message that an arrest warrant may be issued for some Croatian veteran, or release in the public domain a list of suspects, to cause instability on the Croatian political scene”, writes Toma. In her opinion, PM Plenković should come up with a formula, which would end war crimes and be acceptable to the other side. In an opposing commentary for the same newspaper, famous columnist Jelena Lovrić notes that instead of being outraged by the crimes, Croatia is outraged by the investigations. She warns that the idea is currently gaining strength for Croatia to find an interlocutor regarding the fate of BiH in Serbian PM Aleksandar Vučić. “A fearful thought, which suggests at circumventing the Bosniaks and return to the war politics of the time when Slobodan Milošević and Franjo Tuđman were negotiating on the partitioning of BiH”, writes Jelena Lovrić.

Bosnian website Klix published today an open letter of the Chairman of the Main Committee of the Croatian People’s Sabor Božo Ljubić, in which he expresses his outrage at the allegations of Bakir Izetbegović that the threat to Croats in BiH is a mantra. Ljubić reminds several facts, among which the one that in the years between 2006 and 2014 for the seat of the Croatian member of the Presidency of BiH, which by Constitution is reserved for a representative of the Croats, on two occasions voted the Bosniaks. This way Bosniaks had two members, Serbs had one, and Croats were left without representation in the Presidency. Another fact that is pulled out in the letter are the changes in the Constitution of the Federation BiH entity, proposed by High Representative Petritsch. Due to those changes, Croats have almost no say in the cantons dominated by Bosniaks.

The same people are behind the terror attack attempts in Montenegro and Serbia

What I highly recommend you read today is the interview of Vuk Drašković for the Montenegro Pobjedanewspaper, which is at its front page. In it the former foreign minister of the former state of Serbia and Montenegro, now leader of the Serbian Renewal Movement, claims that Đukanović and Vučić were targets of one and the same attacker. According to Drašković, the root of current problems needs to be looked for even prior to October 5th of the year 2000.

“Instead of an uncompromising discovery and resolution of committed crimes, in Serbia was launched the narrative of some large anti-Serbian conspiracy by the anti-Serbian West. It all began even before October 5th of 2000, when Milošević refused to sign in Rambouillet the proposed plan for Kosovo. Not long after that the NATO intervention in FRY followed. This bombing was necessary for Milošević, for he knew that it will forever put at the backseat the crimes, which he and his death squads committed on the territory of former Yugoslavia. At the same time, he was aware that instead of the ‘butcher of the Balkans’, who in the eyes of the world is responsible for the aggression in Croatia and BiH, in Serbia he will be viewed as a victim of the largest army armada in the history of the world.”

Drašković also believes that Serbia even today continues to be in the same vicious circle, talking only about one crime, as though there were none other. Europe is quite reasonably concerned of the possibility of a new conflict among Balkan states, because, in a geostrategic sense, such Balkans would serve Russia as a token in the big game for Ukraine. “Because Russia, as it is now, is a serious state, capable of bringing serious instability to the Balkans. So, I did not have a moment’s doubt that on October 16th a bloodshed was being prepared in Montenegro, as well as the liquidation of Milo Đukanović with the sole aim to hinder not only Montenegro’s NATO membership, but its EU membership as well”, claims Drašković.

On its cover page, the Belgrade Vecernje novosti reports that the terrorist attack in Montenegro was being prepared by Russians, but was averted by the Montenegro Metropolitan Amfilohije. The newspaper quotes the Montenegro special prosecutor Milivoje Katnić, who believes the terrorist attack on Election Day in Montenegro was organised by Russian nationalists assisted by people from Serbia and Montenegro, aiming at a violent overthrow of power in the country. Currently, there is no proof that the state of Russia is involved in this, further claims the prosecutor, quoted by Vecernje novosti.

Serbs prefer Trump

Serbian newspaper Blic publishes today an analysis, in which it asks the question to what extent will the change of power in the White House affect the Balkans. Dr Neven Cvetićanin of the Institute of Social Sciences in Belgrade believes that Trump is preferable, because the Clinton family is being glorified in Kosovo, which means that a possible win for Hillary Clinton could serve those groups which have sympathies for the family. However, it is not reasonable to expect that Hillary Clinton will continue with her husband’s policy, because the world has changed. On the other hand, the majority of Serbs sympathise with Trump and it would be better for Serbia and its regional position if he wins, believes the analyst.

Translated by Stanimir Stoev

Posted in SerbiaComments Off on War in BiH Continues With Other Means

After the European Council Croatia Emerged as a True Member of the EU

Adelina Marini

In the days surrounding the October European Council everyone focused not just on the most painful subjects, like the comprehensive economic agreement with Canada and relations with Russia, but also on the debut of British Prime Minister Theresa May on European scene after she stepped into office last summer. And although there was not much drama surrounding her participation and neither was the subject of the Brits’ decision to leave the EU addressed at all, all eyes were locked on Mrs May’s figure. This somehow left in the shadows another debut, which is a total antipode of the Brexit – the Europe-isation and normalisation of Croatia.

The EU summit of October 20 and 21 was a first for the new Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenković as well, although the European scene is not alien to him at all. Before he assumed the highest office in his home country he used to be an influential member of the European Parliament – vice-chair of one of the most important committees in the EP (the foreign affairs committee) and boss of the EP delegation for relations with Ukraine. As euinside reported, immediately after assuming the leader’s post in the largest and very important political party in the country – the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) – following a severe crisis for the party and a catastrophic crash of their first government after the corruption scandals around Sanader, Mr Plenković radically changed the political discourse in Croatia.

He introduced modesty to the discourse, turned his back on nationalism, demonstrated cool headedness, patience, and confidence. What is more, he introduced the European subjects to the everyday political debate. This became particularly evident after the end of the European Council in Brussels, which was his first working day after the parliament voted confidence to his just-formed government, once more in a coalition with the reformists from Most of independent lists (Most NL). The change was felt immediately. Following the example of European-oriented states Andrej Plenković organised a national briefing after the second day of the summit in the special room of Croatia. So far, both PM Zoran  Milanović, during whose term Croatia became EU member, and his successor Tihomir Orešković spoke to journalists upon entering or exiting the Council meeting.

To some, this may be a technicality, but in fact it is a very important gesture, for it creates the feeling that the prime minister is available to the public to answer any questions. Croatian correspondents to Brussels, who are not used to such treatment, concentrated most of their questions namely on the issues in the summit’s agenda. Of far greater importance, however, is the prime minister’s decision to introduce the practise of reporting on the results of EU summits before Members of Parliament. He participated [in Croatian] in a debate, which lasted for more than three and a half hours and finally evolved into a quarrel with the newly hatched loud and irritating voice of Euroscepticism, embodied by the young MP from the Eurosceptic and anti-NATO party Live Wall Ivan Pernar.

Andrej Plenković announced in front of MPs that he intended to institute the practise of reporting after every meeting of the European Council, which got applauses from MPs of the entire political spectrum. As was noted by the former deputy foreign minister and currently opposition MP (SDP) Joško Klisović, European politics are no longer part of the foreign affairs, but of the domestic ones. According to Milorad Pupovac, MP from the Independent Democratic Serb Party, this is the best way to regain trust between domestic policy and the European one. This also is the best way to enhance the role of the Croatian Sabor (parliament) regarding European institutions.

Former Deputy PM and Minister of Foreign and European Affairs Vesna Pusić also noted that when we talk about European subjects, we are actually talking about Croatian issues as well. Most emotional, however, was Goran Dodig of the Croatian Christian Democratic Party. “Today, for the first time, I feel like a Member of Parliament, because for the first time we are having a serious and argumentative debate. For the first time, I have the feeling that we are discussing things not from the party trenches, but on problems, which concern us all. I wish to thank the Prime Minister for managing to come to the Sabor and I do not know if he is aware of it, but he gave dignity to this Sabor, that in this Sabor and in many of us he created a feeling of usefulness and decency”.

The MP admitted that he has always been a Eurosceptic, but following the debate he had changed his opinion so much that he is aware of the fact that Croatia, being a small country, does not stand many chances without participating in a large and powerful association like the EU. Most NL MP Miro Bulj also admitted that he was against Croatia joining the EU not because of the EU itself, but because the lack of sufficient information on it. Actually, this was the very goal of Mr Plenković, who believes populism and Euroscepticism could be fought only by speaking more and more to the point on European subjects.

Whether due to the fact that he is a dйbutante in the European Council and as a prime minister in general, but during his report (you can download the document itself in Croatian language from here) to MPs of October 26 and also when talking to journalists in Brussels, Andrej Plenković was rather general and cautious, avoided going into details. He listed the main topics of the summit’s agenda – migration, foreign relations and more specifically relations with Russia, trading policy. He announced that representatives from the Croatian Ministry of Internal Affairs will participate in the new European Border and Coast Guard Agency and advocated for a common policy of return of illegal immigrants on a full EU level. He revealed that a large portion of the discussion on the migration subject concentrated on the European solidarity concept and presented the two streams – Orbán’s of flexible solidarity and the old European notion of “true solidarity”. He did not share which group does he count Croatia in.

On trading policy, he hailed the agreement with Canada by stating that it opens up many possibilities, especially for small Croatian enterprises. He is for a quick ratification of the agreement. Regarding Russia, Plenković again was streamlined and rather reiterated in most general terms what the leaders talked about instead of presenting Croatia’s vision on the subject. This was the very thing that drew the most criticism from Croatian MPs. Against the lack of concrete information objected left-wing MP Gordan Maras. Nikola Grmoja of Most NL called for a thorough discussion of the contents of the agreement at the ratification. Joško Klisović was the most thorough in his questions and criticism towards the PM.

“We did not hear from the government what its priorities are in dealing with migration. The entering of Bulgaria and Romania in Schengen continues to be delayed due to the migration question. Speaking of which, what is happening with Croatia’s membership in Schengen? Does the government support the transfer of focus from the Balkan route to the Central-Mediterranean route? He did not tell us what the position is on flexible solidarity. Does the EU possess the ability to lead successful trading policy?”, were some of his questions, among which were also whether the government has an analysis of the effect of the Brexit and whether it has offered that some of the agencies, which are currently in great Britain be transferred to Croatia, like the pharmaceutical agency or the European Banking Authority for example.

Vesna Pusić asked for a national crisis management debate to be organised on migration, which would lead to the development of a strategy. She remarked that the same mistake is being made again and again – placing migration and the refugee crisis in one and the same package. “Those are two totally different things, which intersect, but each requires its own instruments and strategies”, she said. In her opinion, the “Fortress Europe” concept cannot function. Ivan Lovrinović from “Let’s change Croatia” noted that in the EU there are strong disintegration processes going on, especially pointing out the Visegrad group and calling that these issues be discussed over the next two months.

Gordan Jandroković, former minister of foreign affairs and former leader of the parliamentary committee on European issues (HDZ) called for ministers too to be more active on European issues in the respective committees.

Branimir Bunjac of Live Wall, however, snapped that to the Croatian public it is of no interest discussing European subjects, for people are more interested why since the membership 200 000 people have left Croatia. The first two hours of the debate went on smoothly and to the point, until Ivan Pernar walked on stage, the man who made Croatian media mark the birth of the term “pernarism”, which is a synonym to Trumpiotism, Euroscepticism, or populism. As euinside reported, the young MP on several occasions passionately defended Russia and blamed America for all worldly disasters. He believes Croatia has the policy of a servant towards Brussels and Washington.

His positions caused turbulent reactions in many MPs who were head over heel in criticising him on not dealing in facts, and insulting citizens, who voted for their MPs by calling everyone a servant to Brussels or America. Some of them reminded him that due to positions like these, Croatia today may not have been an independent state. They also told him that the EU and America may not be perfect, but are to be preferred than serving Moscow. This part of the discussion went on for an hour and a half and showed clearly that, at this stage, the soil in Croatia is not a good seeding ground for pro-Russian politics. Croatia is grateful to Ukraine for it was the first country to recognise Croatian independence. Besides, Croatia understands Ukraine very well because of Crimea, for it connects this episode with its own experience in separating from the former Yugoslavia.

Introducing European subjects in the internal political debate in Croatia also led to commentaries and analyses in Croatian media. The most in-depth one is by Velimir Šonje in tportal of last week. The author points out [in Croatian] five reasons why Croatia has lost Europe when Europe gained Croatia. “On this day – July 1st 2013 – Croatia lost Europe”, he writes. And the reasons for it are the political quarrels during the crisis; the return to the past; the financial and economic crisis in the EU; the radicalisation of the European East, especially after the refugee shock; the appearance of idea-less political alternatives.

“This is why it has to be repeated constantly that we have entered the EU formally-politically, but mentally and politically we are far away from its liberal democracy and settled market economy. Croatia needs to once again find Europe as a motive. And not the metal Eastern Europe, but the the free and potent Central and Northern Europe, which allows for individual growth and expression. Wouldn’t it be, for us and our future, a carrier rocket to find out what and how are Austrians and Dutchmen doing, rather than Greeks? There is more being written in Croatia about Venezuela and North Korea than about The Netherlands”, comments Velimir Šonje

The prime minister’s intention of driving in the European Union and its agenda into the domestic policy of Croatia will surely aid Croats in discovering Europe as a motive. This could be hiding the risk of the country turning into a Eurosceptic from a Eurorealist, but it is more likely to boost its pro-European orientation. At this stage it is important to note, however that against the background of Theresa May’s Brexit debut in the European Council there was also a pro-European debut by a country, which is extremely important to the EU in a geopolitical sense. At a moment, when the Western Balkans are once more boiling in turmoil, it is very important that the EU has on its external border a country with a strong European orientation, from the tribune of which the most important European subjects are being discussed, in a language understandable to the region. This would have a powerful effect on the stabilisation and Europe-isation of the Western Balkans.

Translated by Stanimir Stoev

Posted in CroatiaComments Off on After the European Council Croatia Emerged as a True Member of the EU

Is This Person America’s New President?

Is This Person America’s New President? Here’s Why Hillary Clinton Won’t Allow Her Corporate Speeches to be Published, Supported by Monsanto

(update added 8 November 2016)

In a previous report, I indicated “Why Hillary Clinton’s Paid Speeches Are Relevant”, but not what they contained. The present report indicates what they contained. 

One speech in particular will be cited and quoted from as an example here, to show the type of thing that all of her corporate speeches contained, which she doesn’t want the general public to know about.

This is the day’s keynote speech, which she gave on Wednesday, 25 June 2014to the Biotechnology Innovation Organization, a lobbying organization in DC, at their annual convention, which in 2014 was held in San Diego. The announcement for attendees said:

“Wednesday’s Keynote session is sponsored by Genentech, and is open to Convention registrants with Convention Access and Convention Access & Partnering badges only. Seating is limited.”

Somehow, a reporter from a local newspaper, the Times of San Diego, managed to get in. Also, somehow, an attendee happened to phone-video the 50-minute interview that the BIO’s CEO did of Clinton, which took place during the hour-and-a-half period, 12-1:30, which was allotted to Clinton.

The Times of San Diego headlined that day, “Hillary Clinton Cheers Biotechers, Backing GMOs and Federal Help”, and gave an excellent summary of her statements, including of the interview. Here are highlights:

It was red meat for the biotech base. Hillary Rodham Clinton, in a 65-minute appearance at the BIO International Convention on Wednesday, voiced support for genetically modified organisms and possible federal subsidies. …

“Maybe there’s a way of getting a representative group of actors at the table” to discuss how the federal government could help biotechs with “insurance against risk,” she said.

Without such subsidies, she said, “this is going to be an increasing challenge.” …

She said the debate about GMOs might be turned toward the biotech side if the benefits were better explained, noting that the “Frankensteinish” depictions could be fought with more positive spin.

“I stand in favor of using seeds and products that have a proven track record,” she said [at 29:00 in the video next posted here], citing drought-resistant seeds she backed as secretary of state. “There’s a big gap between the facts and what the perceptions are.” [that too at 29:00] …

Minutes earlier, Gov. Jerry Brown made a rousing 3-minute pitch for companies to see California as biotech-friendly.

“You’ve come to the right place.” …

Brown had some competition for biotech boosterism in the form of Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, the longtime Clinton ally who pitched his own state as best for biotech. …

[Clinton was] Given a standing ovation at the start and end of her appearance.

In other words: As President, she would aim to sign into law a program to provide subsidies from U.S. taxpayers to Monsanto and other biotech firms, to assist their PR and lobbying organizations to eliminate what she says is “a big gap between the facts and what the perceptions are” concerning genetically modified seeds and other GMOs.

In other words: she ignores the evidence that started to be published in scientific journals in 2012 showing that Monsanto and other GMO firms were selectively publishing studies that alleged to show their products to be safe, while selectively blocking publication of studies that — on the basis of better methodology — showed them to be unsafe. She wants U.S. taxpayers to assist GMO firms in their propaganda that’s based on their own flawed published studies, financed by the GMO industry, and that ignores the studies that they refuse to have published. She wants America’s consumers to help to finance their own being poisoning by lying companies, who rake in profits from poisoning them.

Her argument on this, at 27:00 to 30:00 in the video of the 50-minute interview of Clinton, starts by her citing the actual disinformation (that’s propagandized by the fossil-fuels industries, which actually back her Presidential campaign) that causes the American public to reject the view that humans have caused global warming.

At 27:38 in the video, she said:

“98% of scientists in the world agree that man has caused the problem” of global warming, and she alleged that the reason why there is substantial public resistance to GMOs is the same as the reason why there’s substantial public resistance to the reality that global warming exists and must be actively addressed:

Americans don’t know the science of the matter. She received several applauses from this pro-GMO audience, for making that false analogy. The reality, that it’s false, is that on 15 May 2013, the definitive meta-study, which examined the 11,944 published studies that had been done relating to the question of global warming and its causes, reported that “97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.” The meta-study was titled “Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature”.

So, Clinton’s statement “98%” was only 0.9% off regarding the size of the scientific consensus. However, her implication that the public’s rejection of that actual 97.1% of experts’ findings on global warming, is at all analogous to the public’s rejection of the actually bogus finding by GMO industry ‘experts’ that GMOs are safe, is pure deception by her. The reality is the exact contrary: The fossil-fuels industries have financed the propaganda ‘discrediting’ the scientists’ consensus about global warming, much like the GMO industries have financed the deception of the public to think that ‘scientists’ ‘find’ that GMOs are safe. In fact, as was reported inScientific American, on 23 December 2013, “’Dark Money’ Funds Climate Change Denial Effort”, and the study they were summarizing, from the journal Climate Change, was titled “Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations”. It found that:

“From 2003 to 2007, the Koch Affiliated Foundations and the ExxonMobil Foundation were heavily involved in funding CCCM [climate change counter-movement] organizations. But since 2008, they are no longer making publicly traceable contributions to CCCM organizations. Instead, funding has shifted to pass through [two] untraceable sources [both of which had been set up by the Kochs: Donors Trust, and Donors Capital Fund].”

On 23 April 2016, Politico headlined “Charles Koch: ‘It’s possible’ Clinton is preferable to a Republican for president”, but this isn’t the only indication that Hillary is merely pretending to be their enemy. On 24 February 2016, I headlined “Hillary Clinton’s Global-Burning Record” and summarized and linked to news reports such as the opening there: “On 17 July 2015, Paul Blumenthal and Kate Sheppard at Huffington Post bannered, ‘Hillary Clinton’s Biggest Campaign Bundlers Are Fossil Fuel Lobbyists’ and the sub-head was ‘Clinton’s top campaign financiers are linked to Big Oil, natural gas and the Keystone pipeline.’”

In other words: the same pro-GMO lobbyists who applaud Hillary for verbally endorsing the science that affirms global warming, applaud her for endorsing their own fake ‘science’ which asserts that GMOs have been proven safe. They just love her lie, which analogizes them to the authentic scientists who (97.1%) say that global warming exists and is caused by humans’ emissions of global-warming gases.

Also, she expressed the wish that: “the federal government could help biotechs with ‘insurance against risk,’ she said. Without such subsidies, she said, this is going to be an increasing challenge,” because otherwise, biotech companies might get bankrupted by lawsuits from consumers who might have become poisoned by their products. She wants the consuming public to bear the risk from those products — not the manufacturers of them to bear any of the risks that could result from those manufacturers’ rigged ‘safety’ ‘studies’ (a.k.a.: their propaganda).

In other words: the reason why Hillary Clinton won’t allow her 91 corporate speeches, for which she was paid $21,667,000, to be published, is the lying political cravenness of her pandering to those corporations there. Each group of lobbyists is happy to applaud her lying, regardless of whether her lies include insults against another group of lobbyists, to whom she might be delivering similar lies to butter them up at a different annual convention or etc.

In other words: she’s telling all of them collectively: You’re my type of people, and the public who despise you are merely misguided, but as President I’ll set them straight and they’ll even end up paying part of the bill to be ‘educated’ about these matters, by my Administration, and even part of the bill to pay corporations’ product-liability suits.

The reason why Clinton doesn’t want those speeches to be made public is that she doesn’t want the voters to know that she intends to use their money to propagandize to them for the benefit of those corporations, and also to protect those corporations from liability for harms their products cause the public.

This is called (by the propagandists) ‘capitalism’ and ‘democracy’. Mussolini, with pride, called it sometimes “fascism,” and sometimes “corporationism.” But whatever it’s called, it’s what she supports, and what she represents, to the people who are paying her. And even most of her own voters would find it repulsive, if they knew about it. So: she can’t let them know about it. And she doesn’t.

UPDATE: On 5 October 2016, fifty-six food-related lobbying organizations, such as the American Soybean Association and the International Dairy Foods Association, and including some universities that receive large income from biotech firms to produce ‘scientific studies’ so they can promote their products as being ‘proven safe’, wrote a letter to the heads and ranking members of the Appropriations Committee in both the House and Senate, opening,

“The undersigned organizations support the inclusion of $3 million within the Fiscal Year 2017 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act to better inform the public about the application of biotechnology to food and agricultural production. Regrettably, there is a tremendous amount of misinformation about agricultural biotechnology in the public domain. Dedicated educational resources will ensure key federal agencies responsible for the safety of our nation’s food supply – the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) – are able to more easily convey to the public science- and fact-based information about food.”

That was exactly what Hillary Clinton had proposed on 25 June 2014 to the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (which was one of those 56 lobbying groups). As to whether the idea had originated with Clinton or with top executives in the biotech industry, one can, at the present time, only speculate. However, she was on record (privately) proposing it to the biotech industry more than two years before the biotech industry proposed it to Congress.

Posted in USAComments Off on Is This Person America’s New President?

Naziyahu Congratulates Zionist Trump, Calls Him ‘True Friend’ of ‘Israel’

Image result for Naziyahu IN NAZI UNIFORM

Nazi Prime Minister Benjamin Naziyahu congratulated Zionist Donald Trump on his election as US president on Wednesday and called him “a true friend” of the Nazi entity.

“President-elect Trump is a true friend of the state of Israel, and I look forward to working with him to advance security, stability and peace in our region,” the right-wing premier said in a statement.

“The ironclad bond between the United States and Israel is rooted in shared values, buttressed by shared interests and driven by a shared destiny.”

“I am confident that president-elect Trump and I will continue to strengthen the unique alliance between our two countries and bring it to ever greater heights.”

Naziyahu avoided controversial topics in his statement, unlike members of his government.

Education Minister Nazi Naftali Bennett, who heads the hardline Nazi Jewish Home party, said after Trump’s victory that the idea of a Palestinian state was over.

“Trump’s victory is an opportunity for Israel to immediately retract the notion of a Palestinian state in the centre of the country, which would hurt our security and just cause,” Nazi Bennett said in an apparent reference to the occupied West Bank.

“This is the position of the president-elect … The era of a Palestinian state is over.”

Others, including politicians from Naziyahu’s Likud party, called for Zionist Trump to follow through on his promise to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to al-Quds (Jerusalem).

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Naziyahu Congratulates Zionist Trump, Calls Him ‘True Friend’ of ‘Israel’

Trumping the New World Order

Image result for Trumping CARTOON
By Gearóid Ó Colmáin 

The Trump victory is a blow to liberalism, political correctness and human rights ideology. It is a revolt, albeit limited, against globalisation and therefore a momentary victory for truly progressive forces. Today in Damascus there is at least the hope that the US might wind down its terrorist operations against the Syrian people. Today in Moscow, there is at least a pause in the anxiety of Russians who feared they were going to have to face another Great Patriotic War against Western reaction. Today in Europe, the liberal, child-raping, mass-murdering, lying scumbag establishment are uncomfortable – more so than ever before.

The French media are calling the Trump victory a ‘nightmare’ and a ‘catastrophe’. We who have stood up for the downtrodden workers of this world have long sought to turn the nightmare they have imposed on us back on them. Now, everything depends on how the national democratic movement in the US is turned into the cause of labour against capital. American labour should demand pay rises and an end to ‘free trade’. There will be no more turn-coat Bernie Sanders, no more liberal ‘anti-imperialists’, no more Wall Street ‘democrats’.

A victory for Muslims

Muslims should rejoice at a Trump victory for the Saudis banked on Clinton and lost and the Saudis are the enemies of all Muslims. Trump is unlikely to push for war on Iran. But the United States remains an empire, an extremely predatory war machine. Trump must be pushed in the direction working class people need him to go. He has said he wants to get rid of ‘foreign lobbies’ influencing US policy. It is time to talk about those foreign lobbies – especially the lobby of the Zionist regime. Muslims in the United States should seek to educate Trumpists on the real causes of the wars in the Middle East. They need to understand that Iran and Syria are not enemies of the United States and that the US government should abandon Zionism.

A victory for Blacks

Black people in the United States should be happy with the Trump victory. Black nationalists know that Trump does not care about them. But they also know that he will not impede their cause through espousal of pseudo anti-racism. Black liberation activists will now have allies against the racist, Soros-funded project of ‘Black Lives Matter’ – a programme designed to destroy the Black family through LGBT infiltration of the Black Liberation movement. The Trump victory presents a unique opportunity to expose the agenda of the people waging race war on America’s black proletariat. A halt on mass immigration into the United States will also benefit the Black lumpen proletariat and put it, through organised agitation, back on the ladder of social mobility which was deliberately sabotaged by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. Trump will do nothing for Blacks but he has helped lift the weight of political correctness which has sabotaged Black liberation.

A victory for Latinos

American Latinos should also support regime change in Washington. A wall between Mexico and the United States will intensify the class struggle in both countries, to the advantage of workers. Although a wall opposing the entry of desperately poor Mexican families into the United States is undoubtedly cruel, it also hurts the oligarchs and in the long term, no change is possible without hurting them! If Trump were to follow through on the construction of the wall and his promises to end ‘democracy promotion’ in other countries, progressive forces in Latin America could re-organise and be in a better position than ever before to shake off the shackles of international finance capitalism. US isolationism and protectionism is good for Latin American liberation!

Deep state intrigue

As I pointed out before, the US electoral system is rigged and that the American deep state may have been in revolt against the rampant corruption of Washington. But there is also a possibility that senior and highly influential US imperial strategists within the Council on Foreign Relations, such as  former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Bzrezinski and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, may have secretly wanted Trump to win. Kissinger has often spoken highly of Russian president Vladmir Putin and Dr. Bzrezinski  recently published a paper entitled:Towards a Global Realignment where he wrote of the necessity of ‘cooperation’ between the imperial powers. Could the Trump victory be part of a new ‘multi-polar’ marketing strategy of  US-led global governance? It is something we cannot rule out. Although the revelations about the crimes of the Clinton dynasty by Wikileaks are most certainly true, the exact role of Julien Assange and his organisation in the global imperial system remains ambiguous.

Looking ahead

So, what can we expect from the new Trump administration? Very little, almost nothing. Everything will depend on how popular movements throughout the world exploit the weaknesses that have been exposed in US imperialism. The leaders of America’s minorities MUST reach out to the white proletarian Trumpists. The Trumpists MUST reach out to the Black Liberation movement, to people like Dr Randy Short, Ezili Danto, Irritated Genie, Dr Umar Johnson and others. Dr Randy Short, while pointing out Trump’s shortcomings, described the Republican as “what America needs” and “anti-globalisation”. Ezili Danto, a Haitian lawyer who has worked tirelessly to expose US imperialism against Haiti urged Americans to vote for Trump.

This election has, more than any other, separated genuine anti-imperialists with a strategic and dialectical analysis from the petty-bourgeois, White, urban, ‘anti-racist’, ‘anti-fascist’ mob. The Chomskyites, Trotskyites and anarchists have been trumped! Grass-roots community leaders against the values of globalisation from all ethnic backgrounds must unite against the oligarchs. They need to constantly remind Trump of the necessity of turning the Republican Party into a Workers Party. All of the most nefarious conspiracies against honest labour have been dealt a blow by this result from the global warming scam to the reactionary and racist LGBT to endless foreign wars in the name of ‘human rights’.

My prediction is that Trump will not willingly deliver on any of his promises however a space has been opened for class emancipation; a section of the US proletariat has given the two fingers to the liberal imperialist elite. That is something to be happy about. But watch how the Sorosite oligarchs respond. There will be ‘race riots’ and storms of great magnitude. The Saudi-Israeli backed ‘Islamic State’ will strike. There are violent reactionaries operating at the heart of Trumpism too – far too many! A Sorosite onslaught of race riots and terrorism will be grist to their reactionary mill. That is why Trumpism must become a stepping stone towards a popular front against monopoly capitalism. But we should not overlook the fact that Trump still represents ruling class interests and had considerable support from sections of the oligarchy, such as Rupert Murdoch and Sheldon Adelson.

The Trump victory is, notwithstanding all these problems, good news. There was an applause in the Russian State Duma after the election of Trump. That is an unprecedented development in international relations, which will create a major move for detente between the imperial powers and peace in Syria. There is reason to harbour cautious hope for the new year while not losing sight of the fact that only mass popular movements will bring real change to the world. Conditions today are better than yesterday for the emergence of those movements.

Posted in USAComments Off on Trumping the New World Order

Hillary versus Donald: Ding Dong, The Witch Is Dead! Victory for the Wizard of Oz!



By Diana Johnstone | Global Research 

“There’s no place like home.”

That’s the lesson. Even when home is Kansas.

The real meaning of this election is not, as bitterly disappointed Hillary supporters still maintain with tears in their eyes and fear in their throats, a victory for racism and sexism.

The real meaning of this upset is that Wall Street’s globalization project has been rejected by the citizens of its homeland.

This has major implications for the European nations that have been dragged along into this ruinous project.

Hillary Clinton was the candidate of the military industrial complex and international finance capital. She designed herself to be the figurehead of those forces, as queen of regime change. She aspired to be the one to remake the world in the image Wall Street dictates. It was a project enthusiastically and expensively supported by the one percent who profit from arms contracts and the trade deals they write themselves for their own interests.

To distract from the genuine significance of her candidacy, the Clinton campaign appealed to the desire for respectability of educated city dwellers, portraying Trump supporters as racist yokels motivated by a hateful desire to scapegoat minorities as revenge for their own inadequacies. They were “deplorables”, and you wouldn’t want to be one of them, would you?

Trump was sexist, because he referred to certain women as “bimbos”. Elizabeth Warren called him out for this, on a platform where Hillary sat listening, mouth wide open in delight – she who had referred to Bill’s girlfriends as “bimbo eruptions”. Sleaze and hypocrisy drowned out policy discussions. The worst the Clinton campaign could come up with was an eleven-year-old locker room exchange – just words, hardly comparable to Bill’s chronic actions.

Still, millions who were taken in by the Clinton campaign line are devastated, terrified, convinced that the only reason Trump won was the “racism” and “sexism” of that lower caste in globalized society: white heterosexual working class males.

But no, Virginia, there were other reasons to vote for Trump. Racism and sexism are surely low on the list.

Trump voters were scandalized by Hillary’s lies and corruption. Many of them would have voted for Bernie Sanders if they had the choice. That choice was taken away from them by Democratic Party manipulators who were sold on their own advertising campaign to elect “the first woman President.” A brand new product on the Presidential election market! Be the first to vote for a woman President! New, improved!

Bernie’s success already showed that millions of people didn’t want that woman. But the Democratic Party manipulators and their oligarch sponsors went right ahead with their plans to force Hillary Clinton on an unwilling nation. They brought this defeat on themselves.

Contrary to what you could believe by reading the New York Times, there were even intellectuals who voted for Trump, or at least refused to vote for Hillary, for the simple reason that Trump appears less likely to lead the world into its third and final Great War. He said things giving that impression, but such statements were ignored by mainstream media as they worked overtime to inflate the ogre image. No war with Russia? You must be a Putin puppet!

Trump voters had several reasons to vote for Trump other than “racism”. Most of all, they want their jobs back, jobs that have vanished thanks to the neoliberal policy of transferring manufacturing jobs to places with low wages.

But racism is the only motive recognized by the globalized elite for rejecting globalization. British citizens who voted to leave the European Union in order to recover their traditional democracy were also stigmatized as “racist” and “xenophobe”. Opposition to racism and xenophobia is the natural moral defense of a project of global governance that deprives ordinary citizens of any important power of decision.

This extraordinarily vicious campaign has brought out and aggravated sharp divisions within the United States. The division between city and countryside is most evident on the electoral maps. But these real divisions are exacerbated by a campaign that portrayed Donald Trump as a racist madman, a new Hitler about to bring fascism to America. The antiracism of this campaign, denouncing “hate”, has actually spawned hate.

No, Virginia, Trump is not Hitler. He is the Wizard of Oz. He is a showman who pulled off an amazing trick thanks to the drastic moral and intellectual decline of the American political system.

He is neither as dangerous as his opponents fear, nor as able to “make American great again” as his supporters hope. He is the Lesser Evil. What will become of him in Washington is anybody’s guess.

Posted in USAComments Off on Hillary versus Donald: Ding Dong, The Witch Is Dead! Victory for the Wizard of Oz!

We shouldn’t be surprised about Trump’s victory

Andrew Korybko

Image result for Trump’s victory CARTOON

  1. What struck me the most about this Presidential election campaign, was a complete lack of actual policy by the contestants. It was like watching two clowns ‘splooshing’ custard pies into each others face every day, while NO DETAIL as to HOW each one was going to change America for the better. It looked like a ‘Live’ reality show.

    The release of emails by WikiLeaks also showed that Hillary cannot be trusted to act with integrity. How the FBI decided that she had no case to answer(for not securing her emails) is beyond me.
    And, really, when a Presidential candidate has to use celebrities to somehow give her ‘credibility’ is an insult to the intelligence of the American people.

    Let’s face it, Hillary is a dud, who was relying on her dubious record, and an ex President for a husband, who’s credibility went down the toilet years ago……..

Posted in USAComments Off on We shouldn’t be surprised about Trump’s victory

Trump Wins: Welcome to the new world

Image result for trump cartoon
The BRICS Post 

Modern history will record November 8, 2016 as the day when the United States of America officially decided to vote for a global retreat – from the heady rhetoric of ‘Let’s make the world a better place’ to “Let’s make America great again”.

Americans have voted for building a wall to protect what they have, against the dream of global dominance. This surely marks the end of the uni-polar world as we know it.

The tenor and assertions (of rebuilding American infrastructure, erecting border walls, keeping immigrants away, and dismantling Obamacare) during Republican candidate Donald Trump’s campaign trail followed by his massive victory on Tuesday completes this US retreat.

The resulting void comes at a time when no one nation is ready to fill this space which will be left empty – and this could fuel the rise of real multi-polarity.

At the moment, and surely for many years now, China remains America’s biggest economic rival. That juggernaut continues with Beijing’s ambitious new Silk Road (One Belt One Road) project across Asia and Europe.

China is the world’s second largest economy after the United States and the biggest trading partner for most Asian and African economies. With over 160 cities hosting 1 million+ inhabitants and new cities emerging, China continues to be one of the fastest growing consumer markets.

However, its biggest domestic challenge is to continue to guard against any slips in its politically conservative agenda and that internal social upheaval does not go out of those “iron hands”.

But there is no denying that China will continue as the centerpiece of the global economic discourse even as Trump takes stock of US economic health indicators.

Enter Russia

The next biggest tension point on the global agenda is strategic geopolitics.

Unpalatable as it may be to many, President Vladimir Putin’s Russia – which is facing severe economic difficulties – is ready, willing and able to play an important role here.

Among the Republican leader’s most discussed campaign promises was that America would outsource the fight against ISIS to Putin in Syria.

For Putin, to manage public opinion at home, it’s important to be doing things which can divert attention from local to global affairs.

We are likely to hear more and more of Russia in the coming days, especially since Trump spoke about working with Putin “to wipe out shared enemies”.

They say establishment always resists change.

So it’s likely that Trump might continue on the path set by his predecessors on foreign policy in the short term. But it is quite clear that his focus would be inwards rather than outwards.

Trump might find friendly right-wing dispensations in India and Brazil that could be further persuaded to become Washington’s proxies in their struggle against economically-asserting China and strategically-defiant Russia. In turn, India and Brazil are likely to benefit from this dependence.

Rise of strategic blocs

But in order to understand the likelihood of an American retreat, one needs to look at the recent announcements of Asian countries like the Philippines and Malaysia that have openly rebuffed US meddling in the region vis-à-vis the South China Sea or of the eagerness of EU countries in joining the new China-led financial institutions like the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

Now more than ever, strategic groupings are likely to wield more eminence – BRICS is one such group.

Former UK Vice Finance Minister, Jim O’Neill, who is the father of this acronym, has recently said that BRICS has outperformed his expectations and – as things stand today – it seems he is in for an even bigger surprise.

Meanwhile, Germany’s Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen has already asked President-elect Trump to reassure US allies of his commitment to NATO following some bitter comments during his 2016 campaign.

The EU is another big grouping.

If it succeeds in fighting the growing right-wing onslaught and continues to work with other groups like BRICS and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), the EU is likely to gain from this US retreat.

What Americans have done today is historic. They may not have made history by electing the first female president but they have, unintentionally, initiated steps towards a historic retreat.

They have sent an outsider to the White House with a mandate to look within.

The American Dream has opened its eyes to the new realities.

Welcome to the new world order.

Posted in USAComments Off on Trump Wins: Welcome to the new world

“Election Day Chaos”? NBC Reports U.S. Prepping Possible False-Flag Cyber-Attack on Election Day?


The reliability of all of these reports can reasonably be questioned, but here they are:

On October 14th, NBC News bannered “CIA Prepping for Possible Cyber Strike Against Russia”, and reported that,

“The Obama administration is contemplating an unprecedented cyber covert action against Russia in retaliation for alleged Russian interference in the American presidential election, U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News. … The sources did not elaborate on the exact measures the CIA was considering, but said the agency had already begun opening cyber doors, selecting targets and making other preparations for an operation.”

On October 30th, “Super Station 95” reported an “Update” saying that “a trusted source” said:

It appears the United States is going to engage in battle in Syria. SuperStation95 just received this communication from a trusted source:

I just landed back in the US from Diego Garcia. War is brewing. The island has more aircraft and refueling tankers than I have seen since 2005.

Docks were full and 30 ships were moored off shore.This is a huge buildup.

B1s and B2s and b52s in abundance. Never seen them all at one place. It seems stupid to bunch them up at one facility.

Our layover was only supposed to be for 4 hours but the flight crews were so backed up we stayed overnight. The hotel was full and we bunked in a tent. We have never had to do that before.

AF security is everywhere and they were assey. (Acting like strict, suspicious assholes)

Just a heads up, keep your eyes open. I know that I am not giving away in classified information, the Russians have a satellite dedicated to watching this island.

Also, the navy had 2 subs at the docks at once. I have never seen more than 1 there.

B52s have new paint jobs — all flat black. Whats up with that?

On top of all this, huge numbers of in-flight refueling tankers are also on the island.  More than enough to supply air operations to/from the Middle East, non-stop.

This is a very bad development.  The US would never stage this much hardware at Diego Garcia unless they were planning a full-out, prolonged, military action.

Based upon my military experience as a contractor who has visited Diego Garcia every 6 months for 11 years, we are going to war.

On November 3rd, NBC News headlined “Exclusive: White House Readies to Fight Election Day Cyber Mayhem”, and reported

“Officials are alert for any attempts to create Election Day chaos, and say steps are being taken to prepare for worst-case scenarios, including a cyber-attack that shuts down part of the power grid or the internet. But what is more likely, multiple U.S. officials say, is a lower-level effort by hackers from Russia or elsewhere to peddle misinformation by manipulating Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms.” This news-report included a video of Andrea Mitchell, headlined “Is Russia a third party in the 2016 race?”

If the United States government, on or after Election Day, says that Russia had done something of this nature, then the U.S. ‘response’ to the alleged ‘cyber-attack from Russia’ would presumably be one or more of “the exact measures the CIA was considering,” as NBC reported on October 14th, and World War III could then start with a cyber-war that could escalate to serious consequences, such as deactivating a power-grid in one or both of the countries, and, subsequently, a direct military invasion, of one by the other.

But how would the U.S. public ever be able to come to know whether that alleged Russian provocation actually existed and wasn’t instead provoked intentionally by the U.S. government in order to provide a pretext for the U.S. to invade Russia? (After all, we’ve been pouring troops and weapons onto and near Russia’s borders for months now — and how would the U.S. respond to a provocation in which Russia surrounded our border with nukes?)

On November 2nd, ‘Jeremiah Johnson’ an anonymous retired Green Beret, headlined “Something Big Is Underway On All Fronts: ‘Within The Next Few Weeks The Future Of The United States Will Be Decided’,” and he reported that:

As of this writing, the increased U.S. troop presence in Eastern Europe includes a battalion-sized element of American troops being emplaced in the Suwalki Gap, Polish territory that borders Lithuania in a 60-mile stretch of corridor.  The Russian Defense Ministry announced that 600 Russian and Belarussian airborne troops conducted training exercises in Brest, on the Belorussian-Polish border only a few miles from where the U.S. forces are deploying in Poland. This on the heels of Britain deploying 800 men, tanks, and jets to Estonia, along with pledges of Challenger 2 tanks, APC’s (Armored Personnel Carriers), and drones. Two companies of French and Danish Soldiers will join the British in the deployment to Estonia.

For the first time since 1945, Norway has violated its treaty with Russia (then the Soviet Union) not to station foreign troops on its soil. A company of U.S. Marines will soon be stationed for a 6-month deployment in Norway. The situation is heating up in Ukraine, according to a report on entitled Ukraine Moves Massive Force up to Lugansk Frontline, published October 28, 2016. The report reveals the Ukrainian Army is deploying 3,500 soldiers and 200 armored vehicles of the 15th Motorized Infantry Brigade to Krasny Oktyabr in the district of Lugansk in Eastern Ukraine. For the first time in history, Romanian airspace is being patrolled by the RAF (Royal Air Force) of Britain.

His report closes:

“The next war will be initiated by an EMP [Electro-Magnetic Pulse] device detonated above the continental United States followed by a limited nuclear exchange and then conventional warfare. … Obama is the joker, setting the stage for the transfer of power. That transfer is not going to occur with the losing candidate (in either case) going gently into that good night. The stage is set for a war to begin. The stage is set for a false flag operation to take down our grid. The stage is set to steal the election for Clinton or declare it null and void. Within the next few weeks, the future of the United States will be decided…with or without the consent of the governed.”

If it’s not true, then why is the U.S. engaging in these preparations? Russia has never attacked America. The Cold War was supposed to have ended. The U.S. government obviously thinks it now is actually hotter than ever, and so, apparently, we place the jihadists on the back burner; we’ve got a much bigger war to wage, and we’ll know soon whether it starts soon after the ‘election’.

Posted in USAComments Off on “Election Day Chaos”? NBC Reports U.S. Prepping Possible False-Flag Cyber-Attack on Election Day?

Clinton Is the Most Dangerous Person Alive

An Interview with Edward S. Herman
Global Research
clinton isis

Ann Garrison: Earlier this year, you told me that you differ with Noam Chomsky, your co-author of Manufacturing Consent and other books, in that you plan to vote for the Green Party’s presidential and vice presidential candidates Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka in the swing state of Pennsylvania.

Are you still planning to do so?  

Edward S. Herman (image right): Yes.  

AG: Can you explain why? 

ESH: Because the two duopoly candidates are dangerous to societal and international welfare and even survival. Hillary Clinton is a neo-liberal and pre-eminent war-monger. I think she is the most dangerous person living in the world today, given her highly likely election victory and her likely performance as president. She represents the corporate elite and military-industrial complex more clearly than Trump and she is a follow-on to Bush and Obama. She will pursue similar policies except for her somewhat more aggressive bent. 

Trump is a self-promoting windbag, racist and dangerous, unpredictable phony. We have a ghastly choice in these two. Jill Stein offers a protest opportunity, more so than not voting. On the line that either voting for Stein or not voting would constitute a vote for Trump, one might argue that a vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for war with Syria and Russia and a vote for Netanyahu (and hence for escalated violence in Palestine). 

AG:  Hillary Clinton and John Podesta’s e-mail has revealed that Hillary Clinton is well aware that the Saudi and Qatari rulers – not rogue elements – fund ISIS, and the same Saudi and Qatari rulers fund the Clinton Foundation. Throughout the last George Bush’s presidency, there were innumerable headlines that “Saudi oil sheikhs met with George Bush on his Crawford, Texas ranch.”  What are your thoughts on that? 

ESH: Saudi Arabia is a US ally and an instrument of the warfare state. Hillary Clinton has treated its leaders warmly and she will continue to do so as president. The Clinton Foundation’s receipt of money from Saudi and Qatari leaders is a first class conflict of interest and outrage, but the media have focused on the many less important abuses of Trump, helping cover over the outrages of their preferred candidate, Hillary Clinton, and her husband, Bill Clinton.

AG: What do you think of Clinton’s statement that she would make removing Bashar Al-Assad her top priority? And Trump’s statement that he would not, because that would recklessly risk confrontation with Russia?

ESH: Hillary Clinton has essentially promised to escalate war in Syria and is therefore promising to go to war with Russia as well. Diana Johnstone has made the case that Hillary Clinton plans to try to bring about “regime change” in Russia (cite). This is of course incredibly dangerous and would have aroused a really democratic media, but the existing media are part of the war system, hence Hillary Clinton’s commitment to wars is essentially suppressed. Trump has made a number of statements along the lines of reducing US interventions and commitments abroad and trying to deal with Russia in a less confrontational manner, but he has sometimes contradicted himself by urging expanded arms, use of nuclear weapons, etc. But Hillary Clinton has said nothing that would offset her war-mongering. This difference from Trump may help explain the intensity of media hostility to Trump.

AG: Jill Stein has said that “wars for oil are blowing back at us wth a vengeance” and that she would cut the military budget by half, close most of the foreign bases, and redirect resources into a Green New Deal that would fully employ Americans building sustainable energy and agricultural infrastructure. I can’t imagine you disagree, but do you think it’s important for the Greens to articulate such a vision at the national and international level, instead of focussing solely on local races that they might win? 

ESH: The Greens don’t have the resources to compete in many local elections. So she is wise to focus on the big national and international issues. Furthermore, the real gap in the political system is the lack of opposition to national neoliberal and militaristic policies. It is said that she can’t make a bigger mark given the hegemony of the duopoly, but even Ralph Nader couldn’t get 5 percent of the vote. The system still works well, for the 1%.

AG: Michael Moore has made a movie called “Trumpland” and warned that Trump’s election would be the end of the United States, assuming that would be a bad thing. David Swanson, author of “War Is a Lie,” has imagined the same but argued, in Secession, Trump, and the Avoidability of Civil War,” that the break-up of the United States is not the worst possibility on the horizon. Do you have any thoughts on this? 

ESH: Michael Moore is completely oblivious to the fact that the enlarging war that is likely to follow Hillary Clinton’s election threatens not only a nuclear exchange, but also attacks on civil liberties and the march toward fascism. In its own way, the election of Hillary Clinton might threaten a democratic order as much as a Trump victory. The anti-Trump hysteria has tended to block out consideration of the Hillary Clinton menace.

AG: Is there anything else you’d like to say about why you’re voting for Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka? 

ESH: I’ve always believed in the moral rule laid down in the categorical imperative: “Do that which you would wish generalized.”

Posted in USAComments Off on Clinton Is the Most Dangerous Person Alive

Shoah’s pages


November 2016
« Oct   Dec »