Archive | June 4th, 2019

The Root of All Evil: “People No Longer Matter”


How primitive human beings dealt with the harsh conditions of life can hardly be imagined. I suppose humans emerged in racial and ethnic groups that then merged to some extent, sometimes easily, sometimes not. All, however, face the same hardships to which they responded in various ways. All people require the stuff that is essential to life. Acquiring it is what life is all about. Since all people cannot fend for themselves, these groups made arrangements to take care of the needy. The groups’ survival required it.

Political considerations are always the basis of these arrangements. Political differences always produce different economic practices. Each group has its own political-economy. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democratic Socialism, for instance, are political-economies and each has numerous variations. Economies do not exist in isolation. Any attempt to alter a society’s economic practices requires a corresponding change to its political practices.

For instance, raising the minimum wage substantially is futile unless prices are kept from rising. A large enough rise in prices can negate the effects of any pay raise. Controlling prices, however, is political.

Any attempt to compare the economies practices of different societies is also difficult. Unless the political differences are understood, the economic differences cannot be.

American society has been organized to produce ever higher levels of Gross Domestic Product which is said to be the value of all goods and services produced in a year. Although GDP is defined as domestic product, it is calculated by adding up all the money spent on consumption by households, businesses, and governments. When one year’s GDP is greater than the previous year’s, the “growth” of the economy is revealed. Growth is what American culture strives for. Economic growth brings goods and services to everyone. The more growth the better! In that way, America’s attempts to provide people with what they need to live. Growth is the solution to all human problems. Would that it were so!

GDP is said to be the value of products and services measured by the costs of consuming them. But that is not what it really measures. What it really measures is the amount of money that is moved from the pockets of consumers (buyers) to the pockets of merchants (sellers). That’s all it does; nothing more and nothing less. And that’s all the society cares about. America has been organized for the purpose of transferring money from consumers to merchants. This organization functions with enormous efficiency. The wealth of the merchant class increases by quantum amounts. Such is the greatness of America!

But the gloss of its greatness has been tarnished by its failure to provide for its needy. The word “economics” is derived from the Classical Greek οίκος νέμoμαι (household management). If household management were taken as the goal of human activities, a completely different set of data would reveal the underside of the wealthiest nation the world has ever known. But nobody cares. No economic indicators exist that display this dark underside. Wouldn’t it be helpful to know, for instance, how many employed people have gain-less jobs, jobs that provide so little income that they cannot save even a dime. Are those people employed or enslaved? When the employment rate is calculated monthly, why isn’t the gainless rate calculated? The only answer is that because nobody cares.

America is said to lack a state religion. It lacks one only in name. America’s state religion is Mammonism! Every mercantile is a temple, and every sales counter an altar.

Will Americans ever be virtuous enough to make the changes to those political practices needed to enable the necessary changes to its economic practices? Doubtful! Americans have been inured to ignoring the needy. A primitive society could not do that and survive. Today’s developed societies can. The needy are no longer needed. People no longer matter.

Posted in PoliticsComments Off on The Root of All Evil: “People No Longer Matter”

Tulsi Gabbard Pushes No War Agenda – and the Media Is Out to Kill Her Chances

Voters looking ahead to 2020 are being bombarded with soundbites from the twenty plus Democratic would-be candidates. That Joe Biden is apparently leading the pack according to opinion polls should come as no surprise as he stands for nothing apart from being the Establishment favorite who will tirelessly work to support the status quo.

The most interesting candidate is undoubtedly Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, who is a fourth term Congresswoman from Hawaii, where she was born and raised. She is also the real deal on national security, having been-there and done-it through service as an officer with the Hawaiian National Guard on a combat deployment in Iraq. Though in Congress full time, she still performs her Guard duty.

Tulsi’s own military experience notwithstanding, she gives every indication of being honestly anti-war. In the speech announcing her candidacy she pledged “focus on the issue of war and peace” to “end the regime-change wars that have taken far too many lives and undermined our security by strengthening terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda.” She referred to the danger posed by blundering into a possible nuclear war and indicated her dismay over what appears to be a re-emergence of the Cold War.

In a recent interview with Fox News’s Tucker Carlson, Gabbard doubled down on her anti-war credentials, telling the host that war with Iran would be “devastating,” adding that

“I know where this path leads us and I’m concerned because the American people don’t seem to be prepared for how devastating and costly such a war would be… So, what we are facing is, essentially, a war that has no frontlines, total chaos, engulfs the whole region, is not contained within Iran or Iraq but would extend to Syria and Lebanon and Israel across the region, setting us up in a situation where, in Iraq, we lost over 4,000 of my brothers and sisters in uniform. A war with Iran would take far more American lives, it would cost more civilian lives across the region… Not to speak of the fact that this would cost trillions of taxpayer dollars coming out of our pockets to go and pay for this endless war that begs the question as a soldier, what are we fighting for? What does victory look like? What is the mission?”

Gabbard, and also Carlson, did not hesitate to name names among those pushing for war, one of which begins with B-O-L-T-O-N. She then asked

“How does a war with Iran serve the best interest of the American people of the United States? And the fact is it does not,” Gabbard said. “It better serves the interest of people like [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Bibi Netanyahu and Saudi Arabia who are trying to push us into this war with Iran.”

Clearly not afraid to challenge the full gamut establishment politics, Tulsi Gabbard had previously called for an end to the “illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government,” also observing that “the war to overthrow Assad is counter-productive because it actually helps ISIS and other Islamic extremists achieve their goal of overthrowing the Syrian government of Assad and taking control of all of Syria – which will simply increase human suffering in the region, exacerbate the refugee crisis, and pose a greater threat to the world.” She then backed up her words with action by secretly arranging for a personal trip to Damascus in 2017 to meet with President Bashar al-Assad, saying it was important to meet adversaries “if you are serious about pursuing peace.” She made her own assessment of the situation in Syria and now favors pulling US troops out of the country as well as ending American interventions for “regime change” in the region.

In 2015, Gabbard supported President Barack Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran and in 2016 she backed Bernie Sanders’ antiwar candidacy. More recently, she has criticized President Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal. Last May, she criticized Israel for shooting “unarmed protesters” in Gaza, a very bold step indeed given the power of the Israel Lobby.

Tulsi Gabbard could well be the only genuine antiwar candidate that might truly be electable in the past fifty years, and that is why the war party is out to get her. Two weeks ago, the Daily Beast displayed a headline: “Tulsi Gabbard’s Campaign Is Being Boosted by Putin Apologists.” The article also had a sub-headline: “The Hawaii congresswoman is quickly becoming the top candidate for Democrats who think the Russian leader is misunderstood.”

The obvious smear job was picked by ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, television’s best known Hillary Clinton clone, who brought it up in an interview with Gabbard shortly thereafter. He asked whether Gabbard was “softer” on Putin than were some of the other candidates. Gabbard answered:

“It’s unfortunate that you’re citing that article, George, because it’s a whole lot of fake news.”

Politico the reported the exchange and wrote: “’Fake news’ is a favorite phrase of President Donald Trump…,” putting the ball back in Tulsi’s court rather than criticizing Stephanopoulos’s pointless question. Soon thereafter CNN produced its own version of Tulsi the Russophile, observing that Gabbard was using a Trump expression to “attack the credibility of negative coverage.”

Tulsi responded

“Stephanopoulos shamelessly implied that because I oppose going to war with Russia, I’m not a loyal American, but a Putin puppet. It just shows what absurd lengths warmongers in the media will go, to try to destroy the reputation of anyone who dares oppose their warmongering.”

Tulsi Gabbard had attracted other enemies prior to the Stephanopoulos attack. Glenn Greenwald at The Intercept described how NBC news published a widely distributed story on February 1st, claiming that “experts who track websites and social media linked to Russia have seen stirrings of a possible campaign of support for Hawaii Democrat Tulsi Gabbard.”

But the expert cited by NBC turned out to be a firm New Knowledge, which was exposed by no less than The New York Times for falsifying Russian troll accounts for the Democratic Party in the Alabama Senate race to suggest that the Kremlin was interfering in that election. According to Greenwald, the group ultimately behind this attack on Gabbard is The Alliance for Securing Democracy (ASD), which sponsors a tool called Hamilton 68, a news “intelligence net checker” that claims to track Russian efforts to disseminate disinformation. The ASD website advises that “Securing Democracy is a Global Necessity.”

ASD was set up in 2017 by the usual neocon crowd with funding from The Atlanticist and anti-Russian German Marshall Fund. It is loaded with a full complement of Zionists and interventionists/globalists, to include Michael Chertoff, Michael McFaul, Michael Morell, Kori Schake and Bill Kristol. It claims, innocently, to be a bipartisan transatlantic national security advocacy group that seeks to identify and counter efforts by Russia to undermine democracies in the United States and Europe but it is actually itself a major source of disinformation.

No doubt stories headlined “Tulsi Gabbard Communist Stooge” are in the works somewhere in the mainstream media. The Establishment politicians and their media component have difficulty in understanding just how much they are despised for their mendacity and unwillingness to support policies that would truly benefit the American people but they are well able to dominate press coverage. Given the flood of contrived negativity towards her campaign, it is not clear if Tulsi Gabbard will ever be able to get her message across. But, for the moment, she seems to be the “real thing,” a genuine anti-war candidate who is determined to run on that platform. It might just resonate with the majority of Americans who have grown tired of perpetual warfare to “spread democracy” and other related frauds perpetrated by the band of oligarchs and traitors that run the United States.

Posted in USAComments Off on Tulsi Gabbard Pushes No War Agenda – and the Media Is Out to Kill Her Chances

Fundamental Palestinian Rights: Trump’s “Deal of the Century” “No-Peace/ Peace Plan”, Derogating “The Right of Return”


From what’s known about the scheme, subject to change, Trump’s so-called “deal of the century” has nothing to do with regional peace or treating Palestinians equitably.

It has everything to with serving US and Israeli interests at the expense of fundamental Palestinian rights — why it’s dead before arrival, why it may never be released in final form, especially if new Israeli elections end Netanyahu’s regional reign of terror.

According to Haaretz, Trump’s scheme aims to eliminate Palestinian refugees by naturalizing them as citizens of Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere regionally where they reside.

It’s all about rendering UN General Assembly Resolution 194 null and void —  resolving that

“refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.”

The right of return to one’s country of origin or citizenship is inviolable international law. The fundamental right is affirmed by Fourth Geneva, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Refugees resettled as citizens of other countries lose their universally recognized legal right of return to their country of origin.

UN Charter provisions include “respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples,” along with promoting fundamental human rights on a non-discriminatory basis.

International law guarantees the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland, what Israel and the US reject for Palestinians.

Trump’s no-peace/peace plan aims to pressure or otherwise force them to abandon this fundamental right, along with getting Arab countries to go along with the scheme.

According to Haaretz, Trump’s deal of the century aims to eliminate the right of return that’s been a major obstacle whenever so-called Israeli/Palestinian peace talks were held.

At stake is the fate and rights of around six million diaspora Palestinians, mostly refugees. Trump and Netanyahu regime hardliners want what’s affirmed under international law denied them.

Lebanese law prohibits giving Palestinian refugees citizenship because it would render their right of return null and void — what its diaspora population sought since forcefully displaced from their homeland in 1948.

Jordan also rejects the idea of granting Palestinian refugees citizenship. A core element of the Trump regime plan is bribing these countries with economic incentives to go along.

“…Palestinian refugees are the supreme symbols of Palestinian nationhood,” said Haaretz, adding:

“An American deal that blatantly relies on buying up that symbol for cash, even lots of it, can’t be acceptable to the Palestinian leaders in the West Bank and Gaza.”

According to Iran’s parliament speaker Ali Larijani, the Trump regime aims “to arrange an economic deal and get its money from the miserable (cash-rich) Persian Gulf countries.”

Trump’s one-way deal of the century favoring Israel and US interests is unacceptable to Palestinians wanting statehood and freedom from occupation harshness — what hardliners in Washington and Tel Aviv want them denied.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, USA, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Fundamental Palestinian Rights: Trump’s “Deal of the Century” “No-Peace/ Peace Plan”, Derogating “The Right of Return”

US Forces Destroy Syrian Oil While Enforcing Sanctions


Domestic oil tankers attacked resulting in casualties

The U.S. military attacked three Syrian oil tankers, destroying all and killing four of their drivers.  The tankers were carrying Syrian oil, pumped from Syrian oil wells, and driving on Syrian territory.  The U.S. justified the attack and murders while enforcing the U.S. sanctions against Syria, which prohibit the purchase or importation of any oil.  The oil was pumped from Syrian oil wells under the occupation of the U.S. ally in Syria and then sold to the Syrian government, for the needs of the civilians in the regions under Syrian control.

The far North East corner of Syria has been under occupation by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), and made up of Syrian Kurds who turned against their own country, and are working as mercenaries of the U. S. military.  The region they are occupying by military force while subjugating the civilians who are forced to live under their rule is the location of major Syrian oil wells, which had provided the domestic needs of Syria for decades. The fighters are ethnically Kurds, which is a minority in Syria.  The area they occupy is not predominantly Kurdish, as the majority of the population is Syrian Arabs and Syrian Christians. In an effort to establish a homeland on land which does not belong to them, they put their trust in America, who promised that if they fought ISIS in Reqaa, then the U.S. would support their establishing a Kurdistan in Syria, and breaking up Syria, which was a strategic goal for the U.S.: divide and conquer.

The Syrian civilians are living under an international economic siege, which is causing the suffering of unarmed civilians who are trying to survive, with hopes of recovery.  The war is over, but economic recovery cannot begin due to the sanctions imposed by the richest western nations on the survivors of eight years of conflict which has killed up to 500,000 and has displaced millions.  “I thought if we resisted the terrorists, we would be rewarded with improved conditions, but it looks like defeating the terrorists has caused America and Europe to punish us,” said an Aleppo shopkeeper.

Syria was attacked in March 2011 by an international plan headed up by the U.S. and NATO, and most of the western world signed on to the project to remove a constitutionally elected president from office and institute a Muslim Brotherhood government in Damascus, replacing the secular one.

The U.S. and EU have placed sanctions on Syria for many years, and are increasing the pressure on the civilian population who has suffered eight years of foreign-funded attacks.  Many civilians left the country as migrants to other places, in search of an income and a future free of living under sanctions.  Chemotherapy drugs used to be free at all Syrian national hospitals; but, because of the U.S. and EU sanctions, the Syrian government, and private businessmen are prohibited from importing medicines and products made abroad.  The Syrian drug lab producing chemotherapy drugs for domestic use was destroyed by U. S. cruise missiles in April 2018.

“Since the Syria crisis broke out, the country has been short of all kinds of medicines due to the sanctions from Western countries. Foreign companies stopped exporting high-quality medicines to Syria, especially anti-cancer medicines. So we have been conducting researches on anti-cancer medicines here, and three cancer drugs have been developed,” said the head of the research center destroyed by the U.S. in Damascus.

Electricity in Syria is generated by burning petroleum fuel.  One of the power plants is near Mhardeh, a Christian town of 35,000 which is North of Hama, and South of Idlib.  The terrorists who control Idlib are Radical Islamic terrorists affiliated with Al Qaeda.  They have attacked Mhardeh and the power plantsrepeatedly over eight years.  Earlier, about fifty terrorists dressed up with Syrian Arab Army uniforms and attempted to enter into Mhardeh for the purpose of a massacre; however, at the last moment their plan was discovered and they were stopped and captured alive.  The terrorists have used missiles to attack the power generating plant there many times.  Typically, the area of Idlib, Hama, Homs, and Latakia would plunge into darkness, and later the attack would be confirmed in the news.  Syria has a severe shortage of electricity, and the new normal is electricity cut-offs for hours on rotating schedules.

Several months ago, there were long lines at gasoline stations, as there was a severe gasoline shortage.  This was caused by sanctions, as the various oil tankers cruising toward Syrian with their cargo to be refined in Banias were blocked at the Suez Canal in Egypt, and also blocked in the Mediterranean Sea by the U.S. warships.  Several months passed in which people were walking, or sleeping in the cars while holding their place in a long line.

Posted in USA, SyriaComments Off on US Forces Destroy Syrian Oil While Enforcing Sanctions

The US/UK “Special Relationship”: Anglo-American “Common Values and Shared Interests” Threaten World Peace?


In his 1946 Fulton, Missouri “Iron Curtain” address, Winston Churchillcoined the US/UK “special relationship” term.

Until its 1776 declaration and war of independence, Britain colonized the US. Now it’s the other way around.

The same is true for post-WW II, US orchestrated new world order, transforming Western European countries into virtual US colonies — what the CIA-created EU was and remains all about, wanting them controlled by a higher US power.

At Buckingham Palace on Monday, Queen Elizabeth hailed what she called US/UK “common values and shared interests” — failing to explain the destructive way they play out on the world stage. See below.

During his press conference with Theresa May, Trump hailed the US/UK “special relationship,” calling it the “greatest alliance the world has ever known.” Hyperbole, deceit, bravado, and dissembling define his rhetoric. It makes painful listening.

Britain is part of US-dominated NATO, a killing machine transformed from a defensive to an imperial offensive alliance, waging endless wars of aggression, threatening world peace and humanity’s survival.

As long as NATO exists, peace and stability will remain unattainable. Its 29 members, along with their partnered Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC), Mediterranean Dialogue, and Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI) states comprise a global warmaking alliance — risking nuclear war by pushing things too far.

What’s unthinkable may be inevitable because of US rage for global dominance, Britain united with the US in pursuing it as a junior partner.

The same goes for other NATO-connected states, Israel, and their rogue partners for global conquest, colonization, control, and exploitation.

That’s what US/UK “common values and shared interests,” as well as their “special relationship” is all about — risking the destruction of planet earth and all its life forms.

Trump’s Tuesday remarks were pockmarked with bald-faced Big Lies, demonization of Iran, and demand for Britain and other NATO members to spend more for militarism at a time the only threats these nations face are invented. No real ones exist.

Trump lied about the (nonexistent) threat of “Iran…develop(ing) nuclear weapons” — ignoring the real threat posed by nuclear armed and dangerous Israel, the region’s only nuclear power along with the Pentagon’s presence.

He lied accusing Iran of “supporting and engaging in terrorism” — A US, UK, NATO, Israeli specialty, what Iran is combatting to its credit.

Theresa May’s remarks matched Trump’s in offensiveness and Big Lies. She lied about Britain’s “commitment to justice” — while her regime is slowing killing Julian Assange for the “crime” of truth-telling journalism the way it should be in deference to Washington, confining him under deplorable conditions in Britain’s Belmarsh prison.

May lied about the March 2018 Sergey and Yulia Skripal incident, falsely blaming Russia for harming them, what the Kremlin had nothing to do with, no evidence suggesting otherwise.

She lied about CW incidents in Syria, US/UK-sponsored, carried out by terrorists they support, what Damascus had nothing to do with, blaming Bashar al-Assad a bald-faced Big Lie.

She lied accusing Iran of engaging in “destabilizing activity in the region,” adding it must be “ensure(d) (that) Tehran cannot acquire a nuclear weapon” it doesn’t want, doesn’t have, and wants eliminated everywhere to prevent mass annihilation by their use.

She lied claiming “the UK continues to stand by the nuclear deal.” Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif slammed EU countries for failing to fulfill their obligations under the JCPOA, breaching an international agreement since Trump pulled out in May 2018.

She lied about China, falsely accusing its ruling authorities of “threaten(ing) our shared interests or values.” Polar opposite is true.

The shared bond between the US and UK is hostile to what just societies seek and cherish, to the rights and welfare of ordinary people everywhere, to a world safe and fit to live in.

Polls show about 80% of Brits disapprove of Trump. Tens of thousands of Brits took to the streets in protest of his presence.

On Wednesday, his three-day visit ends with commemorations marking the 75th June 6 D-Day anniversary.

In a Tuesday address, Labor party leader Jeremy Corbyn slammed Trump for spreading hatred and division, including his uncalled for denigration of London Mayor Sadiq Khan.

“I’m proud our city has a Muslim mayor – that we can chase down Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, any kind of racism in our society,” said Corbyn, adding:

“Because racism divides, exploitation of minorities divides, brings about hatred, dislike, disdain and a horrible place for individuals to live in.”

Responding to Trump’s refusal to meet him without mentioning him by name, Corbyn said

“I want to be able to have that dialogue to bring about the better and more peaceful world that we all want to live in.”

“Toxic Trump Out,” “Trump Not Welcome,” “Liar,” “Not in My Name,” “We Are the Carnival of Resistance,” and other signs showed how ordinary Brits despise him.

There’s nothing redeeming about his deplorable domestic and geopolitical agenda, responsible for harming millions at home and abroad.

There’s no end of it under one-party rule with two extremist right wings — Trump the latest in a long line of presidents serving privileged interests exclusively, at the expense of world peace and the general welfare.

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on The US/UK “Special Relationship”: Anglo-American “Common Values and Shared Interests” Threaten World Peace?

Boris Johnson as Interim Prime Minister Could be a Disaster for the UK and British Interests


Boris Johnson as interim Prime Minister – even for a short period up to the next UK General Election – could prove extremely dangerous for both democratic government and for Britain as a sovereign, independent power.

Johnson is not only in thrall to US President Donald Trump but, by association, also to Netanyahu of Israel. Such a triumvirate would, in turn, generally conform to the agenda of AIPAC, the unelected Israel lobby that operates openly in Washington, and also in Westminster under the name of the CFI.  AIPAC, whilst certainly not the largest, is nevertheless probably the most powerful political lobby in the world.

Why is this detrimental to British democratic government?

The right to lobby legislators within a democratically elected government was initially enshrined in the United States as a constitutional privilege for any citizen with a grievance to bring his case before his elected representative without the necessity to recourse to litigation.  That right has now been usurped by political and commercial agencies with unlimited funds, often acting for foreign powers, exerting extreme pressure upon elected representatives, using huge sums of money in order to press their case.  This is widespread in the US but increasingly now also in Britain.

In other words, the original right to lobby has been hijacked by highly paid, political lobbyists acting for vested interests to persuade susceptible members of Congress, or Parliament, to act or vote to the benefit not of the electorate but for the agenda of a lobby.  Such lobbies are usually either commercial, as in the NRA, Big Pharma, Big Oil and the Defense Industry etc or political and acting for a foreign state, as in AIPAC the American Zionist Association and the CFI, the Conservative Friends of Israel in London.

It must by emphasised that these lobbies both in the UK and the US, whilst being a threat to democratic government in that they arrange for unelected representatives to legally infiltrate elected legislative assemblies in order to apply pressure to enact or change legislation to the favour of their employer who might be also a foreign power i.e. a diplomatic mission or foreign embassy in London – are, nevertheless, legitimate under both British and US law, as currently constituted.

Some years ago, it was proposed in the United States that all lobbyists acting for a foreign state should be registered as ‘foreign agents’, but no legislation was enacted into law because – (yes, you guessed it) – it was voted down by the those very congressmen whose primary allegiance was allegedly to a political lobby rather than to the American public who elected them.

There are at least two contenders for the leader of the Conservative Party whose allegiance to Parliament and the British electorate is beyond doubt: they are Jeremy Hunt and Dominic Raab – both highly rated politicians with strong ministerial experience whose political agenda would be exclusively for the benefit of the British taxpayer.

However, there are also other qualified contenders and there are also other lobbyists in Westminster acting on behalf of foreign interests.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on Boris Johnson as Interim Prime Minister Could be a Disaster for the UK and British Interests

Islamophobia and the 2017 Quebec City Mosque Massacre: Motion M-153 Does Not Honour Mosque Victims

Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) is deeply concerned that Motion M-153– which purports to honour the victims of the January 29, 2017 Quebec City mosque massacre – is an attempt to avert a proper tribute to the victims of January 29. M-153, which passed second reading in the House of Commons last Thursday, a private-members motion introduced by Conservative MP Scott Reid, seeks to designate January 29 as a “National Day of Solidarity with Victims of Anti-religious Bigotry and Violence.” CJPME believes this motion fails to address the Islamophobia that inspired the January 29th massacre, instead diluting the significance of the January 29th by grouping together several dissimilar violent incidents from Canadian history.

The full text of Reid’s motion M-153 reads:

“That the House recognize that acts of violence and bigotry directed against religious believers, such as the June 23, 1985, bombing of Air India Flights 182 and 301, the September 15, 2001, firebombing of the Hindu Samaj Temple and the Hamilton Mountain Mosque, the April 5, 2004, firebombing of Montreal’s United Talmud Torah Jewish school, and the January 29, 2017, murder of Muslims at the Quebec City Islamic Cultural Centre, are inimical to a free, peaceful, and plural society and declare January 29 of every year as National Day of Solidarity with Victims of Anti-religious Bigotry and Violence.”

While each of the incidents named above convey suffering and horror, CJPME notes that the Quebec City Mosque Massacre of January 29th is the only attack resulting in fatalities at a place of worship. Moreover, it is by far the most relevant and most recent of the incidents – in fact by 13 years. CJPME points out that November 2018 Statistics Canada findings revealed that of all religious and racial minorities in Canada, Canadian Muslims are facing the highest increase in hate crimes. Parliamentarians should ask themselves why Reid is only now addressing the bigotry that inspired violence over a decade ago, while refusing to address the threat of Islamophobia today.

CJPME President Thomas Woodley responded,

“Rather than honouring the victims of the Quebec City Mosque Massacre, Reid’s motion seems to make every effort to deflect attention from the issue of increasing Islamophobia in Canada.”

CJPME notes Reid’s motivations remain suspect, given the timing of the motion and his refusal to condemn Islamophobia in 2017. CJPME has published an analysis identifying all the significant shortcomings of the motion M-153: “Motion M-153: An attempt to downplay the problems of Islamophobia in Canada.”

CJPME, for its part, launched the “I Remember January 29” campaign in October, 2018 with the Canadian Muslim Forum. This campaign calls on the government to designate January 29th as a “National Day of Remembrance and Action on Islamophobia, and other forms of religious discrimination,” as per Recommendation #30 from the Parliamentary Heritage Committee’s M-103 Report. Unlike Scott Reid’s motion, this call for a Day of Remembrance and Action has community support from hundreds of Canadian organizations, academics, and municipalities as well as over 7,000 Canadian individuals who have signed onto the campaign. CJPME believes that any commemoration of January 29th should focus on the victims of the Quebec City Mosque attack – gunned down in their place of worship – and the odious bigotry which motivated the attack.

Posted in CanadaComments Off on Islamophobia and the 2017 Quebec City Mosque Massacre: Motion M-153 Does Not Honour Mosque Victims

How the U.S. Navy Sold the Vietnam War


Dr. Tom Dooley, whose best-selling book “Deliver Us From Evil” helped create a favorable climate of opinion for U.S. intervention in South Vietnam, has long been linked to legendary CIA officer Edward G. Lansdale and his black operations in Vietnam between 1954 and 1955. But the real story about Dooley’s influential book, which has finally emerged from more recent scholarly research, is that it was engineered by an official of the U.S. Navy’s Pacific Command, Capt. William Lederer.

Lederer is best known as the co-author, with Eugene Burdick, of the 1958 novel “The Ugly American,” which was turned into a 1963 movie starring Marlon Brando. Far more important, however, is the fact that from 1951 through 1957 Capt. Lederer was on the staff of the commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet (CINCPAC), Adm. Felix Stump.

The Pacific Command was intensely interested in Dooley, because the U.S. Navy had the greatest stake of all the military services in the outcome of the conflict between the communists and U.S.-backed anti-communist regimes in Vietnam and China during the mid-1950s. And the Pacific Command was directly involved in the military planning for war in both cases.

Adm. Arthur Radford, the former CINCPAC and then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, led the senior officials pressing President Dwight D. Eisenhower to approve a massive U.S. airstrike against the Viet Minh at Dien Bien Phu in April 1954. And between 1954 and 1955, Adm. Stump called for increasing the size of the Nationalist Chinese raids on the Chinese mainland from offshore islands. He also pushed for a U.S. attack on the mainland, including the use of nuclear weapons, if necessary, to defend those same offshore islands.

Capt. Lederer met Dooley in Haiphong, Vietnam, in 1954 after the Navy launched “Operation Passage to Freedom” to help transport more than 300,000 Vietnamese civilians, soldiers and members of the French Army from the French-controlled North to Saigon. A CIA psychological warfare team led by Lansdale had slipped into Hanoi and Haiphong to sabotage the Ho Chi Minh government takeover and to spread propaganda to provoke fear among Catholics and other residents.

The key tactic of the Lansdale team was to print a series of “black propaganda” leaflets—designed to appear as though they came from the Viet Minh—to frighten residents of the North into leaving for South Vietnam. The most dramatic such deception involved spreading the rumor that the U.S. military was going to bomb Hanoi, a story that was further promoted by leaflets showing concentric circles of destruction of the city by an atomic bomb.

Lt. Tom Dooley, a young Irish Catholic Navy doctor, was “loaned” by the U.S. Navy to Lansdale for the operation, although Dooley apparently thought the team’s function was to gather intelligence. Dooley’s job was ostensibly to manage medical supplies needed for the movement of North Vietnamese to the South, but in fact Dooley functioned as the team’s propagandist, briefing visiting news media and sending out out reports through Catholic media in the United States that supported the CIA’s anti-Viet Minh mission.

Lederer quickly recognized Dooley as a potentially valuable propaganda asset because of his connection with Vietnamese Catholics and his penchant for telling tales of Viet Minh atrocities. It was Lederer who suggested that Dooley write a book about his experiences with North Vietnamese refugees who wanted to move to the South. The Navy gave him a leave of absence to write it, and Lederer became Dooley’s handler for the project. Dooley was a charismatic public speaker but needed Lederer’s help with writing. Lederer also introduced Dooley to Reader’s Digest—by far the most popular magazine in America, with 20 million readers. Chief of Naval Operations Arleigh Burke officially embraced the book and even wrote the introduction to it.

Reader’s Digest published a highly condensed 27-page version of the book in its April 1956 edition, and Farrar, Straus and Cudahy immediately published the full-length version. It became a runaway bestseller, going through twelve printings.

The constantly reiterated theme of Dooley’s book “Deliver Us From Evil” was that the Ho Chi Minh government was determined to suppress the Catholic faith in Vietnam and used torture and other atrocities to terrorize Catholics into submission. That was a grotesque distortion of actual Viet Minh policy. The Ho Chi Minh government had worked hard from the beginning of the war to ensure that there was no interference with Catholics’ exercise of their faith, even establishing severe legal penalties on any infringement of that freedom.

But Dooley’s book was full of lurid descriptions of North Vietnamese Communist atrocities against Catholics that Dooley claimed to have known about from treating the victims. It told of the Viet Minh having partially torn off the ears of several teenagers with pliers and left them dangling—supposedly as punishment for their having listened to the Lord’s Prayer.

And he described the Viet Minh taking seven youths out of their classroom and forcing wooden chopsticks through their eardrums. The children, he wrote, had been accused of “treason” for having attended a religious class at night. As for the teacher, Dooley claimed the Viet Minh had used pliers to pull out his tongue, as punishment for having taught the religious class.

But it was widely recognized within the U.S. government that these stories  were false. Six U.S. Information Agency officials who had been in North Vietnam during that period, as well as former Navy corpsmen who had worked in the Haiphong camp with Dooley, all said they had never heard of any such events. And in 1992 Lederer himself, who had made 25 fact-finding trips to Vietnam since 1951, told an interviewer, “[T]hose things never happened. … I traveled all over the country and never saw anything like them.”

Many years later, in an interview with scholar Edward Palm, Lederer disclaimed any significant influence on the content or tone of Dooley’s book, even though Dooley had credited Lederer with helping put the book in final form. Lederer also told Palm he didn’t remember any such stories appearing in the first draft of the book he read.

But Palm, who obtained the first draft of the manuscript from Dooley’s papers, confirmed to this writer that the first draft did contain those stories of atrocities. And Palm’s monograph documented the fact that the last draft chapter was dated the end of July 1955 and that communications from both men at the time indicated that Lederer had met repeatedly with Dooley during June and July to help him finish the draft.

Palm also quoted from Dooley’s first draft to show that it concluded with a call for Americans to be ready for a U.S. war against communism. If negotiations with the Soviet Union failed to bring “lasting peace,” Dooley’s draft warned, “Communism will have to be fought with arms … it must be annihilated….”  Dooley concluded, “[T]here can be no concessions, no compromise and no coexistence.”

Palm pointed out that the published version of the book dropped that rabidly warlike rhetoric and instead introduced a new character named “Ensign Potts” to represent the view that America must be ready to fight a war to destroy communism. The role of the “Potts” character was to be converted to Dooley’s argument that service to the ordinary Vietnamese would be the most effective way to prevail in the Cold War—after Dooley’s tearful recounting of the story of the Viet Minh puncturing the Catholic youths’ ears with chopsticks, reduced “Potts” to tears as well.

Lederer and Burdick popularized the idea that personal kindness to the people of Southeast Asia from American could help defeat Communism in “The Ugly American” and that same idea infused Lederer’s own March  1955 Reader’s Digest article on the interactions between U.S. sailors and Vietnamese aboard a U.S. Navy ship. Lederer told Palm in a 1996 interview that he had suggested that Dooley model his book on that article.

Palm wrote that he didn’t believes Lederer’s personal preference was to promote a U.S. war in Vietnam. But Lederer had obviously approved Dooley’s portrayal of the Vietnamese Communists as an alien horde terrorizing the Catholics. Catholics were the fastest-growing religious denomination in America from 1940 to 1960, during which time their numbers doubled, and Dooley’s message was an obvious way of mobilizing American Catholics to support Adm. Stump and the Navy’s agenda for Vietnam.

Marine Lt. Col. William Corson, who was detailed to the CIA during much of his career and knew Dooley during the writing of his book, told fellow former Marine Edward Palm in a 1997 telephone interview, “Dooley was programmed toward  a particular end.” He did not say specifically what that end was, but he appeared to mean building popular support for U.S. intervention in Vietnam.

While on a nationwide book tour, Dooley was one of the featured speakers at the first conference of The American Friends of Vietnam—later known as the “Vietnam Lobby”—in Washington, D.C., on June 1, 1956. The meeting was held at a crucial moment in U.S. Vietnam policy. Eisenhower was still supporting the election for a government throughout Vietnam as called for by the 1954 Geneva Agreement, with strict conditions for a free vote. Meanwhile, hardliners in the administration were pushing for opposing that election outright on the ground that Ho Chi Minh would certainly win it, regardless of conditions.

Dooley’s contribution was to describe “Communism” as an “evil, driving, malicious ogre” and recount the “hideous atrocities that we witnessed in our camps every single day.” And he retold the story of the Viet Minh punishing the schoolchildren by puncturing their eardrums.

A few weeks after the meeting, Eisenhower reversed his previous position of supporting the all-Vietnamese Vietnamese, opening the path to deeper U.S. political and military intervention in Vietnam.

Dooley had just learned that his secret life as a gay man in the Navy had been discovered by Naval intelligence, and he was forced to quietly resign. At Lansdale’s suggestion, Leo Cherne of the International Rescue Committee helped Dooley establish a primitive medical clinic near the Chinese border in northern Laos. But Dooley had to agree to cooperate with CIA in Laos by allowing it to smuggle arms into the site of the clinic to eventually be distributed to local anti-Communist militiamen.

The Dooley Clinic in Laos helped make him a hugely popular celebrity, with two more best-selling books, feature stories in popular magazines and network television appearances. By the time Dooley died of cancer in 1961, a Gallup Poll found that Americans viewed him as the third most admired person in the world, after Eisenhower and the pope. But his role in the larger tragedy of U.S. war in Indochina was to serve as the instrument of a highly successful campaign by the U.S. Navy to create the first false propaganda narrative of the conflict—one that has endured for most of Dooley’s fans for decades.

But Dooley’s popularity and saintly image increased the power of his tales of Viet Minh atrocities against Catholics that represented the first major false U.S. propaganda narrative of the Vietnam conflict—one that helped build public support for the U.S. military intervention in Vietnam that began under President John F Kennedy in 1962.

Posted in USAComments Off on How the U.S. Navy Sold the Vietnam War

Half of Black Caucus Signs on to ‘Israeli’ Stance on Syria, in Defiance of Black Public Opinion

The Congressional Black Caucus sides with its party’s war mongers and in fear of the Israel lobby, while large Black majorities believe Israel is neither an ally nor a friend.

“The Black Caucus’ tolerance of apartheid Israel’s barbarism is infinite.”

Nearly 400 members of the U.S. House and Senate signed a letter urging President Trump to keep U.S. troops in Syria – against the wishes of the sovereign government of that country and therefore, in gross violation of international law — and to increase sanctions against Russia for assisting the Syrian government in its battle against Islamic jihadists. Among the signers  were 26 of the 51 Black voting members of the House and the two Black U.S. senators that are running for president, Kamala Harris and Cory Booker.

Nobody except the Israel lobby gets that kind of immediate obeisance from the Congress. Tel Aviv’s interests top the letter’s list of bullet-points: “Underscore Israel’s right to self-defense.” The letter baldly lobbies to increase the annual billions in U.S. subsidies to Israel’s bloated and hyper-aggressive, nuclear-armed military. “We must also look for ways to augment our support in the context of the current 10-year Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Israel,” the letter reads, “ and to ensure that Israel has access to the resources and materiel it needs to defend itself against the threats it faces on its northern border.”

“Tel Aviv’s interests top the letter’s list of bullet-points.”

The massive sign-on was organized to pressure Trump into even more aggressive actions against Iran, and to prevent the president from fulfilling his oft-repeated wish to withdraw from Syria, now that the ISIS “caliphate” has been shattered and al-Qaida’s legions are bottled up in Idlib province, under siege by the Syrian Army. Israel has provided arms and assistance to both terrorist factions, as have Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Britain, France — and the United States, the imperial grandmaster of the jihadist offensive that began in 2011 against Libya (see “U.S. Protects Jihadists in Syria,” BAR). Libya was plunged into barbarism and Syria is in ruins, with half a million dead and a third of the country displaced. Iraq, still reeling from Washington’s 2003 “Shock and Awe” and occupation, has been savaged yet again by the West’s jihadist proxies, with its second largest city, Mosul, flattened by U.S. bombs and artillery. Yet, three-quarters of the U.S. Congress last week signed on to the insane statement that the region has “been destabilized by Iranian regime’s threatening behavior.”

“The United States was the imperial grandmaster of the jihadist offensive that began in 2011.”

Were it not for Iranian and Lebanese Shiite militias and Russia’s 2015 intervention, Syria’s secular government would have fallen to the U.S.-sponsored jihadist legions, at which point the U.S. and allied governments, including Israel, would have occupied the region, ostensibly to restore order and control the head-chopping Islamic warriors. Even in the current circumstances, Israel recently seized the opportunity to formally claim sovereignty over the Syrian Golan Heights , occupied by the Zionists in the 1967 war, and the U.S. got the chance to move 5,000 troops back into Iran to aid in the fight against ISIS, the “rogue” faction of al-Qaida that rejected the West’s instructions to blend in with other Islamist fighters and stick to the mission of regime change in  Syria.

Had President Obama’s 2011 war plan been successful, Syria would have been balkanized into mini-states ruled by warlords beholden to the U.S. and its regional allies, and Lebanon would be wracked by renewed civil war, or under the discipline of constant Israeli air strikes, or both. Iraqi Kurdistan, with its huge oil reserves and deep ties to Israel, would have seceded, and U.S. troops would be back in multi-divisional force in Iraq at the request of a terrified central government. Iran would be surrounded. The stage would then be set to empower the U.S. to cut off China’s access to Middle Eastern (and even central Asian) energy supplies – which was the larger purpose of Obama’s “smart war” of “humanitarian” intervention plus jihadist proxies, his slickly demonic contribution to the Great Imperial Game.

“Three-quarters of the U.S. Congress signed on to the insane statement that the region has “been destabilized by Iranian regime’s threatening behavior.” 

If the Congressional Black Caucus had properly understood that last week’s letter was asking them to help rescue the remnants of the First Black President’s grand plan, they might have signed on in even greater numbers. Even so, the 26 signatories included John Lewis, the “soul” of the Caucus (or “de Lawd,” as he is derisively referred to in Atlanta), who is usually part of the ten or twelve Black Caucus members that can still be counted on to vote against some of the most blatantly warlike measures. Lewis sensed that the letter was an Israeli lobby priority, as did his Black Caucus colleagues, who are listed below in order of their signing .

James Clyburn (SC)
Hakeem Jeffries (NY)
Gregory Meeks (NY)
Karen Bass (CA)
Colin Allred (TX)
Yvette Clarke (NY)
Elijah Cummings (MD)
Donald Payne (NJ)
Val Demings (FL)
David Scott (GA)
John Lewis (GA)
Donald McEachin (VA)
Sheila Jackson Le (TX)
G.K. Butterfield (NC)
Danny Davis (IL)
Joyce Beatty (OH)
Sanford Bishop (GA)
Alma Adams (NC)
Bonnie Watson Coleman (NJ)
Marc Veasey (TX)
Alcee Hastings (FL)
Emanuel Cleaver (MO)
Frederica Wilson (FL)
Steven Horsford (NV)
Robin Kelly (IL)
Antonio Delgado (NY)

Poll Shows Black People Don’t Think of Israel as a Friend or Ally

The 26 lawmakers make up just over half of the 51 Black voting members of the House. (The delegates from Washington, DC, and the U.S. Virgin Islands cannot vote on the House floor.) On the Senate side, presidential candidates Cory Booker and Kamala Harris have always been in the Israel lobby’s pocket. In their haste to make a splash with headlines around the world proclaiming “Nearly 400 Lawmakers Call on Trump to Address Threats in Syria ,” the letter’s handlers may have simply quit pressing for signatures once they reached three-quarters of the House and Senate. Back in the summer of 2014, while Israel was slaughtering over 2,000 Palestinian men, women and children in Gaza, the combined chambers of Congress voted unanimously in favor of a resolution affirming Israel’s “right to defend itself.” Not one member of the Black Caucus dissented or abstained. Thus, their tolerance of apartheid Israel’s barbarism is infinite.

But, where do their Black constituents stand on the unholy U.S. alliance with the Zionist state? A poll taken last October by The Economis/YouGov  showed only 19 percent of Black Americans thought of Israel as an “ally,” compared to 43 percent of whites and 22 percent of Hispanics. Only 17 percent of Blacks think Israel is a “friendly” country, and just 27 percent of whites and 21 percent of Hispanics see Israel as friendly. Among all races in the U.S,, support for Israel is described as “plummeting” – which is cause for the Israel lobby to organize a letter-signing publicity campaign among the folks whose cowardice or bought-and-paid-for allegiance they can count on: the elected officials of both corporate parties.

“Only 17 percent of Blacks think Israel is a ‘friendly’ country.”

The electoral arrangement in the United States, where half of the duopoly is the White Man’s Party, has created a one-party system for Black America. With nowhere else to go, Black voters can think or feel however they want, but their elected representatives vote according to the wishes of their party’s funders – rich white people, virtually all of them in league with apartheid Israel. The Democratic Party is thus the mechanism for rich white people’s political domination of Black America, the nation’s most left-leaning constituency, including on issues of war and peace, and especially on Israeli apartheid. Black Democrats, with the exception of a handful of dissidents like New York lawmakers Charles and Inez Barron , are agents of forces hostile to the Black community, and enemies of peace. Last year, 75 percent of the Black Caucus voted to make police a protected class, and in 2014, shortly before the unanimous vote in favor of Israel, 80 percent of the Black Caucus voted to continue the multi-billion dollar militarization of local police, through the Pentagon’s infamous 1033 program.

Every member of the Black Caucus should be ousted on grounds of misrepresentation. But the authentic Black political conversation doesn’t travel much beyond the barbershops, beauty parlors and activist circles before it is smothered by the octopus of Black America’s one party Democratic state. That’s why the best thing that can happen this primary election season is for the Democratic Party to implode — and set its Black and left constituencies free from the agents of rich man’s rule.

Posted in USAComments Off on Half of Black Caucus Signs on to ‘Israeli’ Stance on Syria, in Defiance of Black Public Opinion

Eid Mubarak from Shoah

Posted in UKComments Off on Eid Mubarak from Shoah

Shoah’s pages


June 2019
« May   Jul »