Bulletin
N°
845
« Momo, or the strange story of the
time-thieves and the child who brought the stolen time back to the
people. »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_JYYcBP2Q
(1986 film adaptation of the book by
Michael Ende)
Subject
:
The Origins of Imperialist
Wars & The Distribution of Scarcity
14 May 2019
Grenoble,
France
Dear
Colleagues and Friends of CEIMSA,
In
his 1968 anthology, Negations,
Essays in Critical Theory, Herbert Marcuse collected essays he had
written between 1934 and 1938, in the early years after the Nazi seizure of power.
He was teaching at New York Institute for Social Research with his friend Max Horkheimer, and in this period it was not yet clear to them
whether or not the destruction of Fascism would set free forces of life that
would make possible a more humane and rational society.
For
if there was one matter about which the author of these essays and his friends
were not uncertain, it was the understanding that the fascist state was
fascist society, and that totalitarian violence and totalitarian reason came
from the structure of existing society, which was in the act of overcoming its
liberal past and incorporating its historical negation. This presented the
critical theory of society with the task of identifying the tendencies that
linked the liberal past with its totalitarian abolition. This abolition was not
restricted at all to the totalitarian states and since then has become reality
in many democracies (and especially in the most developed ones). The present
did not appear to be in immediate opposition to the past: it was necessary to
exhibit the mediation by means of which bourgeois freedom could become unfreedom. But it was also necessary to indicate the
elements that opposed this transformation.
.
. .
The focal point is the interpretation of
some of the leading ideas of intellectual culture – of ideology. In political
economy, Marxian theory had traced to their origins the tendencies that linked
the liberal past with its totalitarian liquidation. What I attempted was to
detect and trace these tendencies in culture, more specifically in its
representative philosophy. For it was mind, reason, consciousness, “pure”
thought that in the traditional culture was supposed to constitute the autonomy
of the subject, the essential freedom of man. Here was
the sphere of negation,
of contradiction to the established order, of protest, of dissociation, of
criticism. Protestantism and the bourgeois revolutions proclaimed the freedom
of thought and of conscience. They were the sanctioned forms of contradiction –
often the only ones – and the most precious refuge of hope. Only rarely and in
exceptional cases did bourgeois society dare to infringe on this refuge. Soul
and mind were (at least officially) considered holy and awesome. Spiritually
and mentally, man was supposed to be as autonomous as possible. This was his
inner freedom, which was his authentic and essential freedom; the other
liberties were taken care of by the economy and the state. Normally it was not
necessary for society to intervene in this sphere; a total coordination and
subordination of individuals was not required. The productive Forces has not yet reached that stage of development at which the
sale of the products of social labor demanded the systematic organization of
needs and wants, including intellectual ones. The market regulated for better
or worse the operation and output of a labor apparatus not yet dependent upon
uninterrupted mass consumption. At a low level of productive forces, bourgeois
society did not yet have the means to administer soul and mind without
discrediting this administration through terroristic violence. Today total
administration is necessary, and the means are at hand; mass gratification,
market research, industrial psychology, computer mathematics, and the so-called
science of human relations. These take care of the nonterroristic,
democratic, spontaneous-automatic harmonization of individual and socially
necessary needs and wants, of autonomy and heteronomy. They assure the free
election of individuals and policies necessary for the system to continue to
exist and grow. The democratic abolition of thought, which the “common man”
undergoes automatically and which he himself carries out (in labor and in the
use and enjoyment of the apparatus of production and consumption), is brought
about in the “higher learning” by those positivistic and positive trends of
philosophy, sociology, and psychology that make the established system into an
insuperable framework for conceptual thought.
But the rapidity with which it was possible
to achieve the social organization and administration of the mind suggests the
question whether the mind did not itself bear part of the responsibility for
such a development. In other words, did intellectual culture prepare its own
liquidation? Were its autonomy, inwardness, purity, and the happiness and
fulfillment that it promised already permeated with unfreedom,
adjustment, unhappiness, and renunciation? Did this culture have an affirmative
character even where it was the negation of the status quo?(pp.xi-xiv)
.
. .
More
than before, breaking through the administered consciousness is a precondition
of liberation. Thought in contradiction must be capable of comprehending and
expressing the new potentialities of a qualitatively different existence. It
must be capable of surpassing the force of technological repression and of
incorporating into its concepts the elements of gratification that are
suppressed and perverted in this repression. In other words, thought in
contradiction must become more negative and more utopian in opposition to the
status quo. This seems to me to be the imperative of the current situation in
relation to my theoretical essays of the thirties.
In totalitarian society, freedom remains
thinkable only as autonomy over the entirety of the apparatus. This includes
the freedom to reduce it or to reconstruct it in its entirety with regard to
the pacification of the struggle for existence and to the rediscovery of quiet and of
happiness. The abolition of material poverty is a possibility within the status
quo; peace, joy, and the abolition of labor are not. And yet only in and
through them can the established order be overcome. Totalitarian society brings
the realm of freedom beyond the realm of necessity under its administration and
fashions it after its own image. In complete contradiction to this future,
autonomy over the technological apparatus is freedom in the realm of
necessity. This means, however, that freedom is only possible as the
realization of what today is called utopia.(p.xx)
Decades
later, after the above discussions, Marcuse met with students and scholars in
Berlin in 1970, and in a question-and-answer session following a lecture, he
addressed a question about the role of violence in social change in the
historical context of the post-World-War Two political economy: “[A]re not our
opponents [to socialism] not the masses but the institutions? Will not the
human forces tend to be on our side?”
Marcuse
responded by pointing out the organic relationship between “Fascism” and the
capitalist culture in which it is cultivated:
The
new fascism – if it comes – will be very different from the old fascism.
History does not repeat itself so easily. When I speak of the rise of fascism I
mean, with regard to America, for example, that the strength of those who
support the cutback of existing civil and political liberties will grow to the
point where the Congress can institute repressive legislation that is very
effective. That is, the mass basis does not have to consist of masses of people
going out into the streets and beating people up, it can also mean that the
masses support increasingly actively a tendency that confines whatever scope
still exists in democracy, thus increasingly weakening the opposition.(Five Lectures, p.100)
When
asked about the difference between revisionism and revolutionary analysis,
Marcuse responded by recounting his experiences as a young man after the First
World War.
Question: On the definition of revisionism
mentioned in the previous question: revisionists are those who think that can
change something in this society within the established institutions, while a
large number of students think it is necessary to form an anti-institutional
and extra-parliamentary opposition.
Let
me say something personal. If you mean by revisionism the German
Social-Democratic Party, I can only say to you that from the time of my own
political education, that is since 1919,I have opposed
this party. In 1917 to 1918 I was a member of the Social-Democratic Party, I resigned
from it after the murder of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht, and from then
on I have criticized this party’s politics. Not because it believed that it
could work within the framework of the established order – for we all do this,
we all make use of even the most minute possibilities in order to transform the
established order from inside it – that is not why I fought the S.P.D. The
reason was rather that it worked in alliance with reactionary, destructive, and
repressive forces.
Since 1918 I have always been hearing of the
left forces within the Social-Democratic Party, and I have continually seen
these left forces move more and more to the right until nothing left was left
in them. You see that I am at least not very convinced by this idea of some
kind of radical work within the party.(pp. 102-103)
.
. .
[T]here
are many different kinds of violence employed in defense and in aggression. For
example, the violence of the policeman which consists in overpowering a
murderer is very different, not only externally but in its instinctual
structure, its substance, from the violence of a policeman who clubs a demonstrator.
Both are acts of violence but they have completely different functions.
What applies here in an individual case also
applies socially and historically. The violence of revolutionary terror, for
example, is very different from that of the White terror, because revolutionary
terror as terror implies its own abolition in the process of creating a free
society, which is not the case for the White terror. The terror employed in the
defense of North Vietnam is essentially different form the terror employed in
the aggression.
How can one prevent revolutionary terror
from turning into cruelty and brutality is another question. In a real
revolution there are always ways and means of preventing this. At the beginning
of the Bolshevik Revolution there was no cruelty, no brutality, no terror going
beyond resistance against those still in power. Where in a revolution this sort
of terror changes into acts of cruelty, brutality, and torture, then we are
already talking about a perversion of the revolution. (pp.103-104)
This
public discussion was followed by several more questions:
First, should we not use opportunities to
join existing organizations to attempt to introduce ferment and consciousness
into their lower levels?
Second, on the right of resistance: in your
essay on tolerance you put this right in quotation marks, but now you have
interpreted it as an ancient principle. What is this right based on? Is it a
romantic relic of natural law, or is it a self-posited right and, if so, how
can the opposition invoke a right which it must first generate?
Third, it is true that enlightenment of
consciousness must occur through demonstrations as well as discussion. But how
can we organize unarmed opposition and carry out materially manifest
nonviolence when the bureaucracy reacts with efforts at physical annihilation?
Our opposition essentially consists in defending existing rights, which are
continually violated by state violence and manipulation. Perhaps instead of
invoking the “right of resistance” we should say that we are sacrificing
lower-level laws in order to defend constitutional law. Furthermore, the
theoretical reasons against the principle of nonviolence contradict the
humanitarian reasons for it.(p.104)
Here,
Marcuse replies to his German audience in a careful and systematic manner:
The last contradiction is based on the
misunderstanding. I have not asserted that nonviolence should be applied or
preached as a principle of strategy. I have in no way equated humanitarianism
and nonviolence. To the contrary I have spoken of situations in which it is
precisely the interest of humanitarianism which leads to violence.
Whether there are situations in which work
aiming at radical transformation can be carried out within existing parties? If
the question is poses
in this way, I would say, Yes. This is actually a question of
practicability. If you know from experience, in your evaluation of the
situation, that there are groups and local organizations which are open and
willing to listen, then of course one should work in these groups. I only said
that from my experience I consider the possibility of transforming the major parties
from within to be null and am just as pessimistic as I was forty years ago.
On the question of the right of resistance:
the quotation marks in the essay on tolerance were only supposed to indicate
that it was an old term of political theory.
There is a very interesting problem
contained in the question whether those who invoke the right of resistance in
their favor have not themselves brought into begin the principle on whose basis
they resist positive law. That is, whether the appeal to the right of
resistance is not relative and no more than the particular interest of a
particular group. I should like to point out historically that this is not the
meaning of the doctrine of the right of resistance. The doctrine of the right
of resistance has always asserted that appealing to the right of reissuance is
an appeal to a higher law, which has universal validity, that is, which goes
beyond the self-defined right and privilege of a particular group. And there
really is a close connection between the right of resistance and natural law.
Now you will say that such a universal higher law simply does not exist. I
believe that it does exist. Today we no longer call it natural law, but I
believe that if we say today that what justifies us in resisting the system is
more than the relative interest of a specific group and more than something
that we ourselves have defined, we can demonstrate this. If we appeal to
humanity’s right to peace, to humanity’s right to abolish exploitation and
oppression, we are not talking about self-defined, special, group interests,
but rather and in fact interests demonstrable as universal rights. That is why
we can and should lay claim today to the right of resistance as more than a
relative right.
On the thesis that tolerance must turn into
specific actions in specific situations, I am in complete agreement. In my talk
I asserted that we have found ourselves for a long time in a situation in which
discussion will turn in to demonstration and other forms of action. No matter how
nonviolent our demonstrations are or will be, we must
expect them to be met with institutional violence. We cannot calm ourselves
with the thought that we are demonstrating peaceably, and therefore it’s legal
and nothing bad will happen. In this sense there is no general organization of
“manifest-material nonviolence.” What we must anticipate at every moment is
that the established order will put into action the institutionalized violence
at its disposal. This is not to exclude our being able to and having to find
forms of demonstration that avoid this confrontation with violence in which, in
the present situation, we are bound to be defeated. If I was correctly informed
yesterday, such forms have already been developed and even tested right here in
Berlin.
.
. .
One thing seems to me to be dangerous. You
are quite right to assert that actually we are the ones who are defending
existing positive laws. If in a democracy we defend civil liberties, we are in
fact defending the laws of the Establishment. But unfortunately that is too
simple. For example, the police and their ordinances are also positive
law. In general we can in fact say: we
are the ones who defend democracy. But that changes nothing about the fact that
in the same breath we must add that we are fully conscious that we are
violating positive law and that we believe we are justified in so doing.(pp.105-106)
At
one point in the question-answer session following a 1970 lecture, the question
is raised about who exactly will be the historical “agents of revolution?”:
Q:
The student opposition know how difficult it is to get
popular support in the advanced capitalist countries. In discussions with
workers, students have repeatedly heard the answer: “I don’t know what you are
talking about – I have got it good, much better than before.” And what does
this worker care about the terror in Vietnam? Humanitarian arguments wouldn’t
do, since humanity itself gave rise to terror.
M:
The worker who says that he has it better than before
is right if, in a nonrevolutionary situation, he does
not think and behave like a revolutionary. All you can do is to make him aware
if the costs of his (poor) well-being – the perpetual toil of his life and the
misery of others. And we must eventually come to grips with the idea that, in
the period of advanced capitalism, the driving revolutionary force may not be
generated by poverty and misery but precisely by the higher expectations within
the better living conditions, and by the developed consciousness of highly qualified and educated workers: precursors of
a new working class or a new part of the old working class. The internal
contradictions of capitalism assume an ever more brutal and global form, and
the new consciousness may become a catalyst in their explosion and solution. As
to your suspicion about humanitarian arguments, I think we should not believe
that we can no longer make use today of humanitarian arguments. I should like
to ask you all a question. If I really radically excluded humanitarian
arguments, on what basis can I work against the system of advanced capitalism?
If you only operate within the framework of technical rationality and from the
start exclude historically transcendent concepts, that is, negation of the
system – for the system is not humane, and humanitarian ideas belong to the
negation of the system – then you continually find yourself in the situation of
being asked, and not being able to answer, the question, What is really so
terrible about this system, which continually expands social wealth so that
strata of the population that previously lived in the greatest poverty and
misery today have automobiles, television sets, and one-family houses? What is
so bad about this system that we dare take the tremendous risk of preaching its
overthrow? If you content yourself with material arguments and exclude all
other arguments you will not get anywhere. We must finally relearn what we
forgot during the fascist period, or what you, who were not even born until
after the first fascist period, have not fully become conscious of: that
humanitarian and moral arguments are not merely deceitful ideology. Rather,
they can and must become central social forces. If we exclude them from our
argumentation at the start, we impoverish ourselves and disarm ourselves in the
face of the strongest arguments of the defenders of the status quo.(pp.95-96)
The
question was raised once more about the role students might play in
revolutionary change:
Q:
On students and radicals in the professions – how do you envisage the
possibility of student revolutionary potential after students leave the
university and are on the way to getting immersed in bourgeois life? At the
moment it is not so important how students are internationally organized – we
are already trying that in Western Europe – but how they are organized after
they get their degrees.
M:
That is really one of the most important questions. In America
much more even than here. While here one can study for years without
having to get a degree and then even go to another university, in the United
States this is not possible. Instead one has to look for a job, and then the
happy days of student opposition are simply over. It is therefore immensely
important to find some means by which those who were in the opposition during
their studies still remain in the opposition afterwards. How this is to be done
must be worked out differently in different cases. But precisely in view of the
terribly important role that the intelligentsia will be playing in the future
social process of production, such a continuity of opposition after one’s
studies is really a crucial problem.(p.107)
The
21 + items below will inform readers of the war clouds now forming on
the horizon and the origins of these threatening formations, as they have developed in the past. The transformation of
men and women from productive members of communities to mindless killers is a
mass psychological phenomenon that can be recognized, if we are properly
educated to see the alienation that is happening in front of us. The physical
and mental numbing of a population has always been a necessary preliminary
stage in preparations for imperialist war. Our society has now fully
entered this stage, and our only hope is mass resistance to the continual
abuse that capitalism inflicts upon us collectively, as the necessary
precondition in order to extract maximum profits from capital investments at
the end of each and every quarter.
Francis Feeley
---
Professor emeritus of American Studies
University Grenoble-Alpes
Director of Research
University of Paris-Nanterre
Center for the Advanced Study of American Institutions and
Social Movements
The University of California-San Diego
a.
Imperial Decay
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51587.htm
(video-9min)
from ClassWarFilms
All empires are evil;
they are certainly undemocratic. Can the U.S. un-imperialize
itself, or must it go the way of all empires? Collapse.
+
The
Lies That Form Our Consciousness
and False Historical Awareness
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51592.htm
by Paul Craig Roberts
My
generation associated dystopias, such as George Orwell’s 1984, with the Soviet Union, a
country in which explanations were controlled and criticism of Stalin would
land a person in the Gulag. We thought of the United States and our life
here much differently. But with the passage of time the difference between life
in the Soviet Union in the 20th century and life in the Western world today is
disappearing. Today, the journalist Julian Assange
is undergoing the same kind of state terror and torture as any Soviet
dissident, if not worse. The Western media is as controlled as the Soviet
media, with print, TV, and public radio serving as a propaganda ministry for
government and the interest groups that control government. Social media,
such as Facebook and Twitter are systematically
denying their platforms to those who express views not supportive of the ruling
order and its agendas. It has turned out to be easy to get rid of the
First Amendment guarantee of free speech as the media have neither the ability
nor the intention of exercising it.
It
was a mistake for my generation to associate Orwell’s Memory Hole and falsified
history only with fictional or real dystopias. Falsified history was all
around us. We just didn’t know enough to spot it. What living and
learning has taught me is that history tends to always be falsified, and
historians who insist on the truth suffer for it. It has been established
that many of the ancient historians are unreliable, because they were “court
historians” who sought material benefit by writing to please a ruler. In
my time many an historian has written for income from book sales by enthralling
the public with tales of glorious victories over demonized enemies that
justified all the sons, grandsons, brothers, fathers, uncles, husbands,
friends, and cousins who were sacrificed for the sake of capitalist armaments
profits. No publisher wanted a truthful account that no one would buy
because of the stark portrayal of the pointlessness of the deaths of loved
ones. Everyone, or almost so, wants to think that their loss was for a noble
cause and was “worth it.”
With
few exceptions, English speaking historians have put the blame for both world
wars on Germany. This is false history. The first real historian of
World War I, or what was called at the time the Great War or the World War, was
Harry Elmer Barnes. Barnes was Professor of Historical Sociology at Smith
College and the William Bayard Cutting Fellow in History at Columbia
University. His book, The Genesis of
the World War, was published in 1926 by Alfred A. Knopf in New York.
Instead
of covering up, as expected, the allied crimes and treachery against Germany,
Barnes told the truth. The German Kaiser, a relative of the British and
Russian royal families, was known throughout the world as a peacemaker, praised
by the New York Times for that role. It is a known and indisputable fact that
the German government acted for peace until Germany, the last power to
mobilize, had to mobilize or be overrun by Russia and France, who were allied
with the British against Germany. Never before in history has the very last
power to mobilize been blamed for starting a war. But facts never get in
the way of court historians.
The
genesis of the war was the desire on the part of two of the Russian Tsar’s
ministers for Constantinople and the French president for territory,
Alsace-Lorraine, lost to Germany in the 1870 Franco-Prussian war. These
schemers used Austria’s response to the assassination of the Austrian archduke
in Serbia, which they likely orchestrated, to declare war as Germany was the
protector of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire.
American
president Woodrow Wilson secured an armistice to the World War, which had senselessly
destroyed millions of lives, by promising Germany that if she agreed to
an armistice, there would be no territorial losses for Germany and no
reparations. When Germany agreed to the armistice, it was Germany that
occupied territories of the opposing camp. There were no foreign troops on
German territory.
As
soon as Germany disengaged, the British put into effect a food blockade that
forced starving Germans to submit to the exploitative Versailles Treaty that
violated every promise that President Wilson had made.
Some
intelligent people, including the most famous economist of the 20th century,
John Maynard Keynes, said that the Versailles Treaty, an exercise in coverup for who caused the war, guaranteed a future
war. And they, not the grasping corrupt establishment, were right.
+
When
We Were the 'Good Guys':
US
Keeps Invoking WWII to Validate New Wars
Americans are sick of fighting a 20-year war against an
undefined enemy they can’t seem to beat. With morale and recruitment scraping
bottom, the world’s best-funded military reckons that, if it can’t win, it can
at least look like a winner.
The US Army looked to World War II, the last war the US
could decisively be said to have “won,” for inspiration when designing its new
service uniform to invoke “the most prominent time the Army’s service to our
nation was universally recognized,” as sergeant major Daniel Dailey, the Army’s
highest-ranking enlisted soldier, told the New York Times. But the specter of World
War II – when Americans were hailed as “the good guys” – was conjured up long
before the military decided to reenact its golden age through cosplay. Indeed, the US has been borrowing from the WWII
playbook since before the War on Terror officially began.
Like WWII, the US’ forever-war, which has long since spilled
beyond the Middle East, is being fought on multiple fronts against countries
that, left alone, would pose no threat to the US. In both cases, the American
people had to be tricked into supporting long, bloody, expensive conflicts that
served little strategic purpose for the US – but strongly benefited their
allies.
Neocon think
tank Project for a New American Century (PNAC) infamously called for a “new
Pearl Harbor” to advance its foreign policy goals, and the attacks of September
11 were used to shred the Constitution and pitch the country headlong into
nearly two decades of unparalleled destruction, destabilizing the Middle East
for generations and bankrupting the US. Neither attack
happened without plenty of warning, however, and both were arguably
permitted to take place in order to manufacture consent for extremely unpopular
wars.
With the US barely out of World War I, President Franklin
Roosevelt faced a population 80 to 90 percent opposed to entering another
global conflict; he even ran on the promise that “your boys are not going to be
sent into any foreign wars.” Not only did Roosevelt deliberately place the US’
Pacific fleet in harm’s way by anchoring it in Pearl Harbor against the advice
of fleet commander Admiral James Richardson; he relieved Richardson of his
command for complaining, reportedly telling
him “Sooner or later the Japanese will commit an overt act against the United
States and the nation will be willing to enter the war.” US military
intelligence, which had cracked the Japanese encryption codes, intercepted
radio messages indicating Japan
planned to attack Hawaii. The attack was allowed to happen, and overnight,
a population allergic to war was baying for Japanese blood.
Several government agents, including FBI Minneapolis field
office chief counsel Coleen Rowley and FBI Special Agent Robert Wright, came
forward before September 11, troubled by evidence that seemed to
point to a foreign group planning an attack on American soil. Saudi
nationals training at flight schools and Israeli “art students” probing security vulnerabilities in
government buildings set off alarms in government agencies all over the
country. But the administration of President George W. Bush, packed with
PNAC alumni, ignored and even punished these whistleblowers. The Twin Towers
were destroyed, the PATRIOT Act (pre-written and ready to go) was rammed
through a docile Congress and, less than a month later, according to General
Wesley Clark, the decision to invade Iraq had been made, even as hostilities
had barely commenced in Afghanistan. Clark was told of a classified memo
from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld that described how “We’re going to
take out seven countries in five years,” and while their timetable is a little
behind, Iran is the only country on that list where the US and its allies
haven’t attempted a regime change.
+
The
Real Threat to Our Safety
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Or2XvoSLygI&feature=youtu.be
by Ron Sakolsky
(video-4min)
Published on May 1, 2019
===========
b.
How we take
back the internet | Edward Snowden
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVwAodrjZMY
Appearing
by telepresence robot, Edward Snowden speaks at
TED2014 about surveillance and Internet freedom. The right to data privacy, he
suggests, is not a partisan issue, but requires a fundamental rethink of the
role of the internet in our lives — and the laws that protect it. "Your
rights matter," he say, "because you never
know when you're going to need them." Chris Anderson interviews, with
special guest Tim Berners-Lee. TEDTalks is a daily
video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where
the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18
minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design --
plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more.
+
From: Cat McGuire [mailto:cat@catmcguire.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2019
Subject: Minds
Check out Minds, a new
privacy-friendly alternative to social media like Facebook
https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/subscriptions
While
you're there, listen to this report by Derrick Broze
of The Conscious Resistence on the Intercept ratting
out yet another whistleblower.
https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/973615701792821248
+
The
rot of American journalism runs deep
with Chris Hedges & Matt Taibbi
===========
c.
Another
Whistleblower Bites the Dust as The Intercept Adds a
Third Notch to Its Burn Belt
by Whitney Webb
The Intercept, which has long been associated with
the documents shared by whistleblower Edward Snowden, has yet to fire any of
the reporters responsible for these breaches that have seen two whistleblowers
already imprisoned and third, Daniel Hale, likely to be imprisoned.
+
Trump Steps up War on Whistleblowers: Air Force Vet
Daniel Hale Arrested For Leaking Drone War Info
https://www.democracynow.org/2019/5/10/trump_steps_up_war_on_whistleblowers
(vieo-39min.)
+
From:
Mark
Crispin Miller
Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019
Subject: [MCM] US indicts whistleblower who exposed Obama's drone
assassination program (and "our free press" ignores it)
This is the third such indictment under Trump, who has now used the
Espionage Act
three times.
That's half as many as Obama's all-time record of using that repressive
act six times
to punish those who dare, or try, to tell the awful truth—more than all
previous
presidents combined.
Trump still
has (at least) some 18 months to equal or surpass Obama's record;
and what's to
stop him? Not "our free press," which has blacked out this story
of Trump's
tyranny, just as it blacked out or played down Obama's dismal record
crushing civil
liberties.
So it's not
just about Julian Assange. "Our free press"
doesn't come to the
defense of anyone
who dares to contradict a major US propaganda narrative—
because the function
of the US press today is to promote such fictions, not
expose them.
MCM
US indicts whistleblower
who exposed
Obama’s drone assassination
program
Air Force's hunter-killer UAV
now flying in Afghanistan
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/05/11/hale-m11.html
by Kevin Reed
On Thursday, an indictment
by the US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia was unsealed against
former intelligence officer Daniel Everett Hale, 31, who was charged with
multiple counts of violating the Espionage Act including illegally obtaining
secret US government documents and giving them to a journalist.
No
reporter or news organization was named in the indictment. However, important
details indicate that the journalist is Jeremy Scahill
and the publisher is the Intercept.
In October 2015, the Intercept published
an eight-part series of articles by Scahill called
“The Drone Papers,” based on a cache of top-secret slide presentations provided
by an anonymous source.
The
series revealed to the public that the Pentagon has been conducting drone-based
warfare for more than a decade and that President Barack Obama had been running
a drone assassination program out of the White House since at least 2011. In
one segment of the series called “Find, Fix, Finish,” the Intercept reported that between January 2011 and June 2012, drone
strikes killed three US citizens in Yemen, including the radical preacher Anwar
al Awlaki, his friend Samir Khan and his 16-year-old
son Abdulrahman Awlaki.
Reported on by the World Socialist Web Site at
the time, the Interceptexposé
showed that, under the guise of fighting the “war on terror,” two drone
assassination programs were operated in parallel by the Pentagon and CIA to
kill specific individuals in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia and Iraq. In
the series, Scahill explained that the Democratic
Party administration of President Obama had rebranded “assassination” as
“targeted killing.”
===========
d.
The
Revelations of WikiLeaks: No. 2 —The
Leak That
‘Exposed
the True Afghan War’
The Afghan Diaries set off a firestorm when it revealed the suppression of
civilian casualty figures, the existence of an elite U.S.-led death squad, and the
covert role of Pakistan in the conflict, as Elizabeth Vos
reports.
This is the
second article in a series that is looking back on the major works of
the publication that has altered the world since its founding in 2006. The
series is an effort to counter mainstream media coverage, which is ignoring WikiLeaks’ work, and is instead focusing on Julian Assange’s personality. It is WikiLeaks’ uncovering of governments’ crimes and
corruption that set the U.S. after Assange and which
ultimately led to his arrest on April 11.
Three months after it published the “Collateral Murder” video, WikiLeaks on July 25, 2010 released a
cache of secret U.S. documents on the war in Afghanistan. It revealed the
suppression of civilian casualty figures, the existence of an elite U.S.-led
death squad and the covert role of Pakistan in the conflict, among other
revelations. The publication of the Afghan
War Diaries helped set the U.S. government on a collision course with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange that ultimately led to his arrest last month.
The war diaries were leaked by then-Army-intelligence-analyst
Chelsea Manning, who had legal access to the logs via her Top Secret clearance.
Manning only approached WikiLeaks, after studying the organization, following
unsuccessful attempts to leak the files to The
New York Times and The Washington
Post.
===========
e.
Assange Is Not a Journalist
(If
Journalists Are Ass-Kissing Propagandists for the Ruling Class)
by Ann Garrison
Saying Assange
not a journalist is like saying Darwin wasn’t a biologist, Einstein wasn’t a
physicist and LeBron James can’t play
basketball.
“Assange is a genius who
looked at global injustice with the mind of a systems analyst,
then founded Wikileaks and the transparency movement.”
High profile journalists have been
jabbering about whether or not Julian Assange is
really one of them. If “journalist” is understood to mean “ass-kissing
propagandist for the ruling class,” then he most certainly is not.
However, if we go by the more
common, less restrictive definitions, anyone who compiles and transmits
information to a willing audience is a journalist. Some are good, most are
awful, even evil, but Julian Assange is historic.
Saying he’s not a journalist is like saying Darwin wasn’t a biologist, Einstein
wasn’t a physicist, LeBron James can’t play
basketball, and by the way, Galileo was wrong. The earth’s flat after all and
we’re the center of the universe.
Assange
is a genius who could have joined the club of tech billionaires, but instead he
looked at global injustice with the mind of a systems analyst, then founded Wikileaks and the transparency movement. They put
corporations and government, including the Pentagon, the FBI, the CIA, and all
the other intel agencies on
notice that they could no longer count on operating in secret. State and
corporate scandals had been uncovered before, but there had never been anything
like Wikileaks. It guaranteed sources anonymity if
they used its dropbox secure technology, and it has
never busted a source. It has published well over 10 million documents and
never had to retract even one. Its decentralized technical infrastructure saves
it from the security state’s cyber weapons, and that strikes terror in the
twisted psyches of Mike Pompeo and his inner circle
of spies, murderers, and thieves without borders. If a global movement can free
Julian Assange, with the full force of the national
security state coming at him, it’ll be a game changer, perhaps even as historic
as Wikileaks itself.
“Wikileaks has
published well over 10 million documents and never had to retract even one.”
On the other hand, prosecuting and
convicting Assange for the crime of possessing and
publishing classified material would establish a precedent for convicting any
journalist, media outlet, or citizen who publishes, republishes, cites, quotes,
or even tweets classified material. There’s a growing list of classified Wikileaks that I could go to prison for quoting even though
they’re not the ones that have shocked the world like the Collateral Murder
video of US soldiers shooting Iraqi civilians from an Apache Helicopter as
though they were playing video games.
+
'We need to
save his life':
Pamela Anderson and WikiLeaks
editor-in-chief visits Julian Assange in high
security prison
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51562.htm
(video-6min.)
by RT
An emotional Pamela
Anderson and WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Kristinn Hrafnsson opened up to
reporters following the first ‘social’ visit to Julian Assange
since the whistleblower was imprisoned last month.
Anderson
and Hrafnsson were the first people allowed to visit Assange, aside from his lawyer, since the 47-year-old was
sentenced to 50 weeks imprisonment for violating bail conditions. The pair looked solemn following
the visit on Tuesday, and spoke to reporters outside of the prison about the “shocking” conditions the WikiLeaks founder is being held in. Friend and public
advocate Anderson spoke of her love for the Australian and said he has not been
able to speak to his children or access a computer or library since his
incarceration.
+
Patrick Henningsen on Julian
Assange's 1st Extradition Hearing
& possible new laws
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1g2pbtr1-c8&feature=youtu.be
(video-24min.)
Patrick
Henningsen is an independent analyst, public speaker
and founder and managing editor of the successful independent news and media
analysis website 21st Century Wire.com . He is also a
host on the popular weekly SUNDAY WIRE radio show which broadcasts live weekly
on the Alternate Current Radio Network (ACR). In November 2016, he launched a
new weekly show on terrestrial AM radio 'Patrick Henningsen
LIVE' on Independent Talk 1100 KFNX broadcasting to one of America's top talk
radio markets in Greater Phoenix. He has also appeared in a number of
international publications including The Guardian, UK Column, Consortium News,
Global Research, New Dawn Magazine, and also on channels like Al Jazeera English, ITN, Edge Media (SKY 200 UK) and US
syndicated radio show Coast to Coast AM.
+
One
Month in Belmarsh: 29th Vigil for Julian Assange
===========
f.
After
nearly two months in jail, Chelsea Manning submits
powerful appeal for release
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51564.htm
by
Niles Niemuth
Betraying my principles
is “a much worse prison than the government can construct”
Whistleblower and political prisoner Chelsea Manning
submitted an appeal Monday to the federal court in the Eastern District of
Virginia asking for her release from jail.
Manning has been held in the Alexandria City Jail since March
8. She was detained for contempt of court after she refused to testify before a
grand jury impaneled to bring frame-up charges against WikiLeaks
publisher and journalist Julian Assange.
“She is convinced that to cooperate with this grand jury
would be a betrayal of her beliefs about the grand jury process, and this grand
jury process in particular,” Manning’s attorneys told the court in a written
statement on Monday. “She is prepared to suffer the consequences for her
beliefs, and it should surprise nobody to find that she has the courage of her
convictions.
Manning’s eight-page statement
is a powerful declaration of political principles. She is being targeted by the
Trump administration as part of a nearly decade-long vendetta against her and Assange for exposing the US government’s war crimes in Iraq
and Afghanistan.
“After two months of confinement, and using every legal
mechanism available so far, I can—without any hesitation—state that nothing
will convince me to testify before this or any other grand jury for that
matter,” Manning declared. “With each passing day my disappointment and
frustration grow, but so too do my commitments to doing the right thing and
continuing to refuse to submit.”
+
Chelsea
Manning Has Been Released From Jail
Chelsea
Manning, in what she said is her first trip outside of the United States since
she was released from a U.S. prison, speaks at the annual re:publica conferences on their opening day on May 2,
2018 in Berlin, Germany. Photo: Sean Gallup / Getty
https://gizmodo.com/chelsea-manning-has-been-released-from-jail-1834656732
by Dell Cameron
Chelsea Manning was released today
from the Virginia jail where she spent 62 days for refusing to testify about
her past ties to WikiLeaks before a federal grand
jury in the Eastern District of Virginia.
Attorneys for Manning said the
release came after the grand jury’s term expired on Thursday. Her legal team
has already been served another subpoena. It demands she appear before a
different grand jury on May 17. Manning has vowed not to answer any questions
and, therefore, could be returned to custody as early as next week.
“Chelsea will continue to refuse to
answer questions, and will use every available legal defense to prove to
District Judge Trenga that she has just cause for her
refusal to give testimony,” her lawyers said.
===========
g.
Palestine
in Pictures: April 2019
https://electronicintifada.net/content/palestine-pictures-april-2019/27256
The Electronic Intifada
(1 May 2019)
+
What
I Saw in Gaza Changed Me Forever
by Ned Rosch
My
true liberation as a Jewish person is bound up with the liberation of
Palestinian people.
Reclaiming Judaism from Zionism is a powerful collection of 40 essays
by Jews from diverse backgrounds. Each describes a personal journey from a
Zionist worldview to activism in solidarity with Palestinians and Israelis
striving to build a society founded on justice, equality, and peaceful
coexistence. In this excerpt from the essay “Palestine and my Journey of
Self-Discovery,” Ned Rosch describes the deep impact
of a visit to Gaza in 2014, shortly after the intensive bombings of Israel’s
“Operation Protective Edge.”
The great Indian writer Arundhati Roy wrote, “The trouble is that once you see it,
you can’t unsee it. And once you’ve seen it, keeping
quiet, saying nothing, becomes as political an act as
speaking out. There’s no innocence. Either way, you’re accountable.” There were
numerous times in my life when I “saw” it and felt the strongly reinforced
foundations of my Zionist upbringing eventually crack wide open and ultimately
turn to dust, but perhaps nothing more deeply touched me and cemented my
perspective than a trip to Gaza in November 2014.
For a brief but remarkable week and
a half, I had the amazing privilege of being part of a health delegation to
this small strip of historic Palestine that is one of the most crowded places
on earth because its population is literally sealed in by the Israelis—with the
assistance of the Egyptians. To be there just two months after Israel’s
murderous 2014 war on the people of Gaza was to catch a glimpse—through the
painful stories I heard and the overwhelming destruction I witnessed—of the
grotesque horror of that 51-day war. The bombed-out structures were everywhere,
the grief universal, the trauma intense.
+
1,700
Gazans shot by IDF face amputation due to funding
crisis,
UN warns
https://www.rt.com/news/458855-gaza-amputation-funding-un/
Palestinian
amputees in Gaza © Suhaib Salem / Reuters
The
UN has warned that 1,700 Gazans shot by Israel
Defense Forces at protests may need amputations in the next two years because
of a lack of healthcare funding to help them recover.
Jamie
McGoldrick, the UN Humanitarian Coordinator for
Occupied Palestinian Territory, told reporters that 7,000 Palestinians were
shot by Israel at protests over the last year, with many hit in the lower legs.
“You’ve
got 1,700 people who are in need of serious, complicated surgeries for them to
be able to walk again,” McGoldrick
said,
explaining the wounded require rehabilitation and “very, very serious and complex bone reconstruction surgery over a two
year period before they start to rehabilitate themselves.”
===========
h.
From: Cat McGuire
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019
Subject: Irish pogrom -- case study of how antisemitism
develops
I highly recommend this May 6 Kevin MacDonald interview with
Andrew Joyce, an Irish Ph.D. historian.
Joyce begins with the historical record showing how
the Russian pogroms were calculated news stories by and large
fabricated so that eastern European Jews could leave the Pale of
Settlement under the guise of widespread exaggerated antisemitism
and thereby be allowed into Europe where economic opportunities would be
plentiful.
Joyce then presents a unique textbook analysis of
how antisemitism develops based on a study of Jews
who migrated to Limerick, Ireland in the late 1800s -- an area almost free of
Jewish history, thus a blank slate to study Jewish-Gentile interactions through
the lens of a Limerick pogrom. (When Joyce talks about
"morality," he's referring to the goy irrational hatred that
typically explains antisemitism.)
Listen to these key segments:
11:50 to 18:00 (6 min) - Myth of Russian pogroms as
seeded by British press
18:35 to 25:45 (7 min) - Ireland case study of
how/why antisemitism develops
27:00 to 30:37 (3 min) - Why elite rulers align
with Jewish dealmakers, throwing their own people under the bus
---------------
I was so taken by Joyce's findings that I sought
out more information and found this astonishing detailed research of his on
Russian pogroms, which he explains:
The series will begin with an explanation of the origins of Russia’s “Jewish
Question.” Subsequent articles will concern the pogroms themselves and how myth
and exaggeration have plagued our conception of them. Finally, I will examine
why these myths were developed, and the broader implications of the prevalence
of myth in Jewish ‘history.’
Revisiting
the 19th-Century Russian Pogroms, Part 1: Russia’s Jewish Question
Myth and the
Russian Pogroms, Part 2: Inventing Atrocities
Myth and the
Russian Pogroms Part 3 – The Jewish Role
I suspect Joyce's 3-part invaluable, eye-opening
articles will never be expanded into a scholarly book to due lack of funding,
if not outright banning by the academy as revisionist hate literature.
Those who do not learn from history are
doomed to repeat it.
===========
i.
Creeping Toward Tyranny
Mr.
Fish / Truthdig
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/creeping-toward-tyranny/
by Chris Hedges
The
destruction of the rule of law, an action essential to establishing an
authoritarian or totalitarian state, began long before the arrival of the Trump
administration. The George W. Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq and
implementation of a doctrine of pre-emptive war were war crimes under
international law. The federal government’s ongoing wholesale surveillance of
the citizenry, another legacy of the Bush administration, mocks our
constitutional right to privacy. Assassinating a U.S. citizen under order of
the executive branch, as the Obama administration did when it murdered the
radical cleric Anwar
al-Awlaki in Yemen, revokes due process. The
steady nullification of constitutional rights by judicial fiat—a legal trick
that has enabled corporations to buy the electoral system in the name of free
speech—has turned politicians from the two ruling parties into amoral tools of
corporate power. Lobbyists in Washington and the state capitals write
legislation to legalize tax boycotts, destroy regulations and government
oversight, pump staggering sums of money into the war machine and accelerate
the largest upward transfer of wealth in American history, one that has
involved looting the U.S. Treasury of trillions of dollars in the wake of the
massive financial fraud that set off the 2008 economic collapse. The ruling
elites, by slavishly serving corporate interests, created a system of
government that effectively denied the citizen the use of state power.
This
decades-long disregard by the two major political parties for the rule of law
and their distortion of government into a handmaiden for corporations set the
stage for Donald Trump’s naked contempt for legality and accountability. It
made inevitable our kakistocracy, rule by the worst
or most unscrupulous (“kakistocracy” is derived from
the Greek words kakistos, meaning worst, and kratos,
meaning rule).
Those
in the parade of imbeciles, grifters, con artists,
conspiracy theorists, racists, Trump family members, charlatans, generals and
Christian fascists, all of whom often see power as a way to enrich themselves
at the expense of the taxpayer, are too many to list here. They include former
Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, Ivanka
Trump, Jared Kushner, Vice President Mike Pence, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke
(who blamed “environmental
terrorist groups” for the 2018 California wildfires, hired private jets to
fly himself around the country and opened public lands for mineral and gas
exploitation), former Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott
Pruitt (who held lavish dinners with the coal-mining and chemical executives
whose companies he then deregulated) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.
This moral swamp also contains bizarre, Svengali-like
figures darting in and out of the shadows, such as Stephen Miller, Michael
Flynn, Steve Bannon, Kellyanne
Conway, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Anthony “The Mooch” Scaramucci and Omarosa Manigault Newman, not to mention paid-off porn stars and
mistresses, sleazy lawyers and bungling and corrupt campaign managers.
+
Is Bolton
Steering Trump Into War With Iran?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51567.htm
by Patrick J. Buchanan
Last week, it was Venezuela in America’s gun sights.
"While a peaceful solution is desirable, military action
is possible," thundered Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
"If that’s what is required, that’s what the United States will do."
John Bolton tutored Vladimir Putin on the meaning of the
Monroe Doctrine: "This is our hemisphere. It’s not where the Russians
ought to be interfering."
After Venezuela’s army decided not to rise up and overthrow
Nicholas Maduro, by Sunday night, it was Iran that
was in our gun sights.
Bolton ordered the USS Abraham Lincoln, its carrier battle
group and a bomber force to the Mideast "to send a clear and unmistakable
message to the Iranian regime that any attack on United States interests or
those of our allies will be met with unrelenting force."
What "attack" was Bolton talking about?
According to Axios, Israel had
alerted Bolton that an Iranian strike on U.S. interests in Iraq was imminent.
Flying to Finland, Pompeo echoed
Bolton’s warning:
"We’ve seen escalatory actions from the Iranians, and …
we will hold the Iranians accountable for attacks on American interests. … (If)
these actions take place, if they do by some third-party proxy, whether that’s
a Shia militia group or the Houthis
or Hezbollah, we will hold the … Iranian leadership directly accountable for
that."
Taken together, the Bolton-Pompeo
threats add up to an ultimatum that any attack by Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, or Iran-backed militias – on Israel, Saudi
Arabia, the UAE or U.S. forces in Iraq, Syria or the Gulf states – will bring a
U.S. retaliatory response on Iran itself.
+
Does Trump
Have Control of His Government,
or Is
It His Government?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51569.htm
by Paul Craig Roberts
I smell a rat.
John Bolton, Trump’s national security adviser or, more
correctly, Israel’s agent, has assembled a team consisting of himself, Israeli
prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Emirati crown prince Mohammed bin Zayed, and Saudi ruler Mohammed bin Salman.
These men are Iran’s four worst enemies.
The purpose of the team is to produce a false flag event that
will provide an excuse for Washington to attack Iran. As the Israelis
are the most competent member of this team, the speculation is that Israel will
shoot down an American aircraft or attack a US Navy vessel, and Washington will
have the presstitute media blame it on Iran. In
other words, a revival of the Northwoods Project that
the US Joint Chiefs presented to President Kennedy in hopes of setting up a US
invasion of Cuba.
The plot seems already to have been set in motion. Both
Bolton and acting Pentagon secretary Patrick Shanahan have announced their
detection of a “credible threat by Iranian regime forces. We call on the
Iranian regime to cease all provocation. We will hold the Iranian regime
accountable for any attack on US forces or our interests.”
To be clear, the “threat” and the “provocation” are not
identified. But they are somehow happening even though no news services
and no governments anywhere in the world, excepting Washington, Israel and
Saudi Arabia, are aware of the “escalatory action from the Iranians.”
+
Trump’s
Iran Policy Is Becoming Dangerous
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51574.htm
by
Colin Kah
Growing evidence
suggests the U.S. president is traveling a path toward war—whether he knows it
or not.
On
May 5, U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton issued a stark warning to
Iran.
The United States, he announced, would deploy the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group along with a bomber task force to the
Persian Gulf, “to send a clear and unmistakable message to the Iranian regime
that any attack on United States interests or on those of our allies will be
met with unrelenting force.” The United States, he continued, “is not seeking
war with the Iranian regime” but is “fully prepared to respond to any attack.”
It remains unclear what triggered the deployment and Bolton’s
strong language. Initial reports
suggested that it may have come in response to indications that Iranian-backed
Shiite militias were planning attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq. Other
reporting suggested
that Israel had tipped off U.S. officials to an impending Iranian attack
against U.S. interests, personnel, or allies in the Gulf. An anonymous U.S.
official said
the deployment had been ordered to bolster “deterrence to what has been seen as
potential preparations by Iranian forces and its proxies that may indicate
possible attacks on U.S. forces in the region,” but the official added that
there were no signs of an imminent Iranian attack.
Given Bolton’s long
track record of exaggerating and manipulating intelligence to justify the
use of force, it might be tempting to dismiss all of this as fake news. But the
prospect of Iran engaging in a provocation that sparks a wider military
confrontation is very real—even if it is the Trump administration’s own policy
of cornering Tehran that has greatly magnified the danger.
+
‘Pity America, because
of this crazy Trump!’
Here’s what Iran’s man in Iraq would say
to Mike Pompeo
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51590.htm
by
Robert Fisk
Why
didn’t Mike Pompeo talk to Iran’s most important
supporter in Iraq?
Mike
Pompeo went to put the thumbscrews on the Iraqi
government this week. No more electrical power from Iran, he told them, and
make sure those pesky Iranians don’t attack our boys in that great American
base in Iraq which Trump was boasting about. The New York Times numbingly told
us that his trip was “shrouded in secrecy” – if only it had been. Then at least
the US secretary of state could have paid a visit to Iran’s most important
supporter in the Iraqi parliament.
I met Hadi al-Ameri in Baghdad a
few days before Pompeo turned up in town. A tough,
curmudgeonly, 64-year-old bearded ex-militia leader, fluent in Persian and in
the Shia politics of Iraq, he is a personal friend of
Qassem Suleimani –
commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Quds
Force and America’s latest “super-terrorist” in the Middle East – and
fought alongside Iran in its eight-year war with Saddam.
I can imagine what he might have told Pompeo,
because this is what he told me over tea in his Baghdad office.
“Pity America, because of this crazy Trump! There were
180,000 American troops here with tanks and all their equipment and we did not
surrender to their intentions or wishes. Today, we want to build an Iraq
depending on itself, strong and sovereign in the region and we will make good
relations with all the regional countries for the interests of the people of
Iraq – not for America or for Saudi Arabia or for Iran. We will not allow
America to use Iraq to watch regional countries. And we will not allow Iraq to
become a battlefield for other countries to clear their debts.”
Mark those words: “Not ... for Iran.” Because Ameri presents himself as an Iraqi nationalist first, a Shia second – his political enemies in Iraq will disagree.
He prides himself on his leadership of the old Badr
Brigade and he played a prominent role in the struggle against Isis
in 2014.
===========
j.
‘Turnkey
Tyranny’ on the Streets of Washington
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51595.htm
by Ray
McGovern
We are at the point
Edward Snowden described as “turnkey tyranny.” And on Wednesday night the key
was turned a bit more dramatically. Ray McGovern explains.
Gerry Condon, President of
Veterans For Peace, was bloodied and “taken to
ground,” on Wednesday night for trying to get food to people inside the
Venezuelan Embassy in Washington. The activists inside, some of whom have lived
in the embassy for weeks with permission from the Venezuelan government, are
protecting the premises from protestors who support the self-declared president
Juan Guaido.
With the acquiescence of Washington police and the Secret
Service, the protestors have been able to block food from entering the embassy.
On Wednesday night electricity was cut to the building. One
activist tossing a loaf of bread to a window was arrested earlier this week for
using a “missile.” Now Condon has been manhandled and nabbed for throwing
a cucumber.
We are at the point Edward Snowden described as “turnkey
tyranny.” On Wednesday night the key was turned a bit more dramatically. Until
now it has been an almost imperceptibly gradual process, like the proverbial
frog in boiling water.
|
===========
k.
1,000 Israeli Soldiers To Arrive in
Honduras to Train Troops, Police on Border Protection
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51568.htm
by teleSUR
Honduras will
receive 1,000 Israeli soldiers to train the country's army for border
protection, fight against drug trafficking, investigation, and
counterterrorism.
A multilateral military treaty between Honduras, Israel, and
the United States will see the deployment of 1000 Israeli soldiers at
Honduras. They will train the Armed Forces of Honduras (FFAA) and National
Police (PN).
The main mission of the troops is to train for border
protection to stop migrants fleeing Honduras to the U.S., especially children.
This would be the second time that Honduras is allowing
foreign military personnel in the territory and the first time in Israel’s
history to send troops abroad.
Apart from border protection, fight against drug trafficking,
investigation, and counterterrorism will be offered as well.
According to local news media El Heraldo,
the presence of Israeli soldiers is part of bilateral cooperation between the
two countries before Honduras transferred its embassy from Tel Aviv to
Jerusalem.
The Israeli army will share space with the Joint Task
Force-Bravo (FTCB) of the U.S. at the Jose Enrique Soto Cano air base in Palmerola.
Honduras also has an agreement of more than a million dollars
with Israel in terms of purchasing arms, military equipment, and repowering
ships and planes. The 10-year agreement was signed in 2016.
The military training agreement was joined by the U.S. because
they have a permanent military base in Palmerola and
want Honduras to guard their borders due to an upsurge of migrants going
towards the North American nation.
The agreement was discussed between Honduran President Juan
Orlando Hernandez, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and the U.S.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo during the
inauguration of Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro.
+
From: Cat McGuire [mailto:cat@catmcguire.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 8:03 AM
To: Cat McGuire
Subject: FOIA release of 9/11 photos of the 5 dancing Israelis
Adam
Green publishes FOIA photos of the infamous 5 dancing Israelis celebrating
the twin tower attacks.
First
time released from FBI. Heaviiy redacted.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuQz6ej7hT4
+
Israeli
forces destroy Gaza office of Turkish Anadolu news
agency
https://cpj.org/2019/05/israeli-forces-destroy-gaza-office-of-turkish-anad.php
Beirut,
May 9, 2019 -- The Committee to Protect Journalists today condemned the Israeli
bombing of Turkish-stated owned news outlet Anadolu
Agency's Gaza office on May 4.
Israeli
warplanes fired five missiles into the building housing the Anadolu
Agency office, destroying the building but causing no casualties, according to a
report by Anadolu Agency, other news
reports, and the regional press freedom group Skeyes.
"It
is completely unacceptable for Israel to bomb and destroy the Gaza office of
Turkey's Anadolu Agency and endanger the lives of
journalists, who are civilians and guaranteed protection under international
law," said CPJ Middle East and North Africa Representative Ignacio Miguel
Delgado. "Israeli authorities know where media outlets are housed in Gaza,
and must ensure that journalists can do their jobs safely, without fear of
being injured or killed."
The
planes first fired warning shots at the building at about 7 p.m., according to
the Anadolu statement and the Skeyes
report.
+
“Deal of the Century” Offers New Name
to the Remains of Four Thousand Year Old Palestine
JERUSALEM, PALESTINE — Nakba
Day — the day when Palestinians commemorate the destruction of their country
and the mass killing and forced eviction of their people — is coming up, and
with each passing day, another disturbing story unfolds.
Perhaps the most disturbing story
so far is the plan to present Palestine with a new name, “New Palestine.” This,
according to a rumored leak,
is what Donald Trump and Jared Kushner are going to present to an anticipating
world as part of the so-called “Deal of the Century.”
Also according to the leak, aside
from a demand for Palestinians to accept a new name as part of the “Deal of the
Century” — forgoing the name “Palestine,” which has been used to describe their
land since the Bronze Age — the Palestinian people will have to accept that
their heritage and their history will be erased and their land will be taken
away for good. In other words, what Palestinians are going to receive,
according to the leak, is a new name but no country, and they will be expected
to accept this or else they will be denied access to foreign aid, not only from
the U.S. but other countries as well.
===========
l.
A Brief Contemporary History of US-Russian Relations
https://therealnews.com/series/reality-asserts-itself-stephen-cohen
(video, in 5 parts)
with Stephen Cohen
+
Russia’s
Ongoing Victory Day
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51596.htm
by Finian Cunningham
As the world again
marked the annual Victory Day against Nazi Germany this week, one thing seems
more evident with each passing year – Russia holds the highest honour for celebrating this event.
The
commemorations in Russia in terms of people numbers and ceremonial splendor far
excel similar public events held across Europe and North America. Even though,
in theory, those latter countries were allies which defeated Nazi Germany in
May 1945
Why have
Victory Day celebrations seem to have become more subdued in Europe and North
America with each passing year, while in Russia, 74 years on, the “Great
Patriotic War” is remembered and revered with undiminished passion?
Russia’s
President Vladimir Putin delivered a rousing speech dedicated to the sacrifices
of the war dead in front of multitudes attending Moscow’s Red Square. There was
also an impressive military parade honoring the fallen heroes, followed by a
breathtaking fireworks display, and marches held across all Russia in towns and
villages for the “Immortal Regiments”.
Meanwhile, tellingly, an article posted on the BBC website was
headlined: “What is VE [Victory in Europe] Day?”
One reason
for the difference is because Russia and other Soviet nations paid a far
greater human price of suffering in the defeat of Nazi Germany. The memory of
the horror is seared into Russian families. And, likewise, so too is the memory
of resistance and ultimately the glory of defeating a monstrous enemy – at
times against all the odds of victory.
Take the
Nazi siege of Leningrad (St Petersburg). For over two years the people of that
city endured starvation and cruelties that hardly anyone in Western Europe or
North America could imagine. Yet the Nazi barbarity was finally overcome, the
city was liberated by the Red Army, and Russian composer Dmitri Shostakovich
who was trapped in the besieged city wrote an internationally renowned symphony
heralding the vanquishing of that trauma.
The later
final defeat of Nazi Germany in May 1945 was indeed a
liberation for all of Europe. But that victory was indisputably due to
the resilience and fortitude of Russian and other Soviet citizens. All told,
the Soviet people lost about 27 million from Nazi war depredations, including
from extermination operations and atrocities inflicted on whole villages. That
number is incomparably greater to what other European countries incurred. Yet,
in spite of the massive onslaught, it was the Soviet people who rose to the
occasion to push back the Nazi invaders all the way to Berlin where the Third
Reich was eventually buried in its war bunkers.
Just one
more figure is enough to tell the story. Some 90 per cent of all Nazi army
casualties during World War II were inflicted in the East fighting against the
Soviet nations. That tells you how and where the Nazi war machine was
terminated.
There are
several current consequences from that horrific war that are still felt today.
One is that
Russia will never allow itself to be invaded and threatened as it was by Nazi
Germany in June 1941. Russia’s defense forces and weapons are perhaps the best
in the world. No wonder Russia is vehemently opposed to NATO expansionism. How
would Americans or British feel if the shoe was on the other foot?
Secondly,
in a paradoxical way, because Russia suffered such infernal hardships from war,
it is perhaps the most peace-loving of all modern nations. In President Putin’s
speech this year, he once again extended a hand of friendship and cooperation
to others to strengthen global security. That is in spite of the fact that the
US and its NATO allies have continually insulted and provoked Russia with
slanderous claims, military saber-rattling and economic sanctions.
A third
consequence is that Western nations who claim to have defeated Nazi Germany –
thereby trying to undermine Russia’s honorable place in that event – have at
the same time an evident historical amnesia. This is not to belittle the
sacrifices of hundreds of thousands of ordinary soldiers from the US and
Britain who gave their lives in the fight against Nazi Germany. Nevertheless,
the boastful claims of Western leaders and media is
belied by the diminishing memorials to the Victory in Europe.
The truth
is Victory in Europe was predominantly a victory by the Russian and Soviet nations.
After all, several of the European countries are guilty from their ruling
establishments collaborating with Nazi Germany, as in France, Norway, Poland,
and others.
The
concomitant of that duplicitous reality is that victory celebrations across
Europe – except for Russia – tend to become somewhat hollow and muted with time.
Another
reality – one that is shameful and concealed by Western establishments – is
that American and British finance capital was very much instrumental in
bankrolling the rise of Hitler’s Third Reich. US corporations such as Ford,
ITT, General Motors and Du Pont made fortunes from investing in Nazi Germany
during the 1930s, making full use of slave camps for cheap labor, before the
outbreak of the war.
The
ambiguous relationship between Western capitalism and Nazi fascism is testified
in today’s cozy alliance between Washington and the Neo-Nazi regime that seized
power in Ukraine. The disgusting veneration by politicians in Kiev for Nazi
collaborators and their vile blood lust against the ethnic Russian people in
Eastern Ukraine are never objected to by governments in Washington or the
European Union.
Russia
knows the evils of fascism because it started this force in the face and
defeated it 74 years ago. That world-changing event will never be forgotten nor
taken for granted.
===========
m.
Trump's Foreign Policy | Full Debate | George
Galloway,
Mark Leonard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcyfVLMWqFI&feature=youtu.be
(video-43min.)
Many
think Trump a buffoon and a threat to world peace. But with ISIS weakened, and
signs of progress in North Korea, perhaps his supporters can point to some
initial successes. Could a beligerent approach to
foreign policy make for a safer world? Is the beat
way of pursuing peace to prepare for war? Or has Trump in fact made the world
more precarious than ever?
+
George Galloway setting the record straight on Iraq
BBC Hardtalk
Part 3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ju14plUOskU&feature=youtu.be
(video-7min.)
===========
n.
On
Julian Assange & Venezuela
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51563.htm
(audio-9min.)
with John Pilger
+
Venezuela –
A Risk to Dollar Hegemony –
Key Purpose
Behind “Regime Change”
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51593.htm
by Peter Koenig
After the new coup attempt – or propaganda coup – Venezuela
lives in a state of foreign imposed insecurity. The failed coup was executed on
30 April by Juan Guaidó, the self-proclaimed and Washington-trained and endorsed
“interim President”, and the opposition leader, Leopoldo
López, who was hurriedly freed from house arrest by Guaidó with a couple of dozens of armed-to-the-teeth
defecting military, who apparently didn’t quite know what they were up to.
Because, when all was over after a few hours, most of them asked to be
re-integrated into their military units – and, as far as I know, they were
readmitted.
These are Washington’s puppets and “coup-makers”. When one
sees that the so-called coup was defeated in a mere few hours, without any Venezuelan
military interference, one wonders whether this was really planned as a coup,
or merely as a “public relations” coup, for the media to ‘recharge’ their
narrative of Maduro dictatorship, of a suffering
people, of famine, of lack of medication and medical supply – all due to the Maduro government’s mismanagement of Venezuela’s natural
riches, the lie-slander we have been used to for the last several years.
For sure, the Venezuelan people are suffering. According to a CEPR report sanctions have
killed some 40,000 Venezuelans. And this, not because of President Maduro’s squandering of Venezuelan resources, but because
of a brutal, merciless outside interference, principally from the United States
and to a lesser degree from Washington’s European vassals. If you listen to the
ceaseless drumbeat for war against Venezuela and her democratically elected
President Nicolas Maduro, by Pompeo,
Bolton, Pence and Trump – you can only wonder and shake your head – what
pathological and schizophrenic world we are living in? – And – are we all sick
to the bone, that we tolerate it, that nobody of and in power – other than
Russia and China – say ‘Halt’ to this deadly fiasco?
This article by Eric Zuesse,
including leaked documents from Pentagon’s southern command, SOUTHCOM, will
give the non-believers plenty of reasons to change their minds. Western
humanity has reached an abject state of mental disease. We allow the slaughter
of tens of millions of people by the United States and its NATO allies, in
US-provoked wars and conflicts around the world, indiscriminate killing for
resources and monetary dominion. But we follow the same killer nation in
accusing a quiet, peace-loving, fully democratic country, like Venezuela, to be
utterly trampled on and punished with the most horrific monetary and economic
sanctions – all illegal, by any standards of law – and our western “leaders”
know it all.
===========
o.
Which New
War Next: Iran or Venezuela?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51576.htm
by
Jacob G. Hornberger
Pity
President Donald “America First” Trump, Secretary of State (and former CIA
Director) Mike Pompeo, National-Security Advisor (and
Cold War fanatic) John Bolton, and Special U.S. Representative to Venezuela
(and Cold War fanatic) Eliott Abrams.
Knowing that the American people have grown weary with their
forever wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Yemen, these four
interventionists can’t decide whether to initiate a new war against Venezuela
or against Iran or against both. They just know that they want a new war, an
exciting war, a winnable war against a poor Third World country, a war that
will cause Americans to forget about the ongoing fiascoes in the Middle East
and Afghanistan and that will hopefully restore America to greatness through
“mission-accomplished” conquest, bombing, death, destruction, and
regime-change. One can easily imagine the arguments that must be taking place
in the White House: “Iran! They ousted our Shah from power!” “No, Venezuela!
It’s part of the worldwide communist conspiracy to take over America!”
Ideally from their standpoint, the choice will be made easier for
them if either Iran or Venezuela strikes first. After all, let’s not forget
that the Constitution, which is supposedly the law of the land, requires a
congressional declaration of war before the president and his army can wage
war. Moreover, after World War II, the Nuremberg War Crimes declared it to be a
war crime for one nation to initiate an attack on another nation.
Not that any president concerns himself with the Constitution and
with Nuremberg principles. Trump knows that he can violate that section of the
Constitution with impunity. He knows that while Congress might impeach him for
“collusion” with the Russians or with the nebulous crime of “obstructing
justice,” there is no possibility that Congress will impeach him for
intentionally violating the declaration-of-war restriction in the Constitution.
He also knows that there is no possibility that the U.S. Supreme Court, whose
responsibility is to enforce the Constitution, will be anything but passive and
deferential to any war initiated by the president.
+
How The U.S. Is Pressing
Iran To Breach The Nuclear Deal
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51575.htm
by Moon
Of Alabama
363
days ago the U.S. left the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the
'nuclear deal' with Iran, and reintroduced sanctions against trade with Iran.
When
the U.S. reintroduced sanctions on Iran it provided sanction 'wavers' for some
customers of Iranian oil. Two weeks ago the extremists in the Trump
administration won out and the those waivers
were eliminated. Some of Iran's customers, Iraq, Turkey and China, will
continue to buy Iranian oil and will face U.S. sanctions.
The
declared aim of the Trump administration's 'maximum pressure campaign' is to
bring all trade with Iran to zero and the country to its knees.
On
Wednesday May 8, one years after the U.S. breached the
deal, it will announce additional sanctions against the country:
The
Wall Street Journal reported last week that new sanctions would target
petrochemical sales. I'm told the administration will likely impose those
sanctions soon, but the new sanctions planned for this week will target a
different sector of the Iranian economy.
The
only European response to the new announcements was a lame statement. The EU should fight for the JCPOA deal
as it is in its interest. But instead it is slow-walking its badly designed INSTEX mechanism that would allow for sanction free
trade with Iran.
Iran
will use the anniversary of the U.S. breach of the deal to announce that it
will no longer stick to some of the restrictions of the JCPOA.
===========
p.
From: Mark Crispin Miller
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2019
Subject: [MCM] Cell phone radiation affects the thyroid gland, and may
increase the risk of preterm birth and thyroid cancer
Thyroid
Cancer & Mobile Phone Use
Cell phone radiation affects the thyroid gland and may increase risk of
preterm birth and thyroid cancer
A new review of the
research has found that cell phone radiation adversely affects cells in the
thyroid gland and thyroid hormones. The study was published in the journal,
Environmental Science and Pollution Research International by Jafar Asl and colleagues.
The findings from this study support the findings from two recent human
studies. Ermioni Tsarna and
colleagues recently found in a cohort study that cell phone use during
pregnancy increased the risk of preterm birth, and Jiajun
Luo and colleagues found in a case-control study that
heavy cell phone use increases the risk of thyroid cancer.
The abstracts for all three studies appear below :
The figure above is from the following open access paper: Carlberg
M, Hedendahl L, Ahonen,
Koppel T, Hardell L. Increasing incidence of thyroid
cancer in the Nordic countries with main focus on Swedish data. BMC Cancer. 16:246. 2016.https://bmccancer.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12885-016-2429-4
--
Asl JF, Larijani B, Zakerkish M, Rahim F, Shirbandi K, Akbari R. The
possible global hazard of cell phone radiation on thyroid cells and hormones: a
systematic review of evidences. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2019 May 6. doi: 10.1007/s11356-019-05096-z. [Epub
ahead of print]
Abstract
The aim of this review was to investigate the effects
of possible harmful waves from either cell phone use or being within the range
of the cell phone from 450 to 3800 MHz on the thyroid cells and hormones. Eight
electronic datasets were systematically searched using MeSH
terms, including "cell phone," "mobile phone,"
"GSM," "radio frequency," "smartphone,"
"triiodothyronine," "thyroxin,"
"thyroid-stimulating hormone," "T3," "T4,"
"TSH," and "morphological" and all possible combinations,
to identify relevant studies published up to Dec 2018. We also manually
searched the reference lists of potentially selected studies to identify
further relevant publications. About 161 relevant studies were initially found.
After screening titles and abstracts, 139 studies were excluded, and finally 22
studies (comprising 7182 cases) were included in the qualitative synthesis.
Of the 22 included studies, 11 studies reported changes in T3 and T4 levels
(six reported a decrease in T3 levels and one reported increase in it);
moreover, five found decreased T4 levels and two studies an increased level. In
other 10 studies, TSH alteration was reported. Of these, two studies reported a
decrease in TSH level and one reported an increase in the hormone levels, while
in the remaining studies non-significant changes were reported. Finally, seven
studies examined histological changes in the thyroid gland follicles and showed
that the volume of these cells was reduced.
Based on the evidence discussed above, the reduction in diameter of thyroid
follicles is potentially linked with cell phone radiation. Exposure may
negatively influence the iodine uptake in the thyroid gland or increases
temperature effect on the thyroid gland. However, further research are needed
in order to show that the level of TSH and thyroid hormone suppression by
microwave.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31062236
Excerpts
The range of SAR [Specific Absorption Rate] reported
in this study was 0.082–4.6 W/kg. Silva et al. stated that RFE [radio frequency
energy] exposure conditions have no potential carcinogenic effect on thyroid
cells with 0.082–0.170 (W/kg) SAR (Silva et al. 2016). It is expected that
reducing this factor will reduce the risk of cell phone waves, but Bhargav et al. show that thyroid gland hormones are
significantly lesser after RF-EMF with 0.54 W/kg SAR exposure compared to sham
(Bergamaschi et al. 2004), and other studies show
contradictory results about the role of SAR and hormonal effects. Despite the
fact that SAR is a very important criterion for judging the highest energy of a
radio signal released from a source of a particular model of a mobile phone, it
alone cannot provide enough information to compare the amount of radio signal
released by different phones to users.
... epidemiological evidences have revealed that even
a relatively slight decrease in T4 levels during pregnancy may lead to decrease
of cognitive functions in offspring (Haddow et al.
1999; Pop et al. 2003). In this regard, Eşmekaya
et al. stated that cell phone has the potential to cause pathological
consequences in the thyroid gland via changing organ structure, as well as
increasing the activity of caspase-dependent pathways
related to apoptosis (Esmekaya et al. 2010). Silva et
al. show the exposure to RFE seems to have no possible oncogenic
consequence on human thyroid cells (Silva et al. 2016). Nonetheless, it is
quite difficult to perform a study exploring the impacts of EMFs on a fetus or
child due to ethical concerns (Sangun et al. 2015).
Conclusions and future perspective
Tissue heating may be usually linked to nonspecific stress reaction induced by
microwave exposure. Exposure negatively influences the iodine uptake in the
thyroid gland, or may influence with increased temperature effect on the
thyroid gland. However, with the advent of new generations of communications
like the 5 G, further research are needed in order to
show the level of TSH and thyroid hormone suppression by microwave.
--
Maternal cell phone use
during pregnancy increased preterm births
Abstract
Tsarna E, Reedijk M, Birks
LE, Guxens M, Ballester F,
Ha M, Jiménez-Zabala A, Kheifets
L, Lertxundi A, Lim HR, Olsen J, Safont
LG, Sudan M, Cardis E, Vrijheid
M, Vrijkotte T, Huss A, Vermeulen
R. Maternal Cell Phone Use During Pregnancy, Pregnancy Duration And Fetal
Growth In Four Birth Cohorts. Am J Epidemiol.
2019 Apr 17. pii:
kwz092. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwz092.
Previous studies evaluating potential effects of prenatal exposure to
radiofrequency fields from cell phones on birth outcomes are inconsistent. We
explored if maternal cell phone use was associated with pregnancy duration and
fetal growth.
We used information from 55,507 pregnant women and their children from Denmark
(1996-2002; DNBC), the Netherlands (2003-2004; ABCD), Spain (2003-2008; INMA)
and Korea (2006-2011; MOCEH). Based on self-reported number of cell phone calls
per day, exposure was grouped as none, low (reference level), intermediate, and
high. We examined pregnancy duration (gestational age at birth, preterm/postterm birth), fetal growth (birth weight ratio,
small/large for gestational age), and birth weight, low and high birth weight,
and meta-analyzed cohort specific estimates.
The intermediate exposure group had higher risk of giving birth at lower
gestational age (Hazard Ratio=1.04, 95% CI 1.01, 1.07), and exposure-response
relationships were found for shorter pregnancy duration (P<0.001) and
preterm birth (P=0.003). We observed no association with fetal growth or birth
weight. In conclusion, maternal cell phone use during pregnancy may be
associated with shorter pregnancy duration and increased risk for preterm
birth.
Results should be interpreted with caution, as they may reflect stress during
pregnancy or other residual confounding, rather than direct effect of cell
phone exposure.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30995291
Excerpts
Exposure to RF-EMF [radio frequency electromagnetic fields] during pregnancy
could affect the growth and development of the fetus and the pregnancy duration
either due to direct radiation of the fetus and the placenta, or indirectly as
a result of altered maternal physiology ...
... During calling and texting abdominal exposure is low and modeling studies
estimate that exposure levels of the human fetus are very low (9–12), although
an experimental study on humans has shown that abdominal RF-EMF exposure may
affect the placenta function (13). In addition, an association between RF-EMF
exposure and thyroid dysfunction has been indicated in animal studies (14,15)....
... A cohort study from Turkey (N=500) retrospectively assessed cell phone use
and reported shorter pregnancy duration and increased risk for preterm birth
(16). In a cohort study from Iran (N=1,200), no association with birth weight
was found (17). In a much larger sample from Norway (N=100,231), no association
was found between cell phone use and low birth weight, preterm birth, or small
for gestational age (SGA) (18)....
The mothers from DNBC and ABCD reported their frequency of cell phone calls
during pregnancy 7 years postnatally. In INMA and
MOCEH, similar questionnaires were given to the mothers during pregnancy. To be
consistent with previous analyses within these cohorts (29), we classified
exposure in four categories (none, low, intermediate, high), based on available
information regarding daily frequency of cell phone calls during pregnancy
(Table 2)....
Table 2 footnote: In DNBC, ABCD, and INMA cohorts, none exposure corresponds to
no calls per day, low exposure to 0-1 calls per day, intermediate exposure to
2-3 calls per day, and high exposure to 4 or more calls per day. In MOCEH
cohort, none exposure corresponds to no calls per day, low exposure to 0-2
calls per day, intermediate exposure to 3-5 calls per day, and high exposure to
6 or more calls per day.
... the OR [odds ratio] for preterm birth gained
statistical significance in the highly exposed group within the cohorts with
prospective exposure assessment (OR=2.03, 95% CI 1.22, 3.39) (Web Tables 8 and
10). In the analysis with binary exposure, we observed an increased risk of
giving birth at lower gestational age (HR=1.04, 95% CI 1.02, 1.07), and
increased odds for preterm birth (OR=1.16, 95% CI 1.05, 1.29) for the mothers
that used their cell phone more often during pregnancy (Web Tables 8 and 11).
The estimates for all the other outcomes were not different from unity (Web
Table 11).
In our study, we observed an association of maternal cell phone use during
pregnancy with pregnancy duration, but not with fetal growth. Since fetal
exposure is very low during cell phone calls (9–12), for the interpretation of
these results we considered the potential effect of RF-EMF on maternal head and
neck structures, as well as indirect pathways related to the use of cell phones
rather than the radiation per se. Animal studies have suggested that RF-EMF
exposure may result in minor thyroid gland dysfunction (14,15).
Additionally, higher preconception thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) levels and
subclinical hypothyroidism during pregnancy have
been associated with higher risk for miscarriage and preterm birth (46–49).
Thus, the increased risk for giving birth preterm among heavier users of cell
phones that we observed could be mediated by mild thyroid dysfunction. However,
the association of RF-EMF exposure from cell phone use with thyroid function is
not established, and large-scale epidemiological studies on the topic are
lacking. Increased oxidative stress has been also considered (50). However, it
is not clear whether the elevation of radical oxygen species resulting from
local RF-EMF exposure is of such an extent in humans that it could trigger
systematic responses affecting the birth outcomes. Causal pathways involving
local radiation of parts of the human body other than maternal head and neck
structures were not considered, as this exposure would not be reflected in the
number of cell phone calls per day....
The exposure variable was based only on the number of cell phone calls per day;
duration of calling was not taken into account, as it was available only in
MOCEH. Furthermore, the number of cell phone calls per day during pregnancy was
self-reported in all cohorts, and was validated only in MOCEH (59). Thus,
misclassification of exposure should have attenuated the observed association,
under our assumption that misclassification was predominantly non-differential
(60–62). We expect that misclassification was much larger in the older cohorts
(DNBC and ABCD), as the number of cell phone calls per day was reported seven
years postnatal. Therefore, the estimates in DNBC and ABCD cohorts should be
more biased towards the null in comparison to INMA and MOCEH cohorts....
In conclusion, in our study more frequent maternal cell phone use during
pregnancy was associated with shorter pregnancy duration, resulting in
increased risk for preterm birth. No association with fetal growth and birth
weight was observed. Study results make strong effects unlikely and should be
interpreted with caution, as they may reflect an effect of stress during
pregnancy or other residual confounding, rather than a direct effect of RF-EMF
exposure.
--
Heavy cell phone use is
linked to thyroid cancer
The first case-control study examining the association between cell phone use
and thyroid cancer found elevated risks of thyroid cancer among heavier,
long-term cell phone users.
At greater risk of thyroid cancer were individuals who used a cell phone for
more than 15 years, for more than two hours per day, or for a greater number of
lifetime hours. Also, those who made the most cell phone calls in their
lifetime were at increased risk.
Men who used cell phones for more than 15 years had over twice the risk of
thyroid cancer as compared to non-cell phone users after controlling for other
factors. Women who used cell phones for more than two hours per day had a 52%
greater risk of thyroid cancer as compared to non-cell phone users.
Although the key findings in this study were of borderline statistical
significance, this may be due to the relatively small sample size, especially
for males. The study included 462 histologically-confirmed
thyroid cancer cases and 498 population-based controls. Also, the study did not
control for cordless phone use which may be a risk factor for thyroid cancer.
The study, published online in the Annals of Epidemiology on October 29, was
conducted by researchers from the Yale School of Medicine and the Connecticut
Health Department.
The authors recommended more research since the results from this study may not
be generalizable to current cell phone users due to
changing technology and patterns of use (e.g., hands-free use, texting). The
authors noted that smart phones were not in common use during the period prior
to 2010-2011 when the data for this study were collected. The majority of study
participants did not start using cell phones until age 21. Future research
should determine if age of first cell phone use is associated with greater
thyroid cancer risk.
The authors reported that thyroid cancer is the fastest growing cancer in the
U.S. Incidence has nearly tripled since the 1980’s from four per 100,000 in
1980 to fifteen per 100,000 in 2014 making this the fifth most common cancer
among women in the country. Although over-diagnosis is believed to account for
about half of this increase, the remainder is likely due to changing environmental
and lifestyle factors.
Yawei Zhang, MD, PhD, of the Yale School of Medicine
and Cancer Center was the senior author of this paper. The research was
supported by the American Cancer Society, the U.S. National Institutes of
Health, and the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s Republic of
China.
My comments: The National Cancer Institute (NCI) estimates that 53,990 new
cases of thyroid cancer will be diagnosed in 2018 making this the 12th most
common cancer in the U.S. Rates for new thyroid cancer cases have increased
3.1% per year over the last ten years (on average) based upon an analysis of
data from the NCI Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-9 (SEER-9) cancer
registry program.
Since smart phones are more likely to have cell antennas located in the bottom
of the phones than earlier cell phone models, the peak radiation exposure from
a smart phone is more likely in the neck than in the brain. Hence, I would
hypothesize that the association between cell phone use and thyroid cancer has
increased in recent years. The switch from “candy bar" and flip phones to
smart phones could explain upward trends over time in thyroid cancer incidence
and relatively flat trends in brain cancer observed in some countries.
Abstract
Luo J, Deziel NC, Huang H,
Chen Y, Ni X, Ma S, Udelsman R, Zhang Y. Cell phone
use and risk of thyroid cancer: a population-based case-control study in
Connecticut. Ann Epidemiol. 2018
Oct 29. pii:
S1047-2797(18)30284-9. doi:
10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.10.004
Purpose. This study aims to investigate the association between cell phone use
and thyroid cancer.
Methods. A population-based case-control study
was conducted in Connecticut between 2010 and 2011 including 462 histologically confirmed thyroid cancer cases and 498
population-based controls. Multivariate unconditional logistic regression was
used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for
associations between cell phone use and thyroid cancer.
Results. Cell phone use was not associated with
thyroid cancer (OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.74-1.48). A suggestive increase in risk of
thyroid microcarcinoma (tumor size ≤10mm) was
observed for long-term and more frequent users. Compared to cell phone
non-users, several groups had non-statistically significantly increased risk of
thyroid microcarcinoma: individuals who had used a
cell phone >15 years (OR: 1.29, 95% CI: 0.83-2.00), who had used a cell
phone >2 hours per day (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 0.83-2.35), who had the most
cumulative use hours (OR: 1.58, 95% CI: 0.98-2.54), and who had the most
cumulative calls (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.78-1.84).
Conclusion. This study found no significant
association between cell phone use and thyroid cancer. A suggestive elevated
risk of thyroid microcarcinoma associated with long-term
and more frequent uses warrants further investigation.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30446214
--
Related posts on Electromagnetic Radiation
Safety
Thyroid
Cancer and Mobile Phone Use
Pregnancy
& Wireless Radiation Risks
Female
Infertility & Cell Phone Radiation
--
Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., Director
Center for Family and Community Health
School of Public Health
University of California, Berkeley
Electromagnetic Radiation Safety
Website:
https://www.saferemr.com
Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/SaferEMR
Twitter: @berkeleyprc
===========
q.
From:
Mark Crispin Miller
Sent:
Thu, 09 May 2019
Subject:
[MCM] CNN goes Goebbels with a Big Lie about Guaido
winning an election in Venezuela, though there wasn't one (and he would not
have won it if there was)
"Our
free press" just keeps on getting scarier.
MCM
CNN Falsely
Claims Venezuela’s Guaido Was
Elected
President in January : “There was no election in
January”
by Jason Ditz
Continuing to
try to advance the US narrative that Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido is the “duly elected” president,
CNN went to the trouble on Sunday afternoon of inventing an entire election to
base this around. In the CNN report, they declared “pressure is mounting on Maduro to step down, following elections in January in
which voters chose opposition leader Juan Guaido <https://web.archive.org/web/20190505220126/https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/05/americas/venezuela-military-helicopter-crash/index.html>
over
him for president.” There was no election in January.
In reality, Venezuela’s presidential election was held on May 20, 2018. The
opposition boycotted the vote, Maduro won with 67.8%
of the vote, while Guaido did not participate at all.
Indeed, the only time Juan Guaido participated in a
presidential vote of any kind was the 2012 Democratic Unity Roundtable’s
presidential primary, which he lost. Guaido’s first
claim to the presidency came in January of 2019, when he unilaterally declared
himself “acting president.”Yet the Trump Administration not only endorsed Guaido as president at this time, they’ve begun referring
to him as the “duly elected” president despite such an election never taking
place. US media outlets have parroted that claim, but CNN took it a step
farther to invent the election too.The CNN article
was written by two senior writers <https://web.archive.org/web/20190505220126/https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/05/americas/venezuela-military-helicopter-crash/index.html>,
and had four others contribute to it. It is hard to
imagine that none of them caught this false claim of a January vote. Yet the
article remained unchanged throughout Sunday and overnight, and it was only
some time on Monday that it was finally revised to say that Guaido
had “declared himself interim president.
===========
r.
'Won't capitulate':
China warns as Trump threatens new tariffs
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51584.htm
by Al Jazeera
China has rejected accusations made by the United States of
backtracking in trade talks and warned it would not "capitulate to any
pressure" as the two sides head into make-or-break negotiations.
"The
US has assigned a lot of labels, such as backtracking, going back on one's
word, and so on. Lots of promises have been foisted on China," Chinese
commerce ministry spokesman Gao
Feng told reporters in Beijing on Thursday.
"China will not capitulate to any pressure, and we have the determination
and ability to defend our own interests," Gao said, warning that it "has already prepared
for all possible situations".
The US has raised the stakes with plans to increase tariffs
on $200bn in Chinese goods from 10 to 25 percent at 12:01am (04:01GMT) on
Friday, prompting Beijing to vow to hit back with "necessary
countermeasures".
Gao's comments came as a
Chinese delegation led by Vice Premier Liu He was set to hold talks in
Washington on Thursday and Friday.
The talks are aimed at salvaging the trade deal that appeared to be unravelling after US President Donald Trump accused China
of breaking it and promised to impose more tariffs if no agreement is reached.
'They broke the deal'
At a rally in Florida on Wednesday, Trump said Beijing would
pay if no agreement is reached.
"I just announced that we'll increase tariffs on China
and we won't back down until China stops cheating our workers and stealing our
jobs, and that's what's going to happen, otherwise we don't have to do business
with them," Trump told a cheering crowd.
"They broke the deal," he added. "They can't
do that. So they'll be paying. If we don't make the deal,
nothing wrong with taking in more than $100bn a year."
Al Jazeera's Adrian Brown said
there was now a "grim" realisation in
Beijing that more US tariffs on Chinese goods are inevitable.
"There is so little time left for Chinese negotiators to
avoid the tariffs, now talks do resume in Washington
on Thursday but they are due to last just two days - just two days to try to
achieve a deal that can somehow prevent this trade dispute from
escalating," he said from Beijing.
"There could be a possible surprise but I think it's
more likely that there is unlikely to be a deal in the short term, I think the
question is will the two sides continue negotiating, if they do, it will be
enough to stabilise markets."
Trump's comments triggered a round of selling in Asian and
European markets.
Trade negotiations are a long process and it is normal to
have disagreements, Gao
said, adding that China is willing to continue talks with the US to resolve the
trade dispute.
While the US wants to reduce the scale of its trade deficit
with China, it is also seeking better protection for American intellectual
property and more market access in China for US companies.
Gao described accusations about Chinese firms stealing tech secrets
as unreasonable and said they were not based on facts.
===========
s.
The Middle East Agenda: Oil, Dollar Hegemony
& Islam in Imperialism
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51594.htm
by
Professor Francis A Boyle
Assalamu’alaikum. Dr. Mahathir, Mrs. Mahathir, distinguished Excellencies, ladies and
gentlemen. Little has changed in the imperialist tendencies of American
foreign policy since the founding of the United States of America in seventeen
eighty-nine.
The
fledgling United States opened the nineteenth century by stealing the continent
of North America from the Indians, while in the process ethnically cleansing
them and then finally deporting the pitiful few survivors by means of death
marches (à la Bataan) to Bantustans, which in America we call reservations, as
in instance of America’s “Manifest Destiny” to rule the world.
Then,
the imperial government of the United States opened the twentieth century by
stealing a colonial empire from Spain — in Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam and the
Philippines, then inflicting a near-genocidal war against the Filipino people.
While at the same time, purporting to annex, the kingdom of Hawaii and
subjecting the native Hawaiian people to near-genocidal conditions from which
they still suffer today. All in the name of securing
America’s so-called place in the sun.
And today at the dawn of the twenty first century,
the world witnesses the effort by the imperial government of the United States
of America to steal a hydrocarbon empire from the Moslem states and peoples,
surrounding central Asia and the Persian Gulf under the pretext of fighting a
war against international terrorism or eliminating weapons of mass destruction
or promoting democracy, which is total nonsense.
For
the past two hundred and sixteen years, the imperialist foreign policy of the United States of America since
its foundation, has been predicated upon racism,
aggression, ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity, war crimes and
outright genocide. At the dawn of the third millennium of humankind’s
parlous existence, nothing has changed about the operational dynamics of
American imperial policy. And we see this today in Afghanistan, Iraq,
Palestine and what appears to be an illegal attack upon Iran. |
Now the
assigned topic today is The Middle
East Agenda : Oil, Dollar Hegemony and Islam.
So, I’m only going to limit my comments to that subject. We have to begin the
story with the Arab oil embargo in 1973. As you know in 1967, Israel launched
an illegal war of aggression against
the surrounding Arab states, stole their land and ethnically cleansed their
people. But eventually Egypt offered a Peace Treaty to Israel, which Israel
rejected and the Egyptians and the Arab states decided then to use force to
recover their lands.
Israel
almost collapsed, the United States and Europe came to their support by
providing weapons and in reaction the Arab states imposed an oil embargo on the
United States and Europe, and brought their economies to their knees.
Whereupon, the then U.S Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger threatened them and
said: This will never happen again, and if you do, we will prevent it. And it
was not just a threat. The United States government then at that time, planned,
prepared and conspired, to steal the oil of the Persian Gulf. They did not have
the military capability to do this at that time, to carry out the Kissinger
threat, which was also then repeated by the Ford administration, and the Carter
administration under Harold Brown and Zbigniew
Brzezinski.
===========
t.
From:
Mark
Crispin Miller
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019
Subject: [MCM] Another one bites the dust: Jon Rappoport's blog has disappeared
from
Jon Rappoport :
This past Saturday, between 2 and 3 PM Eastern Time, WordPress
suddenly took down my blog after 10 years of continuous operation.
There was no warning or advance notice of any kind.
This is outright censorship.
We are attempting to restore service to the blog. Meanwhile, the
situation is this:
You can still access the home page of my site, NoMoreFakeNews.com.
On that page, you can order products by clicking on the "Matrix"
graphics on the right side of the page.
Please consider forwarding this email to those you know letting them
know what happened. They can then go to NoMoreFakeNews.com and sign up for
the email list at the upper left of the home page. They will then
get my output of new articles in their email.
I thank you for your support all these years---NoMoreFakeNews
has existed for 18 years. I need that support more than ever at this
time.
Make your response to this censorship known to WordPress.
[Use this link to order <http://marketplace.mybigcommerce.com/>
Jon's Matrix Collections.]
_____________
Jon Rappoport :
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT
FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a
US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for
private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal
creative power.
Nominated
for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30
years, writing articles on politics,
medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly,
Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and
Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on
global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences
around the world.
You can find this article and more at NoMoreFakeNews
https://nomorefakenews.com/
No More Fake News, Encinitas, CA 92024
===========
u.
Hello all,
This Wed. is the National Day of Action to HALT 5G. People throughout the country can find local actions at www.5gcrisis.com. For NYC the protest will be at 4 pm, Verizon Store at 859 Broadway (at 17th Street) near Union Square. The press release is attached.
Please spread the word!
The science on the dangers of 5G and smart meters is overwhelming. The bottom line is, neither have been pre-tested for safety. The entire ecosystem is at risk. Here are a few info sources:
For a concise overview, see https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-04/5g-worth-risks.
Mobilize and stand for accountability,
Les Jamieson