Bernie Sanders or "Democracy in the US an illusion" by David KERANS

"More and more of the US-population understands that democracy in the US is an illusion – as are equality before the law, equal opportunity, etc"

US Election 2016: Six Levels of Charade, and Three Rs (Rich, Racist, Retarded)

David KERANS | 28.01.2016 | 00:00

«For the first time in a very long time, a candidate who represents the average citizen appears to have an outside shot at winning the Presidency. Will we have the good sense to elect him?» – John Atcheson, July 4th, 2015 A System in Disrepute It would not be a stretch to argue that the most consequential development in the world over the last third of the twentieth century was the asphyxiation of the public interest in the United States. The largest and most advanced economy in history effectively neutered its own political system, thanks primarily to sustained pressure from wealthy interests (who promoted the dogma of free market beneficence, maligned and stigmatized government, systematically suborned politicians and regulators to do their bidding, narrowed the range of political discussion in the mass media, etc.). Momentous consequences ensued, both domestically and internationally. On the home front, the economy now served owners. Where wages had kept pace with productivity in FDR's New Deal society, the two now separated decisively: wages stagnated while productivity maintained its impressive climb, as this startling graphic illustrates: Further, in a story that is now so familiar to everyone, the swelling financial sector co-opted the US government to free it from a wide variety of regulations that had stabilized the economy since the 1930s. The resulting bacchanalia brought the world the financial crisis of 2008, second only to the Great Depression of the 1930s in the annals of purely economic disasters. (We may add here that the decoupling of government from the public interest – combined with the disappearance of the Soviet Union as a deterring influence – facilitated the pursuit of momentous military adventures, like the 2003 invasion of Iraq. But that is a discussion for another time.) Alert observers of the American scene warned throughout these decades that the political system was going bankrupt, and word got out to some. Towards the close of the big economic boom of the 1990s Ralph Nader's presidential campaign on behalf of the nascent Green Party harped on both the Democratic and Republican parties' wholesale surrender to corporate sponsors, and highlighted how the two parties made it almost impossible for competitors to arise. Nader got nearly three percent of the national vote; more important, his campaign did more than anything else to awaken the nation to the stranglehold of big business over both parties and the economic system. The catharsis of Barack Obama replacing George W. Bush and co. via the election of 2008 propelled hopes for effective government to great heights. But once Obama took office his myriad capitulations to capital (if we may phrase it so) greatly outweighed his periodic commitments to democratic principles, as we (among others) have detailed in many previous publications in this forum. Ralph Nader made the call himself. In one little noticed gem, when asked on PBS at the moment major networks were declaring Obama the winner of the 2008 election, «Ralph, your reaction?»: «Prepare yourself to be disappointed». Disappointment in Obama intensified rapidly as he both failed to hold the rich and powerful to the rule of law and refused to push progressive economic and fiscal policies the mass of the population supported. And public perception of the legitimacy of the whole political system sank to alarming lows. The summary we offered in this forum in 2011 bears repeating here: «...an all-time record 69 percent now say they have little or no confidence in the legislative branch of government, up sharply (by 6 percentage points) from 2010; a record 57 percent have little or no confidence in the federal government to solve domestic problems (topping 2010's record reading of 53 percent); on average, Americans now believe the federal government wastes 51 cents of every tax dollar (up from 46 cents a decade ago, and 43 cents in the 1980s). Finally, 82 percent now express dissatisfaction with the way the nation is governed. This reading is more than double the level obtaining throughout the period 1984-2003. It has risen at an unprecedented rate since then...» This, we argue, is the grand narrative that has been on hold ever since: the mass of the population has largely written off both the legislative and executive branches, and is emotionally dead to anything closely associated with the political establishment. More than 40 percent of registered voters now decline to identify with either party, and many (or even most) of those who remain are ready to give up: one survey last summer found 66 percent of Republican primary voters and 40 percent of Democratic primary voters felt betrayed by their party. One can hardly blame them for that, nor for the anger and trepidation which now color their outlook. A recent study determined that a full half of Americans are angrier than they were a year ago, and another found just 48% of baby boomers being satisfied with their overall economic situation, down from 76% as recently as 2011. That is a very sharp dive, amid what the Obama administration is touting as a sustained economic recovery. Six Levels of Charade The huge reservoir of political despair would seem to be ripe for harvesting by any politician with the sense to advocate for the public interest. After all, on myriad issues, mild to enormous majorities of the American population support common-sense policies to the left of what Washington has provided. Alas, the Democratic Party's fealty to corporate donors is more deeply entrenched now than ever, such that the party can hardly produce any leader to challenge the status quo. It is no accident that iconoclast Senator Bernie Sanders is the only one who has emerged to expose the bankruptcy of US politics. Sanders built his career outside the Democratic Party, joining it only a year ago, so as to campaign for its presidential nomination. His decision to pursue the campaign without any corporate donations has guaranteed him the high ground, both morally and as regards issues. Along the way, his rise has exposed at least six separate mountains standing in the way of any challenge to the establishment. Each of them is a major impediment to the «democracy» America prides itself on. The fund-raising imperative is the first hurdle, of course, which Sanders has solved by harvesting millions of small contributions – enough to compete on nearly even terms with a fund-raising behemoth like Hillary Clinton (we need hardly add that prior to the internet age this could never happen). The second is the endorsement game, wherein authority figures weigh in on the candidates and shape public opinion. The scorecard here (from Fivethirtyeight.com, as cited by «All in with Chris Hayes» on MSNBC, January 14, final segment) could not be more damning to the credibility of the Democratic Party: Clinton 457 Sanders 2 O'Malley 1 This tally is no reflection of party elites' conscience on policy. MSNBC host Chris Matthews laid the logic bare while musing about what underlay Vice President Biden's tacit endorsement of Sanders over Clinton in an interview he gave on January 11: «If you and someone else are aiming at the same spot, you offer him something, that's the way it usually works, something like Secretary of State for Biden. But that didn't happen here, apparently». (that is, Clinton chose not to buy Biden off, or he refused her offer). The third hurdle is the presence of the Democratic National Committee as a guardian of the status quo. Being a central player in Washington's political patronage industry, the DNC decided very early to do what it could to silence the Sanders campaign, in which it surely saw a threat to the political officials-for-sale system that enriches the establishment (and deprives the public of real leadership). First, the DNC blatantly buried the party's debates for this election, so as to minimize the public's exposure to Sanders or anyone else who might be tempted to speak truth to power. More important, the DNC set aside almost 30 percent of the national nominating convention delegate pool for appointees (so-called «super delegates»), and pressured these appointees to declare their allegiance to Clinton well before the primary elections begin (in Iowa, on February 1st). These appointees duly did so, declaring for Clinton by a 45-1 margin. The Democratic Party is not long on democracy, obviously. The fourth hurdle is the cooptation of labor union leaders with the political establishment, to the detriment of union rank-and-file. The 2015-16 election cycle is not breaking new ground in this respect, of course. But the current campaign has revealed the perverse degree to which labor union leaderships in the US have surrendered conscience to expediency. It is difficult to find any exception to the trend: whenever union executives endorse a candidate independently, they choose Clinton; whenever union memberships are asked, they choose Sanders. Most union executive committees are bypassing their memberships and cozying up to Clinton, the establishment flagship, thereby depriving Sanders of concerted support from labor in getting out the vote in the primaries. Hurdle five is the establishment's capture of public interest organizations that shape public opinion, including the media (obviously) and issue-specific organizations that channel popular pressure from below. A prime example here is the League of Conservation Voters, an important environmental issues watchdog. The LCV board publicly endorsed Clinton, despite Sanders dwarfing Hillary on environmental issues according to their own rating system. The real issues for the LCV, apparently, are the fact that its Board Chair is close to the Clintons, and the organization receives lots of funding from Wall Street banks and finance sector luminaries. The upshot is that the entire system of communication to the public is fraudulent as regards any serious challenge to the status quo. As John Atcheson summed it up: «We used to think that the civil institutions functioned as a third arm of society distinct from government and business, and capable of holding both accountable. The press, unions, NGO’s, religious organizations – in theory, at least – worked to hold both business and government accountable… So, not only has our government and political process been bought, but the senior members of the NGO and Union community have become enmeshed in the game of money and power that is destroying our Democracy». As if all of these obstacles to an honest reform effort were not enough, the current campaign is exposing one more especially insidious one, sketched out most famously by Chris Hedges, in The Death of the Liberal Class (2010): the tendency of liberals in high places to turn against the most courageous members of their own movement, if serious change appears on the horizon. As we summarized Hedges in this forum in 2011: «During the First World War, the liberal class gradually purged and marginalized its radicals, populists, and iconoclasts. Gradually, the liberal class merged with the establishment, endorsing and legitimizing it, all the while securing universities' and churches' recognition, support, and protection from the political and economic establishment. In the process, the liberal class lost its ability to defend the interests of the population, and has stood by, blind or helpless, over the last few decades as American society changed its shape». The pathological proclivity of the liberal elite to stigmatize and silence a potent reform movement came glaringly into view in mid-January, just as soon as polling showed the Sanders campaign within striking distance of Hillary Clinton. A raft of liberal luminaries who have long purported to stand for the public interest put out articles belittling, trivializing, and mocking Sanders as misguided, naïve, unrealistic, etc. The highest-profile case is economist Paul Krugman, but the list is long. The backlash against the wave of articles attempting to suppress Sanders has been sharp and penetrating (see here and here, e.g., for insightful examples). And Senator Sanders has defended himself ably from the liberal elite's assaults. But his campaign will surely face more of the same at every step. In fact, they will have to clear all six of the hurdles we have detailed here over and over again if the reform candidate is to secure the Democratic nomination for this November's election. Thankfully, a good portion of the public is hearing Bernie Sanders. More and more of the population understands that democracy in the US is an illusion – as are equality before the law, equal opportunity, etc. They understand that it will remain so unless a sustained mass movement reinvigorates the political system, and that the Sanders campaign is the only hope for the foreseeable future. Further, they understand that the meaning of the Presidency can extend very far beyond the territory of specific policy achievements. Having been prepared in part by the euphoria-turned-disappointment of the Obama experience, they are coming to sense what Franklin Roosevelt explained in 1932: «The Presidency is not merely an administrative office. That is the least of it. It is pre-eminently a place of moral leadership. All of our great Presidents were leaders of thought at times when certain historic ideas in the life of the nation had to be clarified». As political observer Conor Lynch put it recently: «Sanders believes in moral leadership, which starts with refusing to play by the current set of rules, where special interests hold politicians hostage. If that is not a sign of a transformative leadership, I don’t know what is». In addition to proposing a full slate of common-sense policies that majorities of Americans already support, Senator Sanders is poised to change the trajectory of political discourse. His administration would adamantly discard rapacious neoliberal economic doctrine and arrogant neoconservative foreign policy, and elevate in their place a full slate of progressive values to guide the nation's public life. This prospect might awaken enough Democratic primary voters to put Sanders on the ballot in November. And who could stop him then? No one. Not even that enduring GOP coalition, the Republicans' three Rs: the rich, the racist, and the retarded. http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/01/28/us-election-2016-six-levels-charade-and-three-rs.html

West Creates Terrorism to “Look Superior”

By Andre Vltchek

Global Research, January 23, 2016

 119 

  73  4 

 

  725

Terrorism has many forms and many faces, but the most terrible of them is cold cruelty.

We are asked to believe that terrorists consist of dirty lunatics, running around with bombs, machine guns and explosive belts. That’s how we are told to imagine them.

Many of them are bearded; almost all are “foreign looking”, non-white, non-Western. In summary they are wife beaters, child rapists and Greek and Roman statue destroyers.

Actually, during the Cold War, there were some white looking “terrorists” – the left-wingers belonging to several revolutionary cells, in Italy and elsewhere in Europe. But only now we are learning that the terrorist acts attributed to them were actually committed by the Empire, by several European right-wing governments and intelligence services. You remember, the NATO countries were blowing up those trains inside the tunnels, or bombing entire train stations…

It “had to be done”, in order to discredit the Left, just to make sure that people would not become so irresponsible as to vote for the Communists or true Socialists.

There were also several Latin American ‘terror’ groups – the revolutionary movements fighting for freedom and against oppression, mainly against Western colonialism. They had to be contained, liquidated, and if they held power, overthrown.

But terrorists became really popular in the West only after the Soviet Union and the Communist Block were destroyed through thousands of economic, military and propaganda means, and the West suddenly felt too exposed, so alone without anyone to fight. Somehow it felt that it needed to justify its monstrous oppressive acts in Africa, the Middle East, Latin America and Asia.

It needed a new “mighty”, really mighty, enemy to rationalize its astronomical military and intelligence budgets. It was not good enough to face a few hundred ‘freaks’ somewhere inside the Colombian jungle or in Northern Ireland or Corsica. There had to be something really huge, something matching that ‘evil’ Soviet “threat”.

Oh how missed that threat was, suddenly! Just a threat of course; not the danger of egalitarian and internationalist ideals…

And so the West linked terrorism with Islam, which is one of the greatest cultures on earth, with 1.6 billion followers. Islam is big and mighty enough, to scare the shit out of the middle class housewives in some Western suburb! And on top of that, it had to be contained anyway, as it was essentially too socialist and too peaceful.

At that time in history, all great secular and socialist leaders of Muslim countries, (like in Iran, Indonesia and Egypt), were overthrown by the West, their legacy spat on, or they were simply banned.

But that was not enough for the West!

In order to make Islam a worthy enemy, the Empire had to first radicalize and pervert countless Muslim movements and organizations, then create the new ones, consequently training, arming and financing them, so they could really look frightening enough.

There is of course one more important reason why “terrorism”, particularly Muslim “terrorism”, is so essential for the survival of Western doctrines, exceptionalism and global dictatorship: it justifies the West’s notion of absolute cultural and moral superiority.

This is how it works:

For centuries, the West has been behaving like a mad bloodthirsty monster. Despite the self-glorifying propaganda being spread by Western media outlets all over the world, it was becoming common knowledge that the Empire was raping, murdering and plundering in virtually all corners of the Globe. A few more decades and the world would see the West exclusively as a sinister and toxic disease. Such a scenario had to be prevented by all means!

And so the ideologues and propagandists of the Empire came up with a new and brilliant formula: Let’s create something that looks and behaves even worse than we do, and then we could trumpet that we are still actually the most reasonable and tolerant culture on earth!

And let’s make a real pirouette: let’s fight our own creation – let’s fight it in the name of freedom and democracy!”

This is how the new generation; the new breed of “terrorist” was born. And it lives! It is alive and well! It is multiplying like Capek’s Salamanders.

***

Western terrorism is not really discussed, although its most extreme and violent forms are battering the world relentlessly and have for a long time, with hundreds of millions of victims piling up everywhere.

Even the legionnaires and gladiators of the Empire, like the Mujaheddin, Al-Qaida, or ISIS, can never come close to the savagery that has been demonstrated time and again by their British, French, Belgian, German or US masters. Of course they are trying very hard to match their gurus and bread-givers, but they are just not capable of their violence and brutality.

It takes “Western culture” to butcher some 10 million people in just one single geographic area, in almost one go!

***

So what is real terrorism, and how could ISIS and others follow its lead? They say that ISIS is decapitating their victims. Bad enough. But who is their teacher?

For centuries, the empires of Europe were murdering, torturing, raping and mutilating people on all continents of the world. Those who were not doing so directly, were “investing” into colonialist expeditions, or sending its people to join genocidal battalions.

King Leopold II and his cohorts managed to exterminate around 10 million people of Western and Central Africa, in what is now known as the Congo. He was hunting people down like animals, forcing them to work on his rubber plantations. If he thought that they were not filling up his coffers fast enough, he did not hesitate to chop off their hands, or burn entire village populations inside their huts, alive.

10 million victims vanished. 10 million! And it did not take place in some distant past, in the “dark ages”, but in the 20th century, under the rule of so-called constitutional monarchy, and self-proclaimed democracy. How does it compare with the terrorism that is ruling over the territories occupied by ISIS? Let’s compare numbers and brutality level!

And the Democratic Republic of Congo has, since 1995, lost again close to 10 million people in a horrid orgy of terror, unleashed by the West’s proxies, Rwanda and Uganda (see the trailer to my film“Rwanda Gambit”).

Germans performed holocausts in South-Western Africa, in what is now Namibia. The Herero tribe was exterminated, or at least close to 90% of it was. People were first kicked out from their land and from their homes, and driven into the desert. If they survived, the German pre-Nazi expeditions followed, using bullets and other forms of mass killing. Medical experiments on humans were performed, to prove the superiority of the Germanic nation and the white race.

These were just innocent civilians; people whose only crime was that they were not white, and were sitting on land occupied and violated by the Europeans.

The Taliban never came close to this, or even ISIS!

To this day, the Namibian government is demanding the return of countless heads severed from its people: heads that were cut off and then sent to the University of Freiburg and several hospitals in Berlin, for medical experiments.

Just imagine, ISIS chopping thousands of European heads, in order to perform medical experiments aiming to demonstrate the superiority of the Arab race. It would be absolutely unthinkable!

Local people were terrorized in virtually all colonies grabbed by Europe, something that I have described in detail in my latest 840-page book “Exposing Lies of the Empire”.

What about the Brits and their famines, which they were using as population control and intimidation tactics in India! In Bengal at least 5 million died in 1943 alone, 5.5 million in 1876-78, 5 million in 1896-97, to name just a few terrorist acts committed by the British Empire against a defenseless population forced to live under its horrid and oppressive terrorist regime!

What I have mentioned above are just 3 short chapters from the long history of Western terrorism. An entire encyclopedia could be compiled on the topic.

But all this sits far from Western consciousness. European and North American masses prefer not to know anything about the past and the present. As far as they are concerned, they rule the world because they are free, bright and hard working. Not because for centuries their countries have plundered and murdered, and above all terrorized the world forcing it into submission.

The elites know everything, of course. And the more they know, the more they put that knowledge to work.

Terrorist trade and experience are passed on from Western masters to their new Muslim recruits.

The Mujahideen, Al-Qaida, ISIS – on closer examination, their tactics of intimidation and terrorization are not original at all. They are built on imperialist and colonialist practices of the West.

News about this, or even about the terror that has been inflicted on the Planet by the West, is meticulously censored. You would never see them on the programs broadcast by the BBC, or read about them in mainstream newspapers and magazines.

On the other hand, the violence and ruthlessness of the client terrorist organizations are constantly highlighted. They are covered in their tiniest detail, repeated, and “analyzed”.

Everybody is furious, horrified! The UN is “deeply concerned”, Western governments are “outraged”, and the Western public “has had enough – it does not want immigrants from those terrible countries that are breeding terrorism and violence”.

The West “simply has to get involved”. And here comes the War on Terror.

It is a war against the West’s own Frankenstein. It is a war that is never meant to be won. Because if it is won, god forbid, there would have to be peace, and peace means cutting defense budgets and also dealing with the real problems of our Planet.

Peace would mean the West looking at its own past. It would mean thinking about justice and rearranging the entire power structures of the Planet. And that can never be allowed.

And so the West is “playing” war games; it is “fighting” its own recruits (or pretending to fight them), while innocent people are dying.

No part of the world, except the West, would be able to invent and unleash something so vile and barbaric as ISIS or Al-Nusra!

Look closer at the strategy of these group-implants: it has no roots in Muslim culture whatsoever. But it is fully inspired by the Western philosophy of colonialist terrorism: “If you don’t fully embrace our dogmas and religion, then we will cut off your head, slash your throat, rape your entire family or burn your village or city to the ground. We will destroy your grand cultural heritage as we did in South America 500 years ago, and in so many other places.”

And so on and so on! It would really require great discipline not to see the connections!

***

In 2006 I was visiting my friend, a former President of Indonesia, and a great progressive Muslim leader, Abdurrahman Wahid, (known in Indonesia as “Gus Dur”). Our meeting was held at the headquarters of his massive Muslim body Nahdlatul Ulama (NU). At that time the NU was the biggest Muslim organization in the world.

We were discussing capitalism and how it was destroying and corrupting Indonesia. Gus Dur was a “closet socialist”, and that was one of the main reasons why the servile pro-Western Indonesian “elites” and the military deposed him out of the Presidency in 2001.

When we touched on the topic of “terrorism”, he suddenly declared in his typically soft, hardly audible voice: “I know who blew up the Marriott Hotel in Jakarta. It was done by our own intelligence services, in order to justify the increase in their budget, as well as aid that they have been receiving from abroad.”

Of course, the Indonesian army, intelligence services and police consist of a special breed of humans. For several decades, since 1965, they have been brutally terrorizing their own population, when the pro-Western coup toppled the progressive President Sukarno and brought to power a fascist military clique, backed by the predominantly Christian business gang. This terror took between 2-3 million lives in Indonesia itself, as well as in East Timor and (until now) in occupied and thoroughly plundered Papua.

3 genocides in only 5 decades!

The Indonesian coup was one of the greatest terrorist acts in the history of mankind. The rivers were clogged with corpses and changed their color to red.

Why? So that capitalism would survive and Western mining companies could have their booty, at the expense of a completely ruined Indonesian nation. So the Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI) would not be able to win elections, democratically.

But in the West, those 1965 intensive massacres planned by the Empire were never described as “terrorism”. Blowing up a hotel or a pub always is however, especially if they are frequented by Western clientele.

Now Indonesia has its own groups of “terrorists”. They returned from Afghanistan where they fought on behalf of the West against the Soviet Union. They are returning from the Middle East now. The recent attacks in Jakarta could be just a foreplay, a well-planned beginning of something much bigger, maybe an opening of the new “front” of toy soldiers of the Empire in Southeast Asia.

For the West and its planners – the more chaos the better.

Had Abdurrahman Wahid been allowed to stay as the President of Indonesia, there would, most likely, have been no terrorism. His country would have undergone socialist reforms, instituted social justice, rehabilitated Communists and embraced secularism.

In socially balanced societies, terrorism does not thrive.

That would be unacceptable to the Empire. That would mean – back to Sukarno’s day! The most populous Muslim nation on earth cannot be allowed to go its own way, to aim for socialism, and to annihilate terrorist cells.

It has to be at the edge. It has to be ready to be used as a pawn. It has to be scared and scary! And so it is.

***

The games the West is playing are complex and elaborate. They are murky and nihilist. They are so destructive and brutal that even the sharpest analysts are often questioning their own eyes and judgments: “Could all this be really happening?”

The brief answer is: “Yes it can. Yes it is, for many long decades and centuries.”

Historically, terrorism is a native Western weapon. It was utilized freely by people like Lloyd George, a British PM, who refused to sign the agreement banning aerial bombardment of civilians, using unshakeable British logic: “We reserve the right to bomb those niggers.” Or Winston Churchill who was in favor of gassing the ‘lower grade’ of races, like Kurds and Arabs.

That is why, when some outsider, a country like Russia, gets involved, launching its genuine war against terrorist groups, the entire West is consumed by panic. Russia is spoiling their entire game! It is ruining a beautifully crafted neo-colonialist equilibrium.

Just look how lovely everything is: after killing hundreds of millions all over the Globe, the West is now standing as the self-proclaimed champion of human rights and freedom. It is still terrorizing the world, plundering it, fully controlling it – but it is being accepted as the supreme leader, a benevolent advisor, and the only trustworthy part of the world.

And almost nobody is laughing.

Because everyone is scared!

Its brutal legions in the Middle East and Africa are destabilizing entire countries, their origins are easily traceable, but almost no one is daring to do such tracing. Some of those who have tried – died.

The more frightening these invented, manufactured and implanted terrorist monsters, the more beautiful the West looks. It is all gimmicks. It has roots in advertisement, and in hundreds of years of propaganda apparatus.

The West then pretends to fight those deep forces of darkness. It uses powerful, “righteous” language, which has clear bases in Christian fundamentalist dogma.

An entire mythology is unleashed; it feels like Wagner’s “Ring”.

The terrorists represent evil, not the enormous expenditure from the coffers of the US State Department, the European Union and NATO. They are more evil than the Devil himself!

And the West, riding on the white horse, slightly pissed on wine but always in good humor, is portrayed as both a victim and the main adversary of those satanic terrorist groups.

It is one incredible show. It is one terrible farce. Look underneath the horseman’s mask: look at those exposed teeth; that deadly grin! Look at his red eyes, full of greed, lust and cruelty.

And let us never forget: colonialism and imperialism are two most deadly forms of terrorism. And these are still the two main weapons of that horseman who is choking the world!

Andre Vltchek is a philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He covered wars and conflicts in dozens of countries. His latest books are: “Exposing Lies Of The Empire” and “Fighting Against Western Imperialism”.Discussion with Noam Chomsky: On Western Terrorism. Point of No Return is his critically acclaimed political novel. Oceania – a book on Western imperialism in the South Pacific. His provocative book about Indonesia: “Indonesia – The Archipelago of Fear”. Andre is making films for teleSUR and Press TV. After living for many years in Latin America and Oceania, Vltchek presently resides and works in East Asia and the Middle East. He can be reached through his website or his Twitter.

The original source of this article is Global Research

Copyright © Andre Vltchek, Global Research, 2016

---

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Russia's approach to humanitarian problems in Syria

Dr Alexander Yakovenko, Russian Ambassador to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Deputy foreign minister (2005-2011). Follow him on Twitter @Amb_Yakovenko

Published time: 28 Jan, 2016 16:23

Get short URL

A general view shows al-Qosour neighborhood of Homs, Syria © Omar Sanadiki / Reuters 

The Syrian conflict has unfolded into a horrific humanitarian disaster that should be dealt with through a joint effort by all parties involved. Russia has been providing humanitarian assistance to the people of Syria ever since the conflict started.

We have been doing this jointly with the Syrian Government as well as through the International Committee of the Red Cross, the UN Refugee Agency, the UN Development Program and other authorized international agencies. We are in contact with Damascus to facilitate the activities of the UN agencies and NGOs in Syria. The Russian air forces in Syria started its own humanitarian mission on January 15. Humanitarian assistance is also sent to Syria by Russia's NGOs (for more details read here).

It is obvious that due to the conflict and spread of terrorism the humanitarian potential of the Syrian Government is limited to the areas under its control. Even under these circumstances, Damascus provides vital social and economic services in uncontrolled regions, providing people with water and electricity, paying out wages and welfare benefits.

The humanitarian problems are to be a subject, but not a precondition, of the forthcoming intra-Syrian negotiations in Geneva on the basis of the UNSC Resolution 2254. A solution of the humanitarian crisis is to be pursued by each party to the conflict as well as "external players". It will not be an overstatement to say that the best way to put an end to the human suffering in Syria and beyond is to reach a political settlement starting with a cease-fire and accompanied by international reconstruction assistance. But terrorists with their barbaric agenda have to be isolated and defeated first.

Attention should also be paid to the areas where people are under siege by the opposition and terrorists. About 250,000 are trapped in the city of Deir al-Zour, which is surrounded by the ISIS jihadists. Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic group Ahrar al-Sham laid siege to the two villages in Syria's northern Idlib province - Kefraya and al-Fua. 80,000 people have been blocked in Nubul and Az-Zahra in Aleppo Province.

Meanwhile, there is evidence provided by NGOs that the Syrian authorities closely cooperate with the United Nations and a number of NGOs in providing humanitarian aid to the people of Syria. Thus, the Syrian Government meets its obligations specified in the UNSC "humanitarian" resolutions. At the same time, anti-government forces have often been breaking the Istanbul cease-fire agreement of 24 September, 2015. Terrorists have been using civilians as a "human shield". Militants on a regular basis have been refusing UN officials access to the besieged areas.

It is worth mentioning that the sanctions and embargoes imposed by the West on Syria is a major factor in the dire humanitarian situation. I wonder if this issue will be brought up at the forthcoming "humanitarian" conference on Syria in London.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Der Schierlingsbecher, politische Morde und Heiligsprechungen 

- ein Diskussionsbeitrag von Gerhard Nauman (Auszug)

Nachtrag zum Beitrag"Sokrates oder Stein sein" (Rezension des Buches "Der Sokrates Prozess von I.F. Stone) von Irene Eckert vom  24. 01. 16

"Da wäre z.B. Jeanne d‘Arc. Dieses noch sehr junge Mädchen führte unter Berufung auf Gott eine patriotische französische Bewegung an, die sich gegen die drohende englische Unterwerfung richtete. Sie fiel durch Verrat den Engländern in die Hände, wurde der französischen Kirche ausgeliefert und von dieser als Hexe verbrannt. Die Kirchenfürsten hielten es immer mit der jeweils herrschenden Macht. Die Asche Jeanne d’Arcs wurde rehabilitiert, nachdem Karl VII. auf der Woge dieser Bewegung gekrönt und den Sieg im hundertjährigen Krieg gegen die Engländer gewonnen hatte. Da stand die Kirche auf der Seite der anderen Macht. Aber der Vatikan brauchte immerhin fast 500 Jahre, ehe er sich zur Heiligsprechung durchgerungen hatte. Er brauchte vorübergehend den Anschein fortschrittlichen Mitgehens.
Ungefähr zu dieser Zeit waren in den USA viel zu kampfstarke Gewerkschaften entstanden, die erfolgreich die Interessen der Arbeiterklasse durchsetzten. Daran hatten die italienischen Einwanderer Sacco und Vanzetti großen Anteil. Das durfte nicht so weitergehen, weswegen sie einfach einen Mord begangen haben mußten. Sie sind 1927 hingerichtet worden. Macht nichts, daß ihre Unschuld erwiesen war. Seitdem war endlich die US-amerikanische Gewerkschaftsbewegung immer mehr den Interessen des Kapitals unterworfen und ist schon lange so gut wie nicht mehr vorhanden, weswegen es in den USA kaum eine Sozialgesetzgebung gibt.

Die Sowjetunion besaß bereits vier Jahre nach den angeblich kriegsentscheidenden Masssenvernichtungen in Hiroshima und Nagasaki selbst die Atombombe. Das war ja schockierend für die Mächtigen der USA, wollte man doch auf lange Sicht mit dieser furchtbaren Waffe die ganze Welt in Schach halten. Es mußten Tatsachen her, mit denen man vor dem eigenen Volke das Mißlingen dieses american way of war begründen und den weltweiten Kampf gegen den Atomtod eindämmen konnte. Und sie wurden gefunden, in Person Ethel und Julius Rosenberg. Nur durch ihre Atomspionage seien die Russen in den Besitz der Bombentechnologie gelangt und haben mit diesem Vaterlandsverrat eine große Gefahr für die USA heraufbeschworen. Zum Beweis wurden Indizien hervorgebracht und eine Hysterie der geschundenen amerikanischen Seele inszeniert. Übrigens, Ethel Rosenberg hat sicher von der Spionagetätigkeit ihres Mannes gewußt, war selbst keine Spionin, wurde aber gleich mit hingerichtet. Sippenhaft wie im Faschismus. Und damals war schon bewiesen, daß nicht die Rosenbergs, sondern Klaus Fuchs, nach sieben Jahren britischem Gefängnis Professor an der TU Dresden, die entscheidenden Notizen an die Sowjetunion lieferte.
Es folgte das Einhämmern der Notwendigkeit, die Kernwaffenrüstung ins Uferlose zu treiben, um der russischen Gefahr zu begegnen. Der mußte natürlich auch regional begegnet werden. Zum Beispiel in Afghanistan, das ja nicht nur Erdgasvorkommen besitzt, sondern vor allem an die UdSSR, an China und an Indien grenzte. Alles Länder, die einen anderen way of life einschlugen oder einschlagen möchten. Aber das geht doch nicht. Überhaupt ist doch Afghanistan in ganz Mittelasien ein sehr zentraler Platz! (Da kann man doch nicht nein sagen, wenns heute den zivilen Wiederaufbau mit Tornados zu unterstützen gilt und tausende Zivilisten sterben müssen.)
1978 war ausgerechnet dort Nur Muhamad Taraki mit seiner ‚Demokratischen Republik Afghanistan‘ dahergekommen und hat eine Bodenreform, einen staatlichen Sektor der Wirtschaft, allgemeine Schulpflicht, kostenlose medizinische Betreuung und andere Sachen eingeführt, die zwar für die Bevölkerung, aber nicht für die inländischen Feudal- und ehemaligen Kolonialherren gut waren. Schon gar nicht für die weltweiten Absichten der USA. Es fanden sich welche, die Taraki ermordeten. Zwar führte das nicht gleich zum gewollten Ergebnis, aber die CIA ist geduldig am Werke. Sie kriegte die Taliban an die Macht, die jetzt im Visier des „Antiterrorkrieges“ hängt. Und das wird auch von der Bundeswehr hochgehalten, das Visier. Papperlapapp, Verteidigungsarmee! Warum hat man denn 1918 die deutschen Kolonien geraubt? Es werden neue gebraucht! Schon wieder zu spät kommen? Nein, mit dem Privatfreund Bush sind wir wieder in der ersten Reihe, auf dem american way of death, und setzen ihn mit dem dunkelhäutigen Friedensnobelpreisträger fort, um den die gleichen Berater mit den gleichen Zielen geschart wurden wie um Bush jun. Und der es nach dem 11. September 2001 allein im Irak auf 2 Millionen Tote brachte.
Aber angefangen wurde lange vorher, heimlich natürlich und/oder verdeckt als Wirtschaftshilfe. 1952 gab Adenauer deshalb drei Milliarden als „Wiedergutmachung an den Juden“ nach Israel, zwei Drittel davon benutzte es für die Kriegsrüstung. Oder U-Boote, die noch erfolgreicher kämpfen konnten als die, mit denen Kapitänleutnant Prien verschwand. Die wurden nach Südafrika geliefert, heimlich. Das alles wußte Uwe Barschel, ehemals Ministerpräsident in Schleswig-Holstein, und wollte das verhindern und ausplaudern. So was darf er doch nicht machen. Ein Glück, daß er 1987 in einem schweizerischen Hotelbett „Selbstmord“ beging, da konnte er nicht mehr plaudern. Daß er ein Gift benutzte, das kein Selbstmörder nehmen würde, weil es langandauernde Todesqualen verursacht, mußte man ja auch nicht gleich ausplaudern. Einer hätte es lange danach vermutlich noch wissen können, einer von der RAF, aber der „hat sich“ am Bahnsteig in Bad Kleinen erschossen. Er muß mit einem sehr langen Arm sehr gelenkig gewesen sein, weil er sich von oben erschoß. Vielleicht wußte er etwas, was in den immer noch verschlossenen Akten der Staatsanwaltschaft steht, obwohl die Ermittlungen längst abgeschlossen sind.
Gamal Abdel Nasser beging zwei entscheidende Fehler, die er nicht überlebte: er nationalisierte den Suezkanal, damit die Einnahmen nicht mehr Großbritannien sondern Ägypten zufließen, und erteilte der Sowjetunion den Auftrag zum Bau des lebenswichtigen Assuan-Staudamms. Als Spitzenpolitiker kann man doch nicht mal einen dieser Fehler lange überleben, Nasser schaffte es nur bis 1970.
Am 1. März 1968 wurde Fritz Bauer in seiner Wohnung tot aufgefunden. Bauer war hessischer Generalstaatsanwalt und hatte im Zusammenhang mit dem Auschwitzprozeß 1963 eine Akte über Hans Globke angelegt. Seine Todesursache ist bis heute nicht geklärt, aber die von ihm begonnenen Ermittlungen gegen hohe Nazijuristen in der BRD, die in Massenmorde verwickelt waren, wurden bald eingestellt.
Ehe aus Adenauers „lieber das Halbe ganz“ ein „endlich wieder das Ganze ganz“ geworden war, konnten Kriegsbeteiligungen nur heimlich organisiert werden. Aber dann umso unheimlicher. Im Golf, in Kroatien, Serbien, Kosovo, Afghanistan, am Horn von Afrika, Kongo und vor dem Libanon wurden die neuen kolonialen Erwartungen geltend gemacht. Und der religiöse Massenmord an rund 300 000 „Hexen“ bis 1856 heißt jetzt nicht mehr Inquisition, sondern „Kongregation für die Glaubenslehre“, die genauso ihren Zweck erfüllt und deren Präfekt bis vor kurzem ein Cardinal Ratzinger war.
Im ausgehenden 20. und beginnenden 21- Jahrhundert heißt der Widerstand gegen Unterdrückung in Palästina nicht mehr Ketzerei, sondern Terrorismus und „radikal-islamische Hamas“. Der Kampf gegen solchen Terror beseitigt notwendigerweise nicht nur Einzelne, sondern ganze Völker.
Warum wehren die sich auch, die Palästinenser, die unbedingt einen eigenen Staat haben wollten und ausgerechnet auf  Gebieten, die doch Israel längst besetzt hält. Schließlich ist dieser Staat, auch mit o.g. Adenauerhilfe gegründet worden, um eben arabischen Widerstand auszuschalten. Als es in den neunziger Jahren einen israelischen Ministerpräsidenten gab, er hieß Jitzhak Rabin, der mit den Palästinensern einen ehrlichen Friedensvertrag abschließen wollte, starb er eine Woche vor der Unterschrift. Man braucht nicht zu fragen wem sein Herzversagen diente. Ohne dieses wäre ja der Kriegsheld Peres nicht Ministerpräsident in seinem faschistoiden Staat geworden.
Der Tod Rabins  kam im rechten Moment, denn die Araber waren sich ziemlich einig in ihrem Kampf um einen eigenen Staat. Das war vornehmlich ein Verdienst von Yassar Arafat. Warum mußte er „zur Behandlung einer Krankheit“ ausgerechnet nach Frankreich gebracht werden, das doch selbst einmal ausgedehnte arabische Kolonien besaß. Als Arafat dort starb, kam man schon auf den Gedanken, daß das nicht mit rechten Dingen zuging. Jetzt ist das beinahe durch die angestrengten Ermittlungen bewiesen.
Eine der wichtigsten Voraussetzungen, in diesem globalen Kampf richtig mitmischen zu können, war, das „Ganze“ , sprich das ganze Deutschland auch wieder ganz zu besitzen. Ein Teil davon war den deutschen Konzernen nämlich  abhanden gekommen. Deshalb schufen sie eine Treuhand, damit dieser Teil von der Wurzel an beseitigt werde und setzten einen gewissen Rowedder als Präsidenten ein. Der wollte die Privatisierung gründlich durchziehen, weil er ja auch ein richtiger Konzernboß war. Nur wollte der die Standorte des zu Privatisierenden, aus welchen Gründen auch immer, erhalten. Das lag aber gar nicht im Sinne der Erfinder.
Rowedder starb an einer Kugel, die ihn durch sein Badezimmerfenster in den Rücken traf. Wer den Finger krümmte, wurde nie ermittelt. Der als Staatssekretär im Finanzministerium, dem die Treuhand unterstand, die standortvernichtende Privatisierung bis zum kaltschnäuzigen Ende durchzog, wurde etwas später dankbarerweise Bundespräsident. Ob der eines Tages heilig gesprochen wird, kann jetzt noch nicht gesagt werden. Als Anfang hat jedenfalls das Stadtparlament von Dietzenbach in Hessen die Kitas verpflichtet, sein Bildnis an die Wand zu hängen. Sicherlich ist es inzwischen wieder abgenommen, und geheiligt wird er mit Sicherheit auch nicht. Er sagte einmal versehentlich die Wahrheit, daß nämlich der Einatz deutschen Militärs im Ausland auch wirtschaftlichen Interessen dient.
Fest steht aber, daß sich im Übergang ins neue Jahrtausend der Vatikan unter Woityla und Ratzinger nicht 500 Jahre Zeit nahmen, um Klerikalfaschisten heilig zu sprechen. Z.B. Kardinal Alojzije Stepanic, der im ustascha-faschistischen Mord von Hitlers Gnaden an Serben, Juden, Sinti und Roma „die Hand Gottes“ erkannte und vor Titos Partisanenarmee Gold für 200 Millionen Dollar in vatikanische Sicherheit brachte. Das wurde Teil des Fonds für die „Rattenlinie“, über die Naziverbrecher in Südamerika angesiedelt wurden, wo sie und ihre Nachfahren sich immer noch einmischen. Oder José Maria Escrivá, Gründer der reaktionären Opus-Dei-Sekte, Vertrauter Francos und Drahtzieher zwischen seiner Sekte, der Vatikanbank, Berlusconi und der CIA.
Die heutigen Kreuzzüge stehen in der Tradition Kaiser Barbarossas oder der Pruzzenvernichtung durch die Gründer Ostpreußens. Gott (und der Papst) behüte, daß sich auch Gläubige finden, die dagegen sind. Er möge sie dran hindern, mit allen Mitteln. Vorerst aber wenigstens mit dem, was Militärbischoff Walter Mixa als „Schwerpunkt in seelsorgerischer Einsatzbegleitung“ ansieht, bei der Eroberung neuer Rohstoffquellen. Das ist geradezu eine Verpflichtung, das Reichskonkordat von 1933 zwischen Hitlerdeutschland und dem Vatikan gilt immer noch. Und wer da behauptet, daß männliche Hexen aus dem Kulturkreis des Islam heutzutage gefoltert werden, der wird exkommuniziert. Wie das Pius XII. 1950 verordnet hatte, als stellvertreter Gottes auf Erden.
Das kann Bischoff Mixa nicht werden, weil so ein Stellvertreter nur aus Katholiken rekrutiert wird. Das hindert ihn nicht, seine seelsorgerische Einsatzbegleitung auch auf zivile Objekte auszudehnen, wie z.B. die Familienpolitik. Und da macht sich doch so eine „Gebärmaschine“ als Drohung gegen eine zwar nötige, aber in diesem freiheitlichen Finanzregime sowieso nicht realisierbare Maßnahme schon ganz prächtig. Obwohl er vor soviel Populismus nun wirklich keine Angst zu haben bräuchte. Vielleicht sagt er sich, besser ist besser, am Ende kommt noch jemand auf den Gedanken, daß es mal eine DDR gab, in der die Kinderfrage eigentlich schon gelöst war.
Die gewählten Beispiele gewollten Sterbens sind einseitig gewählt. Das ergab sich zwangsläufig. Wenn man gesellschaftspolitische Themen behandelt, ist man immer einseitig. Sie müssen aus einer bestimmten Position behandelt werden, die entweder von der einen oder der anderen Seite bestimmt werden. " 

(Auszug aus einer längeren Zuschrift OriginaL von Gerhard Nauman in  "Geschichten von hüben und drüben": GNN Verlag 2015, Badeweg 1, 04435 Schkeuditz. ISBN 978-3-89819-413-6, 15 Euro.)

Syrian oppositions wait for UN response on demands, undecided on participation in Geneva talks

News | 28.01.2016 | 09:01

Xinhua - Syrian oppositions have ended their meetings here Wednesday without reaching a final decision over whether they would participate in Syrian peace talks in Geneva, Al Arabia local news reported on Wednesday.   Head of the Kurdish Democratic Party Sheikh Salem Al Muslat told Al Arabia the meeting will continue on Thursday, adding that their fellow opposition members will continue to wait for the UN response of their demands.   The oppositions released on Tuesday a statement demanding genuine improvements on the ground before starting the negotiations.   The group said it is open to the eventual participation in the talks scheduled to begin on Friday.   The talks stem from an agreement reached in Vienna, Austria, in November by the International Syria Support Group, comprising the Arab League, the European Union, the United Nations, and 17 countries including the United States, Russia and China, as part of an effort to end the five-year-long war with an agreement on new governance, a new constitution and new elections.   The first phase could last two to three weeks before preparations are made for further phases and there will be no opening ceremony, de Mistura said, stressing that there will be a substantial presence of civil society and women, who represent 51 percent of the total population.