From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Sun Nov 1 01:38:50 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 17:38:50 +0900 Subject: [A-List] Why Markets Fail Message-ID: <20091101173850.cdbd97a3.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> by John Michael Greer The Archdruid Report (October 28 2009) Druid perspectives on nature, culture, and the future of industrial society It's a safe bet that any public comment on the politics of peak oil, unless it sticks closely to one of a very few widely accepted opinions, will provide a good demonstration of the laws of thermodynamics by turning plenty of energy into waste heat. Last week's Archdruid Report post was no exception. Between those who thought I was too hard on Cuba, those who thought I was too soft on Cuba, those who insisted America is already a fascist dictatorship, those who thought America would be better off as a fascist dictatorship, and a variety of less classifiable rants, I was well and truly denounced. My favorite for the week was a bit of online splutter that, having exhausted its author's apparently limited vocabulary of profanity, wound up with the nastiest term he knew: "... you American!" Those of my readers with a taste for wry humor may well have found all this as entertaining as I did. Still, this week's essay will leave such amusements behind, and return to the theme I've been developing in recent posts, the reinvention of economics that will be necessary in an age of hard ecological limits and deindustrial decline. Vegetarians and animal rights activists take note: a certain number of sacred cows will have to be slaughtered and dissected in the course of that inquiry, and the process is unlikely to be either painless or clean. Of the sanctified cattle facing a gruesome fate in the years ahead of us, perhaps the most important is that blue-ribbon heifer of modern economics, the belief in the infallibility of free markets. Back in 1776, Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations popularized the idea that free market exchanges offered a more efficient way of managing economic activity than custom or government regulation. The popularity of his arguments has waxed and waned over the years; it may come as no surprise that periods of general prosperity have seen the market's alleged wisdom proclaimed to the skies, while periods of contraction have had the reverse effect. The economic orthodoxy that has been welded in place in the western world since the 1950s, neoclassical economics, made a nuanced version of Smith's theory central to its theories, arguing that aside from certain exceptions much discussed in the technical literature, people making rational decisions to maximize benefits to themselves will simultaneously maximize the benefits to everyone. The neoclassical synthesis has its virtues; you won't find neoclassical economists claiming, as the free market fundamentalists of the Austrian school so often do, that the market is always right, even when its vagaries cause catastrophic human suffering. The concept of market failure is part of the neoclassical vocabulary, and some useful work has been done under the neoclassical umbrella to explain how it is that markets can fail to respond to crucial human needs, as they routinely do. Still, the great problem with neoclassical economics is the one has already been discussed in these posts: its models have consistently failed to foresee devastating economic disasters that many people outside the economics profession could readily and accurately predict years in advance. The implosion of the world economy in 2008 is only the most recent case in point. One writer who surveyed the economics field in the aftermath of the crash noted with some asperity that fewer than two dozen economists anywhere in the world warned in advance of the gargantuan bubble of securitized debt that exploded that year. On the contrary, economists by the score lined up during the bubble years to insist that the giddy financial innovations of the previous decade had banished risk from the market and prosperity was assured into the foreseeable future. They were of course quite wrong, and their failure to see disaster as it loomed up in front of them compares very poorly with the large number of people who used historical parallels to recognize what was happening and make uncomfortably precise forecasts of the results. (Keith Brand, who ran the lively HousingPanic blog straight through the bubble, memorably summarized those predictions: "Dear God, this is going to end so badly".) I have discussed in several earlier posts some of the reasons why the entire economics profession has been so prone to miss the obvious in such cases. Here, though, I want to focus on a reason for failure that's specific to neoclassical economics. Since most of the economists who provide advice to governments come out of the neoclassical mainstream, this is hardly irrelevant to our prospects for the future, especially - as I intend to show - because the same blind spot that left so many pundits dining on a banquet of crow in recent months applies with even greater force to the crucial fact of our time, the arrival of peak oil. The point I want to make here is a little different from the most common critique of neoclassical economics, though there is a connection. Many social critics have commented on the ease with which the neoclassical synthesis consistently ignores the interface between economic wealth and power. Even when people rationally seek to maximize benefits to themselves, after all, their options for doing so are very often tightly constrained by economic systems that have been manipulated to maximize the benefits going to someone else. This is a pervasive problem in most human societies, and it's worth noting that those societies that survive over the long term tend to be the ones that work out ways to keep too much wealth from piling up uselessly in the hands of those with more power than others. This is why hunter-gatherers have customary rules for sharing out the meat from a large kill, why chieftains in so many tribal societies maintain their positions of influence by lavish generosity, and why those nations that got through the last Great Depression intact did so by imposing sensible checks and balances on concentrated wealth - though most of those checks and balances in the United States were scrapped several decades ago, with utterly predictable results. By neglecting and even arguing against these necessary redistributive processes, neoclassical economics has helped feed economic disparities, and these in turn have played a major role in driving cycles of boom and bust. It's no accident that the most devastating speculative bubbles happen in places and times when the distribution of wealth is unusually lopsided, as it was in America, for example, in the 1920s and the period from 1990 to 2008. The connection here is simple: when wealth is widely distributed, more of it circulates in the productive economy of wages and consumer purchases; when wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, more of it moves into the investment economy where the well-to-do keep their wealth, and a buildup of capital in the investment economy is one of the necessary preconditions for a speculative binge. More broadly, concentrations of wealth can be cashed in for political influence, and political influence can be used to limit the economic choices available to others. Individuals can and do rationally choose to maximize the benefits available to them by exercising influence in this way, but the results can impose destructive inefficiencies on the whole economy. In effect, political manipulation of the economy by the rich for private gain does an end run around normal economic processes by way of the world of politics; what starts in the economic sphere, as a concentration of wealth, and ends there, as a distortion of the economic opportunities available to others, ducks through the political sphere in between. A similar end run drives speculative bubbles, although here the noneconomic sphere involved is that of crowd psychology rather than politics. Very often, the choices made by participants in a bubble are not rational decisions that weigh costs against benefits; it's not accidental that the first, and still one of the best, analyses of speculative binges and panics is titled Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841). Here again, a speculative bubble starts in the economic sphere, as a buildup of excessive wealth in the hands of investors, which drives the price of some favored class of assets out of its normal relationship with the rest of the economy, and it ends in the economic sphere, with the crater left by the assets in question as their price plunges roughly as far below the mean as it rose above it, dragging the rest of the economy with it. It's the middle of the trajectory that passes through a particular form of crowd psychology, and since this is outside the economic sphere, neoclassical economics can't deal with it. This would be no problem if neoclassical economists by and large recognized these limitations. Unfortunately a great many of them do not, and the result is the classic type of myopia in which theory trumps reality. Since neoclassical theory claims that economic decisions are made by individuals acting freely and rationally to maximize the benefits accruing to them, it's seemingly all too easy for economists to believe that any economic decision, no matter how harshly constrained by political power or wildly distorted by the delusional psychology of a bubble in full roar, must be a free and rational decision that will allow individuals to maximize their own benefits and benefit society as a whole. Now of course, as mentioned in an earlier post, those who practice this sort of purblind thinking often find it very lucrative to do so. Economists who urged more free trade on the Third World at a time when "free trade" distorted by inequalities of power between nations was beggaring the Third World, like economists who urged people to buy houses at a time when houses were preposterously overpriced and facing an imminent price collapse, not uncommonly prospered by giving such appallingly bad advice. Still, it seems unreasonable to claim that all economists are motivated by greed, when the potent force of a fundamentally flawed economic paradigm also pushes them in the same direction. That same pressure, with the same financial incentives to back it up, also drives the equally bad advice so many neoclassical economists are offering governments and businesses about the future of fossil fuels. The geological and thermodynamic limits to energy growth, like political power and the mob psychology of bubbles, lie outside the economic sphere. The interaction of economic processes with energy resources creates another end run: extraction of fossil fuels to run the world's economies, an economic process, drives the depletion of oil and other fossil fuel reserves, a noneconomic process, and this promises to flow back into the economic sphere in the extended downward spiral of contraction and impoverishment I've called the Long Descent. Here again, neoclassical economics is poorly equipped to deal with the reality of noneconomic constraints on economic processes. It thus comes as no surprise that when an economist enters the peak oil debate, it is almost always to claim that there is nothing to worry about, because the market will solve any shortfall that happens to emerge. As shortfalls emerge, expect to hear the claim - already floated by a few economists - that declining production is simply a sign that the demand for fossil fuel energy has decreased. No doubt when people are starving in the streets, we will hear claims that this is simply because the demand for food has dropped. There are promising signs that the grip of neoclassical theory on modern economics is beginning to weaken. A recent conference on biophysical economics - a field which embraces the heretical concept that the laws of nature trump the laws of money - attracted many attendees and, in a shift of nearly seismic proportions, managed to get coverage in the New York Times. Other alternative viewpoints in economics are beginning to be heard, as they usually are in times of financial woe. Still, what's needed now is something even more sweeping: an economics of whole systems, perhaps modeled on ecology, in which the entire world of noneconomic factors that influence economic processes is explicitly included in theories and practical analyses. Until that emerges, the advice governments and businesses receive from their paid economists may well continue to make matters worse rather than better. _____ John Michael Greer, The Grand Archdruid of the Ancient Order of Druids in America (AODA), has been active in the alternative spirituality movement for more than 25 years, and is the author of more than twenty books, including The Druidry Handbook (Weiser, 2006) and The Long Descent: A User's Guide to the End of the Industrial Age (New Society, 2008). He lives in Cumberland, Maryland. http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2009/10/why-markets-fail.html http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sun Nov 1 03:28:50 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 10:28:50 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Honduras: Growing Political and Organizational Maturity Will Bring Victory Message-ID: <025B5B71ED58473FB21A48C8D2D9034C@home9sg93n9r5y> DISSIDENT VOICE: Honduras: Growing Political and Organizational Matu Posted by: "Arnold August" arnold.august at yahoo.com arnold.august Sat Oct 31, 2009 3:00 pm (PDT) Follow the important on-going discussion: http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/10/honduras-growing-political-and-organizational-maturity-will-bring-victory/ Honduras: Growing Political and Organizational Maturity Will Bring Victory by Arnold August / October 28th, 2009 On June 28 the military coup d?etat took place. On that very same day the seeds of the National Front Against the Coup were sown. Since then it is developing politically and organizationally on a daily basis with the people, exhibiting courage and determination in the face of repression and assassinations. The Front is not only responsible for huge peaceful demonstrations in the cities, but also organizing thousands of local cells and activities in the cities, towns and countryside, carrying out political education in the process. President Zelaya and his legitimate government are also maturing and radicalizing themselves. It has maintained the governing organization in operation whether in exile or in the Brazilian Embassy. Zelaya himself has visited Washington and many capitals in South America, seeking increased support. He attempted two courageous peaceful incursions into his country, by airplane and by ground, and succeeded on the third occasion despite the serious dangers. 10-03-10-570In a situation of negotiations between on the one hand the putschists and on the other hand the legitimate government and its allies in the Front, all this in the context of the presidential elections, what is the Micheletti de facto government attempting to do? Amongst other things, it is trying to divide the resistance forces and weaken the mass movement in the streets in order to gain time and legitimize itself through elections. However, all three forces, firstly the Front and its affiliate social and trade union organizations and followers in the street, secondly the two potential candidates for the presidential elections who are directly linked to the Front and thirdly the Zelaya government, have all further developed their unity with each other. Their combined tactics in this complicated situation constitute one of many examples exhibiting the rapidly growing political maturity and consciousness of all the components forming the resistance. All of these forces, far from succumbing to the usual imperialist tactics of divide and rule, are further unifying themselves. The resistance in the streets, the new political forces and the constitutional Zelaya government all complement each other. From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sun Nov 1 03:41:30 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 10:41:30 -0000 Subject: [A-List] NYT: Deal Set to Restore Ousted Honduran President Message-ID: <34C4B4E22661412B8FE8671818BD38CA@home9sg93n9r5y> NYT: Deal Set to Restore Ousted Honduran President Posted by: "Jane Franklin" janefranklin at hotmail.com Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:56 pm (PDT) THE NEW YORK TIMES October 31, 2009 Deal Set to Restore Ousted Honduran President By GINGER THOMPSON and ELISABETH MALKIN Less than two days after senior American officials arrived in Honduras, the leader of the nation?s de facto government signed an agreement that would allow the return of the country?s ousted president, paving the way for an end to Latin America?s deepest political crisis in years. The deal, which was reached late Thursday and still faces the hurdle of being approved by the Honduran Congress, followed months of intransigence by leaders of the de facto government. After President Manuel Zelaya?s expulsion from the country on June 28, the new government adamantly refused to accept his restoration to office, despite international condemnation, isolation from its neighbors and multiple rounds of failed negotiations. Roberto Micheletti, the leader of Honduras?s de facto government, relented only after senior Obama administration officials landed in the Honduran capital to take charge of the talks, pressing the point that the United States would not recognize the coming presidential election unless he accepted the deal. Though senior administration officials played down their role, Latin America experts said that the agreement represented a breakthrough for President Obama, whose relations in the hemisphere were tested by the crisis. For months, the administration resisted driving the negotiations, positioning itself as just another member of a coalition that included both its allies and its adversaries in the region. Latin American leaders took the lead in the talks, but both sides kept trying to win over Washington, long the dominant power in the region. During a half-hour telephone call last week, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton took a leading role, making it clear to Mr. Micheletti that the United States was growing impatient with the stalemate and demanding that democracy be restored. Mr. Micheletti later joked with his aides that she stuck so close to her message it appeared she had a limited vocabulary. ?I kept trying to explain our position to her,? he said, according to officials close to the talks, ?but all she kept saying was, ?Restitution, restitution, restitution.? ? Speaking on Friday in Pakistan, Mrs. Clinton called the deal a ?historic agreement.? ?I cannot think of another example of a country in Latin America that, having suffered a rupture of its democratic and constitutional order, overcame such a crisis through negotiation and dialogue,? she said. The essential elements of the agreement had largely been worked out months ago by other Latin American leaders. If Congress agrees, Mr. Zelaya will serve out the remaining three months of his term, and the presidential election scheduled for Nov. 29 will be recognized by all sides. Mr. Zelaya and Mr. Micheletti, both members of the Liberal Party, are not candidates. Some significant obstacles remain, not least of which is the approval of the nation?s Congress, which voted overwhelmingly to strip Mr. Zelaya of power four months ago and now has to decide whether to reinstate him. ?That is going to be the issue that is most provocative internally,? said Assistant Secretary of State Thomas A. Shannon Jr., who led the American delegation, ?and probably where we in the international community are going to have to pay the closest attention.? The president of Congress, Jos? Alfredo Saavedra, who is close to Mr. Micheletti, suggested that the legislature was in no hurry to decide on Mr. Zelaya?s fate. ?At this time, nobody, absolutely nobody, can impose deadlines or terms on Congress,? he said. The Zelaya camp also warned that there was much to do before the crisis was over. ?Signing the agreement does not resolve the problem,? Carlos Eduardo Reina, an adviser to Mr. Zelaya, told local news organizations. ?It opens space, it opens the door and determines what will be the path to return Honduras to legality.? Kevin Casas-Zamora, an analyst at the Brookings Institution and a former vice president of Costa Rica, said he expected the Honduran Congress to approve Mr. Zelaya?s return because the two main presidential candidates right now had the most influence over legislators and wanted an agreement that would legitimize the election. According to Mr. Micheletti, the accord would establish a unity government and a verification commission to ensure that its conditions were carried out. It would also create a truth commission to investigate the events of the past few months, but it would not provide amnesty for any crimes committed in connection with the coup. That could cause tensions with the military, which roused Mr. Zelaya from his bed and summarily forced him out of the country. It is unclear what it would mean for Mr. Zelaya, who has been threatened with arrest on charges ranging from corruption to treason. As news of the agreement spread, residents poured from their homes and workplaces across Tegucigalpa, the capital, to celebrate. Jubilation broke out in streets that had been torn with protests for months. Latin American governments had pressed the Obama administration to take a forceful approach to ending the impasse. Immediately after Mr. Zelaya was ousted, Mr. Obama joined the rest of the region in calling for Mr. Zelaya?s reinstatement. Later, the administration suspended about $30 million in aid and visas for people who had been identified as central supporters of the de facto government. But hundreds of millions of dollars in American humanitarian assistance continued to flow, and Latin American countries, concerned about the precedent the coup had set in a region where democracy remained fragile, criticized the United States for sending mixed signals to Honduras. There were no mixed signals this week, said officials close to the talks. ?They showed the isolation the country would face, that doors would be closing to Honduras for some time to come,? said Roberto Flores Berm?dez, a former Honduran ambassador to Washington who served as a representative of the de facto government. Mark Landler contributed reporting from Islamabad, Pakistan. This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sun Nov 1 03:49:26 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 10:49:26 -0000 Subject: [A-List] THE NATION/Grandin: Honduras: Solution or Stall? Message-ID: <4DCC656C238E4A68BD33C9F27F2ECBBC@home9sg93n9r5y> THE NATION/Grandin: Honduras: Solution or Stall? Posted to CN by: "Fred Feldman" ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:54 pm (PDT) http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091116/grandin Honduras: Solution or Stall? By Greg Grandin October 30, 2009 Honduran crisis may soon be over. Maybe. The leader of the coup government, Roberto Micheletti, agreed to a nine-point plan to end the country's political impasse, brokered by Thomas Shannon, the former US Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs and Barack Obama's yet-to-be-confirmed ambassador to Brazil. The deal would return Manuel Zelaya, the democratically elected president deposed in a military coup four months ago, to office; in exchange, the international community will end Honduras' diplomatic isolation and recognize upcoming presidential elections, scheduled for November 29. Roberto Micheletti has agreed to a plan to end the country's political impasse. But the coup government is already looking for loopholes. Honduran Coup Regime in Crisis Honduras Greg Grandin: Those who seized power in June have polarized society, delegitimized political institutions and empowered social movements. Hardliners in the coup government, however, see a loophole in the accords, which gives the Honduran National Congress the power to approve or reject Zelaya's return. And no sooner was the ink dry on the accord when a top Micheletti advisor, Marcia Facusse de Villeda, told Bloomberg News that "Zelaya won't be restored." In a barefaced admission that the coup government was trying to buy time, Facusse said that "just by signing this agreement we already have the recognition of the international community for the elections." Another Micheletti aide, Arturo Corrales, said that since the congress is not in session, no vote on the agreement could be scheduled until "after the elections." But such a calculated reading of the agreement will not play well with most countries, including the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and the European Union, which have repeatedly called for restoration of Zelaya. Brazil--whose Tegucigalpa embassy has given Zelaya shelter since his dramatic surprise return to Honduras over a month ago--applauded Shannon's deal, yet made it clear Zelaya had to be reinstated. And in Honduras, the National Party, whose candidate is expected to win next month's vote, wants this crisis to be over. Its members in Congress may join with Liberal Party deputies loyal to Zelaya to approve the deal. The accord leaves unresolved the issue of whether the widespread human rights violations that have taken place since the coup will be investigated and prosecuted, only vaguely rejecting an amnesty for "political crimes" and calling for the establishment of a truth commission. More than a dozen Zelaya supporters have been executed over the last four months. Security forces have illegally detained nearly 10,000 people; police and soldiers have beaten protesters and gang-raped women. And the very idea of a negotiated solution to the crisis grants legitimacy to those provoked it. Still, if Zelaya were to be restored to the presidency, even just symbolically, to preside over the November elections and supervise a transfer of power to its winner, it would represent a significant victory for progressive forces in the hemisphere. Here's why: 1. The attempt by Micheletti and his backers--both in and out of Honduras--to justify the overthrow of Zelaya by claiming it was a constitutional transfer of power will have definitively failed. If this justification was allowed to go unchallenged, it would have set a dangerous precedent for the rest of Latin America. 2. Efforts to rally support for the coup under the banner of anti-leftism, or anti-Chavismo--much the way anti-communism served to unite conservatives during the Cold War--will likewise have failed. 3. It will confirm the political influence--and unity--of Latin America's progressive governments, particularly Brazil and Venezuela, which have taken the lead in demanding that the coup not stand--a position that aligned them with much of the rest of the world. 4. It will be an important push back for Republicans like South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint and Otto Reich, who tried to use the crisis to push for a more hardline US policy against the left in Latin America. It is DeMint who has put the hold on Shannon's confirmation, as well as on the confirmation of Arturo Valenzuela, Obama's pick for Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs. 5. It will hopefully help the Obama administration realize that in many Latin American countries, there is no alternative to working with the left. In Honduras, the violence of the coup government, as well as the fact that the extended crisis smoked out its less than savory supporters, like Reich, awoke not too pleasant memories of the Cold War. Reich recently penned an essay urging Obama to replicate Ronald Reagan's successful Latin American policy, which the Iran-Contra alum believed paved the way for the fall of the Berlin Wall. Many, however, remember too well Reagan's patronage of death squads and torturers. And reports that Honduran planters were importing Colombian paramilitaries to protect their interests were not helping defenders of the coup make their case. As protests continued, it became clear to all who paid attention that it was the good guys - trade unionists, peasants, Native Americans, environmentalists, feminists, gay and lesbian activists, and progressive priests - who were demanding the return of Zelaya. 6. Zelaya's return would be a huge boost for those good guys, who are largely responsible for the inability of the coup government to consolidate its rule. Against all expectations, they have defied tear gas, batons, bullets, and curfews, and engaged in creative and heroic acts of resistance, growing stronger and more unified than they were before the coup four months ago. They will engage with the new government from a position of strength, while the elites who have long ruled Honduras will be fractured and chastised. The accords brokered by Shannon force Zelaya to renounce any attempt to convene a constitutional convention, yet the National Front against the Coup - the umbrella group that has coordinated opposition to Micheletti - has made it clear that that demand is "non-negotiable" and that it would continue to push for it, no matter who is president. It was of course fear of a constituent assembly that provoked the coup in the first place, and it is an irony probably not lost on those who executed it that a large majority of Hondurans, according to a recent poll, now think that such an assembly would be the best way to solve the country's political crisis. The last thing Micheletti and his supporters want to see is Mel Zelaya, with his white cowboy hat and wide smile, addressing a large crowd filling the streets of Tegucigalpa celebrating his reinstallation, building momentum for fights to come. And this is why Shannon's deal is anything but done. About Greg Grandin Greg Grandin, a professor of history at New York University, is the author, most recently, of Fordlandia: The Rise and Fall of Henry Ford's Forgotten Jungle City (Metropolitan). He serves on the editorial committee of the North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA). more... From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sun Nov 1 03:58:15 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 10:58:15 -0000 Subject: [A-List] HONDURAS OYE: Honduras: What Deal? The Fat Lady Has Many Sisters Message-ID: HONDURAS OYE: Honduras: What Deal? The Fat Lady Has Many Sisters Posted to CN by: "Magbana" magbana at aol.com magbana2004 Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:58 pm (PDT) HONDURAS: What deal? The Fat Lady has Many Sisters http://hondurasoye.wordpress.com/2009/10/30/honduras-what-deal-the-fat-lady-has-many-sisters/ Throughout the Honduran crisis the media have reported agreements between the two sides as if Micheletti was really capable of making concessions and President Zelaya was certain nothing would happen to him if he walked out of the Brazilian embassy. Things happening now must be analyzed based on what happened before. But, most media accounts are devoid of such context. The three factors that must be considered when analyzing developments in Honduras are: everything that has taken place in the last four months, a Fat Lady about to sing and several of her sisters waiting in the wings. If you will, the past, the present, and betting on what is likely to take place in the future. When I awoke this morning I heard Andres Conteris on Democracy Now being interviewed from the Brazilian embassy where he has been since Zelaya?s arrival on September 22. With each question posed to him, it became more and more apparent to me that wherever Zelaya land?s in this whole thing, the people of Honduras will have to continue fighting this thing on their own. Later, in the broadcast, Rep. Grajalva was interviewed later about health care reform, Amy Goodman asked him what he thought of the agreement in Honduras. After swallowing hard, he said, ?I have more questions about it than praise.? Tom Shannon and his entourage were not in Tegucigalpa to tame a feisty Micheletti into a handover of power, rather they were there to collaborate with the golpistas to ensure that Zelaya did not come to power in any true sense of the word. Even bringing him back boxed in heavily by a ?unity government?in order to make the elections look credible is a risk for the golpistas. And, this is why the Fat Lady has not sung yet. Before a closer look at the latest ?agreement,? a review of some past chapters in this saga should help to interpret what is (or isn?t) going on now. While there have been some ridiculous twists and turns in the aftermath of this coup, only one aspect has remained constant and that is the art of delay. The best time eaters are Roberto Micheletti, Oscar Arias, and Hillary Clinton.. Micheletti ate up time by insulting one international delegation after another and then welcoming them back a few weeks later. Oscar Arias, getting his instructions from the US State Department, conducted a charade of a negotiation that just wouldn?t go away. But, it certainly gobbled up an immense amount of time. And then there is Hillary Clinton, queen of cool, who ate up the clock by remaining aloof and unavailable, yet manipulating the overall game from the sidelines. If you recall, on at least two occasions, Zelaya, went to Washington to meet Clinton but was forced to hang around a while until she decided to grant him an appointment. This blatant disrespect of a head of state was the first and best signal that the US was not going to help Zelaya back to the presidential palace. Running out the clock was/is the primary tactic in this tug-of-war because it never was the intention of those operating the levers to reinstate Zelaya . In fact, it appears that the US was one of the primary reasons Zelaya was taken out in the first place. Below is an excerpt from an article by Barry Grey that may shed more light on this, ?US Seeks Deal between Honduran Coup Leaders and Deposed President? ? July 2, 2009 ?There is ample evidence that the Obama administration was deeply involved in plans by Zelaya?s opponents within the Honduran ruling elite?sections of business, the military, the political establishment and the Church?to destabilize or topple his government. The New York Times on Tuesday cited an unnamed US official as saying that US Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Thomas Shannon and US Ambassador to Honduras Hugo Llorens spoke to ?military officials and opposition leaders? in the days before the coup. He said, ?There was talk of how they might remove the president from office, how he could be arrested, on whose authority they could do that.? Both Shannon and Llorens served under the Bush administration as top advisers on Andean affairs?covering Venezuela, Colombia, Bolivia, Peru and Ecuador. Their stints on the National Security Council and at the State Department coincided with the US-backed coup that briefly toppled Venezuela?s Ch?vez in 2002. It appears that the Obama administration was seeking to effect a de facto coup, but without a direct use of the military and under the cover of constitutional legality. That would, it hoped, reverse Washington?s declining influence in Latin America and pave the way for an offensive against Ch?vez and his left nationalist allies in Nicaragua, Bolivia, Ecuador and other countries aligned with Venezuela in the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas.? Before going further, I want to put this military coup thing to bed. The Honduran military kidnapped the president and forcibly exiled him.to Costa Rica. Then, it put a wall of armor between the golpistas and the people of Honduras. The military defended its coup through gross human rights abuses, including murders and disappearances and maintains a massive presence throughout the entire country four months after the coup. If the military, at any point, had laid down their guns, this coup would have fallen in three days. With this, let?s examine how many songs the fat ladies might have to sing before this thing is really over. The agreement produced late Thursday nite, appears to have five basic components: formation of a ?unity? government, recognition of the November 29 election, no amnesty, verification committee to make sure the agreement is implemented, and a truth commission. The agreement calls for a ?unity? government and one can expect Zelaya to be boxed in very tightly. The only unity in this government will be among the golpistas on how best to keep Zelaya?s hands tied. As for recognizing the November 29 election, you could not put a bigger dagger in the heart of the people of Honduras. For all intents and purposes, this will be a golpista election. And, as was the case in Haiti, the people of Honduras will boycott it massively. In the agreement, the international community is being asked to guarantee that it will recognize the result of the election before it even takes place. Regardless of who wins in the election, the winner will carry the banner for the golpistas and the de facto regime?s power grab will be legitimized. Regarding no amnesty, the de facto regime is holding an outstanding warrant for Zelaya?s arrest and there is nothing I have seen to suggest that they won?t execute the warrant if it benefits their political strategy. After all, just yesterday, the de facto regime petitioned the ICC regarding Brazil harboring Zelaya in its embassy based on the warrant issued by the regime God forbid, but the verification of implementation of the steps in the agreement could be handed to the moonlighting mediator, Oscar Arias. The possibility is so immediately ludicrous that I can?t ponder it further. Wow, a truth commission. With the help of the media, the Michelettis, Clinton and her spokesmen, P J. Crowley and Ian Kelly along with her ambassador in Honduras, Hugo Llorens, and Oscar Arias, etc., the truth has been perverted or buried to such an extent that the worth of holding such a commission should be re-considered. Now, if you could have a Rwanda type truth commission where victims question and berate the accused publicly followed by a vote of the community to see if the accused should go to prison ? well, that kind of truth commission I could get into. Finally, for the agreement to be ratified, the Honduran Congress is required to vote on Zelaya?s return AFTER the Supreme Court gives its approval first. We are back to square one. Could it be that the Honduran institution most hostile to Zelaya and responsible for his arrest and expulsion may well decide the fate of millions of Hondurans? There can be no doubt that the Honduran Supreme Court is the biggest Fat Lady in the Honduran opera. From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sun Nov 1 04:28:07 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 11:28:07 -0000 Subject: [A-List] =?windows-1252?q?COFADEH__--__Violations_of_Human_Rights?= =?windows-1252?q?_in_the_framework_of_the_coup_d=92=E9tat_in_Hondu?= =?windows-1252?q?ras=2E?= Message-ID: <62FFEE9EAB5D4E9FA8F141544302B0FD@home9sg93n9r5y> Bertha Oliva de Nativi General Coordinator, COFADEH ?Statistics and Faces of the Repression? Violations of Human Rights in the framework of the coup d??tat in Honduras. Tegucigalpa, Honduras - October 22, 2009 I am a veteran human rights defender. As I prepared this second human rights report since the coup in Honduras, I have felt profound distress. Perhaps because I had begun to think that during the long process of the last decades, we had made some small advances in the area of human rights. Perhaps it is because I look to the past in order to see the future, and to evaluate and to value the present - - that today, over 100 days since the fateful coup on June 28th, I realize that something has shaken the Committee of Families of the Detained and Disappeared of Honduras, COFADEH to the core, and nothing is the same. Immediately after the coup we knew that we had regressed 25 ? 30 years, maybe more. As the impact of the blow set in, we realized that we are now in the midst of a modern Military Coup d??tat in the 21st Century. Unfortunately, we are well versed in the effects of military dictators and we understood that what we were witnessing was not an isolated act but an entire strategy to seize and hold power for the long term; in other words, the dictatorship intends to stay in the Region. We realized that if such an offense could be committed against the person who holds the highest office in the country, what would happen to the rest of the population. We began to prepare ourselves. The military dictatorship wasted no time. Today, just as in the past, we are the depository for tears, anguish, pain and hopelessness. The military dictatorship that we live under today is very similar to that of the decade of the 1980s, however, there is an important difference. During the 1980s, those who repressed the people hid their faces and their names. Today, those who repress the people have names, faces and uniforms: ?blue-green ? olive and white.? In our second human rights report we have focused our concerns on the actions that the X Battalion, based in Marcala - La Paz, has carried out against members of the Resistance against the Military Coup throughout the zone, including the region of Colomoncagua. Similar levels of persecution are also being suffered by people in the Department of Santa Barbara on the part of authorities of the de facto regime in this Department. Another of our primary concerns is the strategy employed by the military dictatorship against teachers in the country which includes illegal and arbitrary retention of salaries, profiling, legal suits brought against them by the Public Ministry, persecution, illegal detentions and even assassination. With indignation and pain we must condemn and repudiate the persecution unleashed on the youth of our country. To some we have had to say, ?until we meet again in another country? in order to prevent them becoming victims of kidnapping, torture and assassination?And to other young people we have said, ?goodbye, we will meet again in the next world.? This second report documents an accelerated Deterioration of Human Rights in the context of the coup d??tat: ? Between June 28th and October 10, 2009, COFADEH has registered over 4000 violations of human rights. The most grievous include 108 violations of the right to life, including 21 assassinations and violent deaths. ? The coup regime is consolidating with the goal of remaining in government beyond the defacto government. This process relies on the use of excessive force on the part of military and police, control of the media and closure of media outlets that are not allies of the regime, use of paramilitaries to intimidate, threaten and kidnap those opposed to the coup, and the emission of illegal decrees that suspend the exercise of fundamental rights. ? It is clear that a repressive apparatus is being mounted to intimidate and annihilate resistance to the coup. In the 115 days since the coup, thousands of human rights violations have been registered that reflect the evolution of state violence and the rupture of institutionality. As of June 29th, COFADEH began to register violations of human rights directly related to peaceful demonstrations on the part of the population. This violence has taken different forms and patterns: generalized violence, violence targeting particular sectors, and selective violence targeting journalists and leaders of the resistance. In addition, judicial intimidation is being used as a tool to demobilize the opposition. Based on proof and documentation in our possession, we affirm to the world that we are living a situation of NATIONAL EMERGENCY in Honduras. We appeal to the International Community to stay vigilant and observant in order to assume the challenge of bringing those who perpetrate crimes against humanity to justice. Bertha Oliva de Nativi General Coordinator, COFADEH From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sun Nov 1 05:49:55 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 12:49:55 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Text of the Agreement Signed on October 30, 2009 (Eng) Message-ID: Text of the Agreement Signed on October 30, 2009 It looks like the Honduran people have a long, hard row to hoe. During the last four months of resistance they have planted the seeds of democracy. This accord deprives them of the water to irrigate their crop. We must continue to stand in solidarity with them through the growing season in expectation that one day there will be a harvest. -- Chuck Kaufman On Sat Oct 31 20:20 , Hendrik Voss sent: Accord for National Reconciliation and the Strengthening of Democracy in Honduras Text of the Agreement Signed on October 30, 2009 By Negotiating Teams of the Elected Government of President Zelaya and Coup Regime of Roberto Micheletti Tegucigalpa, Honduras October 31, 2009 Preamble We, Honduran citizens, men and women, convinced of the need to strengthen the rule of law, protect our Constitution and the laws of our Republic, deepen democracy and ensure a climate of peace and tranquility for our people, have carried out an intense and frank process of political dialogue to seek a peaceful and negotiated solution to the crisis in which our country has been submerged in recent months. As the result of this dialogue, in which the common sense, tolerance and patriotic spirit of all participants have prevailed, we have drawn up a political Accord that will allow civic coexistence to be reestablished and ensure a suitable climate for democratic governability in our country. This Accord, we are certain, will mark the road toward the peace, reconciliation and democracy Honduran society urgently requires. The acceptance of this Accord demonstrates, yet again, that Hondurans are capable of successfully conducting a dialogue and, through it and by it, achieving the high goals set by our society and demanded by our country. Pursuant to the preceding, we have agreed to the following accords. 1. Regarding the National Unity and Reconciliation Government To achieve reconciliation and strengthen democracy, we will form a National Unity and Reconciliation Government composed of representatives from various political parties and social organizations, recognized for their capacity, integrity, competence and willingness to dialogue, who will fill the different Secretariats, Sub-secretariats and other agencies of the State, in conformance with Article 246 and succeeding articles of the Constitution of the Republic of Honduras. In view of the fact that, prior to June 28, the Executive Branch had not sent the National Congress a draft of the General Budget for Revenue and Disbursement, as established in Article 205, Subsection 32 of the Constitution of the Republic of Honduras, this National Unity and Reconciliation Government will respect the General Budget recently approved by the National Congress for fiscal year 2009 and will operate on its basis. 2. Regarding Renunciation of a Call for a National Constituent Assembly and Amending the Unamendable Articles of the Constitution To achieve reconciliation and strengthen democracy, we reiterate our respect for the Constitution and the laws of our country, abstaining from calls for a National Constituent Assembly, either directly or indirectly, and also renouncing the promotion or support of any public consultation for the purpose of reforming the Constitution to permit presidential reelection, modify the form of Government or contravene any of the unamendable articles in our Founding Charter [constitution]. In particular, we will not make public statements or exercise any sort of influence inconsistent with Articles 5, 239, 373 and 374 of the Constitution of the Republic of Honduras and we will energetically reject any expression contrary to the spirit of said articles and the Special Law to Regulate Referendums and Plebiscites. 3. Regarding General Elections and the Transfer of Government To achieve reconciliation and strengthen democracy, we reiterate that in conformance with Articles 44 and 51 of the Constitution of the Republic of Honduras, suffrage is universal, obligatory, egalitarian, direct, free and secret, and it is the responsibility of the fully autonomous and independent Supreme Electoral Tribunal to supervise and administer every facet of electoral activities and processes. Likewise, we call on the Honduran people to peacefully participate in the coming general election and to avoid any type of demonstrations that oppose the elections or their results, or promote insurrection, unlawful conduct, civil disobedience or other acts that could result in violent confrontations or transgressions of the law. For the purpose of demonstrating the transparency and legitimacy of the electoral process, we urge the Supreme Electoral Tribunal to authorize and accredit the presence of international missions from now until the announcement of the general election results, as well as during the transfer of power that will occur, in accordance with Article 237 of the Constitution of the Republic, on January 27, 2010. 4. Regarding the Armed Forces and the National Police To achieve reconciliation and strengthen democracy, we affirm our willingness to comply, in all its terms and conditions, with Article 272 of the Constitution of the Republic of Honduras, in accordance with which the Armed Forces are placed at the disposition of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal from one month before the general elections for the purpose of guaranteeing the free exercise of suffrage, the custody, transport and surveillance of electoral materials and other security aspects of the process. We reaffirm the professional, apolitical, obedient and non-deliberative character of the Honduran Armed Forces. Likewise, we agree that the National Police should strictly abide by the terms of its special legislation. 5. Regarding the Executive Power To achieve reconciliation and strengthen democracy, in the spirit of the subjects of the proposal for the San Jos?? Accord, both negotiating commissions have respectfully decided that the National Congress, as an institutional expression of popular sovereignty, in use of its authority, in consultation with the entities it believes pertinent such as the Supreme Court of Justice and in accordance with the law, resolve the issue regarding ???restoring possession of the Executive Power to its status prior to June 28 until conclusion the current governmental period on January 27, 2010.??? The decision the National Congress adopts should establish a basis for achieving the social peace, political tranquility and democratic governability the society requires and the country needs. 6. Regarding the Verification Commission and the Truth Commission To achieve reconciliation and strengthen democracy, we stipulate the creation of a Verification Commission to verify commitments made under this Accord and those deriving from it, coordinated by the Organization of American States (OAS). Said Commission will be composed of two members of the international community and two members of the national community, the last two to be chosen, one each, by the parties [i.e., one by Micheletti and one by Zelaya]. The Verification Commission will be responsible for attesting to the strict compliance with all of the points of this Accord and will receive the full cooperation of Honduran public institutions for that effect. The failure to comply with any of the commitments contained in this Accord, as verified and declared by the Verification Commission, will result in the activation of measures the Commission will establish for the transgressor or transgressors. For the purpose of clarifying the events occurring before and after June 28, 2009, a Truth Commission will also be created to identify acts that led to the current situation and provide the people of Honduras with elements to avoid repetition of these events in the future. This Dialogue Commission recommends that the next government, in the framework of a national consensus, constitute said Truth Commission in the first half of 2010. 7. Regarding the Normalization of Relations between the Republic of Honduras and the International Community On committing ourselves to faithfully comply with the commitments made in this Accord, we respectfully request the immediate revocation of those measures or sanctions adopted bilaterally or multilaterally that in any way affect the reinsertion and full participation of the Republic of Honduras in the international community, and its access to all forms of cooperation [aid]. We call on the international community to reactivate, as quickly as possible, the cooperation projects in effect with the Republic of Honduras and to continue the negotiation of future projects. We especially urge that, at the request of competent authorities, necessary and timely international cooperation be provided so that the Verification Commission and the future Truth Commission ensure faithful compliance and follow-through for the commitments made under this Accord. 8. Final Dispositions Any differences regarding interpretation or application of this Accord will be submitted to the Verification Commission, which will determine, in adherence to the Constitution of the Republic of Honduras and legislation in force, and through an authentic interpretation of the present Accord, the corresponding solution. Taking into account that this Accord is the product of the understanding and fraternity of Hondurans, we vehemently request that the international community respect the sovereignty of the Republic of Honduras and fully observe the established principle in the United Nations charter of non-interference in the internal affairs of other States. 9. Calendar for Compliance with the Accords Given that this Accord takes immediate effect upon the date of its signing and for the purpose of clarifying the time for compliance and follow-through for the commitments made to achieve national reconciliation, we agree to the following calendar for compliance: October 30, 2009 1. Signing and entrance of the Accord into effect. 2. Formal delivery of the Accord to Congress for the effects of Point 5, ???Regarding the Executive Power.??? November 2, 2009 1. Formation of the Verification Commission. After the signing of this Accord and no later than November 5 1. Formation and installation of the National Unity and Reconciliation Government January 27, 2010 1. Celebration of the transfer of government. First half of 2010 1. Formation of the Truth Commission. 10. Final Declaration On behalf of reconciliation and the patriotic spirit that has brought us to the dialogue table, we commit ourselves to complying in good faith with this Accord and what derives from it. The world is witness to this demonstration of unity and peace, in which we commit our civic conscience and patriotic devotion. Together, we will know how to demonstrate our courage and decision to strengthen the rule of saw and build a tolerant, pluralistic and democratic society. We sign this accord in the city of Tegucigalpa, Honduras, on October 30, 2009. 11. Acknowledgements We take this opportunity to thank the International Community for its accompaniment and good offices, especially the Organization of American States and its Secretary General, Jos?? Miguel Insulza; the [diplomatic] Missions of Foreign Ministers in the Hemisphere; the President of Costa Rica, Oscar Arias S??nchez; the Government of the United States, its President Barack Obama, and his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. 12. Regarding the Tegucigalpa/San Jos?? Accord???s Entrance in Effect For internal purposes, the Accord takes full effect upon signing. For protocolary and ceremonial purposes, a public signing ceremony will be held on November 2. Tegucigalpa, Municipio del Distrito Central, October 30, 2009 [Signed: Armando Aguilar Cruz, Vilma Cecilia Morales Montalv??n, Arturo Gerardo Corrales Alvarez, Victor Orlando Meza L??pez, Mayra Janeth Mej??a del Cid, Rodil Rivera Rodil] PDF of the Accord in Spanish Translated for Narco News by Cadejo4 Tom Loudon wrote: For a pdf version of the agreement signed by President Zelaya and Micheletti- in Spanish only: http://quixote.org/agreement-negotiated-shannon-which-was-signed-thursday _______________________________________________ Lasolidarity mailing list Post: Lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasolidarity From tal1 at cogeco.ca Sun Nov 1 11:17:45 2009 From: tal1 at cogeco.ca (Tony B.) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 13:17:45 -0500 Subject: [A-List] Clinton In Kosovo Message-ID: <179D2A38588A41719E1BF955BEDE4661@TonyPC> ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Rozoff To: stopnato at yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 10:43 AM Subject: [stopnato] Clinton In Kosovo: U.S., Albanian Flags, Chants Of "USA!" http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ha8MuMrIGkjBIisRvRF45wyT4DGQD9BMPOPO2 Associated Press November 1, 2009 Former President Clinton unveils statue in Kosovo By NEBI QENA -The statue portrays Clinton with his left arm raised and holding a portfolio bearing his name and the date when NATO started bombing Yugoslavia, on March 24, 1999. PRISTINA, Kosovo: Thousands of ethnic Albanians braved low temperatures and a cold wind in Kosovo's capital Pristina to welcome former President Bill Clinton on Sunday as he attended the unveiling of an 11-foot (3.5-meter) statue of himself on a key boulevard that also bears his name. Clinton is celebrated as a hero by Kosovo's ethnic Albanian majority for launching NATO's bombing campaign against Yugoslavia in 1999.... This is his first visit to Kosovo since it declared independence from Serbia last year. Many waved American, Albanian and Kosovo flags and chanted "USA!" as the former president climbed on top of a podium with his poster in the background reading "Kosovo honors a hero." Some peeked out of balconies and leaned on window sills to get a better view of Clinton from their apartment blocks. To thunderous applause Clinton waved to the crowd as the red cover was pulled off from the statue. The statue is placed on top of a white-tiled base, in the middle of a tiny square, surrounded by communist-era buildings. "I never expected that anywhere, someone would make such a big statue of me," Clinton said of the gold-sprayed statue weighing a ton (900 kilograms). He also addressed Kosovo's 120-seat assembly, encouraging them to forgive and move on from the violence of the past. The statue portrays Clinton with his left arm raised and holding a portfolio bearing his name and the date when NATO started bombing Yugoslavia, on March 24, 1999. An estimated 10,000 ethnic Albanians were killed during the Kosovo crackdown and about 800,000 were forced out of their homes. They returned home after NATO-led peacekeepers moved in following 78 days of bombing. Leta Krasniqi, an ethnic Albanian, said the statue was the best way to express the ethnic Albanians' gratitude for Clinton's role in making Kosovo a state. "This is a big day," Krasniqi, 25 said. "I live nearby and I'm really excited that I will be able to see the statue of such a big friend of ours every day." Clinton last visited Kosovo in 2003 when he received an honorary university degree. His first visit was in 1999 ? months after some 6,000 U.S. troops were deployed in the NATO-led peacekeeping mission here. Some 1,000 American soldiers are still based in Kosovo as part of NATO's 14,000-strong peacekeeping force. Police in Kosovo upped security measures ahead of Bill Clinton's arrival by adding deploying more traffic police and special police. NATO officials said the peacekeepers were also on alert, although no additional security measures were taken. =========================== Stop NATO http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato Blog site: http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/ To subscribe, send an e-mail to: rwrozoff at yahoo.com or stopnato-subscribe at yahoogroups.com Daily digest option available. ============================== __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Database | Polls MARKETPLACE Mom Power: Discover the community of moms doing more for their families, for the world and for each other Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity 5New Members Visit Your Group Sell Online Start selling with our award-winning e-commerce tools. Group Charity California Pet Rescue: Furry Friends Rescue Yahoo! Groups Mental Health Zone Mental Health Learn More. __,_._,___ From tal1 at cogeco.ca Sun Nov 1 11:18:35 2009 From: tal1 at cogeco.ca (Tony B.) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 13:18:35 -0500 Subject: [A-List] NATO Recruits Persian Gulf States For Greater Afghan War Message-ID: <0E9E08658E0745BDA328CE17C27E9345@TonyPC> ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Rozoff To: stopnato at yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 10:53 AM Subject: [stopnato] NATO Recruits Persian Gulf States For Greater Afghan War http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/11/01/89892.html Al Arabiya November 1, 2009 NATO looks to Gulf States for help in Afghanistan Noureddine Fridhi -NATO considers the Gulf region a continuation of the euro Atlantic security area.... "The partnership between NATO and UAE forces in Afghanistan is an implementation of the spirit behind the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative.? -The UAE and three other Gulf countries - Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar ? have joined the "Istanbul Cooperation Initiative" and ?Saudi Arabia and Oman have showed growing interest in working with NATO,? Rasmussen said. ABU DHABI: NATO asked Gulf States to help with its war in Afghanistan and called for cooperation in shared interests and said Arab and Muslim countries have an advantage of added cultural value over the West to help ease the crisis in Afghanistan, at a security conference in the UAE last Thursday. NATO considers the Gulf region a continuation of the euro Atlantic security area, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told Al Arabiya's Brussels-based correspondent, as the alliance faces serious challenges in Afghanistan with more insurgents on the battle field and a corrupted system in Kabul. "We have a shared interest in helping countries like Afghanistan and Iraq to stand on their feet again, fostering stability in the Middle East... and preventing countries like Somalia and Sudan from slipping deeper into chaos," Rasmussen explained at the "NATO-UAE Relations and Future Prospects of the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative" conference in the UAE capital of Abu Dhabi. Rasmussen's comments came during a meeting between diplomats and military officials from Gulf States and NATO member states representatives, who flew in from Brussels, to discuss ideas to enhance cooperation in the frame work of the "Istanbul Cooperation Initiative," aimed at strengthening relations between the alliance and non-European countries and Muslim countries. ?Beside the financial resources and the reconstruction effort, Gulf Countries have the cultural approach, western countries do not have." NATO's Military Committee Chairman, Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola explained. Amid the tension between Iran and Western countries, Rasmussen told the conference "we all are seriously concerned about nuclear ambitions and about the nuclear domino-effect they could cause in a region that is pivotal for global stability and security." "We also have a common interest in energy security, whether we are suppliers, transit countries or consumers," he added. "Added value"" The UAE Foreign Affairs Minister, Sheikh Abdullah Bin Zaed Al Nahyan, told Al Arabiya in the press conference that the ?added value? Gulf countries can bring to the debate is that ?the Gulf is a vital region to the world and it is the international community's obligation to protect it." "The partnership between NATO and UAE forces in Afghanistan is an implementation of the spirit behind the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative,? Nahyan added. Di Paola said the added value the alliance can bring to the region is "we care about the region's security.? Di Paola explained to Al Arabiya that some NATO allies are engaged with Gulf countries in building maritime regional capabilities.... Di Paola cited the example of the cooperation between Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia in protecting Malacca Detroit [?] as a model for the Gulf countries. NATO needs to delegate some security operations to partners. During the debate, Gulf academics asked NATO officials "who is your enemy" in 2009, 20 years after the collapse of the Berlin Wall. Analysts in the Arab world suggest after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, NATO is targeting the Muslim world, a suggestion NATO officials dismissed and insist the organization is extending hands for cooperation. Giving merit to this thought, the Czech ambassador to NATO told Al Arabiya "in my country some still look to NATO as an old Cold War instrument, which is trying to survive." Many observers suggest the war in Afghanistan is a lifeline for NATO. At the conference Rasmussen oversaw the signing of a security agreement on the exchange of information and how to ?protect classified information? between the UAE and NATO. The UAE and three other Gulf countries - Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar ? have joined the "Istanbul Cooperation Initiative" and ?Saudi Arabia and Oman have showed growing interest in working with NATO,? Rasmussen said. =========================== Stop NATO http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato Blog site: http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/ To subscribe, send an e-mail to: rwrozoff at yahoo.com or stopnato-subscribe at yahoogroups.com Daily digest option available. ============================== __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Database | Polls MARKETPLACE Mom Power: Discover the community of moms doing more for their families, for the world and for each other Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity 5New Members Visit Your Group Share Photos Put your favorite photos and more online. Y! Groups blog The place to go to stay informed on Groups news! Weight Loss Group on Yahoo! Groups Get support and make friends online.. __,_._,___ From tal1 at cogeco.ca Sun Nov 1 11:19:52 2009 From: tal1 at cogeco.ca (Tony B.) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 13:19:52 -0500 Subject: [A-List] U.S., South Korea Plan Armed Intervention In North Korea Message-ID: ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Rozoff To: stopnato at yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 10:57 AM Subject: [stopnato] U.S., South Korea Plan Armed Intervention In North Korea http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=110170§ionid=351020405 Press TV November 1, 2009 Joint US-S. Korea plan to intervene in N. Korea -Observers believe that the plan constitutes an out-right conspiracy to destabilize and overthrow a sovereign government, a blatant violation of international law. The US and South Korea have completed joint action plans for responding to a regime collapse and other internal emergency situations in North Korea, a report says. "South Korea and the US had long worked on Concept Plan 5029, to prepare for a regime collapse and other internal emergencies in North Korea," Yonhap News Agency reported Sunday, quoting an informed South Korean official. The report added that the bilateral discussions started last year after the Lee Myung-bak government pushed to convert the concept plan into a complete and operational plan. ?Since its inauguration last year, the Lee Myung-bak government has pushed to convert the concept plan into an operational plan and it was recently completed," Yonhap News Agency reported Sunday, quoting an informed South Korean official. The plan is a case-by-case response to different emergency situations in North Korea, if a civil war breaks out. "If the South Korea-US combined forces intervene in North Korea's internal instabilities, the South Korean military will assume the leading role in consideration of neighboring countries, while the US military will be responsible for the removal of the North's nuclear facilities and weapons," added the report. North Korea has strongly protested the plan, saying Washington and Seoul were preparing to invade the state. Some 28,500 US troops are situated in South Korea to bolster its' 655,000-strong armed forces against North Korea's 1.2 million-member military. Observers believe that the plan constitutes an out-right conspiracy to destabilize and overthrow a sovereign government, a blatant violation of international law. =========================== Stop NATO http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato Blog site: http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/ To subscribe, send an e-mail to: rwrozoff at yahoo.com or stopnato-subscribe at yahoogroups.com Daily digest option available. ============================== __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Database | Polls MARKETPLACE Mom Power: Discover the community of moms doing more for their families, for the world and for each other Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity 5New Members Visit Your Group Sitebuilder Build a web site quickly & easily with Sitebuilder. Yahoo! Groups Mental Health Zone Mental Health Learn More Yahoo! Groups Small Business Group Share experiences with owners like you. __,_._,___ From tal1 at cogeco.ca Sun Nov 1 12:03:44 2009 From: tal1 at cogeco.ca (Tony B.) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 14:03:44 -0500 Subject: [A-List] Beyond Bollywood Message-ID: <293EE3B1574C416C845D665E85B1DD1F@TonyPC> ...Just beyond the thin rime of Bollywood lies the festering wound of inequalilty, murder, serfdom and mass dispossession that represents the fate of the other 85% of India's peoples. T. The Heart of India Is Under Attack To justify enforcing a corporate land grab, the state needs an enemy - and it has chosen the Maoists By Arundhati Roy November 01, 2009 "The Guardian' -- The low, flat-topped hills of south Orissa have been home to the Dongria Kondh long before there was a country called India or a state called Orissa. The hills watched over the Kondh. The Kondh watched over the hills and worshipped them as living deities. Now these hills have been sold for the bauxite they contain. For the Kondh it's as though god had been sold. They ask how much god would go for if the god were Ram or Allah or Jesus Christ. Perhaps the Kondh are supposed to be grateful that their Niyamgiri hill, home to their Niyam Raja, God of Universal Law, has been sold to a company with a name like Vedanta (the branch of Hindu philosophy that teaches the Ultimate Nature of Knowledge). It's one of the biggest mining corporations in the world and is owned by Anil Agarwal, the Indian billionaire who lives in London in a mansion that once belonged to the Shah of Iran. Vedanta is only one of the many multinational corporations closing in on Orissa. If the flat-topped hills are destroyed, the forests that clothe them will be destroyed, too. So will the rivers and streams that flow out of them and irrigate the plains below. So will the Dongria Kondh. So will the hundreds of thousands of tribal people who live in the forested heart of India, and whose homeland is similarly under attack. In our smoky, crowded cities, some people say, "So what? Someone has to pay the price of progress." Some even say, "Let's face it, these are people whose time has come. Look at any developed country - Europe, the US, Australia - they all have a 'past'." Indeed they do. So why shouldn't "we"? In keeping with this line of thought, the government has announced Operation Green Hunt, a war purportedly against the "Maoist" rebels headquartered in the jungles of central India. Of course, the Maoists are by no means the only ones rebelling. There is a whole spectrum of struggles all over the country that people are engaged in-the landless, the Dalits, the homeless, workers, peasants, weavers. They're pitted against a juggernaut of injustices, including policies that allow a wholesale corporate takeover of people's land and resources. However, it is the Maoists that the government has singled out as being the biggest threat. Two years ago, when things were nowhere near as bad as they are now, the prime minister described the Maoists as the "single largest internal security threat" to the country. This will probably go down as the most popular and often repeated thing he ever said. For some reason, the comment he made on 6 January, 2009, at a meeting of state chief ministers, when he described the Maoists as having only "modest capabilities", doesn't seem to have had the same raw appeal. He revealed his government's real concern on 18 June, 2009, when he told parliament: "If left-wing extremism continues to flourish in parts which have natural resources of minerals, the climate for investment would certainly be affected." Who are the Maoists? They are members of the banned Communist party of India (Maoist) - CPI (Maoist) - one of the several descendants of the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist), which led the 1969 Naxalite uprising and was subsequently liquidated by the Indian government. The Maoists believe that the innate, structural inequality of Indian society can only be redressed by the violent overthrow of the Indian state. In its earlier avatars as the Maoist Communist Centre (MCC) in Jharkhand and Bihar, and the People's War Group (PWG) in Andhra Pradesh, the Maoists had tremendous popular support. (When the ban on them was briefly lifted in 2004, 1.5 million people attended their rally in Warangal.) But eventually their intercession in Andhra Pradesh ended badly. They left a violent legacy that turned some of their staunchest supporters into harsh critics. After a paroxysm of killing and counter-killing by the Andhra police as well as the Maoists, the PWG was decimated. Those who managed to survive fled Andhra Pradesh into neighbouring Chhattisgarh. There, deep in the heart of the forest, they joined colleagues who had already been working there for decades. Not many "outsiders" have any first-hand experience of the real nature of the Maoist movement in the forest. A recent interview with one of its top leaders, Comrade Ganapathy, in Open magazine, didn't do much to change the minds of those who view the Maoists as a party with an unforgiving, totalitarian vision, which countenances no dissent whatsoever. Comrade Ganapathy said nothing that would persuade people that, were the Maoists ever to come to power, they would be equipped to properly address the almost insane diversity of India's caste-ridden society. His casual approval of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) of Sri Lanka was enough to send a shiver down even the most sympathetic of spines, not just because of the brutal ways in which the LTTE chose to wage its war, but also because of the cataclysmic tragedy that has befallen the Tamil people of Sri Lanka, who it claimed to represent, and for whom it surely must take some responsibility. Right now in central India, the Maoists' guerrilla army is made up almost entirely of desperately poor tribal people living in conditions of such chronic hunger that it verges on famine of the kind we only associate with sub-Saharan Africa. They are people who, even after 60 years of India's so-called independence, have not had access to education, healthcare or legal redress. They are people who have been mercilessly exploited for decades, consistently cheated by small businessmen and moneylenders, the women raped as a matter of right by police and forest department personnel. Their journey back to a semblance of dignity is due in large part to the Maoist cadre who have lived and worked and fought by their side for decades. If the tribals have taken up arms, they have done so because a government which has given them nothing but violence and neglect now wants to snatch away the last thing they have - their land. Clearly, they do not believe the government when it says it only wants to "develop" their region. Clearly, they do not believe that the roads as wide and flat as aircraft runways that are being built through their forests in Dantewada by the National Mineral Development Corporation are being built for them to walk their children to school on. They believe that if they do not fight for their land, they will be annihilated. That is why they have taken up arms. Even if the ideologues of the Maoist movement are fighting to eventually overthrow the Indian state, right now even they know that their ragged, malnutritioned army, the bulk of whose soldiers have never seen a train or a bus or even a small town, are fighting only for survival. In 2008, an expert group appointed by the Planning Commission submitted a report called "Development Challenges in Extremist-Affected Areas". It said, "the Naxalite (Maoist) movement has to be recognised as a political movement with a strong base among the landless and poor peasantry and adivasis. Its emergence and growth need to be contextualised in the social conditions and experience of people who form a part of it. The huge gap between state policy and performance is a feature of these conditions. Though its professed long-term ideology is capturing state power by force, in its day-to-day manifestation, it is to be looked upon as basically a fight for social justice, equality, protection, security and local development." A very far cry from the "single-largest internal security threat". Since the Maoist rebellion is the flavour of the week, everybody, from the sleekest fat cat to the most cynical editor of the most sold-out newspaper in this country, seems to be suddenly ready to concede that it is decades of accumulated injustice that lies at the root of the problem. But instead of addressing that problem, which would mean putting the brakes on this 21st-century gold rush, they are trying to head the debate off in a completely different direction, with a noisy outburst of pious outrage about Maoist "terrorism". But they're only speaking to themselves. The people who have taken to arms are not spending all their time watching (or performing for) TV, or reading the papers, or conducting SMS polls for the Moral Science question of the day: Is Violence Good or Bad? SMS your reply to ... They're out there. They're fighting. They believe they have the right to defend their homes and their land. They believe that they deserve justice. In order to keep its better-off citizens absolutely safe from these dangerous people, the government has declared war on them. A war, which it tells us, may take between three and five years to win. Odd, isn't it, that even after the Mumbai attacks of 26/11, the government was prepared to talk with Pakistan? It's prepared to talk to China. But when it comes to waging war against the poor, it's playing hard. It's not enough that special police with totemic names like Greyhounds, Cobras and Scorpions are scouring the forests with a licence to kill. It's not enough that the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), the Border Security Force (BSF) and the notorious Naga Battalion have already wreaked havoc and committed unconscionable atrocities in remote forest villages. It's not enough that the government supports and arms the Salwa Judum, the "people's militia" that has killed and raped and burned its way through the forests of Dantewada leaving 300,000 people homeless or on the run. Now the government is going to deploy the Indo-Tibetan border police and tens of thousands of paramilitary troops. It plans to set up a brigade headquarters in Bilaspur (which will displace nine villages) and an air base in Rajnandgaon (which will displace seven). Obviously, these decisions were taken a while ago. Surveys have been done, sites chosen. Interesting. War has been in the offing for a while. And now the helicopters of the Indian air force have been given the right to fire in "self-defence", the very right that the government denies its poorest citizens. Fire at whom? How will the security forces be able to distinguish a Maoist from an ordinary person who is running terrified through the jungle? Will adivasis carrying the bows and arrows they have carried for centuries now count as Maoists too? Are non-combatant Maoist sympathisers valid targets? When I was in Dantewada, the superintendent of police showed me pictures of 19 "Maoists" that "his boys" had killed. I asked him how I was supposed to tell they were Maoists. He said, "See Ma'am, they have malaria medicines, Dettol bottles, all these things from outside." What kind of war is Operation Green Hunt going to be? Will we ever know? Not much news comes out of the forests. Lalgarh in West Bengal has been cordoned off. Those who try to go in are being beaten and arrested. And called Maoists, of course. In Dantewada, the Vanvasi Chetana Ashram, a Gandhian ashram run by Himanshu Kumar, was bulldozed in a few hours. It was the last neutral outpost before the war zone begins, a place where journalists, activists, researchers and fact-finding teams could stay while they worked in the area. Meanwhile, the Indian establishment has unleashed its most potent weapon. Almost overnight, our embedded media has substituted its steady supply of planted, unsubstantiated, hysterical stories about "Islamist terrorism" with planted, unsubstantiated, hysterical stories about "Red terrorism". In the midst of this racket, at ground zero, the cordon of silence is being inexorably tightened. The "Sri Lanka solution" could very well be on the cards. It's not for nothing that the Indian government blocked a European move in the UN asking for an international probe into war crimes committed by the government of Sri Lanka in its recent offensive against the Tamil Tigers. The first move in that direction is the concerted campaign that has been orchestrated to shoehorn the myriad forms of resistance taking place in this country into a simple George Bush binary: If you are not with us, you are with the Maoists. The deliberate exaggeration of the Maoist "threat" helps the state justify militarisation. (And surely does no harm to the Maoists. Which political party would be unhappy to be singled out for such attention?) While all the oxygen is being used up by this new doppelganger of the "war on terror", the state will use the opportunity to mop up the hundreds of other resistance movements in the sweep of its military operation, calling them all Maoist sympathisers. I use the future tense, but this process is well under way. The West Bengal government tried to do this in Nandigram and Singur but failed. Right now in Lalgarh, the Pulishi Santrash Birodhi Janasadharaner Committee or the People's Committee Against Police Atrocities - which is a people's movement that is separate from, though sympathetic to, the Maoists - is routinely referred to as an overground wing of the CPI (Maoist). Its leader, Chhatradhar Mahato, now arrested and being held without bail, is always called a "Maoist leader". We all know the story of Dr Binayak Sen, a medical doctor and a civil liberties activist, who spent two years in jail on the absolutely facile charge of being a courier for the Maoists. While the light shines brightly on Operation Green Hunt, in other parts of India, away from the theatre of war, the assault on the rights of the poor, of workers, of the landless, of those whose lands the government wishes to acquire for "public purpose", will pick up pace. Their suffering will deepen and it will be that much harder for them to get a hearing. Once the war begins, like all wars, it will develop a momentum, a logic and an economics of its own. It will become a way of life, almost impossible to reverse. The police will be expected to behave like an army, a ruthless killing machine. The paramilitary will be expected to become like the police, a corrupt, bloated administrative force. We've seen it happen in Nagaland, Manipur and Kashmir. The only difference in the "heartland" will be that it'll become obvious very quickly to the security forces that they're only a little less wretched than the people they're fighting. In time, the divide between the people and the law enforcers will become porous. Guns and ammunition will be bought and sold. In fact, it's already happening. Whether it's the security forces or the Maoists or noncombatant civilians, the poorest people will die in this rich people's war. However, if anybody believes that this war will leave them unaffected, they should think again. The resources it'll consume will cripple the economy of this country. Last week, civil liberties groups from all over the country organised a series of meetings in Delhi to discuss what could be done to turn the tide and stop the war. The absence of Dr Balagopal, one of the best-known civil rights activists of Andhra Pradesh, who died two weeks ago, closed around us like a physical pain. He was one of the bravest, wisest political thinkers of our time and left us just when we needed him most. Still, I'm sure he would have been reassured to hear speaker after speaker displaying the vision, the depth, the experience, the wisdom, the political acuity and, above all, the real humanity of the community of activists, academics, lawyers, judges and a range of other people who make up the civil liberties community in India. Their presence in the capital signalled that outside the arclights of our TV studios and beyond the drumbeat of media hysteria, even among India's middle classes, a humane heart still beats. Small wonder then that these are the people who the Union home minister recently accused of creating an "intellectual climate" that was conducive to "terrorism". If that charge was meant to frighten people, it had the opposite effect. The speakers represented a range of opinion from the liberal to the radical left. Though none of those who spoke would describe themselves as Maoist, few were opposed in principle to the idea that people have a right to defend themselves against state violence. Many were uncomfortable about Maoist violence, about the "people's courts" that delivered summary justice, about the authoritarianism that was bound to permeate an armed struggle and marginalise those who did not have arms. But even as they expressed their discomfort, they knew that people's courts only existed because India's courts are out of the reach of ordinary people and that the armed struggle that has broken out in the heartland is not the first, but the very last option of a desperate people pushed to the very brink of existence. The speakers were aware of the dangers of trying to extract a simple morality out of individual incidents of heinous violence, in a situation that had already begun to look very much like war. Everybody had graduated long ago from equating the structural violence of the state with the violence of the armed resistance. In fact, retired Justice PB Sawant went so far as to thank the Maoists for forcing the establishment of this country to pay attention to the egregious injustice of the system. Hargopal from Andhra Pradesh spoke of his experience as a civil rights activist through the years of the Maoist interlude in his state. He mentioned in passing the fact that in a few days in Gujarat in 2002, Hindu mobs led by the Bajrang Dal and the VHP had killed more people than the Maoists ever had even in their bloodiest days in Andhra Pradesh. People who had come from the war zones, from Lalgarh, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Orissa, described the police repression, the arrests, the torture, the killing, the corruption, and the fact that they sometimes seemed to take orders directly from the officials who worked for the mining companies. People described the often dubious, malign role being played by certain NGOs funded by aid agencies wholly devoted to furthering corporate prospects. Again and again they spoke of how in Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh activists as well as ordinary people - anyone who was seen to be a dissenter - were being branded Maoists and imprisoned. They said that this, more than anything else, was pushing people to take up arms and join the Maoists. They asked how a government that professed its inability to resettle even a fraction of the 50 million people who had been displaced by "development" projects was suddenly able to identify 1,40,000 hectares of prime land to give to industrialists for more than 300 Special Economic Zones, India's onshore tax havens for the rich. They asked what brand of justice the supreme court was practising when it refused to review the meaning of "public purpose" in the land acquisition act even when it knew that the government was forcibly acquiring land in the name of "public purpose" to give to private corporations. They asked why when the government says that "the writ of the state must run", it seems to only mean that police stations must be put in place. Not schools or clinics or housing, or clean water, or a fair price for forest produce, or even being left alone and free from the fear of the police - anything that would make people's lives a little easier. They asked why the "writ of the state" could never be taken to mean justice. There was a time, perhaps 10 years ago, when in meetings like these, people were still debating the model of "development" that was being thrust on them by the New Economic Policy. Now the rejection of that model is complete. It is absolute. Everyone from the Gandhians to the Maoists agree on that. The only question now is, what is the most effective way to dismantle it? An old college friend of a friend, a big noise in the corporate world, had come along for one of the meetings out of morbid curiosity about a world he knew very little about. Even though he had disguised himself in a Fabindia kurta, he couldn't help looking (and smelling) expensive. At one point, he leaned across to me and said, "Someone should tell them not to bother. They won't win this one. They have no idea what they're up against. With the kind of money that's involved here, these companies can buy ministers and media barons and policy wonks, they can run their own NGOs, their own militias, they can buy whole governments. They'll even buy the Maoists. These good people here should save their breath and find something better to do." When people are being brutalised, what "better" thing is there for them to do than to fight back? It's not as though anyone's offering them a choice, unless it's to commit suicide, like some of the farmers caught in a spiral of debt have done. (Am I the only one who gets the feeling that the Indian establishment and its representatives in the media are far more comfortable with the idea of poor people killing themselves in despair than with the idea of them fighting back?) For several years, people in Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Jharkhand and West Bengal - some of them Maoists, many not - have managed to hold off the big corporations. The question now is, how will Operation Green Hunt change the nature of their struggle? What exactly are the fighting people up against? It's true that, historically, mining companies have often won their battles against local people. Of all corporations, leaving aside the ones that make weapons, they probably have the most merciless past. They are cynical, battle-hardened campaigners and when people say, "Jaan denge par jameen nahin denge" (We'll give away our lives, but never our land), it probably bounces off them like a light drizzle on a bomb shelter. They've heard it before, in a thousand different languages, in a hundred different countries. Right now in India, many of them are still in the first class arrivals lounge, ordering cocktails, blinking slowly like lazy predators, waiting for the Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) they have signed - some as far back as 2005 - to materialise into real money. But four years in a first class lounge is enough to test the patience of even the truly tolerant: the elaborate, if increasingly empty, rituals of democratic practice: the (sometimes rigged) public hearings, the (sometimes fake) environmental impact assessments, the (often purchased) clearances from various ministries, the long drawn-out court cases. Even phony democracy is time-consuming. And time is money. So what kind of money are we talking about? In their seminal, soon-to-be-published work, Out of This Earth: East India Adivasis and the Aluminum Cartel, Samarendra Das and Felix Padel say that the financial value of the bauxite deposits of Orissa alone is $2.27 trillion (more than twice India's GDP). That was at 2004 prices. At today's prices it would be about $4 trillion. Of this, officially the government gets a royalty of less than 7%. Quite often, if the mining company is a known and recognised one, the chances are that, even though the ore is still in the mountain, it will have already been traded on the futures market. So, while for the adivasis the mountain is still a living deity, the fountainhead of life and faith, the keystone of the ecological health of the region, for the corporation, it's just a cheap storage facility. Goods in storage have to be accessible. From the corporation's point of view, the bauxite will have to come out of the mountain. Such are the pressures and the exigencies of the free market. That's just the story of the bauxite in Orissa. Expand the $4 trillion to include the value of the millions of tonnes of high-quality iron ore in Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand and the 28 other precious mineral resources, including uranium, limestone, dolomite, coal, tin, granite, marble, copper, diamond, gold, quartzite, corundum, beryl, alexandrite, silica, fluorite and garnet. Add to that the power plants, the dams, the highways, the steel and cement factories, the aluminium smelters, and all the other infrastructure projects that are part of the hundreds of MoUs (more than 90 in Jharkhand alone) that have been signed. That gives us a rough outline of the scale of the operation and the desperation of the stakeholders. The forest once known as the Dandakaranya, which stretches from West Bengal through Jharkhand, Orissa, Chhattisgarh, parts of Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra, is home to millions of India's tribal people. The media has taken to calling it the Red corridor or the Maoist corridor. It could just as accurately be called the MoUist corridor. It doesn't seem to matter at all that the fifth schedule of the constitution provides protection to adivasi people and disallows the alienation of their land. It looks as though the clause is there only to make the constitution look good - a bit of window-dressing, a slash of make-up. Scores of corporations, from relatively unknown ones to the biggest mining companies and steel manufacturers in the world, are in the fray to appropriate adivasi homelands - the Mittals, Jindals, Tata, Essar, Posco, Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton and, of course, Vedanta. There's an MoU on every mountain, river and forest glade. We're talking about social and environmental engineering on an unimaginable scale. And most of this is secret. It's not in the public domain. Somehow I don't think that the plans afoot that would destroy one of the world's most pristine forests and ecosystems, as well as the people who live in it, will be discussed at the climate change conference in Copenhagen. Our 24-hour news channels that are so busy hunting for macabre stories of Maoist violence - and making them up when they run out of the real thing - seem to have no interest at all in this side of the story. I wonder why? Perhaps it's because the development lobby to which they are so much in thrall says the mining industry will ratchet up the rate of GDP growth dramatically and provide employment to the people it displaces. This does not take into account the catastrophic costs of environmental damage. But even on its own narrow terms, it is simply untrue. Most of the money goes into the bank accounts of the mining corporations. Less than 10% comes to the public exchequer. A very tiny percentage of the displaced people get jobs, and those who do, earn slave-wages to do humiliating, backbreaking work. By caving in to this paroxysm of greed, we are bolstering other countries' economies with our ecology. When the scale of money involved is what it is, the stakeholders are not always easy to identify. Between the CEOs in their private jets and the wretched tribal special police officers in the "people's" militias - who for a couple of thousand rupees a month fight their own people, rape, kill and burn down whole villages in an effort to clear the ground for mining to begin - there is an entire universe of primary, secondary and tertiary stakeholders. These people don't have to declare their interests, but they're allowed to use their positions and good offices to further them. How will we ever know which political party, which ministers, which MPs, which politicians, which judges, which NGOs, which expert consultants, which police officers, have a direct or indirect stake in the booty? How will we know which newspapers reporting the latest Maoist "atrocity", which TV channels "reporting directly from ground zero" - or, more accurately, making it a point not to report from ground zero, or even more accurately, lying blatantly from ground zero - are stakeholders? What is the provenance of the billions of dollars (several times more than India's GDP) secretly stashed away by Indian citizens in Swiss bank accounts? Where did the $2bn spent on the last general elections come from? Where do the hundreds of millions of rupees that politicians and parties pay the media for the "high-end", "low-end" and "live" pre-election "coverage packages" that P Sainath recently wrote about come from? (The next time you see a TV anchor haranguing a numb studio guest, shouting, "Why don't the Maoists stand for elections? Why don't they come in to the mainstream?", do SMS the channel saying, "Because they can't afford your rates.") Too many questions about conflicts of interest and cronyism remain unanswered. What are we to make of the fact that the Union home minister, P Chidambaram, the chief of Operation Green Hunt, has, in his career as a corporate lawyer, represented several mining corporations? What are we to make of the fact that he was a non-executive director of Vedanta - a position from which he resigned the day he became finance minister in 2004? What are we to make of the fact that, when he became finance minister, one of the first clearances he gave for FDI was to Twinstar Holdings, a Mauritius-based company, to buy shares in Sterlite, a part of the Vedanta group? What are we to make of the fact that, when activists from Orissa filed a case against Vedanta in the supreme court, citing its violations of government guidelines and pointing out that the Norwegian Pension Fund had withdrawn its investment from the company alleging gross environmental damage and human rights violations committed by the company, Justice Kapadia suggested that Vedanta be substituted with Sterlite, a sister company of the same group? He then blithely announced in an open court that he, too, had shares in Sterlite. He gave forest clearance to Sterlite to go ahead with the mining, despite the fact that the supreme court's own expert committee had explicitly said that permission should be denied and that mining would ruin the forests, water sources, environment and the lives and livelihoods of the thousands of tribals living there. Justice Kapadia gave this clearance without rebutting the report of the supreme court's own committee. What are we to make of the fact that the Salwa Judum, the brutal ground-clearing operation disguised as a "spontaneous" people's militia in Dantewada, was formally inaugurated in 2005, just days after the MoU with the Tatas was signed? And that the Jungle Warfare Training School in Bastar was set up just around then? What are we to make of the fact that two weeks ago, on 12 October, the mandatory public hearing for Tata Steel's steel project in Lohandiguda, Dantewada, was held in a small hall inside the collectorate, cordoned off with massive security, with an audience of 50 tribal people brought in from two Bastar villages in a convoy of government jeeps? (The public hearing was declared a success and the district collector congratulated the people of Bastar for their co-operation.) What are we to make of the fact that just around the time the prime minister began to call the Maoists the "single largest internal security threat" (which was a signal that the government was getting ready to go after them), the share prices of many of the mining companies in the region skyrocketed? The mining companies desperately need this "war". They will be the beneficiaries if the impact of the violence drives out the people who have so far managed to resist the attempts that have been made to evict them. Whether this will indeed be the outcome, or whether it'll simply swell the ranks of the Maoists remains to be seen. Reversing this argument, Dr Ashok Mitra, former finance minister of West Bengal, in an article called "The Phantom Enemy", argues that the "grisly serial murders" that the Maoists are committing are a classic tactic, learned from guerrilla warfare textbooks. He suggests that they have built and trained a guerrilla army that is now ready to take on the Indian state, and that the Maoist "rampage" is a deliberate attempt on their part to invite the wrath of a blundering, angry Indian state which the Maoists hope will commit acts of cruelty that will enrage the adivasis. That rage, Dr Mitra says, is what the Maoists hope can be harvested and transformed into an insurrection. This, of course, is the charge of "adventurism" that several currents of the left have always levelled at the Maoists. It suggests that Maoist ideologues are not above inviting destruction on the very people they claim to represent in order to bring about a revolution that will bring them to power. Ashok Mitra is an old Communist who had a ringside seat during the Naxalite uprising of the 60s and 70s in West Bengal. His views cannot be summarily dismissed. But it's worth keeping in mind that the adivasi people have a long and courageous history of resistance that predates the birth of Maoism. To look upon them as brainless puppets being manipulated by a few middle-class Maoist ideologues is to do them a disservice. Presumably Dr Mitra is talking about the situation in Lalgarh where, up to now, there has been no talk of mineral wealth. (Lest we forget - the current uprising in Lalgarh was sparked off over the chief minister's visit to inaugurate a Jindal Steel factory. And where there's a steel factory, can the iron ore be very far away?) The people's anger has to do with their desperate poverty, and the decades of suffering at the hands of the police and the Harmads, the armed militia of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) that has ruled West Bengal for more than 30 years. Even if, for argument's sake, we don't ask what tens of thousands of police and paramilitary troops are doing in Lalgarh, and we accept the theory of Maoist "adventurism", it would still be only a very small part of the picture. The real problem is that the flagship of India's miraculous "growth" story has run aground. It came at a huge social and environmental cost. And now, as the rivers dry up and forests disappear, as the water table recedes and as people realise what is being done to them, the chickens are coming home to roost. All over the country, there's unrest, there are protests by people refusing to give up their land and their access to resources, refusing to believe false promises any more. Suddenly, it's beginning to look as though the 10% growth rate and democracy are mutually incompatible. To get the bauxite out of the flat-topped hills, to get iron ore out from under the forest floor, to get 85% of India's people off their land and into the cities (which is what Chidambaram says he'd like to see), India has to become a police state. The government has to militarise. To justify that militarisation, it needs an enemy. The Maoists are that enemy. They are to corporate fundamentalists what the Muslims are to Hindu fundamentalists. (Is there a fraternity of fundamentalists? Is that why the RSS has expressed open admiration for Chidambaram?) It would be a grave mistake to imagine that the paramilitary troops, the Rajnandgaon air base, the Bilaspur brigade headquarters, the unlawful activities act, the Chhattisgarh special public security act and Operation Green Hunt are all being put in place just to flush out a few thousand Maoists from the forests. In all the talk of Operation Green Hunt, whether or not Chidambaram goes ahead and "presses the button", I detect the kernel of a coming state of emergency. (Here's a maths question: If it takes 600,000 soldiers to hold down the tiny valley of Kashmir, how many will it take to contain the mounting rage of hundreds of millions of people?) Instead of narco-analysing Kobad Ghandy, the recently arrested Maoist leader, it might be a better idea to talk to him. In the meanwhile, will someone who's going to the climate change conference in Copenhagen later this year please ask the only question worth asking: Can we leave the bauxite in the mountain? ? Guardian News and Media Limited 2009 From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Mon Nov 2 01:35:01 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 17:35:01 +0900 Subject: [A-List] Monetary Reform ... Message-ID: <20091102173501.74f71ec8.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> How a National Monetary System Should Work by Richard C Cook Global Research (May 11 2007) The author has received an overwhelming response to his recent Global Research report entitled, "An Emergency Program of Monetary Reform for the United States". The introduction to that report stated that, "the US financial system headed by the Federal Reserve System has failed, and ? only an emergency program of monetary reform can address conditions which may be leading to a catastrophe like the Great Depression or worse". This new report on "Monetary Reform and How a National Monetary System Should Work" continues the dialogue by outlining the principles and mechanisms available to help guide the creation of a monetary system for any nation that wishes to enjoy economic democracy with prosperity. This would be in contrast to the collapsing debt-based monetary system overseen by the Federal Reserve and the other central banks of the world, coordinated at the top by such institutions as the International Monetary Fund, the European Central Bank, and the Bank of International Settlements. Note that all the banks of the Western world are ultimately private institutions owned by the world's super-rich. The international banking structure is operated by and on behalf of the world's monetary elite primarily for their own profit. Just below the banking system are the giant corporations of the global economy which derive capital from and funnel profits into the financiers' empire. Bringing up the rear are the populations and debt-serfs of the no-longer-sovereign nation states, including those of the United States, whose participation in the system as consumers is essential, but whose jobs continue to disappear as manufacturing is increasingly automated. The author had realized as early as 1970 that the central problem with the world's economy lay on the side of distribution, not production. He came to Washington, DC, that year and spent most of the next thirty-six years working within sight of the Washington Monument, learning how things really work, and pondering the methods that might be more in concord with such founding documents of American democracy as the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. Twenty-one of these years were with the US Treasury Department. Now, for the first time, this report builds on the findings of many of the world's monetary reformers past and present by offering a complete prescription for a new and better world. This prescription is radically different from most progressive reform agendas that address only symptoms of the underlying systemic failures. Where Money Comes From When setting out to study monetary principles, we must realize how little we know of the real facts of monetary history. Economics is an extremely limited discipline rife with untested assumptions and unchallengeable dogmas. Its most pernicious doctrine is the assertion that there is something called "the market", where there is an "invisible hand" that makes everything work out the way it is supposed to. Actually, an economy functions according to the principles according to which it is designed and regulated. If it is designed to funnel wealth into the hands of the monetary controllers, then that is what the "market" and the "invisible hand" will do. If it is designed to foster "the general welfare", as it should according to the preamble to the US Constitution, then the "market" and the "invisible hand" will tend in that direction. Unfortunately, we march today to the tune of the monetary elite, so they are the ones who reap the profits and the benefits. They are the ones on whom the "invisible hand" lavishes the wealth of the world. It is done through the process of bank-created credit. While during the nineteenth century other forms of money circulated, such as large quantities of coinage, silver certificates, and government-issued greenbacks, almost all the money that exists today originates through a loan by a financial institution to an individual or a business. When a loan is made it is issued as a liability on the bank's ledger. When it is repaid, the liability is canceled. With today's computer systems, all transactions are digitized, of course. The bank keeps the interest on the loan as its combined administrative fee and profit. The money that is lent had no prior existence. Once money is created as credit, it takes many forms according to how the loan recipient spends it. Some credit is used by businesses or individuals as investment in order to generate profits over and above the amount they must repay to the bank with interest. If the money is used simply for consumer purchases, the individual consumer must pay back the loan through future earnings. In those cases where the borrower defaults on the loan or goes bankrupt, the money simply remains in circulation however it was spent. Unfortunately, large amounts of credit are used mainly for speculation, not for any benefit to the producing economy. This includes securities bought on margin and borrowing by hedge funds where the fund may make a profit even if the value of its investments goes down. Bank-created credit in this case is little more than chips in a casino. Other borrowing takes place by equity funds and other types of investors for leveraged mergers or buyouts of entire companies, where the predators wreck a company's infrastructure by reducing costs and selling its assets, then pay back their bank loans before unloading the business on someone else. The most important thing to realize about the banking system is that the money which enters into circulation as purchasing power must eventually be returned in the repayment of loans. This is why the Federal Reserve's monetary measures - M1, M2, and M3 - are meaningless, because so much of it has liens against it. We are taught that paying it back is the way things should be - obviously, if we borrow something, we should pay back what we owe. But the peculiar thing is that because the borrowed money pays for labor, commodities, rent, et cetera, it becomes part of the prices that are eventually charged for goods and services. However, when the money goes back to the bank to cancel a loan, that purchasing power disappears. Neither the banks nor economists ever make note of the fact that this process creates a chronic shortage of purchasing power which must be filled by more loans and more bank profits. The economy is thus a treadmill that borrowers must constantly trudge along in order to have enough money for survival. So a system which is seemingly grounded in the simple adage that if you borrow you should repay is all wrong. The reason it is all wrong is that in most cases, individual consumers should never have to borrow in the first place. And we never ask ourselves why, with the abundance that is possible from modern science and technology, should people have to borrow money at interest for the necessities of life - a house, a car, household expenses, an education, et cetera. Thus we realize that the financial system works against what should be the real purpose of money, which is to serve as a ticket for the purchase by people of articles they need to survive or otherwise desire to utilize once the demand for survival has been met. People have needs and desires. The economy is fully capable of producing all the goods and services needed to fulfill those needs and desires. But the system is broken, because, despite the abundance of credit available for financial speculation, there is not sufficient money available at the consumer level to mediate between prices and consumption, even when most people have a job. We still must borrow, and that is wrong. There should be a better way for society to generate the money for what people need. So what is really going on here? One of the things that is going on is that money is being mis-defined as a commodity. People who believe money is a commodity think it has value in and of itself. But one of the hardest things to grasp about money is that not even gold or silver money, or paper money supposedly backed by gold or silver, has or could have intrinsic value. Actually, money is anything that a willing buyer and a willing seller agree to exchange for something else. Money could be and has been such things as gold, silver, paper, wampum, cows, stones, shells, sticks with notches, or, today, electronic blips. What may appear to give gold or silver value is its scarcity and durability. But unless there are goods and services available and for sale, gold and silver are totally useless. You can't eat gold or silver, live in them, or wear them. In and of themselves they have no value. What gives any money value is the producing economy and nothing else. So by this definition, bank-created credit, while it may generate money which a willing buyer and seller agree to exchange, is money with strings attached, in that at some point, it must travel back to the bank in cancellation of a debt. Thus a buyer who offers it to a seller is, in reality, deceiving himself about his actual ability to pay. He is not a free man. Always lurking in the back of his mind is that with every article he has purchased he has shackled himself ever more firmly to future indentured servitude. The seller, on the other hand, may breathe a little more freely having just acquired some of the monetary medium necessary to repay his own debts. And so it goes, ad infinitum. Even if the money were backed by gold and silver, the system would work in exactly the same way. So by what right do the bankers bind the economy in such a straightjacket of debt? Again, the underlying logic is that money is a commodity. A group of men have money. It is their money, we believe, rightfully earned. Therefore, because these individuals have money, they have a further right to lend it to others. But under existing laws, the banking system then makes the leap of assuming that because they have money which can be lent, they have a right to lend much more than they actually possess. Somehow they have become fit practitioners of the fractional reserve banking system whereby, as described above, they can lend simply by creating debits in their computers, based on some ratio between their capital stock and their lending ceiling. But if bankers can do this, why can't you or I? If I have $1,000, why can't I then lend $10,000 and collect the corresponding interest? The answer is that a bank has a government charter and supposedly can guarantee through various safeguards that the people to whom it lends can repay. But even this isn't required of a bank any more if it can package its loans and sell them to some other business entity, such as an investment company. But the fact is that banks can only be created by people who are already rich, can put up some initial capital, build a functioning business, and obtain the government charter mentioned above. Once they do this, they are the masters of the world. Also note that under today's highly unstable financial conditions, it is not only banks which create credit through lending. Since the deregulation of the 1980s, Wall Street brokerage firms greatly expanded the system whereby speculative loans are floated for purchase of securities. This has resulted in a current ratio of debt to equity of 22:1 in the US securities markets, where debt far outweighs value. What is Credit? The word "credit" is one of the most widely-used and important in the English language. Dictionary.com lists twenty-one definitions. All these definitions have some connotation of the concept of "value" and the exchange of that value across the dimensions of time and space between one person and another. Obviously, the ideas of "credit" and "money" are closely related. The idea of credit when viewed from a macroeconomic perspective refers to the ability of an economy to produce goods and services of value to the members of that community. It refers to the potential value of that economy to support life. What it does not and cannot refer to is money in and of itself, because money, as we have seen, has no intrinsic value. Without the credit-potential of a producing economy, money has no meaning. On the other hand, money can be a convenient yardstick to measure credit, as when we state that the 2006 GDP of the United States was $12.98 trillion. But actually, the "real" credit of the US economy was much higher, because our economy is not running at anywhere near its full capacity. The automobile industry, for instance, is running at about fifty percent of its physical potential. So the real credit of the US is actually higher than the GDP. "Credit" in an economic sense confers a legal right to draw on the goods and services that make up the potential GDP of the nation. It is the way the society agrees to hand out the monetary tickets by which the GDP may be acquired. Obviously, the issuance of either too many or too few tickets will cause problems. The issuance of too few tickets will result in underproduction, poverty, even death. The issuance of too many tickets will result in inflation. When the Federal Reserve creates, then deflates, asset bubbles, like the currently collapsing housing bubble, these effects alternate, resulting in the kind of ongoing economic chaos we have seen for decades. It can readily be seen that credit is a cultural phenomenon. It is the sum total of the entire productive capacity of the nation. It has grown from the past, exists in the present, and can be projected into the future. It is the result of the work of untold millions of people, dead and gone, alive today, and yet unborn. Many of its results may be proprietary, in terms of businesses, property, and patents owned, et cetera, but every person who has ever lived, lives today, or who will live in the future is a participant in that culture. Therefore, credit can and should be viewed as a communal endowment, a public phenomenon, a part of what is called "the commons", even with the normal and natural fact of the existence of private property. So the use of credit and its distribution should be treated as a public utility, like water or electricity. Everyone should have a right to its use, according to some rational, lawful, and humane criteria of need or contribution to creating it. As with the use of other utilities, it is the responsibility of the community to see that credit is used wisely and for positive and constructive purposes. But no one should be denied it altogether, because it is a necessity of life. Money, as a measure of credit, should therefore be available to the entire community. The government, as the representative of the community, has the responsibility of overseeing, coordinating, and regulating its availability, keeping in mind the fairest and most socially beneficial ways for it to be utilized. Monetary reformers would argue that extensive availability of credit to the working population should be part of the "general welfare" guaranteed by the preamble to the US Constitution. This should not be confused with the virtually unlimited availability of credit to speculators and stock predators as is presently the case with our Wall Street-based economy. But these principles are poorly recognized. Money, and therefore credit, is viewed as private property, even though most of it, as stated previously, is made by banks "out of thin air". It is no exaggeration to say that the existing system is one whereby the financial elite has confiscated and privatized the most important public resource of all, more important than water, land, electric power, et cetera. This has resulted in much of the world's wars, poverty, and crime. Let us again examine the ways money enters into the economic system, this time looking at the total credit picture of the US economy. We said that the 2006 GDP was $12.98 trillion. This takes into account a trade deficit of $726 billion. The question is, where did the credit come from to purchase the GDP, because, by definition, it all had to be paid for in prices. According to official data, the available national income in 2006 was $10.23 trillion, including wages, salaries, interest, dividends, personal business earnings, and capital gains. Of this amount, approximately one-third was taken through taxes by government at the federal, state, and local levels. Churning through the economy was borrowing of all kinds - for consumption, commerce, investment, speculation, new government debt, and to finance business transactions. In fact it was the net increase in debt - $3.77 trillion - that paid for the difference between GDP and national income. Debt also financed much of the trade deficit by our borrowing to purchase what was imported from abroad. The need to borrow has been greatly increased by the decline of the US manufacturing sector, where well-paying jobs that contributed to the national income have disappeared or been outsourced overseas. The ratio of debt to national income has reached historic proportions - 460 percent of the national income today versus 186 percent in 1957. Orthodox economics, including the manipulation of interest rates by the Federal Reserve, has no tools for resolving this crisis. The main reason is that neither economists nor politicians understand it, though bankers certainly do. Orthodox economics is helpless because people do not understand how the gap between production and purchasing power relates to the way the microeconomics of the corporation translates into the macroeconomics of nations. We observed earlier in this report that prices of articles within the economy include the loans that are taken out during the production process. But these loans are canceled as bank liabilities when they are repaid. Therefore the purchasing power of the economy always lags behind prices. But this is not the only area where prices include factors that are not paid out in wages, salaries, dividends, or other sources of individual or business income. Other factors include retained earnings, insurance, certain maintenance and overhead costs, plus the cumulative effect of corporations buying from each other with payments which never exit the production system. As a result, only somewhere between a third and a half of all costs are ever distributed to consumers. This analysis has been documented at length by the Social Credit movement and has been well-known to monetary reformers for decades. This gap is what drives nations to seek overseas markets for their products as the US did so strenuously during the post-World War Two period. When the US balance of payments later fell into negative territory, we tried to compensate by the policy of "dollar hegemony", whereby we foisted our currency on the rest of the world as the principal means of oil trading, maintenance of currency reserves, and paying for our trade deficit. But as the US internal and external debt grows and our fiscal and trade deficits deepen, a total systemic breakdown is starting to take place. The main recent prop of the US economy, the housing bubble, is deflating. And frantically, we are trying to escape by a radical devaluation of the dollar combined with an aggressive military policy based essentially on confiscating the resources of other nations such as Iraq. This, combined with action to prop up our fiscal deficit by importing dollars spent abroad on manufactured products we no longer make ourselves, has created a house of cards that must soon come down. All that is lacking is a major shock, such as a widening war in the Middle East or inability by foreign creditors to continue to accept devalued dollars. Neither devaluation nor aggression will solve the problem which derives from the failure of debt financing to create real purchasing power and thereby resolve the chaos through which a system built for the profits of the financiers can never produce enough unencumbered credit to maintain our desired level of production and the standard of living that goes with it. The Prescription As with anyone facing bankruptcy, it is time for those who wish to understand the current US economic crisis to take a deep breath, step back, and gather themselves in order to correctly assess the situation. Obviously the solution is not to risk blowing up the world by continuing to resolve our domestic economic problems through overseas conquests. This is what the Western nations have been trying to do for centuries, and it appears that the rest of the world may finally have had enough. This is especially the case today when the main factor that is floating the US economy is the huge US trade imbalance where foreign nations must use the dollars they take in to their ultimate disadvantage by financing a federal budget deficit that is measured in dollars whose value is dropping. Nor does the solution lie on the production side of the equation. The US and other developed economies are capable of producing everything their populations need, even accompanied by a reasonable amount of foreign trade, especially if we can return our industry to the level of productivity we enjoyed prior to the Federal Reserve-induced recession of 1979 to 1983 which gave us today's anemic "service economy". Rather the solution lies with the federal government taking back its constitutionally-authorized control of the credit of the nation from the financiers and managing it as previously stated - as a public utility. There is no need to eliminate capitalism, change the basis of property ownership, abolish corporations, et cetera, because the organization and administration of the production process is essentially irrelevant to the real problem. Once again, the producing economy is not the problem. It has performed with tremendous effectiveness in creating the goods and services people need and want. It would be the basis for real economic democracy if its bounty could be made available and distributed in accordance with democratic principles. It is essential to realize that the central government of a sovereign nation has the right, the ability, and the responsibility to introduce ALL new credit into existence. This is totally different from having the central bank "print money" by relaxing lending policies, resulting in an infusion of cheap loans which must still be repaid. Sovereign creation of credit is not based on debt. It is and should be based on direct spending of money into circulation by the government itself. Obviously the government should do this in a way that promotes the best interests of the members of society while respecting the varying degrees of contribution by those of different levels of skill and achievement. It is quite possible to enact such a program with due regard to all established conventions of private property and the private ownership and control of existing wealth. To those who are concerned that the concept of publicly-controlled credit postulates a monetary supply that can be turned on and off like tap water, this is a misconception. There is indeed a cornucopia of supply on the earth, but it is not of money. If is of what human beings are capable of producing with the skill of their hands and their heads and the knowledge of science and technology. Money is only a ticket to transfer this abundance from producer to consumer, but it must be plentiful enough to allow the transfer of all that is reasonably desired, it should not be misused for financial speculation, and it is the job of government to bring that money to the place of the economic activity where it is needed. The key point is that such money should not be encumbered by debt to a financial institution, including the banks of the Federal Reserve System. This should be done according the following principles: The decisions of what goods and services should be produced should represent a reasonable mix of what is needed and desired by consumers with what is required for the public good by way of regulation and infrastructure. Decisions should be made by a combination of market forces, business governance, and oversight by representative government. In other words, production should be conducted as we imagine it is done at present, though in reality neither the market, business, nor representative government can function properly and responsibly today because they are under so much pressure from a disastrously dysfunctional monetary system. Purchasing power should be provided to all individuals whether they work or not. This is increasingly important as fewer workers are needed due to automation to produce an increasing amount of goods. There is no way to avoid dislocation of workers due to change in an advanced economy, but it is essentially that people be protected from such change even if they decide to opt out of working for a living at all. There are many productive things people can do without having to draw an income from a paying job. The money provided to people regardless of whether they work would constitute the National Dividend envisioned by a Social Credit system. One way to manage such a system would be to require everyone to work until the age of forty, when optional retirement would be offered. The idea of one nation being the world's policeman with military bases everywhere and a right to conquer other nations at will and take their resources must be abandoned once and for all. A system where the nations of the world are financially independent and self-sustaining as described in this report would lead to the possibility of international stability and trade among nations and regions of the world acting as equals. The history of the last century proves that the drive to war is largely fueled by the need for financial dominance as an offset to the failure to generate sufficient internal purchasing power through democratic management of credit. This syndrome would be eliminated by the monetary reforms described herein. These are the principles - a functioning economy that combines responsible free enterprise with government regulation and infrastructure; democratic distribution of a National Dividend which supplements earned income; and an international system of economic relationships among sovereign nations acting as equals. None of these principles is currently being met, and no one in a leadership position has a plan to take us there, either now or when the crisis strikes. The first measure in bringing about change, taking the US as an example, would be for the federal government to create a Monetary Control Board as envisioned by model legislation proposed by the American Monetary Institute. This board would oversee the entire process of assuring that the money supply is sufficient to express the real credit demands of the nation in paying for the GDP. This would be followed by a combination of the following steps: We should spend sufficient credit into existence to supply the basic operating expenses of government at all levels without recourse to either taxes or borrowing. In the past, this has been done by the colonial American legislatures, the Continental Congress at the time of the Revolutionary War, and the federal government during the Civil War. Probably two-thirds of existing federal government expenditures could be eliminated, because much of it is to compensate for a failed monetary system, including much of the military machine. Further, at least ninety percent of all taxes could be eliminated under such a program. The only taxes that would be retained would be those in the form of user fees for infrastructure operations and maintenance or those levied as a control mechanism to prevent inflation. Capital expenses for infrastructure construction at the federal, state, and local levels could be financed through a self-capitalized national infrastructure bank. Government expenditures would continue to require legislative approval under our republican form of government which would be enhanced, not threatened, by monetary reform. The remainder of the total societal gap between production and purchasing power would be filled by a non-taxable National Dividend of two types. One would be a cash stipend paid to all citizens which would also serve the purpose of eliminating poverty by providing everyone with a basic income guarantee. The remainder of the National Dividend would consist of an overall pricing subsidy, whereby a designated proportion of all purchases, including home building expenses, would be rebated to consumers. The total National Dividend per person would probably exceed $12,000 per year under today's economic conditions. It would be a calculated value charged against a government ledger but would be off-budget, with no need to finance it with taxation or borrowing. A portion of the National Dividend would be made available to all citizens reaching the age of eighteen, who would receive a non-taxable lump-sum of $60,000 for higher education, trade school, or business investment. Bank financing would be much more limited than at present. Private sector corporate investment would be funded entirely out of retained earnings and capital markets without recourse to bank lending. Bank lending for stock speculation would be abolished as would leveraged buyouts. Bank lending would be accomplished without fractional reserve methods by requiring banks to supplement their capital and deposits with credit borrowed at very low rates from the federal government as publicly-created credit. While the banks would be allowed to add administrative costs and a reasonable business profit for lending used to finance commerce, mortgages, and small business start-up, government guarantees and subsidies should result in net interest rates to borrowers no greater than one percent. International trade would be accommodated through a regulated system of exchange rates based on real purchasing values of respective national currencies. Results This program would not create a Utopia or install a Big Brother to watch over us. It would not relieve mankind of the need to work, study, save, take care of our environment, make wise decisions, use opportunities intelligently, participate in representative government, care for those less fortunate, provide for our posterity, practice self-restraint, obey moral strictures, worship our creator, or love our neighbor as ourselves. What this program would do would be to allow the nation's monetary system to reach the same level of maturity, functionality, and access presently found, at least potentially, in the physical economy which utilizes science and technology so effectively in producing abundant goods and services. This means that the program would free mankind from the control of the monetary elite which has unjustly usurped the fruits of the labor of everyone else. The amount of money involved in this control over time is immense. In his report on "An Emergency Program of Monetary Reform of the United States", the author calculated that the National Dividend for 2006 should have resulted in an average stipend paid to each US citizen of $12,600. For a person aged sixty, this would work out to $756,000 over a lifetime in current dollars. This figure of $756,000 represents the amount of money an individual has had to borrow from financial institutions to make up what he should have received as his share of a National Dividend if Congress had not ceded the public prerogatives of credit-creation that exist in the Constitution to private financiers. Extrapolated for the entire US population, the amount of unnecessary borrowing probably has exceeded $100 trillion since World War Two. We can gain confidence that this figure is in the ball-park by realizing that total societal debt in the US today has been reliably estimated at over $48 trillion. Thus it is easy to see that in time, the program of monetary reform described in this report could eliminate poverty and the main causes of war, reduce the size of government, and give individuals a chance to prosper. It would replace the current system of debt-serfdom caused by monetary strangulation at the consumer level with true economic democracy. Economic democracy may be defined as free access to the bounty of God's earth, according to one's need, character, ability, and work. The purpose of this access is for individuals to have the liberty to work out responsibly their own occupation, lifestyle, identity, and destiny without these being dictated by external authorities or the threat of economic ruin. These are the freedoms that are inherent in the ideals that created America and, though compromised so much, have been America's gift to the rest of the world. The reader might ask why, if these reforms could so readily be made, weren't they thought of and implemented before? The answer is that these reforms have been known and promoted by many people in the past, both known and unknown, including such leaders in America as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, Herbert Hoover, Franklin D Roosevelt, John F Kennedy, and many others. But working against such enlightened leaders has been an international financier conspiracy with immense political power. The modern era of financier control in the US started with the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. But during the 1920s, the US was still outstripping the rest of the world with rapid economic growth. This was due to a favorable financial position with respect to Europe after World War One, the wide availability of credit in the domestic economy, rapid industrial progress, and the predilection of American industrialists to pay their workers generous wages. Note that President Herbert Hoover is on this list of enlightened leaders. It is not generally known that Hoover, elected in 1928, had become familiar with the Social Credit system which originated in Great Britain with Major C H Douglas, who published the seminal work, Economic Democracy, in 1918. Douglas, with intimate knowledge of the events of the time, later related in his book Warning Democracy (1931) that in order to counter Hoover's enlightened economic ideas, the financiers decided to wreck the US economy, starting with the stock market crash of 1929. There is an official version of history, then there is the way things really happened. Thus Hoover is popularly, but mistakenly, portrayed as a failed president. But Hoover, an engineer and one of the most capable presidents in US history, identified the Federal Reserve, acting on its own, as having brought on the Great Depression. He responded by creating the Reconstruction Finance Corporation to revitalize the economy with a fresh infusion of credit, but, having been blamed for the crash, was voted out of office in favor of FDR in 1932. The RFC remained and was instrumental in rebuilding the economy over the next two decades. Roosevelt himself understood that the federal government had to maintain a decisive degree of control over credit, though he was undermined by people in his own administration favorable to the financiers. So he never completed a program of real monetary reform. During the 1930s, Douglas was forecasting another world war due to monetary causes, but he was told during his visits to the US that the financiers would never allow Social Credit to be implemented. According to monetary reform folklore, the financial elite looked around for an economist to combat Douglas's ideas and settled on John Maynard Keynes. The Keynesian system tried to deal with the monetary problem through massive government deficits, high taxes, and rapid economic growth. This system worked through the World War Two years and beyond but ran out of steam after the 1963 assassination of JFK and the loss by the US of its trade advantages and fiscal solvency during and after the Vietnam War. The financiers reasserted control throughout the 1970s, leading to the devastating Federal Reserve-induced recession of 1979 to 1983 and the deregulation of the financial industry during the Reagan years of 1981 to 1989. That left matters where they stand today. Since the 1980s, every US economic expansion has been nothing more than a Federal Reserve-created asset inflation. The latest has been the now collapsing housing bubble, the largest bubble in history. The financiers are trying to bring about an orderly decline - the so-called "soft landing" - though at the likely cost of the wealth, health, jobs, homes, and perhaps even some of the lives of tens of millions of demoralized people. Will we let them get away with it? Obviously, the government has bail-outs on its mind, though now, with housing gone, there may be nothing left for the financiers to inflate for the next round of chaos. Still, they are trying. Analysts are now calling attention to a new merger and acquisition bubble and a huge securities lending boom that has driven the stock market to historic levels even as consumer purchasing power in the US crumbles. If this bubbles bursts, much of the middle class wealth that remained after the 1987 stock market crash, the 2000 to 2002 bursting of the dot.com bubble, and the ongoing decline of the housing market will be gone for good. Maybe the party is finally over. Maybe at the end of their 300-year reign, starting roughly with the creation of the Bank of England in 1694, the financiers have finally succeeded in doing enough damage to the world economy that the rest of us are willing to take action. Or maybe there will be a sufficient distraction by more war in the Middle East and elsewhere. Maybe peak oil or global warming will intervene with destruction on too large a scale to ignore. Or maybe we'll just limp along into the sunset. Only time will tell. But however the change may happen, it remains the author's conviction that, one way or the other, a fair and intelligent monetary system will someday exist on the planet earth. _____ Richard C Cook is the author of We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform (2009) and Challenger Revealed: An Insider's Account of How the Reagan Administration Caused the Greatest Tragedy of the Space Age (2007). He is a Washington, DC-based writer and consultant who, in addition to NASA, taught history and worked in the US Civil Service Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, the Carter White House and spent 21 years with the US Treasury Department. His website is at www.richardccook.com. Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article. To become a Member of Global Research: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=section§ionName=membership The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor at yahoo.com http://www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner. For media inquiries: crgeditor at yahoo.com (c) Copyright Richard C Cook, Global Research, 2007 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5615 http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Mon Nov 2 02:05:15 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 09:05:15 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Bringing Chiquita Brands to Justice Message-ID: <45A7E8F8710249D19D2668471D689495@home9sg93n9r5y> Bringing Chiquita Brands to Justice http://zzs-blg.blogspot.com/ The history of Latin America, particularly its domination by the US, is inseparable from the machinations of the United Fruit Company. The interventions of the UFC are the legends of anti-imperialists in the South, especially its most esteemed writers and intellectuals. No corporate entity has demonstrated a more callous disregard for the independence of Central and South American countries, using bribes, extortion, subsidies, and coup-mongering to influence domestic politics to its advantage. In its latest incarnation as Chiquita Brands International, the company was caught red-handed funding Colombian terrorists, the notorious Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia, a collection of right-wing paramilitaries responsible for the assassination and disappearance of tens of thousands of Colombians perceived as in opposition to the big landowners and corporations. From the umbrella organization?s inception in 1997, Chiquita funded the paramilitaries through its Colombian subsidiary, Banadex, S.A. In 2007, a US District Court confirmed this connection and payments to AUC totaling $1.7 million through 2004. Testimony showed that one shipment alone ? off-loaded from a Chiquita ship ? put 3000 assault rifles and ammunition into the hands of the terrorists. The matter was forced to the attention of US courts because of the September 2001 designation by the US government of AUC as a terrorist organization, a fact too obvious for even the Bush administration to deny. Court proceedings indicate that Chiquita executives were aware of the collaboration with the terrorists at least by 2002. Moreover, despite a Justice Department finding and the advise of outside counsel, the firm continued to fund AUC from April 24, 2003 until February 4, 2004. In order to avoid disclosure and face personal incrimination, the executives agreed to a $25 million settlement of fines to the US Justice Department. Interestingly, the current Attorney General, Eric Holder, legally represented Chiquita Brands before the US District Court, a dubious credential for his appointment as the top judicial officer in the US. As matters were left after the settlement, Chiquita was, of course, instructed to desist in its support for the terrorists. But, according to a Colombian newspaper account (El Espectador, September 5, 2009), the Columbian Attorney General?s office has disclosed evidence that Chiquita has, through closely allied companies, continued to finance terrorist organizations in Colombia from 2004 through 2007. The Colombian prosecutor?s office contends that Chiquita Brand engaged two cover firms, Invesmar SA (through Colombian subsidiary, Banacol SA) and Olinsa, to continue the engagement with AUC. Testimony has been taken from one judicially protected terrorist leader that Banacol SA paid around 3 billion Colombian Pesos to his group. He affirmed that he served as a liaison with Chiquita Brands and that they agreed to an arrangement of three cents on the dollar for the paramilitaries from every box of bananas produced. An accounting examination by the Attorney General?s Office of the Banacol SA confirmed a voluntary diversion of funds to the terrorist groupings. Olinsa was set up in 2005 with an extremely generous loan from Chiquita Brands at interest rates well below those prevailing in Colombia. Nearly all of its business is conducted with Chiquita Brands. Ninety-four per cent of Olinsa?s shares are held by an ex-employee of Chiquita Brands, according to the accounting report of the Attorney General?s office. These two firms, strongly suspected of continuing support for AUC, are demonstrably linked to Chiquita Brands International (other related firms are also under investigation). As the investigation continues, all agree that testimony by US Chiquita executives would be decisive in concluding the matter. Unfortunately, this is hindered by the confidentiality agreement secured with the settlement of the $25 million fine. It would be most helpful if the US Attorney General, Eric Holder, would re-open the case in the US in light of the findings of the Colombian Attorney General. Surely, the evidence suggesting the continued aid by Chiquita Brands to AUC warrants cooperation on the part of the US authorities. If the support continued after the 2007 settlement, it constitutes both contempt for US law and flagrantly criminal activity on the part of the corporation. For Attorney General Holder, cooperating with the Colombian investigation is not only a legal duty, but a test of his commitment to equal justice given his former role as counsel for Chiquita Brands. Any reluctance to follow the leads opened by Colombian authorities will surely risk the taint of prejudice in favor of his former client. Every effort should be made to bring the Chiquita investigation to the attention of elected officials and the Justice Department. Zoltan Zigedy zoltanzigedy at gmail.com _______________________________________________ Lasolidarity mailing list Post: Lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasolidarity From nscchicago at igc.org Sun Nov 1 09:13:47 2009 From: nscchicago at igc.org (NSC WORKERS COOP) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 10:13:47 -0600 Subject: [A-List] GUATEMALA HONDURAS NICARAGUA HUGO CHAVEZ Message-ID: Tom Baker here, friends, with news and reports from - Guatemala, Dia de la Raza and the people shut down the country They are outraged by fat capital mining operations - Honduras and the "Acuerdo" Comment from Pastors for Peace Oligarchy and US ignore the people - Nicarague Hotline reports on the lifting of term limits for elected officials and the Great Sea Turtles laid their eggs - Interconnect News Alert posts recent interview with Hugo Chavez about Obama, bases in Colombia, and so on. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 1639 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091101/a55031a2/attachment.txt -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/bmp Size: 1036854 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091101/a55031a2/attachment-0001.bin -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Panama Vicente Alba Subject: Fw: Our response to the Honduras "agreement": This is not a victory; it's a US State Department manipulation! Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 22:12:58 -0700 (PDT) Size: 29630 Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091101/a55031a2/attachment-0004.eml -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Peter and Gail Mott Subject: News Alert October 2009 Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:30:37 -0400 (EDT) Size: 59576 Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091101/a55031a2/attachment-0005.eml -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Nicaragua Network" Subject: [Lasolidarity] Nicaragua Network Hotline--October 27, 2009 Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:30:38 -0700 Size: 44700 Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091101/a55031a2/attachment-0006.eml -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: QUETZALCOATL38 at aol.com Subject: [actionla] Massive protests rock Guatemala Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:33:19 EDT Size: 17130 Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091101/a55031a2/attachment-0007.eml From suzannedk at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 11:18:02 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 19:18:02 +0100 Subject: [A-List] Fwd: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] An Emergency Program In-Reply-To: <20091031105942.79f4b1df.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> References: <20091031105942.79f4b1df.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> Message-ID: Why U.S. markets fail rather than the title of the posting "Why Markets Fail" which implies any and all. It is because they were set up to fail. A very simple test will confirm this simple conclusion. To wit: one of the most important regulations set into motion in the 1930s was to break up the monopolies, remove the casino banking and casino investing , and to make draconion laws prohibiting monopolies, period. The lesson of the great depression was profound, countrywide, worldwide. One government spokesman within the last week on t.v. was asked where the most depression suicides on Wall Street happened. He replied only one, there were none other! A flat out lie. Very interesting one for it implies that nothing is either to be learned about this depression and it is to be clearly ubcoupled from the 1933 one, nothing to learn there either, no connection at all. Well, the fact that the banking monopolies have only grown vaster, bigger mean that no cure for these fiscal imbalances was ever intended. Simple. Two and two is still four. Look at it this way. Say you are a millionaire, with twenty million in several vast banks, six in fact. You lose in total ten million dollars, the money coming from all six. You sue all six, being still wealthy, for your money. None is returned to you after a lawsuit lasting ten years and costing you five million in legal fees. One of your team of crack lawyers says to you in parting that the banks are so big they are guarantied of never finding, much less returning, your money. Incredulous, you ask him if he knew this taking the case? He coughs in embarressment, coloring, mumbling, "Yeah, we all knew. You withhold the fee and get socked by the lawfirm involved, gettting large fines added. You have much less than five million left and that fewer millions are thirty percent less vauable than they were ten years ago. Real problem? You are not a corporation, civil rights law is no longer applicable, laws of contract versus individual and bank only favor the bank. Ten years from now would be 2018. Comments? Suzanne suzannedk at gmail.com ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Bill Totten Date: Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 2:59 AM Subject: [R-G] [BillTottenWeblog] An Emergency Program To: Suzanne de Kuyper of Monetary Reform for the United States by Richard C Cook Global Research (April 26 2007) The author of this independent report worked for the Carter White House and NASA, then spent 21 years with the US Treasury Department. In the report, he explains that the US financial system headed by the Federal Reserve System has failed and that only an emergency program of monetary reform can address conditions which may be leading to a catastrophe like the Great Depression or worse. Such an assessment has become increasingly familiar as economic storm clouds continue to gather. But the analysis and recommendations contained in the report may be surprising, even to many progressives. Introduction The mass media show attractive images of the comfortable lifestyles of the upper income earners who benefit from the cash-rich global economy. Which luxury car to drive, which championship golf course to frequent, which hedge funds to invest in, which stock brokers to consult - good questions if you've got the money! But behind this attractive scenery, debt, bankruptcy, and poverty are a tsunami that is overwhelming much of the world's population, including growing numbers in the US. Following close on the heels of these calamities is a worldwide breakdown in law and order. Drug dealing, money laundering, gangsterism, white collar crime, political corruption, weapons trafficking, human slavery, terrorism, and endemic warfare are the dark side of a global financial system where everything has a price, the rich seem above the law, and individual security is almost impossible to attain. Behind the fences of our gated communities, we fancy ourselves the "good guys" in this scenario. We've learned to blame the victim, failing to see that it's a world the US and the other Western powers have fashioned through our centuries-long march to own or control everything that can have a price tag attached to it. Meanwhile, "dollar hegemony" has flooded the world with US currency, loans, or debt instruments to support our fiscal and trade deficits, pay for our extraordinary level of resource utilization, induce foreign governments to purchase our armaments, ensure the allegiance of their governing elites, and maintain their economies in subservience through World Trade Organization and International Monetary Fund trade and lending policies. Today we are engaged in the outright military conquest of the Middle East. Our political leaders tell us that if we don't fight the "terrorists" in Bagdad we will have to fight them on our own shores. But India, which has become our largest armaments customer, has seen a soaring number of suicides among bankrupt farmers left out of that nation's economy. The illegal immigrants who have flooded the US from Mexico have watched NAFTA destroy their own family farms, where 600 Mexican farmers a day are forced off the land. But now our pigeons are coming home to roost. The CEO of one of our leading brokerage houses received over $53 million in bonuses in 2006. Not far from his plush Wall Street office, veterans of two Iraq wars sleep in homeless shelters. While US corporations, including the financial industry, are reaping enormous profits, our domestic economic problems are growing, including an enormous load of cumulative societal debt, a continuing decline of real family income, and increasing wealth and income gaps between the rich and the rest. Despite the reports in the mainstream press about the economy's "soft landing" and the continued record-setting performance of the stock market, the financial markets have been shaken by the bursting of the housing bubble and soaring home foreclosures. Meanwhile, the relentless decline of our domestic manufacturing sector continues. But one thing is connected to another. A good investigator always asks, "Who benefits?" The most salient feature of our financial system is that the creation of new purchasing power through credit - loans, mortgages, credit cards, et cetera - is controlled by private financial institutions and, though regulated, works principally for their profit. Because we are never taught about alternative economic structures, we take this system for granted, though earlier generations had profound fears of becoming what President Martin Van Buren prophetically called a "bank-ridden society". The private control of credit has given vast wealth and ironclad political dominance to what Van Buren and his 19th century contemporaries warned about - the Money Power, even though our Constitution gave Congress authority over our monetary system. This authority had been compromised through the system of state-chartered banks before the Civil War. But with the National Banking Acts of 1863-4 and the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, Congress largely ceded its powers over money to the private banking industry. Today, high finance rules our economy and most of the violence-wracked world. The system came into existence in order to provide the capital for economic growth during the industrial revolution, but those who ran it figured out how to do so in ways that vastly increased their own wealth and power. They rule the world today. But the system is man-made, with functions and effects that can be measured and analyzed. The system was created by historical forces, but if we want to, we can identify these forces and change the system. What we have lacked is the understanding of our possible choices, along with the discernment and moral courage to act on our understanding. The direction in which change must be sought is that of greater economic democracy; that is, a higher degree of sharing of the bounty of the earth by more people. Though our economics textbooks don't mention it, a reform movement began in Great Britain in the 1920s called Social Credit, which showed how a financial system in a modern economy can be so structured as to serve democracy and freedom, not erode them. This knowledge has had a profound influence in parts of the British Commonwealth but has rarely been discussed in the US. This report explains how the Social Credit system could apply to the US economy, along with other monetary proposals that have been put forth by US reformers from the 19th century until today. The report provides a unique diagnosis of the underlying financial issues by applying new concepts to familiar data. It criticizes finance capitalism but without going to the other extreme of proposing a collectivist solution. It affirms the value of "democratic capitalism", combined with a shift to more public control of credit, and it offers a new approach to achieving worldwide prosperity, starting with economic recovery in the US. This can be done through measures that could be implemented today by inspired political leadership. Most economic reform programs nibble around the edges. Many proposals address symptoms, not causes, such as suggestions to use tax or trade policy to bring exports and imports back into balance. Other observers would destroy society - or, more accurately, watch it destroy itself - before building something new. Another line of reasoning says we can only look forward to decades of a lower standard of living before we work our way out of the present crisis. Monetary reform accepts none of these scenarios. It takes life as we live it on the individual level in a technological age as basically positive. It embraces the enormous productivity of modern industrial methods with approval and hope. But it identifies factors in the nature of industrial production at the level of the corporation as creating a chronic state of instability. These factors, which are explained later in this report, create an economy in a state of continuous crisis and disintegration to which governments react in all the wrong ways. One way is to permit the misuse of debt-financing to bridge an ongoing gap between the value of production and the purchasing power available to the community to absorb it. Another is to attempt to overcome instability by fostering continuous economic growth merely through inflationary bubbles where financial transactions can be taxed as though they produced real, tangible, value. Another is through an aggressive foreign policy based on trade and monetary dominance. Obviously, if all developed nations pursue such policies - as they inevitably do - wars must result. It is thus no coincidence that the last 100 years of incredible progress in science and technology have witnessed almost constant warfare. The most surprising thing that monetary reformers declare is that our problems stem not from a failure to manage fairly the limited resources found in a world of scarcity but from our inability to manage a world of almost unlimited abundance and prosperity. The first thing monetary reform would do would be to change the underlying financial structure from one that confines this abundance to the privileged few - whether nations or individuals - to one that would provide it to everyone on earth. The measures which are available have been discussed among reformers for many years and could begin to have a positive effect within weeks of implementation. This is the direction in which economic stability can and should be sought, rather than the terminal out-of-control configuration of global corporatism, finance capitalism, and military aggression that has brought us to the brink of catastrophe. For the glory of God and the love of man, we now owe it to humanity to make these epochal changes. In the meantime, it would be foolish for people to wait and do nothing while the system continues to crumble. The report closes with suggestions for immediate action by concerned people. Leisure Dividend? Ever since mankind began to invent machines to do our work, we began to look forward to a "leisure dividend". Products could now be manufactured with far less human effort. Every new wave of mechanization, from the harnessing of steam power in the late 1700s to the cybernetic revolution of today, has held out the promise of less work and more enjoyment of the good things of life. We've seen tremendous gains for the workforce. We enjoy a forty-hour workweek, a cornucopia of new consumer products, universal public education, longer life spans, revolutions in communications, medicine, entertainment, and transportation, a whole new world of interesting things to do, to know, to accomplish. The world is so much happier and better off than in the days when our ancestors worked all day and half the night just to survive, right? Well, wrong. Today, the quality of life in the US seems to be moving backwards. While the shelves of the big-box stores are crammed with products, most of them are made overseas by low-paid laborers from countries like China and Indonesia. The people who work in the stores earn wages that hover around the poverty level. Not long ago, in the 1950s, a single wage-earner, usually the husband, could support a family while the wife stayed home and looked after the children. Yet they could buy a house, a car, and household appliances, go away on vacation, and send the kids to college. Today both husband and wife must work, often at more than one job, to make ends meet. Inflation has been rampant in big ticket items such as the cost of a home, health care, utilities, insurance, and higher education, and is now affecting the cost of food. The costs of petroleum products are soaring again. Over forty-seven million people don't have health insurance, poverty is on the rise after a generational decline, and thirty-five million don't have enough food to eat. Good jobs are scarce, and stress-related illness has become an epidemic. Meanwhile, public assets like electricity have been privatized at an alarming rate. Public infrastructure such as roads, bridges, school buildings, levees, and water systems are often crumbling, with state and local governments unable to make improvements without budget cuts elsewhere or stiff tax increases to pay the costs of borrowing. While the recent weakening of the dollar has improved the US export position slightly and created a few more jobs, the official unemployment rate of less than five percent does not include people no longer looking for work, nor does it take into account the huge number of jobs that are low-paying and without benefits. In fact the real purchasing power of the American workforce is on a steady downward trajectory, while the average pay of employees at Wall Street brokerage firms is more than $250,000 a year, and the CEOs of some US companies earn thousands of dollars an hour. But is the problem really that those at the top of the heap earn so much more than the rest of us? If so, the solution would be simple. We should do some of the things many reformers advocate, such as restore a truly progressive income tax, close corporate tax loopholes, implement universal health insurance, and make borrowing for college a little less expensive. But while economic policies that are fairer may be desirable, they would fail to address major underlying structural issues, especially financial ones. The main problem with the US economy today has to do with earnings and prices. People simply do not earn anywhere near enough to buy what the economy produces. Gap Between GDP and Purchasing Power In 2006, our Gross Domestic Product was about $12.98 trillion, with the enormous trade deficit of $726 billion figured in. Our total national income was $10.23 trillion, including wages, salaries, interest, dividends, personal business earnings, and capital gains. Of this amount, at least ten percent, or $1.02 trillion, would have been reinvested either at home or abroad, including retirement savings, leaving total available purchasing power of $9.21 trillion. The $12.98 trillion GDP minus $9.21 trillion of purchasing power equals $3.77 trillion. That's what the figures indicate was the shortfall that would have been needed to consume the entire GDP. Thus we do not earn enough to buy what we produce. What does this mean, and who, or what, is to blame? Despite the high CEO compensation, the huge Wall Street salaries and bonuses, and the wealth and income disparities between high and low earners, we should not blame the "capitalists"; that is, the business owners, for the entire problem. Business profit taken as dividends is only about seven percent of GDP. Besides, the "capitalists" are us! Forty-five million Americans have some measure of stock ownership, including a multitude of tax-deferred retirement plans and mutual funds. This is one of the strengths of our economy - the "ownership society" - for which we deserve a pat on the back. Also, the dividends we earn are mostly spent, so most of it finds its way back into the economy. Let's look at the situation from a slightly different standpoint, starting with the $12.98 trillion GDP. It's said that the US economy is the most powerful and productive in the history of the world. This is true, even with our trade deficit and our decline in manufacturing due to relocating so much of our factory production abroad. So we should be dancing in the streets. There should be festivals, celebrations! Obviously that's not happening. Why not? It's not happening because of how we define the $3.77 trillion gap between GDP and earnings. Since we produce the value of our entire GDP with such low labor costs, the $3.77 trillion differential really should be viewed as the total societal dividend, right? But it's not defined as a dividend. Rather it's defined as a shortfall. This is because it still appears in prices. And with the stagnation of wages and salaries, combined with the current slowdown in appreciation of housing values which is resulting in lower capital gains, the shortfall is growing. Obviously, those goods and services still have to be paid for - the entire $12.98 trillion. The way they are paid for is through debt. You, the consumer must go out and borrow to cover the $3.77 trillion gap between GDP and purchasing power. This is how much our debt increased in 2006 - the amount of new debt less what we paid off. This new debt was 29 percent of GDP last year. Note that this analysis deals with gross numbers, so does not dwell on the major social problem that income disparities are growing within the US, with a higher proportion of income each year going to the wealthiest segments of society. Conversely, the debt burden which fills the gap between GDP and income falls disproportionately on the lower income brackets. But the point is undeniable. Our ability to produce our incredible GDP with relatively little labor means that, under the existing system, we have to borrow money from financial institutions and pay with interest to enjoy what really should be the leisure dividend mentioned at the start of this report. Remember this point, because we'll be coming back to it. Finally, these numbers shouldn't surprise anyone. Every responsible analyst has made the point that ours is a consumer-based economy and that consumer borrowing keeps it afloat. It's why economists and politicians keep such a close eye on the "consumer confidence" polls. It's why President George W Bush, after the 9-11 tragedy, told us to "go shopping". The Growing Debt Burden Again, what should have been a total societal dividend from our fantastic producing economy somehow became a debt. How did that happen? Let's focus on the debt for now. Obviously, the $3.77 trillion we borrowed - the debt we just discovered where a dividend might have been expected - included a little fun - vacations, entertainment, wide-screen TVs, et cetera. But there's not a lot of frivolous expenditure in the average family's budget. Most of what we buy we need just to live. Many families even charge groceries on their credit cards. At the end of 2006, total debt in the US, including households, businesses, and all levels of government, was $48.3 trillion. This is fifty percent higher than the sum of all personal wealth held by the entire US population and 38 percent higher than the value of all publicly-traded US companies! That's $161,000 per US resident, or $564,000 for a family of four, payable with interest. Again, it includes personal debt, business debt that is reflected in the prices we pay, and federal, state, and local debt for which we, the taxpayers, are accountable. And the debt has been building up from year to year. It's increasing, not going down. During the year 2005-2006, debt grew five times faster than the GDP. The Federal Reserve has calculated that total debt today is 460 percent of the national income versus 186 percent in 1957. Credit card debt was $9,300 per household in 2004 and is more now, three years later. A typical family pays $1,200 a year in credit card interest charges alone. In 2004, students graduating from college had an average debt of $21,899. Many end up owing $80,000 or more, especially if they attend law or medical school. Under the 2005 bankruptcy "reform" legislation, student loan debt can never be written off. One result of skyrocketing debt is that the financial industry, which today includes much more than just banks, is the fastest growing sector in the economy, with capitalization increasing from less than five percent of the Standard and Poor's total in 1980 to twenty-two percent today. The financial industry now generates thirty percent of all US corporate profits. These profits result from account and transaction fees, commissions, interest charges, foreclosures, penalties, and late fees. Much of the profits - which totaled about $545 billion in 2006 - are the financial industry's windfall, resulting from an economy that substitutes debt for earned purchasing power. These profits would have paid the entire 2006 Department of Defense budget with $126 billion left over and were larger than the GDP of 92 percent of the world's nations. While some of the profits support consumption through payment of salaries, dividends, and bonuses to financial industry executives, employees, and shareholders, much is plowed back into new lending. This contributes to further erosion of total societal purchasing power. The data on financial industry profits also call into question the national rollback of usury regulation which started in the 1980s. Few realize that interest rates in the range of 6.5 to 7.5 percent, which are viewed today as "low", are actually higher than in times past. The average mortgage interest rate in 1960, for example, was 5.25 percent. A working definition of "usury" has long been any interest rate higher than what can be justified by the lender's risk. This has been forgotten in the face of contentions by the Federal Reserve that raising interest rates is a monetary tool to control "inflation". The contentions are disproved by the fact that inflation was low in the 1950s and 1960s, when interest rates were below today's levels, but much higher since the 1970s. Thus the data suggest that high interest rates are actually a cause of inflation rather than a result. A large portion of society's debt is incurred by the federal government, with the taxpayer eventually having to pay. Currently the national debt is over $8.84 trillion. James Turk wrote in an report titled "Economic Suicide" in The Freemarket Gold and Money Report, March 2006: "?The dire financial straits the federal government is facing, its financial position, is even worse than it appears ... In the 2005 Financial Report of the US Government, US Comptroller General David Walker reported that, 'The federal government's fiscal exposures now total more than $46 trillion, up from $20 trillion in 2000'. Yes, it's insane. But it's even more insane that people buy the US government's T-Bonds and T-Bills, thinking that they are a safe, low-risk investment." In fiscal year 2000, 1.1 percent of the federal government's cash flow came from new debt. This soared to 20.4 percent in 2005. During that period, total federal debt grew 40.5 percent. Higher interest rates will produce a 9.3 percent increase in interest on the national debt in the 2008 federal budget that will lead to cuts in social services, education, and health care. There is pressure from budget belt-tighteners to reduce the government's $46 trillion exposure by slashing future retirement benefits like Social Security or entitlement programs like Medicare, Medicaid, veterans' benefits, food stamps, et cetera. Thus the most vulnerable members of society are expected to pay for structural financial problems that have left the federal government, according to competent observers associated with the Federal Reserve, functionally bankrupt. Federal debt is only one element of spending by all levels of government - federal, state, and local - which has become a major drag on the US economy. Not only must US wage and salary earners pay for the debt that supports their spending, they must also pay a cumulative tax burden equal to a third of their total income. We pay as much in taxes as for housing, food, and transportation combined. Governments also take advantage of housing inflation by taxing newly assessed values to the point where people whose incomes don't keep up, and who may even own their homes outright, are forced to sell and move away. Our inability to support our economy through earnings also results in the fact that the US supports much of its enormous fiscal and trade deficits by selling securities to foreigners, who own thirteen percent of US stocks, 24 percent of corporate bonds, and 44 percent of Treasury bonds. It was estimated almost a decade ago that two-thirds of US currency was in foreign hands. When foreigners bring their dollars into US markets they drive up prices, especially of real estate. As indicated earlier, another aspect of the problem is that the growing debt affects different economic classes in different ways. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the top one percent of US households owns 57 percent of all income, capital gains, dividends, interest, and rents. These super-rich, along with the upper middle class, are debt-free or are able to leverage debt profitably, and are often the owners and executives of the financial institutions to which the rest of us owe money. The middle-class, declining as a proportion of the population, is under increasing pressure as debt eats up more of the family income. For them, debt is often a source of intense personal stress, the more so as family savings have plummeted, Many families have cashed in the equity in their homes for spending money, but the remaining equity is now at an all-time low proportionate to assessed value - 55 percent in 2003 versus 85 percent in 1950. The working class or those in poverty or without jobs are being crushed. A low unemployment rate due to the creation of more "service economy" jobs may prevent mass starvation, but that's about all. According to The Nation, there is no longer any place in America where a person earning a minimum wage can afford even a one-bedroom apartment. These people, living in the "fringe economy" and relying on payday loans, group housing, check cashing stores, and rent-to-own stores, are the prey of a growing industry of usurious lenders often backed by corporate financial giants. Perhaps a third of Americans, including tens of millions of the "working poor", are in this category, with their ranks growing daily. Finally, there are the homeless, abandoned by the most abundant economy in the world, approaching a million in number nationwide. What is the Bush administration, Congress, or the Federal Reserve doing to address the potential for financial catastrophe due to skyrocketing debt? The answer is, "nothing", unless you call making it more difficult for families to qualify for mortgages "doing something". What Can Be Done? The one thing that is certain is that they don't have an answer. The answer is not tighter regulation and more restrictions on lending, which may protect financial institutions from exposure, but do little to help consumers. Nothing is solved for the economy at large by forcing consumers to pay high rents instead of mortgage payments, postpone buying needed cars or other major household items, or get a low-paying job instead of going to college. The answer is not for the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates, though it might help consumers a little in the short run. But too much damage has been done in the past with interest rate cuts that ignored economic fundamentals, such as the 2001-3 cuts that led to the housing bubble which is now deflating with drastic consequences. Besides, cuts are likely to cause the foreign investors to pull out of our investment markets, leaving us unable to service our gigantic existing debt load. The answer is not to cut the costs of production. Employee benefits would be further decimated, more jobs would be eliminated or outsourced overseas, tax revenues would fall, and "fiscal austerity" would lead to more reductions in government social services. The answer is not harder work or productivity increases. This may lead to more or cheaper goods, but since wages and salaries never keep up with productivity growth, the gap between consumption and production also grows. In fact, the more we automate, the harder we work, and the more efficient we become, the worse off we are financially! Again, it's because purchasing power never keeps up with production. As indicated at the beginning of this report, higher taxation of the upper brackets and closing corporate loopholes would be more fair and would allow some degree of recovery of income derived from financial profiteering, but even this would not be nearly enough to cover the gap between GDP and purchasing power. It is this gap, currently filled through debt, which is taken for granted and has never been properly investigated or explained by any official body. The debt taken out to fill the gap is the 600-pound gorilla in the room that the politicians and pundits have agreed to ignore. It's a bleak picture, but not a new one. President Franklin D Roosevelt addressed the problem half-consciously with the massive spending programs of the New Deal. This was an attempt to overcome the shortage in purchasing power through a large federal deficit and a steeply progressive income tax, rather than placing the entire burden on middle and lower income citizens as the US is doing today. The US was finally able to work its way out of this crisis through spending on World War Two and a large balance of payments surplus which continued into the 1960s. But with today's huge trade deficit, that solution is not available and, with monetary reform, would not be necessary. But the situation still points to problems monetary reformers have been writing about for over a century. Unfortunately, for the last fifty years, since the New Deal faded into memory, our political leaders, the mainstream media, the establishment economists, and the financial and corporate vested interests, all of whom are free-market fundamentalists who believe government is helpless to remedy the situation, have ignored what the reformers have been saying. For all of them, "growth" is the only answer to whatever problem may arise. But when growth in GDP falters, or is not matched by purchasing power, not only does it not improve conditions, it makes them worse. This is the underlying flaw in the system that cries out for an answer. C H Douglas and Social Credit In 1918, Scottish industrial engineer Major C H Douglas published a book titled Economic Democracy, where he wrote that several major factors associated with modern mechanized production resulted in a gap between the value of manufactured goods and purchasing power distributed through wages, salaries, and dividends. That is, he addressed the exact problem the US and other developed economies were facing both then and now. In a 1932 publication, The Old and the New Economics, Douglas listed several systemic causes "of a deficiency of purchasing power as compared with collective prices of goods for sale". These included business profits not distributed as dividends (retained earnings); individual savings, that is, "mere abstention from buying"; "investment of savings in new works, which create a new cost without fresh purchasing power"; accounting factors, where costs previously incurred are carried over into current prices; and "deflation", that is, "sale of securities by banks and recall of loans". Other elements not mentioned by Douglas include insurance, which is costly in the US, maintenance of unused plant capacity, which is extensive due to the decline of US manufacturing output, employer retirement contributions, and the cumulative sum of retained earnings and other cost factors when businesses buy from each other. These factors all show up in the prices of goods and services but are not paid as earnings to individuals. A simple way to understand what happens is that prices that a business charges must not only pay for labor costs but must also cover all non-labor costs, as well as equip the firm to perform in the future. Also, while the financial and accounting systems force consumers to pay for the costs of capital depreciation, they do not give them credit for appreciation of the value of the business that will appear through future capital gains. This applies particularly to technology-intensive companies where high R&D costs must be recovered in prices but do not show up proportionately in employees' immediate take-home pay. Taken together, the impact of all these factors is devastating to consumers and the economy at large, because we never earn enough to compensate for what the tax and accounting systems label as costs. Douglas's analysis had solved the main financial problem of the industrial age, one which puzzled most of his contemporaries, including Winston Churchill, who said in a 1930 speech at Oxford: "Who would have thought that it would be easier to produce by toil and skill all the most necessary or desirable commodities than it is to find consumers for them? Who would have thought that cheap and abundant supplies of all the basic commodities would find the science and civilization of the world unable to utilize them? Have all our triumphs of research and organization bequeathed us only a new punishment: the Curse of Plenty? Are we really to believe that no better adjustment can be made between supply and demand? Yet the fact remains that every attempt has failed. Many various attempts have been made, from the extremes of Communism in Russia to the extremes of Capitalism in the United States. They include every form of fiscal policy and currency policy. But all have failed, and we have advanced little further in this quest than in barbaric times." Churchill was speaking at the start of the Great Depression, which, with unsold milk being poured in the farm fields, was the classic case of society's failure to distribute what industry and agriculture were perfectly capable of producing. "Poverty in the midst of plenty", became the hallmark of the modern age and continues to roar down the world's highways with a murderous vengeance today. But Douglas showed how to solve the problem by an analysis of the concept of "credit". He pointed out that there are really two forms of credit. One is "real credit", which equates to the total ability of a nation to produce goods and services through increasingly efficient use of science and technology. Another way to define "real credit" is to view it as "productive potential". The second is "financial credit" issued as loans by the banks. Douglas made it clear that in a system where the banks have a monopoly on the issuance of credit, as ours does, they are the most powerful entity in the economy and therefore will be the most powerful politically as well. They will enhance their power, and their profits, by keeping financial credit scarce, so the amount they issue will never approach the amount of "real credit" that ultimately should derive from the bounty of the producing economy. Even in a country like the US, where claims are made that credit is cheap and abundant, there are strings attached, simply because the limited amount of credit that financial institutions choose to make available obviously must be repaid and repaid with interest. Also, today's "low" interest rates are still higher than in the 1950s and 1960s. And when the inevitable credit contraction comes at the downside of every business cycle, the wealth of society gradually but remorselessly fall into the creditors' hands. Further, people don't realize how much events on the national and international scale are connected in ways that are not evident on the surface. Monetary decisions, for example, have more to do with determining the course of a nation's economy than any other factor. Similarly, it is the state of its economy that determines a nation's foreign policy. The usual recourse taken by a society whose economy is strapped for purchasing power, Douglas said, is to try to export more than it imports to make up for the credit shortfall through a positive balance of payments. Because this leads to tremendous competition among nations for foreign markets as a matter of sheer financial survival, wars must result. We can see that because the US today has such a large trade deficit, even more of the production/consumption gap must be filled by bank-issued credit or by the conquests of war. This seems to be the case with the war on Iraq, whose real cause appears to be the desire for corporate profits through control of oil. Douglas and his followers pointed out that war or mobilization for war also has the "benefit" of destroying or idling large quantities of production (bombs, missiles, tanks, airplanes, et cetera), which otherwise society is unable to consume. The war economy also props up the employment numbers. It was World War Two that finally pulled the US out of the Depression, and it is the huge quantity of deficit spending on the military-industrial complex which continues to anchor the US economy today. This has happened in accordance with the Douglas model of a debt-based economy where people do not earn enough to buy what industry must produce to create jobs. Critics may ask why, if Douglas's analysis is correct, is it not generally recognized and accepted? The answer is that it IS recognized and accepted, but only by the monetary reformers on the one hand and the financiers on the other. But the financiers, who own the mass media, are not telling the rest of us, because it's what makes them so rich and powerful. This is why William Greider titled his 1987 book on the subject, Secrets of the Temple: How the Federal Reserve Runs the Country. We are dealing here with the deepest secrets of the financial control of the world. One final point about Douglas is to observe that late in his career he made remarks that have been interpreted as anti-Semitic when he pointed out that, historically, certain Jewish customs allowed them to take advantage of non-Jews in business dealings. He also pointed out, as have others, that many of the financiers engaged in the banking business have been Jews. Douglas attributed their success to a high degree of organizational skill and their ability to excel and take control in business matters. But the Social Credit movement itself is not and has never been anti-Semitic. Nor is the author of this report, and neither is the worldwide monetary reform movement. In calling for change, we are talking about a new system, a new philosophy, and new laws based on principles of justice and democracy that are accepted everywhere, though often embattled. The Jewish people are not responsible for the present crisis and did not create it. It's simply the way the Western economic system evolved. Finance capitalism came out of the Italian city-states. At various times it furthered industrialization by making credit available, but any system can be abused. Any system outlives its usefulness and eventually has to be changed. The National Dividend Solution The way out of the monetary dilemma, said Douglas, was not to opt for Marxism or socialism, because economic democracy cannot be achieved by another collectivist "-ism" to replace finance capitalism. Also, Marxism, like finance capitalism, assumes an economy of scarcity. It simply says that workers have a greater right to the limited supply of manufactured products than do business owners. Douglas, by contrast, saw things through the eyes of an engineer. He saw that technology created a possibility of virtually unlimited abundance. He saw that workers' wages would fade away as a source of societal purchasing power as machines took over more of their work. But he also saw that this abundance could be distributed to those who needed and deserved it only if society took back its rightful prerogative of credit creation from the banks and made that credit available without hindrance to individuals. Finally, Douglas saw that the distribution of credit could not be tied solely to work because many jobs would cease to exist through advancing automation. These were revolutionary ideas and remain so today. Enough people understood what Douglas was talking about that his ideas became a significant political force in Great Britain, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada. The Social Credit movement he founded still exists in those countries. The primary method this system would use to implement public creation of credit would be through a cash stipend paid to all citizens known as a National Dividend. Because the dividend would be an expression of the sum total of the producing potential expressed as the "real credit" of the nation, it would be distributed as a book entry on a government ledger, not as a budget expenditure paid for by tax revenues. And the right to the dividend would not be tied to whether or not a person had a job. Going back to the discussion at the beginning of this report of the $12.98 trillion 2006 GDP versus the $9.21 trillion in purchasing power generated through wages, salaries, dividends, et cetera, recall that the $3.77 "gap" that should have been viewed as an overall dividend to society instead had to be financed by debt. Now we've come full circle. It's the National Dividend of the Social Credit system that explains the gap and would in fact provide it to the residents of the nation as their rightful benefit from creating, operating, and maintaining our wondrous economy. It's society as a whole which created our economy, and we are the ones who should benefit from it. A Social Credit system would be implemented through simple bookkeeping. The funding of the National Dividend would be drawn from a national credit account which would include all factors which give rise to production costs and create new capital assets. The national credit account could also be used for price subsidies. Prices in the US are generally too high, leading manufacturers to cut costs by shipping jobs overseas. But it is simply wrong that the hard work we do for our standard of living should turn against us and end up taking away our jobs. A program of price subsidies would allow us to stop penalizing our workers for their high levels of productivity and could be funded as another element of the National Dividend. You might ask at this point, is a National Dividend simply having the government "give away" money created out of "nothing"? If so, it's the same "nothing" from which banks make loans under their "fractional reserve" privileges, using as a base a small collateral of customer deposits and government securities. The difference is that bank loans must be repaid, while payments under a National Dividend system would not. Thus the National Dividend would be real money, unlike Federal Reserve Notes. These are a substandard type of money, since each one is entered into circulation only through a debt payable to a bank with interest. But the National Dividend is not "free" money. Rather it's the result of a powerful, productive, and scientific economic system that has developed over the course of centuries and today is so strong that some of its benefits can and should be made available to everyone in society without their having to work as hard to enjoy them. A National Dividend would represent the true wealth of the community, the bounty of our incredible GDP and our amazing efficiency, of which all citizens should be the rightful beneficiaries once the business owners receive a reasonable profit. Again, it's important to realize that Social Credit is not a socialist system. Rather it is "democratic capitalism", in contrast to the "finance capitalism" that has become so damaging. We must realize too that while "democratic capitalism" has been talked about, and is the basis of the idea of widespread stock ownership, it has never been implemented as the driving principle of a developed economy. Rather the cream is always skimmed off the top by the financial elite through their control of credit-creation. Again, the heart of the Social Credit program is the fact that the collateral base of the government-managed National Dividend, as with all sources of legitimate currency, would be the productive capacity of the economy expressed as GDP. This is what already stands behind "the full faith and credit of the United States". This is the true "credit" of the nation. It's what provides the real "backing" of the currency. Viewed from a philosophical level, the national credit, including that portion from which the National Dividend would be drawn, is the monetization of an intangible; that is, the totality of the nation's real wealth as expressed by its laws, history, physical plant, land, resources, and the education, skills, and character of its people. Without all of these, the government could print dollars - or the banks could lend them - from here to eternity, and they would be totally useless. Under a Social Credit system, banks would continue to function in limited ways, but they would not have the privilege of funding the entire shortfall in purchasing power of the nation. Instead, if we'd had a Social Credit system in place, the $3.77 trillion gap in the 2006 US economy between production and earnings - the bounty of our productive genius - would have been bridged by a National Dividend averaging $12,600 for every man, woman, and child (legal resident or citizen) in the nation. Looked at from another angle, this payment has some relationship to a "basic income guarantee", which has been advocated by many economists, politicians, and reformers in the US for decades, including Milton Friedman and Dr Martin Luther King, Junior, and which is the idea behind the current citizens' dividend of about $1,000 per resident under the Alaska Permanent Fund. The difference between a National Dividend and a basic income guarantee is that the dividend is tied to production and consumption data and may vary from year to year. During years that the dividend fell below a designated threshold, the balance of a basic income guarantee could be provided from tax revenues. But in a highly-automated economy such as that of the US, the National Dividend would normally be sufficient. One use individuals would be likely to make of their dividend would be to pay down personal, household, or student debt, though some of that debt should be written off by restoration of a more reasonable - that is, pre-2005 - federal bankruptcy law. Further, if the dividend were reduced to an average of $10,000, the additional $2,600 could be used to pay down the principle on the $8.84 trillion national debt as well. The entire debt could be retired in eleven years, with interest being funded from tax revenues as it is today. What About Inflation? Bankers and their apologists have always argued that any program of publicly-generated credit would cause inflation. This is nothing but propaganda. Because a National Dividend would replace bank-credit of the same amount, it would bring the total monetary supply of the nation only up to the level of the GDP. It would not result in "more dollars chasing the same amount of goods", but would simply bridge the gap. Not only would the National Dividend be non-inflationary, it could even be counter-inflationary by liquidating previous financial costs without creating new ones. Besides, what is truly inflationary is the Federal Reserve's policy of creating, then deflating, asset bubbles, the latest being the housing bubble. With such bubbles, prices inflate on the way up, but only level out on the way down. This can do irreversible structural damage to the economy. Inflation due to the housing bubble has affected not only home prices - it has also escalated rents and business leases, made it harder for people to start small businesses, and difficult for young people even to find a rented room. Meanwhile, home and property ownership is becoming a high-priced commodity available only to the rich. This type of inflation has an immense ripple effect. What it means is that the dollars people earn can purchase less throughout the economy, because every business must operate in a building and on a parcel of land which now costs much more. The housing bubble has been a catastrophe to democracy. With the Federal Reserve at the helm and the private banking industry in charge of credit, the dollar has lost almost ninety percent of its value since 1960. Since the early 1970s, virtually every period of economic growth has been a Federal Reserve-created bubble, with the Treasury Department helping out in the early 1990s with a strong-dollar policy that contributed to the dot.com bubble. With every cycle, more and more assets fall into the hands of the wealthy, including both US and foreign investors. Also, bank interest by itself is inflationary, because it adds to the cost of doing business at many points in the production-consumption stream. The Federal Reserve claims it is fighting inflation when it raises interest rates, but what it actually does is slow down economic activity by suppressing wages and salaries or throwing people out of work. The higher interest itself pulls in the other direction by adding to costs. Thus inflation has continued even during periods of monetary contraction, as in the 1979-83 recession when the consumer price index rose almost twenty percent. Another point on inflation is that under our system of bank-created debt-based credit, businesses inflate their prices to make paying their debt cheaper, as does the federal government. A government like ours that is deeply in debt always wants to pay with dollars of less value, so it pursues inflationary policies in order to push taxpayers into higher tax brackets. This is yet another way a bank-centered monetary system distorts real economic values and hurts working people and families. Management of a modern producing economy the way the Federal Reserve does by raising and lowering interest rates is a travesty. With no participation by any elected official, and with the most superficial explanations, the Federal Reserve can and does alter the value of all the money in the United States. The US courts, were they willing to face down the financiers who are the de facto controllers of the Federal Reserve, could easily rule that this is an unconstitutional confiscation of property without due process. At times, as in the early 1980s, when the Federal Reserve devastated the economy with interest rates of more than twenty percent, its actions are simply a crime. Such an event can have far-reaching and even catastrophic consequences. When the Federal Reserve decided in 1979 to begin a radical escalation of interest rates to combat the inflation of the 1970s, it took the Carter administration by surprise. After President Ronald Reagan took office in 1981, the top echelons of his administration reacted to the Federal Reserve's actions with dismay. The economy was collapsing in the worst recession since the Great Depression. But instead of confronting the Federal Reserve and its financial controllers, the Reagan administration took a series of radical actions to slash tax rates for the upper income brackets, deregulate the banking system, add huge sums to the national debt by throwing deficit-produced dollars at the military-industrial complex, and commence a new era of low-scale proxy warfare in Afghanistan, Angola, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and elsewhere known as the "Reagan doctrine". President Reagan was so relieved when the Federal Reserve finally relented by lowering interest rates in 1983, he declared in his 1984 reelection campaign that it was "morning in America". But instead of facing up to and addressing the monetary actions taken by the Federal Reserve which ended up damaging our industrial infrastructure and leaving us with today's anemic "service economy", the Reagan administration panicked and set in motion a complex series of compensating actions that ignored the underlying monetary issues. As a current example of how the system works, in early 2006, the Federal Reserve announced an interest rate hike after data came out which showed that US workers were seeing their pay go up a tenth of a percentage point higher than expected. As a result of these kinds of interest rate increases, hundreds of thousands of people pay higher rates on their adjustable rate mortgages, foreclosures of homes increase, tens of millions pay more interest on their credit card balances, and the loans that fuel the American economy, paying for everything from raw materials to inventory and transportation, cost more. Also, business and individual bankruptcies increase, workers and salaried employees are laid off, and, in the example cited above, the stock market took a hit, with hundreds of millions of dollars of value lost in a single day, wealth that simply vanished. The correct term for such a system is "monetary hell". Reducing the payment of interest to banks through monetary reform would lessen inflationary pressure and eliminate the policy whereby the Federal Reserve tries to create "price stability" on the backs of working people. Its policy, which is the essence of so-called "monetary targeting" or "monetarism", and which is fully supported by a Congress dominated by monetary conservatives from both political parties, is really one of class warfare. As US billionaire investor Warren Buffett has said, "There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning". Benefits of a National Dividend System The method by which the Federal Reserve attempts to manipulate the economy by adjusting interest rates is not only destructive and tends to further the long-term interests of the financiers to the detriment of society, it would be completely unnecessary under a National Dividend system. Under a National Dividend system with periodic cash stipends, most people would work anyway, but they would not have to work so much, and if they wanted to take some time off, stay home and care for children or the elderly, take lower-paid positions in education or the arts, or learn a new profession, they could do so. At last there would be a leisure dividend. Of course this goes counter to many of our prejudices, including fundamentalist notions that man is meant to toil and suffer. In practice, of course, those who toil and suffer exclude the monetary controllers. Another way to look at it is that a National Dividend could at last provide enough personal freedom that all our time and energy would not have to be spent just keeping our bodies fed, sheltered, and clothed. We would be free for more important cultural and spiritual pursuits. Who knows what forms society might take or what we might accomplish if the individual were liberated from the crushing demands of economic necessity? Another prejudice to overcome is the idea that if we just "give people money" they will waste or abuse it or become alcoholics or drug addicts. But people tend to respond positively to social benefits and make the most of opportunities when presented. Slackers always must face their own consciences and generally find it easier to live up to community expectations than live as self-indulgent outcasts. Also, neither Social Credit nor a basic income guarantee is a "free money" program. A strong, functioning economy is required. Freedom must be earned. And it has been earned in our mature, highly-developed economy. Besides, what really turns people into alcoholics or drug addicts is a pressure-cooker economy like we have today. Maybe this is why, according to a report that came out in March 2007 by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, forty percent of college students are binge drinkers and twenty-three percent meet the medical criteria for substance abuse. Part of the problem is likely that students are staring at a future of huge debts and few good jobs, where the rich rule the world and the rest struggle to survive. Financial conditions may be reflected in young peoples' attitudes, where, according to the Higher Education Research Institute, the proportion who say it is "essential" or "very important" to be "very well-off financially" grew from 41.9 percent in 1967 to 74.5 percent in 2005, and "developing a meaningful philosophy of life" dropped in importance from 85.5 percent to 45 percent. According to a Gallup survey, 55 percent "dream about getting rich", though few ever will. For now, let's leave it to the imagination of the reader to ponder further the social, political, and economic benefits of a national credit program, including the effects on the lives, aspirations, and attitudes of our youth. As you do so, realize that it could mitigate many of the economic causes of the drive toward war that are threatening to blow up the world in Iraq and elsewhere; that is, competition among nations for markets and resources and use of war expenditures to create jobs and profits. It would also provide the first real opportunity in decades for economic decisions to be made on the basis of other considerations than financial profits - such as what economic policies would benefit individuals, families, or the environment. This change could result in another dividend - the elusive "peace dividend", where tax money saved from no longer needing to conquer the world to prop up our collapsing debt-based financial structure could be used for such urgent priorities as environmental protection and clean-up, infrastructure maintenance, and alternative energy R&D and conversion. A fifty percent cut in military expenditures would yield over $300 billion per year for these and other beneficial purposes. Public Control of Credit Finally, a comprehensive monetary reform program could also shift a certain amount of credit creation through lending to the federal government, away from the private banking industry, which has held that monopoly in the US most of the time since the creation of the Federal Reserve System. This would reflect the fact that credit should really be viewed as a publicly-regulated utility like water or electricity. Overall monetary targets could be overseen by a Monetary Control Board within the US Treasury Department, as advocated by the American Monetary Institute in its model legislation, the American Monetary Act. The logic of publicly-controlled credit is obvious. If government has the authority to charter banks to issue credit through loans against a small reserve of deposits, it could just as easily issue credit itself against a reserve of tax receipts or even against the "real credit" of the nation's GDP. Because government would not have to earn a profit on lending, it could offer credit at much lower rates of interest, only enough perhaps to cover administrative costs. An example of how public credit can be used successfully was the Reconstruction Finance Corporation which provided the US economy with billions of dollars in low-interest loans from 1932 to the early 1950s. Another example was the Home Owners Loan Corporation which took over the mortgage industry from Wall Street speculators during the New Deal and established secure home ownership through low-interest fixed-rate loans as the basis for middle class financial security. This system was eventually destroyed by the deregulation of the 1980s. Efforts to create a new basis for public credit today could restore programs like the RFC or HOLC and lead to low or even zero-percent interest lending programs for state and local infrastructure projects through a self-capitalized federally-sponsored infrastructure bank. Funds could also be distributed from the national credit account as grants. Public credit for infrastructure investment could become a vehicle for shifting the US economy back in the direction of heavy manufacturing and helping to restore our status as the world's leading industrial democracy. Public credit could also be used to provide or subsidize inexpensive loans at the local level for consumers, students, and small businesses. These loans could be made available at interest rates as low as one percent. Such a program could be implemented by having the federal government lend money at low interest to commercial banks from a national credit account. The banks would then use the money to fund consumer loans while charging only an additional administrative fee plus a reasonable business profit. Through a National Dividend and publicly-regulated credit, rural and small-town America, as well as Native American communities, all of which have had the life sucked out of them by poverty and debt, would vastly benefit, as would our center cities. In fact, a rebirth of local culture and self-sustainability, which various half-hearted and heavily bureaucratized federal programs have tried unsuccessfully to address, could at last be possible. The monetary reform program would address several of the biggest social and economic problems, including lack of income security. Without income security, we can't even start to solve many other problems, because we have to work so hard just to keep our heads above water. And more of us are going under all the time. There was a time in American life when the leaders of government and business calculated what people needed for a decent life and tried to provide for it. Those times are gone. People today have been tossed to the corporate and financial wolves. A broad-based program based on public control of credit-creation would replace a financial system that benefits mainly the financial plutocracy with one that supports democratic values and local financial needs. It would give back control over their own lives to individuals and communities. It would immediately relieve some of the most serious sources of economic and political tension that are driving the world toward more and bigger wars. And by facilitating self-sustaining local economies both at home and abroad, the program would reduce the pressure for the large and powerful nations of the West to prey on the rest of the world. Economic Potential Finally, a point should be made that would take another lengthy report to elaborate, which is that our existing economy, where GDP cannot be purchased by the cumulative national income unless it is heavily augmented by debt, is an economy operating in a straightjacket. Even with a $13 trillion GDP, it is an underperforming economy, one which is not even close to its full potential. It is another secret of high finance that its overall effect under today's conditions is actually to throttle legitimate economic activity, not facilitate it. If the national credit were free to expand along with production, there is no reason why our GDP could not be much higher than what it is today, except that it would be distributed more democratically. This level of abundance need not be environmentally damaging, because it would include the application of technology to mitigate environmental hazards and develop new materials and processes. The abundance would have the effect of raising the standard of living for everyone in society. The same methods could be applied in other developed and developing nations. The fact that we have not allowed science and technology to reach this level of potential is another manifestation of the misuse of financial credit to create an unnatural scarcity which benefits only the financial controllers. Also, increased economic activity would not necessarily lead to out-of-control world population growth, as a society's birthrate tends to decrease through voluntary means as it becomes more prosperous and stable. Immediate Steps Viewed from the perspective of this report, world history over the last 100 years is starkly simple. The aspiration of every nation, regardless of its economic habits and ideology, has been to maintain something resembling income security for its population. This is natural; above all, people want to live. But science and industry have made it possible to satisfy human needs without full employment, leaving the gap between purchasing power and production which this report has explained. But instead of supplying its citizens with the needed National Dividend, governments have tried to fill the gap through a welfare state based on income redistribution, through socialist state controls, through bank-furnished credit, or a combination. No approach yet devised has resolved an inherently unstable economic situation that is endemic to a technological economy that refuses to operate on the basis of truly democratic principles. The US, among nations, has had the most success in creating a measure of stability but has been able to do so only through economic domination of the rest of the world as a means of filling the production/consumption gap. This domination began with the massive loans to the European combatants during World War One, continued through the lend-lease program of World War Two, and reached its zenith through the economic recovery measures after the war, the aim of which was to maintain for the US a positive trade balance. Thus was formed the basis for US prosperity during the 1950s and 1960s. This trade domination began to expire with the Vietnam War and had evaporated by the 1970s. After the fall of Saigon in 1975, the only way the US saw to keep its economy afloat was through the policy of dollar hegemony, where use of the dollar was established for oil trading and as a worldwide reserve currency. With the Reagan administration came the habitual resort to military power as the enforcer of US financial prerogatives. This is what accounts for the period of incessant low-key warfare that has controlled US policy since the late 1970s, with the "War on Terror" and the military invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq being only the latest phase. Today, as US dollar hegemony, along with our domestic economy, begin their collapse, through laws as immutable as those of physics, the threat of world war has returned. But another world war would not produce economic stability. The only way to achieve that objective is through real economic democracy as described in this report and in similar writings by other monetary reformers. But the cost of doing so, as seen by the financial and political establishment, would be to give up their near-total control of society. In conclusion, it should be clear that this report takes an optimistic view of mankind, its aspirations and potential. And it affirms the positive value of science and technology. Human beings were created in the image of God, and God does not want us to be miserable on a planet where all can be provided for. Obviously it would take a book to describe a complete monetary reform program to take us in this direction. This report has put forth some key concepts. For now it is enough to summarize the way out of our economic dilemmas by recommending that the federal government take the following steps: 1) Issue a $10,000 average dividend, created simply as an accounting book entry, to every US legal resident or citizen (to be determined), tax-free and without reducing any other benefits currently being paid. A sensible ratio between adults and children would be calculated. A temporary system of price controls would be instituted to prevent profiteering. 2) Create a second dividend which totaled approximately $800 billion as a first installment on paying the principal on the national debt and freeze the purchase of US assets by foreign holders of US debt instruments until currency exchange programs can be put into place. (The dividends paid to individuals and for repayment of the national debt would equal the gap between GDP and purchasing power for 2006.) 3) Continue to issue both dividends for each future year based on the calculated gap between GDP and purchasing power. 4) Utilize the money saved from no longer having to maintain an aggressive military posture overseas to compensate for monetary problems by addressing urgent priorities such as alternative energy R&D and restore more progressive tax rates for the highest income brackets. 5) Create a self-capitalized national infrastructure bank to lend or provide grants to state and local governments for infrastructure maintenance and development with provisions for use of US-made products. 6) Use federally-created credit or resources to subsidize local banks in providing low-cost credit to consumers, students, and small businesses. 7) Create a Monetary Control Board within the executive branch to regulate the US monetary system, determine the amount of the National Dividend, assure the stable value of money, and oversee both private and public use of credit. (For additional provisions of the American Monetary Act, see the American Monetary Institute website at www.monetary.org.) 8) Return to the more forgiving pre-2005 bankruptcy laws and offer genuine debt relief to nations which owe money to banks and international lending agencies. 9) Move toward a national system of "fair pricing" subsidies using national credit as a funding base. 10) Support the adoption of a similar monetary program for other nations of the world. To implement this program, Congress could pass a series of laws which would have the effect of taking back the people's Constitutional prerogative over their monetary system and laying the basis for future prosperity. These laws could help to usher in a new age of humanity. In fact, the agony of degradation and violence the world is now going through may someday be seen as the birth throes of a new age of economic enlightenment. A key would be a democratic monetary system which opens the door to material abundance for all people. We know that the financial industry which controls the economy and politics of the world might have to be persuaded to support these proposals. The chief argument may be this: Yes, you have become rich through your monopoly over credit. Yes, you preside over the economies of most of the world. But don't you see that you have bled the life out of the people who just want to live and work? Don't you see that it is their labor that is keeping you alive too? Don't you think that if society destroys itself from war, financial collapse, and pollution you might lose your own livelihood and ability to sustain yourselves? So why don't you join us in making a better world, even if it means altering a financial system that has the momentum of centuries behind it but that today is choking the aspirations of humanity like a dead hand? Shouldn't we make a start by addressing our economic problems rationally and democratically through a monetary reform program that benefits everyone, that properly rewards us for our miraculously productive economy, and that has a good chance of success if we embrace it with determination and hope? The only question at this late stage may be whether economic democracy will be achieved through a process of peaceful reform, or whether it will be built on the ashes of whatever is left of world society after the likely coming catastrophe. In the Meantime There is much that individuals, families, and groups can do right now to address the effects of the economic crisis in their own lives. These measures exist on the material, mental, and spiritual levels. Following is a short list: Don't borrow. What enslaves us to an economic system in a chronic state of collapse is, above all, our debts. Throw away credit cards. If it makes sense to do so, rent instead of taking out a mortgage to pay the inflated prices of today's housing. Work for a year or two and save for college. If your debts are overwhelming, don't be afraid to declare bankruptcy or look for other options. If you have money, put it into tangible assets before its value is destroyed by inflation. Think for yourself. Search for reliable information about the economic and political situation and the true reasons for wars and other forms of organized violence. Read books and turn off the TV and video games. Discuss ideas and issues with your kids, family, and friends. Start a website which expresses responsible opinions and offers help and information to others. Hone your skills. Do your own car and household repairs. Grow and cook your own food. Shop at thrift stores. If you can, raise farm animals. Take classes in handicrafts. Start your own part-time business. Take a job doing manual labor. Demand that the local schools teach practical skills to young people. Work with others on creating democratic intentional communities. Explore group housing. Live near mass transit commuting lines. Set up barter groups and consider establishing local currency systems as many people did during the 19th century and the Great Depression. In the last two years there have been a number of new communities being started in small towns or rural areas as people have seen the writing on the wall about what may be coming to an endangered American economy. Become politically active. Register, vote, and demand honest elections. Support politicians who have integrity. Demand changes along the lines suggested in this report, as well as consumer-friendly laws and regulations, including those that favor mass transit and affordable housing. Lobby locally for public space for farmers' markets and commitments by government agencies to buy from local small business. Don't allow government to drive people out of their homes with property tax increases or to seize private property on behalf of developers. Work with schools and expect them to teach democratic ideals including economic reform. Honor those who speak truth to power and let the government know that the Bill of Rights means something to you. Demand local programs to help people avoid and get out of debt. Let the local media know that you want to see reporting on real issues and more public interest programming. Boycott companies, retailers, and media outlets that oppose reform. Remember that external circumstances have no power. We tend to be overwhelmed by the apparent strength of government, corporations, employers, banks, our credit rating, the economy, the media, armies, technology, our endangered possessions, et cetera. The power of these things is illusory and is based on the dualistic conceptions of the human carnal mind. In reality, God is the only source of power in the universe, and the more we realize God's presence, the less do we fear externals. Search for God within. Every person has a higher self, which is God, and which may be sought and found through prayer and meditation. The Last Word We'll give the last word to Edward Kellogg (1790-1858), an American businessman who published his ideas about monetary reform in Labor and Other Capital (1849). Kellogg favored consumer lending at as little as one percent interest, as advocated earlier in this report. This lending would originate from a government-operated credit account he called a Safety Fund. Kellogg's ideas were well-known among American progressives during the latter part of the 19th century and are drawing attention again today. The following excerpt is from A New Monetary System (1875) published posthumously. "This money power is not only the most governing and influential, but it is also the most unjust and deceitful of all earthly powers. It entails upon millions excessive toil, poverty and want, while it keeps them ignorant of the cause of their sufferings; for, with their tacit consent, it silently transfers a large share of their earnings into the hands of others, who have never lifted a finger to perform any productive labor. "The same power has grossly deceived our public teachers; for not being able rationally to account for the great inequalities of wealth and condition existing in society, and being expected to furnish a satisfactory explanation in some way, they tell the people that these great wrongs are providential, that they are the mysterious workings of the providence of God, that all these evils are governed and controlled by His power and goodness. "This method of accounting for the gross political wrongs in society has covered up and hidden from view a multitude of heinous sins. Notwithstanding the number of those who now live in luxurious idleness, performing little, if any useful labor, and the great number of those who remain idle because the scarcity of money renders it impossible for them to obtain work, yet with all these impediments, there is generally enough produced each year in each nation to give to every man, woman and child a comfortable living. "Every person of common sense must see that God in his providence has bountifully provided for man and that there is some other power working against him, and diametrically opposed to the righteous distribution of his bounties. It is the providence of the national laws, establishing this unjust power of money, which robs the producing classes of their rights. "As the bounties of God are abundant, so must the money for their distribution be abundant, or they can never be justly distributed. If the scarcity of money or its centralizing power retard the production and the distribution of the products of labor, the power of the money is unjust and oppressive, and instead of being in unison with the providence of God, it is the most powerful opponent of his righteous laws, as well as the most powerful and bitter opponent of justice and beneficence among men. "It would be as reasonable to expect sweet waters to flow from a bitter fountain, as to expect just distributions of property if the standard by which it is valued is unjust. We are not depicting an unknown evil. Legislators, financiers, and the producing classes all know that money is possessed of some mysterious evil power, which has never been clearly explained and defined. "We have intended to remove this mystery concerning the nature and operations of money, and to show what laws must be annulled, and we shall proceed to show what other laws must be enacted, in order to establish money that will be endowed with an equitable power. The evil power of money has been politically established, and it must be politically annulled. It is a public wrong, and the public must administer the remedy." _____ Richard C Cook is the author of We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform (2009) and Challenger Revealed: An Insider's Account of How the Reagan Administration Caused the Greatest Tragedy of the Space Age (2007). He is a Washington, DC-based writer and consultant who, in addition to NASA, taught history and worked in the US Civil Service Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, the Carter White House and spent 21 years with the US Treasury Department. His website is at www.richardccook.com. Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article. To become a Member of Global Research: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=section§ionName=membership The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor at yahoo.com www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner. For media inquiries: crgeditor at yahoo.com (c) Copyright Richard C Cook, Global Research, 2007 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5494 TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click on the word "comment" highlighted at the end of the version of this essay posted at http://billtotten.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ Rad-Green mailing list Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 90775 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091101/19f24494/attachment.txt From cb31450 at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 10:10:36 2009 From: cb31450 at gmail.com (c b) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 12:10:36 -0500 Subject: [A-List] Honduras Message-ID: <5c2e4d230911020910w57c9626dkcfa6ac482b4aaf78@mail.gmail.com> 1 Ousted Honduran Leader: Pact Will Restore Me 2 Statement of Honduran National Front of Resistance Ousted Honduran Leader: Pact Will Restore Me By JUAN ZAMORANO, Associated Press Writer October 30, 2009 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091030/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_honduras_coup TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras - Deposed President Manuel Zelaya and his opponents have agreed to a U.S.-brokered deal that he said will return him to power four months after a coup shook faith in Latin America's young democracies. The power-sharing agreement reached late Thursday calls for Congress to decide whether to reinstate the leftist Zelaya. While the legislature backed his June 28 ouster, congressional leaders have since said they won't stand in the way of an agreement that ends Honduras' diplomatic isolation and legitimizes presidential elections planned for Nov. 29. Assistant U.S. Secretary of State Thomas Shannon said Friday that the two sides finally made concessions after realizing the international community wouldn't recognize the elections or restore aid without a compromise. "There was no more space for them to dither," he said. Shannon cautioned that "there are a variety of moving parts to this agremeent" and said he would stay in Honduras while the two sides negotiate the details. Under the plan, a government of national unity would take office to oversee the elections and the transition to the next president, who will be inaugurated on Jan. 27. Neither Zelaya nor interim President Roberto Micheletti is running. Most polls show lawmaker Porfirio Lobo of the National Party leading Elvin Santos of the Liberal Party to which both Zelaya and Micheletti belong. "We are willing to be cooperative in Congress with the agreement of the negotiators," Lobo said Friday. "The best decision for Honduras will be taken." The plan does not include a deadline for congress to act, but Zelaya told The Associated Press that he expects a decision in "more or less a week." Meanwhile, he said, he will remain at the Brazilian Embassy in Tegucigalpa, where he took refuge after slipping back into the country Sept. 21 from his forced exile. "I'm not going anywhere," he said Friday. Soldiers still surrounded the embassy and floodlights still interrupted sleep, but it has been several days since troops have crowed and meowed in the wee hours to keep those inside awake. Backers hugged Zelaya after hearing the news and one asked him to autograph a white cowboy hat resembling the one the deposed leader always wears. The hat already bore Shannon's signature. The breakthrough was a major foreign-policy victory for Obama. Speaking to reporters in Islamabad, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called it "an historic agreement," saying: "This is a big step forward for the inter-American system." Zelaya was ousted after ignoring orders from the Supreme Court to abandon a referendum aimed at rewriting the constitution. Opponents said his secret plan was to lift a constitutional ban on presidential re-election; Zelaya denies that. During his three years in office, Zelaya had alienated Honduras' elite by forming an increasingly strong alliance with Venezuela's socialist president, Hugo Chavez. The new agreement would create a power-sharing government and bind both sides to recognize the presidential elections, as well as putting the armed forces under the command of electoral officials to ensure that the vote is legitimate. It also creates a truth commission and rejects amnesty for political crimes. Micheletti called the pact a "significant concession" on his part. ___ Associated Press Writer Martha Mendoza contributed to this report from Mexico City . === Honduran National Front of Resistance to the Coup celebrates restoration of Zelaya! Vows continued struggle for a just society! Comuniqu?? No. 32 http://www.nicanet.org/?p=854#more-854 The National Front of Resistance to the Coup d'Et??t, facing the imminent signing of a negotiated agreement between the commission representing the legitimate President Manuel Zelaya Rosales and the representatives of the de facto regime, communicates the following to the Honduran people and the international community: 1. We celebrate the upcoming restoration of President Manuel Zelaya Rosales as a popular victory over the narrow interests of the coup oligarchy. This victory has been obtained through four months of struggle and sacrifice by the people who, in spite of the savage repression unleashed by the repressive forces of the state in the hands of the dominant class, have been able to resist and grow in their levels of consciousness and organization and turn themselves into an irrepressible social force. 2. The signing on the part of the dictatorship of the document which mandates "returning the holder of executive power to its pre June 28 state," represents the explicit acceptance that in Honduras there was a coup d'??tat that should be dismantled in order to return to institutional order and guarantee a democratic framework in which the people can exercise their right to transform society. 3. We demand that the accords signed at the negotiating table be processed in an expedited fashion by the National Congress. We alert all our comrades at the national level so that they can join the actions to pressure for the immediate compliance with the contents of the final document from the negotiating table. 4. We reiterate that a National Constituent Assembly is an unrenounceable aspiration of the Honduran people and a non-negotiable right for which we will continue struggling in the streets, until we achieve the re- founding of our society to convert it into one that is just, egalitarian and truly democratic. /Translation by the Nicaragua Network/ From cb31450 at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 10:30:13 2009 From: cb31450 at gmail.com (c b) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 12:30:13 -0500 Subject: [A-List] The Generals' Revolt Message-ID: <5c2e4d230911020930l3f1fa8d3ka6fe7365d1795b6d@mail.gmail.com> The Generals' Revolt As Obama rethinks America's failed strategy in Afghanistan, he faces two insurgencies: the Taliban and the Pentagon ROBERT DREYFUSS Posted Oct 28, 2009 1:51 PM Rollingstone.com http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/30493567/the_generals_revolt In early October, as President Obama huddled with top administration officials in the White House situation room to rethink America's failing strategy in Afghanistan, the Pentagon and top military brass were trying to make the president an offer he couldn't refuse. They wanted the president to escalate the war - go all in by committing 40,000 more troops and another trillion dollars to a Vietnam-like quagmire - or face a full-scale mutiny by his generals. Obama knew that if he rebuffed the military's pressure, several senior officers - including Gen. David Petraeus, the ambitious head of U.S. Central Command, who is rumored to be eyeing a presidential bid of his own in 2012 - could break ranks and join forces with hawks in the Republican Party. GOP leaders and conservative media outlets wasted no time in warning Obama that if he refused to back the troop escalation being demanded by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander overseeing the eight-year-old war, he'd be putting U.S. soldiers' lives at risk and inviting Al Qaeda to launch new assaults on the homeland. The president, it seems, is battling two insurgencies: one in Afghanistan and one cooked up by his own generals. "I don't understand why the military is putting so much pressure on the White House now over Afghanistan," says a former U.S. ambassador to Pakistan. "Unless it has something to do with the presidential ambitions of a certain Centcom commander." The military's campaign to force Obama's hand started in earnest in September, when the Commander's Initial Assessment of the war - a highly classified report prepared by McChrystal - was leaked to The Washington Post. According to insiders, the leak was coordinated by someone close to Petraeus, McChrystal's boss and ally. Speculation has centered on Gen. Jack Keane, a retired Army vice chief of staff and Petraeus confidant, who helped convince George W. Bush to get behind the "surge" in Iraq. In the report, McChrystal paints a dire picture of the American effort in Afghanistan, concluding that a massive increase in troop levels is the only way to prevent a humiliating failure. On Capitol Hill, hawkish GOP congressmen seized the opening to turn up the heat on Obama by demanding that he allow McChrystal and Petraeus to come to Washington to testify at high-profile hearings to ask for more troops. "It is time to listen to our commanders on the ground, not the ever-changing political winds whispering defeat in Washington," declared Sen. Kit Bond, a Republican from Missouri. Attempting to usurp Obama's authority as commander in chief, Sen. John McCain introduced an amendment to compel the two generals to come before Congress, but the measure was voted down by the Democratic majority. As the pressure from the military and the right built, McChrystal went on 60 Minutes to complain that he had only talked to Obama once since his appointment in June. Then, upping the ante, the general flew to London for a speech, where he was asked if de-escalating the war, along the lines reportedly suggested by Vice President Joe Biden, might work. "The short answer is: no," said McChrystal, dismissing the idea as "shortsighted." His comment - which bluntly defied the American tradition that a military officer's job is to carry out policy, not make it - shocked political observers in Washington and reportedly angered the White House. "Petraeus and McChrystal have put Obama in a trick bag," says Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, a former top aide to Secretary of State Colin Powell. "We had this happen one time before, with Douglas MacArthur" - the right-wing general who was fired after he defied President Truman over the Korean War in 1951. It isn't clear how far McChrystal and his boss, Petraeus, are willing to go. There have been rumors around the Pentagon that McChrystal might quit if Obama doesn't give him what he wants - a move that would fuel Republican criticism of Obama. "He'll be a good soldier, but he will only go so far," a senior U.S. military officer in Kabul told reporters. For his part, Obama moved quickly to handle the insurrection. One day after McChrystal's defiant London speech, the president unexpectedly summoned the general to a one-on-one meeting aboard an idling Air Force One in Copenhagen. No details of the discussion were released, but two days later Jim Jones, the retired Marine general who now serves as Obama's national- security adviser, publicly rebuked McChrystal, declaring that it is "better for military advice to come up through the chain of command." The struggle between the White House and the Pentagon is an important test of whether the president can take command in a political storm that could tear his administration apart. Obama himself is partly to blame for the position he finds himself in. During the presidential campaign last year, Obama praised the Afghan conflict as "the right war," in contrast to the bungled and unnecessary invasion of Iraq. Once in office, he ordered 21,000 additional troops to Kabul, painting the war as vital to America's national security. "If the Afghan government falls to the Taliban or allows Al Qaeda to go unchallenged," the president declared, "that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can." He also fired the commanding general in Afghanistan, David McKiernan, and replaced him with McChrystal, a close Petraeus ally and an advocate of the doctrine of counterinsurgency. When it comes to COIN, as it's known in military jargon, Petraeus literally wrote the book: the Counterinsurgency Field Manual, which has become the bible for proponents of COIN. In its essence, counterinsurgency demands an extremely troop-intensive, village-by-village effort to win hearts and minds among the population of an occupied country, supported by a lethal killing machine and an expensive "clear, hold and build" program to eliminate the enemy from an area and consolidate those gains. Within the military, COIN has developed a cult following. "It has become almost a religion for some people," says Paul Pillar, a former top intelligence official with wide expertise in terrorism and the Middle East. Supporters of Petraeus and McChrystal acknowledge that applying COIN to Afghanistan means a heavy U.S. commitment to war, in both blood and treasure. Even if Obama dispatches 40,000 additional troops, on top of the 68,000 Americans already committed, we won't even know if it's working for at least a year. "That is something that will certainly take 12 to 18 months to assess," said Kim Kagan, the president of the Institute for the Study of War, who helped write McChrystal's request for more troops. Bruce Riedel, a COIN advocate and veteran CIA officer who led Obama's review of the war last March, is even more blunt. "Anyone who thinks that in 12 to 18 months we're going to be anywhere close to victory," he said, "is living in a fantasyland." In addition, the doctrine of counterinsurgency virtually assures long-running military campaigns in other hot spots, even as we're engaged in combat and rebuilding operations in Afghanistan. "We're going to be involved in this type of activity in a number of countries for the next 15 to 20 years," said Lt. Gen. David Barno, a COIN advocate who served as commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan. So far, though, COIN hasn't exactly delivered on its promises. Despite the addition of 21,000 troops in March, the Taliban have continued to make gains across Afghanistan, establishing control or significantly disrupting at least 40 percent of the country. According to McChrystal's own report, Taliban leaders "appoint shadow governors for most provinces," set up courts, levy taxes, conscript fighters and boast about providing "security against a corrupt government." What's more, U.S. casualties have skyrocketed: In the four months since McChrystal took over, 165 Americans have died in Afghanistan - nearly one-fifth of those killed during the entire war. By late summer, some in the Obama administration began to have doubts about the efficacy of McChrystal's counterinsurgency strategy - doubts that greatly increased in the wake of Afghanistan's disastrous presidential election in August. Hamid Karzai, Washington's hand-picked president, was accused of widespread fraud, including ballot-box stuffing and "ghost" polling stations. Without a credible Afghan government, COIN can't succeed, since its core idea is to build support for the Afghan government. Even before the election fiasco, Obama had sent Jones, his national-security adviser, to Kabul to deliver a message to his military commander: The White House wouldn't look favorably on sending more soldiers to Afghanistan. If the Pentagon asked for more troops, Jones told McChrystal's top generals, the president would have "a Whisky Tango Foxtrot moment" - that is, What the fuck? According to The Washington Post, which reported the encounter, the generals present "seemed to blanch at the unambiguous message that this might be all the troops they were going to get." Not long after the Afghan elections, Obama began a top- to-bottom strategy review of the war. Among those who started to question the basic assumptions of McChrystal and his COIN allies were Jones, many of his colleagues on the National Security Council, and Vice President Biden. By contrast, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton remained remarkably quiet during the assessment, seeming to defer to the White House when it came to challenging the Pentagon brass. The issue has presented the most difficult political decision of Obama's presidency thus far. The White House knew that if Obama were to "fully resource" the military campaign, he would be going to war without his own political base, which has turned strongly against the Afghan war. For the first time since 2001, according to polls, a majority of Americans believe that the war in Afghanistan is "not worth fighting." Fifty-seven percent of independents and nearly three-quarters of Democrats oppose the war - and overall, only 26 percent of Americans support the idea of adding more troops. Indeed, if Obama were to escalate the war, his only allies would be the Pentagon, Congressional Republicans, an ultraconservative think tank called the Foreign Policy Initiative, whose supporters include Karl Rove, Sarah Palin and a passel of neoconservatives and former aides to George W. Bush. On the other hand, rejecting McChrystal's demands for more troops would make Obama vulnerable to GOP accusations that he was embracing defeat, and give congressional Republicans another angle of attack during midterm elections next year. Even worse, the administration has to take into account the possibility of a terrorist attack, which would allow the GOP to put the blame on the White House. "All it would take is one terrorist attack, vaguely linked to Afghanistan, for the military and his opponents to pounce all over him," says Pillar. Within the administration, Biden has emerged as the leading opponent of McChrystal's approach to never- ending war. "He's proposing that we stop doing large- scale counterinsurgency, that we rely on drones, U.S. Special Forces and other tools to combat Al Qaeda," says Stephen Biddle, an expert at the Council on Foreign Relations who served on McChrystal's advisory team. Biden's view, which has support among a significant number of officials and analysts in and out of government, is that rather than trying to defeat the Taliban, the United States ought to focus on targeting Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups that want to strike at American targets. That Biden took the lead, says one former national- security official, may be a sign that he has the president's support. "Biden is playing a very inside game," says the official. "He's in every meeting." In early October, the vice president held a private session to discuss war strategy with two members of the administration who are considered among the more hawkish members of Obama's team: Hillary Clinton and Richard Holbrooke, the State Department's special adviser on Afghanistan and Pakistan. In addition, Biden and Obama, both former senators, are said to be relying on the counsel of a pair of relatively dovish former colleagues, Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island and Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts. Kerry, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has recently made comparisons between Afghanistan and Vietnam. Also weighing in, apparently to advise against sending more troops, has been Colin Powell, who met quietly with Obama in mid-September. Supporters of Biden's view argue that adding more troops would actually make the problem worse, not better, because the Taliban draw support from the fiercely nationalist Pashtun ethnic group in Afghanistan and Pakistan, who will mobilize to resist a long-term occupation. "The real fact is, the more people we put in, the more opposition there will be," says Selig Harrison, a longtime observer of Afghanistan at the Center for International Policy, a think tank formed in the wake of the Vietnam War by former diplomats and peace activists. The only exit strategy that might work, say Harrison and others, is dramatically reducing the U.S. military role in Afghanistan, shifting the focus from the Taliban to Al Qaeda, and stepping up political and diplomatic efforts. Such an initiative would also require an intensive push to secure support from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia - which maintain links to the Taliban - as well as Iran, Russia, India and China. "There's only one mission there that we can accomplish," says Michael Scheuer, who led the CIA's anti-Osama bin Laden unit for years. "To go into Afghanistan, kill Al Qaeda, do as much damage to the Taliban as possible and leave." Opponents of that approach insist that it would allow Al Qaeda to re-establish a safe haven in Afghanistan and resume plotting attacks. But many terrorism experts point out that Al Qaeda doesn't need Afghanistan as a base of operations, since it can plan actions from Pakistan or, for that matter, from a mosque in London or Hamburg. "We deal with Al Qaeda in every country in the world without invading the country," says Sen. Russ Feingold, a Democrat who serves on both the Senate foreign-relations and intelligence committees. "We deal with them in Indonesia, the Philippines, Yemen, Somalia, in European countries, in our own country, with various means that range from law enforcement to military action to other kinds of actions." Feingold, who has proposed setting a flexible timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. forces, says that the administration must listen to advisers like Biden who favor shifting course in Afghanistan. "If they do not, if they refuse to, then we in Congress have to start proposing our own timetables, just as we did when we were stonewalled by the Bush administration," Feingold says. "I'm prepared to take whatever steps I need to, in consultation with other members of Congress, to make those proposals if necessary." Other Democrats have also expressed doubts about appropriating more money for the conflict. Monthly spending on the war is rising rapidly - from $2 billion in October 2008 to $6.7 billion in June 2009 - and Obama has requested a total of $65 billion for 2010, even without another troop surge. "I don't think there is a great deal of support for sending more troops to Afghanistan in the country or in Congress," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has declared his preference for sending trainers to Afghanistan to build that country's armed forces, instead of U.S. combat troops. And Rep. Jim McGovern recently got 138 votes for an amendment that would have required the administration to declare its exit strategy. "The further we get sucked into this war, the harder it will be to get out of it," McGovern says. "What the hell is the objective? Tell me how this has a happy ending. Tell me how we win this. How do we measure success?" Given the political pressure from both sides, Obama appears to favor sidestepping the issue. At a meeting with congressional leaders from both parties at the White House on October 6th, the president said he won't significantly reduce the number of troops in Afghanistan, as many Democrats had hoped - but he also seemed unlikely to endorse the major troop buildup proposed by McChrystal. While that approach may quell the Pentagon's insurrection for now, it only prolongs the conflict in Afghanistan, postponing what many see as an inevitable withdrawal. Wilkerson, the former aide to Colin Powell, hopes Obama will follow the example of President Kennedy, who faced down his generals during the Cuban Missile Crisis. "It's going to take John Kennedy-type courage to turn to his Curtis LeMay and say, 'No, we're not going to bomb Cuba,'" Wilkerson says. "It took a lot of courage on Kennedy's part to defy the Pentagon, defy the military - and do the right thing." [From Issue 1090 - October 29, 2009] From cb31450 at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 11:27:40 2009 From: cb31450 at gmail.com (c b) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 13:27:40 -0500 Subject: [A-List] REUTERS: WHO chief says Fidel Castro "looks wonderful" Message-ID: <5c2e4d230911021027u69d0ddeco2f56fcd8a34f9cd9@mail.gmail.com> REUTERS: WHO chief says Fidel Castro "looks wonderful" Posted by: "Walter Lippmann" walterlx at earthlink.net walterlx Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:53 pm (PDT) WHO chief says Fidel Castro "looks wonderful" Wed Oct 28, 2009 2:49pm EDT * WHO chief says Fidel Castro looks strong, "wonderful" * Praises Cuban health system * Says WHO has helped 121 countries get H1N1 medicine By Jeff Franks HAVANA, Oct 28 (Reuters) - Former Cuban leader Fidel Castro "looks wonderful," World Health Organization director general Margaret Chan said on Wednesday, after meeting the 83-year-old who resigned the presidency last year due to ailing health. Chan, speaking at the end of her first visit to Cuba, said she met with Castro for more two hours on Tuesday during which he displayed a "truly impressive" knowledge of healthcare issues and looked to be in good condition. "I'm a doctor, I understand the importance of confidentiality, but I have to say he looks wonderful," Chan told a press conference in Havana. When their talk was over, "I was humbled. He walked me out of the house -- that's quite a distance, so pretty strong," she said of his condition. Castro has not been seen in public except for videos and photos since July 2006 when he underwent intestinal surgery. In February 2008, after taking power in a 1959 revolution and holding it for 49 years, he quit the presidency, citing age and health issues, and was succeeded by younger brother Raul Castro, 78. Fidel Castro still meets with visiting dignitaries and writes columns, usually about international affairs, for Cuban media. In a 24-minute video shown on Cuban television in August, he looked fit as he spoke with a group of Venezuelan law students, but rumors still pop up occasionally that he is at death's door. Chan said she toured Cuban medical facilities and came away impressed with the communist-led island's health system, which provides free care to all Cubans. Citing its strong health indicators on such things as life expectancy and infant mortality, she said, "In a country of this level of economic development, to be able to achieve those very good health indices is not easy." Cuba, she said, "has the right vision and the right direction. Health is a state policy and health is seen as a right of the people." Cuba's health system is widely praised for its preventative measures and basic care, but also suffers from problems such as shortages of medicine and equipment and badly maintained facilities. The government blames the U.S. trade embargo against the island for many of the system's deficiencies. Chan said the World Health Organization has helped 121 countries, including Cuba, stockpile doses of the medicine Tamiflu to treat H1N1 flu, which has killed nearly 5,000 people globally since appearing earlier this year. She said the organization is working to procure H1N1 vaccines for developing countries and so far "we have pledges from the vaccine manufacturers and development partners to a total of 200 million doses." She said the vaccines would become available over the next year and be distributed to "about 100 countries," likely including Cuba. (Reporting by Jeff Franks; Editing by Tom Brown and Vicki Allen) From the.buffalo.in.the.midst at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 11:33:14 2009 From: the.buffalo.in.the.midst at gmail.com (Leighm) Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 10:33:14 -0800 Subject: [A-List] In OTHER South News... Venezuelan ambassador in Alaska to promote cultural, commercial exchange Message-ID: <4AEF25EA.5020605@gmail.com> The CITGO heating oil program is having a diplomatic payoff (and has been renewed). Indian Country Today: Venezuelan Ambassador Bernardo Alvarez will meet with the Alaska Inter-Tribal Council and a number of tribal chiefs whose communities have benefited from Venezuela?s discounted heating oil program. The ambassador?s trip will aim to strengthen relations with Alaska?s indigenous tribes and promote cultural, commercial and academic links between the U.S. and Venezuela. http://www.indiancountrytoday.com/enews/alerts/67567582.html A few more links here: http://news.google.com/news/search?pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=Venezuelan%20Ambassador%20Bernardo%20Alvarez%20will%20meet%20with%20the%20Alaska%20Inter-Tribal%20Council& From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Mon Nov 2 16:04:35 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 08:04:35 +0900 Subject: [A-List] Our Economy Was a Scam and Now We're Dead Broke Message-ID: <20091103080435.95bc7560.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> by Joe Bageant, JoeBageant.com Alternet (October 27 2009) When Barack Obama took office it seemed to some of us that his first job was to get the national silverware out of the pawn shop. Or at least maintain the world's confidence that it was possible for us to get out of debt. America is dead broke, the easy credit, phantom "growth" economy has been exposed for what it was. A credit scam. Even Hillary Clinton and Obama's best efforts have not coaxed much more dough out of foreign friends. But at least we again have a few friends abroad. So now we must jackleg ourselves back into something resembling a productive activity. No matter how you cut it, things will not be as much fun as shopping and speculative "investing" were. The fiesta is over, the economy as we knew it is dead. The national money shamans have danced around the carcass of our dead horse economy, chanted the recovery chant and burned fiat currency like Indian sage, enshrouding the carcass in the sacred smoke of burning cash. And indeed, they have managed to prop up the carcass to appear life-like from a distance, if you squint through the smoke just right. But it still stinks here from the inside. Clearly at some point we must find a new horse to ride, and sure as god made little green apples one is broaching the horizon. And it looks exactly like the old horse. Then too, what else did we expect? His economic team of free market billionaires and financial hotwires includes most of those who helped Bill Clinton sell the theory that Americans didn't need jobs. Actual labor, if you will remember, was for Asian sweatshops and Latin maquiladoras. We, as a nation one third of whose population is functionally illiterate, were going to transmute ourselves into an information and transactional economy. Ain't gonna sweat no mo' no mo' - just drink wine and sing about Jesus all day. Along with these economic hotwires came literally hundreds of K Street and Democratic lobbyists. Supposedly, every president is forced to hire these guys because no one else seems to have the connections or knows how to get a bill through Congress. Consequently, the current regime's definition of a recovery is more of the same as ever. A return of the mortgage market and credit to its former level - the level that blew us out of the water in the first place. Ah, but we're gonna manage it better this time. There is no one-trick pony on earth equal to capitalism. Somewhere in the smoking wreckage lie the solutions. The solutions we aren't allowed to discuss: adoption of a Wall Street securities speculation tax; repeal of the Taft-Hartley anti-union laws; ending corporate personhood; cutting the bloated vampire bleeding the economy, the military budget; full single payer health care insurance, not some "public option" that is neither fish nor fowl; taxation instead of credits for carbon pollution; reversal of inflammatory U.S. policy in the Middle East (as in, get the hell out, begin kicking the oil addiction and quit backing the spoiled murderous brat that is Israel). Meanwhile we may all feel free to row ourselves to hell in the same hand basket. Except of course the elites, the top five percent or so among us. But 95 percent is close enough to be called democratic, so what the hell. The trivialized media, having internalized the system's values, will continue to act as rowing captain calling out the strokes. News gathering in America is its own special hell, and reduces its practitioners to banality and elite sycophancy. But Big Money calls the shots. With luck we will see at least some reverse of the Bush regime's assault on habeas corpus, due process, privacy. Changing such laws doesn't much affect that one percent whose income is equal to the combined bottom fifty percent of Americans. Beyond that, the big money is constitutionally protected. Our Constitution is first and foremost a property document protecting their money. In actual practice, our constitutional civil liberties, inspiring as they are in concept to people around the world, are mainly side action to make the institutionalization of the owning class more palatable. You can argue that may not have been the intent of the slave owning, rent collecting, upper class founding fathers. But you would be full of shit. We can keep on pretending to be independent, free to keep on living in those houses on which we still owe $300,000. But they own and control the money that comes through our hands. And they plan to keep on owning it and charging us to use it. On the positive side, there has probably been no more fertile opportunity to improve US international relations since post World War Two. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bolton were about as endearing as pederasts at a baby shower. And now that we have shot up half the planet, certainly there is no more globally attractive person to patch up the bullet holes than Barack Obama (yes, I know Bill Clinton's feelings are hurt by that). Awarding him the Nobel Peace Prize (again Bill Clinton's feeling are sorely wounded) was an invitation to rejoin the human race. Of course, there are a significant number of Americans still who could not give a rat's ass about world opinion of the good ole USA. Nearly every damned one of my neighbors back in Virginia, in fact. The sharks are still running the only game in town and they have never had it better. To be sure, with the economic collapse some of the financial lords won't pile quite up as many millions this year. Others will however have a record year. All are still squatting in the tall cotton. Their grandfathers who so hated FDR's reforms must be chugging cognac in hell celebrating today's America. America's unions have been neutered and taught to beg. At long last we have established a permanent underclass and deindustrialized the country in favor of low wage service industries here and dirt cheap labor from abroad. We've managed to harden the education and income gap into something an American oligarch can take pride in. Hell, my bank card is issued by Prescott Bush's Union Bank and my most recent mortgage was held by J P Morgan's creation. My electricity is generated by Rockefeller's coal and energy holdings and my Exxon gasoline credit card is issued by a successor to Standard oil. The breakfast I eat comes from Archer Daniels Midland. So did my dog's breakfast. We are the very products and property of these people and their institutions. With peak oil, population pressure, vanishing world resources and global warming, we can never again be what we once were - a civilization occupying a relative material paradise through a danse macabre of planetarily unsustainable growth. But no presidential candidate is going to run on the promise that "If we do everything just right, pull in our belts and sacrifice, we can at best be a second world nation in fifty years, providing we don't mind the lack of oxygen and a few cancers here and there". Better to hawk the myth of profitable pollution through carbon credits. Which Obama is doing. We burn the grain supplies of starving nations in our vehicles. Skilled American construction workers now unemployed drive their big trucks into town and knock at my door asking to rake my leaves for ten bucks. There is nothing ironic in this to their minds. "Middle class" people making $150,000 a year will get a new tax break (as if we were all earning 150K). Energy prices are predicted to stabilize because we intend to burn the state of West Virginia in our power plants. The corpses of our young people are still being unloaded from cargo planes at Dover Delaware, but from two fronts now. Mortgage foreclosures are expected to double before they slacken. I cannot imagine debtors not getting at least temporary relief, if not decent jobs or affordable health care. Surely we will see more "change". But never under any conditions will we be allowed to touch the real money, or get anywhere near it, much less redistribute it. Because, as a bookie friend once told me, "You got your common man living on hope, lottery tickets, or the dogs or the ponies, and you got operators. People who can see the whole game in play. They set the rules. Because they hold the money. That ain't never gonna change." On the other hand national opinion changes almost hourly. But if the starting gate bell rang right now for the next presidential race, I'd have to put ten bucks on Obama to place. We cannot assume the Republican party will remain stupid. Assumptions don't work at all. Remember what happened when we assumed the Democrats were capable of courage and leadership? _____ Joe Bageant is author of the book, Deer Hunting With Jesus: Dispatches from America's Class War (2007), about working class America. A complete archive of his on-line work, along with the thoughts of many working Americans on the subject of class may be found on his website: http://www.joebageant.com/ (c) 2009 JoeBageant.com All rights reserved. http://www.alternet.org/story/143521/ http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From tal1 at cogeco.ca Mon Nov 2 21:07:22 2009 From: tal1 at cogeco.ca (Tony B.) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 23:07:22 -0500 Subject: [A-List] 5, 000-Acre Afghan Air Base: 25, 000 U.S. Personnel And Growing Message-ID: <313C3D3BA1FA47748C4A813865D88314@TonyPC> ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Rozoff To: stopnato at yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 10:27 PM Subject: [stopnato] 5,000-Acre Afghan Air Base: 25,000 U.S. Personnel And Growing http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j76qwMZk05IEjIFYrYclWnkC5ihAD9BMU80O0 Associated Press November 1, 2009 Already the main Afghan war hub, Bagram is growing By HAMZA HENDAWI -Plans are under way to build a new, $22 million passenger terminal and a new cargo yard costing $9 million. To increase cargo capacity, a new parking ramp supporting the world's largest aircraft is to be completed this spring. Elsewhere at Bagram, construction has begun on permanent brick-and mortar housing for troops and headquarters for military units....The base command is acquiring more land next year on the east side to expand the base....When the U.S. military took over Bagram in December 2001, the base was 1,616 hectares (3,993 acres)....It is now 2,104 hectares (5,198 acres).... BAGRAM AIR FIELD, Afghanistan: Seen from a tiny village on a recent moonless night, the sprawling U.S. base three miles to the north looks more like a medium-size city than a military facility in a war zone. Bagram Air Field, as the base is formally known, is the largest U.S. military hub of the war in Afghanistan and is home to some 24,000 military personnel and civilian contractors. Yet it is continuing to grow to keep up with the requirements of an escalating war and troop increases. With tens of millions of dollars pouring into expanding and upgrading facilities, Bagram is turning into something of a military "boom town." Large swathes of the 2,000-hectare (5,000-acre) base look like a construction site, with the rumble of building machinery and the scream of fighter-jets overhead providing the soundtrack. The rapid growth here is taking place at a time when the Obama administration is debating the future direction of the increasingly unpopular war, now in its ninth year. Among the options under discussion is a recommendation by U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the overall commander of foreign forces in Afghanistan, to bring in additional U.S. troops, perhaps as many as 80,000. But even with current troop levels ? 65,000 U.S. troops and about 40,000 from allied countries ? Bagram already is bursting at the seams. Plans are under way to build a new, $22 million passenger terminal and a new cargo yard costing $9 million. To increase cargo capacity, a new parking ramp supporting the world's largest aircraft is to be completed this spring. Elsewhere at Bagram, construction has begun on permanent brick-and mortar housing for troops and headquarters for military units, according to Lt. Col. Troy Joslin, chief of Bagram's operations. Hundreds of Afghan builders in traditional tunics, loose pants and hard hats arrive by bus every morning. Dozens of trucks laden with dirt and other building materials come into the base daily. The water and electricity systems and the waste management facility are being upgraded. The Army Corps of Engineers is increasing the capacity of the base's roads as well as building new ones on the east side of the airfield, said Joslin. The base command is acquiring more land next year on the east side to expand the base, according to Joslin. No figure was given. When the U.S. military took over Bagram in December 2001, the base was 1,616 hectares (3,993 acres), according to Capt. Jennifer Bocanegra, a military spokeswoman at Bagram. It is now 2,104 hectares (5,198 acres), she said. .... The base's main road, a tree-lined thoroughfare called "Disney drive," is so congested at times it looks like a downtown street at rush hour. Kicking up dust on that road are Humvees, mine-resistant vehicles, SUVs, buses, trucks and sedans. A pedestrian path running alongside that road is as busy as a shopping street on a Saturday afternoon, with hundreds of soldiers, Marines, airmen, navy officers and civilian contractors almost rubbing shoulders. Similarly, the lines are long at the overcrowded food halls, the American fast food outlets, cafes, PX stores and ATM machines. .... The air field is already handling 400 short tons of cargo and 1,000 passengers daily, according to Air Force spokesman Capt. David Faggard. A new 3.5-kilometer (2.17-mile runway) was completed in 2006, to accommodate large aircraft, he added. Bagram was a major Soviet base during Moscow's 1979-89 occupation of Afghanistan, providing air support to Soviet and Afghan forces fighting the mujahedeen. It also was fought over by rival factions during the country's civil war that followed the Soviet withdrawal. The view from the old Soviet-built air traffic tower, replaced last year by a new, $50 million tower, reveals a picture more akin to a busy commercial hub than a military facility in a war zone. So frantic is the pace at the air field that giant C-17 transport aircraft fill up with soldiers almost as soon as their cargo is emptied. "The current expansion supports thousands of additional Coalition troops, either assigned to or supported from Bagram Air Field," said Bocanegra. With Bagram's rapid growth and increase in importance to the war effort, the need to protect it was never greater. The responsibility for that primarily falls on Air Force personnel and paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division. Bagram lies in Parwan, a relatively quiet province. The Taliban-led insurgency, while growing in numbers and strength elsewhere, is not known to have a significant presence in the province. Still, the base is susceptible to rocket and mortar attacks. This year insurgents have launched more than a dozen attacks on Bagram, killing four and wounding at least 12, according to military spokesman Lt. Col. Mike Brady. =========================== Stop NATO http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato Blog site: http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/ To subscribe, send an e-mail to: rwrozoff at yahoo.com or stopnato-subscribe at yahoogroups.com Daily digest option available. ============================== __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Database | Polls MARKETPLACE Mom Power: Discover the community of moms doing more for their families, for the world and for each other Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity 5New Members Visit Your Group Sell Online Start selling with our award-winning e-commerce tools. Yahoo! Groups Mental Health Zone Mental Health Learn More Yahoo! Groups Small Business Group Ask questions, share experiences. __,_._,___ From tal1 at cogeco.ca Mon Nov 2 22:10:45 2009 From: tal1 at cogeco.ca (Tony B.) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 00:10:45 -0500 Subject: [A-List] The Generals' Revolt In-Reply-To: <5c2e4d230911020930l3f1fa8d3ka6fe7365d1795b6d@mail.gmail.com> References: <5c2e4d230911020930l3f1fa8d3ka6fe7365d1795b6d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5EA63B05A777447EA9B39607CA90A125@TonyPC> Interesting analysis....except...the author seems to totally buy into this myth that the US is in Afghanistan because of 'al Qaeda'...rather than the more or less transparent fact of Afghanistan's geostrategic importance. It's difficult to fathom at times how such 'analysts' can actually function at all whilst operating from within such a propagandistic fog. T. ----- Original Message ----- From: "c b" To: ; "Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx andthe thinkers he inspired" Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 12:30 PM Subject: [A-List] The Generals' Revolt > The Generals' Revolt > > As Obama rethinks America's failed strategy in > Afghanistan, he faces two insurgencies: the Taliban > and the Pentagon > > ROBERT DREYFUSS > Posted Oct 28, 2009 1:51 PM > Rollingstone.com > http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/30493567/the_generals_revolt > > In early October, as President Obama huddled with top > administration officials in the White House situation > room to rethink America's failing strategy in > Afghanistan, the Pentagon and top military brass were > trying to make the president an offer he couldn't > refuse. They wanted the president to escalate the war - > go all in by committing 40,000 more troops and another > trillion dollars to a Vietnam-like quagmire - or face a > full-scale mutiny by his generals. > > Obama knew that if he rebuffed the military's pressure, > several senior officers - including Gen. David Petraeus, > the ambitious head of U.S. Central Command, who is > rumored to be eyeing a presidential bid of his own in > 2012 - could break ranks and join forces with hawks in > the Republican Party. GOP leaders and conservative media > outlets wasted no time in warning Obama that if he > refused to back the troop escalation being demanded by > Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander overseeing the > eight-year-old war, he'd be putting U.S. soldiers' lives > at risk and inviting Al Qaeda to launch new assaults on > the homeland. The president, it seems, is battling two > insurgencies: one in Afghanistan and one cooked up by > his own generals. > > "I don't understand why the military is putting so much > pressure on the White House now over Afghanistan," says > a former U.S. ambassador to Pakistan. "Unless it has > something to do with the presidential ambitions of a > certain Centcom commander." > > The military's campaign to force Obama's hand started in > earnest in September, when the Commander's Initial > Assessment of the war - a highly classified report > prepared by McChrystal - was leaked to The Washington > Post. According to insiders, the leak was coordinated by > someone close to Petraeus, McChrystal's boss and ally. > Speculation has centered on Gen. Jack Keane, a retired > Army vice chief of staff and Petraeus confidant, who > helped convince George W. Bush to get behind the "surge" > in Iraq. In the report, McChrystal paints a dire picture > of the American effort in Afghanistan, concluding that a > massive increase in troop levels is the only way to > prevent a humiliating failure. > > On Capitol Hill, hawkish GOP congressmen seized the > opening to turn up the heat on Obama by demanding that > he allow McChrystal and Petraeus to come to Washington > to testify at high-profile hearings to ask for more > troops. "It is time to listen to our commanders on the > ground, not the ever-changing political winds whispering > defeat in Washington," declared Sen. Kit Bond, a > Republican from Missouri. Attempting to usurp Obama's > authority as commander in chief, Sen. John McCain > introduced an amendment to compel the two generals to > come before Congress, but the measure was voted down by > the Democratic majority. > > As the pressure from the military and the right built, > McChrystal went on 60 Minutes to complain that he had > only talked to Obama once since his appointment in June. > Then, upping the ante, the general flew to London for a > speech, where he was asked if de-escalating the war, > along the lines reportedly suggested by Vice President > Joe Biden, might work. "The short answer is: no," said > McChrystal, dismissing the idea as "shortsighted." His > comment - which bluntly defied the American tradition > that a military officer's job is to carry out policy, > not make it - shocked political observers in Washington > and reportedly angered the White House. > > "Petraeus and McChrystal have put Obama in a trick bag," > says Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, a former top aide to > Secretary of State Colin Powell. "We had this happen one > time before, with Douglas MacArthur" - the right-wing > general who was fired after he defied President Truman > over the Korean War in 1951. > > It isn't clear how far McChrystal and his boss, > Petraeus, are willing to go. There have been rumors > around the Pentagon that McChrystal might quit if Obama > doesn't give him what he wants - a move that would fuel > Republican criticism of Obama. "He'll be a good soldier, > but he will only go so far," a senior U.S. military > officer in Kabul told reporters. > > For his part, Obama moved quickly to handle the > insurrection. One day after McChrystal's defiant London > speech, the president unexpectedly summoned the general > to a one-on-one meeting aboard an idling Air Force One > in Copenhagen. No details of the discussion were > released, but two days later Jim Jones, the retired > Marine general who now serves as Obama's national- > security adviser, publicly rebuked McChrystal, declaring > that it is "better for military advice to come up > through the chain of command." > > The struggle between the White House and the Pentagon is > an important test of whether the president can take > command in a political storm that could tear his > administration apart. Obama himself is partly to blame > for the position he finds himself in. During the > presidential campaign last year, Obama praised the > Afghan conflict as "the right war," in contrast to the > bungled and unnecessary invasion of Iraq. Once in > office, he ordered 21,000 additional troops to Kabul, > painting the war as vital to America's national > security. "If the Afghan government falls to the Taliban > or allows Al Qaeda to go unchallenged," the president > declared, "that country will again be a base for > terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as > they possibly can." He also fired the commanding general > in Afghanistan, David McKiernan, and replaced him with > McChrystal, a close Petraeus ally and an advocate of the > doctrine of counterinsurgency. > > When it comes to COIN, as it's known in military jargon, > Petraeus literally wrote the book: the Counterinsurgency > Field Manual, which has become the bible for proponents > of COIN. In its essence, counterinsurgency demands an > extremely troop-intensive, village-by-village effort to > win hearts and minds among the population of an occupied > country, supported by a lethal killing machine and an > expensive "clear, hold and build" program to eliminate > the enemy from an area and consolidate those gains. > Within the military, COIN has developed a cult > following. "It has become almost a religion for some > people," says Paul Pillar, a former top intelligence > official with wide expertise in terrorism and the Middle > East. > > Supporters of Petraeus and McChrystal acknowledge that > applying COIN to Afghanistan means a heavy U.S. > commitment to war, in both blood and treasure. Even if > Obama dispatches 40,000 additional troops, on top of the > 68,000 Americans already committed, we won't even know > if it's working for at least a year. "That is something > that will certainly take 12 to 18 months to assess," > said Kim Kagan, the president of the Institute for the > Study of War, who helped write McChrystal's request for > more troops. Bruce Riedel, a COIN advocate and veteran > CIA officer who led Obama's review of the war last > March, is even more blunt. "Anyone who thinks that in 12 > to 18 months we're going to be anywhere close to > victory," he said, "is living in a fantasyland." > > In addition, the doctrine of counterinsurgency virtually > assures long-running military campaigns in other hot > spots, even as we're engaged in combat and rebuilding > operations in Afghanistan. "We're going to be involved > in this type of activity in a number of countries for > the next 15 to 20 years," said Lt. Gen. David Barno, a > COIN advocate who served as commander of U.S. forces in > Afghanistan. > > So far, though, COIN hasn't exactly delivered on its > promises. Despite the addition of 21,000 troops in > March, the Taliban have continued to make gains across > Afghanistan, establishing control or significantly > disrupting at least 40 percent of the country. According > to McChrystal's own report, Taliban leaders "appoint > shadow governors for most provinces," set up courts, > levy taxes, conscript fighters and boast about providing > "security against a corrupt government." What's more, > U.S. casualties have skyrocketed: In the four months > since McChrystal took over, 165 Americans have died in > Afghanistan - nearly one-fifth of those killed during > the entire war. > > By late summer, some in the Obama administration began > to have doubts about the efficacy of McChrystal's > counterinsurgency strategy - doubts that greatly > increased in the wake of Afghanistan's disastrous > presidential election in August. Hamid Karzai, > Washington's hand-picked president, was accused of > widespread fraud, including ballot-box stuffing and > "ghost" polling stations. Without a credible Afghan > government, COIN can't succeed, since its core idea is > to build support for the Afghan government. > > Even before the election fiasco, Obama had sent Jones, > his national-security adviser, to Kabul to deliver a > message to his military commander: The White House > wouldn't look favorably on sending more soldiers to > Afghanistan. If the Pentagon asked for more troops, > Jones told McChrystal's top generals, the president > would have "a Whisky Tango Foxtrot moment" - that is, > What the fuck? According to The Washington Post, which > reported the encounter, the generals present "seemed to > blanch at the unambiguous message that this might be all > the troops they were going to get." > > Not long after the Afghan elections, Obama began a top- > to-bottom strategy review of the war. Among those who > started to question the basic assumptions of McChrystal > and his COIN allies were Jones, many of his colleagues > on the National Security Council, and Vice President > Biden. By contrast, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates > and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton remained > remarkably quiet during the assessment, seeming to defer > to the White House when it came to challenging the > Pentagon brass. > > The issue has presented the most difficult political > decision of Obama's presidency thus far. The White House > knew that if Obama were to "fully resource" the military > campaign, he would be going to war without his own > political base, which has turned strongly against the > Afghan war. For the first time since 2001, according to > polls, a majority of Americans believe that the war in > Afghanistan is "not worth fighting." Fifty-seven percent > of independents and nearly three-quarters of Democrats > oppose the war - and overall, only 26 percent of > Americans support the idea of adding more troops. > Indeed, if Obama were to escalate the war, his only > allies would be the Pentagon, Congressional Republicans, > an ultraconservative think tank called the Foreign > Policy Initiative, whose supporters include Karl Rove, > Sarah Palin and a passel of neoconservatives and former > aides to George W. Bush. > > On the other hand, rejecting McChrystal's demands for > more troops would make Obama vulnerable to GOP > accusations that he was embracing defeat, and give > congressional Republicans another angle of attack during > midterm elections next year. Even worse, the > administration has to take into account the possibility > of a terrorist attack, which would allow the GOP to put > the blame on the White House. "All it would take is one > terrorist attack, vaguely linked to Afghanistan, for the > military and his opponents to pounce all over him," says > Pillar. > > Within the administration, Biden has emerged as the > leading opponent of McChrystal's approach to never- > ending war. "He's proposing that we stop doing large- > scale counterinsurgency, that we rely on drones, U.S. > Special Forces and other tools to combat Al Qaeda," says > Stephen Biddle, an expert at the Council on Foreign > Relations who served on McChrystal's advisory team. > Biden's view, which has support among a significant > number of officials and analysts in and out of > government, is that rather than trying to defeat the > Taliban, the United States ought to focus on targeting > Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups that want to strike > at American targets. > > That Biden took the lead, says one former national- > security official, may be a sign that he has the > president's support. "Biden is playing a very inside > game," says the official. "He's in every meeting." In > early October, the vice president held a private session > to discuss war strategy with two members of the > administration who are considered among the more hawkish > members of Obama's team: Hillary Clinton and Richard > Holbrooke, the State Department's special adviser on > Afghanistan and Pakistan. In addition, Biden and Obama, > both former senators, are said to be relying on the > counsel of a pair of relatively dovish former > colleagues, Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island and Sen. John > Kerry of Massachusetts. Kerry, the chairman of the > Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has recently made > comparisons between Afghanistan and Vietnam. Also > weighing in, apparently to advise against sending more > troops, has been Colin Powell, who met quietly with > Obama in mid-September. > > Supporters of Biden's view argue that adding more troops > would actually make the problem worse, not better, > because the Taliban draw support from the fiercely > nationalist Pashtun ethnic group in Afghanistan and > Pakistan, who will mobilize to resist a long-term > occupation. "The real fact is, the more people we put > in, the more opposition there will be," says Selig > Harrison, a longtime observer of Afghanistan at the > Center for International Policy, a think tank formed in > the wake of the Vietnam War by former diplomats and > peace activists. The only exit strategy that might work, > say Harrison and others, is dramatically reducing the > U.S. military role in Afghanistan, shifting the focus > from the Taliban to Al Qaeda, and stepping up political > and diplomatic efforts. Such an initiative would also > require an intensive push to secure support from > Pakistan and Saudi Arabia - which maintain links to the > Taliban - as well as Iran, Russia, India and China. > > "There's only one mission there that we can accomplish," > says Michael Scheuer, who led the CIA's anti-Osama bin > Laden unit for years. "To go into Afghanistan, kill Al > Qaeda, do as much damage to the Taliban as possible and > leave." > > Opponents of that approach insist that it would allow Al > Qaeda to re-establish a safe haven in Afghanistan and > resume plotting attacks. But many terrorism experts > point out that Al Qaeda doesn't need Afghanistan as a > base of operations, since it can plan actions from > Pakistan or, for that matter, from a mosque in London or > Hamburg. "We deal with Al Qaeda in every country in the > world without invading the country," says Sen. Russ > Feingold, a Democrat who serves on both the Senate > foreign-relations and intelligence committees. "We deal > with them in Indonesia, the Philippines, Yemen, Somalia, > in European countries, in our own country, with various > means that range from law enforcement to military action > to other kinds of actions." > > Feingold, who has proposed setting a flexible timetable > for the withdrawal of U.S. forces, says that the > administration must listen to advisers like Biden who > favor shifting course in Afghanistan. "If they do not, > if they refuse to, then we in Congress have to start > proposing our own timetables, just as we did when we > were stonewalled by the Bush administration," Feingold > says. "I'm prepared to take whatever steps I need to, in > consultation with other members of Congress, to make > those proposals if necessary." > > Other Democrats have also expressed doubts about > appropriating more money for the conflict. Monthly > spending on the war is rising rapidly - from $2 billion > in October 2008 to $6.7 billion in June 2009 - and Obama > has requested a total of $65 billion for 2010, even > without another troop surge. "I don't think there is a > great deal of support for sending more troops to > Afghanistan in the country or in Congress," said House > Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the > Senate Armed Services Committee, has declared his > preference for sending trainers to Afghanistan to build > that country's armed forces, instead of U.S. combat > troops. And Rep. Jim McGovern recently got 138 votes for > an amendment that would have required the administration > to declare its exit strategy. "The further we get sucked > into this war, the harder it will be to get out of it," > McGovern says. "What the hell is the objective? Tell me > how this has a happy ending. Tell me how we win this. > How do we measure success?" > > Given the political pressure from both sides, Obama > appears to favor sidestepping the issue. At a meeting > with congressional leaders from both parties at the > White House on October 6th, the president said he won't > significantly reduce the number of troops in > Afghanistan, as many Democrats had hoped - but he also > seemed unlikely to endorse the major troop buildup > proposed by McChrystal. While that approach may quell > the Pentagon's insurrection for now, it only prolongs > the conflict in Afghanistan, postponing what many see as > an inevitable withdrawal. Wilkerson, the former aide to > Colin Powell, hopes Obama will follow the example of > President Kennedy, who faced down his generals during > the Cuban Missile Crisis. "It's going to take John > Kennedy-type courage to turn to his Curtis LeMay and > say, 'No, we're not going to bomb Cuba,'" Wilkerson > says. "It took a lot of courage on Kennedy's part to > defy the Pentagon, defy the military - and do the right > thing." > > [From Issue 1090 - October 29, 2009] > > From rasherrs at eircom.net Mon Nov 2 08:37:17 2009 From: rasherrs at eircom.net (Paddy Hackett) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 15:37:17 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Do the Irish working class have the leadership they deserve? Message-ID: <25160A0DB259475D95F88DC2134BB843@paddyhacket> There is a big problem facing the Irish working class.It is an ideological and cultural problem.The consciousness and culture of the working class is persistently bourgeois. It sees the capitalist system as the natural society. Consequently it sees all economic and social problems as solvable within the framework of capitalism.It has been under the illusion that it can have an indefinite affluent existence under capitalism.It cannot see that most of the problems that beset the working class are a product of the inherent limits of capitalism. It thinks problems can be solved outside of the need to engage in class struggle.Indeed much of the class don't even see themselves as forming part of a class. This is why it supports bourgeois parties such as the Fianna Fail party, the Fine Gael party and the Labour Party and their satellites such as the Green Party and others.The political and social consciousness of the Irish working class is effectively bourgeois. Irish capitalism has a bourgeois working class. This is why too the Irish,dare I say, proletariat have a trade union leadership that collaborates with the government and the state in general. Indeed the Irish state is a neo-corporate state in which the labour organisations are integrated into the state. Given the way in which developments are proceeding there is no need for fascism. The growing authoritarian neo-corporate Irish state fortified by the EU does the job well enough for capitalism. No need for fascism. The Cowan government has successfully made cut backs in the living standards of the working class on an unprecedented scale. Yet there has been little resistance from the workers. A few squeaks here and there --nothing significant. About a year later the "organised working class" looks like its going to mount mass pressure on the government.And even this was of a rather limited character.The demands,being made by the leadership of the planned protests and strikes, had a distinctly reformist ring to them. It must be remembered too that much of the working class is not even "organised" in unions.This appalling is a product of disillusionment with these bureaucratised labour organisations that,much of the time, collaborate with whatever government happens to be in power. It is also a result of the lack of political class consciousness of much of the working class.This is partly a result of the relatively generous welfare benefits and assistance that has been provided by the state.It is intended as a sop that keeps the class quiescent.Many working class families contain one or two young adults that are availing of these hand-outs by the state. Many of them have been obtaining handouts through fraud that render many of them relatively comfortable.But then you have others who have worked hard and obtain few,if any,of these handouts. Clearly they cannot feel much class solidarity for the scammers (lumpen elements) who have little or no interest in working class politics. Many workers see the Fianna Fail government as incompetent and unscrupless.But Brian Cowan has been showing quite some leadership. He has succeeded in pushing through massive cuts in the living standards of the working class and only meeting with very marginal resistance. Generally speaking "moaning" on the Joe Duffy show is about as far as the resistance has gone. The Joe Duffy show is the modern substitute for popular resistance.Indeed the Cowan government succeeded in demobilising mass protests that were to be mounted over six months ago. He is trying it again by engaging in current talks with the trade union leadership. Don't they just luv when Brian calls them in to talk with him. How they suck up to him. In short there is really nothing positive that can be said about the working class in the Irish Republic. It is bourgeois,egoistic and even reactionary.It has little interest in subversive politics and never really questions anything.It is not even religious. It is in many ways just nothing.It exists, in a sense, from the shoulders down.Formal education is just seen as a matter of getting a good job. It is because of the impoverished character of the Irish working class that the radical left in Ireland is correspondingly so weak and impovershied. It is almost all cut from the same cloth --little diversity. Paddy Hackett Related Link: http://paddy-hackett.blogspot.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4931 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091102/12807e56/attachment.txt From toddfboyle at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 13:22:40 2009 From: toddfboyle at gmail.com (Todd Boyle) Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 12:22:40 -0800 Subject: [A-List] Fwd: Financial Cryptography Update: Gold bullion market set to implode? Message-ID: Ian is a longtime author and researcher of cryptographic systems related to banking and payments, Todd Subject: Financial Cryptography Update: Gold bullion market set to implode? From: iang at iang.org Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 20:01:53 +0100 (CET) (( Financial Cryptography Update: Gold bullion market set to implode? )) November 02, 2009 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ https://financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/001205.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------ I don't normally follow the gold talk because on the one hand it is the goldbugs saying "gold is set to explode" and on the other is a bunch of bankers that insult the noble metal, while on the backside buying & selling it short, naked and happy as fast as they can. That is, the story never changes. Which in some senses is good. There has always been an expectation that gold would survive. So far nothing has changed to keep that expectation solid, with gold at $1000 an ounce, up from around $250 8 or 9 years ago. But there is another aspect beyond the price: the market itself. As it happens, this is founded on a thing called "good delivery" bars run by LBMA (London Bullion Market Association), London being the center of the physical gold trading world. This is a good efficient and simple system which works like this: once your gold is "in" the LBMA good delivery programme, you can reliably ship it to any one of the vaults that are in, and sell it within. Deliver it out of LBMA-territory, and your gold loses its status. To put it in, it has to be tested, at some cost. So, most of the physical retail gold that is traded (in bars) is inside the LBMA system. It's just easier to buy and sell when someone guarantees it. Which brings me to the point: Obviously, the guarantee can be wrong. About 10 years ago the debate of unreliable LBMA bars erupted in the digital gold community, and we discovered at that time that the gold is not routinely checked in any way once it is in the system. At all! I predicted then that this would mean the gold would slowly lose its integrity, as insiders raided it sliver-by-sliver, over the many many decades of its operation. It looks like I was right, from this post that JPM sent: http://www.marketskeptics.com/2009/10/gold-market-reaching-breaking-point.html C) In an Asian depository, they've found "Good Delivery" bricks that had been gutted and filled with tungsten. And predictably, the writer goes on to report "B) A number of large interests have demanded audits of gold stored in London." If you hold gold in the LBMA system, be worried. If you are an issuer of digital gold be very worried. Why? Because it looks like the gold markets are about to be tested. Not in price terms but in delivery terms. To summarise a long post by market skeptics (Eric deCarbonnel): * Indians are shifting from buying gold jewellry to gold coins. * China now actively promotes selling and holding of physical gold. That's the government, and every bank! * Hong Kong and Dubai are pulling their physical gold out of London. German and Swiss investors and funds, likewise, and also demanding delivery out of the USA. * There is now an overall trend to take physical delivery from metals facilities (vaults, exchanges, etc). * Which has resulted in a rash of complaints ... which quickly become fingers pointed at possible collapse: delays, "complications", wrong bars, wrong weights, "restrictions", costs blossoming, etc. * New York and Tokyo commodity exchanges are now permitting their gold futures contracts to be settled not in real metal but in shares of gold exchange-traded funds (ETFs)... NYSE-Liffe arbitrarily switched delivery of 1kg bars to ... notes on 1/3 interests in 100 ounce bars. If you can get three notes, you can take a 100 ounce! * irregularities in bar amounts have surfaced at different places (e.g., Canadian Mint) * Deutsche Bank may have recently closed out a gold shortage by buying it from the ECB and delivering it. Apparently, to the tune of 35.5 tons of gold, in one day! 12 days earlier someone shorted the same amount... * gold banks (those big in the trade) are offering 25% over spot to settle in anything but physical gold. Have we got the message that physical gold now counts? If so, then one could wonder why open interest in gold trading on COMEX has since exploded? From August this year, it's jumped from a stable 1000-1100 tons band to around 1450. That's 40% up in a virtually traded commodity that is increasingly being demanded to convert to physical delivery! And, according to their reserves, it cannot be delivered: COMEX only holds 250t. I wouldn't rule out a run on COMEX, and if so, it will likely collapse. That's because its reserves are a fraction of the open interest, so it looks highly vulnerable to being squeezed by the open traders (the "shorts") on one hand and the retail demands for physical delivery. Why won't the former deliver? Because for the most part they haven't got it; a short sale is generally a promise to acquire it when needed. In trading parlance, a lot more of the shorts are "naked shorts" which means they rely on a falling market (it's supposed to be illegal to be naked in a public trading, but a lot of markets look more like a nudist convention than a church meeting). And we have a rising demand for physical, and a rising price in gold. So the squeeze happens this way: first the COMEX warehouse gets cleaned out. Then COMEX puts the squeeze on the short sellers to deliver their promise. Gold, physical, now. Which shorts then suddenly fold their cards, reveal their nakedness and declare mea culpa, I'm a nudist, so chase me. At some point, when enough of this goes on and is reported, the whole pyramid of cards collapses. What's the likelihood of this happening? I feel it is being tested at the moment. It will probably take a rash of more bad financial news to make it happen, faster than we can react. E.g., a couple of months of CITs or European unemployment figures. But it is possible, because the gold markets have not been divorced from the decades of corruption that brought down the other markets. More likely we will see a gradual shift out of COMEX, out of London and across to other gold exchanges; preferably ones outside the western/toxic asset belt, and ones that can more easily prove their reserves. Meanwhile, those who hang on will lose value. Someone has to pay for the frauds of the past. It's definitely not easy to predict when something will happen. But it is possible to point to fundamental and powerful contradictory forces. And that's the situation right now with the markets in gold, if that post is reliable (it might not be, it's from a goldbug, after all!). I would suggest that if people want to speculate in the gold of any form right now, hold physical only. The rest is ... too uncertain in value. That's beyond speculation, that's gambling, only do that if you really enjoy the thrill of losing bar-worths of value. (Note: one thing I loosely follow is goldmoney's blogs and post from founder James Turk. He's just announced his long-running newsletter is now migrated online only, and for free. http://www.fgmr.com/index.html ) -- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 8207 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091102/f542c3e9/attachment.txt From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Tue Nov 3 06:04:21 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 22:04:21 +0900 Subject: [A-List] Thinking the Unthinkable Message-ID: <20091103220421.27901a7b.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> Clusterfuck Nation by James Howard Kunstler Comment on current events by the author of The Long Emergency (2005) www.kunstler.com (November 02 2009) A side-trip to the local mall - where else to buy ammo around here? - evinced an epic struggle for supremacy of the chain stores between the Great Pumpkin and Santa Claus, with both fat-assed icons trying to shove the other out of the primary display sites as if the store aisle were a WWF ring in some grubby forsaken Palookaville far far from the salons of Washington decision-making, which, I guess, this is. This is the kind of place that a Jimmy Stewart character would have called home in 1946; only today it looks like a place taken over by a certain species of space aliens, slovenly in mind as well as body. Our gods are not happy. Anyway, that third fat-assed icon, the Thanksgiving Turkey, was nowhere in sight, perhaps due to the recognition that there is far more grievance than gratitude 'out here' in the fly-over zone. America still does everything possible except prepare to become a different America, perhaps even a better America than the current release, and this is unfortunate because history is merciless. History doesn't care if the dog peed on your homework ... or you had car trouble this morning ... or the tattoo on your neck got infected ... or (to take this in another direction), you justified robbing scores of billions of dollars out of the mortgage sector because your too-big-to-fail company came down with the financial equivalent of swine flu and the top executives were hallucinating that they lived in a world with no boundaries of law or common decency. We're at another one of those weird inflection points of "current events" - a momentous eddy in the larger stream of history. A good deal of the already-proclaimed return to normality ("normalcy" in WGHarding-speak) depends on something close to a normal holiday shopping season, when so much of the nation's merchandise inventory moves from WalMart to under the Christmas tree. Of course, even if it were to turn out like a year-2005-type credit card binge, the result would surely be a sort of hemorrhagic fever of buyer's remorse afterward. An aerial view of the Heartland long about February 1st would show households blowing up like individual kernels of popcorn at an accelerating rate until the terrain itself was obscured by an evil fluff of financial woe suffocating the poor folks trapped under it. Over the weekend, the The Huffington Post ran a McClatchy news service story {1} about Godman Sachs's misdeeds around the issuance of mortgage backed securities. The basic idea in it was that GS was aggressively gathering trash mortgages from fly-by-night "originators" all over America to bundle into tradable security paper, which they then pawned off on feckless, inattentive investors (pension funds, foreign banks, et cetera) seeking miracle returns - at the same time that GS was buying credit default swap "insurance" by the bale, knowing full well that the collateral backing their own issuance of mortgage backed securities was of a quality somewhere between dead carp and dog poop. In other words, they were shoveling shit investments out of one window, and betting against the value of them from another window. Thus a picture resolves of GS's "true opinion" of the securities it paddled, and the question arises whether failure to inform the peddled of this opinion constitutes fraud. I certainly think it does. I've been making substantially the same case in this column for two years now, so it is interesting to see the mainstream media awaken to a story-line that an ambitious nine-year-old could have pulled off the Web over recent months. I also continue to assert that a flurry of bonuses paid out this holiday season by Goldman Sachs and its other amigos at the top of the banking food chain will be greeted by violence - which will be the natural outcome of a society whose government fails to even give the appearance of protecting its citizens from organized crime. How did a sock puppet get appointed head of the US Department of Justice, folks will wonder. How bad is the situation 'out there' really? In my view, things are veering toward such extreme desperation that the US government might fall under the sway, by extra-electoral means, of an ambitious military officer, or a group of such, sometime in the near future. I'm not promoting a coup d'etat, you understand, but I am raising it as a realistic possibility as elected officials prove utterly unwilling to cope with a mounting crisis of capital and resources. The 'corn-pone Hitler' scenario is still another possibility - Glen Beck and Sarah Palin vying for the hearts and minds of the morons who want 'to keep gubmint out of Medicare!' - but I suspect that there is a growing cadre of concerned officers around the Pentagon who will not brook that fucking nonsense for a Crystal City minute and, what's more, would be very impatient to begin correcting the many fiascos currently blowing the nation apart from within. Remember, today's US military elite is battle-hardened after eight years of war in Asia. No doubt they love their country, as Julius Caesar and Napoleon Bonaparte loved theirs. It may pain them to stand by and watch it dissolve like a castle made of sugar in a winter gale. I raise this possibility because no one else has, and I think we ought to be aware that all kinds of strange outcomes are possible in a society under severe stress. History is a harsh mistress. For all his 'star quality' and likable personality, President Obama is increasingly perceived as impotent where the real ongoing disasters of public life are concerned, and he has made the tragic choice to appear to be hostage to the bankers who are systematically draining the life-blood from the middle class. Whatever we are seeing on the S & P ticker these days does not register the agony of ordinary people losing everything they worked for and even believed in. In a leadership vacuum, centers don't hold, things come apart, and rough beasts slouch toward Wall Street. Link {1} http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/77791.html http://kunstler.com/blog/2009/11/thinking-the-unthinkable.html http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 3 07:10:15 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 14:10:15 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Honduras: The struggle must be more intense than ever Honduras: The struggle must be more intense than ever Message-ID: CUBADEBATE: Honduras: The struggle must be more intense than ever Posted to CN by: "Diana Barahona" dlbarahona at charter.net dlbarahona Sun Nov 1, 2009 3:23 pm (PST) http://dianabarahona.blogspot.com/ This is an excellent commentary by a Honduran sociologist that puts the "deal" cut between Zelaya and the class enemies in perspective. I did the translation. I would like to see this republished in as many places as possible--I'm sure that Mr. Salgado wouldn't mind. On the contrary, I believe that was his intention since it was published on a non-commercial Web site called Cubadebate. So if you have a Web site or your own blog, please publish this! Diana Barahona ================================================================ Sunday, November 1, 2009 Honduras: The struggle must be more intense than ever Honduras: A people's victory; the struggle must be more intense than ever by Ricardo Salgado, Honduran sociologist Oct. 30, 2009 Cubadebate SPANISH: http://www.cubadebate.cu/opinion/2009/10/30/honduras-una-victoria-del-pueblo-la-lucha-debe-ser-mas-intensa-que-nunca/ ENGLISH http://dianabarahona.blogspot.com/2009/11/honduras-struggle-must-be-more-intense.html Those who claimed several weeks ago that the president would be restored at the beginning of November, though bound by his hands and feet, in order to legitimate the elections, managed to describe the end that we are witnessing now. But let the record show that it is not the end of the coup; this continues in effect, its purposes prevail; the conditions that brought it about continue just as they were on June 28. The political agreement made under pressure from gringo diplomacy does not cover critical issues, but rather tries to ignore critical matters and highlights the preeminence of oligarchic interests. President Zelaya signed with his restoration what can only be interpreted as the victory of the coup and the putschists. The details continue to be thorny: there is as yet no firm schedule of the actions that will take Zelaya back to the presidential palace. Technically the agreement may keep the constitutional president imprisoned for several more days in the Brazilian embassy, since it is the National Congress that must decide the fate of the country. This same congress, which committed the crime of forging the president's signature and which decreed his removal. Just a small agreement where the thief decides what kind of justice his victim will receive. The Supreme Court, which ordered the arrest and deportation of Manuel Zelaya Rosales, will have to give its legal opinion in order to guide the congress. Brilliant solution. There are several commissions to be formed: follow-up, truth and who-knows-what else. Within the framework of this mess the oligarchy wins the recognition of the fraudulent elections [for Nov. 29]; now Zelaya will lend his efforts to achieve that the gates of international aid are reopened to the now wrecked Honduran economy. In the end there are no guarantees of what is going to happen, neither how nor when. As has happened over all of these tragic months, uncertainty dominates the landscape. We continue to depend on the tricks of the assassins who invent decrees that they don't even respect. Yesterday, contrasting with the negotiating table, the resistance was brutally repressed. In spite of having the required permits, the police and military decided to give the popular movement a new dose of gas, blows and bullets, as a reminder that the agreements don't eliminate the repression; they don't eliminate the human rights violations. It would be very ingenuous to think that we have managed to solve something. The military maintain a very autonomous position with respect to the politicians and obey their business masters, who continue with the idea that their interests will be maintained by beating up the people. The repressive decrees signed by Micheletti also remain in effect. The machine of human rights violations is still alive, well oiled and above all, active against the Honduran people. It seems that the negotiation, at least up until now that I am writing these lines, has forgotten the huge jail that the de facto regime has created. It is worth asking ourselves what will happen now with President Zelaya; will he have the same honor guard? What will be his relationship to the armed forces? And his relationship to Micheletti's Congress? On the other hand the matter of the crimes against humanity committed by the military with the complicity of the de facto regime and the criminal oligarchy remains pending. Fortunately for the Honduran people, through arrogance or clumsiness, the putschists obviated the issue of the amnesty that Oscar Arias had given them in his original plan. Very important questions for the Honduran popular movement will come. The coup was precipitated by the just demands of the Honduran people, which continue without an answer from the ruling classes. Perhaps the latter gained time in order to delay the process of change in Honduras. What is going to happen with the electoral process? There is a fraud that is also not included in the negotiation. Nevertheless, there now will be a lot of pressure so that the progressive candidacies participate in this process. This delicate issue requires a very on-the-mark analysis. Nevertheless, participation in this electoral process, independently of the results, may allow the popular mobilization to continue. Now our vision must be long-term; we must choose very wisely the actions that we are going to take, without renouncing our principles or our demands. The political situation presents new challenges, and now UNITY is a critical matter; not for electioneering ends; the conjuncture obliges us to give answers to the people; answers that include giving our people their political space. It is worth recalling here the many arguments that were made, through all of the comrades' contributions, which have generated opinion. It is worth recalling that the action of the resistance has been key to forcing the dark forces of the right to negotiate positions. Without the popular movement this conclusion would not have been necessary. The protagonism that the people of this country have earned has been a central element for an unusual phenomenon in the history of Latin America to have arisen: an overthrown president is restored to his position. I fervently hope that President Zelaya never forgets that it has been the actions of the people that have won his restitution; that he does not forget his moral debt to the refounding of Honduras. This is a people's victory, but it is only a triumph on the road of much suffering and despair that will surely come in the search for a new country, where we can all live in peace. The oligarchy and the empire have shown that they will give us nothing. If we want to conquer our freedom we must struggle for it. In this way, the slogans remain. Today we celebrate, but we stay alert. The struggle is perhaps more intense today than ever. Today many traitors will emerge once again from the shadows; today we must remember our martyrs with more intensity than ever, to whom we owe the conquering of a dream: the independence of Honduras. Let us remember: the struggle begins here. Let us not make the mistake of mistaking this for our aspirations. For the assassins, neither forgetfulness nor pardon. URL of article: http://www.cubadebate.cu/opinion/2009/10/30/honduras-una-victoria-del-pueblo-la-lucha-debe-ser-mas-intensa-que-nunca/ Posted by Diana Barahona at 2:49 PM 0 comments ------------------------------------------------- "If we do not bring an end to the capitalist system, it will be impossible to save the Earth." Evo Morales From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 3 07:18:45 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 14:18:45 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Triumph for Democracy in Honduras? Message-ID: Triumph for Democracy in Honduras? Monday, November 02, 2009 On Friday October 30th, a U.S. brokered, Agreement for National Reconciliation and the Strengthening of Democracy in Honduras was signed between President Zelaya and putsch leader Micheletti. Among many sectors, the deal is being hailed as a triumph for democracy in Honduras. Indeed, in their statement, also issued on Friday, the National Resistance Front announced a ?celebration of the upcoming restoration of President Manuel Zelaya Rosales as a popular victory over the narrow interests of the coup oligarchy.? The Resistance Front recognizes that this victory has come as a result of four months of struggle and sacrifice by the people in the face of ruthless repression. And indeed, this agreement is a victory and Zelaya?s restoration will happen only because the people have stayed in the streets, have suffered countless acts of repression and have refused to cave in the face of this repression. One lingering question which remains is; can any true will of the people of Honduras be expressed by conducting elections in four weeks, in a context where civil liberties are virtually non-existent and widespread repression by the military and the police continue unabated? The question regarding viability of elections was not addressed in the communication issued by the National Front on Friday. It remains unclear what their position will be regarding the elections. The other major point in their statement was their affirmation of ?a National Constituent Assembly as an un-renounceable aspiration of the Honduran people and a non-negotiable right for which we will continue struggling in the streets, until we achieve the re-founding of our society to convert it into one that is just, egalitarian and truly democratic.? This was a direct refutation of point number two of the Agreement which asks for an: ?abstention from calls for a National Constituent Assembly, either directly or indirectly, and also renouncing the promotion or support of any public consultation for the purpose of reforming the Constitution to permit presidential reelection, modify the form of Government or contravene any of the un-amendable articles in our Constitution.? The Resistance Front continues to move forward socializing with their base what that would look like. On Sunday during the now traditional Sunday Assemblies the theme of the presentation was: ?Paths of Latin American Peoples on the roads to Constituent Assemblies.? There is a firm commitment to the need for this path, as the only real vehicle for meaningful change. Regarding the elections, what is clear; the U.S. decided that it was imperative that the upcoming elections be legitimated; in response to the nearly unanimous international consensus that, conducted by an illegitimate government, election results needed to be rejected. If the elections had been held in this context, it would have resulted in an undefined extension of the chaos. This was clearly not an acceptable option. To avoid this scenario, the U.S. exerted major muscle against the recalcitrant Micheletti, which resulted in an agreement which ostensibly opens the way for Zelaya?s return to the Presidency, albeit in the context of ?National Unity and Reconciliation Government?. If the Honduran Congress, after consulting with the Supreme Court, does in fact reinstate Zelaya as President, it will be an admission that their previous actions were illegal, and will constitute a reversal of the coup which they had previously endorsed. This is a small triumph for democracy but this is where the positive aspects of the Agreement end. The U.S. is now involved in a ?full court press? to assure international recognition of the upcoming elections, in spite of a total lack of conditions in Honduras for holding elections. It was widely predicted months ago, that what we are seeing now would be the scenario; that Zelaya would be reinstated at a very late date, in order legitimize the elections but to effective exclude the participation of alternative candidates. Due to the un-clarity of the Agreement, it is difficult to predict when Zelaya might be reinstated, but even if it happens at the earliest possible moment, it is impossible for there to be transparent and fair elections this month. There are two alternative candidates for President; from the left wing UD party and an independent candidate, who, in the new political context of Honduras, if they were able to put forward a unity candidate, the candidate could conceivably mount a substantial challenge to the two traditional parties. The Agreement has put these two candidates in an exceptionally difficult situation. Because of their proactive resistance to the coup, they have been subject to extensive persecution. The independent candidate, Carlos H. Reyes, has spent part of the last four months in hiding, due to death threats. He was also viciously attacked at a protest three months ago, and has spent his time since the attack in the hospital, and subsequently undergoing therapy for his mutilated wrist. Neither of these two candidates has spent the last months campaigning, because even if they had desired to do so, and they had not been suffering permanent persecution, the restrictions on individual rights have made campaigning essentially illegal. How can there be fair elections when opposition candidates are being actively pursued and persecuted by the police and army? The candidates have not spent their time organizing the estimated 26,000 poll workers they would need in order to at least potentiate transparency at each polling place, and fraud free counting and tabulation. Is there any conceivable way a structure like this can be put in place in such a short period of time, in a context where widespread repression of opposition expression continues? What will prevent the commission of massive fraud in these elections? No systems have even begun to be put in place by alternative candidates that would be able to detect or prevent complete and total fraud. The Agreement was reached on Thursday October 29th (and signed on Friday). On Thursday there were three separate massive attacks by police and army against unarmed protesters in different locations in Tegucigalpa. The march, which had a permit, was brutally attacked in spite of the permission. The third attack happened at night, after the Agreement had been announced; in one of the barrios where ?pot banging? protests continue in defiance of continued repression. How is conceivable that these repressive forces will ?cease and desist? from one minute to the next? Even more frightening, the Agreement puts this same army, which has exhibited persistent brutality during the coup regime ?at the disposition of the Supreme Electoral Council.? The question for all is: Will they see their role as protecting the right to vote for everyone, or repressing those they feel might not vote the way they demand? As the resistance movement in Honduras celebrates the victory in turning around the coup, they are also grappling with the many implications this new context brings. The obvious danger is that an election under these circumstances could bring a very similar power structure as that present under the putsch government, the repressive apparatus firmly entrenched and a sheen of legitimacy which would have never been possible for Micheletti. Tom Loudon Co-Director Quixote Center _______________________________________________ Lasolidarity mailing list Post: Lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasolidarity From ioriwase at mail.mohawknationnews.com Tue Nov 3 07:48:16 2009 From: ioriwase at mail.mohawknationnews.com (Mohawk Nation News) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 09:48:16 -0500 Subject: [A-List] MNN Uncharted Waters of Akwesasne Message-ID: <01dcae29$40120$0cc94085202546@xnote> UNCHARTED WATERS OF AKWESASNE MNN. Nov. 2, 2009. Some things don?t change. Polar Inuit said in 1930: ? white men have quite the same minds as small children. They are easily angered. When they cannot get their way, they are moody and, like children, have the strangest ideas and fancies. [Perkins, John. To the Ends of the Earth. Pantheon. NY. 1981]. The Defenders of the Land, a non-native organization, invited three women from the Akwesasne Peoples Fire to their Ottawa meeting on Saturday, November 1, 2009. About 35 non-native people were there. They walked to the Federal Court Building. A few said some words on the steps. One of the Mohawk women spoke for less than two minutes about the border issue at Akwesasne. Suddenly about ten RCMP surrounded her, all non-natives. One pushed a cell phone at her and told her Major Turcotte, a non-native Aboriginal liaison officer, wanted to speak to her. Turcotte asked her if she had the permission of the Algonquins to be in Ottawa and that she had to ask Chief Commanda if she could visit the city. Otherwise she had no right to be there. It sounded crazy. She hung up and proceeded to Victoria Island. No non-natives were asked if they had authority to be in Ottawa. Misinformation! Ottawa is on the south shore of the Ottawa River which is Haudenosaunee Territory. We never gave these squatters permission to be on our territory according to our law and protocol. Sounds like another ridiculous scheme of CSIS [Canada Secret Intelligence Service] to intimidate, isolate and try to degrade us. Jaggi Singh of Montreal is involved with the Defenders of the Land. He tried to organize our youth in Kahnawake to prop up their own causes without doing anything for us. MNN stopped associating with him. Singh became aggressive and rude. He acted like one of those heavily financed gatekeepers who pretend to be activists to divert the agenda. Recently allegations were made that cops were intimidating his organizations!! The bewildered CBSA Canada Border Services Agency thugs have not been on Kawenoke Island [the island formerly known as Cornwall Island] since May 31, 2009. They fled when we didn?t want these foreigners to be armed for war in the middle of our community so they could shoot or bomb us. They fantasize that we will get tired of freedom and peace and go home! The Mohawks now have a permanent building next to the empty Canada customs check point in the middle of Kawenoke. The CBSA have set up a temporary shack on the north shore at the foot of the International Bridge. The Bridge tolls that were on Kawenoke Island are now on the bridge, which is utterly foolish and dangerous. If there?s an accident, don?t blame the Mohawks. Canada must stop their criminality. Their confused border Gestapo have grabbed at least 40 vehicles from selected Mohawks. If we don?t report to them when they decide, they extort a $1,000 bounty without due process. These racist car jackings could be reported to the police and insurance providers as theft. Another group trying to sabotage the Kaianereh?ko:wa [Great Law] are the Camel Toe Treaty people. Ahab the Arab [the sheik of the burning sand], his partner Fatima of the 7 Veils [without the rings on her fingers or bells on her toes] and some of their followers recently did something interesting. They apparently loaded the cement border marker on St. Regis Road and took it somewhere. Their emotionally charged internet guru and handler, Natasha, must have gushed. Those turning their backs on the Kaianereh?ko:wa are committing treason [Wampum 58]. They are supposed to be banished from Onowaregeh [Great Turtle Island]. They?re also violating the Two Row Wampum by accepting another law, leaving the canoe and boarding the colonial ship. When will they get on their camels and leave? Donations to finish the building are needed. www.akwesasnepeoplesfire.com. 613-937-1813. Kahentinetha MNN Mohawk Nation News, www.mohawknationnews.com kahentinetha2 at yahoo.com Note: Your financial help is needed and appreciated. Please send your donations by check or money order to ?MNN Mohawk Nation News?, Box 991, Kahnawake [Quebec, Canada] J0L 1B0. Or go to PayPal on MNN website. Nia:wen thank you very much. Go to MNN BORDER category for more stories; New MNN Books Available now! From tal1 at cogeco.ca Tue Nov 3 16:26:55 2009 From: tal1 at cogeco.ca (Tony B.) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 18:26:55 -0500 Subject: [A-List] Afghanistan: More Pentagon Contractors Than U.S. Troops Message-ID: ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Rozoff To: stopnato at yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 9:23 AM Subject: [stopnato] Afghanistan: More Pentagon Contractors Than U.S. Troops http://en.trend.az/regions/world/ocountries/1571468.html Trend News Agency November 3, 2009 Still no count of U.S. contractors in Afghanistan The U.S. government does not know exactly how many contractors it employs in Afghanistan, a U.S. commission said on Monday, raising basic questions about oversight of wartime operations, Reuters reported. Contractors in Afghanistan outnumber U.S. troops there and scandals involving misconduct by employees of private firms on the U.S. payroll in Afghanistan and Iraq have prompted calls by Congress for greater accountability. The Commission on Wartime Contracting, a bipartisan, independent commission mandated by Congress, presented data at a hearing showing major discrepancies in different accounting methods used to determine the number of U.S. contractors. A traditional manual count by the U.S. military's Central Command turned up nearly 74,000 U.S. Defense Department contractors in Afghanistan as of June 30 - more than twice the number shown in another survey by the Pentagon. "I kind of want to scream.... Why if it's so important, are we failing to do something so basic?" said Christopher Shays, a former Republican lawmaker and a co-chair of the bipartisan committee. Gary Motsek, an assistant deputy undersecretary of defense, acknowledged in testimony that U.S. efforts to create a system to better count the number of contractors in Afghanistan had so far come up short. "We failed," Motsek said, calling for better funding and regulations to require all U.S. agencies to report figures for contractors. "You should be concerned about the gap, because we are concerned about the gap." Motsek and Redding Hobby, deputy director of logistics, contracting, and engineering at Central Command, indicated that while the manual count system was not 100 percent precise, it was still the best gauge available. .... =========================== Stop NATO http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato Blog site: http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/ To subscribe, send an e-mail to: rwrozoff at yahoo.com or stopnato-subscribe at yahoogroups.com Daily digest option available. ============================== __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Database | Polls MARKETPLACE Mom Power: Discover the community of moms doing more for their families, for the world and for each other Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity 5New Members Visit Your Group Share Photos Put your favorite photos and more online. Yahoo! Groups Small Business Group Ask questions, share experiences Cat Zone on Yahoo! Groups Join a Group all about cats.. __,_._,___ From tal1 at cogeco.ca Tue Nov 3 19:24:01 2009 From: tal1 at cogeco.ca (Tony B.) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 21:24:01 -0500 Subject: [A-List] Monetary Reform ... In-Reply-To: <20091102173501.74f71ec8.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> References: <20091102173501.74f71ec8.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> Message-ID: <58CB2C27AE7E4A6D9F62D94D7D55CE02@TonyPC> Some interesting stuff here...but, of course, what Cook is clearly advocating is captialist refomism...and I find it difficult to understand how the 'economic democracy' he advocates could, a) come about through the mechanisms he describes, b) could, in any case, be maintained in the face of natural capitalist impulses to concentrate power, and c) actually create the conditions for a true economic democracy in the face of the inherently exploitative nature of capitalist political/social relations. Certainly the nationalization of banks and the government control of credit ('social credit') is an essential plank in any revision of present economic social relations. Granted. But to think that you can have a purely 'economic' revolution without a political one...that is, without a redefining of political and social relations ...of power relations between classes...at the same time...is, I proffer, wrong-headed. Just consider for instance the tremendous obstacles we now face in implementing solutions to our various global ecological crises. For in what form do those obstacles present themselves? The answer is that present-day market mechanisms, far from enabling such solutions (for which the technical means already exist), are a positive hindrance to them. Thus, entrenched capitalist interests stand at every key juncture, in the path towards a reconfigured global ecological relationship. The rational planning - and long term vision - that is necessary to implement such solutions are being thwarted by the seemingly inescapable short term interests and visions of the dominant corporate / capitalist players in the key industrial and energy sectors of the economy. To expect that this will all change because the credit system has been revamped (somehow mysteriously...given that the key power brokers still hold sway) is, I think, naive. In short, I applaud Cook's desire and intent to establish 'economic democracy' (and remembering the liberal myth, i.e. "that you can have political democracy without economic democracy"), but I find the 'social credit' movement ideologically stuck in capitalist refomism.... a reformism that prefers to turn a blind eye to the inescapble fact that capitalist economic and social relations are at their heart of hearts...quintessentially exploitative. And in my books, there just t'aint no way of gettin' 'round that. Tony ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Totten" To: Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 3:35 AM Subject: [A-List] Monetary Reform ... > How a National Monetary System Should Work > > by Richard C Cook > > Global Research (May 11 2007) > > > The author has received an overwhelming response to his recent > Global Research report entitled, "An Emergency Program of Monetary > Reform for the United States". The introduction to that report > stated that, "the US financial system headed by the Federal Reserve > System has failed, and ? only an emergency program of monetary > reform can address conditions which may be leading to a catastrophe > like the Great Depression or worse". > > This new report on "Monetary Reform and How a National Monetary > System Should Work" continues the dialogue by outlining the > principles and mechanisms available to help guide the creation of a > monetary system for any nation that wishes to enjoy economic > democracy with prosperity. This would be in contrast to the > collapsing debt-based monetary system overseen by the Federal > Reserve and the other central banks of the world, coordinated at > the top by such institutions as the International Monetary Fund, > the European Central Bank, and the Bank of International > Settlements. > > Note that all the banks of the Western world are ultimately private > institutions owned by the world's super-rich. The international > banking structure is operated by and on behalf of the world's > monetary elite primarily for their own profit. > > Just below the banking system are the giant corporations of the > global economy which derive capital from and funnel profits into > the financiers' empire. Bringing up the rear are the populations > and debt-serfs of the no-longer-sovereign nation states, including > those of the United States, whose participation in the system as > consumers is essential, but whose jobs continue to disappear as > manufacturing is increasingly automated. > > The author had realized as early as 1970 that the central problem > with the world's economy lay on the side of distribution, not > production. He came to Washington, DC, that year and spent most of > the next thirty-six years working within sight of the Washington > Monument, learning how things really work, and pondering the > methods that might be more in concord with such founding documents > of American democracy as the Declaration of Independence and the US > Constitution. Twenty-one of these years were with the US Treasury > Department. > > Now, for the first time, this report builds on the findings of many > of the world's monetary reformers past and present by offering a > complete prescription for a new and better world. This prescription > is radically different from most progressive reform agendas that > address only symptoms of the underlying systemic failures. > > Where Money Comes From > > When setting out to study monetary principles, we must realize how > little we know of the real facts of monetary history. Economics is > an extremely limited discipline rife with untested assumptions and > unchallengeable dogmas. Its most pernicious doctrine is the > assertion that there is something called "the market", where there > is an "invisible hand" that makes everything work out the way it is > supposed to. > > Actually, an economy functions according to the principles > according to which it is designed and regulated. If it is designed > to funnel wealth into the hands of the monetary controllers, then > that is what the "market" and the "invisible hand" will do. If it > is designed to foster "the general welfare", as it should according > to the preamble to the US Constitution, then the "market" and the > "invisible hand" will tend in that direction. > > Unfortunately, we march today to the tune of the monetary elite, so > they are the ones who reap the profits and the benefits. They are > the ones on whom the "invisible hand" lavishes the wealth of the > world. > > It is done through the process of bank-created credit. While during > the nineteenth century other forms of money circulated, such as > large quantities of coinage, silver certificates, and > government-issued greenbacks, almost all the money that exists > today originates through a loan by a financial institution to an > individual or a business. > > When a loan is made it is issued as a liability on the bank's > ledger. When it is repaid, the liability is canceled. With today's > computer systems, all transactions are digitized, of course. The > bank keeps the interest on the loan as its combined administrative > fee and profit. The money that is lent had no prior existence. > > Once money is created as credit, it takes many forms according to > how the loan recipient spends it. Some credit is used by businesses > or individuals as investment in order to generate profits over and > above the amount they must repay to the bank with interest. If the > money is used simply for consumer purchases, the individual > consumer must pay back the loan through future earnings. In those > cases where the borrower defaults on the loan or goes bankrupt, the > money simply remains in circulation however it was spent. > > Unfortunately, large amounts of credit are used mainly for > speculation, not for any benefit to the producing economy. This > includes securities bought on margin and borrowing by hedge funds > where the fund may make a profit even if the value of its > investments goes down. Bank-created credit in this case is little > more than chips in a casino. > > Other borrowing takes place by equity funds and other types of > investors for leveraged mergers or buyouts of entire companies, > where the predators wreck a company's infrastructure by reducing > costs and selling its assets, then pay back their bank loans before > unloading the business on someone else. > > The most important thing to realize about the banking system is > that the money which enters into circulation as purchasing power > must eventually be returned in the repayment of loans. This is why > the Federal Reserve's monetary measures - M1, M2, and M3 - are > meaningless, because so much of it has liens against it. > > We are taught that paying it back is the way things should be - > obviously, if we borrow something, we should pay back what we owe. > > But the peculiar thing is that because the borrowed money pays for > labor, commodities, rent, et cetera, it becomes part of the prices > that are eventually charged for goods and services. However, when > the money goes back to the bank to cancel a loan, that purchasing > power disappears. Neither the banks nor economists ever make note > of the fact that this process creates a chronic shortage of > purchasing power which must be filled by more loans and more bank > profits. The economy is thus a treadmill that borrowers must > constantly trudge along in order to have enough money for survival. > > So a system which is seemingly grounded in the simple adage that if > you borrow you should repay is all wrong. The reason it is all > wrong is that in most cases, individual consumers should never have > to borrow in the first place. And we never ask ourselves why, with > the abundance that is possible from modern science and technology, > should people have to borrow money at interest for the necessities > of life - a house, a car, household expenses, an education, et > cetera. > > Thus we realize that the financial system works against what should > be the real purpose of money, which is to serve as a ticket for the > purchase by people of articles they need to survive or otherwise > desire to utilize once the demand for survival has been met. > > People have needs and desires. The economy is fully capable of > producing all the goods and services needed to fulfill those needs > and desires. But the system is broken, because, despite the > abundance of credit available for financial speculation, there is > not sufficient money available at the consumer level to mediate > between prices and consumption, even when most people have a job. > We still must borrow, and that is wrong. There should be a better > way for society to generate the money for what people need. > > So what is really going on here? > > One of the things that is going on is that money is being > mis-defined as a commodity. People who believe money is a commodity > think it has value in and of itself. But one of the hardest things > to grasp about money is that not even gold or silver money, or > paper money supposedly backed by gold or silver, has or could have > intrinsic value. > > Actually, money is anything that a willing buyer and a willing > seller agree to exchange for something else. Money could be and has > been such things as gold, silver, paper, wampum, cows, stones, > shells, sticks with notches, or, today, electronic blips. What may > appear to give gold or silver value is its scarcity and durability. > But unless there are goods and services available and for sale, > gold and silver are totally useless. You can't eat gold or silver, > live in them, or wear them. In and of themselves they have no > value. What gives any money value is the producing economy and > nothing else. > > So by this definition, bank-created credit, while it may generate > money which a willing buyer and seller agree to exchange, is money > with strings attached, in that at some point, it must travel back > to the bank in cancellation of a debt. Thus a buyer who offers it > to a seller is, in reality, deceiving himself about his actual > ability to pay. He is not a free man. Always lurking in the back of > his mind is that with every article he has purchased he has > shackled himself ever more firmly to future indentured servitude. > > The seller, on the other hand, may breathe a little more freely > having just acquired some of the monetary medium necessary to repay > his own debts. And so it goes, ad infinitum. Even if the money were > backed by gold and silver, the system would work in exactly the > same way. > > So by what right do the bankers bind the economy in such a > straightjacket of debt? Again, the underlying logic is that money > is a commodity. A group of men have money. It is their money, we > believe, rightfully earned. Therefore, because these individuals > have money, they have a further right to lend it to others. > > But under existing laws, the banking system then makes the leap of > assuming that because they have money which can be lent, they have > a right to lend much more than they actually possess. Somehow they > have become fit practitioners of the fractional reserve banking > system whereby, as described above, they can lend simply by > creating debits in their computers, based on some ratio between > their capital stock and their lending ceiling. > > But if bankers can do this, why can't you or I? If I have $1,000, > why can't I then lend $10,000 and collect the corresponding > interest? The answer is that a bank has a government charter and > supposedly can guarantee through various safeguards that the people > to whom it lends can repay. But even this isn't required of a bank > any more if it can package its loans and sell them to some other > business entity, such as an investment company. > > But the fact is that banks can only be created by people who are > already rich, can put up some initial capital, build a functioning > business, and obtain the government charter mentioned above. Once > they do this, they are the masters of the world. > > Also note that under today's highly unstable financial conditions, > it is not only banks which create credit through lending. Since the > deregulation of the 1980s, Wall Street brokerage firms greatly > expanded the system whereby speculative loans are floated for > purchase of securities. This has resulted in a current ratio of > debt to equity of 22:1 in the US securities markets, where debt far > outweighs value. > > What is Credit? > > The word "credit" is one of the most widely-used and important in > the English language. Dictionary.com lists twenty-one definitions. > All these definitions have some connotation of the concept of > "value" and the exchange of that value across the dimensions of > time and space between one person and another. Obviously, the ideas > of "credit" and "money" are closely related. > > The idea of credit when viewed from a macroeconomic perspective > refers to the ability of an economy to produce goods and services > of value to the members of that community. It refers to the > potential value of that economy to support life. What it does not > and cannot refer to is money in and of itself, because money, as we > have seen, has no intrinsic value. Without the credit-potential of > a producing economy, money has no meaning. > > On the other hand, money can be a convenient yardstick to measure > credit, as when we state that the 2006 GDP of the United States was > $12.98 trillion. But actually, the "real" credit of the US economy > was much higher, because our economy is not running at anywhere > near its full capacity. The automobile industry, for instance, is > running at about fifty percent of its physical potential. So the > real credit of the US is actually higher than the GDP. > > "Credit" in an economic sense confers a legal right to draw on the > goods and services that make up the potential GDP of the nation. It > is the way the society agrees to hand out the monetary tickets by > which the GDP may be acquired. > > Obviously, the issuance of either too many or too few tickets will > cause problems. The issuance of too few tickets will result in > underproduction, poverty, even death. The issuance of too many > tickets will result in inflation. When the Federal Reserve creates, > then deflates, asset bubbles, like the currently collapsing housing > bubble, these effects alternate, resulting in the kind of ongoing > economic chaos we have seen for decades. > > It can readily be seen that credit is a cultural phenomenon. It is > the sum total of the entire productive capacity of the nation. It > has grown from the past, exists in the present, and can be > projected into the future. It is the result of the work of untold > millions of people, dead and gone, alive today, and yet unborn. > Many of its results may be proprietary, in terms of businesses, > property, and patents owned, et cetera, but every person who has > ever lived, lives today, or who will live in the future is a > participant in that culture. > > Therefore, credit can and should be viewed as a communal endowment, > a public phenomenon, a part of what is called "the commons", even > with the normal and natural fact of the existence of private > property. So the use of credit and its distribution should be > treated as a public utility, like water or electricity. Everyone > should have a right to its use, according to some rational, lawful, > and humane criteria of need or contribution to creating it. > > As with the use of other utilities, it is the responsibility of the > community to see that credit is used wisely and for positive and > constructive purposes. But no one should be denied it altogether, > because it is a necessity of life. > > Money, as a measure of credit, should therefore be available to the > entire community. The government, as the representative of the > community, has the responsibility of overseeing, coordinating, and > regulating its availability, keeping in mind the fairest and most > socially beneficial ways for it to be utilized. Monetary reformers > would argue that extensive availability of credit to the working > population should be part of the "general welfare" guaranteed by > the preamble to the US Constitution. This should not be confused > with the virtually unlimited availability of credit to speculators > and stock predators as is presently the case with our Wall > Street-based economy. > > But these principles are poorly recognized. Money, and therefore > credit, is viewed as private property, even though most of it, as > stated previously, is made by banks "out of thin air". It is no > exaggeration to say that the existing system is one whereby the > financial elite has confiscated and privatized the most important > public resource of all, more important than water, land, electric > power, et cetera. This has resulted in much of the world's wars, > poverty, and crime. > > Let us again examine the ways money enters into the economic > system, this time looking at the total credit picture of the US > economy. We said that the 2006 GDP was $12.98 trillion. This takes > into account a trade deficit of $726 billion. The question is, > where did the credit come from to purchase the GDP, because, by > definition, it all had to be paid for in prices. > > According to official data, the available national income in 2006 > was $10.23 trillion, including wages, salaries, interest, > dividends, personal business earnings, and capital gains. Of this > amount, approximately one-third was taken through taxes by > government at the federal, state, and local levels. > > Churning through the economy was borrowing of all kinds - for > consumption, commerce, investment, speculation, new government > debt, and to finance business transactions. In fact it was the net > increase in debt - $3.77 trillion - that paid for the difference > between GDP and national income. > > Debt also financed much of the trade deficit by our borrowing to > purchase what was imported from abroad. The need to borrow has been > greatly increased by the decline of the US manufacturing sector, > where well-paying jobs that contributed to the national income have > disappeared or been outsourced overseas. The ratio of debt to > national income has reached historic proportions - 460 percent of > the national income today versus 186 percent in 1957. > > Orthodox economics, including the manipulation of interest rates by > the Federal Reserve, has no tools for resolving this crisis. The > main reason is that neither economists nor politicians understand > it, though bankers certainly do. > > Orthodox economics is helpless because people do not understand how > the gap between production and purchasing power relates to the way > the microeconomics of the corporation translates into the > macroeconomics of nations. We observed earlier in this report that > prices of articles within the economy include the loans that are > taken out during the production process. But these loans are > canceled as bank liabilities when they are repaid. Therefore the > purchasing power of the economy always lags behind prices. > > But this is not the only area where prices include factors that are > not paid out in wages, salaries, dividends, or other sources of > individual or business income. Other factors include retained > earnings, insurance, certain maintenance and overhead costs, plus > the cumulative effect of corporations buying from each other with > payments which never exit the production system. > > As a result, only somewhere between a third and a half of all costs > are ever distributed to consumers. This analysis has been > documented at length by the Social Credit movement and has been > well-known to monetary reformers for decades. > > This gap is what drives nations to seek overseas markets for their > products as the US did so strenuously during the post-World War Two > period. When the US balance of payments later fell into negative > territory, we tried to compensate by the policy of "dollar > hegemony", whereby we foisted our currency on the rest of the world > as the principal means of oil trading, maintenance of currency > reserves, and paying for our trade deficit. > > But as the US internal and external debt grows and our fiscal and > trade deficits deepen, a total systemic breakdown is starting to > take place. The main recent prop of the US economy, the housing > bubble, is deflating. And frantically, we are trying to escape by a > radical devaluation of the dollar combined with an aggressive > military policy based essentially on confiscating the resources of > other nations such as Iraq. > > This, combined with action to prop up our fiscal deficit by > importing dollars spent abroad on manufactured products we no > longer make ourselves, has created a house of cards that must soon > come down. All that is lacking is a major shock, such as a widening > war in the Middle East or inability by foreign creditors to > continue to accept devalued dollars. > > Neither devaluation nor aggression will solve the problem which > derives from the failure of debt financing to create real > purchasing power and thereby resolve the chaos through which a > system built for the profits of the financiers can never produce > enough unencumbered credit to maintain our desired level of > production and the standard of living that goes with it. > > The Prescription > > As with anyone facing bankruptcy, it is time for those who wish to > understand the current US economic crisis to take a deep breath, > step back, and gather themselves in order to correctly assess the > situation. > > Obviously the solution is not to risk blowing up the world by > continuing to resolve our domestic economic problems through > overseas conquests. This is what the Western nations have been > trying to do for centuries, and it appears that the rest of the > world may finally have had enough. This is especially the case > today when the main factor that is floating the US economy is the > huge US trade imbalance where foreign nations must use the dollars > they take in to their ultimate disadvantage by financing a federal > budget deficit that is measured in dollars whose value is dropping. > > Nor does the solution lie on the production side of the equation. > The US and other developed economies are capable of producing > everything their populations need, even accompanied by a reasonable > amount of foreign trade, especially if we can return our industry > to the level of productivity we enjoyed prior to the Federal > Reserve-induced recession of 1979 to 1983 which gave us today's > anemic "service economy". > > Rather the solution lies with the federal government taking back > its constitutionally-authorized control of the credit of the nation > from the financiers and managing it as previously stated - as a > public utility. There is no need to eliminate capitalism, change > the basis of property ownership, abolish corporations, et cetera, > because the organization and administration of the production > process is essentially irrelevant to the real problem. > > Once again, the producing economy is not the problem. It has > performed with tremendous effectiveness in creating the goods and > services people need and want. It would be the basis for real > economic democracy if its bounty could be made available and > distributed in accordance with democratic principles. > > It is essential to realize that the central government of a > sovereign nation has the right, the ability, and the responsibility > to introduce ALL new credit into existence. This is totally > different from having the central bank "print money" by relaxing > lending policies, resulting in an infusion of cheap loans which > must still be repaid. > > Sovereign creation of credit is not based on debt. It is and should > be based on direct spending of money into circulation by the > government itself. Obviously the government should do this in a way > that promotes the best interests of the members of society while > respecting the varying degrees of contribution by those of > different levels of skill and achievement. It is quite possible to > enact such a program with due regard to all established conventions > of private property and the private ownership and control of > existing wealth. > > To those who are concerned that the concept of publicly-controlled > credit postulates a monetary supply that can be turned on and off > like tap water, this is a misconception. There is indeed a > cornucopia of supply on the earth, but it is not of money. If is of > what human beings are capable of producing with the skill of their > hands and their heads and the knowledge of science and technology. > > Money is only a ticket to transfer this abundance from producer to > consumer, but it must be plentiful enough to allow the transfer of > all that is reasonably desired, it should not be misused for > financial speculation, and it is the job of government to bring > that money to the place of the economic activity where it is > needed. The key point is that such money should not be encumbered > by debt to a financial institution, including the banks of the > Federal Reserve System. > > This should be done according the following principles: > > The decisions of what goods and services should be produced should > represent a reasonable mix of what is needed and desired by > consumers with what is required for the public good by way of > regulation and infrastructure. Decisions should be made by a > combination of market forces, business governance, and oversight by > representative government. In other words, production should be > conducted as we imagine it is done at present, though in reality > neither the market, business, nor representative government can > function properly and responsibly today because they are under so > much pressure from a disastrously dysfunctional monetary system. > > Purchasing power should be provided to all individuals whether they > work or not. This is increasingly important as fewer workers are > needed due to automation to produce an increasing amount of goods. > There is no way to avoid dislocation of workers due to change in an > advanced economy, but it is essentially that people be protected > from such change even if they decide to opt out of working for a > living at all. There are many productive things people can do > without having to draw an income from a paying job. The money > provided to people regardless of whether they work would constitute > the National Dividend envisioned by a Social Credit system. One way > to manage such a system would be to require everyone to work until > the age of forty, when optional retirement would be offered. > > The idea of one nation being the world's policeman with military > bases everywhere and a right to conquer other nations at will and > take their resources must be abandoned once and for all. A system > where the nations of the world are financially independent and > self-sustaining as described in this report would lead to the > possibility of international stability and trade among nations and > regions of the world acting as equals. The history of the last > century proves that the drive to war is largely fueled by the need > for financial dominance as an offset to the failure to generate > sufficient internal purchasing power through democratic management > of credit. This syndrome would be eliminated by the monetary > reforms described herein. > > These are the principles - a functioning economy that combines > responsible free enterprise with government regulation and > infrastructure; democratic distribution of a National Dividend > which supplements earned income; and an international system of > economic relationships among sovereign nations acting as equals. > None of these principles is currently being met, and no one in a > leadership position has a plan to take us there, either now or when > the crisis strikes. > > The first measure in bringing about change, taking the US as an > example, would be for the federal government to create a Monetary > Control Board as envisioned by model legislation proposed by the > American Monetary Institute. This board would oversee the entire > process of assuring that the money supply is sufficient to express > the real credit demands of the nation in paying for the GDP. This > would be followed by a combination of the following steps: > > We should spend sufficient credit into existence to supply the > basic operating expenses of government at all levels without > recourse to either taxes or borrowing. In the past, this has been > done by the colonial American legislatures, the Continental > Congress at the time of the Revolutionary War, and the federal > government during the Civil War. Probably two-thirds of existing > federal government expenditures could be eliminated, because much > of it is to compensate for a failed monetary system, including much > of the military machine. Further, at least ninety percent of all > taxes could be eliminated under such a program. The only taxes that > would be retained would be those in the form of user fees for > infrastructure operations and maintenance or those levied as a > control mechanism to prevent inflation. Capital expenses for > infrastructure construction at the federal, state, and local levels > could be financed through a self-capitalized national > infrastructure bank. Government expenditures would continue to > require legislative approval under our republican form of > government which would be enhanced, not threatened, by monetary > reform. > > The remainder of the total societal gap between production and > purchasing power would be filled by a non-taxable National Dividend > of two types. One would be a cash stipend paid to all citizens > which would also serve the purpose of eliminating poverty by > providing everyone with a basic income guarantee. The remainder of > the National Dividend would consist of an overall pricing subsidy, > whereby a designated proportion of all purchases, including home > building expenses, would be rebated to consumers. The total > National Dividend per person would probably exceed $12,000 per year > under today's economic conditions. It would be a calculated value > charged against a government ledger but would be off-budget, with > no need to finance it with taxation or borrowing. > > A portion of the National Dividend would be made available to all > citizens reaching the age of eighteen, who would receive a > non-taxable lump-sum of $60,000 for higher education, trade school, > or business investment. > > Bank financing would be much more limited than at present. Private > sector corporate investment would be funded entirely out of > retained earnings and capital markets without recourse to bank > lending. Bank lending for stock speculation would be abolished as > would leveraged buyouts. > > Bank lending would be accomplished without fractional reserve > methods by requiring banks to supplement their capital and deposits > with credit borrowed at very low rates from the federal government > as publicly-created credit. While the banks would be allowed to add > administrative costs and a reasonable business profit for lending > used to finance commerce, mortgages, and small business start-up, > government guarantees and subsidies should result in net interest > rates to borrowers no greater than one percent. > > International trade would be accommodated through a regulated > system of exchange rates based on real purchasing values of > respective national currencies. > > Results > > This program would not create a Utopia or install a Big Brother to > watch over us. It would not relieve mankind of the need to work, > study, save, take care of our environment, make wise decisions, use > opportunities intelligently, participate in representative > government, care for those less fortunate, provide for our > posterity, practice self-restraint, obey moral strictures, worship > our creator, or love our neighbor as ourselves. > > What this program would do would be to allow the nation's monetary > system to reach the same level of maturity, functionality, and > access presently found, at least potentially, in the physical > economy which utilizes science and technology so effectively in > producing abundant goods and services. > > This means that the program would free mankind from the control of > the monetary elite which has unjustly usurped the fruits of the > labor of everyone else. The amount of money involved in this > control over time is immense. In his report on "An Emergency > Program of Monetary Reform of the United States", the author > calculated that the National Dividend for 2006 should have resulted > in an average stipend paid to each US citizen of $12,600. For a > person aged sixty, this would work out to $756,000 over a lifetime > in current dollars. > > This figure of $756,000 represents the amount of money an > individual has had to borrow from financial institutions to make up > what he should have received as his share of a National Dividend if > Congress had not ceded the public prerogatives of credit-creation > that exist in the Constitution to private financiers. Extrapolated > for the entire US population, the amount of unnecessary borrowing > probably has exceeded $100 trillion since World War Two. We can > gain confidence that this figure is in the ball-park by realizing > that total societal debt in the US today has been reliably > estimated at over $48 trillion. > > Thus it is easy to see that in time, the program of monetary reform > described in this report could eliminate poverty and the main > causes of war, reduce the size of government, and give individuals > a chance to prosper. It would replace the current system of > debt-serfdom caused by monetary strangulation at the consumer level > with true economic democracy. > > Economic democracy may be defined as free access to the bounty of > God's earth, according to one's need, character, ability, and work. > The purpose of this access is for individuals to have the liberty > to work out responsibly their own occupation, lifestyle, identity, > and destiny without these being dictated by external authorities or > the threat of economic ruin. These are the freedoms that are > inherent in the ideals that created America and, though compromised > so much, have been America's gift to the rest of the world. > > The reader might ask why, if these reforms could so readily be > made, weren't they thought of and implemented before? The answer is > that these reforms have been known and promoted by many people in > the past, both known and unknown, including such leaders in America > as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Thomas > Edison, Henry Ford, Herbert Hoover, Franklin D Roosevelt, John F > Kennedy, and many others. But working against such enlightened > leaders has been an international financier conspiracy with immense > political power. > > The modern era of financier control in the US started with the > Federal Reserve Act of 1913. But during the 1920s, the US was still > outstripping the rest of the world with rapid economic growth. This > was due to a favorable financial position with respect to Europe > after World War One, the wide availability of credit in the > domestic economy, rapid industrial progress, and the predilection > of American industrialists to pay their workers generous wages. > > Note that President Herbert Hoover is on this list of enlightened > leaders. It is not generally known that Hoover, elected in 1928, > had become familiar with the Social Credit system which originated > in Great Britain with Major C H Douglas, who published the seminal > work, Economic Democracy, in 1918. Douglas, with intimate knowledge > of the events of the time, later related in his book Warning > Democracy (1931) that in order to counter Hoover's enlightened > economic ideas, the financiers decided to wreck the US economy, > starting with the stock market crash of 1929. > > There is an official version of history, then there is the way > things really happened. Thus Hoover is popularly, but mistakenly, > portrayed as a failed president. But Hoover, an engineer and one of > the most capable presidents in US history, identified the Federal > Reserve, acting on its own, as having brought on the Great > Depression. He responded by creating the Reconstruction Finance > Corporation to revitalize the economy with a fresh infusion of > credit, but, having been blamed for the crash, was voted out of > office in favor of FDR in 1932. > > The RFC remained and was instrumental in rebuilding the economy > over the next two decades. Roosevelt himself understood that the > federal government had to maintain a decisive degree of control > over credit, though he was undermined by people in his own > administration favorable to the financiers. So he never completed a > program of real monetary reform. > > During the 1930s, Douglas was forecasting another world war due to > monetary causes, but he was told during his visits to the US that > the financiers would never allow Social Credit to be implemented. > According to monetary reform folklore, the financial elite looked > around for an economist to combat Douglas's ideas and settled on > John Maynard Keynes. The Keynesian system tried to deal with the > monetary problem through massive government deficits, high taxes, > and rapid economic growth. > > This system worked through the World War Two years and beyond but > ran out of steam after the 1963 assassination of JFK and the loss > by the US of its trade advantages and fiscal solvency during and > after the Vietnam War. The financiers reasserted control throughout > the 1970s, leading to the devastating Federal Reserve-induced > recession of 1979 to 1983 and the deregulation of the financial > industry during the Reagan years of 1981 to 1989. > > That left matters where they stand today. Since the 1980s, every US > economic expansion has been nothing more than a Federal > Reserve-created asset inflation. The latest has been the now > collapsing housing bubble, the largest bubble in history. The > financiers are trying to bring about an orderly decline - the > so-called "soft landing" - though at the likely cost of the wealth, > health, jobs, homes, and perhaps even some of the lives of tens of > millions of demoralized people. > > Will we let them get away with it? Obviously, the government has > bail-outs on its mind, though now, with housing gone, there may be > nothing left for the financiers to inflate for the next round of > chaos. Still, they are trying. Analysts are now calling attention > to a new merger and acquisition bubble and a huge securities > lending boom that has driven the stock market to historic levels > even as consumer purchasing power in the US crumbles. > > If this bubbles bursts, much of the middle class wealth that > remained after the 1987 stock market crash, the 2000 to 2002 > bursting of the dot.com bubble, and the ongoing decline of the > housing market will be gone for good. > > Maybe the party is finally over. Maybe at the end of their 300-year > reign, starting roughly with the creation of the Bank of England in > 1694, the financiers have finally succeeded in doing enough damage > to the world economy that the rest of us are willing to take > action. Or maybe there will be a sufficient distraction by more war > in the Middle East and elsewhere. Maybe peak oil or global warming > will intervene with destruction on too large a scale to ignore. Or > maybe we'll just limp along into the sunset. > > Only time will tell. But however the change may happen, it remains > the author's conviction that, one way or the other, a fair and > intelligent monetary system will someday exist on the planet earth. > > _____ > > Richard C Cook is the author of We Hold These Truths: The Hope of > Monetary Reform (2009) and Challenger Revealed: An Insider's > Account of How the Reagan Administration Caused the Greatest > Tragedy of the Space Age (2007). He is a Washington, DC-based > writer and consultant who, in addition to NASA, taught history and > worked in the US Civil Service Commission, the Food and Drug > Administration, the Carter White House and spent 21 years with the > US Treasury Department. His website is at www.richardccook.com. > > Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole > responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those > of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this > article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for > Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any > inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article. > > To become a Member of Global Research: > http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=section§ionName=membership > > The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research > articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title > are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be > displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or > other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: > crgeditor at yahoo.com > > http://www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use > of which has not always been specifically authorized by the > copyright owner. We are making such material available to our > readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance > a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. > The material on this site is distributed without profit to those > who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research > and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material > for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from > the copyright owner. > > For media inquiries: crgeditor at yahoo.com > > (c) Copyright Richard C Cook, Global Research, 2007 > > http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5615 > > > http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com > http://www.ashisuto.co.jp > > From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Wed Nov 4 01:47:27 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:47:27 +0900 Subject: [A-List] Yes, Virginia Message-ID: <20091104174727.5a1cca68.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> There Are No Reserve Requirements (Part 2/2) by Jake Towne seekingalpha.com (August 12 2009) Since the 1990s, the Fed has changed accounting rules so even the loose ~ ten percent fractional reserve requirement could be thwarted. We live in an era of paper tickets. In Part 1, Fractional Reserve Banking in Pictures {1}, we saw how the banking system creates fraudulent money by creating new money on top of old. The reserve requirement limit used in the example, ten percent, is the figure usually given, which means that from a $10 deposit the banking system could generate $90 of new money. Also, the Fed uses Open Market Operations to create new money by writing a check upon itself. This article will demonstrate that reserve requirements are effectively not in existence and easily avoided by accounting tricks in the US banking system. In my view, the evidence is unrefutable as the sources are from the Fed and documentation from Citigroup. Although I have tried my best to keep the following simple and source my data, please feel free to comment or question and I will do my best to reply. The first chart is from the Fed's latest Purposes and Functions {2} from 2005 on page 51. As can be seen, "net transaction accounts" have a ten percent reserve requirement when over $45 million at a depository institution. Net transaction accounts are checking accounts, demand deposit accounts, NOW (negotiable order of withdrawal) accounts, or credit union share draft accounts (page 135). "Nonpersonal time deposits" are defined (page 129) as a "time deposit held by a depositor other than an individual" such as certificates of deposits, or CDs. These have no reserve requirement. Now what about savings accounts and certificates of deposits? These are termed "nontransaction accounts" by the Fed since they do not meet the requirements of a transaction account {3}. See our next chart, taken from page 21 in this 1993 article {4} from the Federal Reserve Board's Division of Monetary Affairs. Personal savings accounts, CDs, or money market accounts are NOT reservable liabilities since December 1990 as stated directly by the Fed in 1993 and indirectly by their non-inclusion here. So, there are NO reserve requirements for personal savings accounts and CDs. The above leave us only with checking/NOW (or "net transaction") accounts. Here's the text for the "two sub-accounts" trick done for "accounting purposes" by Citibank. "For accounting purposes, all Citibank consumer checking accounts (Regular Checking, Citigold Interest Checking, Interest Checking and Basic Banking Account) consist of two sub-accounts; a transaction sub-account to which all financial transactions are posted; and a holding sub-account into which available balances above a pre-set level are transferred daily. Funds will be transferred to your transaction sub-account to meet your transactional needs. For Regular Checking and Basic Banking Account, both sub-accounts are non-interest bearing. For Citigold Interest Checking and Interest Checking, both sub-accounts pay the same interest rate. Transfers can occur on any business day. Transfers to the holding sub-account will be made whenever available balances in the transaction sub-account exceed a preset level. Transfers from the holding subaccount to the transaction sub-account will be made whenever transaction sub-account balances fall below a predetermined level. Because banking regulations limit the number of transfers between these types of subaccounts, all balances in the holding sub-account will be transferred to the transaction sub-account in the sixth transfer in any calendar month. Both sub-accounts are treated as a single account for purposes of the client's deposits and withdrawals, access and information, tax reporting, fees, etc". (Citibank Client Manual pages 19-20/33) {5} First, note that the account holders have no idea these sub-accounts exist unless they read this fine print. I encourage you to check your checking account's fine print - all of the major banks I have checked use "two sub-accounts", and several nearby local banks in my area have it too. Second, note that the holding sub-accounts may fluctuate daily, and there are no rules whatsoever limiting how much of the currency can be diverted to this holding sub-account. Obviously, the reason for the "two sub-accounts" accounting trick, more politely termed "Deposit Reclassification" by the banking industry (see pages 9 & 10 of this agreement {6} from Camden National Bank), is to have the holding sub-account deemed a nontransaction account and no longer subject to reserve requirements. In Eric deCarbonnel's article "Deposit Reclassification Used To Eliminate All Reserve Requirements" {7}, he refers to additional sources including this easy-to-follow piece from Romney & Associates {8} where the author outlines the benefits and profits from deposit reclassification - by changing reserve requirements at their whims, banks can loan out even more - which is naive insanity of course in the event of a bank run. Speaking of bank runs, let's take a look at the Fed monetary base, reserves, and vault cash. Per the latest H3 report from the Fed {9}, we have the below data (in millions of US Dollars). Note the massive swings in nonborrowed reserves and the monetary base which took place roughly a year ago. In the next chart, I took the reported deposits of FDIC depository institutions - which is an approximation I have made of the US banking system from June 30 2008 {10, page 16} and the latest March 31 2009 {11, page 18) - and listed the July 2008 and July 2009 results from the H3 report. Provided my calculation of dividing the Total Reserves by the FDIC-reported Domestic Deposits is reasonable (I haven't been able to find suitable Fed numbers, hence my usage of FDIC data), the "Towne reserve ratio" was just a shocking 0.6% in July 2008. While the current "Towne reserve ratio" is 10.6% now, this is likely due to the monetary base change below. While I will be the first to note these percentages are just rough numbers, isn't it funny how the math is now close to ten percent? Note that in July 2008, the banking system's vault cash EXCEEDED both required and total reserves. [Vault cash is the physical banknotes that banks keep on hand to meet withdrawals; the vast majority of dollars exists in the form of electrons, and only a tiny sliver is metal coinage.] Now, in July 2009, the required reserves and vault cash have been relatively unchanged. Over the same period, the monetary base has almost doubled from $847 billion to $1,681 billion while reserves grew by about the same amount, from a scant $45 billion to $803 billion. Where did this money come from? It is likely just Fed "liquidity" or newly created currency. We would need to audit the Fed {12} to really be sure, but the timing and amount coincides with the Banker Bailout of October 2008. At any rate, the intention of this money is likely just to paper over the collapse of the banking system last year. Conclusion In plain English, the US banking system is using a sneaky accounting trick listed the fine print of checking account agreements to escape the gravity pull of reserve requirements. The system likely already crashed last year, but the Fed pumped in liquidity last year at the same time as the Banker Bailout to avoid the collapse of this Ponzi scheme. This brings me to an interesting conclusion - at this point in history, our monetary system is really no more than paper ticket printing and excited electrons. [Although technically speaking, dollars are linen with mercury, arsenic, cyanide, titanium dioxide, formaldehyde, lithium, valium, zinc imbedded as I wrote {13} in "The Federal Reserve - A Good Company to Work For?".] Although our central bank, the Fed, can technically NEVER go bankrupt since it has the power to create as many paper tickets as needed, risks over the long-term include psychological events like hyperinflation where the demand to store money goes to zero, and the purchasing power of the currency approaches zero as well. However, the true responsibility lies with US Congress, which "delegated" its control over the currency to the Fed in 1913. As F A Hayek wrote in The Road to Serfdom {14}, delegated autonomy from the legislative body of a socialist state is usually done to escape blame and responsibility for the inevitable mistakes of central planning. Understand that the next time you see your Congressman or -woman, unless he happens to be Dr Ron Paul, they ARE responsible for quite literally stealing purchasing power from your pocket as I related in further detail in "Unlocking the Money Matrix - The Real Interest Rate {15, Part 12 of 15}". The solution? The money power must be returned to We the People. The Fed must be abolished, by populating the US House with representatives who will end the Fed. I've outlined the steps I recommend in slides 26 to 47 of this presentation, but this certainly requires a national debate. One last bit of math. $49 Billion in vault cash divided by 307 million Americans works out to a whopping $160 per person. Maybe Bernanke over at the Fed should fire up the printing presses! Note: Thanks to Eric deCarbonnel whose article "US Banks Operating Without Reserve Requirements" {16} clued me in to the above facts. Interested readers are also recommended to read my last update on the banking system from April "Off a Cliff with No Airbags" {17} as the situation has only worsened, and the conclusion section is still quite relevant. Please ask any questions below and I will do my best to answer them clearly. Links: {1} http://towneforcongress.com/economy/fractional-reserve-banking-in-pictures-part-12 {2} http://www.federalreserve.gov/pf/pf.htm {3} http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=a91cbce06362edbde5a6756d2493e47f&rgn=div8&view=text&node=12:2.0.1.1.5.0.2.2&idno=12 {4} http://federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/0693lead.pdf {5} https://online.citibank.com/JRS/popups/ao/Client_Manual_20090611.pdf {6} http://www.camdennational.com/docs/CNB_disclosure.pdf {7} http://www.marketskeptics.com/2009/03/deposit-reclassification-used-to.html {8} http://www.romney.com/fis/ReclassBenStrat.htm {9} http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h3/current/h3.htm {10} http://www2.fdic.gov/qbp/2008jun/qbp.pdf {11} http://www2.fdic.gov/qbp/2009mar/qbp.pdf {12} http://www.nolanchart.com/article6522.html {13} http://www.nolanchart.com/article6036.html {14} http://www.nolanchart.com/article5069.html {15} http://towneforcongress.com/economy/unlocking-the-money-matrix-the-real-interest-rate-part-1215 {16} http://www.marketskeptics.com/2009/03/us-banks-operate-without-reserve.html {17} http://www.nolanchart.com/article6305.html _____ Jake Towne is running for US Congress in Pennsylvania's 15th District in the 2010 election as a citizen unaffiliated with any political parties. Jake also writes at www.LibertyMaven.com and www.CampaignForLiberty.com. A master campaign presentation for internet viewing is available. A novel campaign website built by Raging Debate, TowneForCongress.com has recently opened. We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. As always, unlike the NFL, the author grants full permission to allow any accounts of, rebroadcasts, retransmissions, repostings of this article to your blog or anywhere else in order to promote the Restoration of our Republic. Veritas numquam perit. Veritas odit moras. Veritas vincit. Truth never perishes. Truth hates delay. Truth conquers. Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito. Do not give in to evil but proceed ever more boldly against it. http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/274602-jake-towne/22316-yes-virginia-there-are-no-reserve-requirements-part-2-2 http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From noreply at coha.org Tue Nov 3 11:05:37 2009 From: noreply at coha.org (Council on Hemispheric Affairs) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:05:37 -0500 Subject: [A-List] =?utf-8?q?_Outrage_and_Double_Standards=3A_The_Lockerbie?= =?utf-8?q?_and_Cubana_Airlines=E2=80=99_Bombing?= Message-ID: <20091103180459.D9A223E4A0E@mx-out.daemonmail.net> Council on Hemispheric Affairs Research MemorandumCouncil on Hemispheric Affairs Research Memorandum About COHA Contact COHA In the News Internships Outrage and Double Standards: The Lockerbie and Cubana Airlines? Bombings The recent release of convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdel Basete al-Megrahi produced immediate outrage from the White House in reaction to later scenes of jubilation marking his arrival in Libya. Al-Megrahi had been freed on humanitarian grounds by Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill. The former intelligence agent for the Libya government has advanced prostate cancer and is not expected to live more than a few months. He was the only person actually convicted in the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 from London to New York, which killed all 259 on board the aircraft as well as 11 residents of the village of Lockerbie. A majority of the passengers were U.S. citizens. Prior to his release, warnings were given by President Obama and members of Congress to Libya authorities not to celebrate the terrorist?s return. When the images were shown of al-Megrahi waving to a cheering crowd at the Tripoli airport, the rebuke was instantaneous. President Obama said the sight was ?highly objectionable.? White House spokesman Robert Gibbs called the media coverage of the scene, ?tremendously offensive to the survivors that, as I said, lost a loved one in 1988. I think the images we saw in Libya were outrageous and disgusting.? For full article click here This analysis was prepared by COHA Guest Contributor Keith Bolender Tuesday, November 03, 2009 | Research Memorandum 09.2 The Council on Hemispheric Affairs, founded in 1975, is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and information organization. It has been described on the Senate floor as being "one of the nation's most respected bodies of scholars and policy makers." For more information, please see our web page at www.coha.org; or contact our Washington offices by phone (202) 223-4975, fax (202) 223-4979, or email coha at coha.org. If you no longer wish to receive our press releases, you may unsubscribe. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4176 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091103/f0ec2c74/attachment.txt From nscchicago at igc.org Wed Nov 4 00:04:03 2009 From: nscchicago at igc.org (NSC WORKERS COOP) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 01:04:03 -0600 Subject: [A-List] Eva Golinger on Honduras - What Is "Smart Power"? Message-ID: <4B9DC3B66897411EBEF37DB2A5E2A9B1@NSCCHICAGO> From: "Robert Rudner" To: "NSC Chicago" Subject: Eva Golinger on Honduras A Definitive Report on the Crisis in Honduras: A Victory for ?Smart Power? By Eva Golinger* The Ch?vez Code Monday, Nov 2, 2009 Henry Kissinger said that diplomacy is the ?art of restraining power?. Obviously, the most influential ideologue on US foreign policy of the twenty first century was refering to the necesity to ?restrain the power? of other countries and goverments in order to maintain the dominant world power of the United States. Presidents in the style of George W. Bush employed ?Hard Power? to achieve this goal: weapons, bombs, threats and military invasions. Others, like Bill Clinton, used ?Soft Power?: cultural warfare, Hollywood, ideals, diplomacy, moral authority and campaigns to ?win the hearts and minds? of those in enemy nations. The Obama administration has opted for a mutation of these two concepts, fusioning military power with diplomacy, political and economic influence with cultural penetration and legal manuvering. They call this ?Smart Power?. It?s first application is the coup d?etat in Honduras, and as of today, it?s worked to perfection. During her confirmation hearing before the Senate, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton remarked that ?we should use what has been called ?smart power?, the complete range of tools that are at our disposal ? diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal and cultural ? choosing the correct tool, or combination of tools, for each situation. With ?smart power?, diplomacy will be the vanguard of our foreign policy.? Clinton later reinforced this concept affirming that the ?wisest path will be to first use persuasion.? So, what is intelligent about this concept? It?s a form of politics that is difficult to classify, difficult to detect and difficult to deconstruct. Honduras is a clear example. On one hand, President Obama condemned the coup against President Zelaya while his ambassador in Tegucigalpa held regular meetings with the coup leaders. Secretary of State Clinton repeated over and over again during the past four months that Washington didn?t want to ?influence? the situation in Honduras ? that Hondurans needed to resolve their crisis, without outside interference. But it was Washington that imposed the mediation process ?led? by President Oscar Arias of Costa Rica, and Washington that kept funding the coup regime and its supporters via USAID, and Washington that controlled and commanded the Honduran armed forces, involved in repressing the people and imposing a brutal regime, through its massive military presence in the Soto Cano military base. Washington lobbyists also wrote the San Jos? ?agreement?, and in the end, it was the high level State Department and White House delegation that ?persuaded? the Hondurans to accept the agreement. Despite the constant US interference in the coup d?etat in Honduras ? funding, design, and political and military support ? Washington?s ?smart power? approach was able to distort public opinion and make the Obama administration come out as the grand victor of ?multilateralism?. What ?smart power? achieved was a way to disguise Washington?s unilateralism as multilateralism. From day one, Washington imposed its agenda. On July 1st, spokespeople for the Department of State admitted in a press briefing that they had prior knowledge of the coup in Honduras. They also admitted that two high level State Department officials, Thomas Shannon and James Steinberg, were in Honduras the week before the coup meeting with the civil and military groups involved. They said their purpose was to ?impede the coup?, but how, therefore, can they explain that the airplane that forcefully exiled President Zelaya left from the Soto Cano military base in the presence of US military officers? The facts demonstrate the truth about Washington and the coup in Honduras, and the subsequent successful experiment with ?smart power?. Washington knew about the coup before it happened, yet continued to fund those involved via USAID and NED. The Pentagon aided in the illegal forced exile of President Zelaya, and later, the Obama administration used the Organization of American States (OAS) ? during a moment at which it was on the border of extinction ? as a fa?ade to impose its agenda. The discourse of the Department of State always legitimated the coup leaders, calling on ?both parts?to resolve the political dispute in a peaceful way through dialogue.? Since when is an illegal usurper of power considered a ?legitimate part? capable of dialogue? Obviously, a criminal actor who takes power by force is not interested in dialoguing. Based on this Washington logic, the world should call on the Obama administration to ?resolve its political dispute with Al Qaeda in a peaceful way through dialogue, and not war?. The Obama/Clinton ?smart power? achieved its first victory during the initial days of the coup, persuading the member states of the OAS to accept a 72-hour wait period to allow the coup regime in Honduras to ?think through its actions?. Soon after, Secretary of State Clinton imposed the mediation efforts, led by Arias, and by then, so much space had been ceded to Washington, that the US just stepped in and took the reigns. When President Zelaya went to Washington and met with Clinton, it was obvious who was in control. And that?s how they played it out, buying more and more time up until the last minute, so that even if Zelaya returns to power now he will have no space or time to govern. The people were left out, excluded. Months of repression, violence, persecution, human rights violations, curfews, media closures, tortures and political assasinations have been forgotten. What a relief, as Subsecretary of State Thomas Shannon remarked upon achieving the signature of Micheletti and Zelaya on the final ?agreement?, that the situation in Honduras was resolved ?without violence?. Upon signature of the ?agreement? this past October 30th, Washington immediately lifted the few restrictions it had imposed on the coup regime as a pressure tactic. Now they can get visas again and travel north, they don?t have to worry about the millions of dollars from USAID, which hadn?t even been suspended in the first place. The US military in presence in Soto Cano can reinitiate all their activities ? oh wait, they never stopped in the first place. The Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) of the Pentagon affirmed just days after the coup that ?everything is normal with our armed forces in Honduras, they are engaging in their usual activities with their Honduran counterparts.? And Washington is already preparing its delegation of elections observors for the November 29th presidential elections ? they are already on their way. Forget about Cold War torturer Billy Joya who was scheming with the coup regime against the resistance; or the Colombian paramilitary forces sent in to help the coup regime ?control? the population. Don?t worry anymore about the sonic warfare LRAD weapon used to torture those inside the Brazilian embassy in an attempt to oust Zelaya from the building. Nothing happened. As Thomas Shannon said, ?we congratulate two great men for reaching this historic agreement?. And Secretary of State Clinton commented that ?this agreement is a tremendous achievement for the Hondurans.? Wait, for who? In the end, the celebrated ?agreement? imposed by Washington only calls upon the Honduran Congress ? the same Congress that falsified Zelaya?s resignation letter in order to justify the coup, and the same Congress that supported the illegal installation of Micheletti in the presidency ? to determine whether or not it wants to reinstate Zelaya as president. And only after receiving a legal opinion from the Honduran Supreme Court ? the same one that said Zelaya was a traitor for calling for a non-binding poll vote on potential future constitutional reform, and the same one that ordered his violent capture. Even if the Congress? answer is positive, Zelaya would not have any power. The ?agreement? stipulates that the members of his cabinet will be imposed by those political parties involved in the coup, the armed forces will be under the control of the Supreme Court that supported the coup, and Zelaya could be tried for his alleged ?crime? of ?treason? because he wanted to have a non-binding poll on constitutional reform. Per the ?agreement? a truth commission would supervise its implementation. Today, Ricardo Lagos, ex president of Chile and staunch Washington ally, was announced as the leader of the Honduran Truth Commission. Lagos is co-director of the Board of Directors of the Inter-American Dialogue, a right wing think tank that influences Washington?s policies on Latin America. Lagos also was charged with creating a Chilean version of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), la Fundaci?n Democracia y Desarrollo, to ?promote democracy? in Latin America, US-style. Upon leaving the presidency in 2006, Lagos was named President of the Club of Madrid ? an exclusive club of ex presidents dedicated to ?promoting democracy? around the world. Several key figures involved in currently destabilizing left-leaning Latin American governments are members of this ?club?, including Jorge Quiroga and Gonzalo S?nchez de Lozada (ex presidents of Bolivia), Felipe Gonz?lez (ex prime minister of Spain), V?clav Havel (ex president of the Chech Republic) and Jos? Mar?a Aznar (ex prime minister of Spain), amongst many others. In the end, ?smart power? was sufficiently intelligent to deceive those who today celebrate an ?end to the crisis? in Honduras. But for a majority of people in Latin America, the victory of Obama?s ?smart power? in Honduras is a dark and dangerous shadow closing in on us. Initiatives such as ALBA have just begun to achieve a level of Latin American independence from the dominant northern power. For the first time in history, the nations and peoples of Latin America have been collectively standing strong with dignity and sovereignty, building their futures. And then along came Obama with his ?smart power?, and ALBA was hit by the coup in Honduras, Latin American integration has been weakened by the US military expansion in Colombia, and the struggle for independence and sovereignty in Washington?s backyard is being squashed by a sinister smile and insincere handshake. Bowing before Washington, the crisis in Honduras ?was resolved?. Ironically, the same crisis was fomented by the US in the first place. There is talk of similar coups in Paraguay, Nicaragua, Ecuador and Venezuela, where subversion, counterinsurgency and destabilization increase daily. The people of Honduras remain in resistance, despite the ?agreement? reached by those in power. Their determined insurrection and commitment to justice is a symbol of dignity. The only way to defeat imperialist agression ? soft, hard or smart - is through the union and integration of the people. ?The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes longer.? ? Henry Kissinger _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/ From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au Tue Nov 3 23:51:24 2009 From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta) Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2009 17:51:24 +1100 Subject: [A-List] What's new at Links: Honduras deal, Cuba, ISO, S. Africa, Cultural Revolution, Pakistan, African Communist, CPA councillors, anti-war march, NGO cretinism Message-ID: <4AF1246C.8020701@greenleft.org.au> What's new at Links: Honduras deal, Cuba, ISO, S. Africa, Cultural Revolution, Pakistan, African Communist, CPA councillors, anti-war march, NGO cretinism * * * Subscribe free to Links - International Journal of Socialist Renewal - at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373 You can also follow Links on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LinksSocialism Visit and bookmark http://links.org.au and add it to your RSS feed (http://links.org.au/rss.xml). If you would like us to consider an article, please send it to links at dsp.org.au *Please pass on to anybody you think will be interested in Links. * * * Honduras: Deal signed for Zelaya's return, but struggle continues By Stuart Munckton October 31, 2009 -- After more than 120 days of mass resistance by the poor majority of Honduras, against a coup regime that overthrew elected President Manuel Zelaya, the regime has finally signed an agreement for Zelaya's reinstatement. * Read more Cuba: UN for the 18th consecutive year demands end to US blockade Vote: 187 in favour to 3 against, with 2 abstentions * Read more Paul Le Blanc -- Why I'm joining the US International Socialist Organization: Intensifying the struggle for social change By Paul Le Blanc October 2009 -- I have decided to join the International Socialist Organization (ISO) because I believe socialists can and must, at this moment, intensify the struggle to bring about positive social change. * Read more South Africa: Time for a new democratic left party? By Mazibuko K. Jara October 30, 2009 -- Our country is in crisis. There is deepening inequality, many people live in permanent poverty and millions are unemployed for most of their adult lives. Women continue to suffer from social oppression, violence and poverty. The very ecological and biophysical conditions for our human existence are under threat. Retrogressive ideologies in our society are gaining ground: we are going back to ethnic identity, we have retrogressive notions of womanhood, we have seen the rise in the power of undemocratic rule of unelected chiefs. The state is dysfunctional, corrupt and fraudulent. The state seems unwilling to confront the economic system that produces all these crises. Together, none of these socioeconomic problems can be addressed by a South Africa that reproduces capitalism. These problems require solutions that go beyond capitalist accumulation. * Read more China: Youth and the Cultural Revolution By Graham Milner The revolution that brought the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to power in 1949 marked the second great breach, after the Russian Revolution of October 1917, in the 20th century imperialist world order, and initiated a process that was to remove from the capitalist orbit the most populous nation in the world, containing over a quarter of its population. The revolution of 1949 aroused vast expectations not only among China's popular masses, but also among the peoples of the Third World as a whole, and indeed among the socialist-minded everywhere.[2] However, by the end of the 20th century, communism had been overturned in Eastern Europe and the USSR, while in China a largely discredited, authoritarian, Stalinist regime had virtually abandoned anything more than a nominal adherence to socialist ideals. So what went wrong? * Read more Pakistan: What to do about religious fundamentalism? By Farooq Tariq October 28, 2009 -- Once again Pakistan has become the focus of world attention. Every day there is news of the latest suicide attack or military operation, with killings, injuries and the displacing of communities. Recently schools were ordered closed for more than a week. Even children talk about death and suicide attacks. With more than 125 police checkpoints in Islamabad, it has become a fortress city. Lahore and other large cities are suffering the same fate: there are police road blockades everywhere. After each terrorist attack authorities issue another security high alert and set up additional barriers. How ironic that, until recently, officials and the media described these "terrorists" as Mujahideen fighting for an Islamic world. * Read more South Africa: 'The African Communist': 50 years of mobilisation, analysis By Blade Nzimande October 26, 2009 -- A browse through the very first edition of the African Communist in 1959 not only gives an insight into the time and context during which it was launched but also the courageous and defiant character of those who breathed life into our historic journal: ``This magazine, the African Communist, has been started by a group of Marxist-Leninists in Africa, to defend and spread the inspiring and liberating ideas of Communism in our great Continent, and to apply the brilliant scientific method of Marxism to the solution of its problems. It is being produced in conditions of great difficulty and danger. Nevertheless we mean to go on publishing it, because we know that Africa needs Communist thought, as dry and thirsty soil needs rain.'' * Read more Australia: Red councillors during the Cold War: Communists on Sydney City Council, 1953-59 Recent electoral victories in Australia by socialists at the municipal council level -- the Socialist Party's Stephen Jolly in Victoria and Socialist Alliance's Sam Wainwright in Western Australia -- have sparked renewed interest in the experiences of other socialists who have been elected to such bodies. With permission of the Rough Reds Collective, Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal is publishing Beverley Symons' paper that examines the example of Communist Party of Australia members elected to the Sydney City Council in the 1950s. This article first appeared in the 2003 book A Few Rough Reds, published by the Australian Society for the Study of Labour History, Canberra Region Branch. * Read more Britain: Landmark demo against the war in Afghanistan + videos By Robin Beste October 25, 2009 -- Stop the War's demonstration on October 24 brought the centre of London to a standstill. It was a landmark demonstration, led by Lance Corporal Joe Glenton -- the first serving soldier in the British army to join an anti-war march. * Read more Asia: NGOs display `lobby cretinism' over ASEAN human rights commission By Giles Ji Ungpakorn October 25, 2009 -- The Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) is made up of Thailand, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Burma, Brunei and Singapore, which are all authoritarian states. It also includes the semi-democratic Malaysia, along with the Philippines and Indonesia, which are more or less democratic. Would anyone expect a gathering of government leaders from these countries to set up a genuine human rights commission? Apparently, some NGOs from the region did think so. * Read more * * * Links seeks to promote the international exchange of information, experience of struggle, theoretical analysis and views of political strategy and tactics within the international left. It is a forum for open and constructive dialogue between active socialists coming from different political traditions. It seeks to bring together those in the international left who are opposed to neoliberal economic and social policies. It aims to promote the renewal of the socialist movement in the wake of the collapse of the bureaucratic model of "actually existing socialism" in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. ATTENTION: Sign up for regular ``what's new'' announcement emails at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373 Follow Links on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LinksSocialism -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 13136 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091104/ac769ca3/attachment.txt From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 4 08:55:10 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:55:10 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Presidente Zelaya -- letter to Hilary Clinton, Message-ID: <128F63CB5B924579BE18EA1BABD5D759@home9sg93n9r5y> In his letter to Hilary Clinton, Presidente Zelaya (below in Spanish) says he is surprised by the declarations of Thomas Shannon on CNN en Espa?ol Tuesday afternoon where he says that the Government of National Unity and Reconciliation can proceed without President Zelaya being restored as President by the Honduran Congress, and that the U.S. will recognize the Honduran elections without President Zelaya in the Presidential Palace. This directly subverts the power of the Verification Commission which was installed yesterday and Secretary Hilda Solis and Ex President of Chile Ricardo Lagos met with President Zelaya in the Brazilian embassy yesterday evening as the entity that is charged with interpreting and implementing the Accord. It also directly counters the OAS and UN statements on the need to reverse the coup and restore President Zelaya to office. It's vital to pressure Hilary Clinton to publicly renounce the statements made by Thomas Shannon, and to let the Verification Commission proceed with its work. Greetings to all from the Brazilian embassy, andr?s Andr?s Thomas Conteris Democracy Now! en Espa?ol andres at democracynow.org andres at desmilitarizacion.net www.democracynow.org/es Cel. in Honduras 011-504-9777-8514 Tegucigalpa, M. D. C., 3 de Noviembre de 2009 Se?ora Hillary Clinton Secretaria de Estado USA Estimada Secretaria Clinton: Con respecto a las sorpresivas declaraciones dadas hoy a CNN por el Subsecretario de estado Thomas Shannon, donde se pronuncia sobre el acuerdo desconociendo que todav?a esta en curso su cumplimiento, el Gobierno de la Rep?blica de Honduras solicita respetuosamente al Gobierno de EEUU una aclaraci?n. Reconocemos el derecho que el gobierno de EEUU tiene de manifestarse libremente, pero en esta ocasi?n nos vemos obligados a presentar p?blicamente esta Respetuosa solicitud a la Secretaria de Estado de los Estados Unidos, la Sra. Hillary Clinton para que aclare al pueblo Hondure?o , si la posici?n de su pa?s a sido modificada o cambiada sobre la condena al Golpe de Estado en Honduras, su manifestaciones de cumplir las resoluciones de la OEA , ONU lo mismo que el apoyo y respeto al esp?ritu democr?tico del Plan Arias hoy ratificado en el acuerdo de Tegucigalpa-San Jos? y si por el contrario a lo antes manifestado, ahora se busca a toda costa sin esperar el cumplimiento de los acuerdos pretendiendo reconocer las elecciones sin revertir el golpe de estado ni resolver la profunda crisis que enfrenta nuestra pa?s . El Congresista Cesar Ham candidato a la presidencia del Partido unificaci?n Democr?tica , el Ciudadano Carlos H Reyes Candidato Independiente a la Presidencia igual que 50 Alcaldes y 20 Diputados del partido liberal y lista de diputados del Partido Innovaci?n y Unidad (PINU-SD), han reafirmados su retiro del proceso electoral si no se da la restituci?n a la Presidencia de la Rep?blica del Presidente Jos? Manuel Zelaya Rosales previa a las elecciones; asimismo el Frente Nacional Contra el Golpe de Estado compuesto por 42 organizaciones populares federaciones sindicales campesinas ind?genas desconocen igual que su servidor y su gobierno el proceso electoral y los resultados de estas elecciones si se llevan a cabo bajo un r?gimen de dictadura militar y comprobadas violaciones a los derechos humanos . Hoy se instalo la comisi?n de verificaci?n establecida en el acuerdo de Tegucigalpa-San Jos? en la cual uno de sus integrantes es la Secretaria del trabajo del Gobierno de Estados Unidos siendo esta comisi?n la ?nica autorizada para interpretar este acuerdo. Por tanto lo anunciado hoy por el Sub-Secretario de Estado Thomas Shannon contradice a la comisi?n verificadora. La democracia es un bien universal y un derecho de los pueblos confiamos que EEUU como lo ha hecho hasta hora, siga acompa?ando al pueblo hondure?o y a la comunidad latino americana en este proceso pacifico de reconstruir la democracia y el estado de derecho, neg?ndose a reconocer el uso de la fuerzas militares para resolver conflictos pol?ticos a trav?s se los golpes de estado. Respetuosamente nos suscribimos de usted atentamente, Jos? Manuel Zelaya Rosales Presidente de Honduras _______________________________________________ Lasolidarity mailing list Post: Lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasolidarity From suzannedk at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 07:26:53 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:26:53 +0100 Subject: [A-List] Bagram Airforce Base 74-6 Message-ID: Is now over 5,000 acres large, it was 3,000 acres large five years ago. Since the plan is to stay in Afghanistan until all the oil and any other riches are used up and have enriched the U.S., at least another forty years, Bagram may be 10,000 acres large by then, it's present personel at 25,000 may well be up to and over 50,000 by 'ending' time. The U.S. is planning to stay in the Middle East forever, who am I kidding? Should Obama have too many strong reservations we may have another assasination on our hands, just watvh Hilarie's body language as she schmoozes with the Israeli Prim Minister on the podium. Suzanne suzannedk at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 780 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091104/6f07a512/attachment.txt From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 4 10:24:37 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:24:37 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Did Honduras deal weaken Zelaya? Message-ID: <590A1E403FF44C4CA0CA359C86C2C50E@home9sg93n9r5y> Did Honduras deal weaken Zelaya? What first seemed like a victory for ousted President Manuel Zelaya could become a setback for him depending on what ? and when ? the Honduran Congress decides. By Sara Miller Llana | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor from the November 3, 2009 edition Mexico City - When ousted Honduran president Manuel Zelaya and his successor, Roberto Micheletti, signed a deal last week to resolve the crisis that has crippled the Central American nation for four months, Mr. Zelaya was jubilant. He told his supporters he expected to be back in office in a week's time. But as the Honduran Congress, now the ultimate arbiter, prepares to decide whether that will indeed be the case the political waters are in many ways murkier than they have been since Zelaya was toppled on June 28. What first seemed like a victory for Zelaya and the diplomats who secured the deal could become a setback. "Everyone was congratulating the victory of diplomacy on Friday," says Miguel Calix, a political analyst in the Honduran capital, Tegucigalpa. "If you read the deal carefully, Zelaya is weaker now than he was a week ago; the deal does not ensure that Zelaya will be president again." Under the terms of the agreement, which works off of an earlier proposal by Costa Rican President Oscar Arias and brokered last week by US diplomat Thomas Shannon, a national unity government and truth commission are to be formed while the international community is asked to reverse suspensions in aid and recognize the Nov. 29 electoral process. But Zelaya's return to office is complicated and far from certain ? for now. Under the terms of last week's deal, Zelaya can return to office only if Congress approves. There is no timeline for Congress to vote, even though presidential elections are less than four weeks away. Here are two scenarios for the days to come: ? Congress could vote to restore Zelaya to the presidency. This is the scenario that the international community has been demanding all along ? threatening not to recognize Nov. 29 elections if Zelaya is not restored. It would be a diplomatic coup for the US, who got both sides to the negotiating table after talks stalled for months. However, the Honduran Congress backed Zelaya's ouster. Though the presidential contenders may broker a deal for Zelaya's return so that elections are recognized and aid restored, many lawmakers remain firmly opposed to Zelaya, who they accuse of trying to alter the Constitution to scrap presidential term limits. Zelaya denies this. And his supporters say they fear that Congress won't solve the issue quickly. "They are already showing signs of stalling," says Omar Rivera, a member of Zelaya's former government. On Monday Jos? Alfredo Saavedra, who heads the Honduran Congress, said that he had not yet decided when legislators will be called back into session, despite demands from diplomats not to delay the vote. Mr. Rivera says Congress could wait until after elections to make a decision. "If they do delay, there will be problems," says Rivera, who adds that Zelaya will not recognize a national unity government to be set up this week if a decision on his return is not first reached. ? Congress could reject Zelaya's return to office. Many observers are wondering how the US, which has hailed the deal as an "historic agreement," will react if Zelaya is not voted back into power or if Honduran lawmakers stall. For now, they have put their support behind the electoral process. Victor Rico, political affairs secretary of the Organization of American States (OAS), told the Associated Press that "the United States and the OAS will accompany Honduras in the elections." Recognition of elections is a relief to many Hondurans, and for many observers it's the key to moving past the political crisis. "[The deal] provides a path forward so that preparations for the election can get underway in a very serious way," says Eric Farnsworth, vice president of the Council of the Americas, a consultant group based in New York. "What this does is it legitimizes the election. ? I think that continues to be the key." But focusing on the election as the way out of the political crisis is not a solution in the eyes of Zelaya supporters, who will likely intensify their street protests if Zelaya is not restored to office. Many say that the US gains by being able to recognize the vote. "But we feel cheated by the US," says Rivera. "They do not care about the reinstatement of Zelaya, they just care about the elections." While Honduras is dependent on the US more than many other nations, it still remains unclear how the world community will react if Congress does not vote to reinstate Zelaya. If Zelaya is not reinstated, says Kevin Casas-Zamora, the former vice president of Costa Rica and now at the Brookings Institution, "you have no reversal of a coup d'etat," he says. He says that the world community would likely reject that scenario. "The issue will become all the more complicated," he says. "The champagne corks popped out too early." _______________________________________________ Lasolidarity mailing list Post: Lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasolidarity From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 4 10:48:18 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:48:18 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Prensa Latina - Honduras Roundup Message-ID: Prensa Latina - Honduras Roundup Posted to CN by: "Walter Lippmann" walterlx at earthlink.net walterlx Tue Nov 3, 2009 3:19 pm (PST) Hope in Honduras for New Plan to End Crisis Tegucigalpa, Nov 3 (Prensa Latina) The crisis caused by the coup in Honduras remains unsolved despite an accord recently reached, however the setting up of a commission might help unblock the political standoff and put an end to unconstitutionality. Cuerpo : When the pact between the representatives of President Manuel Zelaya and those of the de-facto regime led by Roberto Micheletti was signed in Friday, many in Honduras and in other parts of the world welcomed this event as a hope for returning to the Rule of Law. After inking the document, new contradictions came up, related to different interpretations on what was agreed, some people present in the negotiating table said. According to the de-facto regime, the new proposal does not force the acceptance of the reinstatement of Zelaya and neither is National Congress obliged to decide on the matter with urgency, since no deadline was set. The Commission is aimed at finding a solution to any difference of interpretation or implementation that may come up, one of the representatives of the de-facto regime jurist Vilma Morales said. Attorney Rodil Rivera, representing Zelaya?s team, stressed that any attempt to distort or affect the achievement of the agreement is considered as betraying the country, since the issue that is being discussed is to halt the coup. Both parties hope for the Commission to solve the conflict. gdb/mjm Honduran Congress Analyzes Crisis Agreement Tegucigalpa, Nov 3 (Prensa Latina) The Honduran Congress started Tuesday the analysis of the agreement expected to resolve the national crisis triggered by the coup, but it is yet to be defined when the plenary of the Legislative will discuss the issue. Cuerpo : The document signed last week by representatives of President Manuel Zelaya and the de facto regime left in Congressional hands the restitution of the constitutional leader. Congress leaders said they would discuss today whether to call a special session to deal with the restitution of the dignitary, as agreed in the negotiating table with the mediation of the Organization of American States (OAS) and the US government. The board of directors of the unicameral Parliament must analyze the agreement and set the steps to its implementation, amid a situation characterized by constant delaying pro coup manoeuvres, denounced the movement of popular resistance. After the signing of the agreement last Friday, new disputes emerged between the Roberto Micheletti's regime and the delegates of Zelaya, owing to different interpretations about the agreement, according to representatives of both parties. The meeting of Congresssional leaders is in session some hours before the arrive to this capital of a Verification Commission sponsored by OAS led by Chilean ex President Ricardo Lugos, in charge of supervising the performance of the agreement. Lagos told a radio station here that the way out of the Honduran crisis is "to re-instate President Zelaya owing to limited time left to end his term in office". According to the Chilean politician, will be perfect that the Honduran Legislative puts it to the vote by the legislators as soon as possible. The special meeting, without a defined date, must bring together at less 85 of 128 deputies. According to Zelaya, the regime of Micheletti is trying to ignore the spirit of the agreement and he is turning to delaying strategies. cgm/mjm Anti-Coupist Front Urges Zelaya Restoration Tegucigalpa, Nov 3 (Prensa Latina) The National Front against the Coup d?Etat in Honduras warned today that the restoration of president Manuel Zelaya should be made effective this week to prevent a deepening of the crisis. Cuerpo : The organization grouping tradeunionists, peasants, indigenous, women, progressive polititians and other sectors, will keep a permanent protest in front of the National Congress building, demanding the approval of the return of Zelaya to power. The accords signed on October 30 between the constitutional government and the de facto regime left in the hands of parliament the faculty to restablish the existing executive power before the June 28 coup. However, popular leaders expressed their concern because some political sectors and allies to the dictatorship pretend to dismiss the spirit of what was agreed to through delaying tactics or denying then compliance with the essential issues. ?This is very dangerous because we are less than one month away of the electoral process,? warned the general coordinator of the Front, Juan Barahona. The organization reiterated its decision to not recognize the polls of November 29, if the institutional order is not restored. According to the time schedule, the verifying commission of the agreements should be installed today, while for Thursday, a Unity and National Reconciliation Government is expected to be formed. ?The crisis generated by the coup d?Etat will end when the accords are implemented,? indicated Carlos Eduardo Reina, one of the resistance movement leaders already in its 129 days of protest demanding the return to institutionality. This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 4 10:55:19 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:55:19 -0000 Subject: [A-List] =?windows-1252?q?The_Crisis_Won=92t_Be_Resolved_on_Paper?= Message-ID: <9D7381B07EF54CB7BEB409EE4B5CC616@home9sg93n9r5y> C?leo Alvarez Casildo: The Crisis Won?t Be Resolved on Paper For a November 2010 Referendum on a New Constitution in Honduras By el diario Tiempo San Pedro Sula, Honduras November 2, 2009 http://www.narconews.com/Issue61/article3914.html LA CEIBA: Garifuna leader C?leo Alvarez Casildo recognizes that the imminent restitution of President Manuel Zelaya Rosales is an important step toward returning peace to the nation, but he says that the crisis isn?t totally resolved. Garifuna leader C?leo Alvarez Casildo D.R. 2009 ? el diario Tiempo ?The simple fact that there is a written agreement between parties in conflict really doesn?t resolve the crisis that inflicts the Honduran people,? said the leader, who was national president of the Medical Workers Union (Sitramedhys) in the 1980s. Alvarez Casildo said that this is an agreement between the political and economic classes but at its core it doesn?t solve the accumulated crises that harm the Honduran people. He added that the agreement generates some calm but what must come next are practical steps, for example reform of the Electoral Law so that there can be separate elections for president, congress and mayors. ?There needs to be a referendum in November 2010, that is what we insist on, it doesn?t matter who is president, so that the citizenry can pronounce itself for a new Constitution.? ?That is the source of the national discord, and until it is corrected, we will remain in crisis. A new Constitution of the Republic needs to be written.? ?But the solution is not only found in a new Constitution, but also in a new power relationship where the citizens have better access, support for production, education and quality health care, access to housing, to justice and public safety and a more equitable distribution of wealth.? From cb31450 at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 11:46:57 2009 From: cb31450 at gmail.com (c b) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 13:46:57 -0500 Subject: [A-List] Extensive online repository of Soviet books Message-ID: <5c2e4d230911041046j37d74909g5afbc0ef7f6452e4@mail.gmail.com> Extensive online repository of Soviet books at http://leninist.biz/ http://leninist.biz/ A Abc of Dialectical and Historical Materialism A Abc of Dialectical and Historical Materialism A Abc of Planning: Fundamentals of the theory and methodology of economic planning, An A About Andrei Tarkovsky A About Lenin: Lenin in Soviet Literature A Account to the Party and the People:, An A Across the Soviet Union: Impressions of the USSR A Activeness and Self-Education A Actors Without Makeup A Advocates of Colonialism A Aesthetics and Poetics A Aesthetics, Art, Life: A collection of articles A Aesthetics: A Textbook A Afghanistan Weighs Heavy on My Heart: The reminiscences of soldiers who fought in Afghanistan A Afghanistan, the Revolution Continues A Afghanistan: Between the past and future A Afghanistan: Past and present A Africa Today: Progress, difficulties, perspectives A Africa: Politics Economy Ideology A Africa: Progress, problems, prospects: A African Communists Speak: Articles and documents from "The African Communist" A African Countries? Foreign Policy. A After 14,000 Wars A Against Dogmatism and Sectarianism in the Working-Class Movement A Against Liquidationism A Against Right-Wing and Left-Wing Opportunism, Against Trotskyism A Against Trotskyism: The struggle of Lenin and the CPSU against Trotskyism A Against U.S. Aggression for National Salvation A Against the Threat of Another World War A Age-Group and Pedagogical Psychology A Aggressive Broadcasting, Evidence Facts Documents: Psychological Warfare A Agony of a Dictatorship: Nicaraguan Chronicle, The A Agostinho Neto A Agrarian India Betwen the World Wars A Agrarian Reforms and Hired Labour in Africa A Agrarian Relations in the USSR A Agricultural Co-operatives: Their role in the development of socialist agriculture in the Soviet Union A Agriculture in the U.S.S.R A Aim of A Lifetime:, The A Albert Einstein?s Philosophical Views and the Theory of Relativity A Albert Einstein: Creator and rebel A Alexei Tolstoy Collected Works In Six Volumes: A All About The Telescope A Along the Path Blazed in Helsinki A Alternatives to Positivism. A Always a Journalist A Ambient Conflicts: Chapters from the history of relations between countries with different social system A American Age of Reason: Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, The A American Literary Criticism: An anthology A American Model on the Scales of History, The A American Utopia, The A American Youth Today A Americans: As seen by a Soviet writer, The A Anarchism and Anarcho-Syndicalism A Anatomy of Lies [Amnesty International], The A Anatomy of the Middle East Conflict A Ancient Civilisations of East and West A Andromeda: A Space Age Tale A Anglo-Bulgarian Relations During the Second World War A Anthology of Soviet Short Stories: In Two Volumes: Volume One. A Anthology of Soviet Short Stories: In Two Volumes: Volume Two. A Anthony Eden A Anti-Communism Today A Anti-Communism, the Main Line of Zionism A Anti-Hitler Coalition:, The A Antitank Warfare A Anton Chekhov and His Times A Anton Makarenko: His life and his work in education A Arab Struggle For Economic Independence A Arduous Beginning, The A Are Our Moscow Reporters Giving Us the Facts About the USSR? A Aristotle A Armed Forces of the Soviet Union, The A Arms Trade: A new level of danger, The A Arms and Dollars: Roots of U.S. foreign policy A Army and Social Progress, The A Army and the Revolutionary Transformation of Society, The A Art Festivals, USSR A Art and Social Life A Art and Society: Collection of articles A Artistic Creativity, Reality and Man. A Artistic Truth and Dialectics of Creative Work A As Military Adviser in China A As the People Willed: A documented account of how the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was founded (1917?1922) A Ascent: Careers in the USSR, The A Asian Dilemma: A Soviet view and Myrdal?s concept A Asian Dilemma: The essence of social progress in the transitional period A Astronomy for Entertainment A At the Bidding of the Heart: A At the Centr\ve of Political Storms: The memoirs of a Soviet diplomat A At the Turning Points of History: Some lessons of the struggle against revisionism within the Marxist-Leninist movement A Atlantis A Atomic Nucleus A Authoritarianism and Democracy A Avengers: A Awakening to Life: Forming behaviour and the mind in deaf-blind children A Azerbaijanian Poetry, Classic Modern, Traditional: B Badges and Trophies in Soviet Sports B Basic Economic Law of Modern Capitalism, The B Basic Principles of Dialectical and Historical Materialism, The B Basic Principles of Operational Art and Tactics: A Soviet view, The B Basic Principles of the Organisation of Soviet Agriculture, The B Basic Problems of the Marxist-Leninst Theory: Symposium of Lectures B Basics of Marxist-Leninist Theory B Battle for the Caucasus B Battle of Ideas in the Modern World., The B Battle of Kursk, The B Before the Nazi Invasion: Soviet Diplomacy in September 1939?June 1941 B Beginning: Lenin?s Childhood and Youth, The B Behind the Facade of the Masonic Temple: B Behind the Scenes of Third Reich Diplomacy. B Benefactors of Peace B Big Business and the Economic Cycle: B Big Changes in the USSR: Leafing through the Soviet Journal Kommunist B Biosphere and Politics, The B Birth of Nations, The B Birth of a Genius: The Development of the Personality and World Outlook of Karl Marx B Black Book and Schwambrania:, The B Blacks in United States History B Bolshevik Party?s Struggle Against Trotskyism (1903?February 1917), The B Bolshevik Party?s Struggle Against Trotskyism in the Post-October Period., The B Bolshevik-led Socialist Revolution, March?October 1917, The B Bolsheviks and the Armed Forces in Three Revolutions:, The B Book About Artists B Book About Bringing Up Children, A B Book About Russia: In the union of equals:, A B Books in the Service of Peace, Humanism, and Progress B Books in the USSR B Boris Kustodiev: The Artist and His Work B Boris Pasternak: Selected writings and letters. B Bourgeois Economic Thought 1930s?1970s B Bourgeois Nations and Socialist Nations B Breadwinners, The B Brief Course of Dialectical Materialism: Popular outline, A B British Foreign Policy During World War II 1939?1945 B Broad-Casting Pirates or Abuse of the Microphone: B Builder of Socialism and Figher Against Fascism, The B Bureaucracy in India B Bureaucracy, Triumph and Crisis: New thinking B Bureaucrats in Power?Ecological Collapse B By: ANNA LOUISE STRONG C Camp of Socialism and the Camp of Capitalism, The C Can Man Change the Climate? C Can Socialists & Communists Co-Operate? C Canada?USA: Problems and contradictions in North American economic integration C Capital Accumulation and Economic Growth in Developing Africa C Capitalism and the Ecological Crisis C Capitalism at the End of the Century C Capitalism, Socialism and Scientific and Technical Revolution C Capitalism, the Technological Revolution, and the Working Class C Capitalist Economy C Case for Perestroika: Articles from the monthly Kommunist , The C Categories and Laws of the Political Economy of Communism C Caught in the Act C Causality and the Relation of States in Physics C Cause of My Life., The C Caution: Zionism!: C Cecil Rhodes and His Time C Central Asia and Kazakhstan Before and After the October Revolution C Central Asia and Kazakstan[d] Before and After the October Revolution: Reply to falsifiers of history C Central Asia in Modern Times: C Central V.I. Lenin Museum C Centralised Planning of the Economy C Ch?ing Empire and the Russian State in the 17th Century, The C Challenges of Our Time: Disarmament and social progress, The C Champions of Peace C Changing Face of the Earth:, The C Chapters from the History of Russo-Chinese Relations 17th?19th Centuries C Child Development and Education C Child, Adults, Peers: Patterns of communication C Children and Sport in the USSR C Children and Sport in the USSR C Chile, Corvalan, Struggle. C Chile: CIA Big Business C China Theatre in World War II: 1939?1945., The C China and Her Neighbours from Ancient Times to the Middle Ages: C Choice Facing Europe, The C Choice for Children, A C Christ?Myth or Reality? C Christian Ecumenism C Christianity and Marxism C Cia Target: The USSR C Cia in Asia: Covert operations against India and Afghanistan., The C Cia in Latin America, The C Cia in the Dock., The C Citizenship of the USSR: A legal study. C City Invincible C City of the Yellow Devil: Pamphlets, articles and letters about America, The C Civil Codes of the Soviet Republics., The C Civil Law and the Protection of Personal Rights in the USSR C Civil War in Russia: Its causes and significance, The C Civil War in the United States, The C Civilisation and Global Problems C Civilisation and the Historical Process C Civilisation, Science, Philosophy: C Civilisation, science, philosophy : theme of the 17th World Congress of Philosophy C Classes and Nations C Classes and the Class Struggle in the USSR, 1920s?1930s C Classic Soviet Plays C Classical Islamic Philosophy C Cmea Countries and Developing States: Economic cooperation C Cmea Today: From economic co-operation to economic integration C Cmea and Third Countries: Legal aspects of co-operation C Cmea and the Strategy of Acceleration C Cmea: International Significance of Socialist Integration C Co-operative Movement in Asia and Africa:, The C Collapse of the Russian Empire 1917, The C Comet in the Night: The story of Alexander Ulyanov?s heroic life and tragic death as told by his contemporaries C Coming World Order, The C Comintern and the East: A critique of the critique, The C Comintern and the East: The struggle for the Leninist strategy and tactics in national liberation movements, The C Comintern and the East: strategy and tactics in national liberation movements, The C Communism and Cultural Heritage C Communism and Freedom C Communism as a Social Formation C Communism: Questions and Answers: 1 C Communism: Questions and Answers: 7 C Communism: Questions and answers: 4 C Communist Morality C Communist Party (Cuba): (Collection of documents) C Communist Party in Socialist Society: A critique of bourgeois concepts , The C Communist Response to the Challenge of Our Time, The C Communists and the Youth: Study of revolutionary education C Comprehensive Programme for the Further Extension and Improvement of Co-Operation and the Development of Socialist Economic Integration by the CMEA Member Countries C Comprehensive Science of Man: Studies and solutions, A C Comrade Stalin?the Continuer of Lenin?s Great Work C Concept of Common Heritage of Mankind: From new thinking to new practice. C Concepts of Regional Development C Concise Psychological Dictionary, A C Confrontation or Compromise?: The meaning of worker participation in the management of capitalist enterprises C Conjugation of Russian Verbs C Conservation of Nature C Conservatism in U.S. Ideology and Politics C Consolidation of the Socialist Countries Unity C Conspiracy Against Delgado: A History of One Operation by the CIA and the PIDE C Conspiracy Against the Tsar: A Portrait of the Decembrists C Constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics C Constitutional Law and Political Institutions. C Contemporary Anti-Communism: Policy and ideology. C Contemporary Bourgeois Legal Thought: A Marxist evaluation of the basic concepts C Contemporary Capitalism and the Middle Classes C Contemporary Capitalism: New developments and contradictions C Contemporary International Law: Collection of articles. C Contemporary Political Science in the USA and Western Europe C Contemporary Revolutionary Process: Theoretical Essays, The C Contemporary Trotskyism: Its anti-revolutionary nature C Contemporary World History 1917?1945, A C Contemporary World Situation and Validity of Marxism C Contradictions of Agrarian Integration in the Common Market C Correction of the Convicted: Law, theory, practice C Correspondence Between the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR and the Presidents of the USA and the Prime Ministers of Great Britain During the Great Patriotic War of 1941?1945: VOLUME 1: C Correspondence Between the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR and the Presidents of the USA and the Prime Ministers of Great Britain During the Great Patriotic War of 1941?1945: VOLUME 2: C Cpsu and the Soviet State in Developed Socialist Society, The C Cpsu in the Struggle for Unity of All Revolutionary and Peace Forces, The C Cpsu?s Nationalities Policy: Truth and lies, The C Cpsu: Ideological, political and organisational principles., The C Cpsu: Party of Proletarian Internationalism C Cpsu: Topical Aspects of History and Policy, The C Criminalistics C Crisis of Capitalism and the Conditions of the Working People., The C Crisis of World Capitalism C Critique of Anti-Marxist Theories C Critique of Mao Tse-Tung?s Theoretical Conceptions., A C Critique of Masarykism, A C Cultural Changes in Developing Countries C Cultural Exchange: 10 years after Helsinki C Cultural Life of the Soviet Worker: A Sociological Study, The C Culture and Perestroika C Culture for the Millions C Current Problems of Contemporary Capitalism D Danger: NATO D De Gaulle: His Life and Work D Death Can Wait D Decisions of the Central Committee, C.P.S.U.(B.) on Literature and Art (1946-1948) D Dedication: Stories about Soviet men and women D Definition (Logico-Methodological Problems) D Demography in the Mirror of History D Denis Diderot D Destiny of Capitalism in the Orient D Destiny of the World: The socialist shape of things to come, The D Destruction of Reason, The D Destructive POLICY [Policy of Chinese leadership], A D Destructive Policy, A D Detente and Anti-communism D Detente and the World Today: 26th CPSU Congress: D Developed Socialism: Theory and practice D Developed Socialist Society: Basic features and place in history. D Developing Countries from the Standpoint of Marxist Political Economy D Developing Countries? Social Structure, The D Developing Nations At the Turn of Millennium. D Development by J.V. Stalin of the Marxist-Leninist Theory of the National Question, The D Development of Revolutionary Theory by the CPSU. D Development of Rights and Freedoms in the Soviet State, The D Development of Soviet Law and Jurisprudence:, The D Development of the Monist View of History., The D Dialectical Logic: Essays on its history and theory D Dialectical Materialism and the History of Philosophy D Dialectical Materialism. D Dialectical Materialism: Popular lectures D Dialectics in Modern Physics D Dialectics of the Abstract and the Concrete in Marx?s Capital, The D Dialogue For Peace D Dialogue of Cultures or Cultural Expansion? D Dictionary for Believers and Nonbelievers., A D Dictionary of Ethics., A D Dictionary of International Law, A D Dictionary of Philosophy (1967) D Dictionary of Philosophy (1984) D Dictionary of Political Economy., A D Dictionary of Scientific Communism., A D Difficult Mission: War Memoirs: Soviet Admiral in Great Britain during the Second World War. D Dilemma of Balanced Regional Development in India D Diplomacy of Aggression: Berlin?Rome?Tokyo Axis, its rise and fall. D Diplomatic Battles Before World War II D Disarmament and the Economy D Disarmament: the Command of the Times D Discovering the Soviet Union D Discovery of the Century D Distribution of the Productive Forces: General schemes, theory and practice D Dmitry Shostakovich: About himself and his times D Do The Russians Want War? D Documents and Materials Relating to the Eve of the Second World War: D Documents and Resolutions: the 26th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Moscow, February 23?March 3, 1981 D Domination in 2,545 Endgame Studies. D Dramas of the Revolution. D Drawings by Soviet Children D Dynamic Stability: The Soviet economy today D Dynamic Twentieth Century, The E Early Centuries of Russian History E Early Russian Architecture E Early Stories E East After the Collapse of the Colonial System, The E Eastern Societies: Revolution, Power, Progress: E Echoes of the A-Blast E Ecology and Development E Ecology: Political Institutions and Legislation: environmental law in the USSR E Economic ?Theories? of Maoism., The E Economic Aspects of Capitalist Integration E Economic Aspects of Social Security in the USSR, The E Economic Cycle: Postwar Development, The E Economic Development and Perspective Planning E Economic Geography of the Ocean E Economic Geography of the Socialist Countries of Europe: E Economic Geography of the World E Economic Geography of the World E Economic Geography: Theory and methods E Economic Growth and the Market in the Developing Countries E Economic History: The Age of Imperialism (1870?1917), An E Economic Inequality of Nations E Economic Integration: Two approaches E Economic Law E Economic Neocolonialism: Problems of South-East Asian Countries? Struggle for Economic Independence E Economic Policy During the Construction of Socialism in the USSR E Economic Substantiation of the Theory of Socialism, The E Economic System of Socialism, The E Economic Theories and Reality E Economic Zone: An International Legal Aspect, The E Economics, Politics, the Class Struggle, International Relations E Economies of Rich and Poor Countries, The E Economies of the Countries of Latin America E Economy of the Soviet Union Today: Socialism Today, The E Education in the U.S.S.R. E Education of the Soviet Soldier: Party-political work in the Soviet armed forces. E Einstein and the Philosophical Problems of 20th-Century Physics E Einstein E Elements of Political Knowledge. E Elitist Revolution or Revolution of the Masses? E Elyuchin E Emotions, Myths and Theories. E End of Ideology Theory: Illusions and reality:, The E End of the Third Reich., The E Engels: A short biography E English Revolution of the 17th Century through Portraits of Its Leading Figures, The E Enigma of Capital: A Marxist viewpoint., The E Environment: International Aspects E Envoy of the Stars: Academician Victor Ambartsumyan E Epoch of the Collapse of Capitalism and the Development of Socialism E Era of Man or Robot? E Ernesto Che Guevara E Essays in Contemporary History, 1917?1945 E Essays in Contemporary History, 1946?1990 E Essays in Political Economy: Imperialism and the developing countries E Essays in Political Economy: Socialism and the socialist orientation E Essays on Linguistics: Language systems and structures E Estonia, One of the United Family. E Eternal Man: Reflections, dialogues, portraits E Ethics of Science: Issues and controversies, The E Ethics. E Ethiopia: Population, resources, economy E Ethnic Problems of the Tropical Africa: Can they be solved? E Ethnocultural Development of African Countries E Ethnocultural Processes and National Problems in the Modern World. E Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere E Europe 1939: E Europe and Detente E Europe and the Communists E European Security and Co-Operation: E European Security: Social aspects E Evgeny Vakhtangov E Exercises in Russian syntax with explanatory notes: [no date [ca. 1960]]. E Experience of Industrial Management in the Soviet Union, The E Experience of the CPSU: Its World Significance. E Export of Counter-Revolution: Past and present, The F Face to Face With America: The story of N.S. Khrushchov?s [Khrushchev?s] visit to U.S.A., September 15?27, 1959 F Facts About the USSR F Failure of Three Missions: British diplomacy and intelligence in the efforts to overthrow Soviet government in Central Asia and Transcaucasia... F Fate of Man, The F Faust versus Mephistopheles? F Felix Dzerzhinsky: A biography. F Female Labour Under Socialism: The Socio-Economic Aspects F Feudal Society and Its Culture F Few Salient Points or Things That Agitate Us: A collection of articles, A F Fifty Fighting Years: The Communist Party of South Africa, 1921?1971 F Fifty Soviet Poets F Fifty Years of a New Era: F Fighters for National Liberation: Political profiles F Fighting Red Tape in the USSR F Figures for Fun: F Film Trilogy About Lenin, A F Final Reckoning, Nuremburg Diaries, The F Finale: A Retrospective Review of Imperialist Japan?s Defeat in 1945 F Finance and Credit in the USSR F First Breath of Freedom, The F First Congress of the Communist Party of Cuba: F First Days of the October [sic. ABEBOOKS], The F First Man in Space: F Firsthand News F Five Years? Progress in Agricultural Production and the Tasks for the Future: Report F Following Lenin?s Course: Speeches and articles F Following the Course of All-round Perfection of Socialism F For All Time and All Men [Karl Marx] F For Man?s Happiness: The forum of Soviet Communists F For a Nuclear-Free World F For a Restructuring of International Economic Relations: 20th anniversary of UNCTAD F Foreign Comrades in the October Revolution: Reminiscences F Formation of the Socialist Economic System F Foundations of Marxist Aesthetics F Founding Fathers of the United States: Historical portraits F Fourth Congress of the Lao People?s Revolutionary Party:, The F Fraternal Family of Nations:, A F Frederick Engels: A Biography F Frederick Engels: His Life and Work F Freedom and the Artist F Freedom of Conscience in the USSR F From Anti-Imperialism to Anti-Socialism: The evolution of Peking?s foreign policy F From Childhood to Centenarian F From Geneva to Reykjavik F From Helsinki to Belgrade: F From Keynes to Neoclassical Synthesis: F From Literacy Classes to Higher Education F From Madrid to Vienna: Follow-up report of the Soviet Committee for European Security and Cooperation on the Helsinki Final Act F From Revisionism to Betrayal: A criticism of Ota Sik?s economic views F From Socialism to Communism F From Tsarist General to Red Army Commander F From Wooden Plough to Atomic Power: The Story of Soviet Industrialisation. F From the History of Soviet-Chinese Relations in the 1950?s: Concerning the discussion of Mao Zedong?s role F From the Missionary Days to Reagan: US China Policy F Fundamental Law of the U.S.S.R., The F Fundamental Problems of Marxism F Fundamentals of Corrective Labour Legislation of the USSR and the Union Republics: Statute on remand in custody F Fundamentals of Criminalistics F Fundamentals of Dialectical Materialism F Fundamentals of Dialectics F Fundamentals of Ergonomics F Fundamentals of Legislation of the USSR and the Union Republics F Fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism Manual F Fundamentals of Marxist-Leninist Philosophy (1974), The F Fundamentals of Marxist-Leninist Philosophy (1982), The F Fundamentals of Marxist-Leninist Theory and Tactics of Revolutionary Parties F Fundamentals of Philosophy F Fundamentals of Political Economy (1980) F Fundamentals of Political Economy (1983), The F Fundamentals of Political Economy: Popular course F Fundamentals of Political Science: Textbook for primary political education. F Fundamentals of Scientific Communism F Fundamentals of Scientific Management of Socialist Economy F Fundamentals of Scientific Socialism F Fundamentals of Soviet State Law F Fundamentals of Sports Training F Fundamentals of the Socialist Theory of the State and Law F Future of Society:, The F Future of the USSR?s Economic Regions, The F Futurology Fiasco: A Critical Study of non-Marxist Concepts of How Society Develops G General Chernyakhovsky G General Council of The First International 1864?1866: The London conference 1865 minutes G General Crisis of Capitalism G General Theory of Law: Social and philosophical problems, The G Generalisation and Cognition G Genesis of the Soviet Federative State (1917?1925) G Genocide G Geographical Prognostication: Problems and prospects G Geography and Ecology: A collection of articles, 1971?1981 G Geography of the Soviet Union: Physical background, population, economy G Georgi Dimitrov Selected Works (Volume 1): G Georgi Dimitrov Selected Works (Volume 2): G Georgi Dimitrov Selected Works (Volume 3) G Georgi Dimitrov: An eminent theoretician and revolutionary G Georgi Plekhanov Selected Philosophical Works (Volume I): G Georgi Plekhanov Selected Philosophical Works (Volume II): G Georgi Plekhanov Selected Philosophical Works (Volume III): G Georgi Plekhanov Selected Philosophical Works (Volume IV): G Georgi Plekhanov Selected Philosophical Works (Volume V): G German Imperialism: Its past and present G Germany: G Glance at Historical Materialism, A G Global engineering. G Global Ecology G Global Problems and the Future of Mankind G Global Problems of Our Age G Global Problems of Our Age G Glory Eternal: Defence of Odessa 1941 G Going Beyond the Square: Notes by an economist G Gorky Collected Works in Ten Volumes: G Gorky and His Contemporaries: G Government Regulation of the Private Sector in the USSR G Great Baikal Amur Railway, The G Great Construction Works of Communism and the Remaking of Nature G Great Heritage: The classical literature of Old Rus, The G Great March of Liberation, The G Great Mission of Literature and Art, The G Great October Revolution and World Social Progress, The G Great October Revolution and the Intelligentsia:, The G Great October Revolution and the Working Class, National Liberation and General Democratic Movements, The G Great October Socialist Revolution, The G Great Patriotic War of the Soviet Union, 1941?1945: G Grounds for Optimism G Growing Up Human G Growing Up in the Soviet Union from the Cradle to Coming of Age G Guarantee of Peace H Hague Congress of the First International, September 2?7, 1872:, The H Handbook of Philosophy, A H Hands Up! Or Public Enemy No. 1 H Hans Kohn Analyses the Russian Mind H Hashar H Hatredmongers: Anti-Soviet activity of the Lithuanian Clerical Emigr??s H Health Protection in the USSR. H Heartbeat of Reform: Soviet jurists and political scientists discuss the progress of Perestroika:, The H Henry Thoreau H Henry Winston: Profile of a U.S. communist H Higher Education and Computerisation H Highlights of a Fighting History: 60 Years of the Communist Party, USA H Historical Experience of the CPSU in Carrying Out Lenin?s Co-operative Plan H Historical Knowledge: A Systems-Epistemological Approach. H Historical Materialism (1969) H Historical Materialism: An outline of Marxist theory of society. H Historical Materialism: Basic problems. H Historical Materialism: Theory, methodology, problems. H Historical Science in Socialist Countries: H Historical Science in the USSR: New research: H History OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION / BOLSHEVIKS / SHORT COURSE H History Versus Anti-History: A critique of the bourgeois falsification of the postwar history of the CPSU. H History and Politics: American historiography on Soviet society H History in the Making: Memoirs of World War II Diplomacy H History of Afganistan H History of Ancient Philosophy: Greece and Rome H History of Classical Sociology, A H History of India (2 v.), A H History of Old Russian Literature, A H History of Psychology, A H History of Realism, A H History of Religion H History of Science: Soviet research, The H History of Soviet Foreign Policy 1945?1970 H History of the Ancient World. H History of the Middle Ages H History of the October Revolution H History of the USA Since World War I H History of the USSR in three parts: PART I: H History of the USSR in three parts: PART II: H History of the USSR in three parts: PART III: H History of the USSR: An outline of socialist construction H History of the USSR: Elementary course H History of the USSR: The era of socialism H Ho Chi Minh Selected Writings, 1920?1969: H Ho Chi Minh. H Honour Eternal: Second World War Memorials H How Many Will the Earth Feed? H How Socialism Began: Russia Under Lenin?s Leadership 1917?1923 H How Soviet Economy Won Technical Independence H How Wars End: Eye-witness accounts of the fall of Berlin H How the National Question Was Solved in Soviet Central Asia H How the Revolution Was Won: H How the Soviet Economy Is Run: H How to Study Historical Materialism H How to Study the Theory of Scientific Communism: H Human Relations Doctrine: Ideological weapon of the monopolies. H Human Rights and Freedoms in the USSR H Human Rights and International Relations H Human Rights, What We Argue About H Human Rights: Continuing the discussion H Humanism of Art., The H Humanism, Atheism: Principles and Practice H Humanism: Its Philosophical, Ethical and Sociological Aspects. I I Hereby Apply for an Apartment I I Saw the New World Born: John Reed I Icon Painting: State Museum of Palekh Art. I Ideals and Spiritual Values of Socialist Society, The I Ideological Struggle Today I Ideological Struggle and Literature:, The I Ideology and Social Progress I Ideology and Tactics of Anti-Communism: Myths and Reality, The I Illusion of Equal Rights: Legal Inequality in the Capitalist World, An I Image of India: The Study of Ancient Indian Civilisation in the USSR, The I Immortality: Verse By Soviet Poets Who Laid Down Their Lives in the Great Patriotic War of 1941?1945 I Imperial China: Foreign-policy conceptions and methods I Imperialism and the Developing Countries I Improvement of Soviet Economic Planning I In Disregard of the Law I In Pursuit of Social Justice I In Search of Harmony I In Search of Holy Mother Russia I In Southern Africa I In the Forecasters? Maze I In the Grip of Terror I In the Name of Life: Reflections of a Soviet Surgeon I In the Name of Peace I In the World of Music I India: Independence and oil I India: Social and Economic Development (18th?20th Century) I India: Spotlight on Population I Indian Economy, The I Indian Philosophy in Modern Times I Individual and Society, The I Individual and the Microenvironment, The I Individual in Socialist Society, The I Industrial Revolution in the East, The I Industrialisation of Developing Countries I Industrialisation of India I Inflation Under Capitalism Today I Information Abused: Critical essays I Insane Squandering: The Social and Economic Consequences of the Arms Race I Integration of Science., The I Intensifying Production: Acceleration factors I Inter-American Relations from Bolivar to the Present I Interaction of Sciences in the Study of the Earth, The I International Covenants on Human Rights and Soviet Legislation I International Humanitarian Law I International Law of the Sea, The I International Law: A textbook I International Law I International Monetary Law I International Monopolies and Developing Countries I International Solidarity with the Spanish Republic 1936?1939: I International Space Law. I International Terrorism and the CIA: Documents, Eyewitness Reports, Facts I International Trade and the Improvement of the Standard of Living in the West I International Working-Class Movement, Volume 1: The Origins of the Proletariat and Its Evolution as a Revolutionary Class, The I International Working-Class Movement, Volume 2: The Working-Class Movement in the Period of Transition to Imperialism (1871?1904), The I International Working-Class Movement, Volume 3: Revolutionary battles of the early 20th Century, The I International Working-Class Movement, Volume 4: The Socialist Revolution in Russia and the International Working Class (1917?1923), The I International Working-Class Movement, Volume 5: The Builder of Socialism and Fighter Against Fascism, The I International Working-Class Movement, Volume 6: The Working-Class Movement in the Developed Capitalist Countries After the Second World War (1945?1979), The I International Working-Class and Communist Movement: Historical Record (1830s to mid-1940s) I Interpreting America: Russian and Soviet Studies of the History of American Thought I Introduction to Physics I Invitation to a Dialogue I Islam and Muslims in the Land of the Soviets J Jawaharlal Nehru and His Political Views J Jawaharlal Nehru J Joint Jubilee Meeting of the CPSU Central Committee, Supreme Soviet of the USSR and the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation, Moscow November 3, 1967 J Jonestown Carnage: A CIA crime, The K Kampuchea: From Tragedy to Rebirth K Karl Marx and Modern Philosophy: Collection of Articles K Karl Marx and Our Time: Articles and speeches K Karl Marx and Our Time: The struggle for peace and social progress K Karl Marx?s Great Discovery: The dual-nature-of-labour doctrine: K Karl Marx: A Biography K Karl Marx: Short biography. K Keynesianism Today: K Klement Gottwald Selected Writings 1944?1949 K Komsomol: Questions and Answers, The K Konstantin Stanislavsky, 1863?1963: Man and Actor: K Kwame Nkrumah L Labour Protection at Soviet Industrial Enterprises L Labour in the USSR: Problems and solutions L Land of Soviets, The L Landmarks in History: The Marxist Doctrine of Socio-Economic Formations L Landmarks of Marxist Socio-Economic Foundations L Last Nuclear Explosion: Forty years of struggle against nuclear tests, The L Last of the Romans and European Culture, The L Law and Force in the International System L Law and Legal Culture in Soviet Society L Law, Morality and Man: L Law, Progress, and Peace: A journalist?s observations on the influence of Soviet law on the progressive development of international law L Leap Through the Centuries, A L Leftist Terrorism: Are the Leftist Terrorists Really Left? L Legal Regulation of Soviet Foreign Economic Relations, The L Legislation in the USSR L Legislative Acts of the USSR: Book 3 L Lenin About the Press L Lenin Collected Works L Lenin In Our Life. L Lenin In Profile: World writers and artists on Lenin L Lenin On Participation of the People in Government L Lenin Prize Winners: Soviet stars theatre, music, art L Lenin Selected Works L Lenin Talks to America. L Lenin Through the Eyes of Lunacharsky L Lenin Through the Eyes of the World: L Lenin and Books L Lenin and Gorky: Letters, reminiscences, articles. L Lenin and Library Organisation. L Lenin and Modern Natural Science. L Lenin and National Liberation in the East L Lenin and Problems of Literature. L Lenin and USSR Foreign Politics L Lenin and the Bourgeois Press L Lenin and the Leagues of Struggle L Lenin and the Soviet Peace Policy: Articles and Speeches 1944?80. L Lenin and the World Revolutionary Process L Lenin in London: Memorial places L Lenin in Soviet Literature; A Remarkable Year, etc. L Lenin in Soviet Poetry L Lenin on Labour Under Socialism: The Great Legacy of Marxism-Leninism L Lenin on Language L Lenin on religion, V.I. L Lenin on the Intelligentsia L Lenin on the Unity of the International Communist Movement L Lenin?s "What the ?Friends of the People? Are and How They Fight the Social-Democrats" L Lenin?s ?Materialism and Empirio-Criticism? L Lenin?s ?The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky? L Lenin?s Behests and the Making of Soviet Latvia L Lenin?s Comrades-In-Arms: L Lenin?s Doctrine of National Liberation Revolutions and Modern World L Lenin?s Geneva Addresses L Lenin?s Ideas and Modern International Relations L Lenin?s Plan of Building Socialism in the USSR L Lenin?s Political Testament L Lenin?s Teaching on the World Economy and Its Relevance to Our Times L Lenin?s Theory of Non-capitalist Development and the Experience of Mongolia: L Lenin?s Theory of Revolution L Lenin: A Biography L Lenin: A Short Biography., V.I. L Lenin: Comrade and man L Lenin: Great and Human L Lenin: His life and work: Documents and photographs, V.I. L Lenin: Revolution and the World Today L Lenin: The Founder of the Soviet Armed Forces L Lenin: The Great Theoretician. L Lenin: The Revolutionary. L Lenin: The Story of His Life, V. I. L Lenin: Youth and The Future L Lenin: a Biography L Leningrad Does Not Surrender L Leninism and Contemporary Problems of the Transition from Capitalism to Socialism. L Leninism and Modern China?s Problems L Leninism and Revolution: Reply to Critics L Leninism and Today?s Problems of the Transition to Socialism L Leninism and the Agrarian Peasant Question in Two Volumes: Volume One: L Leninism and the Agrarian Peasant Question in Two Volumes: Volume Two: L Leninism and the Battle of Ideas. L Leninism and the National Question L Leninism and the Revolutionary Process L Leninism and the World Revolutionary Working-Class Movement (1971): L Leninism and the World Revolutionary Working-Class Movement (1976): L Leninism: The Banner of Liberation and Progress of Nations L Leninist Standards of Party Life. L Leninist Theory of Reflection and the Present Day, The L Leninist Theory of Revolution and Social Psychology L Leninist Theory of Socialist Revolution and the Contemporary World. L Let Us Live in Peace and Friendship L Let the Blood of Man Not Flow L Let the Living Remember: Soviet War Poetry L Letters From the Dead: L Lev Vygotsky. L Liberation Mission of the Soviet Armed Forces in the Second World War L Liberation of Europe, The L Liberation L Lie of a Soviet War Threat, The L Life and Activities of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin: A lofty example of serving mankind, The L Life and Death of Martin Luther King, The L Life and Work of Walt Whitman: A Soviet view L Life of Lenin L Life, Art and America: Narratives and stories, articles L Life, We?re All in It Together L Lifelong Cause, A L Literature and the New Thinking L Living Ocean, The L Living and Effective Teaching of Marxism-Leninism:, The L Logic Made Simple: A dictionary L Logic L Lomonosov?s Philosophy L Long Road: Sino-Russian economic contacts from ancient times to 1917, The L Looking Into the Future M Macro-Economic Models M Mad Love M Made in USSR M Mahitahi = Work Together: Some peoples of the Soviet Union M Main Trends in Philosophy: A theoretical analysis of the history of philosophy., The M Major Ethnosocial Trends in the USSR M Making of the Marxist Philosophy from Idealism and Revolutionary Democracy to Dialectical Materialism and Scientific Communism, The M Man After Work: Social problems of daily life and leisure time. M Man At Work: The Scientific and Technological Revolution, the Soviet Working Class and Intelligentsia M Man and His Stages of Life M Man and Man?s World: the categories of ?man? and ?world? in the system of scientific world outlooks M Man and Nature: The ecological crisis and social progress M Man and Sea Warfare M Man and Society M Man and the Scientific and Technological Revolution M Man as the Object of Education: An Essay in Pedagogical Anthropology (Selected extracts) M Man at the Limit: Eye-witness reports M Man?s Dreams are Coming True. M Man?s Potential: Sketches M Man?s Road to Progress: Talks on political topics M Man, Science and Society M Man, Science, Humanism: A New Synthesis M Man, Society and the Environment: M Man: His Behaviour and Social Relations M Management of Socialist Production M Mankind and the Year 2000: Current problems M Manoeuvre in Modern Land Wafare M Manpower Resources and Population Under Socialism M Manzhou Rule in China M Mao Tse-Tung: A political portrait M Mao Tse-Tung: An ideological and psychological portrait M Mao?s Betrayal M Maoism As It Really Is: M Maoism Through the Eyes of Communists M Maoism Unmasked: Collection of Soviet Press Articles M Maoism and Its Policy of Splitting the National Liberation Movement M Maoism and Mao?s Heirs M Maoism: The Curse of China M Market of Socialist Economic Integration: Selected conference papers, The M Marshal of the Soviet Union G. Zhukov (Volume 2): M Marx & Engles Collected Works M Marx Engels On Religion M Marx and Engels Through the Eyes of Their Contemporaries M Marx?s ?Critique of the Gotha Programme? M Marx?s Theory of Commodity and Surplus-Value: Formalised exposition M Marxism and the Renegade Garaudy M Marxism-Leninism on Proletarian Internationalism M Marxism-Leninism on War and Army M Marxism-Leninism on War and Peace M Marxism-Leninism on the Non-Capitalist Way M Marxism-Leninism: A Flourishing Science M Marxism-Leninism: The International teaching of the working class M Marxist Conception of Law, The M Marxist Philosophy at the Leninist Stage M Marxist Philosophy: A Popular Outline. M Marxist Philosophy M Marxist-Leninist Aesthetics and Life: M Marxist-Leninist Aesthetics and the Arts M Marxist-Leninist Philosophy: Diagrams, tables, illustrations for students of Marxist-Leninist theory. M Marxist-Leninist Philosophy M Marxist-Leninist Teaching of Socialism and the World Today, The M Marxist-Leninist Theory of Society:, The M Mass Information in the Service of Peace and Progress M Mass Media in the USSR M Mass Organisations in the U.S.S.R. M Materialismus Militans: Reply to Mr. Bogdanov M Maxim Gorky Letters M Maxim Litvinov M May Day Traditions M Meaning and Conceptual Systems. M Meaning of Life, The M Mechanisation of Soviet Agriculture: The economic effect, The M Meeting of European Communist and Workers? Parties for Peace and Disarmament, Paris, 28?29 April, 1980 M Meeting of Representatives of the Parties and Movements participating in the celebration of the 70th anniversary of the Great October Socialist Revolution M Meeting the Challenge: Soviet youth in the Great Patriotic War 1941?1945 M Meetings with Sholokhov M Memoirs of Wartime Minister of Navy M Men at War M Methodology of History M Methodology of Law M Middle East: Oil and Policy, The M Mikhail Bulgakov and His Times: Memoirs, Letters M Milestones of Soviet Foreign Policy 1917?1967. M Militant Solidarity, Fraternal Assistance: M Militarism and Science M Militarism in Peking?s Policies M Military-Industrial Complex of the USA, The M Millionaires and Managers M Miracle of the Age M Moby Dick, or the Whale M Modern History of China., The M Modern History of the Arab Countries M Modern History, 1640?1870 M Modern State and Politics, The M Modern Theories of International Economic Relations M Moiseyev?s Dance Company M Monetary Crisis Of Capitalism: Origin, Development M Monism and Pluralism in Ideology and in Politics (Abridged). M Monopoly Press: Or, How American journalism found itself in the vicious circle of the ?crisis of credibility?, The M Morality and Politics: Critical essays on contemporary views about the relationship between morality and politics in bourgeois sociology M Moscow Diary, A M Moscow Soviet, The M Moscow, Stalingrad, 1941?1942: Recollections, stories, reports. M Multilateral Economic Co-Operation of Socialist States:, The M Music Education in the Modern World: M Musical Journey Through the Soviet Union, A M My Day and Age: selected poems M Mysteries of the Deeps [i.E. Deep]: M Mystery of Pearl Harbor: Facts and Theories, The M Myth About Soviet Threat: cui bono? M Myth, Philosophy, Avant-Gardism: N N. Lobachevsky and His Contribution to Science N Namibia, A Struggle for Independence: N National Economic Planning N National Folk Sports in the USSR N National Languages in the USSR: Problems and Solutions N National Liberation Movement in West Africa N National Liberation Revolutions Today: Part I: N National Liberation Revolutions Today: Part II N National Liberation: Essays on Theory and Practice N National Sovereignty and the Soviet State N Nationalism reframed N Nationalities Question: Lenin?s Approach:, The N Nations and Internationalism N Nations and Social Progress N Nato: A Bleak Picture N Nato: Threat to World Peace N Nature Reserves in the USSR N Nature of Science: An epistemological analysis., The N Nearest Neighbour is 170 KM Away: A journey into the Soviet Union, The N Neo-Colonialism on the Warpath N Neo-Freudians In Search of ?Truth?. N Neocolonialism and Africa in the 1970s N Neocolonialism: Methods and manoeuvres. N Nep, a Modern View N Never Say Die N New Approach to Economic Integration, A N New Constitution of the USSR, The N New Information Order or Psychological Warfare?, A N New International Economic Order N New Life Begun: Prose, poetry and essays of the 1920s?1930s, A N New Realities and the Struggle of Ideas N New Scramble for Africa, The N New Soviet Legislation on Marriage and the Family N Newly Free Countries in the Seventies, The N Nihilism Today. N Nikolai Miklouho-Maclay: Traveller, scientist and humanist N Nikolai Vavilov: The Great Sower: N Nine Modern Soviet Plays N Nineteenth Century American Short Stories N Non-Capitalist Development: An Historical Outline N Non-aligned Movement, The N Noncapitalist Way: Soviet Experience and the Liberated Countries, The N Normalization of World Trade and the Monetary Problem N North Russian Architecture N Not For War We Raise Our Sons: A collection of letters to the Soviet Peace Fund and the Soviet Women?s Committee N Notes on Indian History (664?1858) N Nuclear Disarmament N Nuclear Engineering Before and After Chernobyl: N Nuclear Space Age: The Soviet viewpoint, The N Nuclear Strategy and Common Sense N Nuclear WAR: THE MEDICAL AND BIOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES N Nuremberg Epilogue, The O Ocean and Its Resources O October Revolution and Africa, The O October Revolution and the Arts:, The O October Revolution and the Working-Class, National Liberal, and General Democratic Movements, The O October Storm and After:, The O October Storm and After:, The O Of Human Values: Soviet literature today O Old, the New, the Eternal: Reflections on art, The O On Communist Education O On Education: Selected articles and speeches O On Historical Materialism O On Just and Unjust Wars O On Labour-Oriented Education and Instruction O On Literature and Art O On Proletarian Internationalism O On Relations Between Socialist and Developing Countries O On The Art and Craft of Writing O On The Principle Of Mutual Advantage: O On a Military Mission to Great Britain and the USA O On the ?Manifesto of the Communisty Party? of Marx and Engels O On the Communist Programme O On the Edge of an Abyss: From Truman to Reagan, the doctrines and realitites of the Nuclear Age O On the Eve of World War II: A foreign policy study O On the Intelligentsia O On the International Working-Class and Communist Movement O On the Paris Commune O On the Path of Cultural Progress: Culture of the socialist world O On the Side of a Just Cause: Soviet assistance to the heroic Vietnamese people O On the Soviet State Apparatus O On the Threshold of the Twenty-First Century: The technological revolution and literature O On the Track of Discovery. [Series 1] [n.d. [1960?s]]: O On the Unity of the International Communist Movement O On the Upgrade: Living standards in the Soviet Union O On the Way to Knowledge: Man, the Earth, outer space, acceleration O One Is Not Born a Personality. O One True Luxury: Research into communication pattern of Soviet schoolchildren, The O One Way Ticket to Democracy: O Optimal Functioning System for a Socialist Economy O Orbits of the Global Economy, The O Organisation and Management: A sociological analysis of Western theories O Organisation of Domestic Trade in the USSR O Organisation of Industry and Construction in the USSR O Organisation of Statistics in the U.S.S.R. O Organisation of Statistics in the USSR O Organization of African Unity: 25 years of struggle O Origin and Principles of Scientific Socialism O Origin of Man, The O Origin of the Human Race., The O Origins of the Proletariat and Its Evolution as a Revolutionary Class, The O Our Course: Peace and Socialism O Our Course: Peace and Socialism O Our Lives, Our Dreams: Soviet women speak: O Our Rights: Political and economic guarantees: O Outer Space: Politics and law O Outline History of Africa, An O Outline History of the Communist International (1971) O Outline History of the Soviet Working Class O Outline Political History of the Americas O Outline Theory of Population, An O Outline of Soviet Labour Law, An O Overseas Chinese Bourgeoisie: A Peking tool in southeast Asia. O Overseas Expansion of Capital:, The P Pacific Community: An Outlook, The P Palekh: Village of Artists P Palestine Problem: Aggression, resistance, ways of settlement, The P Palestine Question: Document adopted by the United Nations and other international organisations and conferences, The P Panorama of the Soviet Union P Part Played By Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man, The P Passing Age: The ideology and culture of the late bourgeois epoch, The P Path of Valour., The P Path to Peace: A view from Moscow, The P Patrice Lumumba: Fighter for Africa?s freedom P Peace Prospects From Three Worlds P Peace Strategy in the Nuclear Age P Peace and Disarmament. Academic Studies. 1980 P Peace and Disarmament. Academic Studies. 1982 P Peace and Disarmament. Academic Studies. 1984 P Peace and Disarmament: Academic Studies, special issue 1987: P Peace and Disarmament P Peaceful Coexistence: Contemporary international law of peaceful coexistence P Peking Reaches Out: A Study of Chinese Expansionism P People?s Army, The P People?s Control in Socialist Society P People?s Democracy, A New Form of Political Organization of Society P People?s Theater: From the Box Office to the Stage P Peoples of the North and Their Road to Socialism, The P Perestroika In Action: P Perestroika: The Crunch is Now P Permanent Blush of Shame: A Trip to the East and West, A P Personal Property in the USSR P Personal Subsidiary Farming Under Socialism P Petty-Bourgeois Revolutionism (Anarchism, Trotskyism and Maoism) P Phenomenon of the Soviet Cinema P Philosophical Conception of Man:, The P Philosophical Concepts in Natural Science. P Philosophical Foundations of Scientific Socialism P Philosophical Problems of Elementary Particle Physics P Philosophical Traditions Today. P Philosophical Views of Mao Tse-Tung: A Critical Analysis, The P Philosophy and Scientific Cognition P Philosophy and Social Theory: An Introduction to Historical Materialism P Philosophy and Sociology. P Philosophy and the Ecological Problems of Civilisation P Philosophy and the World-Views of Modern Sciences P Philosophy in the USSR: Problems of dialectical materialism. P Philosophy of Dialectical Materialism., The P Philosophy of Optimism: Current problems P Philosophy of Revolt: Criticism of left radical ideology., The P Philosophy of Survival, The P Philososphy in the USSR: Problems of historical materialism P Physics of Interstellar Space: A popular-science outline P Pioneers of Space P Plain-Spoken Facts, The P Planet of Reason: A Sociological Study of Man-Nature Relationship, The P Planning a Socialist Economy P Planning in Developing Countries: Theory and methodology P Planning in the USSR: Problems of theory and organisation P Planning of Manpower in the Soviet Union P Plato P Please Accept my Donation: Collection of Letters to the Soviet Peace Fund P Pluto?s Chain: Explorations of the Kamchatka-Kuril volcanic belt P Polar Diaries P Policy Keeping the World on Edge, A P Policy of Peaceful Coexistence in Action, The P Policy of Provocation and Expansion: A collection of documents and articles, published in the Soviet press, dealing with China?s policy of annexation and its territorial claims to other countries, A P Policy of the Soviet Union in the Arab World:, The P Politcal Economy (1983) P Political Consciousness in the U.S.A.: Traditions and evolutions. P Political Economy (1989) P Political Economy of Capitalism (1974), The P Political Economy of Capitalism (1985) P Political Economy of Revolution:, The P Political Economy of Socialism (1967) P Political Economy of Socialism (1985) P Political Economy: A Condensed Course P Political Economy: A beginner?s course P Political Economy: A study aid P Political Economy: Capitalism P Political Economy: Socialism. P Political Map of the World, The P Political Reality and Political Consciousness. P Political Systems, Development Trends: Theme of the 11th World Congress of political sciences P Political Terms: A short guide P Political Terrorism: An Indictment of Imperialism. P Political Thought of Ancient Greece P Political Work in the Soviet Army P Politico-Economic Problems of Capitalism. P Population Biology: Progress and problems of studies on natural populations P Population and Socio-Economic Development P Population of the USSR: A socio-economic survey, The P Population, Economics, and Politics: The socio-economic development of the European members of the CMEA P Populism: Its past, present and future. P Present-Day China: Socio-economic problems, collected articles. P Present-Day Ethnic Processes in the USSR P Present-Day Problems in Asia and Africa: Theory - Politics - Personalities P Present-day Non-Marxist Political Economy: P Press Is a Great Force, The P Prevent War, Safeguard Peace. [ca. 1962] P Prevention of War: Doctrines, concepts, prospects P Principles of Criminology, The P Principles of Philosophy, The P Principles of the Theory of Historical Process in Philosophy. P Priorities of Soviet Foreign Policy Today, The P Privileged Generation: Children in the Soviet Union, The P Problem of the Ideal: The nature of mind and its relationship to the brain and social medium, The P Problems of Africa Today P Problems of Common Security P Problems of Contemporary Aesthetics: A collection of articles P Problems of Leninism P Problems of Modern Aesthetics: P Problems of Socialist Theory P Problems of Soviet School Education P Problems of War and Peace: A critical analysis of bourgeois theories. P Problems of the Communist Movement: Some Questions of Theory and Method. P Problems of the Development of Mind. P Problems of the History of Philosophy. P Proceedings of the First Congress of the Yemeni Socialist Party: P Profession of the Stage-Director, The P Profiles in Labour: Essays about heroes of socialist labour P Programme of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union:, The P Protestant Ethic and the ?Spirit? of Capitalism and Other Writings, The P Psychiatry P Psychological Research in USSR: Volume 1 P Psychological War, The P Psychology (1989) P Psychology As You May Like It P Psychology in the Soviet Union: A Historical Outline. P Psychology of Experiencing: An analysis of how critical situations are dealt with, The P Psychology of Learning: Theories of learning and programmed instruction, The P Psychology of Management of Labour Collectives, The P Psychology of Phantasy:, The P Psychology of Thinking, The P Public Education in Soviet Azerbaijan: Appraisal of an achievement P Public Education in the U.S.S.R. P Public Enterprises in Developing Countries: Legal status P Public Sector in Developing Countries:, The P Publishing in the Soviet Union P Pulse of Time, The Q Questions of the Methodology of History: R R&D in Social Reproduction. R Races and Peoples: Contemporary ethnic and racial problems. R Races of Mankind, The R Racism: An ideological weapon of imperialism. R Rational Utilization of Natural Resources and the Protection of the Environment, The R Re-reading Dostoyevsky R Reader on Social Sciences (ABC #1), A R Reader on the History of the USSR (1917?1937)., A R Real Socialism and Ideological Struggle R Real Truth: Profiles of Soviet Jews, The R Recent History of the Labor Movement in the United States 1918?1939 R Recent History of the Labor Movement in the United States 1939?1965 R Recent History of the Labor Movement in the United States 1965?1980 R Recreational Geography in the USSR R Red Carnation., The R Red Star and Green Crescent R Reflections on Security in the Nuclear Age: A Dialogue Between Generals East and West R Relativity and Man R Religion and Social Conflicts in the U.S.A. R Religion in the World Today R Remarkable Year: The Blue Notebook: Retracing Lenin?s Steps., A R Reminiscences of a Kremlin Commandant. [no date, ca. 1965.] R Rendezvous in Space: Soyuz Apollo R Renovation of Traditions: (traditions and innovations of Socialist realism in Ukrainian prose) R Report of the Central Committee of the CPSU to the XXVI Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Immediate Tasks of the Party in Home and Foreign Policy R Report to the Nineteenth Party Congress on the Work of the Central Committee of the C.P.S.U.(B.) R Requirements of Developed Socialist Society R Responsiblity for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity: R Resumption and Development of International Economic Relations, The R Retracing Lenin?s Steps R Revolution in Laos: Practice and Prospects R Revolutionaries of India in Soviet Russia: Mainspring of the Communist movement in the East R Revolutionary Battles of the Early 20th Century R Revolutionary Democracy and Communists in the East R Revolutionary Democracy in Africa R Revolutionary Movement of Our Time and Nationalism., The R Revolutionary Process in the East:, The R Revolutionary Vanguard:, The R Riddle of the Origin of Consciousness., The R Riddle of the Self, The R Riddles of Three Oceans, The R Right of the Accused to Defence in the USSR, The R Right-Wing Revisionism Today R Rights Accruing From Loss of Health R Rights of Soviet Citizens: Collected normative acts R Rights of the Individual in Socialist Society, The R Rise and Fall of the Gunbatsu: A Study in Military History, The R Rise and Growth of the Non-Aligned Movement, The R Rise of Socialist Economy: The experience of the USSR, other socialist, and socialist-oriented developing countries, The R Road to Communism:, The R Road to Great Victory: Soviet Diplomacy 1941?1945 R Road to Nirvana, The R Road to Stable Peace in Asia, The R Road to Victory: The Struggle For National Independence, Unity, Peace and Socialism in Vietnam, The R Role of Advanced Ideas in Development of Society R Role of Socialist Consciousness in the Development of Soviet Society, The R Role of the State in Socio-Economic Reforms in Developing Countries, The R Role of the State in the Socialist Transformation of the Economy of the U.S.S.R., The R Rules of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union R Russia and Her People: Recollections in Tranquillity R Russia and the West: 19th Century R Russian Discovery of America, A R Russian History in Tales R Russian Museum: A Guide, The R Russian Orthodox Church (1982), The R Russian Orthodox Church 10th to 20th Centuries, The R Russian Revolution: The Comic Book Version, The R Russian Revolution: What actually happened?, The R Russian Revolutionary Tradition, The R Russian Thinkers: Essays on Socio?Economic Thought in the 18th and 19th Centuries R Russians Abroad S Sacred Lyre: Essays on the life and work of Alexander Pushkin S Safeguard of Peace: Soviet armed forces:, A S Salyut Project, The S Saturn Is Almost Invisible S Scandinavian Social Democracy Today S School of Classical Dance S Science AT THE CROSS ROADS S Science Fiction and Adventure Stories by Soviet Writers S Science Fiction: English and American Short Stories S Science In Its Youth: Pre-Marxian political economy, A S Science Policy: Problems and trends S Science Serves the Nation: S Science and Morality S Science and Philosophy S Science and Society. S Science and Soviet People?s Education S Science and Technology, Humanism and Progress: S Science in the USSR: S Science, Technology and the Economy S Scientific Communism (1986) S Scientific Communism (A Popular Outline) S Scientific Communism and Its Falsification by the Renegades S Scientific Communism: A textbook S Scientific Intelligentsia in the USSR: (structure and dynamics of personnel), The S Scientific Management of Society (1971), The S Scientific Management of Society S Scientific and Technical Progress and Socialist Society S Scientific and Technical Progress in the USA: S Scientific and Technical Revolution: Economic aspects S Scientific and Technological Progress and Social Advance S Scientific and Technological Revolution and the Revolution in Education, The S Scientific and Technological Revolution: Its impact on management and education, The S Scientific and Technological Revolution: Its role in today?s world, The S Scientific and Technological Revolution: Social Effects and Prospects, The S Scientific-Technological Revolution and the Contradictions of Capitalism., The S Sdi: Key to security or disaster S Search in Pedagogics: Discussions of the 1920?s and Early 1930s, A S Second International, 1889?1914: The History and heritage, The S Second Session of the Supreme Soviet of the U.S.S.R.: S Second World War: A Politico-Military Survey, The S Secret War Against Cuba S Secret War Against Soviet Russia, The S Secret Weapon in Africa S Secrets from Whitehall and Downing Street S Secrets of the Second World War. S Seeking Rational Solutions: Discussions old and new S Selected Pedagogical Works S Selected Philosophical Works S Selected Speeches and Articles S Selected Works in Geography S Selected Writings: Linguistics, poetics S Selections from Shaw: A fearless champion of truth. S Selections from Shaw: A fearless champion of truth S Semantic Philosophy of Art S Sentinels of Peace S Sergei Prokofiev: Materials, Articles, Interviews S Serving the People. S Seven Days in May S Seven Essays on Life and Literature S Shakespeare in the Soviet Union: A collection of articles. S Sholokhov: A critical appreciation S Short Course on Political Economy, A S Short Economic History of the USSR, A S Short History of Geographical Science in the Soviet Union, A S Short History of Soviet Society, A S Short History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union., A S Short History of the National-Liberation Movement in East Africa, A S Short History of the USSR (1987), A S Short History of the USSR: A popular outline, A S Short History of the USSR: Part I., A S Short History of the USSR: Part II., A S Short History of the World in Two Volumes, A S Short History of the World in Two Volumes, A S Siberia, 60 Degrees East of Greenwich: Oil and people S Siberia: Achievements, Problems, Solutions S Siberia: Epic of the Century S Silent Death (Chemical weapons/warfare), The S Simon Bolivar S Sino-Soviet Relations 1945-1973: S Sketches of the Soviet Union S Social Democracy and Southern Africa, 1960s?1980s S Social Informaton and the Regulation of Social Development S Social Insurance in the U.S.S.R. S Social Organisations in the Soviet Union: Political and legal organisational aspects S Social Partnership or Class Struggle?: Theory, Legislation & Practice S Social Problems of Man?s Environment: Where We Live and Work S Social Programme of the Ninth Five-Year Plan S Social Psychology and History S Social Psychology and Propaganda S Social Psychology S Social Science S Social Sciences: Information system., The S Social Security in the USSR S Social Structure of Soviet Society, The S Social and Economic Geography: An essay in conceptual terminological systematisation S Social and State Structure of the U.S.S.R., The S Socialism As a Social System S Socialism Theory and Practice: S Socialism and Capitalism: Score and Prospects S Socialism and Communism: Selected passages, 1956?63 S Socialism and Communism S Socialism and Culture: A collection of articles S Socialism and Democracy: A Reply to opportunists S Socialism and Energy Resources S Socialism and Humanism S Socialism and Law: Law in society S Socialism and Optimism S Socialism and State Administration S Socialism and Wealth S Socialism and the Individual S Socialism and the Newly Independent Nations S Socialism and the Rational Needs of the Individual S Socialism and the State S Socialism in the USSR: How it was built S Socialism?s Historic Mission and the World Today S Socialism: A new theoretical vision S Socialism: Crisis or renewal? S Socialism: Foreign Policy in Theory and Practice S Socialism: Its Role in History. S Socialism: One-party and multi-party system S Socialism: Questions of Theory S Socialist Community at a New Stage, The S Socialist Community: A new type of relations among nations, The S Socialist Countries? Economy in the 1970s, The S Socialist Countries: Important Changes, The S Socialist Culture and Man S Socialist Democracy: Aspects of theory S Socialist Humanism, Culture, Personality: S Socialist Ideal and Real Socialism, The S Socialist Ideology S Socialist Integration S Socialist International, The S Socialist Internationalism (1978) S Socialist Internationalism: Theory and practice of international relations of a new type S Socialist Life Style and the Family S Socialist Literatures, Problems of Development S Socialist Long-Term Economic Planning. S Socialist Management: The Leninist concept. S Socialist Nationalisation of Industry. S Socialist Organisation of Labour S Socialist Policy of Peace: Theory and practice S Socialist Realism and the Modern Literary Process S Socialist Realism in Literature and Art: S Socialist Revolution and Its Defense, The S Socialist Revolution in Russia and the Intelligentsia, The S Socialist Revolution in Russia and the International Working Class (1917?1923), The S Socialist Self-Government S Socialist Society In the Present Stage: Proceedings of a section meeting S Socialist Society: Its social justice S Socialist Society: Scientific principles of development S Socialist Way of Development in Agriculture, The S Socialist Way of Life: Problems and perspectives S Socialist World System, The S Socialist-Oriented State: Instrument of Revolutionary Change, A S Society and Economic Relations S Society and Individual: Give and take S Society and Nature: Socio-ecological problems S Society and Youth S Society and the Environment: A Soviet view S Society of the Future S Sociological Theory and Social Practice: S Sociology of Culture, The S Sociology of Revolution: A Marxist view S Sociology: Problems of theory and method. S Soldier?s Duty, A S Soldier?s Memoirs:, A S Solving the National Question in the USSR S Some Aspects of Party-Political Work in the Soviet Armed Forces S Some Basic Rights of Soviet Citizens S Some Questions Concerning the Struggle of Counter-Revolutionary Trotskyism Against Revolutionary Leninism S South Africa Against Africa, 1966?1986 S Southeast Asia: History, economy, policy. S Southern Africa: Apartheid, Colonialism, Aggression. S Soviet Agriculture S Soviet Ambassador Reports Back, The S Soviet Armed Forces Yesterday and Today, The S Soviet Army, The S Soviet Banker?s Notes, A S Soviet Circus: A Collection of articles, The S Soviet Collective Farm (a sociological study), The S Soviet Communist Forum: (World response to the 25th CPSU congress) S Soviet Constitution and the Myths of Sovietologists, The S Soviet Constitution: A dictionary, The S Soviet Court, The S Soviet Democracy and Bourgeois Sovietology S Soviet Democracy in the Period of Developed Socialism S Soviet Economic Reform: Progress and problems. S Soviet Economy Forges Ahead: Ninth five-year plan 1971?1975. S Soviet Economy: Results and prospects S Soviet Employee?s Rights in Law S Soviet Family Budgets S Soviet Finance: Principles, Operation S Soviet Financial System S Soviet Fine Arts S Soviet Foreign Policy Volume I: S Soviet Foreign Policy Volume II: S Soviet Foreign Policy: A brief review 1955?65. S Soviet Foreign Policy: Objectives and principles S Soviet Foreign Trade: Today and tomorrow S Soviet Form of Popular Government, The S Soviet Frontiers of Tomorrow S Soviet General Staff at War 1941?1945: Book 1, The S Soviet General Staff at War 1941?1945: Book 2, The S Soviet Geographical Explorations and Discoveries S Soviet Geography Today: Aspects of theory S Soviet Geography Today: Physical Geography S Soviet Historical Science: New research S Soviet Industry S Soviet Land Legislation. S Soviet Legislation on Children?s Rights. S Soviet Legislation on Women?s Rights: S Soviet Literature?Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow S Soviet Literature: Problems and People S Soviet Lithuania on the Road to Prosperity S Soviet Man: The making of a socialist type of personality S Soviet Nationalities and Policy and Bourgeois Historians: The formation of the Soviet multinational state (1917?1922) in contemporary American historiography S Soviet Navy in War and Peace, The S Soviet North: In the Land of the Midnight Sun; the Arctic; News from High Latitudes S Soviet North: Present Development and Prospects, The S Soviet Officers S Soviet Parliament: A reference book, The S Soviet Peace Efforts on the Eve of World War II S Soviet Peace Policy, 1917?1939 S Soviet Peasantry: An outline history (1917?1970), The S Soviet People as I Knew Them S Soviet People: A new historical community, The S Soviet Planned Economy, The S Soviet Policy for Asian Peace and Security S Soviet Political System Under Developed Socialism, The S Soviet Political System: Perceptions and perspectives S Soviet Psychology S Soviet Reality in the Seventies S Soviet Rock: 25 Years in the Underground + 5 Years of Freedom S Soviet Russia Opts for Peace S Soviet Russian Literature 1917?1977: Poetry and Prose - Selected Reading S Soviet Russian Stories of the 1960s and 1970s S Soviet Scene 1987: A collection of press articles and interviews S Soviet School of Courage and Warcraft, The S Soviet Science and Technique in the Service of Building Communism in the U.S.S.R. S Soviet Socialist Democracy S Soviet Society: Philosophy of Development S Soviet Stars in the World of Music S Soviet State and Law., The S Soviet State as a Subject of Civil Law, The S Soviet State, The S Soviet Trade Unions: A collection of background materials, The S Soviet Trade Unions: Yesterday Today Tomorrow S Soviet Ukraine S Soviet Union 50 Years Statistical Returns S Soviet Union Today, The S Soviet Union and Africa, The S Soviet Union and European Security, The S Soviet Union and International Economic Cooperation, The S Soviet Union and the Manchurian Revolutionary Base (1945?1949), The S Soviet Union as Americans See It 1917?1977, The S Soviet Union: Political and Economic Reference Book. S Soviet Volunteers in China 1925?1945 S Soviet Way of Life, The S Soviet Women (Some aspects of the status of women in the USSR) S Soviet Women: A portrait. S Soviet Worker, The S Soviet Writers Look At America S Soviet Youth and Socialism. S Soviet Youth: A socio-political outline. S Soviet?U.S. Relations, 1933?1942 S Soviets of People?s Deputies: Democracy and administration S Soviets of Workers? and Soldiers? Deputies on the Eve of the October Revolution, March?October 1917 S Soweto: Life and Struggles of a South African Township S Space Age, The S Space Flights Serve Life on Earth S Specialisation and Co-Operation of the Socialist Economies S Sport and Society S Stanislavsky S State Law of the Socialist Countries: Socialism Today, The S State Monopoly Capitalism and Labour Law S State Monopoly Incomes Policy: Conception and Practice (In the Context of Great Britain) S State Property in the USSR: Legal aspects S State Structure of the USSR S State and Communism, The S State and Nations in the USSR, The S State of Israel: A Historical, Economic and Political Study , The S State, Democracy and Legality in the USSR: Lenin?s ideas today, The S State-Monopoly Capitalism and the Labour Theory of Value. S Steeled in the Storm: Essays on the history of the Komsomol S Steep Steps: A Journalist?s Notes, The S Stories About Lenin and the Revolution S Stories About the Party of Communists Under Whose Leadership the Peoples of Russia Overthrew... S Straight from the Heart: The writer and the time series S Strategy of Economic Development in the USSR, The S Strategy of Transnational Corporations, The S Stride Across a Thousand Years:, A S Strong in Spirit, The S Struggle for Socialism in the World S Studies in Psychology: The collective and the individual. S Study of Soviet Foreign Policy, A S Subject, Object, Cognition. S Submarines in Arctic Waters S Sukhomlinsky on Education, V. S Surrealism S System of Physical Education in the USSR, The S Systems Theory: Philosophical and Methodological Problems T Tales of the Ancient World: T Talking About the Future: Can We Develop Without Disaster T Talking About the Future: Is Mankind Heading for a Raw Materials Crisis? T Talks on Soviet Democracy. T Teacher?s Experience: Stanislav Shatsky: A collection, A T Teaching of Political Economy: A critique of non-Marxian theories, The T Teaching: Calling and skills. T Teaching T Technological Neo-colonialism T Tehran, Yalta and Potsdam Conferences., The T Television In the West and Its Doctrines. T Ten Years of the Ethiopian Revolution T Territorial Industrial Complexes: Optimisation models and general aspects T Territorial Organisation of Soviet Economy, The T Terrorism and International Law T That Curious World of Nature: Geography for entertainment T The POLICY OF NON-ALIGNMENT T Theatre, Music, Art (1967?1970) T Their Point of View: Young Americans in the USSR T Theoretical Aspects of Linguistics T Theoretical Physics T Theories of Surplus Value: T Theory and Practice of Proletarian Internationalism, The T Theory and Tactics of the International Communist Movement T Theory of Earth?s Origin: Four lectures T Theory of Growth of a Socialist Economy, The T Theory of Population: Essays in Marxist research., The T Theory of the State and Law T There Shall be Retribution: Nazi war criminals and their protectors T They Came to Stay: North Americans in the USSR T They Found Their Voice: Stories from Soviet Nationalities with No Written Language Before the 1917 October Revolution T They Knew Lenin: Reminiscenses of Foreign Contemporaries T They Sealed Their Own Doom T Third Soviet Generation T Third World War? Threats, real, and imaginary, A T Third World: Problems and Prospects, current stage of the national-liberation struggle, The T Thirty Years of Victory T This Amazing Amazing Amazing But Knowable Universe T This NATION AND SOCIALISM ARE ONE T This Nation and Socialism Are One T This Whole Human Rights Business T This is My Native Land: A Soviet journalists travels T Three Centuries of Russian Poetry T Three Leaders: Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi T Three Men in a Boat to Say Nothing of the Dog T Through the Russian Revolution T Time For a New Way of Thinking T Time to Speak Out, The T To Be an Individual?Is It the Lot of Only a Chosen Few? T To Children I Give My Heart T Tomorrow Will Be Too Late: Dialogue on the threshold of the third millennium T Topsy-Turvy Planet, or, Paramon?s Incredible Tale of Travel and Adventure, A T Towards Freedom and Progress: The triumph of Soviet power in Central Asia T Towards Social Homogeneity T Towards Technologies of the Future T Towns for People T Tracing Martin Bormann T Trade Among Capitalist Countries T Trade Unions in Socialist Society T Trade Unions, Disarmament, Conversion T Trade and Coexistence T Transition from Capitalism to Socialism, The T Transnational Corporations And Militarism T Travel to Distant Worlds T Travels to New Guinea: Diaries Letters Documents. T Tretyakov Art Gallery: A Guide T Triumph of Lenin?s Ideas: Proceedings of Plenary Session T Triumph of the Leninist Ideas of Proletarian Internationalism: T Truth About Afghanistan:, The T Truth About Cultural Exchange: 10 Years After Helsinki, The T Turning-Point of World War II:, The T Twentieth Century Capitalism T Two Directions of Socio-economic Development in Africa T Two Hundred Days of Fire: Accounts by participants and witnesses of the battle of Stalingrad T Two Worlds?Two Monetary Systems U U.S. Budget and Economic Policy. U U.S. Labour Unions Today: Basic problems and trends. U U.S. Military Doctrine, The U U.S. Monopolies and Developing Countries U U.S. Negroes in Battle: From Little Rock to Watts U U.S. Neocolonialism in Africa U U.S. Policies in the Indian Ocean U U.S. Policy in Latin America: Postwar to present. U U.S. Two-Party System: Past and present:, The U U.S. War Machine and Politics, The U Ultras in the USA., The U Ulyanov Family, The U Unbreakable Union of Soviet Republics, The U Undaunted Heroes: A Vietnam diary, The U Undeclared War: Imperialism vs. Afghanistan:, The U Union of Soviet Writers: Aims, Organisation, Activities, The U United Soviet People, The U Unity, Solidarity, Internationalism: International Communist Unity: U Universe and Civilisation, The U Us Monopolies and Developing Countries U Usa and Western Europe: Economic Relations After World War II, The U Usa versus Western Europe: New Trends U Usa, Western Europe, Japan: a triangle of rivalry, The U Usa: Anatomy of the Arms Race U Usa: Imperialists and Anti-Imperialists: The great foreign policy debate at the turn of the Century U Usa: Militarism and the Economy U Ussr - USA - Sports Encounters U Ussr Builds for the Future, The U Ussr Economy in 1976?1980, The U Ussr Proposes Disarmament (1920s?1980s), The U Ussr State Industry During the Transition Period U Ussr Tenth Five-Year Plan Building Projects U Ussr Through Indian Eyes U Ussr and Countries of Africa U Ussr and Developing Countries: Economic Cooperation, The U Ussr and International Copyright Protection, The U Ussr and International Economic Relations:, The U Ussr in World Politics., The U Ussr?FRG Relations: A new stage U Ussr?USA Trade Unions Compared U Ussr?s Activities in the UN for Peace, Security and Co-Operation, 1945?1985, The U Ussr, Reorganisation and Renewal U Ussr, the USA, and the People?s Revolution in China, The U Ussr: A Dictatorship or a Democracy?, The U Ussr: A Short History., The U Ussr: A Time of Change: Scholars, Writers and Artists Speak U Ussr: A genuine united nations, The U Ussr: A guide for businessmen U Ussr: Education, Science and Culture., The U Ussr: For Peace Against Aggression: U Ussr: Geography of the eleventh five-year plan period U Ussr: Public Health and Social Security., The U Ussr: Questions and Answers U Ussr: Sixty Years of the Union: 1922?1982 U Ussr: Youth of the Eighties V Vietnam Story, The V Village Children: A Soviet experience V Vladimir Favorsky V Vladimir Ilyich Lenin: A biography V Vladimir Ilyich Lenin: Life and works V Vladimir Ilyich Lenin: Pages from his life with reminiscences of his associates V Vladimir Ilyich Lenin V Vladimir Mayakovsky: Innovator V Vladimir Vysotsky: Hamlet with a guitar W Wanted... W War Is Their Business: The U.S. Military-Industrial Complex: W War of Ideas in Contemporary International Relations:, The W War?s Unwomanly Face W Wars and Population W Washington Crusaders On the March W Washington Silhouettes: A political round-up W Washington Versus Havana W Way Society Develops, The W We Are From Friendship University [nd (mid 1960s)] W We Choose Peace W Weaponry in Space: The dilemma of security W Welfare the Basic Task: Five Year Plan, 1971?1975 W West Berlin: In memory of those Soviet officers and men who fell in the battle to liberate Berlin W West Berlin: Yesterday and Today W West European Integration: Its policies and international relations W Western Aid: Myth and Reality W Western Europe Today: Economics, politics, the class struggle, international relations W What Are Classes and the Class Struggle? (ABC #14) W What Are They After in Peking? W What Are Trade Unions? (ABC #21) W What If Everything You Thought You Knew About AIDS Was Wrong? W What Is Capitalism? (ABC #8) W What Is Communism? (ABC #10) W What Is Democratic Centralism? W What Is Democratic Socialism? W What Is Dialectical Materialism? (ABC #6) W What Is Good and What is Bad W What Is Historical Materialism? (ABC #7) W What Is Labour? (ABC #11) W What Is Marxism-Leninism? (ABC #2) W What Is Personality? (ABC #23) W What Is Philosophy? (ABC #4) W What Is Political Economy? (ABC #3) W What Is Property? (ABC #13) W What Is Revolution? (ABC #17) W What Is Scientific Communism? (ABC #5) W What Is Socialism? (ABC #9) W What Is Surplus Value? (ABC #12) W What Is The Party? (ABC #15) W What Is The Scientific and Technological Revolution? (ABC #22) W What Is The State? (ABC #16) W What Is The Transition Period? (ABC #18) W What Is The Working People?s Power? (ABC #19) W What Is The World Socialist System? (ABC #20) W What Is What? (ABC #24) W What Maoism is Really Like W What Real Socialism Means to the People: W What?s What in World Politics: A reference book W Where All Roads Into Space Begin: W Where Human Rights Are Real. W Where It?s Coldest W Where the Old Are Young: Long life in the Soviet Caucasus W White Book:, The W White House and the Black Continent, The W Whither and With Whom? Essays from the ideological front W Who?s Who in the Soviet Cinema: Seventy Different Portraits W Why We Returned to the Soviet Union: Testimonies from Russian emigr??s W Wilfred Grenfell: His life and work W Will We Survive? W Winning for Peace: The great victory?its world impact W Winston Churchill W Witness to War: W Women Today W Women in Science W Women in the USSR: On the UN Decade for Women W Women of a New World W Words of Friends: Greetings extended to the XXVIth Congress of the CPSU, The W Work and Love W Workers in Society: Polemical essays W Workers? Control Over Production: Past and present. W Working Class Movement in the Period of Transition to Imperialism (1871?1904), The W Working Class and Social Progress:, The W Working Class and its Allies, The W Working Class and the Contemporary World:, The W Working Class and the Trade Unions in the USSR:, The W Working Class in Socialist Society:, The W Working Class?The Leading Force of the World Revolutionary Process:, The W Working-Class Movement in the Developmed Capitalist Countries After the Second World War (1945?1979), The W Working-Class Struggle for Peace and Social Progress:, The W Working-Class and National-Liberation Movements: W World Capitalist Economy: Structural changes:, The W World Communist Movement: An outline of strategy and tactics, The W World Energy Problem, The W World Market Today, The W World Revolutionary Movement of the Working Class W World Revolutionary Process, The W World Socialist Movement & Anti-Communism., The W World Socialist System and Anti-Communism, The W World Socialist System:, The W World War II: Myths and the Realities. W World War II: The Decisive Battles of the Soviet Army W World Without Arms?, A W World of Man In the World of Nature, The W Wormwood [Hitler-era anti-semitism & postwar Zionism] W Writer?s Creative Individuality and the Development of Literature, The Y Yakov Sverdlov Y Year 2000: End of the human race?, The Y Year of Victory Y Yellow Devil: Gold and capitalism., The Y Young Communist International and Its Origins, The Y Young Teens Blaze Paths to Peace: The story of the first global children?s festival for peace, friendship co-operation Y Young in the Revolution:, The Y Your First Move: Chess for beginners. Y Youth and Politics Y Youth and the Party: Documents Z Zionism Stands Accused Z Zionism: Enemy of peace and social progress http://leninist.biz/en/TAZ 2009 August 07 ? 1,774 titles ? 241 online At@ Leninist . Biz ... we mean Business ! ? 13:45:49 ? leninistbiz From cb31450 at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 12:00:15 2009 From: cb31450 at gmail.com (c b) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:00:15 -0500 Subject: [A-List] How Detroit, the Motor City, turned into a ghost town Message-ID: <5c2e4d230911041100p6d081e88n68d6937f87fbc5b6@mail.gmail.com> How Detroit, the Motor City, turned into a ghost town Wall Street is celebrating a recovery in the US economy, but the future looks increasingly bleak in America's industrial heartland by Paul Harris in Detroit The Observer (UK) - November 01, 2009 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/01/detroit-michigan-economy-recession-unemployment Try telling Brother Jerry Smith that the recession in America has ended. As scores of people queued up last week at the soup kitchen which the Capuchin friar helps run in Detroit, the celebrations on Wall Street in New York seemed from another world. The hungry and needy come from miles around to get a free healthy meal. Though the East Detroit neighbourhood the soup kitchen serves has had it tough for decades, the recession has seen almost any hope for anyone getting a job evaporate. Neither is there any sign that jobs might come back soon. "Some in the past have had jobs here, but now there is nothing available to people. Nothing at all," Brother Jerry said as he sat behind a desk with a computer but dressed in the simple brown friar's robes of his order. Outside his office the hungry, the homeless and the poor crowded around tables. Many were by themselves, but some were families with young children. None had jobs. Indeed, the soup kitchen itself is now starting to dip into its savings to cope with a drying up of desperately needed donations. This is an area where times are so tough that the soup kitchen is a major employer for the neighbourhood, keeping its own staff out of poverty. But now Brother Jerry fears he may also have to start laying people off. Officially, America is on the up. The economy grew by 3.5% in the past quarter. On Wall Street, stocks are rising again. The banks - rescued wholesale by taxpayers' money last year - are posting billions of dollars of profits. Thousands of bankers and financiers are wetting their lips at the prospect of enormous bonuses, often matching or exceeding those of pre-crash times. The financial sector is lobbying successfully to fight government attempts to regulate it. The wealthy are beginning to snap up property again, pushing prices up. In New York's fashionable West Village a senior banker recently splurged $10m on a single apartment, sending shivers of delight through the city's property brokers. But for tens of millions of Americans such things seem irrelevant. Across the country lay-offs are continuing. Indeed, jobless rates are expected to rise for the rest of 2009 and perhaps beyond. Unemployment in America stands at 9.8%. But that headline figure, massaged by bureaucrats, does not include many categories of the jobless. Another, broader official measure, which includes those such as the long-term jobless who have given up job-seeking and workers who can only find piecemeal part-time work, tells another story. That figure stands at 17%. Added to that shocking statistic are the millions of Americans who remain at risk of foreclosure. In many parts of the country repossessions are still rising or spreading to areas that have escaped so far. In the months to come, no matter what happens on the booming stock market, hundreds of thousands of Americans are likely to lose their homes. For them the recession is far from over. It rages on like a forest fire, burning through jobs, savings and homes. It will serve to exacerbate a long-term trend towards deepening inequality in America. Real wages in the US stagnated in the 1970s and have barely risen since, despite rising living costs. The gap between the average American worker and high-paid chief executives has widened and widened. The richest 1% of Americans have more financial wealth than the bottom 95%. It seems the American hope of a steady job, producing rising income and a home in the suburbs, has evaporated for many. A generation of aspiring middle-class homeowners have been wiped out by the recession. "Poor people just don't have the political clout to lobby and get what they need in the way Wall Street does," said Brother Jerry. There is little doubt that Detroit is ground zero for the parts of America that are still suffering. The city that was once one of the wealthiest in America is a decrepit, often surreal landscape of urban decline. It was once one of the greatest cities in the world. The birthplace of the American car industry, it boasted factories that at one time produced cars shipped over the globe. Its downtown was studded with architectural gems, and by the 1950s it boasted the highest median income and highest rate of home ownership of any major American city. Culturally it gave birth to Motown Records, named in homage to Detroit's status as "Motor City". Decades of white flight, coupled with the collapse of its manufacturing base, especially in its world-famous auto industry, have brought the city to its knees. Half a century ago it was still dubbed the "arsenal of democracy" and boasted almost two million citizens, making it the fourth-largest in America. Now that number has shrunk to 900,000. Its once proud suburbsnow contain row after row of burnt-out houses. Empty factories and apartment buildings haunt the landscape, stripped bare by scavengers. Now almost a third of Detroit - covering a swath of land the size of San Francisco - has been abandoned. Tall grasses, shrubs and urban farms have sprung up in what were once stalwart working-class suburbs. Even downtown, one ruined skyscraper sprouts a pair of trees growing from the rubble. The city has a shocking jobless rate of 29%. The average house price in Detroit is only $7,500, with many homes available for only a few hundred dollars. Not that anyone is buying. At a recent auction of 9,000 confiscated city houses, only a fifth found buyers. The city has become such a byword for decline that Time magazine recently bought a house and set up a reporting team there to cover the city's struggles for a year. There has been no shortage of grim news for Time's new "Assignment Detroit" bureau to get their teeth into. Recently a semi-riot broke out when the city government offered help in paying utility bills. Need was so great that thousands of people turned up for a few application forms. In the end police had to control the crowd, which included the sick and the elderly, some in wheelchairs. At the same time national headlines were created after bodies began piling up at the city's mortuary. Family members, suffering under the recession, could no longer afford to pay for funerals. Incredibly, despite such need, things are getting worse as the impact of the recession has bitten deeply into the city's already catastrophic finances. Detroit is now $300m in debt and is cutting many of its beleaguered services, such as transport and street lighting. As the number of bus routes shrivels and street lights are cut off, it is the poorest who suffer. People like TJ Taylor. He is disabled and cannot work. He relies on public transport. It has been cut, so now he must walk. But the lights are literally going out in some places, making already dangerous streets even more threatening. "I just avoid those areas that are not lit. I pity for the poor people who live in them," he said. The brutal truth, some experts say, is that Detroit is being left behind - and it is not alone. In cities across America a collapsed manufacturing base has been further damaged by the recession and has led to conditions of dire unemployment and the creation of an underclass. Richard Feldman, a former Detroit car- worker and union official turned social activist, sees disaster across the country. Sitting in a downtown Detroit bar, he lists a grim roll call of cities across America where decline is hitting hard and where the official end of the recession will make little difference. Names such as Flint, Youngstown, Buffalo, Binghamton, Newton. Feldman sees a relentless decline for working- class Americans all the way from Iowa to New York. He sees the impact in his own family, as his retired parents-in-law have difficulties with their gutted pension fund and his disabled son stares at cuts to his benefits. The economic changes going on, he believes, are a profound de-industrialisation with which America is failing to come to terms. "We are going to have to face the end of the industrial age," he said. "This didn't just happen last October either. It's been happening here in Detroit since the 1980s. Detroit just got it first, but it could happen anywhere now." The busy highway of Eight Mile Road marks the border between the city of Detroit and its suburbs. On one side stretches the city proper with its mainly black population; on the other stretches the progressively more wealthy and more white suburbs of Oakland County. But this recession has reached out to those suburbs, too. Repossessions have spread like a rash down the streets of Oakland's communities. Joblessness has climbed, spurred by yet another round of mass lay-offs in the auto industry. Feldman recently took a tour down Eight Mile Road and was shocked by what he saw: "I went door-to-door north and south of Eight Mile and I could not tell the difference any more. I did not believe it until I saw it." Professor Robin Boyle, an urban planning expert at Detroit's Wayne State University, believes the real impact of the recession will continue to be felt in those suburbs for years to come. For decades they stood as a bulwark against the poverty of the city, ringing it like a doughnut of prosperity, with decrepit inner Detroit as the hole at its centre. Now home losses and job cuts are hitting the middle classes hard. "Recovery is going to take a generation," he said. "The doughnut itself is sick now. But what do you think that means for the poor people who live in the hole?" That picture is borne out by the recent actions of Gleaners Community Food Bank. The venerable Detroit institution has long sent out parcels of food, clothing and furniture all over the city. But now it is doing so to the suburbs as well, sometimes to people who only a year or so ago had been donors to the charity but now face food shortage themselves. Gleaners has delivered a staggering 14,000 tonnes of food in the past 12 months alone. Standing in a huge warehouse full of pallets of potatoes, cereals, tinned fruit and other vitals, Gleaners' president, DeWayne Wells, summed up the situation bluntly: "People who used to support this programme now need it themselves. The recession hit them so quickly they just became overwhelmed." In Detroit many people see the only signs of recovery as coming from themselves. As city government retreats and as cuts bite deep, some of those left in the city have not waited for help. Take the case of Mark Covington. He was born and raised in Detroit and still lives only a few yards from the house where he grew up in one of the city's toughest neighbourhoods. Laid off from his job as an environmental engineer, Covington found himself with nothing to do. So he set about cleaning up his long-suffering Georgia Street neighbourhood. He cleared the rubble where a bakery had once stood and planted a garden. He grew broccoli, strawberries, garlic and other vegetables. Soon he had planted two other gardens on other ruined lots. He invited his neighbours to pick the crops for free, to help put food on their plates. Friends then built an outdoor screen of white-painted boards to show local children a movie each Saturday night and keep them off the streets. He helped organise local patrols so that abandoned homes would not be burnt down. He did all this for free. All the while he still looked desperately for a job and found nothing. Yet Georgia Street improved. Local youths, practised in vandalism and the destruction of abandoned buildings, have not touched his gardens. People flock to the movie nights, harvest dinners and street parties Covington holds. Inspired, he scraped together enough cash to buy a derelict shop and an abandoned house opposite his first garden. He wants to reopen the shop and turn the house into a community centre for children. To do it, he needs a grant. Or a cheap bank loan. Or a job. But for people like Covington the grants have dried up, the banks are not lending, and no one is hiring. There is no help for him. It is hard not to compare Covington's struggle for cash to the vast bailout of America's financial industry. "We just can't get a loan to help us out. The banks are not lending," he said. On an unseasonal warm day last week, he stood in his urban garden, tending his crops, and gazed wistfully at the abandoned buildings that he now owns but cannot yet turn into something good for his neighbourhood. He does not seem bitter. But he does wonder why it seems so easy in modern America for those who already have a lot to get much more, while those who have least are forgotten. "It makes me wonder how they do it. And where is that money coming from?" he asked. From cb31450 at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 13:09:37 2009 From: cb31450 at gmail.com (c b) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:09:37 -0500 Subject: [A-List] The Berlin wall had to fall, but today's world is no Message-ID: <5c2e4d230911041209x4f809969xb49a93c47f8e8e23@mail.gmail.com> The Berlin wall had to fall, but today's world is no fairer Twenty years after that shameful symbol of division was torn down, ultra-liberal capitalism needs its own perestroika by Mikhail Gorbachev The Guardian (U.K.) October 30, 2009 http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/30/1989-capitalism-in-crisis-perestroika Twenty years have passed since the fall of the Berlin wall, one of the shameful symbols of the cold war and the dangerous division of the world into opposing blocks and spheres of influence. Today we can revisit the events of those times and take stock of them in a less emotional and more rational way. The first optimistic observation to be made is that the announced "end of history" has not come about, though many claimed it had. But neither has the world that many politicians of my generation trusted and sincerely believed in: one in which, with the end of the cold war, humankind could finally forget the absurdity of the arms race, dangerous regional conflicts, and sterile ideological disputes, and enter a golden century of collective security, the rational use of material resources, the end of poverty and inequality, and restored harmony with nature. Another important consequence of the end of the cold war is the realisation of one of the central postulates of New Thinking: the interdependence of extremely important elements that go to the very heart of the existence and development of humankind. This involves not only processes and events occurring on different continents but also the organic linkage between changes in the economic, technological, social, demographic and cultural conditions that determine the daily existence of billions of people on our planet. In effect, humankind has started to transform itself into a single civilisation. At the same time, the disappearance of the iron curtain and barriers and borders, unexpected by many, made possible connections between countries that until recently had different political systems, as well as different civilisations, cultures and traditions. Naturally, we politicians from the last century can be proud of the fact that we avoided the danger of a thermonuclear war. However, for many millions of people around the globe, the world has not become a safer place. Quite to the contrary, innumerable local conflicts and ethnic and religious wars have appeared like a curse on the new map of world politics, creating large numbers of victims. Clear proof of the irrational behaviour and irresponsibility of the new generation of politicians is the fact that defence spending by numerous countries, large and small alike, is now greater than during the cold war, and strong-arm tactics are once again the standard way of dealing with conflicts and are a common feature of international relations. Alas, over the last few decades, the world has not become a fairer place: disparities between the rich and the poor either remained or increased, not only between the north and the developing south but also within developed countries themselves. The social problems in Russia, as in other post-communist countries, are proof that simply abandoning the flawed model of a centralised economy and bureaucratic planning is not enough, and guarantees neither a country's global competitiveness nor respect for the principles of social justice or a dignified standard of living for the population. New challenges can be added to those of the past. One of these is terrorism. In a context in which world war is no longer an instrument of deterrence between the most powerful nations, terrorism has become the "poor man's atomic bomb", not only figuratively but perhaps literally as well. The uncontrolled proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the competition between the erstwhile adversaries of the cold war to reach new technological levels in arms production, and the presence of the new pretenders to an influential role in a multipolar world all increase the sensation of chaos in global politics. The crisis of ideologies that is threatening to turn into a crisis of ideals, values and morals marks yet another loss of social reference points, and strengthens the atmosphere of political pessimism and nihilism. The real achievement we can celebrate is the fact that the 20th century marked the end of totalitarian ideologies, in particular those that were based on utopian beliefs. Yet new ideologies are quickly replacing the old ones, both in the east and the west. Many now forget that the fall of the Berlin wall was not the cause of global changes but to a great extent the consequence of deep, popular reform movements that started in the east, and the Soviet Union in particular. After decades of the Bolshevik experiment and the realisation that this had led Soviet society down a historical blind alley, a strong impulse for democratic reform evolved in the form of Soviet perestroika, which was also available to the countries of eastern Europe. But it was soon very clear that western capitalism, too, deprived of its old adversary and imagining itself the undisputed victor and incarnation of global progress, is at risk of leading western society and the rest of the world down another historical blind alley. Today's global economic crisis was needed to reveal the organic defects of the present model of western development that was imposed on the rest of the world as the only one possible; it also revealed that not only bureaucratic socialism but also ultra-liberal capitalism are in need of profound democratic reform ???? their own kind of perestroika. Today, as we sit among the ruins of the old order, we can think of ourselves as active participants in the process of creating a new world. Many truths and postulates once considered indisputable, in both the east and the west, have ceased to be so, including the blind faith in the all-powerful market and, above all, its democratic nature. There was an ingrained belief that the western model of democracy could be spread mechanically to other societies with different historical experience and cultural traditions. In the present situation, even a concept like social progress, which seems to be shared by everyone, needs to be defined, and examined, more precisely. [Mikhail Gorbachev was the last president of the Soviet Union; he was awarded the Nobel peace prize in 1990] From vertegaa at vcn.bc.ca Wed Nov 4 13:10:58 2009 From: vertegaa at vcn.bc.ca (John Vertegaal) Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:10:58 -0800 Subject: [A-List] Monetary Reform ... In-Reply-To: <58CB2C27AE7E4A6D9F62D94D7D55CE02@TonyPC> References: <20091102173501.74f71ec8.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> <58CB2C27AE7E4A6D9F62D94D7D55CE02@TonyPC> Message-ID: <4AF1DFD2.8020007@vcn.bc.ca> Cook's analysis is simply wrong. Sure he hits some things right on the head, but a broken clock is right twice a day too. You cannot analyze a gap in production output and purchasing power, by taking GDP figures as gospel. On the basis of all successful businesses having to pass on all investment costs down to their customers, until resolved at the retail level through direct personal spending, C and I are of opposite sign. And not only that but since all personal taxes (paid through income) are investment costs of business too, and nX in overall analysis is plagued by fallacy of composition, NIPA is sorely amiss stating GDP as C + I + G + nX. Its figures are double counted! No wonder they have to fudge their figures substantially before being able to make them fit. Moreover, the gap's components are mostly SC fallacies too. There is only one element to blame for the shortfall in income to resolve production output and that is asset price inflation. And SC's answer is yet more money creation?! They neither understand that money's primary attribute is being a unit of account and thus property of the map, not the territory; nor the true nature of inflation. Sure we need (monetary) reform, but Cook's version isn't it; and for that matter, neither is Brown's. There is nothing magical about fractional reserve banking. All its floated loans need to be paid back with interest. And there is only one faction with the economic wherewithal to resolve the associated fees: banksters and their underlings. Even if that German study showing the overall interest cost approaching 50% of income is way off base; reported $3000 monthly pool heating bills of banksters are a piss in the ocean as far as interest cost resolution is concerned. All investment (supply) puts the economy in disequilibrium until it's rectified through direct spending (demand) way later in time. In other words, living standard augmentation _determines_ economic growth. With the former having stagnated for over a generation as far as the the great majority is concerned and the latter being fudged by NIPA, no wonder we're up shit creek without paddles. And I'm afraid that donning Marxian overcoats isn't going to help much either. As I see it and please correct me if I'm wrong, its tenets rest by enlarge on reasoning by induction. Like atheists not realizing that their despise of "true believers" is just another belief, Marxists don't apprehend that by replacing capitalist voodoo economics with central planning and single-entry bookkeeping, no more than supplanting one set of fetishes for another is effected. Even if by chance Marx was right, the tremendous obstacle of human motivation will need to be overcome; less it will lead to the situation characteristically observed as: "they pretend to pay us and we pretend to work". So the answer is? ...the neutralization of the "power" of money. With Michael H. I've come to the conclusion "that any alternative financial policy should involve an active tax policy". The drab equalization of all living standards through socialism isn't going to be convincing democratically. That's why I previously proposed limiting after-tax personal income to the existing spread in consumergood durables. Super fancy items like yachts and personal planes should be restricted in size as being obtainable through savings/loans, just like the rest of us acquire our more expensive durables. But in terms of the economy being a means toward the end of living standard provision in addition to our direct obtention of exogenous use values, land like capital, has no inherent economic value of its own; if there are no pertinent returns, then there is no land/capital value. The answer lies thus not in directly taxing land/capital; for whatever values these are designated to be, they are only tentative. But instead in taxing their realized returns, i.e. the income dedicated to be derived from land and capital; which, given the imperative passing on of business costs, in the end of course is someone else's directly spent income. Furthermore, enforced sales of land/capital items, to pay for owed taxes, would equally require the income circuit to be conducted. In conclusion: if one wants to understand the economy it is vital to realize that all investment is debt creation; which is only resolvable (wealth realizing) through the direct spending towards living standard enhancement by others. Thus Wall Street antics don't create wealth, they are criminal bunko games. Non of this is ideological. Its only articles of faith are my previously stated three axioms, the rest is deduced. In other words, you'll have to disagree with my axioms in order to disagree with the above. John V Tony B. wrote: > Some interesting stuff here...but, of course, what Cook is clearly > advocating is captialist refomism...and I find it difficult to > understand how the 'economic democracy' he advocates could, a) come > about through the mechanisms he describes, b) could, in any case, be > maintained in the face of natural capitalist impulses to concentrate > power, and c) actually create the conditions for a true economic > democracy in the face of the inherently exploitative nature of > capitalist political/social relations. > > Certainly the nationalization of banks and the government control of > credit ('social credit') is an essential plank in any revision of > present economic social relations. Granted. But to think that you can > have a purely 'economic' revolution without a political one...that is, > without a redefining of political and social relations ...of power > relations between classes...at the same time...is, I proffer, wrong-headed. > > Just consider for instance the tremendous obstacles we now face in > implementing solutions to our various global ecological crises. For in > what form do those obstacles present themselves? The answer is that > present-day market mechanisms, far from enabling such solutions (for > which the technical means already exist), are a positive hindrance to > them. Thus, entrenched capitalist interests stand at every key juncture, > in the path towards a reconfigured global ecological relationship. The > rational planning - and long term vision - that is necessary to > implement such solutions are being thwarted by the seemingly inescapable > short term interests and visions of the dominant corporate / capitalist > players in the key industrial and energy sectors of the economy. To > expect that this will all change because the credit system has been > revamped (somehow mysteriously...given that the key power brokers still > hold sway) is, I think, naive. > > In short, I applaud Cook's desire and intent to establish 'economic > democracy' (and remembering the liberal myth, i.e. "that you can have > political democracy without economic democracy"), but I find the 'social > credit' movement ideologically stuck in capitalist refomism.... a > reformism that prefers to turn a blind eye to the inescapble fact that > capitalist economic and social relations are at their heart of > hearts...quintessentially exploitative. And in my books, there just > t'aint no way of gettin' 'round that. > > Tony > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Totten" > To: > Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 3:35 AM > Subject: [A-List] Monetary Reform ... > > >> How a National Monetary System Should Work >> >> by Richard C Cook >> >> Global Research (May 11 2007) >> >> >> The author has received an overwhelming response to his recent >> Global Research report entitled, "An Emergency Program of Monetary >> Reform for the United States". The introduction to that report >> stated that, "the US financial system headed by the Federal Reserve >> System has failed, and ? only an emergency program of monetary >> reform can address conditions which may be leading to a catastrophe >> like the Great Depression or worse". >> >> This new report on "Monetary Reform and How a National Monetary >> System Should Work" continues the dialogue by outlining the >> principles and mechanisms available to help guide the creation of a >> monetary system for any nation that wishes to enjoy economic >> democracy with prosperity. This would be in contrast to the >> collapsing debt-based monetary system overseen by the Federal >> Reserve and the other central banks of the world, coordinated at >> the top by such institutions as the International Monetary Fund, >> the European Central Bank, and the Bank of International >> Settlements. >> >> Note that all the banks of the Western world are ultimately private >> institutions owned by the world's super-rich. The international >> banking structure is operated by and on behalf of the world's >> monetary elite primarily for their own profit. >> >> Just below the banking system are the giant corporations of the >> global economy which derive capital from and funnel profits into >> the financiers' empire. Bringing up the rear are the populations >> and debt-serfs of the no-longer-sovereign nation states, including >> those of the United States, whose participation in the system as >> consumers is essential, but whose jobs continue to disappear as >> manufacturing is increasingly automated. >> >> The author had realized as early as 1970 that the central problem >> with the world's economy lay on the side of distribution, not >> production. He came to Washington, DC, that year and spent most of >> the next thirty-six years working within sight of the Washington >> Monument, learning how things really work, and pondering the >> methods that might be more in concord with such founding documents >> of American democracy as the Declaration of Independence and the US >> Constitution. Twenty-one of these years were with the US Treasury >> Department. >> >> Now, for the first time, this report builds on the findings of many >> of the world's monetary reformers past and present by offering a >> complete prescription for a new and better world. This prescription >> is radically different from most progressive reform agendas that >> address only symptoms of the underlying systemic failures. >> >> Where Money Comes From >> >> When setting out to study monetary principles, we must realize how >> little we know of the real facts of monetary history. Economics is >> an extremely limited discipline rife with untested assumptions and >> unchallengeable dogmas. Its most pernicious doctrine is the >> assertion that there is something called "the market", where there >> is an "invisible hand" that makes everything work out the way it is >> supposed to. >> >> Actually, an economy functions according to the principles >> according to which it is designed and regulated. If it is designed >> to funnel wealth into the hands of the monetary controllers, then >> that is what the "market" and the "invisible hand" will do. If it >> is designed to foster "the general welfare", as it should according >> to the preamble to the US Constitution, then the "market" and the >> "invisible hand" will tend in that direction. >> >> Unfortunately, we march today to the tune of the monetary elite, so >> they are the ones who reap the profits and the benefits. They are >> the ones on whom the "invisible hand" lavishes the wealth of the >> world. >> >> It is done through the process of bank-created credit. While during >> the nineteenth century other forms of money circulated, such as >> large quantities of coinage, silver certificates, and >> government-issued greenbacks, almost all the money that exists >> today originates through a loan by a financial institution to an >> individual or a business. >> >> When a loan is made it is issued as a liability on the bank's >> ledger. When it is repaid, the liability is canceled. With today's >> computer systems, all transactions are digitized, of course. The >> bank keeps the interest on the loan as its combined administrative >> fee and profit. The money that is lent had no prior existence. >> >> Once money is created as credit, it takes many forms according to >> how the loan recipient spends it. Some credit is used by businesses >> or individuals as investment in order to generate profits over and >> above the amount they must repay to the bank with interest. If the >> money is used simply for consumer purchases, the individual >> consumer must pay back the loan through future earnings. In those >> cases where the borrower defaults on the loan or goes bankrupt, the >> money simply remains in circulation however it was spent. >> >> Unfortunately, large amounts of credit are used mainly for >> speculation, not for any benefit to the producing economy. This >> includes securities bought on margin and borrowing by hedge funds >> where the fund may make a profit even if the value of its >> investments goes down. Bank-created credit in this case is little >> more than chips in a casino. >> >> Other borrowing takes place by equity funds and other types of >> investors for leveraged mergers or buyouts of entire companies, >> where the predators wreck a company's infrastructure by reducing >> costs and selling its assets, then pay back their bank loans before >> unloading the business on someone else. >> >> The most important thing to realize about the banking system is >> that the money which enters into circulation as purchasing power >> must eventually be returned in the repayment of loans. This is why >> the Federal Reserve's monetary measures - M1, M2, and M3 - are >> meaningless, because so much of it has liens against it. >> >> We are taught that paying it back is the way things should be - >> obviously, if we borrow something, we should pay back what we owe. >> >> But the peculiar thing is that because the borrowed money pays for >> labor, commodities, rent, et cetera, it becomes part of the prices >> that are eventually charged for goods and services. However, when >> the money goes back to the bank to cancel a loan, that purchasing >> power disappears. Neither the banks nor economists ever make note >> of the fact that this process creates a chronic shortage of >> purchasing power which must be filled by more loans and more bank >> profits. The economy is thus a treadmill that borrowers must >> constantly trudge along in order to have enough money for survival. >> >> So a system which is seemingly grounded in the simple adage that if >> you borrow you should repay is all wrong. The reason it is all >> wrong is that in most cases, individual consumers should never have >> to borrow in the first place. And we never ask ourselves why, with >> the abundance that is possible from modern science and technology, >> should people have to borrow money at interest for the necessities >> of life - a house, a car, household expenses, an education, et >> cetera. >> >> Thus we realize that the financial system works against what should >> be the real purpose of money, which is to serve as a ticket for the >> purchase by people of articles they need to survive or otherwise >> desire to utilize once the demand for survival has been met. >> >> People have needs and desires. The economy is fully capable of >> producing all the goods and services needed to fulfill those needs >> and desires. But the system is broken, because, despite the >> abundance of credit available for financial speculation, there is >> not sufficient money available at the consumer level to mediate >> between prices and consumption, even when most people have a job. >> We still must borrow, and that is wrong. There should be a better >> way for society to generate the money for what people need. >> >> So what is really going on here? >> >> One of the things that is going on is that money is being >> mis-defined as a commodity. People who believe money is a commodity >> think it has value in and of itself. But one of the hardest things >> to grasp about money is that not even gold or silver money, or >> paper money supposedly backed by gold or silver, has or could have >> intrinsic value. >> >> Actually, money is anything that a willing buyer and a willing >> seller agree to exchange for something else. Money could be and has >> been such things as gold, silver, paper, wampum, cows, stones, >> shells, sticks with notches, or, today, electronic blips. What may >> appear to give gold or silver value is its scarcity and durability. >> But unless there are goods and services available and for sale, >> gold and silver are totally useless. You can't eat gold or silver, >> live in them, or wear them. In and of themselves they have no >> value. What gives any money value is the producing economy and >> nothing else. >> >> So by this definition, bank-created credit, while it may generate >> money which a willing buyer and seller agree to exchange, is money >> with strings attached, in that at some point, it must travel back >> to the bank in cancellation of a debt. Thus a buyer who offers it >> to a seller is, in reality, deceiving himself about his actual >> ability to pay. He is not a free man. Always lurking in the back of >> his mind is that with every article he has purchased he has >> shackled himself ever more firmly to future indentured servitude. >> >> The seller, on the other hand, may breathe a little more freely >> having just acquired some of the monetary medium necessary to repay >> his own debts. And so it goes, ad infinitum. Even if the money were >> backed by gold and silver, the system would work in exactly the >> same way. >> >> So by what right do the bankers bind the economy in such a >> straightjacket of debt? Again, the underlying logic is that money >> is a commodity. A group of men have money. It is their money, we >> believe, rightfully earned. Therefore, because these individuals >> have money, they have a further right to lend it to others. >> >> But under existing laws, the banking system then makes the leap of >> assuming that because they have money which can be lent, they have >> a right to lend much more than they actually possess. Somehow they >> have become fit practitioners of the fractional reserve banking >> system whereby, as described above, they can lend simply by >> creating debits in their computers, based on some ratio between >> their capital stock and their lending ceiling. >> >> But if bankers can do this, why can't you or I? If I have $1,000, >> why can't I then lend $10,000 and collect the corresponding >> interest? The answer is that a bank has a government charter and >> supposedly can guarantee through various safeguards that the people >> to whom it lends can repay. But even this isn't required of a bank >> any more if it can package its loans and sell them to some other >> business entity, such as an investment company. >> >> But the fact is that banks can only be created by people who are >> already rich, can put up some initial capital, build a functioning >> business, and obtain the government charter mentioned above. Once >> they do this, they are the masters of the world. >> >> Also note that under today's highly unstable financial conditions, >> it is not only banks which create credit through lending. Since the >> deregulation of the 1980s, Wall Street brokerage firms greatly >> expanded the system whereby speculative loans are floated for >> purchase of securities. This has resulted in a current ratio of >> debt to equity of 22:1 in the US securities markets, where debt far >> outweighs value. >> >> What is Credit? >> >> The word "credit" is one of the most widely-used and important in >> the English language. Dictionary.com lists twenty-one definitions. >> All these definitions have some connotation of the concept of >> "value" and the exchange of that value across the dimensions of >> time and space between one person and another. Obviously, the ideas >> of "credit" and "money" are closely related. >> >> The idea of credit when viewed from a macroeconomic perspective >> refers to the ability of an economy to produce goods and services >> of value to the members of that community. It refers to the >> potential value of that economy to support life. What it does not >> and cannot refer to is money in and of itself, because money, as we >> have seen, has no intrinsic value. Without the credit-potential of >> a producing economy, money has no meaning. >> >> On the other hand, money can be a convenient yardstick to measure >> credit, as when we state that the 2006 GDP of the United States was >> $12.98 trillion. But actually, the "real" credit of the US economy >> was much higher, because our economy is not running at anywhere >> near its full capacity. The automobile industry, for instance, is >> running at about fifty percent of its physical potential. So the >> real credit of the US is actually higher than the GDP. >> >> "Credit" in an economic sense confers a legal right to draw on the >> goods and services that make up the potential GDP of the nation. It >> is the way the society agrees to hand out the monetary tickets by >> which the GDP may be acquired. >> >> Obviously, the issuance of either too many or too few tickets will >> cause problems. The issuance of too few tickets will result in >> underproduction, poverty, even death. The issuance of too many >> tickets will result in inflation. When the Federal Reserve creates, >> then deflates, asset bubbles, like the currently collapsing housing >> bubble, these effects alternate, resulting in the kind of ongoing >> economic chaos we have seen for decades. >> >> It can readily be seen that credit is a cultural phenomenon. It is >> the sum total of the entire productive capacity of the nation. It >> has grown from the past, exists in the present, and can be >> projected into the future. It is the result of the work of untold >> millions of people, dead and gone, alive today, and yet unborn. >> Many of its results may be proprietary, in terms of businesses, >> property, and patents owned, et cetera, but every person who has >> ever lived, lives today, or who will live in the future is a >> participant in that culture. >> >> Therefore, credit can and should be viewed as a communal endowment, >> a public phenomenon, a part of what is called "the commons", even >> with the normal and natural fact of the existence of private >> property. So the use of credit and its distribution should be >> treated as a public utility, like water or electricity. Everyone >> should have a right to its use, according to some rational, lawful, >> and humane criteria of need or contribution to creating it. >> >> As with the use of other utilities, it is the responsibility of the >> community to see that credit is used wisely and for positive and >> constructive purposes. But no one should be denied it altogether, >> because it is a necessity of life. >> >> Money, as a measure of credit, should therefore be available to the >> entire community. The government, as the representative of the >> community, has the responsibility of overseeing, coordinating, and >> regulating its availability, keeping in mind the fairest and most >> socially beneficial ways for it to be utilized. Monetary reformers >> would argue that extensive availability of credit to the working >> population should be part of the "general welfare" guaranteed by >> the preamble to the US Constitution. This should not be confused >> with the virtually unlimited availability of credit to speculators >> and stock predators as is presently the case with our Wall >> Street-based economy. >> >> But these principles are poorly recognized. Money, and therefore >> credit, is viewed as private property, even though most of it, as >> stated previously, is made by banks "out of thin air". It is no >> exaggeration to say that the existing system is one whereby the >> financial elite has confiscated and privatized the most important >> public resource of all, more important than water, land, electric >> power, et cetera. This has resulted in much of the world's wars, >> poverty, and crime. >> >> Let us again examine the ways money enters into the economic >> system, this time looking at the total credit picture of the US >> economy. We said that the 2006 GDP was $12.98 trillion. This takes >> into account a trade deficit of $726 billion. The question is, >> where did the credit come from to purchase the GDP, because, by >> definition, it all had to be paid for in prices. >> >> According to official data, the available national income in 2006 >> was $10.23 trillion, including wages, salaries, interest, >> dividends, personal business earnings, and capital gains. Of this >> amount, approximately one-third was taken through taxes by >> government at the federal, state, and local levels. >> >> Churning through the economy was borrowing of all kinds - for >> consumption, commerce, investment, speculation, new government >> debt, and to finance business transactions. In fact it was the net >> increase in debt - $3.77 trillion - that paid for the difference >> between GDP and national income. >> >> Debt also financed much of the trade deficit by our borrowing to >> purchase what was imported from abroad. The need to borrow has been >> greatly increased by the decline of the US manufacturing sector, >> where well-paying jobs that contributed to the national income have >> disappeared or been outsourced overseas. The ratio of debt to >> national income has reached historic proportions - 460 percent of >> the national income today versus 186 percent in 1957. >> >> Orthodox economics, including the manipulation of interest rates by >> the Federal Reserve, has no tools for resolving this crisis. The >> main reason is that neither economists nor politicians understand >> it, though bankers certainly do. >> >> Orthodox economics is helpless because people do not understand how >> the gap between production and purchasing power relates to the way >> the microeconomics of the corporation translates into the >> macroeconomics of nations. We observed earlier in this report that >> prices of articles within the economy include the loans that are >> taken out during the production process. But these loans are >> canceled as bank liabilities when they are repaid. Therefore the >> purchasing power of the economy always lags behind prices. >> >> But this is not the only area where prices include factors that are >> not paid out in wages, salaries, dividends, or other sources of >> individual or business income. Other factors include retained >> earnings, insurance, certain maintenance and overhead costs, plus >> the cumulative effect of corporations buying from each other with >> payments which never exit the production system. >> >> As a result, only somewhere between a third and a half of all costs >> are ever distributed to consumers. This analysis has been >> documented at length by the Social Credit movement and has been >> well-known to monetary reformers for decades. >> >> This gap is what drives nations to seek overseas markets for their >> products as the US did so strenuously during the post-World War Two >> period. When the US balance of payments later fell into negative >> territory, we tried to compensate by the policy of "dollar >> hegemony", whereby we foisted our currency on the rest of the world >> as the principal means of oil trading, maintenance of currency >> reserves, and paying for our trade deficit. >> >> But as the US internal and external debt grows and our fiscal and >> trade deficits deepen, a total systemic breakdown is starting to >> take place. The main recent prop of the US economy, the housing >> bubble, is deflating. And frantically, we are trying to escape by a >> radical devaluation of the dollar combined with an aggressive >> military policy based essentially on confiscating the resources of >> other nations such as Iraq. >> >> This, combined with action to prop up our fiscal deficit by >> importing dollars spent abroad on manufactured products we no >> longer make ourselves, has created a house of cards that must soon >> come down. All that is lacking is a major shock, such as a widening >> war in the Middle East or inability by foreign creditors to >> continue to accept devalued dollars. >> >> Neither devaluation nor aggression will solve the problem which >> derives from the failure of debt financing to create real >> purchasing power and thereby resolve the chaos through which a >> system built for the profits of the financiers can never produce >> enough unencumbered credit to maintain our desired level of >> production and the standard of living that goes with it. >> >> The Prescription >> >> As with anyone facing bankruptcy, it is time for those who wish to >> understand the current US economic crisis to take a deep breath, >> step back, and gather themselves in order to correctly assess the >> situation. >> >> Obviously the solution is not to risk blowing up the world by >> continuing to resolve our domestic economic problems through >> overseas conquests. This is what the Western nations have been >> trying to do for centuries, and it appears that the rest of the >> world may finally have had enough. This is especially the case >> today when the main factor that is floating the US economy is the >> huge US trade imbalance where foreign nations must use the dollars >> they take in to their ultimate disadvantage by financing a federal >> budget deficit that is measured in dollars whose value is dropping. >> >> Nor does the solution lie on the production side of the equation. >> The US and other developed economies are capable of producing >> everything their populations need, even accompanied by a reasonable >> amount of foreign trade, especially if we can return our industry >> to the level of productivity we enjoyed prior to the Federal >> Reserve-induced recession of 1979 to 1983 which gave us today's >> anemic "service economy". >> >> Rather the solution lies with the federal government taking back >> its constitutionally-authorized control of the credit of the nation >> from the financiers and managing it as previously stated - as a >> public utility. There is no need to eliminate capitalism, change >> the basis of property ownership, abolish corporations, et cetera, >> because the organization and administration of the production >> process is essentially irrelevant to the real problem. >> >> Once again, the producing economy is not the problem. It has >> performed with tremendous effectiveness in creating the goods and >> services people need and want. It would be the basis for real >> economic democracy if its bounty could be made available and >> distributed in accordance with democratic principles. >> >> It is essential to realize that the central government of a >> sovereign nation has the right, the ability, and the responsibility >> to introduce ALL new credit into existence. This is totally >> different from having the central bank "print money" by relaxing >> lending policies, resulting in an infusion of cheap loans which >> must still be repaid. >> >> Sovereign creation of credit is not based on debt. It is and should >> be based on direct spending of money into circulation by the >> government itself. Obviously the government should do this in a way >> that promotes the best interests of the members of society while >> respecting the varying degrees of contribution by those of >> different levels of skill and achievement. It is quite possible to >> enact such a program with due regard to all established conventions >> of private property and the private ownership and control of >> existing wealth. >> >> To those who are concerned that the concept of publicly-controlled >> credit postulates a monetary supply that can be turned on and off >> like tap water, this is a misconception. There is indeed a >> cornucopia of supply on the earth, but it is not of money. If is of >> what human beings are capable of producing with the skill of their >> hands and their heads and the knowledge of science and technology. >> >> Money is only a ticket to transfer this abundance from producer to >> consumer, but it must be plentiful enough to allow the transfer of >> all that is reasonably desired, it should not be misused for >> financial speculation, and it is the job of government to bring >> that money to the place of the economic activity where it is >> needed. The key point is that such money should not be encumbered >> by debt to a financial institution, including the banks of the >> Federal Reserve System. >> >> This should be done according the following principles: >> >> The decisions of what goods and services should be produced should >> represent a reasonable mix of what is needed and desired by >> consumers with what is required for the public good by way of >> regulation and infrastructure. Decisions should be made by a >> combination of market forces, business governance, and oversight by >> representative government. In other words, production should be >> conducted as we imagine it is done at present, though in reality >> neither the market, business, nor representative government can >> function properly and responsibly today because they are under so >> much pressure from a disastrously dysfunctional monetary system. >> >> Purchasing power should be provided to all individuals whether they >> work or not. This is increasingly important as fewer workers are >> needed due to automation to produce an increasing amount of goods. >> There is no way to avoid dislocation of workers due to change in an >> advanced economy, but it is essentially that people be protected >> from such change even if they decide to opt out of working for a >> living at all. There are many productive things people can do >> without having to draw an income from a paying job. The money >> provided to people regardless of whether they work would constitute >> the National Dividend envisioned by a Social Credit system. One way >> to manage such a system would be to require everyone to work until >> the age of forty, when optional retirement would be offered. >> >> The idea of one nation being the world's policeman with military >> bases everywhere and a right to conquer other nations at will and >> take their resources must be abandoned once and for all. A system >> where the nations of the world are financially independent and >> self-sustaining as described in this report would lead to the >> possibility of international stability and trade among nations and >> regions of the world acting as equals. The history of the last >> century proves that the drive to war is largely fueled by the need >> for financial dominance as an offset to the failure to generate >> sufficient internal purchasing power through democratic management >> of credit. This syndrome would be eliminated by the monetary >> reforms described herein. >> >> These are the principles - a functioning economy that combines >> responsible free enterprise with government regulation and >> infrastructure; democratic distribution of a National Dividend >> which supplements earned income; and an international system of >> economic relationships among sovereign nations acting as equals. >> None of these principles is currently being met, and no one in a >> leadership position has a plan to take us there, either now or when >> the crisis strikes. >> >> The first measure in bringing about change, taking the US as an >> example, would be for the federal government to create a Monetary >> Control Board as envisioned by model legislation proposed by the >> American Monetary Institute. This board would oversee the entire >> process of assuring that the money supply is sufficient to express >> the real credit demands of the nation in paying for the GDP. This >> would be followed by a combination of the following steps: >> >> We should spend sufficient credit into existence to supply the >> basic operating expenses of government at all levels without >> recourse to either taxes or borrowing. In the past, this has been >> done by the colonial American legislatures, the Continental >> Congress at the time of the Revolutionary War, and the federal >> government during the Civil War. Probably two-thirds of existing >> federal government expenditures could be eliminated, because much >> of it is to compensate for a failed monetary system, including much >> of the military machine. Further, at least ninety percent of all >> taxes could be eliminated under such a program. The only taxes that >> would be retained would be those in the form of user fees for >> infrastructure operations and maintenance or those levied as a >> control mechanism to prevent inflation. Capital expenses for >> infrastructure construction at the federal, state, and local levels >> could be financed through a self-capitalized national >> infrastructure bank. Government expenditures would continue to >> require legislative approval under our republican form of >> government which would be enhanced, not threatened, by monetary >> reform. >> >> The remainder of the total societal gap between production and >> purchasing power would be filled by a non-taxable National Dividend >> of two types. One would be a cash stipend paid to all citizens >> which would also serve the purpose of eliminating poverty by >> providing everyone with a basic income guarantee. The remainder of >> the National Dividend would consist of an overall pricing subsidy, >> whereby a designated proportion of all purchases, including home >> building expenses, would be rebated to consumers. The total >> National Dividend per person would probably exceed $12,000 per year >> under today's economic conditions. It would be a calculated value >> charged against a government ledger but would be off-budget, with >> no need to finance it with taxation or borrowing. >> >> A portion of the National Dividend would be made available to all >> citizens reaching the age of eighteen, who would receive a >> non-taxable lump-sum of $60,000 for higher education, trade school, >> or business investment. >> >> Bank financing would be much more limited than at present. Private >> sector corporate investment would be funded entirely out of >> retained earnings and capital markets without recourse to bank >> lending. Bank lending for stock speculation would be abolished as >> would leveraged buyouts. >> >> Bank lending would be accomplished without fractional reserve >> methods by requiring banks to supplement their capital and deposits >> with credit borrowed at very low rates from the federal government >> as publicly-created credit. While the banks would be allowed to add >> administrative costs and a reasonable business profit for lending >> used to finance commerce, mortgages, and small business start-up, >> government guarantees and subsidies should result in net interest >> rates to borrowers no greater than one percent. >> >> International trade would be accommodated through a regulated >> system of exchange rates based on real purchasing values of >> respective national currencies. >> >> Results >> >> This program would not create a Utopia or install a Big Brother to >> watch over us. It would not relieve mankind of the need to work, >> study, save, take care of our environment, make wise decisions, use >> opportunities intelligently, participate in representative >> government, care for those less fortunate, provide for our >> posterity, practice self-restraint, obey moral strictures, worship >> our creator, or love our neighbor as ourselves. >> >> What this program would do would be to allow the nation's monetary >> system to reach the same level of maturity, functionality, and >> access presently found, at least potentially, in the physical >> economy which utilizes science and technology so effectively in >> producing abundant goods and services. >> >> This means that the program would free mankind from the control of >> the monetary elite which has unjustly usurped the fruits of the >> labor of everyone else. The amount of money involved in this >> control over time is immense. In his report on "An Emergency >> Program of Monetary Reform of the United States", the author >> calculated that the National Dividend for 2006 should have resulted >> in an average stipend paid to each US citizen of $12,600. For a >> person aged sixty, this would work out to $756,000 over a lifetime >> in current dollars. >> >> This figure of $756,000 represents the amount of money an >> individual has had to borrow from financial institutions to make up >> what he should have received as his share of a National Dividend if >> Congress had not ceded the public prerogatives of credit-creation >> that exist in the Constitution to private financiers. Extrapolated >> for the entire US population, the amount of unnecessary borrowing >> probably has exceeded $100 trillion since World War Two. We can >> gain confidence that this figure is in the ball-park by realizing >> that total societal debt in the US today has been reliably >> estimated at over $48 trillion. >> >> Thus it is easy to see that in time, the program of monetary reform >> described in this report could eliminate poverty and the main >> causes of war, reduce the size of government, and give individuals >> a chance to prosper. It would replace the current system of >> debt-serfdom caused by monetary strangulation at the consumer level >> with true economic democracy. >> >> Economic democracy may be defined as free access to the bounty of >> God's earth, according to one's need, character, ability, and work. >> The purpose of this access is for individuals to have the liberty >> to work out responsibly their own occupation, lifestyle, identity, >> and destiny without these being dictated by external authorities or >> the threat of economic ruin. These are the freedoms that are >> inherent in the ideals that created America and, though compromised >> so much, have been America's gift to the rest of the world. >> >> The reader might ask why, if these reforms could so readily be >> made, weren't they thought of and implemented before? The answer is >> that these reforms have been known and promoted by many people in >> the past, both known and unknown, including such leaders in America >> as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Thomas >> Edison, Henry Ford, Herbert Hoover, Franklin D Roosevelt, John F >> Kennedy, and many others. But working against such enlightened >> leaders has been an international financier conspiracy with immense >> political power. >> >> The modern era of financier control in the US started with the >> Federal Reserve Act of 1913. But during the 1920s, the US was still >> outstripping the rest of the world with rapid economic growth. This >> was due to a favorable financial position with respect to Europe >> after World War One, the wide availability of credit in the >> domestic economy, rapid industrial progress, and the predilection >> of American industrialists to pay their workers generous wages. >> >> Note that President Herbert Hoover is on this list of enlightened >> leaders. It is not generally known that Hoover, elected in 1928, >> had become familiar with the Social Credit system which originated >> in Great Britain with Major C H Douglas, who published the seminal >> work, Economic Democracy, in 1918. Douglas, with intimate knowledge >> of the events of the time, later related in his book Warning >> Democracy (1931) that in order to counter Hoover's enlightened >> economic ideas, the financiers decided to wreck the US economy, >> starting with the stock market crash of 1929. >> >> There is an official version of history, then there is the way >> things really happened. Thus Hoover is popularly, but mistakenly, >> portrayed as a failed president. But Hoover, an engineer and one of >> the most capable presidents in US history, identified the Federal >> Reserve, acting on its own, as having brought on the Great >> Depression. He responded by creating the Reconstruction Finance >> Corporation to revitalize the economy with a fresh infusion of >> credit, but, having been blamed for the crash, was voted out of >> office in favor of FDR in 1932. >> >> The RFC remained and was instrumental in rebuilding the economy >> over the next two decades. Roosevelt himself understood that the >> federal government had to maintain a decisive degree of control >> over credit, though he was undermined by people in his own >> administration favorable to the financiers. So he never completed a >> program of real monetary reform. >> >> During the 1930s, Douglas was forecasting another world war due to >> monetary causes, but he was told during his visits to the US that >> the financiers would never allow Social Credit to be implemented. >> According to monetary reform folklore, the financial elite looked >> around for an economist to combat Douglas's ideas and settled on >> John Maynard Keynes. The Keynesian system tried to deal with the >> monetary problem through massive government deficits, high taxes, >> and rapid economic growth. >> >> This system worked through the World War Two years and beyond but >> ran out of steam after the 1963 assassination of JFK and the loss >> by the US of its trade advantages and fiscal solvency during and >> after the Vietnam War. The financiers reasserted control throughout >> the 1970s, leading to the devastating Federal Reserve-induced >> recession of 1979 to 1983 and the deregulation of the financial >> industry during the Reagan years of 1981 to 1989. >> >> That left matters where they stand today. Since the 1980s, every US >> economic expansion has been nothing more than a Federal >> Reserve-created asset inflation. The latest has been the now >> collapsing housing bubble, the largest bubble in history. The >> financiers are trying to bring about an orderly decline - the >> so-called "soft landing" - though at the likely cost of the wealth, >> health, jobs, homes, and perhaps even some of the lives of tens of >> millions of demoralized people. >> >> Will we let them get away with it? Obviously, the government has >> bail-outs on its mind, though now, with housing gone, there may be >> nothing left for the financiers to inflate for the next round of >> chaos. Still, they are trying. Analysts are now calling attention >> to a new merger and acquisition bubble and a huge securities >> lending boom that has driven the stock market to historic levels >> even as consumer purchasing power in the US crumbles. >> >> If this bubbles bursts, much of the middle class wealth that >> remained after the 1987 stock market crash, the 2000 to 2002 >> bursting of the dot.com bubble, and the ongoing decline of the >> housing market will be gone for good. >> >> Maybe the party is finally over. Maybe at the end of their 300-year >> reign, starting roughly with the creation of the Bank of England in >> 1694, the financiers have finally succeeded in doing enough damage >> to the world economy that the rest of us are willing to take >> action. Or maybe there will be a sufficient distraction by more war >> in the Middle East and elsewhere. Maybe peak oil or global warming >> will intervene with destruction on too large a scale to ignore. Or >> maybe we'll just limp along into the sunset. >> >> Only time will tell. But however the change may happen, it remains >> the author's conviction that, one way or the other, a fair and >> intelligent monetary system will someday exist on the planet earth. >> >> _____ >> >> Richard C Cook is the author of We Hold These Truths: The Hope of >> Monetary Reform (2009) and Challenger Revealed: An Insider's >> Account of How the Reagan Administration Caused the Greatest >> Tragedy of the Space Age (2007). He is a Washington, DC-based >> writer and consultant who, in addition to NASA, taught history and >> worked in the US Civil Service Commission, the Food and Drug >> Administration, the Carter White House and spent 21 years with the >> US Treasury Department. His website is at www.richardccook.com. >> >> Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole >> responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those >> of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this >> article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for >> Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any >> inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article. >> >> To become a Member of Global Research: >> http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=section§ionName=membership >> >> >> The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research >> articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title >> are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be >> displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or >> other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: >> crgeditor at yahoo.com >> >> http://www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use >> of which has not always been specifically authorized by the >> copyright owner. We are making such material available to our >> readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance >> a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. >> The material on this site is distributed without profit to those >> who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research >> and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material >> for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from >> the copyright owner. >> >> For media inquiries: crgeditor at yahoo.com >> >> (c) Copyright Richard C Cook, Global Research, 2007 >> >> http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5615 >> >> >> http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com >> http://www.ashisuto.co.jp >> >> > > > > > !DSPAM:3411,4af0e5e325622044158970! > From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Wed Nov 4 15:56:38 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 07:56:38 +0900 Subject: [A-List] A Monetary Reformer's Interpretation Message-ID: <20091105075638.32965916.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> of "The Lord of the Rings" by Richard C Cook May 24, 2007 The film trilogy "The Lord of the Rings", produced by Peter Jackson of New Zealand, ranked with "Star Wars" as one of the most popular cinematic events of all time. The strength of its appeal derived perhaps from its faithfulness to the letter and spirit of J R R Tolkien's literary masterpiece. Not the least of the fascination of both the books and their cinematic depiction was the irony whereby the horrendous evil of the disembodied eye of Sauron, aided by the traitorous wizard Saruman and the legions of cruel and hideous orcs, threatened to destroy Middle Earth, while the task of averting catastrophe lay with a gentle hobbit bearing to the demon's lair a ridiculously small token of power, a single golden ring. Of course men and hobbits had helpers, including the angel-like elves, plus the enlightened wizard Gandalf, ever-loyal to the forces of light and good. Tolkien never said what exactly the story was supposed to mean. But such ambiguity is expected in great symbolic art. It does not detract from the validity of the genre that collects its force from transmitting through symbols the psychic energy and racial memories from what Jung called the collective unconscious. Two generations of students and scholars have been guessing at the meaning. Filmmaker Jackson and his colleagues had too much integrity to try to explain it, except in general terms, where so many others had speculated. Besides, the meaning of art can often be understood with the heart and soul, even where the mind draws a blank. Regardless, everyone senses that "The Lord of the Rings" is a parable of our times, where the twin forces of creativity and destruction are both so powerful and where the jury is still out over whether we can harness the forces of science and technology for human good or whether we will destroy ourselves through warfare, disease, or some ecological catastrophe like global warming. There have been countless predictions of worldwide catastrophe in recent decades. Many believe that today's wars in the Middle East prefigure an Armageddon, nuclear or otherwise. Whether or not "The Lord of the Rings" has parallels in the events of years past or today, it has secured its own place in the doom-and-gloom literature of our age. One thing that is clear about "The Lord of the Rings" is that the virtues most highly prized are loyalty among companions and courage in the face of death. Time and again the cause seems lost. Time and again men, wizards, elves, dwarves, and hobbits must pluck up their courage and choose to move forward in the face of almost certain defeat. Time and again fate intervenes at the last possible moment, until Frodo succeeds in passing the final test and the evil ring is swallowed up in the cauldrons of fire deep within Mount Doom. Then, deprived of its minuscule but never-explained linchpin of power, the entire world of evil instantly self-destructs and Middle Earth is saved. We see at the end that life at its core is good and evil merely a shadow. I am a monetary reformer, so I will assert my author's prerogative, as have so many others, of putting forth a theory of "what it means", leaving the reader to decide whether my interpretation is plausible or not. My interpretation of "The Lord of the Rings" may recall that many believed L Frank Baum's masterpiece "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" published in 1900 was a monetary parable. According to this interpretation, the evil spell over Oz symbolized the bankers' control of gold (measured in ounces = oz) which they abused to constrict the currency during the depression of the 1890s when many farmers and merchants were forced into foreclosure or bankruptcy. The Cowardly Lion was viewed as representing William Jennings Bryan. He had made his renowned speech at the 1896 Democratic national convention in Chicago where he exclaimed, "You shall not crucify mankind on a cross of gold!" But he was criticized for doing little of a practical nature to bring about the progressive monetary reform agenda of the time. Later, Baum's book was made into the most famous motion picture of all time, "The Wizard of Oz" starring Judy Garland. The film appeared in 1939 at the end of the Great Depression which was another American tragedy with monetary causes. Due to lack of a circulating medium of exchange, men stood in soup lines unable to find work while the factories that might have employed them had shut down. Today people are starting to realize that again we have an economy in crisis and that again the causes are monetary. We have stagnating employee incomes, rapidly increasing control of wealth by the very rich, a middle class in decline, growing poverty, collapse of our manufacturing job base, a bursting housing bubble, resurgent commodity inflation, soaring but shaky stock prices, and capital markets dominated by predatory equity and hedge funds. Increasingly, China and other foreign nations are purchasing US business assets. It's all capped by a gigantic private and public debt burden that is growing exponentially. Debt is threatening to bring the entire system down in a crash that not only could exceed the Great Depression but has been likened to the downfall of another debt-ridden behemoth - the Roman Empire. Every day it becomes more clear that the trouble stems from a rotten financial system that enriches the financier elite at the expense of everyone else. The crisis has been brewing for decades. After the stock market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression that followed, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt gained enough control over money and credit for the US to recover, but he never carried out full-scale monetary reform. From the 1950s on, the banking system maneuvered to tear itself away from the controls - and low interest rates -imposed on it by FDR's New Deal. What we have today is the result of that long-term victory of the bankers over the producing economy. A key event was the 1979 to 1983 recession when the Federal Reserve crashed the economy with interest rates over twenty percent and wrecked our public and private infrastructure. By the end of the decade of the 1980s, the Reagan and Bush administrations had left us with a brief recovery ending in another recession, an unregulated financial sector, destruction of the savings and loan industry, the era of junk bonds and leveraged buyouts, and the anemic "service" economy which continues today. The economic story of the Clinton administration which came next was largely one of enormous foreign investment and the rise and collapse of the dot.com bubble. Finally, we have the George W Bush economy and the possible death-knell of economic democracy in the United States. Throughout these disasters, we should be looking hard for the footprints and fingerprints of the Federal Reserve which has largely been the creature of the private financial interests since it was created in 1913. It was then that the US Congress ceded its constitutional authority to "coin money and regulate the value thereof" to the private financiers who are the real power behind the monetary throne. In fact the whole system of institutionalized debt oppression may be deeply unconstitutional. The preamble to our Constitution stipulates a system of law that will "promote the general welfare". Banking laws that have the opposite effect of promoting the benefit of the few over the well-being of the many should be subject to court review. So should the presumed authority of the Federal Reserve to destroy property and income values through interest rate policies that enhance bank profits while disrupting commercial activities. Interest rate increases carried out by the Federal Reserve are often implemented to fight the inflation originally created by financier investment bubbles. This is what happened with the housing bubble when the last unlucky home purchaser to hold property before the Fed pulled out the carpet from under the economy was the one stuck with an overpriced asset and an unpayable mortgage. Moreover, the fifth and fourteenth amendments provide that neither the federal government nor the states may deprive a person of "life, liberty, or property without due process of law". This language should also prompt the courts to review legislation that undermines economic democracy, makes it impossible for much of our population to earn a decent living, and subjects debtors to unreasonable conditions to declare bankruptcy. The provision in the 2005 bankruptcy "reform" legislation that makes it impossible ever to write off student loan debt, for example, should be declared unconstitutional. We are now paying the price of neglect as much of our population sinks toward the status of what the Roman Empire institutionalized as debt slavery. We are still looking for a William Jennings Bryan to declare that mankind shall not be destroyed by being cast into the abyss of debt. Perhaps we are looking in the wrong places. Maybe the one we should be seeking is a hobbit. Here's how I see today's crisis reflected in "The Lord of the Rings": The evil disembodied all-seeing eye of Sauron: Whatever devils sit atop and rule the international financial system which is profiting from so much economic and financial chaos. Mordor, the realm of Sauron: The international banking and financial system in all its aspects and the world of war, oppression, and economic ruin it has created over the last century, when hundreds of millions have been slain through useless wars and upheavals over power, ideology, money, and control of resources. The ring of power: The ability of credit to grow exponentially at compound interest, aided over time by fractional reserve banking, so that debt now threatens to devour the entire world of the producing economy. Mount Doom, where the Dark Lord's ring of power was forged: Any bank, brokerage house, or other financial institution where money is lent at usury. Sauron's ally, the evil wizard Saruman: The talented and highly-educated economists, scholars, and journalists who have sold themselves over the past several generations in the service of the monetary elite. Isengard, the tower where Saruman resided: The economics departments of many universities, the business and editorial sections of most major newspapers, and the many think tanks which favor and further the dominance of the monetary overseers. The orcs: The foot soldiers who have sold themselves to perpetrate and enforce the power of the monetary controllers, including some of the current leaders of the United States government. The world of men: The world of men. King Aragorn: Unique ability of a man, through self-sacrifice, to act in human life as an impartial channel for good. The dwarves working as miners and craftsmen in the mountains: The owners, managers, and employees of legitimate businesses, the cream of whose labor is skimmed by usury finance. The elves: The artists and poets of the world who behold, dumbfounded, man's inhumanity to man through financial oppression. Gandalf: The small number of enlightened people who have helped mankind evolve toward a higher monetary vision, such as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and C H Douglas (1879-1952), the Scottish founder of the Social Credit monetary reform movement. The hobbits: The ordinary, unknown people (us!) who just want to live and let live and who have guessed the secret of the ring of compound interest and fractional reserve banking. They realize that once the ring is dropped into the fire of understanding the oppressive system that is destroying mankind will collapse, allowing a new age of humanity to begin. In making these comparisons I realize that when Tolkien sat down to write he did not necessarily set out to call the world banking system on the carpet. In fact his own father was a banker. Tolkien was born in Bloemfontein, South Africa, in 1892 where his family was living because his father Arthur was engaged in starting a branch for the home bank headquartered in London. Still, Britain has been home to a monetary reform movement for a long time. One early figure was the writer G K Chesterton, whose brother A K published a magazine named "Candour" to which Tolkien subscribed. According to Stephen Goodson, a South African monetary reformer who inherited Tolkien's copies of "Candour" from a relative, Tolkien had underlined the following passage in red: "There should only be one source of money: one fountainhead from which flows the nation's blood to vitalize commerce and industry, ensure economic equity and justice and safeguard the welfare of the people ... In other words, it has always been and still is our contention that the prerogative of creating and issuing the money of the nation should be restored to the State". Tolkien was a sensitive man. As a poet and writer he was attuned to the enormous clash of forces which so often figured in twentieth century history. There has been virtually non-stop war on a worldwide scale since 1914 as nations and ideologies have fought for dominance. But embedded within this history is a deeper struggle for human freedom within all ideological systems where individuals have tried to be true to themselves in the face of the overwhelming organized might that would destroy them. In my opinion, it is the conflict between economic democracy on the one hand and the domination of worldwide usury finance enforced by political power on the other that most reflects the struggle for human freedom today and that will determine the survival of any human civilization that is worth having. Perhaps the recurring clash of the forces of individual freedom versus organized repression also had some bearing on producing the psychic atmosphere which became through Tolkien and Peter Jackson an epic of men, dwarves, elves, wizards, hobbits, and demons. _____ Richard C Cook is the author of We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform (2009) and Challenger Revealed: An Insider's Account of How the Reagan Administration Caused the Greatest Tragedy of the Space Age (2007). He is a Washington, DC-based writer and consultant who, in addition to NASA, taught history and worked in the US Civil Service Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, the Carter White House and spent 21 years with the US Treasury Department. His website is at www.richardccook.com. http://www.theheartlandusa.com/articles/authors/cook/RC2007/rcc_052407.htm (this URL may no longer be available) http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Wed Nov 4 23:40:57 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:40:57 +0900 Subject: [A-List] Monetary Reform ... In-Reply-To: <4AF1DFD2.8020007@vcn.bc.ca> References: <20091102173501.74f71ec8.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> <58CB2C27AE7E4A6D9F62D94D7D55CE02@TonyPC> <4AF1DFD2.8020007@vcn.bc.ca> Message-ID: <20091105154057.9d2be3ae.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> John, Cook's analysis seems to fit the data here in Japan: 1. Private banks create about ninety percent of Japan's money via "loans" and charge interest on it until repaid. (Our government coins and prints the rest and charges no interest.) 2 Over the past two decades, the amount of money created by private banks has been about the same as the amount of Japan's GDP. 3. The prime rate has averaged over four percent per annum over the past two decades. 4. So more than four percent of GDP is either: (a) increased costs of goods and services that wouldn't have to have been paid if government created all of our money and spent it into circulation instead of letting private banks "lend" it into circulation at interest or (b) decreased (after interest) income available to consumers to pay for those goods and services. In other words the more than four percent of GDP banks suck out of the economy as interest on the money they create out of thin air raises the cost of producing goods and services (and thus the prices charged for those goods and services) and decreases the ability of consumers to buy those goods and services - to the combined effect of more than four percent of GDP. Eliminating fractional-reserve banking by compelling banks to loan only money they have in hand for the length of time they have it in hand (100% reserves), and having the government create and spend all of our money into circulation would eliminate this four percent of GDP gap between goods and services produced and consumers ability to buy them. I agree that we also should reform taxes, particularly taxing the rent on land, installing a Tobin tax on asset trading, and restoring the progressivity of income taxes to the levels they were when nations like the US and Japan were prosperous. Bill On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:10:58 -0800 John Vertegaal wrote: > Cook's analysis is simply wrong. Sure he hits some things right on the > head, but a broken clock is right twice a day too. You cannot analyze a > gap in production output and purchasing power, by taking GDP figures as > gospel. On the basis of all successful businesses having to pass on all > investment costs down to their customers, until resolved at the retail > level through direct personal spending, C and I are of opposite sign. > And not only that but since all personal taxes (paid through income) are > investment costs of business too, and nX in overall analysis is plagued > by fallacy of composition, NIPA is sorely amiss stating GDP as C + I + > G + nX. Its figures are double counted! No wonder they have to fudge > their figures substantially before being able to make them fit. > > Moreover, the gap's components are mostly SC fallacies too. There is > only one element to blame for the shortfall in income to resolve > production output and that is asset price inflation. And SC's answer is > yet more money creation?! They neither understand that money's primary > attribute is being a unit of account and thus property of the map, not > the territory; nor the true nature of inflation. > > Sure we need (monetary) reform, but Cook's version isn't it; and for > that matter, neither is Brown's. There is nothing magical about > fractional reserve banking. All its floated loans need to be paid back > with interest. And there is only one faction with the economic > wherewithal to resolve the associated fees: banksters and their > underlings. Even if that German study showing the overall interest cost > approaching 50% of income is way off base; reported $3000 monthly pool > heating bills of banksters are a piss in the ocean as far as interest > cost resolution is concerned. > > All investment (supply) puts the economy in disequilibrium until it's > rectified through direct spending (demand) way later in time. In other > words, living standard augmentation _determines_ economic growth. With > the former having stagnated for over a generation as far as the the > great majority is concerned and the latter being fudged by NIPA, no > wonder we're up shit creek without paddles. > > And I'm afraid that donning Marxian overcoats isn't going to help much > either. As I see it and please correct me if I'm wrong, its tenets rest > by enlarge on reasoning by induction. Like atheists not realizing that > their despise of "true believers" is just another belief, Marxists don't > apprehend that by replacing capitalist voodoo economics with central > planning and single-entry bookkeeping, no more than supplanting one set > of fetishes for another is effected. Even if by chance Marx was right, > the tremendous obstacle of human motivation will need to be overcome; > less it will lead to the situation characteristically observed as: "they > pretend to pay us and we pretend to work". > > So the answer is? ...the neutralization of the "power" of money. With > Michael H. I've come to the conclusion "that any alternative financial > policy should involve an active tax policy". The drab equalization of > all living standards through socialism isn't going to be convincing > democratically. That's why I previously proposed limiting after-tax > personal income to the existing spread in consumergood durables. Super > fancy items like yachts and personal planes should be restricted in size > as being obtainable through savings/loans, just like the rest of us > acquire our more expensive durables. But in terms of the economy being a > means toward the end of living standard provision in addition to our > direct obtention of exogenous use values, land like capital, has no > inherent economic value of its own; if there are no pertinent returns, > then there is no land/capital value. > > The answer lies thus not in directly taxing land/capital; for whatever > values these are designated to be, they are only tentative. But instead > in taxing their realized returns, i.e. the income dedicated to be > derived from land and capital; which, given the imperative passing on of > business costs, in the end of course is someone else's directly spent > income. Furthermore, enforced sales of land/capital items, to pay for > owed taxes, would equally require the income circuit to be conducted. > > In conclusion: if one wants to understand the economy it is vital to > realize that all investment is debt creation; which is only resolvable > (wealth realizing) through the direct spending towards living standard > enhancement by others. Thus Wall Street antics don't create wealth, they > are criminal bunko games. Non of this is ideological. Its only articles > of faith are my previously stated three axioms, the rest is deduced. In > other words, you'll have to disagree with my axioms in order to disagree > with the above. > > John V > > > Tony B. wrote: > > Some interesting stuff here...but, of course, what Cook is clearly > > advocating is captialist refomism...and I find it difficult to > > understand how the 'economic democracy' he advocates could, a) come > > about through the mechanisms he describes, b) could, in any case, be > > maintained in the face of natural capitalist impulses to concentrate > > power, and c) actually create the conditions for a true economic > > democracy in the face of the inherently exploitative nature of > > capitalist political/social relations. > > > > Certainly the nationalization of banks and the government control of > > credit ('social credit') is an essential plank in any revision of > > present economic social relations. Granted. But to think that you can > > have a purely 'economic' revolution without a political one...that is, > > without a redefining of political and social relations ...of power > > relations between classes...at the same time...is, I proffer, > > wrong-headed. > > > > Just consider for instance the tremendous obstacles we now face in > > implementing solutions to our various global ecological crises. For in > > what form do those obstacles present themselves? The answer is that > > present-day market mechanisms, far from enabling such solutions (for > > which the technical means already exist), are a positive hindrance to > > them. Thus, entrenched capitalist interests stand at every key > > juncture, in the path towards a reconfigured global ecological > > relationship. The rational planning - and long term vision - that is > > necessary to implement such solutions are being thwarted by the > > seemingly inescapable short term interests and visions of the dominant > > corporate / capitalist players in the key industrial and energy > > sectors of the economy. To expect that this will all change because > > the credit system has been revamped (somehow mysteriously...given that > > the key power brokers still hold sway) is, I think, naive. > > > > In short, I applaud Cook's desire and intent to establish 'economic > > democracy' (and remembering the liberal myth, i.e. "that you can have > > political democracy without economic democracy"), but I find the > > 'social credit' movement ideologically stuck in capitalist > > refomism.... a reformism that prefers to turn a blind eye to the > > inescapble fact that capitalist economic and social relations are at > > their heart of hearts...quintessentially exploitative. And in my > > books, there just t'aint no way of gettin' 'round that. > > > > Tony > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Totten" > > To: > > Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 3:35 AM > > Subject: [A-List] Monetary Reform ... > > > > > >> How a National Monetary System Should Work > >> > >> by Richard C Cook > >> > >> Global Research (May 11 2007) > >> > >> > >> The author has received an overwhelming response to his recent > >> Global Research report entitled, "An Emergency Program of Monetary > >> Reform for the United States". The introduction to that report > >> stated that, "the US financial system headed by the Federal Reserve > >> System has failed, and ? only an emergency program of monetary > >> reform can address conditions which may be leading to a catastrophe > >> like the Great Depression or worse". > >> > >> This new report on "Monetary Reform and How a National Monetary > >> System Should Work" continues the dialogue by outlining the > >> principles and mechanisms available to help guide the creation of a > >> monetary system for any nation that wishes to enjoy economic > >> democracy with prosperity. This would be in contrast to the > >> collapsing debt-based monetary system overseen by the Federal > >> Reserve and the other central banks of the world, coordinated at > >> the top by such institutions as the International Monetary Fund, > >> the European Central Bank, and the Bank of International > >> Settlements. > >> > >> Note that all the banks of the Western world are ultimately private > >> institutions owned by the world's super-rich. The international > >> banking structure is operated by and on behalf of the world's > >> monetary elite primarily for their own profit. > >> > >> Just below the banking system are the giant corporations of the > >> global economy which derive capital from and funnel profits into > >> the financiers' empire. Bringing up the rear are the populations > >> and debt-serfs of the no-longer-sovereign nation states, including > >> those of the United States, whose participation in the system as > >> consumers is essential, but whose jobs continue to disappear as > >> manufacturing is increasingly automated. > >> > >> The author had realized as early as 1970 that the central problem > >> with the world's economy lay on the side of distribution, not > >> production. He came to Washington, DC, that year and spent most of > >> the next thirty-six years working within sight of the Washington > >> Monument, learning how things really work, and pondering the > >> methods that might be more in concord with such founding documents > >> of American democracy as the Declaration of Independence and the US > >> Constitution. Twenty-one of these years were with the US Treasury > >> Department. > >> > >> Now, for the first time, this report builds on the findings of many > >> of the world's monetary reformers past and present by offering a > >> complete prescription for a new and better world. This prescription > >> is radically different from most progressive reform agendas that > >> address only symptoms of the underlying systemic failures. > >> > >> Where Money Comes From > >> > >> When setting out to study monetary principles, we must realize how > >> little we know of the real facts of monetary history. Economics is > >> an extremely limited discipline rife with untested assumptions and > >> unchallengeable dogmas. Its most pernicious doctrine is the > >> assertion that there is something called "the market", where there > >> is an "invisible hand" that makes everything work out the way it is > >> supposed to. > >> > >> Actually, an economy functions according to the principles > >> according to which it is designed and regulated. If it is designed > >> to funnel wealth into the hands of the monetary controllers, then > >> that is what the "market" and the "invisible hand" will do. If it > >> is designed to foster "the general welfare", as it should according > >> to the preamble to the US Constitution, then the "market" and the > >> "invisible hand" will tend in that direction. > >> > >> Unfortunately, we march today to the tune of the monetary elite, so > >> they are the ones who reap the profits and the benefits. They are > >> the ones on whom the "invisible hand" lavishes the wealth of the > >> world. > >> > >> It is done through the process of bank-created credit. While during > >> the nineteenth century other forms of money circulated, such as > >> large quantities of coinage, silver certificates, and > >> government-issued greenbacks, almost all the money that exists > >> today originates through a loan by a financial institution to an > >> individual or a business. > >> > >> When a loan is made it is issued as a liability on the bank's > >> ledger. When it is repaid, the liability is canceled. With today's > >> computer systems, all transactions are digitized, of course. The > >> bank keeps the interest on the loan as its combined administrative > >> fee and profit. The money that is lent had no prior existence. > >> > >> Once money is created as credit, it takes many forms according to > >> how the loan recipient spends it. Some credit is used by businesses > >> or individuals as investment in order to generate profits over and > >> above the amount they must repay to the bank with interest. If the > >> money is used simply for consumer purchases, the individual > >> consumer must pay back the loan through future earnings. In those > >> cases where the borrower defaults on the loan or goes bankrupt, the > >> money simply remains in circulation however it was spent. > >> > >> Unfortunately, large amounts of credit are used mainly for > >> speculation, not for any benefit to the producing economy. This > >> includes securities bought on margin and borrowing by hedge funds > >> where the fund may make a profit even if the value of its > >> investments goes down. Bank-created credit in this case is little > >> more than chips in a casino. > >> > >> Other borrowing takes place by equity funds and other types of > >> investors for leveraged mergers or buyouts of entire companies, > >> where the predators wreck a company's infrastructure by reducing > >> costs and selling its assets, then pay back their bank loans before > >> unloading the business on someone else. > >> > >> The most important thing to realize about the banking system is > >> that the money which enters into circulation as purchasing power > >> must eventually be returned in the repayment of loans. This is why > >> the Federal Reserve's monetary measures - M1, M2, and M3 - are > >> meaningless, because so much of it has liens against it. > >> > >> We are taught that paying it back is the way things should be - > >> obviously, if we borrow something, we should pay back what we owe. > >> > >> But the peculiar thing is that because the borrowed money pays for > >> labor, commodities, rent, et cetera, it becomes part of the prices > >> that are eventually charged for goods and services. However, when > >> the money goes back to the bank to cancel a loan, that purchasing > >> power disappears. Neither the banks nor economists ever make note > >> of the fact that this process creates a chronic shortage of > >> purchasing power which must be filled by more loans and more bank > >> profits. The economy is thus a treadmill that borrowers must > >> constantly trudge along in order to have enough money for survival. > >> > >> So a system which is seemingly grounded in the simple adage that if > >> you borrow you should repay is all wrong. The reason it is all > >> wrong is that in most cases, individual consumers should never have > >> to borrow in the first place. And we never ask ourselves why, with > >> the abundance that is possible from modern science and technology, > >> should people have to borrow money at interest for the necessities > >> of life - a house, a car, household expenses, an education, et > >> cetera. > >> > >> Thus we realize that the financial system works against what should > >> be the real purpose of money, which is to serve as a ticket for the > >> purchase by people of articles they need to survive or otherwise > >> desire to utilize once the demand for survival has been met. > >> > >> People have needs and desires. The economy is fully capable of > >> producing all the goods and services needed to fulfill those needs > >> and desires. But the system is broken, because, despite the > >> abundance of credit available for financial speculation, there is > >> not sufficient money available at the consumer level to mediate > >> between prices and consumption, even when most people have a job. > >> We still must borrow, and that is wrong. There should be a better > >> way for society to generate the money for what people need. > >> > >> So what is really going on here? > >> > >> One of the things that is going on is that money is being > >> mis-defined as a commodity. People who believe money is a commodity > >> think it has value in and of itself. But one of the hardest things > >> to grasp about money is that not even gold or silver money, or > >> paper money supposedly backed by gold or silver, has or could have > >> intrinsic value. > >> > >> Actually, money is anything that a willing buyer and a willing > >> seller agree to exchange for something else. Money could be and has > >> been such things as gold, silver, paper, wampum, cows, stones, > >> shells, sticks with notches, or, today, electronic blips. What may > >> appear to give gold or silver value is its scarcity and durability. > >> But unless there are goods and services available and for sale, > >> gold and silver are totally useless. You can't eat gold or silver, > >> live in them, or wear them. In and of themselves they have no > >> value. What gives any money value is the producing economy and > >> nothing else. > >> > >> So by this definition, bank-created credit, while it may generate > >> money which a willing buyer and seller agree to exchange, is money > >> with strings attached, in that at some point, it must travel back > >> to the bank in cancellation of a debt. Thus a buyer who offers it > >> to a seller is, in reality, deceiving himself about his actual > >> ability to pay. He is not a free man. Always lurking in the back of > >> his mind is that with every article he has purchased he has > >> shackled himself ever more firmly to future indentured servitude. > >> > >> The seller, on the other hand, may breathe a little more freely > >> having just acquired some of the monetary medium necessary to repay > >> his own debts. And so it goes, ad infinitum. Even if the money were > >> backed by gold and silver, the system would work in exactly the > >> same way. > >> > >> So by what right do the bankers bind the economy in such a > >> straightjacket of debt? Again, the underlying logic is that money > >> is a commodity. A group of men have money. It is their money, we > >> believe, rightfully earned. Therefore, because these individuals > >> have money, they have a further right to lend it to others. > >> > >> But under existing laws, the banking system then makes the leap of > >> assuming that because they have money which can be lent, they have > >> a right to lend much more than they actually possess. Somehow they > >> have become fit practitioners of the fractional reserve banking > >> system whereby, as described above, they can lend simply by > >> creating debits in their computers, based on some ratio between > >> their capital stock and their lending ceiling. > >> > >> But if bankers can do this, why can't you or I? If I have $1,000, > >> why can't I then lend $10,000 and collect the corresponding > >> interest? The answer is that a bank has a government charter and > >> supposedly can guarantee through various safeguards that the people > >> to whom it lends can repay. But even this isn't required of a bank > >> any more if it can package its loans and sell them to some other > >> business entity, such as an investment company. > >> > >> But the fact is that banks can only be created by people who are > >> already rich, can put up some initial capital, build a functioning > >> business, and obtain the government charter mentioned above. Once > >> they do this, they are the masters of the world. > >> > >> Also note that under today's highly unstable financial conditions, > >> it is not only banks which create credit through lending. Since the > >> deregulation of the 1980s, Wall Street brokerage firms greatly > >> expanded the system whereby speculative loans are floated for > >> purchase of securities. This has resulted in a current ratio of > >> debt to equity of 22:1 in the US securities markets, where debt far > >> outweighs value. > >> > >> What is Credit? > >> > >> The word "credit" is one of the most widely-used and important in > >> the English language. Dictionary.com lists twenty-one definitions. > >> All these definitions have some connotation of the concept of > >> "value" and the exchange of that value across the dimensions of > >> time and space between one person and another. Obviously, the ideas > >> of "credit" and "money" are closely related. > >> > >> The idea of credit when viewed from a macroeconomic perspective > >> refers to the ability of an economy to produce goods and services > >> of value to the members of that community. It refers to the > >> potential value of that economy to support life. What it does not > >> and cannot refer to is money in and of itself, because money, as we > >> have seen, has no intrinsic value. Without the credit-potential of > >> a producing economy, money has no meaning. > >> > >> On the other hand, money can be a convenient yardstick to measure > >> credit, as when we state that the 2006 GDP of the United States was > >> $12.98 trillion. But actually, the "real" credit of the US economy > >> was much higher, because our economy is not running at anywhere > >> near its full capacity. The automobile industry, for instance, is > >> running at about fifty percent of its physical potential. So the > >> real credit of the US is actually higher than the GDP. > >> > >> "Credit" in an economic sense confers a legal right to draw on the > >> goods and services that make up the potential GDP of the nation. It > >> is the way the society agrees to hand out the monetary tickets by > >> which the GDP may be acquired. > >> > >> Obviously, the issuance of either too many or too few tickets will > >> cause problems. The issuance of too few tickets will result in > >> underproduction, poverty, even death. The issuance of too many > >> tickets will result in inflation. When the Federal Reserve creates, > >> then deflates, asset bubbles, like the currently collapsing housing > >> bubble, these effects alternate, resulting in the kind of ongoing > >> economic chaos we have seen for decades. > >> > >> It can readily be seen that credit is a cultural phenomenon. It is > >> the sum total of the entire productive capacity of the nation. It > >> has grown from the past, exists in the present, and can be > >> projected into the future. It is the result of the work of untold > >> millions of people, dead and gone, alive today, and yet unborn. > >> Many of its results may be proprietary, in terms of businesses, > >> property, and patents owned, et cetera, but every person who has > >> ever lived, lives today, or who will live in the future is a > >> participant in that culture. > >> > >> Therefore, credit can and should be viewed as a communal endowment, > >> a public phenomenon, a part of what is called "the commons", even > >> with the normal and natural fact of the existence of private > >> property. So the use of credit and its distribution should be > >> treated as a public utility, like water or electricity. Everyone > >> should have a right to its use, according to some rational, lawful, > >> and humane criteria of need or contribution to creating it. > >> > >> As with the use of other utilities, it is the responsibility of the > >> community to see that credit is used wisely and for positive and > >> constructive purposes. But no one should be denied it altogether, > >> because it is a necessity of life. > >> > >> Money, as a measure of credit, should therefore be available to the > >> entire community. The government, as the representative of the > >> community, has the responsibility of overseeing, coordinating, and > >> regulating its availability, keeping in mind the fairest and most > >> socially beneficial ways for it to be utilized. Monetary reformers > >> would argue that extensive availability of credit to the working > >> population should be part of the "general welfare" guaranteed by > >> the preamble to the US Constitution. This should not be confused > >> with the virtually unlimited availability of credit to speculators > >> and stock predators as is presently the case with our Wall > >> Street-based economy. > >> > >> But these principles are poorly recognized. Money, and therefore > >> credit, is viewed as private property, even though most of it, as > >> stated previously, is made by banks "out of thin air". It is no > >> exaggeration to say that the existing system is one whereby the > >> financial elite has confiscated and privatized the most important > >> public resource of all, more important than water, land, electric > >> power, et cetera. This has resulted in much of the world's wars, > >> poverty, and crime. > >> > >> Let us again examine the ways money enters into the economic > >> system, this time looking at the total credit picture of the US > >> economy. We said that the 2006 GDP was $12.98 trillion. This takes > >> into account a trade deficit of $726 billion. The question is, > >> where did the credit come from to purchase the GDP, because, by > >> definition, it all had to be paid for in prices. > >> > >> According to official data, the available national income in 2006 > >> was $10.23 trillion, including wages, salaries, interest, > >> dividends, personal business earnings, and capital gains. Of this > >> amount, approximately one-third was taken through taxes by > >> government at the federal, state, and local levels. > >> > >> Churning through the economy was borrowing of all kinds - for > >> consumption, commerce, investment, speculation, new government > >> debt, and to finance business transactions. In fact it was the net > >> increase in debt - $3.77 trillion - that paid for the difference > >> between GDP and national income. > >> > >> Debt also financed much of the trade deficit by our borrowing to > >> purchase what was imported from abroad. The need to borrow has been > >> greatly increased by the decline of the US manufacturing sector, > >> where well-paying jobs that contributed to the national income have > >> disappeared or been outsourced overseas. The ratio of debt to > >> national income has reached historic proportions - 460 percent of > >> the national income today versus 186 percent in 1957. > >> > >> Orthodox economics, including the manipulation of interest rates by > >> the Federal Reserve, has no tools for resolving this crisis. The > >> main reason is that neither economists nor politicians understand > >> it, though bankers certainly do. > >> > >> Orthodox economics is helpless because people do not understand how > >> the gap between production and purchasing power relates to the way > >> the microeconomics of the corporation translates into the > >> macroeconomics of nations. We observed earlier in this report that > >> prices of articles within the economy include the loans that are > >> taken out during the production process. But these loans are > >> canceled as bank liabilities when they are repaid. Therefore the > >> purchasing power of the economy always lags behind prices. > >> > >> But this is not the only area where prices include factors that are > >> not paid out in wages, salaries, dividends, or other sources of > >> individual or business income. Other factors include retained > >> earnings, insurance, certain maintenance and overhead costs, plus > >> the cumulative effect of corporations buying from each other with > >> payments which never exit the production system. > >> > >> As a result, only somewhere between a third and a half of all costs > >> are ever distributed to consumers. This analysis has been > >> documented at length by the Social Credit movement and has been > >> well-known to monetary reformers for decades. > >> > >> This gap is what drives nations to seek overseas markets for their > >> products as the US did so strenuously during the post-World War Two > >> period. When the US balance of payments later fell into negative > >> territory, we tried to compensate by the policy of "dollar > >> hegemony", whereby we foisted our currency on the rest of the world > >> as the principal means of oil trading, maintenance of currency > >> reserves, and paying for our trade deficit. > >> > >> But as the US internal and external debt grows and our fiscal and > >> trade deficits deepen, a total systemic breakdown is starting to > >> take place. The main recent prop of the US economy, the housing > >> bubble, is deflating. And frantically, we are trying to escape by a > >> radical devaluation of the dollar combined with an aggressive > >> military policy based essentially on confiscating the resources of > >> other nations such as Iraq. > >> > >> This, combined with action to prop up our fiscal deficit by > >> importing dollars spent abroad on manufactured products we no > >> longer make ourselves, has created a house of cards that must soon > >> come down. All that is lacking is a major shock, such as a widening > >> war in the Middle East or inability by foreign creditors to > >> continue to accept devalued dollars. > >> > >> Neither devaluation nor aggression will solve the problem which > >> derives from the failure of debt financing to create real > >> purchasing power and thereby resolve the chaos through which a > >> system built for the profits of the financiers can never produce > >> enough unencumbered credit to maintain our desired level of > >> production and the standard of living that goes with it. > >> > >> The Prescription > >> > >> As with anyone facing bankruptcy, it is time for those who wish to > >> understand the current US economic crisis to take a deep breath, > >> step back, and gather themselves in order to correctly assess the > >> situation. > >> > >> Obviously the solution is not to risk blowing up the world by > >> continuing to resolve our domestic economic problems through > >> overseas conquests. This is what the Western nations have been > >> trying to do for centuries, and it appears that the rest of the > >> world may finally have had enough. This is especially the case > >> today when the main factor that is floating the US economy is the > >> huge US trade imbalance where foreign nations must use the dollars > >> they take in to their ultimate disadvantage by financing a federal > >> budget deficit that is measured in dollars whose value is dropping. > >> > >> Nor does the solution lie on the production side of the equation. > >> The US and other developed economies are capable of producing > >> everything their populations need, even accompanied by a reasonable > >> amount of foreign trade, especially if we can return our industry > >> to the level of productivity we enjoyed prior to the Federal > >> Reserve-induced recession of 1979 to 1983 which gave us today's > >> anemic "service economy". > >> > >> Rather the solution lies with the federal government taking back > >> its constitutionally-authorized control of the credit of the nation > >> from the financiers and managing it as previously stated - as a > >> public utility. There is no need to eliminate capitalism, change > >> the basis of property ownership, abolish corporations, et cetera, > >> because the organization and administration of the production > >> process is essentially irrelevant to the real problem. > >> > >> Once again, the producing economy is not the problem. It has > >> performed with tremendous effectiveness in creating the goods and > >> services people need and want. It would be the basis for real > >> economic democracy if its bounty could be made available and > >> distributed in accordance with democratic principles. > >> > >> It is essential to realize that the central government of a > >> sovereign nation has the right, the ability, and the responsibility > >> to introduce ALL new credit into existence. This is totally > >> different from having the central bank "print money" by relaxing > >> lending policies, resulting in an infusion of cheap loans which > >> must still be repaid. > >> > >> Sovereign creation of credit is not based on debt. It is and should > >> be based on direct spending of money into circulation by the > >> government itself. Obviously the government should do this in a way > >> that promotes the best interests of the members of society while > >> respecting the varying degrees of contribution by those of > >> different levels of skill and achievement. It is quite possible to > >> enact such a program with due regard to all established conventions > >> of private property and the private ownership and control of > >> existing wealth. > >> > >> To those who are concerned that the concept of publicly-controlled > >> credit postulates a monetary supply that can be turned on and off > >> like tap water, this is a misconception. There is indeed a > >> cornucopia of supply on the earth, but it is not of money. If is of > >> what human beings are capable of producing with the skill of their > >> hands and their heads and the knowledge of science and technology. > >> > >> Money is only a ticket to transfer this abundance from producer to > >> consumer, but it must be plentiful enough to allow the transfer of > >> all that is reasonably desired, it should not be misused for > >> financial speculation, and it is the job of government to bring > >> that money to the place of the economic activity where it is > >> needed. The key point is that such money should not be encumbered > >> by debt to a financial institution, including the banks of the > >> Federal Reserve System. > >> > >> This should be done according the following principles: > >> > >> The decisions of what goods and services should be produced should > >> represent a reasonable mix of what is needed and desired by > >> consumers with what is required for the public good by way of > >> regulation and infrastructure. Decisions should be made by a > >> combination of market forces, business governance, and oversight by > >> representative government. In other words, production should be > >> conducted as we imagine it is done at present, though in reality > >> neither the market, business, nor representative government can > >> function properly and responsibly today because they are under so > >> much pressure from a disastrously dysfunctional monetary system. > >> > >> Purchasing power should be provided to all individuals whether they > >> work or not. This is increasingly important as fewer workers are > >> needed due to automation to produce an increasing amount of goods. > >> There is no way to avoid dislocation of workers due to change in an > >> advanced economy, but it is essentially that people be protected > >> from such change even if they decide to opt out of working for a > >> living at all. There are many productive things people can do > >> without having to draw an income from a paying job. The money > >> provided to people regardless of whether they work would constitute > >> the National Dividend envisioned by a Social Credit system. One way > >> to manage such a system would be to require everyone to work until > >> the age of forty, when optional retirement would be offered. > >> > >> The idea of one nation being the world's policeman with military > >> bases everywhere and a right to conquer other nations at will and > >> take their resources must be abandoned once and for all. A system > >> where the nations of the world are financially independent and > >> self-sustaining as described in this report would lead to the > >> possibility of international stability and trade among nations and > >> regions of the world acting as equals. The history of the last > >> century proves that the drive to war is largely fueled by the need > >> for financial dominance as an offset to the failure to generate > >> sufficient internal purchasing power through democratic management > >> of credit. This syndrome would be eliminated by the monetary > >> reforms described herein. > >> > >> These are the principles - a functioning economy that combines > >> responsible free enterprise with government regulation and > >> infrastructure; democratic distribution of a National Dividend > >> which supplements earned income; and an international system of > >> economic relationships among sovereign nations acting as equals. > >> None of these principles is currently being met, and no one in a > >> leadership position has a plan to take us there, either now or when > >> the crisis strikes. > >> > >> The first measure in bringing about change, taking the US as an > >> example, would be for the federal government to create a Monetary > >> Control Board as envisioned by model legislation proposed by the > >> American Monetary Institute. This board would oversee the entire > >> process of assuring that the money supply is sufficient to express > >> the real credit demands of the nation in paying for the GDP. This > >> would be followed by a combination of the following steps: > >> > >> We should spend sufficient credit into existence to supply the > >> basic operating expenses of government at all levels without > >> recourse to either taxes or borrowing. In the past, this has been > >> done by the colonial American legislatures, the Continental > >> Congress at the time of the Revolutionary War, and the federal > >> government during the Civil War. Probably two-thirds of existing > >> federal government expenditures could be eliminated, because much > >> of it is to compensate for a failed monetary system, including much > >> of the military machine. Further, at least ninety percent of all > >> taxes could be eliminated under such a program. The only taxes that > >> would be retained would be those in the form of user fees for > >> infrastructure operations and maintenance or those levied as a > >> control mechanism to prevent inflation. Capital expenses for > >> infrastructure construction at the federal, state, and local levels > >> could be financed through a self-capitalized national > >> infrastructure bank. Government expenditures would continue to > >> require legislative approval under our republican form of > >> government which would be enhanced, not threatened, by monetary > >> reform. > >> > >> The remainder of the total societal gap between production and > >> purchasing power would be filled by a non-taxable National Dividend > >> of two types. One would be a cash stipend paid to all citizens > >> which would also serve the purpose of eliminating poverty by > >> providing everyone with a basic income guarantee. The remainder of > >> the National Dividend would consist of an overall pricing subsidy, > >> whereby a designated proportion of all purchases, including home > >> building expenses, would be rebated to consumers. The total > >> National Dividend per person would probably exceed $12,000 per year > >> under today's economic conditions. It would be a calculated value > >> charged against a government ledger but would be off-budget, with > >> no need to finance it with taxation or borrowing. > >> > >> A portion of the National Dividend would be made available to all > >> citizens reaching the age of eighteen, who would receive a > >> non-taxable lump-sum of $60,000 for higher education, trade school, > >> or business investment. > >> > >> Bank financing would be much more limited than at present. Private > >> sector corporate investment would be funded entirely out of > >> retained earnings and capital markets without recourse to bank > >> lending. Bank lending for stock speculation would be abolished as > >> would leveraged buyouts. > >> > >> Bank lending would be accomplished without fractional reserve > >> methods by requiring banks to supplement their capital and deposits > >> with credit borrowed at very low rates from the federal government > >> as publicly-created credit. While the banks would be allowed to add > >> administrative costs and a reasonable business profit for lending > >> used to finance commerce, mortgages, and small business start-up, > >> government guarantees and subsidies should result in net interest > >> rates to borrowers no greater than one percent. > >> > >> International trade would be accommodated through a regulated > >> system of exchange rates based on real purchasing values of > >> respective national currencies. > >> > >> Results > >> > >> This program would not create a Utopia or install a Big Brother to > >> watch over us. It would not relieve mankind of the need to work, > >> study, save, take care of our environment, make wise decisions, use > >> opportunities intelligently, participate in representative > >> government, care for those less fortunate, provide for our > >> posterity, practice self-restraint, obey moral strictures, worship > >> our creator, or love our neighbor as ourselves. > >> > >> What this program would do would be to allow the nation's monetary > >> system to reach the same level of maturity, functionality, and > >> access presently found, at least potentially, in the physical > >> economy which utilizes science and technology so effectively in > >> producing abundant goods and services. > >> > >> This means that the program would free mankind from the control of > >> the monetary elite which has unjustly usurped the fruits of the > >> labor of everyone else. The amount of money involved in this > >> control over time is immense. In his report on "An Emergency > >> Program of Monetary Reform of the United States", the author > >> calculated that the National Dividend for 2006 should have resulted > >> in an average stipend paid to each US citizen of $12,600. For a > >> person aged sixty, this would work out to $756,000 over a lifetime > >> in current dollars. > >> > >> This figure of $756,000 represents the amount of money an > >> individual has had to borrow from financial institutions to make up > >> what he should have received as his share of a National Dividend if > >> Congress had not ceded the public prerogatives of credit-creation > >> that exist in the Constitution to private financiers. Extrapolated > >> for the entire US population, the amount of unnecessary borrowing > >> probably has exceeded $100 trillion since World War Two. We can > >> gain confidence that this figure is in the ball-park by realizing > >> that total societal debt in the US today has been reliably > >> estimated at over $48 trillion. > >> > >> Thus it is easy to see that in time, the program of monetary reform > >> described in this report could eliminate poverty and the main > >> causes of war, reduce the size of government, and give individuals > >> a chance to prosper. It would replace the current system of > >> debt-serfdom caused by monetary strangulation at the consumer level > >> with true economic democracy. > >> > >> Economic democracy may be defined as free access to the bounty of > >> God's earth, according to one's need, character, ability, and work. > >> The purpose of this access is for individuals to have the liberty > >> to work out responsibly their own occupation, lifestyle, identity, > >> and destiny without these being dictated by external authorities or > >> the threat of economic ruin. These are the freedoms that are > >> inherent in the ideals that created America and, though compromised > >> so much, have been America's gift to the rest of the world. > >> > >> The reader might ask why, if these reforms could so readily be > >> made, weren't they thought of and implemented before? The answer is > >> that these reforms have been known and promoted by many people in > >> the past, both known and unknown, including such leaders in America > >> as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Thomas > >> Edison, Henry Ford, Herbert Hoover, Franklin D Roosevelt, John F > >> Kennedy, and many others. But working against such enlightened > >> leaders has been an international financier conspiracy with immense > >> political power. > >> > >> The modern era of financier control in the US started with the > >> Federal Reserve Act of 1913. But during the 1920s, the US was still > >> outstripping the rest of the world with rapid economic growth. This > >> was due to a favorable financial position with respect to Europe > >> after World War One, the wide availability of credit in the > >> domestic economy, rapid industrial progress, and the predilection > >> of American industrialists to pay their workers generous wages. > >> > >> Note that President Herbert Hoover is on this list of enlightened > >> leaders. It is not generally known that Hoover, elected in 1928, > >> had become familiar with the Social Credit system which originated > >> in Great Britain with Major C H Douglas, who published the seminal > >> work, Economic Democracy, in 1918. Douglas, with intimate knowledge > >> of the events of the time, later related in his book Warning > >> Democracy (1931) that in order to counter Hoover's enlightened > >> economic ideas, the financiers decided to wreck the US economy, > >> starting with the stock market crash of 1929. > >> > >> There is an official version of history, then there is the way > >> things really happened. Thus Hoover is popularly, but mistakenly, > >> portrayed as a failed president. But Hoover, an engineer and one of > >> the most capable presidents in US history, identified the Federal > >> Reserve, acting on its own, as having brought on the Great > >> Depression. He responded by creating the Reconstruction Finance > >> Corporation to revitalize the economy with a fresh infusion of > >> credit, but, having been blamed for the crash, was voted out of > >> office in favor of FDR in 1932. > >> > >> The RFC remained and was instrumental in rebuilding the economy > >> over the next two decades. Roosevelt himself understood that the > >> federal government had to maintain a decisive degree of control > >> over credit, though he was undermined by people in his own > >> administration favorable to the financiers. So he never completed a > >> program of real monetary reform. > >> > >> During the 1930s, Douglas was forecasting another world war due to > >> monetary causes, but he was told during his visits to the US that > >> the financiers would never allow Social Credit to be implemented. > >> According to monetary reform folklore, the financial elite looked > >> around for an economist to combat Douglas's ideas and settled on > >> John Maynard Keynes. The Keynesian system tried to deal with the > >> monetary problem through massive government deficits, high taxes, > >> and rapid economic growth. > >> > >> This system worked through the World War Two years and beyond but > >> ran out of steam after the 1963 assassination of JFK and the loss > >> by the US of its trade advantages and fiscal solvency during and > >> after the Vietnam War. The financiers reasserted control throughout > >> the 1970s, leading to the devastating Federal Reserve-induced > >> recession of 1979 to 1983 and the deregulation of the financial > >> industry during the Reagan years of 1981 to 1989. > >> > >> That left matters where they stand today. Since the 1980s, every US > >> economic expansion has been nothing more than a Federal > >> Reserve-created asset inflation. The latest has been the now > >> collapsing housing bubble, the largest bubble in history. The > >> financiers are trying to bring about an orderly decline - the > >> so-called "soft landing" - though at the likely cost of the wealth, > >> health, jobs, homes, and perhaps even some of the lives of tens of > >> millions of demoralized people. > >> > >> Will we let them get away with it? Obviously, the government has > >> bail-outs on its mind, though now, with housing gone, there may be > >> nothing left for the financiers to inflate for the next round of > >> chaos. Still, they are trying. Analysts are now calling attention > >> to a new merger and acquisition bubble and a huge securities > >> lending boom that has driven the stock market to historic levels > >> even as consumer purchasing power in the US crumbles. > >> > >> If this bubbles bursts, much of the middle class wealth that > >> remained after the 1987 stock market crash, the 2000 to 2002 > >> bursting of the dot.com bubble, and the ongoing decline of the > >> housing market will be gone for good. > >> > >> Maybe the party is finally over. Maybe at the end of their 300-year > >> reign, starting roughly with the creation of the Bank of England in > >> 1694, the financiers have finally succeeded in doing enough damage > >> to the world economy that the rest of us are willing to take > >> action. Or maybe there will be a sufficient distraction by more war > >> in the Middle East and elsewhere. Maybe peak oil or global warming > >> will intervene with destruction on too large a scale to ignore. Or > >> maybe we'll just limp along into the sunset. > >> > >> Only time will tell. But however the change may happen, it remains > >> the author's conviction that, one way or the other, a fair and > >> intelligent monetary system will someday exist on the planet earth. > >> > >> _____ > >> > >> Richard C Cook is the author of We Hold These Truths: The Hope of > >> Monetary Reform (2009) and Challenger Revealed: An Insider's > >> Account of How the Reagan Administration Caused the Greatest > >> Tragedy of the Space Age (2007). He is a Washington, DC-based > >> writer and consultant who, in addition to NASA, taught history and > >> worked in the US Civil Service Commission, the Food and Drug > >> Administration, the Carter White House and spent 21 years with the > >> US Treasury Department. His website is at www.richardccook.com. > >> > >> Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole > >> responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those > >> of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this > >> article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for > >> Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any > >> inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article. > >> > >> To become a Member of Global Research: > >> http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=section§ionName=membership > >> > >> > >> The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research > >> articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title > >> are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be > >> displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or > >> other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: > >> crgeditor at yahoo.com > >> > >> http://www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use > >> of which has not always been specifically authorized by the > >> copyright owner. We are making such material available to our > >> readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance > >> a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. > >> The material on this site is distributed without profit to those > >> who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research > >> and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material > >> for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from > >> the copyright owner. > >> > >> For media inquiries: crgeditor at yahoo.com > >> > >> (c) Copyright Richard C Cook, Global Research, 2007 > >> > >> http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5615 > >> > >> > >> http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com > >> http://www.ashisuto.co.jp > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > !DSPAM:3411,4af0e5e325622044158970! > > > > > From noreply at coha.org Wed Nov 4 12:27:55 2009 From: noreply at coha.org (Council on Hemispheric Affairs) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:27:55 -0500 Subject: [A-List] =?utf-8?q?Argentina_Reviews_Heated_de_la_R=C3=BAa_Case?= Message-ID: <20091104192707.B4F813E41A6@mx-out2.daemonmail.net> Council on Hemispheric Affairs Research MemorandumCouncil on Hemispheric Affairs Research Memorandum About COHA Contact COHA In the News Internships Looking Backward to Move Forward: The Re-Opening of the Troubling de la R?a Case Argentina has long been a nation of political and economic upheaval, and the recent summoning of ex-president Fernando de la R?a before a tribunal to respond to his role in the violence accompanying riots in the Plaza de Mayo in December of 2001 served to reopen old wounds. During the recession of 2001, tens of thousands of protestors took to the streets of Buenos Aires in response to de la R?a?s fiscal policies, which resulted in fierce demonstrations that caused 5 deaths and 107 injuries. De la R?a eventually was acquitted of any wrongdoing in proceedings in October of 2007, but the investigation was reopened on October 7th of this year by federal judge Claudio Bonadio. To understand the motivation behind the latest call for the presentation of de la R?a it is necessary to first examine the broad issues of his tenure in office and the reasons behind the riots. The 1990s: A Return to Prosperity The story of de la R?a?s meteoric ascension to power and his subsequent fall from grace began during his predecessor?s administration in the early 1990s, which was at the time a period of presumed prosperity for Argentina. Under President Carlos Menem and his superstar Economy Minister Domingo Cavallo, new policies, such as pegging the peso to the dollar, were implemented that everyone had assumed effectively ended inflation, which had reached 5,000% by 1989. For full article click here This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Lindsey Peckham Wednesday, November 04, 2009 | Research Memorandum 09.2 The Council on Hemispheric Affairs, founded in 1975, is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and information organization. It has been described on the Senate floor as being "one of the nation's most respected bodies of scholars and policy makers." For more information, please see our web page at www.coha.org; or contact our Washington offices by phone (202) 223-4975, fax (202) 223-4979, or email coha at coha.org. If you no longer wish to receive our press releases, you may unsubscribe. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4361 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091104/d9432919/attachment.txt From suzannedk at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 12:34:31 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:34:31 +0100 Subject: [A-List] GM and Opel Message-ID: The change of mind of General Motors was to be expected. This move is much like the Gaza War pulling aside the opening curtain of World War Empire U.S.A./Israel ...in short "We do what is in the whim of our best interest, challenge us if you will! You will lose, everything." You will apply to our humanity? We do nor ascribe to humanity, only profits, and religious obsessions, do not be siily! United States exceptionalism is based not on reality but on assumptions and propaganda based on those assumptions. India's move to buy gold yesterday as they have never bought it before is a silent statement that they are distancing themselves, a nation of over one billion people, from United States financial inherent instability. The world now watches the scam artists of the universe go bankrupt..... Morals, ethics have nothing to do with it. No-one in their right minds trusts a liar, a shyster! That the United States supports anything that Israel wants to do only shows how weak and ineffectual the United States really is! How adrift in very dangerous waters it is. We who are U.S. citizens who analyse, critisize, have every reason to watch our backs in our own country. Fascism is alive and thriving in the U.S., duck all you who object! Suzanne suzanedk at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 1436 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091104/fb445ac2/attachment.txt From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Thu Nov 5 01:46:38 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 08:46:38 -0000 Subject: [A-List] AFL-CIO in Honduras Message-ID: <0123B63E2DCE424EA31DF100F2C66691@home9sg93n9r5y> Regarding the discussion of the AFL-CIO in Honduras, I've been researching the AFL-CIO in Honduras during the Cold War for about six years now, and working with the unions there, and have a general sense of the their relations to the coup. On the Honduran end, there are three labor federations: 1) the one affiliated with the Christian Democrats (CGT), 2) a second, of the former AFL affiliates, the CTH (led by Juan Barahona), and 3) the CUTH, the Left federation that split off from the CTH in 1992. All three federations have been very deep in opposing the coup. The CUTH has been strongest, but Juan Barahona of the CTH is a central figure in the top of the Resistance and sometimes its main spokesperson. There was some regional footdragging of CTH affiliates in the beginning of the coup, however. I don't know much about the exact nuances of the CGT. Israel Salinas, head of the CUTH, will be in Los Angeles and San Diego next week, for those who are interested in hearing him speak. ( I don't have the details of where and when.) As for the AFL-CIO, they denounced the coup in the US. the next day, and passed a resolution at the convention in Pittsburgh. The Solidarity Center has definitely been supporting the resistance on the ground, from the very beginning. I've seen no evidence that it is trying to moderate the movement. Part of the problem in analyzing this, of course, is the continuing lack of transparency on the AFL-CIO's part, leaving us with a guessing game as to what exactly they are doing and whether it's everything they should. Then there's Hilda Solis, supported by the AFL-CIO, but not the same thing in this context by any means, given that she's a) in the Obama cabinet; and b) from L.A. and not part of the AFL-CIO foreign policy project directly. My assumption is that from the Obama Administration's perspective, she's Liberal window dressing, and an attempt to assure Latinos (and, perhaps, Labor) that everything's OK in Honduras now. She herself, by contrast, presumably wants to do the best she can to restore Zelaya and took the opportunity to try her best. Dana Frank Dept. of History University of California, Santa Cruz _______________________________________________ Lasolidarity mailing list Post: Lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasolidarity This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Thu Nov 5 01:55:31 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 08:55:31 -0000 Subject: [A-List] its better to have Hilda there than someone from the State Department Message-ID: My gut sense, is its better to have Hilda there than someone from the State Department. She is probably the most progressive member of the Obama cabinet - really the only true progressive we got out of the whole bunch. She has always been a strong supporter of our efforts to Close the School of the Americas. In general, when she was in the House she was one of the best members on trade issues and military issues around Latin America. My experience around some of the work we did around reversing the coup was that I and others received increasingly different receptions from White House staff and State Department staff. Seemingly - as the coup continued the State Department seemed to find more concerns about Zelaya and things to support within the de facto regime. At least in words - the White House tended to stay more consistent with strongly wanting Zelaya's return. It is also my sense that this is the reason that the administration did not allow the diplomacy last week to be just a State Department mission - curiously, Dan Restrepo from the White House was sent along. My hunch is that Hilda is a much better arbitrator than anyone from the State Department and this was a way to go around the State Department. Best, Eric Eric LeCompte SOA Watch Phone: (202)234-3440 Fax: (202)636-4505 elecompte at soaw.org -----Original Message----- From: lasolidarity-bounces+elecompte=soaw.org at lists.mayfirst.org [mailto:lasolidarity-bounces+elecompte=soaw.org at lists.mayfirst.org] On Behalf Of james at afgj.org Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 11:15 AM To: Levy Schroeder Cc: lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org Subject: Re: [Lasolidarity] President Zelaya writes Hilary Clinton to clarify US Policy following statement by Shannon on CNN en Espa~nol Interesting question. And I'm not knowledgeable enough to have any kind of conclusive answer. That said, as a strong critic of, and supporter of reforming, AFL-CIO foreign policy, before the coup happened, I had done a little research into the various labor union confederations in Honduras, and into which political wings they were associated with and what was their relationship with the Solidarity Center, and I followed what they were doing--somewhat, I must emphasize--during and after the coup. With lots of incomplete information, I still walked away with the impression that all the major union centers, including the one traditionally aligned with the National Party, were out in the streets opposing the coup. Also, what scant attention I paid to AFL-CIO statements about the situation seemed to indicate they were opposing the coup. I would also add that usually when the Solidarity Center supports progressive struggles and is doing positive things, it still plays a role in trying to stop these struggles from growing into the kind of political consciousness and organization that would actively resist, rather than ameliorate, neoliberal economic development. But...from what I can see so far of the labor movement on the ground in Honduras, and the more or less supportive role of the AFL-CIO, I'm not sure that having Hilda Solis in there is the most negative development in this saga. I'd be interested in hearing what those who are more knowledgeable have to say about this. Does anybody think it very, very odd that the U.S. Secretary of LABOR has been appointed in this position? Can someone enlighten me as to why she was chosen? It smells bad to me, but I can't identify it. Levy --- On Wed, 11/4/09, andres thomas conteris wrote: From: andres thomas conteris Subject: [Lasolidarity] President Zelaya writes Hilary Clinton to clarify US Policy following statement by Shannon on CNN en Espa~nol To: hondurasaction at yahoogroups.com, lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org, contacto at rds.org.hn Date: Wednesday, November 4, 2009, 8:55 AM In his letter to Hilary Clinton, Presidente Zelaya (below in Spanish) says he is surprised by the declarations of Thomas Shannon on CNN en Espa?ol Tuesday afternoon where he says that the Government of National Unity and Reconciliation can proceed without President Zelaya being restored as President by the Honduran Congress, and that the U.S. will recognize the Honduran elections without President Zelaya in the Presidential Palace. This directly subverts the power of the Verification Commission which was installed yesterday and Secretary Hilda Solis and Ex President of Chile Ricardo Lagos met with President Zelaya in the Brazilian embassy yesterday evening as the entity that is charged with interpreting and implementing the Accord. It also directly counters the OAS and UN statements on the need to reverse the coup and restore President Zelaya to office. It's vital to pressure Hilary Clinton to publicly renounce the statements made by Thomas Shannon, and to let the Verification Commission proceed with its work. Greetings to all from the Brazilian embassy, andr?s Andr?s Thomas Conteris Democracy Now! en Espa?ol andres at democracynow.org andres at desmilitarizacion.net www.democracynow.org/es Cel. in Honduras 011-504-9777-8514 Tegucigalpa, M. D. C., 3 de Noviembre de 2009 Se?ora Hillary Clinton Secretaria de Estado USA Estimada Secretaria Clinton: Con respecto a las sorpresivas declaraciones dadas hoy a CNN por el Subsecretario de estado Thomas Shannon, donde se pronuncia sobre el acuerdo desconociendo que todav?a esta en curso su cumplimiento, el Gobierno de la Rep?blica de Honduras solicita respetuosamente al Gobierno de EEUU una aclaraci?n. Reconocemos el derecho que el gobierno de EEUU tiene de manifestarse libremente, pero en esta ocasi?n nos vemos obligados a presentar p?blicamente esta Respetuosa solicitud a la Secretaria de Estado de los Estados Unidos, la Sra. Hillary Clinton para que aclare al pueblo Hondure?o , si la posici?n de su pa?s a sido modificada o cambiada sobre la condena al Golpe de Estado en Honduras, su manifestaciones de cumplir las resoluciones de la OEA , ONU lo mismo que el apoyo y respeto al esp?ritu democr?tico del Plan Arias hoy ratificado en el acuerdo de Tegucigalpa-San Jos? y si por el contrario a lo antes manifestado, ahora se busca a toda costa sin esperar el cumplimiento de los acuerdos pretendiendo reconocer las elecciones sin revertir el golpe de estado ni resolver la profunda crisis que enfrenta nuestra pa?s . El Congresista Cesar Ham candidato a la presidencia del Partido unificaci?n Democr?tica , el Ciudadano Carlos H Reyes Candidato Independiente a la Presidencia igual que 50 Alcaldes y 20 Diputados del partido liberal y lista de diputados del Partido Innovaci?n y Unidad (PINU-SD), han reafirmados su retiro del proceso electoral si no se da la restituci?n a la Presidencia de la Rep?blica del Presidente Jos? Manuel Zelaya Rosales previa a las elecciones; asimismo el Frente Nacional Contra el Golpe de Estado compuesto por 42 organizaciones populares federaciones sindicales campesinas ind?genas desconocen igual que su servidor y su gobierno el proceso electoral y los resultados de estas elecciones si se llevan a cabo bajo un r?gimen de dictadura militar y comprobadas violaciones a los derechos humanos . Hoy se instalo la comisi?n de verificaci?n establecida en el acuerdo de Tegucigalpa-San Jos? en la cual uno de sus integrantes es la Secretaria del trabajo del Gobierno de Estados Unidos siendo esta comisi?n la ?nica autorizada para interpretar este acuerdo. Por tanto lo anunciado hoy por el Sub-Secretario de Estado Thomas Shannon contradice a la comisi?n verificadora. La democracia es un bien universal y un derecho de los pueblos confiamos que EEUU como lo ha hecho hasta hora, siga acompa?ando al pueblo hondure?o y a la comunidad latino americana en este proceso pacifico de reconstruir la democracia y el estado de derecho, neg?ndose a reconocer el uso de la fuerzas militares para resolver conflictos pol?ticos a trav?s se los golpes de estado. Respetuosamente nos suscribimos de usted atentamente, Jos? Manuel Zelaya Rosales Presidente de Honduras -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ Lasolidarity mailing list Post: Lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasolidarity From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Thu Nov 5 03:19:12 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 19:19:12 +0900 Subject: [A-List] How to rebuild the global financial system Message-ID: <20091105191912.4de73462.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> And save the planet by Benjamin Fulford benjaminfulford.com (undated) With a brand new financial system built from scratch, it would be possible to end world poverty and stop environmental destruction within a month. The reason is simple, we have been blinded from reality by a hypnotic pyramid scheme known as the world financial system. The financial system is nothing more than the process of deciding what humanity will do in the future. In other words, it is fundamentally nothing more than mass psychology. Thus, if humanity changed their collective psychology about how to run the planet, it could decide, within a few days, to care for the poor and stop destroying nature. It is simply a matter of making the collective decision to do so. That is all. Before offering one example of how a new system could function, let us look at what exists now. For a long time certain privately owned central banks, most notoriously the Federal Reserve Board and the Bank of England, have been turning this planet into a hellish slave pyramid. At the bottom are poor innocent creatures being burned to death by starving third world farmers moving on from depleted soil to find fresh farm land to feed their hungry children. The innocent creatures have no value because the global financial system considers them worth zero unless they are turned into "products". Thus the poor of the world pass what little income they are able to glean from the destroyed rain-forest up to the next step of the pyramid. That would be small time merchants who peddle mostly goods made in faraway lands for a teeny profit. And so the up the pyramid we go, past bribed leaders who sell their countries natural resources for a pittance and ignore environmental protection rules in exchange for huge bribes. If they try to stand up for their people and ask for a fair price, the Western peoples are fooled with a fake story into supporting a "war" against an "evil dictator". Further up the pyramid we find the brainwashed populations of the Western world who support endless wars because they have been fooled into thinking it is for "human rights" and to spread "democracy". They mostly live lives of meaningless hedonism enabled by the tribute payments they have been receiving from the poorest countries. Both their education systems and their media have been subverted so long ago that they rarely wake up to the fact they have been brainwashed all their lives. If they do, they are "taken care of". Next up we find the pigs of the system. These are the ultra-rich who know the true masters are the hyper-rich who make their money by printing paper. Although many of them actually make real things and thus contribute to humanity, they go along with this con-job because they are both bribed and scared of being killed by hired goons. Now let us look at how the fiat money system controlled by the hyper-rich works. What they do is create money out of nothing, usually as digits in a computer. They then "lend" this money to the people who have to pay it back with "interest". The end result is an upwards flow of tribute to an elite few at the top in exchange for nothing. Up the pyramid goes real stuff, down the pyramid goes paper worth "nothing". On a smaller scale this sort of thing is known as a pyramid scheme. On a global scale it is still a pyramid scheme. Pyramid schemes end when they run out of new people ready to join the bottom of the pyramid. The global pyramid scheme is ending because we are running out of nature to destroy and people to oppress. The situation is so dire that ninety percent of the world's savings are going to feed a hungry Anglo-American Israeli military machine that is being used to suppress the people of the planet. As they say, you can't squeeze blood from a rock so, the situation now has come to the point where the pyramid is collapsing. What we need to do now is to rebuild the global financial system from scratch. One approach would be to stop the digital printing presses and give people in bankrupt America/England and Israel et cetera enough cash for a month or so to tide them over until the new system was built. We would then need to do an inventory of the planet earth. It would assign value to everything on the planet, forests, oceans, people et cetera. Any money in the old system that could be connected to real things like land and factories, would remain in the hands of its previous owners. Any money that was made from "nothing" would be reassigned to the forests, oceans and poor peoples of the world. The next step would be to gather all the wisest people to come up with the details of a better way of navigating into the future. This would involve creating a harmonious balance between nature, markets and people. The end result should be that humanity as a whole creates more life and wealth than it destroys. In other words never again must humanity become an engine of destruction. Humanity can then go out into the universe creating new gardens of Eden everywhere. http://benjaminfulford.com/howtorebuild.html http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Thu Nov 5 17:38:06 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:38:06 +0900 Subject: [A-List] Six Signs That the American Empire Message-ID: <20091106093806.e59ed4a1.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> Is Coming to an Early End by Michael T Klare, Tomdispatch.com AlterNet (October 27 2009) Memo to the CIA: You may not be prepared for time-travel, but welcome to 2025 anyway! Your rooms may be a little small, your ability to demand better accommodations may have gone out the window, and the amenities may not be to your taste, but get used to it. It's going to be your reality from now on. Okay, now for the serious version of the above: In November 2008, the National Intelligence Council (NIC), an affiliate of the Central Intelligence Agency, issued the latest in a series of futuristic publications intended to guide the incoming Obama administration. Peering into its analytic crystal ball in a report entitled Global Trends 2025, it predicted that America's global preeminence would gradually disappear over the next fifteen years - in conjunction with the rise of new global powerhouses, especially China and India. The report examined many facets of the future strategic environment, but its most startling, and news-making, finding concerned the projected long-term erosion of American dominance and the emergence of new global competitors. "Although the United States is likely to remain the single most powerful actor [in 2025]", it stated definitively, the country's "relative strength - even in the military realm - will decline and US leverage will become more constrained". That, of course, was then; this - some eleven months into the future - is now and how things have changed. Futuristic predictions will just have to catch up to the fast-shifting realities of the present moment. Although published after the onset of the global economic meltdown was underway, the report was written before the crisis reached its full proportions and so emphasized that the decline of American power would be gradual, extending over the assessment's fifteen-year time horizon. But the economic crisis and attendant events have radically upset that timetable. As a result of the mammoth economic losses suffered by the United States over the past year and China's stunning economic recovery, the global power shift the report predicted has accelerated. For all practical purposes, 2025 is here already. Many of the broad, down-the-road predictions made in Global Trends 2025 have, in fact, already come to pass. Brazil, Russia, India, and China - collectively known as the BRIC countries - are already playing far more assertive roles in global economic affairs, as the report predicted would happen in perhaps a decade or so. At the same time, the dominant global role once monopolized by the United States with a helping hand from the major Western industrial powers - collectively known as the Group of 7 (G-7) - has already faded away at a remarkable pace. Countries that once looked to the United States for guidance on major international issues are ignoring Washington's counsel and instead creating their own autonomous policy networks. The United States is becoming less inclined to deploy its military forces abroad as rival powers increase their own capabilities and non-state actors rely on "asymmetrical" means of attack to overcome the US advantage in conventional firepower. No one seems to be saying this out loud - yet - but let's put it bluntly: less than a year into the fifteen-year span of Global Trends 2025, the days of America's unquestioned global dominance have come to an end. It may take a decade or two (or three) before historians will be able to look back and say with assurance, "That was the moment when the United States ceased to be the planet's preeminent power and was forced to behave like another major player in a world of many competing great powers". The indications of this great transition, however, are there for those who care to look. Six Way Stations on the Road to Ordinary Nationhood Here is my list of six recent developments that indicate we are entering "2025" today. All six were in the news in the last few weeks, even if never collected in a single place. They (and other events like them) represent a pattern: the shape, in fact, of a new age in formation. 1. At the global economic summit in Pittsburgh on September 24th and 25th, the leaders of the major industrial powers, the G-7 (G-8 if you include Russia) agreed to turn over responsibility for oversight of the world economy to a larger, more inclusive Group of 20 (G-20), adding in China, India, Brazil, Turkey, and other developing nations. Although doubts have been raised about the ability of this larger group to exercise effective global leadership, there is no doubt that the move itself signaled a shift in the locus of world economic power from the West to the global East and South - and with this shift, a seismic decline in America's economic preeminence has been registered. "The G-20's true significance is not in the passing of a baton from the G-7/G-8 but from the G-1, the US", Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University wrote in the Financial Times. "Even during the 33 years of the G-7 economic forum, the US called the important economic shots". Declining American leadership over these last decades was obscured by the collapse of the Soviet Union and an early American lead in information technology, Sachs also noted, but there is now no mistaking the shifting of economic power from the United States to China and other rising economic dynamos. 2. According to news reports, America's economic rivals are conducting secret (and not-so-secret) meetings to explore a diminished role for the US dollar - fast losing its value - in international trade. Until now, the use of the dollar as the international medium of exchange has given the United States a significant economic advantage: it can simply print dollars to meet its international obligations while other nations must convert their own currencies into dollars, often incurring significant added costs. Now, however, many major trading countries - among them China, Russia, Japan, Brazil, and the Persian Gulf oil countries - are considering the use of the Euro, or a "basket" of currencies, as a new medium of exchange. If adopted, such a plan would accelerate the dollar's precipitous fall in value and further erode American clout in international economic affairs. One such discussion reportedly took place this summer at a summit meeting of the BRIC countries. Just a concept a year ago, when the very idea of BRIC was concocted by the chief economist at Goldman Sachs, the BRIC consortium became a flesh-and-blood reality this June when the leaders of the four countries held an inaugural meeting in Yekaterinburg, Russia. The very fact that Brazil, Russia, India, and China chose to meet as a group was considered significant, as they jointly possess about 43% of the world's population and are expected to account for 33% of the world's gross domestic product by 2030 - about as much as the United States and Western Europe will claim at that time. Although the BRIC leaders decided not to form a permanent body like the G-7 at this stage, they did agree to coordinate efforts to develop alternatives to the dollar and to reform the International Monetary Fund in such a way as to give non-Western countries a greater voice. 3. On the diplomatic front, Washington has been rebuffed by both Russia and China in its drive to line up support for increased international pressure on Iran to cease its nuclear enrichment program. One month after President Obama cancelled plans to deploy an anti-ballistic missile system in Eastern Europe in an apparent bid to secure Russian backing for a tougher stance toward Tehran, top Russian leaders are clearly indicating that they have no intention of endorsing strong new sanctions on Iran. "Threats, sanctions, and threats of pressure in the current situation, we are convinced, would be counterproductive", declared the Russian foreign minister, Sergey V Lavrov, following a meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Moscow on October 13th. The following day, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said that the threat of sanctions was "premature". Given the political risks Obama took in canceling the missile program - a step widely condemned by Republicans in Washington - Moscow's quick dismissal of US pleas for cooperation on the Iranian enrichment matter can only be interpreted as a further sign of waning American influence. 4. Exactly the same inference can be drawn from a high-level meeting in Beijing on October 15th between Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao and Iran's first vice president, Mohammed Reza Rahimi. "The Sino-Iran relationship has witnessed rapid development as the two countries' leaders have had frequent exchanges, and cooperation in trade and energy has widened and deepened", Wen said at the Great Hall of the People. Coming at a time when the United States is engaged in a vigorous diplomatic drive to persuade China and Russia, among others, to reduce their trade ties with Iran as a prelude to toughened sanctions, the Chinese statement can only be considered a pointed rebuff of Washington. 5. From Washington's point of view, efforts to secure international support for the allied war effort in Afghanistan have also met with a strikingly disappointing response. In what can only be considered a trivial and begrudging vote of support for the US-led war effort, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced on October 14th that Britain would add more troops to the British contingent in that country - but only 500 more, and only if other European nations increase their own military involvement, something he undoubtedly knows is highly unlikely. So far, this tiny, provisional contingent represents the sum total of additional troops the Obama administration has been able to pry out of America's European allies, despite a sustained diplomatic drive to bolster the combined NATO force in Afghanistan. In other words, even America's most loyal and obsequious ally in Europe no longer appears willing to carry the burden for what is widely seen as yet another costly and debilitating American military adventure in the Greater Middle East. 6. Finally, in a move of striking symbolic significance, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) passed over Chicago (as well as Madrid and Tokyo) to pick Rio de Janeiro to be the host of the 2016 summer Olympics, the first time a South American nation was selected for the honor. Until the Olympic vote took place, Chicago was considered a strong contender, especially since former Chicago resident Barack Obama personally appeared in Copenhagen to lobby the IOC. Nonetheless, in a development that shocked the world, Chicago not only lost out, but was the city eliminated in the very first round of voting. "Brazil went from a second-class country to a first-class country, and today we began to receive the respect we deserve", said Brazilian President Luiz In?cio Lula da Silva at a victory celebration in Copenhagen after the vote. "I could die now and it already would have been worth it". Few said so, but in the course of the Olympic decision-making process the US was summarily and pointedly demoted from sole superpower to instant also-ran, a symbolic moment on a planet entering a new age. On Being an Ordinary Country These are only a few examples of recent developments which indicate, to this author, that the day of America's global preeminence has already come to an end, years before the American intelligence community expected. It's increasingly clear that other powers - even our closest allies - are increasingly pursuing independent foreign policies, no matter what pressure Washington tries to bring to bear. Of course, none of this means that, for some time to come, the US won't retain the world's largest economy and, in terms of sheer destructiveness, its most potent military force. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that the strategic environment in which American leaders must make critical decisions, when it comes to the nation's vital national interests, has changed dramatically since the onset of the global economic crisis. Even more important, President Obama and his senior advisers are, it seems, reluctantly beginning to reshape US foreign policy with the new global reality in mind. This appears evident, for example, in the administration's decision to revisit US strategy on Afghanistan. It was only in March, after all, that the president embraced a new counterinsurgency-oriented strategy in that country, involving a buildup of US boots on the ground and a commitment to protracted efforts to win hearts and minds in Afghan villages where the Taliban was resurgent. It was on this basis that he fired the incumbent Afghan War commander, General David D McKiernan, replacing him with General Stanley A McChrystal, considered a more vigorous proponent of counterinsurgency. When, however, McChrystal presented Obama with the price tag for the implementation of this strategy - 40,000 to 80,000 additional troops (over and above the 20,000-odd extra troops only recently committed to the fight) - many in the president's inner circle evidently blanched. Not only will such a large deployment cost the US treasury hundreds of billions of dollars it can ill afford, but the strains it is likely to place on the Army and Marine Corps are likely to be little short of unbearable after years of multiple tours and stress in Iraq. This price would be more tolerable, of course, if America's allies would take up more of the burden, but they are ever less willing to do so. Undoubtedly, the leaders of Russia and China are not entirely unhappy to see the United States exhaust its financial and military resources in Afghanistan. Under these circumstances, it is hardly surprising that Vice President Joe Biden, among others, is calling for a new turn in US policy, foregoing a counterinsurgency approach and opting instead for a less costly "counter-terrorism" strategy aimed, in part, at crushing Al Qaeda in Pakistan - using drone aircraft and Special Forces, rather than large numbers of US troops (while leaving troop levels in Afghanistan relatively unchanged). It is too early to predict how the president's review of US strategy in Afghanistan will play out, but the fact that he did not immediately embrace the McChrystal plan and has allowed Biden such free rein to argue his case suggests that he may be coming to recognize the folly of expanding America's military commitments abroad at a time when its global preeminence is waning. One senses Obama's caution in other recent moves. Although he continues to insist that the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran is impermissible and that the use of force to prevent this remains an option, he has clearly moved to minimize the likelihood that this option - which would also be plagued by recalcitrant "allies" - will ever be employed. On the other side of the coin, he has given fresh life to American diplomacy, seeking improved ties with Moscow and approving renewed diplomatic contact with such previously pariah states as Burma, Sudan, and Syria. This, too, reflects a reality of our changing world: that the holier-than-thou, bullying stance adopted by the Bush administration toward these and other countries for almost eight years rarely achieved anything. Think of it as an implicit acknowledgement that the US is now descending from its status as the globe's "sole superpower" to that of an ordinary country. This, after all, is what ordinary countries do; they engage other countries in diplomatic discourse, whether they like their current governments or not. So, welcome to the world of 2025. It doesn't look like the world of our recent past, when the United States stood head and shoulders above all other nations in stature, and it doesn't comport well with Washington's fantasies of global power since the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. But it is reality. For many Americans, the loss of that preeminence may be a source of discomfort, or even despair. On the other hand, don't forget the advantages to being an ordinary country like any other country: Nobody expects Canada, or France, or Italy to send another 40,000 troops to Afghanistan, on top of the 68,000 already there and the 120,000 still in Iraq. Nor does anyone expect those countries to spend $925 billion in taxpayer money to do so - the current estimated cost of both wars, according to the National Priorities Project. The question remains: How much longer will Washington feel that Americans can afford to subsidize a global role that includes garrisoning much of the planet and fighting distant wars in the name of global security, when the American economy is losing so much ground to its competitors? This is the dilemma President Obama and his advisers must confront in the altered world of 2025. _____ Michael T Klare is a professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College and author of Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: The New Geopolitics of Energy (2009). A documentary film version of his previous book, Blood and Oil, is available from the Media Education Foundation at Bloodandoilmovie.com. (c) 2009 Tomdispatch.com All rights reserved. http://www.alternet.org/story/143514/ http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From tal1 at cogeco.ca Thu Nov 5 18:17:44 2009 From: tal1 at cogeco.ca (Tony B.) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 20:17:44 -0500 Subject: [A-List] Six Signs That the American Empire In-Reply-To: <20091106093806.e59ed4a1.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> References: <20091106093806.e59ed4a1.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> Message-ID: <66C49D84769344B1904CD972EB5EE751@TonyPC> "The question remains: How much longer will Washington feel that Americans can afford to subsidize a global role that includes garrisoning much of the planet and fighting distant wars in the name of global security, when the American economy is losing so much ground to its competitors? This is the dilemma President Obama and his advisers must confront in the altered world of 2025. " To risk beating a dead horse....Here we see, yet again, yet another academic pundit completely under the thrall of the, 'we're-doing-it-all-for-you' genre of propaganda. Sigh. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Totten" To: Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 7:38 PM Subject: [A-List] Six Signs That the American Empire > Is Coming to an Early End > > by Michael T Klare, Tomdispatch.com > > AlterNet (October 27 2009) > > > Memo to the CIA: You may not be prepared for time-travel, but > welcome to 2025 anyway! Your rooms may be a little small, your > ability to demand better accommodations may have gone out the > window, and the amenities may not be to your taste, but get used to > it. It's going to be your reality from now on. > > Okay, now for the serious version of the above: In November 2008, > the National Intelligence Council (NIC), an affiliate of the > Central Intelligence Agency, issued the latest in a series of > futuristic publications intended to guide the incoming Obama > administration. Peering into its analytic crystal ball in a report > entitled Global Trends 2025, it predicted that America's global > preeminence would gradually disappear over the next fifteen years - > in conjunction with the rise of new global powerhouses, especially > China and India. The report examined many facets of the future > strategic environment, but its most startling, and news-making, > finding concerned the projected long-term erosion of American > dominance and the emergence of new global competitors. "Although > the United States is likely to remain the single most powerful > actor [in 2025]", it stated definitively, the country's "relative > strength - even in the military realm - will decline and US > leverage will become more constrained". > > That, of course, was then; this - some eleven months into the > future - is now and how things have changed. Futuristic predictions > will just have to catch up to the fast-shifting realities of the > present moment. Although published after the onset of the global > economic meltdown was underway, the report was written before the > crisis reached its full proportions and so emphasized that the > decline of American power would be gradual, extending over the > assessment's fifteen-year time horizon. But the economic crisis and > attendant events have radically upset that timetable. As a result > of the mammoth economic losses suffered by the United States over > the past year and China's stunning economic recovery, the global > power shift the report predicted has accelerated. For all practical > purposes, 2025 is here already. > > Many of the broad, down-the-road predictions made in Global Trends > 2025 have, in fact, already come to pass. Brazil, Russia, India, > and China - collectively known as the BRIC countries - are already > playing far more assertive roles in global economic affairs, as the > report predicted would happen in perhaps a decade or so. At the > same time, the dominant global role once monopolized by the United > States with a helping hand from the major Western industrial powers > - collectively known as the Group of 7 (G-7) - has already faded > away at a remarkable pace. Countries that once looked to the United > States for guidance on major international issues are ignoring > Washington's counsel and instead creating their own autonomous > policy networks. The United States is becoming less inclined to > deploy its military forces abroad as rival powers increase their > own capabilities and non-state actors rely on "asymmetrical" means > of attack to overcome the US advantage in conventional firepower. > > No one seems to be saying this out loud - yet - but let's put it > bluntly: less than a year into the fifteen-year span of Global > Trends 2025, the days of America's unquestioned global dominance > have come to an end. It may take a decade or two (or three) before > historians will be able to look back and say with assurance, "That > was the moment when the United States ceased to be the planet's > preeminent power and was forced to behave like another major player > in a world of many competing great powers". The indications of this > great transition, however, are there for those who care to look. > > Six Way Stations on the Road to Ordinary Nationhood > > Here is my list of six recent developments that indicate we are > entering "2025" today. All six were in the news in the last few > weeks, even if never collected in a single place. They (and other > events like them) represent a pattern: the shape, in fact, of a new > age in formation. > > 1. At the global economic summit in Pittsburgh on September 24th > and 25th, the leaders of the major industrial powers, the G-7 (G-8 > if you include Russia) agreed to turn over responsibility for > oversight of the world economy to a larger, more inclusive Group of > 20 (G-20), adding in China, India, Brazil, Turkey, and other > developing nations. Although doubts have been raised about the > ability of this larger group to exercise effective global > leadership, there is no doubt that the move itself signaled a shift > in the locus of world economic power from the West to the global > East and South - and with this shift, a seismic decline in > America's economic preeminence has been registered. > > "The G-20's true significance is not in the passing of a baton from > the G-7/G-8 but from the G-1, the US", Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia > University wrote in the Financial Times. "Even during the 33 years > of the G-7 economic forum, the US called the important economic > shots". Declining American leadership over these last decades was > obscured by the collapse of the Soviet Union and an early American > lead in information technology, Sachs also noted, but there is now > no mistaking the shifting of economic power from the United States > to China and other rising economic dynamos. > > 2. According to news reports, America's economic rivals are > conducting secret (and not-so-secret) meetings to explore a > diminished role for the US dollar - fast losing its value - in > international trade. Until now, the use of the dollar as the > international medium of exchange has given the United States a > significant economic advantage: it can simply print dollars to meet > its international obligations while other nations must convert > their own currencies into dollars, often incurring significant > added costs. Now, however, many major trading countries - among > them China, Russia, Japan, Brazil, and the Persian Gulf oil > countries - are considering the use of the Euro, or a "basket" of > currencies, as a new medium of exchange. If adopted, such a plan > would accelerate the dollar's precipitous fall in value and further > erode American clout in international economic affairs. > > One such discussion reportedly took place this summer at a summit > meeting of the BRIC countries. Just a concept a year ago, when the > very idea of BRIC was concocted by the chief economist at Goldman > Sachs, the BRIC consortium became a flesh-and-blood reality this > June when the leaders of the four countries held an inaugural > meeting in Yekaterinburg, Russia. > > The very fact that Brazil, Russia, India, and China chose to meet > as a group was considered significant, as they jointly possess > about 43% of the world's population and are expected to account for > 33% of the world's gross domestic product by 2030 - about as much > as the United States and Western Europe will claim at that time. > Although the BRIC leaders decided not to form a permanent body like > the G-7 at this stage, they did agree to coordinate efforts to > develop alternatives to the dollar and to reform the International > Monetary Fund in such a way as to give non-Western countries a > greater voice. > > 3. On the diplomatic front, Washington has been rebuffed by both > Russia and China in its drive to line up support for increased > international pressure on Iran to cease its nuclear enrichment > program. One month after President Obama cancelled plans to deploy > an anti-ballistic missile system in Eastern Europe in an apparent > bid to secure Russian backing for a tougher stance toward Tehran, > top Russian leaders are clearly indicating that they have no > intention of endorsing strong new sanctions on Iran. "Threats, > sanctions, and threats of pressure in the current situation, we are > convinced, would be counterproductive", declared the Russian > foreign minister, Sergey V Lavrov, following a meeting with > Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Moscow on October 13th. The > following day, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said that the > threat of sanctions was "premature". Given the political risks > Obama took in canceling the missile program - a step widely > condemned by Republicans in Washington - Moscow's quick dismissal > of US pleas for cooperation on the Iranian enrichment matter can > only be interpreted as a further sign of waning American influence. > > 4. Exactly the same inference can be drawn from a high-level > meeting in Beijing on October 15th between Chinese Prime Minister > Wen Jiabao and Iran's first vice president, Mohammed Reza Rahimi. > "The Sino-Iran relationship has witnessed rapid development as the > two countries' leaders have had frequent exchanges, and cooperation > in trade and energy has widened and deepened", Wen said at the > Great Hall of the People. Coming at a time when the United States > is engaged in a vigorous diplomatic drive to persuade China and > Russia, among others, to reduce their trade ties with Iran as a > prelude to toughened sanctions, the Chinese statement can only be > considered a pointed rebuff of Washington. > > 5. From Washington's point of view, efforts to secure international > support for the allied war effort in Afghanistan have also met with > a strikingly disappointing response. In what can only be considered > a trivial and begrudging vote of support for the US-led war effort, > British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced on October 14th that > Britain would add more troops to the British contingent in that > country - but only 500 more, and only if other European nations > increase their own military involvement, something he undoubtedly > knows is highly unlikely. So far, this tiny, provisional contingent > represents the sum total of additional troops the Obama > administration has been able to pry out of America's European > allies, despite a sustained diplomatic drive to bolster the > combined NATO force in Afghanistan. In other words, even America's > most loyal and obsequious ally in Europe no longer appears willing > to carry the burden for what is widely seen as yet another costly > and debilitating American military adventure in the Greater Middle > East. > > 6. Finally, in a move of striking symbolic significance, the > International Olympic Committee (IOC) passed over Chicago (as well > as Madrid and Tokyo) to pick Rio de Janeiro to be the host of the > 2016 summer Olympics, the first time a South American nation was > selected for the honor. Until the Olympic vote took place, Chicago > was considered a strong contender, especially since former Chicago > resident Barack Obama personally appeared in Copenhagen to lobby > the IOC. Nonetheless, in a development that shocked the world, > Chicago not only lost out, but was the city eliminated in the very > first round of voting. > > "Brazil went from a second-class country to a first-class country, > and today we began to receive the respect we deserve", said > Brazilian President Luiz In?cio Lula da Silva at a victory > celebration in Copenhagen after the vote. "I could die now and it > already would have been worth it". Few said so, but in the course > of the Olympic decision-making process the US was summarily and > pointedly demoted from sole superpower to instant also-ran, a > symbolic moment on a planet entering a new age. > > On Being an Ordinary Country > > These are only a few examples of recent developments which > indicate, to this author, that the day of America's global > preeminence has already come to an end, years before the American > intelligence community expected. It's increasingly clear that other > powers - even our closest allies - are increasingly pursuing > independent foreign policies, no matter what pressure Washington > tries to bring to bear. > > Of course, none of this means that, for some time to come, the US > won't retain the world's largest economy and, in terms of sheer > destructiveness, its most potent military force. Nevertheless, > there is no doubt that the strategic environment in which American > leaders must make critical decisions, when it comes to the nation's > vital national interests, has changed dramatically since the onset > of the global economic crisis. > > Even more important, President Obama and his senior advisers are, > it seems, reluctantly beginning to reshape US foreign policy with > the new global reality in mind. This appears evident, for example, > in the administration's decision to revisit US strategy on > Afghanistan. > > It was only in March, after all, that the president embraced a new > counterinsurgency-oriented strategy in that country, involving a > buildup of US boots on the ground and a commitment to protracted > efforts to win hearts and minds in Afghan villages where the > Taliban was resurgent. It was on this basis that he fired the > incumbent Afghan War commander, General David D McKiernan, > replacing him with General Stanley A McChrystal, considered a more > vigorous proponent of counterinsurgency. When, however, McChrystal > presented Obama with the price tag for the implementation of this > strategy - 40,000 to 80,000 additional troops (over and above the > 20,000-odd extra troops only recently committed to the fight) - > many in the president's inner circle evidently blanched. > > Not only will such a large deployment cost the US treasury hundreds > of billions of dollars it can ill afford, but the strains it is > likely to place on the Army and Marine Corps are likely to be > little short of unbearable after years of multiple tours and stress > in Iraq. This price would be more tolerable, of course, if > America's allies would take up more of the burden, but they are > ever less willing to do so. > > Undoubtedly, the leaders of Russia and China are not entirely > unhappy to see the United States exhaust its financial and military > resources in Afghanistan. Under these circumstances, it is hardly > surprising that Vice President Joe Biden, among others, is calling > for a new turn in US policy, foregoing a counterinsurgency approach > and opting instead for a less costly "counter-terrorism" strategy > aimed, in part, at crushing Al Qaeda in Pakistan - using drone > aircraft and Special Forces, rather than large numbers of US troops > (while leaving troop levels in Afghanistan relatively unchanged). > > It is too early to predict how the president's review of US > strategy in Afghanistan will play out, but the fact that he did not > immediately embrace the McChrystal plan and has allowed Biden such > free rein to argue his case suggests that he may be coming to > recognize the folly of expanding America's military commitments > abroad at a time when its global preeminence is waning. > > One senses Obama's caution in other recent moves. Although he > continues to insist that the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran > is impermissible and that the use of force to prevent this remains > an option, he has clearly moved to minimize the likelihood that > this option - which would also be plagued by recalcitrant "allies" > - will ever be employed. > > On the other side of the coin, he has given fresh life to American > diplomacy, seeking improved ties with Moscow and approving renewed > diplomatic contact with such previously pariah states as Burma, > Sudan, and Syria. This, too, reflects a reality of our changing > world: that the holier-than-thou, bullying stance adopted by the > Bush administration toward these and other countries for almost > eight years rarely achieved anything. Think of it as an implicit > acknowledgement that the US is now descending from its status as > the globe's "sole superpower" to that of an ordinary country. This, > after all, is what ordinary countries do; they engage other > countries in diplomatic discourse, whether they like their current > governments or not. > > So, welcome to the world of 2025. It doesn't look like the world of > our recent past, when the United States stood head and shoulders > above all other nations in stature, and it doesn't comport well > with Washington's fantasies of global power since the Soviet Union > collapsed in 1991. But it is reality. > > For many Americans, the loss of that preeminence may be a source of > discomfort, or even despair. On the other hand, don't forget the > advantages to being an ordinary country like any other country: > Nobody expects Canada, or France, or Italy to send another 40,000 > troops to Afghanistan, on top of the 68,000 already there and the > 120,000 still in Iraq. Nor does anyone expect those countries to > spend $925 billion in taxpayer money to do so - the current > estimated cost of both wars, according to the National Priorities > Project. > > The question remains: How much longer will Washington feel that > Americans can afford to subsidize a global role that includes > garrisoning much of the planet and fighting distant wars in the > name of global security, when the American economy is losing so > much ground to its competitors? This is the dilemma President Obama > and his advisers must confront in the altered world of 2025. > > _____ > > Michael T Klare is a professor of peace and world security studies > at Hampshire College and author of Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: > The New Geopolitics of Energy (2009). A documentary film version of > his previous book, Blood and Oil, is available from the Media > Education Foundation at Bloodandoilmovie.com. > > (c) 2009 Tomdispatch.com All rights reserved. > > http://www.alternet.org/story/143514/ > > > http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com > http://www.ashisuto.co.jp > > From tal1 at cogeco.ca Thu Nov 5 19:24:50 2009 From: tal1 at cogeco.ca (Tony B.) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 21:24:50 -0500 Subject: [A-List] Escape from the Zombie Food Court Message-ID: <6D56D703BC374854B79BF2C5043C8070@TonyPC> April 03, 2009 Escape from the Zombie Food Court Joe Bageant recently spoke at Berea College in Berea, Kentucky, Eastern Kentucky University at Lexington, and the Adler School of Professional Psychology in Chicago, where he was invited to speak on American consciousness and what he dubbed "The American Hologram," in his book, Deer Hunting With Jesus. Here is a text version of the talks, assembled from his remarks at all three schools. By Joe Bageant I just returned from several months in Central America. And the day I returned I had iguana eggs for breakfast, airline pretzels for lunch and a $7 shot of Jack Daniels for dinner at the Houston Airport, where I spent two hours listening to a Christian religious fanatic tell about Obama running a worldwide child porn ring out of the White House. Entering the country shoeless through airport homeland security, holding up my pants because they don't let old men wear suspenders through security, well, I knew I was back home in the land of the free. Anyway, here I am with you good people asking myself the first logical question: What the hell is a redneck writer supposed to say to a prestigious school of psychology? Why of all places am I here? It is intimidating as hell. But as Janna Henning and Sharrod Taylor here have reassured me that all I need to do is talk about is what I write about. And what I write about is Americans, and why we think and behave the way we so. To do that here today I am forced to talk about three things -- corporations, television and human spirituality. No matter how smart we may think we are, the larger world cannot and does not exist for most of us in this room, except through media and maybe through the shallow experience of tourism, or in the minority instance, we may know of it through higher education. The world however, is not a cultural history course, a National Geographic special or recreational destination. It is a real place with many fast developing disasters, economic and ecological collapse being just two. The more aware among us grasp that there is much at stake. Yet, even the most informed and educated Americans have cultural conditioning working against them round the clock. As psych students, most of you understand that there is no way you can escape being conditioned by your society, one way or another. You are as conditioned as any trained chicken in a carnival. So am I. When we go to the ATM machine and punch the buttons to make cash fall out, we are doing the same thing as the chickens that peck the colored buttons make corn drop from the feeder. You will not do a single thing today, tomorrow or the next day that you have not been generally indoctrinated and deeply conditioned to do -- mostly along class lines. For instance, as university students, you are among the 20% or so of Americans indoctrinated and conditioned to be the administrating and operating class of the American Empire in some form or another. In the business of managing the other 75% in innumerable ways. Psychologists, teachers, lawyers, social workers, doctors, accountants, sociologists, mental health workers, clergy -- all are in the business of coordinating and managing the greater mass of working class citizenry by the Empire's approved methods, and toward the same end: Maximum profitability for a corporate based state. Yet it all seems so normal. Certainly the psychologists who have prescribed so much Prozac that it now shows up in the piss of penguins, saw what they did as necessary. And the doctors who enable the profitable blackmail practiced by the medical industries see it all as part of the most technologically advanced medical system in the world. And the teacher, who sees no problem with 20% of her fourth graders being on Ritalin, in the name of "appropriate behavior," is happy to have control of her classroom. None of these feel like dupes or pawns of a corporate state. It seems like just the way things are. Just modern American reality. Which is a corporate generated reality. Given the financialization of all aspects of our culture and lives, even our so-called leisure time, it is not an exaggeration to say that true democracy is dead and a corporate financial state has now arrived. If you can get your head around that, it's not hard to see an ever merging global corporate system masquerading electronically and digitally as a nation called the United States. Or Japan for that matter. The corporation now animates us from within our very selves through management of the need hierarchy in goods and information. As students, even in such an enlightened institution as this one, you are being subjected to the at least some of pedagogy of the corporate management of society for maximum profit. Unarguably your training will help many fellow human beings. But in the larger scheme of things, you are part of an institution, the American Psycho-socio-medical complex, and thus authorized to manage public consciousness, one person at a time. Remember that the entire pedagogy in which you are immersed is itself immersed in a corporate financial state. Even if some of what you do is alternative psychology, that is a reaction to the state, and therefore a result of it. It's still part of the financialization of consciousness. And, I might add that none you expect to work for nothing. This financialization of our consciousness under American style capitalism has become all we know. That's why we fear its loss. Hence the bailouts of the thousands of "zombie banks," dead but still walking, thanks to the people's taxpayer offerings to the money god so that banks will not die. We believe that we dare not let corporations die. Corporations feed us. They entertain us. Corporations occupy one full half of our waking hours of our lives, through employment, either directly or indirectly. They heal us when we are sick. So it's easy to see why the corporations feel like a friendly benevolent entity in the larger American consciousness. Corporations are, of course, deathless and faceless machines, and have no soul or human emotions. That we look to them for so much makes us a corporate cult, and makes corporations a fetish of our culture. Yet to us, they are like the weather just there. All of us live together in this corporate fetish cult. We agree upon and consent to its reality, just as the Aztecs agreed upon Quetzalcoatl and the lost people of Easter Island agreed that the great stone effigies of their remote island had significance. We are not unique Strangely enough, even as a population mass operating under unified corporate management machinery, most Americans believe they are unique individuals, significantly different from every other person around them. More than any other people I have met, Americans fear loss of uniqueness. Yet you and I are not unique in the least. Despite the American yada yada about individualism, you are not special. Nor am I. Just because we come from the manufacturer equipped with individual consciousness, does not make us the center of any unique world, private or public, material, intellectual or spiritual. The fact is, you will seldom if ever make any significant material or lifestyle choices of your own in your entire life. If you don't buy that house, someone else will. If you don't marry him, someone else will. If you don't become a psychologist, lawyer or a clergyman or a telemarketer, someone else will. We are all replaceable parts in the machinery of a capitalist economy. "Oh but we have unique feelings and emotions that are important," we say. Psychologists specialize in this notion. Yet I venture to say that none of us will ever feel an emotion that someone long dead has not felt, or some as yet unborn person will not feel. We are swimmers in an ancient rushing river of humanity. You, me, the people in my Central American village, the child in Bangladesh, and the millionaire frat boys who run our financial and governmental institutions with such adolescent carelessness. All of our lives will eventually be absorbed without leaving a trace. Still though, for Western peoples in particular, there is the restless inner cultural need to differentiate our lives from the other swimmers. Most of us, especially as educated people in the Western World, will never beat that one. Fortunately though, we can meaningfully differentiate our lives (at least in the Western sense) in the way we choose to employ our consciousness. Which is to say, to own our consciousness. If we exercise enough personal courage, we can possess the freedom to discover real meaning and value in our all-too-brief lives. We either wake up to life, or we do not. We are either in charge of our own awareness or we let someone else manage it by default. That we have a choice is damned good news. The bad news is that we nevertheless remain one of the most controlled peoples on the planet, especially regarding control of our consciousness, public and private. And the control is tightening. I know it doesn't feel like that to most Americans. But therein rests the proof. Everything feels normal; everybody else around us is doing the same things, so it must be OK. This is a sort of Stockholm Syndrome of the soul, in which the prisoner identifies with the values of his or her captors, which in our case is of course, the American corporate state and its manufactured popular culture. When we feel that such a life is normal, even desirable, and we act accordingly, we become helpless. Learned helplessness. For instance, most Americans believe there is little they can do in personally dealing with the most important moral and material crises ever faced, both in America and across the planet, beginning with ecocide, war making, and the grotesque deformation of the democratic process we have settled for. Citizenship has been reduced to simple consumer group consciousness. Consequently, even though Americans are only six percent of the planet's population, we use 36% of the planet's resources. And we interpret that experience as normal and desirable and as evidence of being the most advanced nation in the world. Despite that our lives have been reduced to a mere marketing demographic. Let me digress for just a moment, to tell you about how life is outside the marketing demographic. I live much of the year in the Third World country of Belize, Central America, a nation so damned poor that our cash bounces. True, it ain't Zimbabwe, or the Sudan -- there are no dying people in the streets. But food security is easily the biggest problem and growing by the day. Yet, despite our meager and diminishing resources down there, and much government corruption, people are still citizens, not marketing demographics, not yet anyway. Citizens who struggle toward a just society. They have made more progress than the United States in some respects. For instance, we have: A level of free medical care for the poor, though we lack much equipment and facilities. Maternity pay if either you or your spouse are employed. Retirement on Social Security at age 60. Worker rights, such as mandatory accrued severance pay for workers, even temporary workers. Most Belizeans own their homes outright, and all citizens are entitled to a free piece of land upon which to build one. Employment is scarce, and that has a down side: Many folks waste a lot of valuable time having sex , perhaps because they have too much time on their hands. The Jehovah's Witnesses missionaries are working hard to fix that problem. Anyway, American and Canadian tourists drive by in their rented SUVs and you can see by their expressions they are scared as hell of those bare footed black folks in the sand around them. Central America sure as hell ain't heaven. But lives there are not what we Americans are told about the Third World either. It's not a flyblown, dangerous place run by murdering drug lords, and full of miserable people. It's just a whole lot of very poor people trying to get by and make a decent society. I mention these things because it's a good example of how North Americans live in a parallel universe in which they are conditioned to see everything in terms of consumer goods and "safety," as defined by police control. Conditioned to believe they have the best lives on the planet by every measure. So when they see our village and its veneer of "tropical grunge," they experience fear. Anything outside of the parameters of the cultural hallucination they call "the first world" represents fear and psychological free fall. Yet, even if we think in that sort of outdated terminology, first, second and Third World, and most Americans do, then America is a second world nation. We have no universal free health care (don't kid yourself about the plan underway), no guarantee of anything really, except competitive struggle with one another for work and money and career status, if you are one of those conditioned to think of your job and feudal debt enslavement as a "career." High infant mortality rates, abysmal educational scores, poor diet, no national public transportation system, crumbling infrastructure, a collapsed economy, even by our own definition we are a second world nation. Learning to love shiny objects But there is a shiny commercial skin that covers everything American, a thin layer of glossy throwaway technology, that leads the citizenry to believe otherwise. That slick commercial skin, the bright colored signs for Circuit City and The Gap (rest in peace), the clear plastic that covers every product from CDs to pre-cut vegetables, the friendly yellow and red wrapper on the burger inside its bright red paper box, the glossy branding of every item and experience. These things are the supposed tangible evidence that the slick conditioned illusion, the one I call The American Hologram, is indeed real. If it's bright and shiny and new, it must be better. Right? It's the complete opposite of tropical grunge. Last week when I got back to the States I took a shower in an American friend's new $30,000 gleaming remodeled bathroom. It felt like a surgical operating room experience, compared to wading into the Caribbean surf in the tropical dusk with a bar of soap. Like a parallel universe straight out of The Matrix. Meat space versus the parallel universe So how is it that we Americans came to live in such a parallel universe? How is it that we prefer such things as Facebook (don't get me wrong, I'm on Facebook too), and riding around the suburbs with an iPod plugged into our brain looking for fried chicken in a Styrofoam box? Why prefer these expensive earth destroying things over love and laughter with real people, and making real human music together with other human beings -- lifting our voices together, dancing and enjoying the world that was given to us? Absolutely for free. And the answer is this: We suffer under a mass national hallucination. Americans, regardless of income or social position, now live in a culture entirely perceived inside a self-referential media hologram of a nation and world that does not exist. Our national reality is staged and held together by media, chiefly movie and television images. We live in a "theater state." In our theater state, we know the world through media productions which are edited and shaped to instruct us on how to look and behave and view the outside world. As in all staged productions and illusions, everyone we see is an actor. There are the television actors portraying what supposedly represents reality. Non-actors in Congress perform in front of the cameras, as the American empire's cultural machinery weaves and spins out our cultural mythology. Cultural myth production is an enormous industry in America. It is very similar to the national projects of pyramid-building in Egypt, or cathedral-building in medieval Europe. And in our obsession with violence and punishment, two characteristics of a consensual police state reality, we are certainly similar to prison camp building in Stalinist Russia. Actually, we're pretty good in that department too. Consider that one fourth of all the incarcerated people on earth are in U.S. prisons. U.S. citizens imprisoned by their own government. Good guys and bad guys at the chariot races In any case, the media culture's production of martyrs, good guys and bad guys, fallen heroes and concept outlaws, is not just big corporate business. It is the armature of our cultural behavior. It tells us who to fear (Middle Eastern terrorists, Mr. Chavez in Venezuela, and foreign made pharmaceuticals), who to scorn (again the same candidates, along with Brittney Spears for her lousy child rearing skills). Our daily news is the modern version of Roman coliseum shows. Elections are personality combat, chariot races, not examinations of solutions being offered. None are offered. What are being offered are monkey models. Man as a social animal necessarily mimics the behavior he sees around him, whether it be by real people or moving images of people. This eye-to-brain to mimicry connection does not care. Consequently, we know how to act and what the things around us are because television and media tell us. Television is the software, the operating instructions for our society. Thus, social realism for us is a television commercial for the American lifestyle: what's new to wear, what to eat, who's cool (Obama), what and whom to fear (that perennial evil booger, Castro) or who to admire (Bill Gates, pure American genius at work). This societal media software tells us what music our digitized corporate complex is selling, but you never see images of ordinary families sitting around in the evenings making music together, or creating songs of their own based upon their own lives and from their own hearts. Because that music cannot be bought and sold, and is not profitable. I think about that when the children and their parents sing and dance on the sand in front of my shack in Central America. We Americans are not offered that choice. Managing mythology So instead of a daily life in the flesh, belly to belly and soul to soul, lived out in the streets, and parks and public places, in love and the workplace, we get 40-inch televisions, YouTube, Cineplexes, and the myths spun out by Hollywood. Now for a national mythology to work, it has to be accessible to everyone all the time, it has to be all in one bundle. For example, in North Korea, it is wrapped up in a single man, Kim. In America, as we have said, it is the media and Hollywood in particular. Hollywood accommodates Imperial myths, melting pot myths, and hegemonic military masculinity myths, and glamour myths. It articulates our culture's social imaginary: "the prevailing images a society needs to project about itself in order to maintain certain features of its organization." And the features of our media mythology are terrifying when you think about them. As a writer friend says, It is watching "Man on Fire," with Denzel Washington's tragic pose and his truthful bullets, and his willingness to saw the fingers off of Mexicans to get the information on time to protect us from The Evil. It is the absorption of that electronic mythology that allowed us to co-sign the torture at Abu Ghraib. Incidentally, speaking of Abu Ghraib, I am a friend of Ray Hardy, lawyer to Lynndie England, the leash girl of Abu Ghraib. He has copies of thousands of other, far more grisly Abu Ghraib photos. Believe me, they picked the gentlest ones to release. Anyway, when the media and government people in power made that selection, they were managing your consciousness. What you know and don't know. Keeping you calmer by withholding the truth. Rather like not upsetting little children so they will continue to quietly behave the way you want. But, like children, the American public got bored with the subject of torture long ago, so we quit seeing the victims. Plenty of new evidence has been coming out for years since Lynndie's famous pics from Abu Ghraib. But the short American attention span, created by our rapid fire media, says, "Move on to the next hologram please. Whoa! Stop the remote. Nice butt shot of Sarah Palin there!" The result is that Americans cannot achieve the cathexis we need. Cathexis is the ground zero psychic and emotional attachment to the world that cannot be argued. It is "beyond ideological challenge because it is called into existence affectively." Americans are conditioned to reject any affective attachment that does not have a happy ending. And in that, we remain mostly a nation of children. We never get to grow up. So we tell ourselves the Little Golden Book fairy tales -- that we are a great and compassionate people, and that we are personally innocent of any of our government's horrific crimes abroad. Guiltless as individuals. And we do remain innocent, in a sense, as long as we cannot see beyond the media hologram. But it is a terrible kind of self-inflicted innocence that can come to no good. We are a nation latch key kids babysat by an electronic hallucination, the national hologram. The TV goldfish bowl You may or may not watch much television, but the average American spends almost one-third of his or her waking life doing so. The neurological implications of this are so profound that they cannot even be comprehended in words, much less described by them. Television constitutes our reality in the same fashion that water constitutes the environment in a goldfish bowl. It's everywhere and affects everything, even when we are not watching it. Television regulates our national perceptions and our interior ideations of who we Americans are. It schedules our cultural illusions of choice. It pre-selects candidates in our elections. By the way, as much as I like Obama, I fully understand he is there because he was selected by the illusion producing machinery of television, and citizens under its influence. It is hard to underestimate the strength of these illusions. TV regulates holiday marketing opportunities and the national neurological seasons. It tells us, "It's Christmas! Time to shop!" Or "it's election season, time to vote." Or "it's football season, let us rally passions and buy beer and cheer." Or that America's major deity, "The Economy," is suffering badly. "Sacred temples on Wall Street make great sickness upon the land!" Or most ominous of all, "It's time to make war! Again." It is fair to say that television and the American culture are the same thing. More than any other factor, it is the glue of society and the mediator of our experience. American culture is stone cold dead without it. If all the TVs in America went black, so would most of America's collective consciousness and knowledge. Because corporate media have replaced nearly all other previous forms of accumulated knowledge. Especially the ancient forms, such as contemplation of the natural world, study and care of the soul. And I do not mean soul in the religious sense either. I mean the deeper self, the one you go to sleep with every night. The media have colonized our inner lives like a virus. The virus is not going away. This commoditization of our human consciousness is probably the most astounding, most chilling accomplishment of American capitalist culture. Escape from the zombie food court Capitalist society however, can only survive by defying the laws of thermodynamics, through endlessly expanding growth, buying and using more of everything, every year and forever. Thus the cult of radical consumerism. It has been the deadliest cult of all because, so far, it has always triumphed, and has now spread around the earth and its nations. Why has it been so viral, so attractive to so many for so long? How did it come to grip the consciousness of so much of mankind, from Beijing to Bangladesh? Thuggish enforcement accounts for part of it, of course. But it has succeeded too because it requires no effort. No critical thinking. Not even literacy. Just passive consumption. That the easy addiction to consumption is probably hard wired into us. Every one of us will go right out this door tonight and continue to play out our lives as contributors to ecocide and global warming, mainly because it's easier. And besides, we are not offered any other real options, and we don't know any other way. Nor can we ever know any other way without making a great effort. How to make that effort? (Assuming you even want to.) As we said, consuming images, goods or buying your identity at Old Navy or a retro clothing shop takes no real effort or thought. Just money. Text messaging your whereabouts at the mall may be a technological wonder, but you're still absolutely nowhere if you are just one more oral grooved organism in the food court at the mall moving in a swarm toward Quiznos. So how do you escape the programming of the food court, and, I might include, escape even those parts of this school that may serve more to indoctrinate than enlighten you? All pedagogy, even the best, is nevertheless about control. How does one escape such a total system? In a word, service. Humble and thoughtful service to the world. It is heartening that we do have concerned Americans studying to alleviate the great suffering of so much of humanity. I have no proof of it, but it seems like earnest idealism is making a comeback since its decline following the optimistic 1960s. People and institutions such as this one are attempting to move American society forward again, heal us of our national sickness to the extent you can, after decades of regression, not to mention repression. Of course, to solve problems you must first identify them. Let me say here that one of the most profound things I have learned from the Third World, perhaps the only thing I have learned, and as psychologists you've surely heard it before, is this: The diagnosis is not the disease. Which is why our prescribed treatment never seems to work in places like Africa. Or even in the Bronx or South Philly. Even our most well intentioned thinking and study of the afflictions of Africa and Latin America, American inner cities or Appalachia, suffers from hubris, because they are necessarily the products of western propertized and monetized thinking that cause the problem. So now we study our victims with great piety. And supposedly teach them solutions to the problems we continue to cause for them. Western people studying globalization's horrific effects, or rape in Africa, or world poverty are doing so under the assumption that such things can be dealt with through some social mechanistic means, through analysis and unbiased reason and rational value-free science. Or by a network of officially sanctioned agencies. For years I have wanted to see the opposite take place. To see well fed, educated Americans learn from the poor of the earth. Do what Gandhi advised, let the poor be the teachers. Go among them with nothing, one set of clothing and no money, keep your mouth shut, and do your best not to affect anything (which is impossible, I know. But you can come, as they say, "close enough for government work.") Then just let the world happen to you, like they do in the so-called "passive societies," instead of trying to happen to it in typical Western fashion. Not trying to "improve" things. Maybe practice milpa agriculture with Mayans on the Guatemalan border, watching corn grow for three months. Fish in a lonely dugout, sun-up to sun-down, in the dying reefs of the Caribbean, with only a meal or two of fish as your reward. Do such things for a month or two. First you will experience boredom, then comes an internal psychic violence and anger, much like the experience of zazen, or sitting meditation, as the layers of your mind conditioning peel away. Don't quit, keep at it, endure it, to the end. And when you return you will find that deeply experiencing a non-conditioned reality changes things forever. What you have experienced will animate whatever intellectual life you have developed. Or negate much of it. But in serious, intelligent people, experiencing non-manufactured reality usually gives lifelong meaning and insight to the work. You will have experienced the eternal verities of the world and mankind at ground zero. And you will find that the healthy social structures our well intentioned Western minds seek are already inherent in the psyche of mankind, but imprisoned. And the startling realization that you and I are the unknowing captors. In conclusion, I would point out that the high technological imprisonment of our consciousness has been fairly recent. There are still those among us who remember when it was not so entrapped. A few of us still know what it was like to experience non-manufactured realities -- life outside our mass produced kitsch culture. Particularly some aging Sixties types, who sought to pass through the doors of perception. Many made it through. But in my travels to places such as this one, I also meet a new breed of younger people, who get it completely. I meet them in the more advanced psychological venues such as Adler. And especially in the ecological movement. They seem to already know what it took me a lifetime to learn: that each of us is but one strand in the vast organic web of flesh and blood chlorophyll. All things and all beings are inextricably connected at the most profound level. Any physicist will confirm this. We are bound by its every wave and particle, all of us -- the lonely night clerk at Motel 6 and the leviathans of the deep, the sleeping grandmother in New Haven, Connecticut and the maimed Iraqi child in Kirkuk. It can be understood by anyone though, simply by owning one's own consciousness. And in doing so we find that ownership and domination are both temporary and meaningless. And that the animating spirit of the earth is real and within us and claimable. The purpose of life is to know this. Einstein glimpsed it. Lao-Tzu knew it. So did St. Francis. But you and I are not supposed to. It would shatter the revered, digitized, super-sized, utterly meaningless hologram. The one that mesmerizes us, and mediates our every experience, but isolates us from universal humanness and its coursing energies. Such as love. Or mercy. Compassion. Existential pain. Hunger. Or the unmitigated joy of simply being alive one finds in children everywhere, even among the poorest. Most of the human race still lives in that realm. Blessed is the one who joins them. Because he or she learns that the truth is not relative, and that because the human mind seeks balance, social justice is not only inescapable in the long run, but inevitable. I won't be around for that, but on a clear day if I squint real hard I can see down that road ahead. And on that road I can see the long chain of decent human beings like yourselves walking toward the light. And for your very presence on this earth and in this room, I am grateful. Thank you all from the bottom of my heart. Thank you. From kaliyuga at wildblue.net Fri Nov 6 00:57:38 2009 From: kaliyuga at wildblue.net (MARGARET WYLES) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 23:57:38 -0800 Subject: [A-List] How to rebuild the global financial system In-Reply-To: <20091105191912.4de73462.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> References: <20091105191912.4de73462.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> Message-ID: <82b839ea0911052357na41a70draa914560bfa7dbf5@mail.gmail.com> Bill, Living in Japan, how much do you know about this guy. I can't decide whether or not he is just a wing nut or really has connections. Maggie On 11/5/09, Bill Totten wrote: > And save the planet > > by Benjamin Fulford > > benjaminfulford.com (undated) > > > With a brand new financial system built from scratch, it would be > possible to end world poverty and stop environmental destruction > within a month. The reason is simple, we have been blinded from > reality by a hypnotic pyramid scheme known as the world financial > system. The financial system is nothing more than the process of > deciding what humanity will do in the future. In other words, it is > fundamentally nothing more than mass psychology. Thus, if humanity > changed their collective psychology about how to run the planet, it > could decide, within a few days, to care for the poor and stop > destroying nature. It is simply a matter of making the collective > decision to do so. That is all. > > Before offering one example of how a new system could function, let > us look at what exists now. For a long time certain privately owned > central banks, most notoriously the Federal Reserve Board and the > Bank of England, have been turning this planet into a hellish slave > pyramid. At the bottom are poor innocent creatures being burned to > death by starving third world farmers moving on from depleted soil > to find fresh farm land to feed their hungry children. The innocent > creatures have no value because the global financial system > considers them worth zero unless they are turned into "products". > Thus the poor of the world pass what little income they are able to > glean from the destroyed rain-forest up to the next step of the > pyramid. That would be small time merchants who peddle mostly goods > made in faraway lands for a teeny profit. And so the up the pyramid > we go, past bribed leaders who sell their countries natural > resources for a pittance and ignore environmental protection rules > in exchange for huge bribes. If they try to stand up for their > people and ask for a fair price, the Western peoples are fooled > with a fake story into supporting a "war" against an "evil > dictator". > > Further up the pyramid we find the brainwashed populations of the > Western world who support endless wars because they have been > fooled into thinking it is for "human rights" and to spread > "democracy". They mostly live lives of meaningless hedonism enabled > by the tribute payments they have been receiving from the poorest > countries. Both their education systems and their media have been > subverted so long ago that they rarely wake up to the fact they > have been brainwashed all their lives. If they do, they are "taken > care of". > > Next up we find the pigs of the system. These are the ultra-rich > who know the true masters are the hyper-rich who make their money > by printing paper. Although many of them actually make real things > and thus contribute to humanity, they go along with this con-job > because they are both bribed and scared of being killed by hired > goons. > > Now let us look at how the fiat money system controlled by the > hyper-rich works. What they do is create money out of nothing, > usually as digits in a computer. They then "lend" this money to the > people who have to pay it back with "interest". The end result is > an upwards flow of tribute to an elite few at the top in exchange > for nothing. Up the pyramid goes real stuff, down the pyramid goes > paper worth "nothing". > > On a smaller scale this sort of thing is known as a pyramid scheme. > On a global scale it is still a pyramid scheme. Pyramid schemes end > when they run out of new people ready to join the bottom of the > pyramid. The global pyramid scheme is ending because we are running > out of nature to destroy and people to oppress. The situation is so > dire that ninety percent of the world's savings are going to feed a > hungry Anglo-American Israeli military machine that is being used > to suppress the people of the planet. As they say, you can't > squeeze blood from a rock so, the situation now has come to the > point where the pyramid is collapsing. > > What we need to do now is to rebuild the global financial system > from scratch. One approach would be to stop the digital printing > presses and give people in bankrupt America/England and Israel et > cetera enough cash for a month or so to tide them over until the > new system was built. We would then need to do an inventory of the > planet earth. It would assign value to everything on the planet, > forests, oceans, people et cetera. Any money in the old system that > could be connected to real things like land and factories, would > remain in the hands of its previous owners. Any money that was made > from "nothing" would be reassigned to the forests, oceans and poor > peoples of the world. > > The next step would be to gather all the wisest people to come up > with the details of a better way of navigating into the future. > This would involve creating a harmonious balance between nature, > markets and people. The end result should be that humanity as a > whole creates more life and wealth than it destroys. In other words > never again must humanity become an engine of destruction. Humanity > can then go out into the universe creating new gardens of Eden > everywhere. > > http://benjaminfulford.com/howtorebuild.html > > > http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com > http://www.ashisuto.co.jp > > From nscchicago at igc.org Thu Nov 5 18:15:21 2009 From: nscchicago at igc.org (NSC WORKERS COOP) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 19:15:21 -0600 Subject: [A-List] [Lasc-cc] USSF Planning Call Nov 10 - YOU ARE INVITED Message-ID: <3C4A28B8EFEE426D932619536D9689DA@NSCCHICAGO> Tom Baker here, Chicago Nicaragua Solidarity Latin America Solidarity Coalition, and, friends, the United States Social Forum (ooh, sounds governmental) is actually popular grassroots bottom up forum for people to meet mingle talk and learn, build movement for consequental social change. Visit www.ussf2010.org/ We note that missing from the agenda for this rather big event in Detroit this coming June 2010 is, what we call "The Latin America Track" We think we need the Latin America Track because so much, so profound and so related to people of the US is information, opportunity to talk back, present about all that is going on in Latin America. Strong and effective movements for social change are in place and models for mobilization to help us here, the USA of Arrogance and Amnesia are happening in Latin America, from Venezuela, Brazil, Ecuador, Bolivia, Chiapas, El Salvador, HONDURAS and Nicaragua, all over the place. It is difficult to separate the two populations, that of the indigenous of this hemisphere from that of the conquering Imperialist Old World We is all affected and the Power for Change Is the People, We the People. So, invitation to join in, CONFERENCE CALL TUESDAY NOVEMBER 10 at 4pm Central call-in # 1-218-936-4700 (code 071979) PS. excuse the distracting change in colors as I have difficulty making this thing work. I didn't choose these colors, the machine chose them and it's hard to talk to machines. ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: [Lasc-cc] USSF Planning Call Nov 10 > If your organization is interested in participating in the USSF June 2010 > in Detroit, please join other groups on the LASC CC to begin planning for > LASC's role in a proposed Latin America "track" at the Social Forum. > > DATE: Nov. 10 > Time: 5pm EST > > (call-in # 1-218-936-4700 (code 071979) > > _______________________________________________ > Lasc-cc mailing list > > Post: Lasc-cc at lists.mayfirst.org > List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasc-cc > > To Unsubscribe > Send email to: Lasc-cc-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org > Or visit: > https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/lasc-cc/nscchicago%40igc.org > > You are subscribed as: nscchicago at igc.org > From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Fri Nov 6 03:39:08 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 19:39:08 +0900 Subject: [A-List] The Iron Cheer of Empire Message-ID: <20091106193908.ae31bf68.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> No free tortillas in the Workhouse Republic by Joe Bageant JoeBageant.com (October 28 2009) Ajijic, Mexico - Every afternoon when I knock off from writing, after I suck down a Modelo beer and take an hour nap, I step out onto the 400-year-old cobbled street, with its hap-scatter string of vendors lining both sides. All sorts of vendors - vegetable vendors, vendors of tacos, chicharrones, chenille bedspreads and plucked chickens, cigarros, soft drinks, sopa and suet. Merchants whose business address consists of a card table in front of their casita. Here in this working class neighborhood on Calle Zaragoza, tourists seldom venture, and the neighborhood merchants' customers are their neighbors. Their goods are the common fare of daily family life in Mexico. Today, at a table less than two blocks away, I purchased a dozen brown eggs, with the idea of making huevos rancheros. The purchase took three quarters of an hour, and included stumbling but cheerful half English/half Spanish conversations with the six vendors between my casita and the table of Gabriel, the old egg and cheese vendor with an artificial leg and wizened smile who assures me that rooster-fertilized eggs make a man go all night. "I am too old to care about that", I half speak, half gesture in that rudimentary sign language understood everywhere. "Hawwww" he chortles and says something in Spanish I cannot understand. An English speaking bystander, a teenager with a backward baseball cap and dressed in "LA sag", translates: "He says his pendejo is as hard as his plastic leg. You still alive! You never too old!" These vendors are not poor people or peasants. They own homes, drive cars, watch cable television, send their children to college and do most of the things North Americans do. But their jobs are their livelihoods, not their lives, and every transaction is permeated with the ebb and flow of daily neighborhood and family life. "Is Maria going to graduate after all? Si! But by just by the hair in her nose! Who is going to sell fireworks for the Feast of Saint Andrew?" (Saint Andrew is the patron saint of Ajijic.) Behind the plastered brick walls along the street mechanics fix cars, dentists pull teeth and teachers cheer preschoolers onward in a chirping Spanish rendition of Eensy Weensy Spider. The entire street is busily, but not hectically, engaged in making a living, most of the people doing so within fifty feet of where they will sleep tonight. But before they sleep they will sit out on the street, or perhaps the tiny neighborhood plaza, gossiping with the same neighbors who've been their customers all day. The same families into which their children will marry and whose sick elders they will burn candles for in the ancient stone church, founded as a Spanish colonial mission to civilize the Huichol Indians who've since retreated up into the mountains to honor their "god of the opening clouds" in peyote rituals. Obviously work and commerce have their problems here, just as anywhere else. The peso rises and falls. Cheap Chinese imports crowd out domestic goods. People work hard, especially tradesmen and laborers, but there is a complete lack of obsession and stress that characterizes North American jobs. Which, of course, many Canadians and Americans retired to Ajijic take for laziness. It may be my bias, or my imagination, or my distaste for toil, but from here America looks like one big workhouse, "under God, indivisible, with time off to shit, shower and shop". A country whose citizens have been reduced to "human assets" of a vast and relentless economic machine, moving human parts oiled by commodities and kept in motion by the edict, "produce or die". Where employment and a job dominates all other aspects of life, and the loss of which spells the loss of everything. Yeah, yeah, I know, them ain't jobs - in America we don't have jobs, we have careers. I've read the national script, and am quite aware that all those human assets writing computer code and advertising copy, or staring at screen monitors in the "human services" industry are "performing meaningful and important work in a positive workplace environment". Performing? Is this brain surgery? Or a stage act? If we are performing, then for whom? Exactly who is watching? Proof abounds of the unending joy and importance of work and production in our wealth-based economy. Just read the job recruitment ads. Or ask any of the people clinging fearfully by their fingernails to those four remaining jobs in America. But is a job - hopefully a good one - and workplace strivance really everything? Most of us would say, "Well of course not". But in a nation that now sends police to break up the tent camps and car camps of homeless unemployed citizens who once belonged to the middle class, it might well be everything. In one of those divine moments of synchronicity writers pray for, I just saw reinforcement of the above. Checking my email web browser, one of those annoying ads masquerading as advice, popped up. It reads: "Doing good work is no longer enough! Ten tips to keep from being laid off your job." Shown is a cheerful young woman at a desk, feeling deliriously safe about her job, judging from her hysterical bug-eyed smile, thanks to "These Ten Tips!" from a commercial jobs agency. When personal employment fears, job terror and insecurity, can be captured and turned into a job for someone else, there's not much room left for the general spirit of commonality, or a sense of a shared commons (such as this Mexican street) of the nation's work-life. Not when any of us could become indigent at a moment's notice. But you won't hear anyone complaining. America doesn't like whiners. A whiner or a cynic is about the worst thing you can be in the land of gunpoint optimism. Foreigners often remark on the upbeat American personality. I assure them that our American corpocracy has its ways of pistol whipping or sedating its human assets into the appropriate level of cheeriness. Appearing cheerful is vital in a society where all of life is monitored by an employer, a credit rating bureau or the media's projection of the world, and mediated by the financialization of life's every aspect. Every action and movement is a transaction, some as large as the mortgage, others as small as the purchase of a bus token, or the cost of a cell phone call, gasoline, vehicle maintenance and parking costs for movement within the sprawling asphalt grids we call communities. Even respite from work with its vacation "leisure destinations" put on the credit card, and even the greatest commons of all, nature, has a cost of access, whether it be admission to national parks or the cost of camping and other "recreational equipment". In the background a tabulator relentlessly calculates our bill for the thoroughly transactional and mediated life. Quit paying the bills and you are disappeared. Erased from the screens of a society of watchers watching each other - or watching celebrities, those godlike creatures dwelling on the Olympus of the most watched ... and dreaming of perhaps being watched on Oprah by even more watchers than already watch us for some fleeting few seconds. There is a flickering screen or monitor in front of and between every citizen of the mediated society of watchers. Whether we watch television or other media matters not, we dwell among the watchers in a surveillance society of our peers. We dress appropriately, speak middle class English, not urban street slang or redneck, and look as prosperous as possible, or as hip as possible, or as learned or pious or whatever within our peer groups, and for outsider groups. No jokers, smokers or midnight tokers allowed in Mainstream American society and culture, which consists of working, consuming and "appearing to be", but never purely being. We flow willingly through the transactional circuitry of the wealth economy like ghosts, optimistic and eerily cheerful, encountering one another through the hierarchical commodity affinity groups we call our peers, people who consume the same things we do, and have the same purchased identity and "lifestyle" we do. Swimmers in a sea of mass produced goods and mass produced identities through consumption of those goods, we strive for uniqueness, but not very hard, lest we lose the commodities we've acquired. This is stamped deep within our American being by the greater forces of commodity capitalism; we seem to carry it with us wherever we go. We want to experience uniqueness. Thus Americans and Canadians complain that there are now "too many gringos" in Ajijic", implying that they are different than the rest of their own kind. But the truth is that we are all very commonly issued products of a profit driven workhouse where no human commons is allowable, lest the workers find meaning and joy in each other as human beings, and perhaps become less work driven, less productive and less profitable. Best that their lives remain mediated, disembodied from the great commons of the human spirit, unmoored from the great natural commons binding all living things called Earth - images of which will be provided for your delight on The Nature Channel at 9 pm tonight. Until then, stay cheerful. Pay your bills on time. Good night! Meanwhile, night is falling in Ajijic. Next door a child protests his nightly bath. A Chihuahua yips in the casita across the courtyard, the flickering blue light of a television shatters like harmless lightning on the face of a very large old woman fallen asleep in an armchair beneath a hanging tapestry of Christ feeding his lambs. Which reminds me. Tomorrow morning I must make those huevos rancheros. http://www.joebageant.com/joe/2009/10/the-iron-cheer-of-empire.html http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Fri Nov 6 03:37:55 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 19:37:55 +0900 Subject: [A-List] How to rebuild the global financial system In-Reply-To: <82b839ea0911052357na41a70draa914560bfa7dbf5@mail.gmail.com> References: <20091105191912.4de73462.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> <82b839ea0911052357na41a70draa914560bfa7dbf5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20091106193755.3a1fd68e.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> Maggie, I know him well and both like and trust him. His profile speaks for itself. I don't think Forbes or his other employers would have hired or tolerated a "wing nut". However he does delve into areas that I cannot confirm the validity of myself. But this particular post contains nothing surprising to me nor anything not easily confirmable by anyone. Bill On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 23:57:38 -0800 MARGARET WYLES wrote: > Bill, > > Living in Japan, how much do you know about this guy. I can't decide > whether or not he is just a wing nut or really has connections. > > Maggie > > On 11/5/09, Bill Totten wrote: > > And save the planet > > > > by Benjamin Fulford > > > > benjaminfulford.com (undated) > > > > > > With a brand new financial system built from scratch, it would be > > possible to end world poverty and stop environmental destruction > > within a month. The reason is simple, we have been blinded from > > reality by a hypnotic pyramid scheme known as the world financial > > system. The financial system is nothing more than the process of > > deciding what humanity will do in the future. In other words, it is > > fundamentally nothing more than mass psychology. Thus, if humanity > > changed their collective psychology about how to run the planet, it > > could decide, within a few days, to care for the poor and stop > > destroying nature. It is simply a matter of making the collective > > decision to do so. That is all. > > > > Before offering one example of how a new system could function, let > > us look at what exists now. For a long time certain privately owned > > central banks, most notoriously the Federal Reserve Board and the > > Bank of England, have been turning this planet into a hellish slave > > pyramid. At the bottom are poor innocent creatures being burned to > > death by starving third world farmers moving on from depleted soil > > to find fresh farm land to feed their hungry children. The innocent > > creatures have no value because the global financial system > > considers them worth zero unless they are turned into "products". > > Thus the poor of the world pass what little income they are able to > > glean from the destroyed rain-forest up to the next step of the > > pyramid. That would be small time merchants who peddle mostly goods > > made in faraway lands for a teeny profit. And so the up the pyramid > > we go, past bribed leaders who sell their countries natural > > resources for a pittance and ignore environmental protection rules > > in exchange for huge bribes. If they try to stand up for their > > people and ask for a fair price, the Western peoples are fooled > > with a fake story into supporting a "war" against an "evil > > dictator". > > > > Further up the pyramid we find the brainwashed populations of the > > Western world who support endless wars because they have been > > fooled into thinking it is for "human rights" and to spread > > "democracy". They mostly live lives of meaningless hedonism enabled > > by the tribute payments they have been receiving from the poorest > > countries. Both their education systems and their media have been > > subverted so long ago that they rarely wake up to the fact they > > have been brainwashed all their lives. If they do, they are "taken > > care of". > > > > Next up we find the pigs of the system. These are the ultra-rich > > who know the true masters are the hyper-rich who make their money > > by printing paper. Although many of them actually make real things > > and thus contribute to humanity, they go along with this con-job > > because they are both bribed and scared of being killed by hired > > goons. > > > > Now let us look at how the fiat money system controlled by the > > hyper-rich works. What they do is create money out of nothing, > > usually as digits in a computer. They then "lend" this money to the > > people who have to pay it back with "interest". The end result is > > an upwards flow of tribute to an elite few at the top in exchange > > for nothing. Up the pyramid goes real stuff, down the pyramid goes > > paper worth "nothing". > > > > On a smaller scale this sort of thing is known as a pyramid scheme. > > On a global scale it is still a pyramid scheme. Pyramid schemes end > > when they run out of new people ready to join the bottom of the > > pyramid. The global pyramid scheme is ending because we are running > > out of nature to destroy and people to oppress. The situation is so > > dire that ninety percent of the world's savings are going to feed a > > hungry Anglo-American Israeli military machine that is being used > > to suppress the people of the planet. As they say, you can't > > squeeze blood from a rock so, the situation now has come to the > > point where the pyramid is collapsing. > > > > What we need to do now is to rebuild the global financial system > > from scratch. One approach would be to stop the digital printing > > presses and give people in bankrupt America/England and Israel et > > cetera enough cash for a month or so to tide them over until the > > new system was built. We would then need to do an inventory of the > > planet earth. It would assign value to everything on the planet, > > forests, oceans, people et cetera. Any money in the old system that > > could be connected to real things like land and factories, would > > remain in the hands of its previous owners. Any money that was made > > from "nothing" would be reassigned to the forests, oceans and poor > > peoples of the world. > > > > The next step would be to gather all the wisest people to come up > > with the details of a better way of navigating into the future. > > This would involve creating a harmonious balance between nature, > > markets and people. The end result should be that humanity as a > > whole creates more life and wealth than it destroys. In other words > > never again must humanity become an engine of destruction. Humanity > > can then go out into the universe creating new gardens of Eden > > everywhere. > > > > http://benjaminfulford.com/howtorebuild.html > > > > > > http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com > > http://www.ashisuto.co.jp > > > > > > From cb31450 at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 06:29:57 2009 From: cb31450 at gmail.com (c b) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 08:29:57 -0500 Subject: [A-List] Obama, the Karzai Brothers & the Ghost of Najibullah Message-ID: <5c2e4d230911060529o2e689bb1hf3327c52ccfa4c77@mail.gmail.com> Obama, the Karzai Brothers & the Ghost of Najibullah Left Margin By Carl Bloice BlackCommentator.com Editorial Board It???s said that you can buy photos of Najibullah on the streets of Kabul these days and even cassettes of speeches he made in the 1980s when he was president of Afghanistan. Najibullah???s name evokes controversy. Always cited are the condemnation by some Afghans for his ties to the Soviet Union and his previous role as chief of the country???s internal security apparatus. However, it is impossible not to acknowledge the country social gains made during his time in leadership. As soon as his government was overthrown the victors wiped out land reform programs, instituted Sharia or Islamic religious law, cut women off from education, athletics and the professions and banned things like movies, television, videos, dancing, kite flying, and beard trimming. Quiet as it???s kept, for many in the Afghan capital, the Najibullah years were a time of great promise. But also of great danger. Outside forces were plotting and the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency was spurring reactionary groups - trained and equipped by the United States, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and others - to overthrow the Afghan government. Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter, in the words of former CIA analyst Ray McGoverrn, ???thought it a good idea to mousetrap the Soviets into their own Vietnam debacle by baiting them into invading Afghanistan in 1979, the war which was the precursor to the great-power Afghan quagmire three decades later.?? In 1979, Soviet troops entered the country to defend the Afghan government and remained there nine years. The effort was pre-doomed; the USSR leadership had ignored warnings, coming from even its own military strategists, that history had shown the fiercely independent and resourceful Afghan would never be subdued by the military might of foreign forces. On March 10, 1992, the New York Times reported that with the Soviet troops having left the country, ???Afghanistan???s President made an impassioned appeal to the United States today to help his country become a bulwark against the spread of Islamic fundamentalism in Central Asia.?? In an interview with correspondent Edward A. Gargan, Najibullah ???also pleaded for immediate economic and humanitarian assistance from Washington,?? which long backed the Afghan fundamentalist guerrillas fighting his Government. He also promised that he would release four Afghans who worked in the United States Embassy and were convicted of espionage in 1983. ???The Afghan President???s praise for the United States and his attempt to enlist Washington in common cause against fundamentalism marked the sharpest departure yet from the open hostility that has characterized relations between Kabul and Washington since Afghanistan???s leftist coup of 1978,?? wrote Gargan. ???We have a common task, Afghanistan, the United States of America, and the civilized world, to launch a joint struggle against fundamentalism,?? Najibullah told the Times, and ???described what he thought would happen to his country if Islamic extremists took power in Kabul.?? ???If fundamentalism comes to Afghanistan, war will continue for many more years,?? Najibullah said. ???Afghanistan will turn into a center of world smuggling for narcotic drugs. Afghanistan will be turned into a center for terrorism.?? Well, all that has come to pass. I was in Kabul February 15, 1989 when the final withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan took place; they had been in the country since December 1979. Most of the other reporters traveled to Jalalabad for the start of the final retreat, moving with the departing forces back to Kabul on their way out of the country. I remained in the capital and on that day a few of us were taken by our guides from the government to a shop that had been demolished by a bomb attack the previous day. It wasn???t a big terrorist attack but the message was clear: this is what is in store for Kabul now. That, too, came to pass. Gargan attributed Najibullah???s appeal to Washington to his having been ???Abandoned by his former benefactors in Moscow and cast somewhat adrift in the new politics of the region.?? That???s one way of putting it, but he really had no other choice. The USSR couldn???t restrain the Taliban and the various mujahedeen factions and besides it was in the midst of a political upheaval that would about two years hence bring down the ruling Communist Party. Najibullah had expressed support for a United Nations plan to summon ??? in Gargan???s words ???a wide spectrum of Afghans - including the Islamic fundamentalist guerrillas - to a gathering that would lead to a political accord to end Afghanistan???s years of civil conflict.?? There is no question that he persistently pursued a campaign for national reconciliation and reached out repeatedly to tribal and religious leaders across the country and the region. On the eve of the final stage of the Soviet withdrawal, Najibullah repeated his call for compromise and national unity before a large audience of notables and foreigners. But the Mujahedeen ???freedom fighters?? (as they were then called by the U.S. media and politicians at the time) and their benefactors in the region and Washington weren???t interested. The Times noted that the State Department refused to even comment on the Gargan interview. And so the attacks continued. Najibullah and his Watan (Homeland) Party remained in office until April 1992 when a major warlord, General Abdul Rashid Dostum decided to switch sides and the government ??? affected by severe economic difficulties (made worse by punitive sanctions undertaken by the Russian Government of Boris Yeltsin) ??? fell to the combined forces of mujahedeen and various tribal groups (???warlords?? ). But that hardly ended the country???s travails. The victorious groups soon began to fight each other over the spoils. The greatest damage to the country???s infrastructure and the city of Kabul came not from the Soviet invasion but from the internecine rocket attacks following the government???s ouster. In 1994, the recently organized Taliban made its appearance on the scene. Last week???s attack by the Taliban on targets in Kabul carried with them a grave symbolism. After Najibullah???s overthrow his family was able to flee the country but he refused to leave, choosing instead to take refuge in the United Nations compound where he remained for four years. In September 1996 the Taliban took control of Kabul from the Mujahedeen and began to bombard the UN facility. Najibullah was taken from the compound along with his brother, his secretary and his bodyguards. They were all hanged. The bloody body of the deposed president was hung from a lamp post, his severed private parts stuck in his mouth. One Afghan writer suggested Najibullah deserved his fate having been na??ve enough to think the Taliban would recognize the UN center as out of bounds. Last week???s attack lay to rest that notion once again. And so it came to pass that from that time forward to the Al Qaeda attack on the United States September 11, 2001 and beyond, Afghanistan has been and continues to be ???a center of world smuggling for narcotic drugs?? and ???a center for terrorism.?? Over the years, the Left in that part of the world (and a lot of other places) has made a many mistakes that contributed to the advance of rightwing reactionary movements and forces. However, the biggest culprits have been the U.S. and its Western allies. In their zeal to crush communist, socialist and left movements and parties and a desire to control petroleum resources, they have anointed and fostered the fundamentalists over the secular and democratic, and taken advantage of religious, ethnic and sectarian divisions, stirring pots where they could find them from Central Europe to Iraq. Oh, and that narcotics thing. What short memories we sometime have. Yes, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency sometime cavorts with drug dealers. It did it in the war in South East Asia a few decades ago. Remember the Golden Triangle? ???If it sounds a lot like Vietnam when Vietnam started to really come apart, it is ??? President Diem???s grotesquely corrupt brother was a CIA source and a noxious agent of influence,?? writes Robert Baer, a former Middle East CIA field office, in Time magazine. ???We came into Afghanistan in October 2001 with the same willful blindness. The CIA knew that its ally, the Tajik Northern Alliance, was a paid-up proxy of Iran, just as it was fully aware that another ally, Uzbek General Dostum, was one of Afghanistan???s great butchers (though Dostum has always denied the widespread allegations of his brutality). When it came to finding crucial partners on the ground, there were simply no alternatives.?? According to Time, ???From December 2001 through 2002, according to a former Drug Enforcement Administration official speaking on condition of anonymity, ???the CIA and the military turned a blind eye to drug traffickers if they thought they could help them against Taliban and al-Qaeda.????? ???We had no problem dealing with Afghan Islamic fundamentalists, terrorists, drug dealers and thugs when the Carter and Reagan White Houses waged a proxy war against the Soviet Union in the ???80s,?? writes Baer. ???The CIA and the White House turned a blind eye to our proxies??? faults because the fundamentalists were the best fighters and happy to take down our Cold War enemy. ???The claim that Ahmed Wali Karzai has been on the payroll of the CIA for the past eight years, as reported in today???s New York Times, won???t come as a surprise to most Afghans, who have long considered his brother, Afghan president Hamid Karzai, to be an American puppet,?? wrote Aryn Baker in Time on October 28. ???The revamped allegations that Karzai fr??re is deeply involved in Afghanistan???s annual $4-billion drug industry isn???t much of a shocker either - on the streets of Kabul and Kandahar the name ???Wali??? has long been synonymous with someone who can get away with a crime because he has friends in the right places. Diplomats, counter-narcotics officials and commanders from the International Security Assistance Force, NATO???s military wing in Afghanistan, have all privately (and not so privately) expressed frustration with President Karzai for not reining in his brother. In fact, the people most likely to be shocked by the revelations are Americans back at home, who are already wondering why we should be sending more soldiers and money to a country whose leadership has rarely proved an adequate partner.?? As it turns out there are more than two Karzai brothers. Citing recent study published by the Center on International Cooperation at New York University, investigative reporter Gareth Porter Writes: ???The report suggests that the U.S. and NATO contingents are spending hundreds of millions of dollars annually on contracts with Afghan security providers, most of which are local power brokers guilty of human rights abuses.?? ???In addition to Ahmed Wali Karzai, it names Hashmat Karzai, another brother of President Karzai, and Hamid Wardak, the son of Defence Minister Rahim Wardak, as powerful figures who control private security firms that have gotten security contracts without registering with the government.?? The allegation of drug dealing and CIA payoff to Ahmed Wali Karzai?? throws into sharp relief the most crucial question the administration now faces in Afghanistan,?? wrote Mark Sappenfield in the Christian Science Monitor last Wednesday. ???Should America continue its policy of working with warlords and disreputable power-brokers in an attempt to use their influence to advance US interests? Or should it instead focus on protecting the Afghan people ??? in many cases from the very warlords the US has supported in the past??? I was sitting around the other day with a group of people whose views, one might say, ranged from center to left. On Afghanistan they appeared to be of the unanimous opinion that U.S. policy had to make a sharp departure from the past. The best option for the Obama Administration is neither ???counterinsurgency?? nor ???counterterrorism.?? Nor is total disengagement desired, they agreed. The answer lies in development. A ???Marshall Plan?? sized program to tackle poverty and illiteracy in the region could improve the situation. Military escalation will only make matters worse. Of course, launching such en effort would require an end to the fighting and the withdrawal of U.S. and NATO troops.. A path to that would likely lay in a proposal widely broached in Europe and hardly mentioned in this country for an international conference involving; first and foremost, all Afghanistan???s neighboring states and each of the warring parties in the country with the aim of arriving at a security agreement. It might come through the United Nations like the plan that Najibullah was entertaining back in 1998 ??? long before September 11. Only this way can the conditions arise for the Afghan people to decide their own destiny free of dictates and intrigues from abroad. In any case, the proper path for the U.S. must not involve continuing to bed down with the feudal warlords and the likes of the Karzai brothers. That puts us on the wrong side of history and decency. BlackCommentator.com Editorial Board member Carl Bloice is a writer in San Francisco, a member of the National Coordinating Committee of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism and formerly worked for a healthcare union. From kaliyuga at wildblue.net Fri Nov 6 09:06:50 2009 From: kaliyuga at wildblue.net (MARGARET WYLES) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 08:06:50 -0800 Subject: [A-List] How to rebuild the global financial system In-Reply-To: <20091106193755.3a1fd68e.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> References: <20091105191912.4de73462.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> <82b839ea0911052357na41a70draa914560bfa7dbf5@mail.gmail.com> <20091106193755.3a1fd68e.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> Message-ID: <82b839ea0911060806hb009180m77ee451930374728@mail.gmail.com> Wow! I have always wondered about him and am, frankly, glad to have some personal affirmation that he is trustworthy. I've wanted to like him, but his ideas are quite out there and he's interviewed by people like Jeff Rense, whose site is quite suspect, IMO. I first saw a video by him in which he suggested that the earthquake in China was triggered by US weaponry. In the video, he showed footage of some Japanese official saying that the US had threatened them with an earthquake if they didn't go along with some fiscal policy. I tried to find confirmation elsewhere on the internet for his suggestion, but could find none. Recently, he's been talking quite a bit about his close connections with Asian secret societies and the imminent defeat of the Illuminati. If he is truly credible, and his sources are accurate, we may be in for some major changes. My apologies for calling your friend a 'wing nut.' Maggie On 11/6/09, Bill Totten wrote: > Maggie, > > I know him well and both like and trust him. His profile speaks for > itself. I don't think Forbes or his other employers would have hired or > tolerated a "wing nut". However he does delve into areas that I cannot > confirm the validity of myself. But this particular post contains nothing > surprising to me nor anything not easily confirmable by anyone. > > Bill > > On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 23:57:38 -0800 MARGARET WYLES > wrote: > >> Bill, >> >> Living in Japan, how much do you know about this guy. I can't decide >> whether or not he is just a wing nut or really has connections. >> >> Maggie >> >> On 11/5/09, Bill Totten wrote: >> > And save the planet >> > >> > by Benjamin Fulford >> > >> > benjaminfulford.com (undated) >> > >> > >> > With a brand new financial system built from scratch, it would be >> > possible to end world poverty and stop environmental destruction >> > within a month. The reason is simple, we have been blinded from >> > reality by a hypnotic pyramid scheme known as the world financial >> > system. The financial system is nothing more than the process of >> > deciding what humanity will do in the future. In other words, it is >> > fundamentally nothing more than mass psychology. Thus, if humanity >> > changed their collective psychology about how to run the planet, it >> > could decide, within a few days, to care for the poor and stop >> > destroying nature. It is simply a matter of making the collective >> > decision to do so. That is all. >> > >> > Before offering one example of how a new system could function, let >> > us look at what exists now. For a long time certain privately owned >> > central banks, most notoriously the Federal Reserve Board and the >> > Bank of England, have been turning this planet into a hellish slave >> > pyramid. At the bottom are poor innocent creatures being burned to >> > death by starving third world farmers moving on from depleted soil >> > to find fresh farm land to feed their hungry children. The innocent >> > creatures have no value because the global financial system >> > considers them worth zero unless they are turned into "products". >> > Thus the poor of the world pass what little income they are able to >> > glean from the destroyed rain-forest up to the next step of the >> > pyramid. That would be small time merchants who peddle mostly goods >> > made in faraway lands for a teeny profit. And so the up the pyramid >> > we go, past bribed leaders who sell their countries natural >> > resources for a pittance and ignore environmental protection rules >> > in exchange for huge bribes. If they try to stand up for their >> > people and ask for a fair price, the Western peoples are fooled >> > with a fake story into supporting a "war" against an "evil >> > dictator". >> > >> > Further up the pyramid we find the brainwashed populations of the >> > Western world who support endless wars because they have been >> > fooled into thinking it is for "human rights" and to spread >> > "democracy". They mostly live lives of meaningless hedonism enabled >> > by the tribute payments they have been receiving from the poorest >> > countries. Both their education systems and their media have been >> > subverted so long ago that they rarely wake up to the fact they >> > have been brainwashed all their lives. If they do, they are "taken >> > care of". >> > >> > Next up we find the pigs of the system. These are the ultra-rich >> > who know the true masters are the hyper-rich who make their money >> > by printing paper. Although many of them actually make real things >> > and thus contribute to humanity, they go along with this con-job >> > because they are both bribed and scared of being killed by hired >> > goons. >> > >> > Now let us look at how the fiat money system controlled by the >> > hyper-rich works. What they do is create money out of nothing, >> > usually as digits in a computer. They then "lend" this money to the >> > people who have to pay it back with "interest". The end result is >> > an upwards flow of tribute to an elite few at the top in exchange >> > for nothing. Up the pyramid goes real stuff, down the pyramid goes >> > paper worth "nothing". >> > >> > On a smaller scale this sort of thing is known as a pyramid scheme. >> > On a global scale it is still a pyramid scheme. Pyramid schemes end >> > when they run out of new people ready to join the bottom of the >> > pyramid. The global pyramid scheme is ending because we are running >> > out of nature to destroy and people to oppress. The situation is so >> > dire that ninety percent of the world's savings are going to feed a >> > hungry Anglo-American Israeli military machine that is being used >> > to suppress the people of the planet. As they say, you can't >> > squeeze blood from a rock so, the situation now has come to the >> > point where the pyramid is collapsing. >> > >> > What we need to do now is to rebuild the global financial system >> > from scratch. One approach would be to stop the digital printing >> > presses and give people in bankrupt America/England and Israel et >> > cetera enough cash for a month or so to tide them over until the >> > new system was built. We would then need to do an inventory of the >> > planet earth. It would assign value to everything on the planet, >> > forests, oceans, people et cetera. Any money in the old system that >> > could be connected to real things like land and factories, would >> > remain in the hands of its previous owners. Any money that was made >> > from "nothing" would be reassigned to the forests, oceans and poor >> > peoples of the world. >> > >> > The next step would be to gather all the wisest people to come up >> > with the details of a better way of navigating into the future. >> > This would involve creating a harmonious balance between nature, >> > markets and people. The end result should be that humanity as a >> > whole creates more life and wealth than it destroys. In other words >> > never again must humanity become an engine of destruction. Humanity >> > can then go out into the universe creating new gardens of Eden >> > everywhere. >> > >> > http://benjaminfulford.com/howtorebuild.html >> > >> > >> > http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com >> > http://www.ashisuto.co.jp >> > >> > >> >> > > From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 6 12:16:34 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 19:16:34 -0000 Subject: [A-List] US will recognize Honduras election with or without reinstated Zelaya -- Senator Jim DeMint Message-ID: Friday, November 6th 2009 - 2:38 am US will recognize Honduras election with or without reinstated Zelaya United States will recognize the Honduran elections results regardless of whether former President Manuel Zelaya is returned to office and regardless of whether the vote on reinstatement takes place before or after November 29th, according to Republican Senator Jim DeMint who claims he was given guarantees to that effect by the US State Department. ?Secretary Clinton and Assistant Secretary Shannon have assured me that the US will recognize the outcome of the Honduran elections regardless of whether Manuel Zelaya is reinstated. I take our administration at their word that they will now side with the Honduran people and end their focus on the disgraced Zelaya? said the conservative Senator from South Carolina. ?I am happy to report the Obama Administration has finally reversed its misguided Honduran policy and will fully recognize the November 29th elections? added Senator DeMint. ?Given this commitment, which Senator DeMint has requested for months, he will lift objections on the nominations of Arturo Valenzuela to be Assistant Secretary of Western Hemisphere Affairs and Thomas Shannon to be US Ambassador to Brazil?. The Honduran congress is expected to take a vote on the reinstatement of ousted president Zelaya, following consultations with the Supreme Court. ?My goal has always been to work with the administration to get the policy on the Honduran elections reversed. Now that this goal has been achieved, I will lift my objections to the two nominations. ?This marks an important step forward for the brave people of Honduras. They are proving, despite crushing hardship and impossible odds, that freedom and democracy can succeed anywhere people are willing to fight for it?, adds the release. ?The independence, transparency, and fairness of their elections have never been in doubt. And now, thanks to the Obama Administration?s welcome reversal, the new government sworn into office next January can expect the full support of the United States and I hope the entire international community.? ?I trust Secretary Clinton and Mr. Shannon to keep their word, but this is the beginning of the process, not the end. I will eagerly watch the elections, and continue closely monitoring our administration?s future actions with respect to Honduras and Latin America.? From noreply at coha.org Fri Nov 6 11:49:43 2009 From: noreply at coha.org (Council on Hemispheric Affairs) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 13:49:43 -0500 Subject: [A-List] Zelaya's Fading Prospects as U.S. Pulls Back Support Message-ID: <20091106184938.92F1A3E5133@mx-out.daemonmail.net> Council on Hemispheric Affairs Research MemorandumCouncil on Hemispheric Affairs Research Memorandum About COHA Contact COHA In the News Internships Cunning Micheletti Determined to Outfox Zelaya, Insouciant U.S. Diplomats; Meanwhile, Clinton Delivers a Likely Fatal Blow to Ousted Honduran President Zelaya?s Already Grim Prospects After adamantly rejecting all attempted negotiations, the Honduran de facto government signed an agreement on October 29th ostensibly opening space for a potential resolution to the country?s four-month standoff. The agreement called for the formation of a unity government that will assume power and oversee the November 29th presidential elections. But even under the most favorable of circumstances, the terms of the peace agreement would transform Zelaya into little more than a figurehead president, drained of all his authority. The accord left the restoration of executive power in the hands of the Honduran Congress and Supreme Court, the two bodies that authorized and led the way to Zelaya?s removal from the presidency in the first place. Still, the most lethal blow to Zelaya?s return was delivered by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when she acknowledged that his restitution would not affect Washington?s recognition of the election results. Clinton?s Coup de Main Apparently the U.S. plan under discussion was never meant to be implemented, and de facto leader Roberto Micheletti?s alleged agreement was probably little more than a hoax. While the new deal was feted as ending the conflict, such celebration may have proved to be premature as progress has since reached a standstill, which perhaps was the intended outcome all along. On Tuesday, Honduran Congressional leaders postponed calling the legislative body out of recess in order to verify the accords, and it remains to be seen whether they will even bother to endorse the agreement, especially after the State Department so effectively sabotaged the peace process. For full article click here This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Ethan Katz Friday, November 06, 2009 | Research Memorandum 09.2 The Council on Hemispheric Affairs, founded in 1975, is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and information organization. It has been described on the Senate floor as being "one of the nation's most respected bodies of scholars and policy makers." For more information, please see our web page at www.coha.org; or contact our Washington offices by phone (202) 223-4975, fax (202) 223-4979, or email coha at coha.org. If you no longer wish to receive our press releases, you may unsubscribe. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 4846 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091106/31d6ec49/attachment.txt From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 6 16:46:24 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 23:46:24 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Agreement Falls Apart! Urgent Action: Call the White House and State Department on Honduras! Message-ID: Alliance for Global Justice http://afgj.org Urgent Action: Call the White House and State Department on Honduras! Agreement Falls Apart! [The Alliance for Global Justice has received this important action alert from School of the Americas Watch (SOAW). We urge you to take action.] We are extremely concerned about the situation in Honduras, where SOA graduates overthrew the democratically elected government on June 28, 2009. An agreement that was brokered last week between representatives of President Zelaya and the coup regime was supposed to "return the holder of executive power to its pre-June 28 state" but it turns out it was just another stalling tactic by the coup regime. [Nicaragua Network note: U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) said that U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Assistant Secretary Thomas Shannon had assured him that the US would recognize the outcome of the Honduran elections regardless of whether Manuel Zelaya was reinstated. This is unacceptable.] Read a statement from Honduran President Manuel Zelaya below. SOA Watch supports the three key demands that the National Front of Resistance Against the Coup in Honduras has put forward: ? the return to constitutional order with the reinstatement of the legitimate president, Manuel Zelaya Rosales ? respect for the sovereign right of the Honduran people to establish a National Constituent Assembly for the purpose of refounding their nation ? punishment for those who have violated human rights. Join us in calling the White House and leave a message for President Barack Obama and Dan Restrepo (Special Assistant to the President and National Security Council Senior Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs) at 202-456-1111 or 202-456- 1414 and the State Department and leave a message for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Assistant Secretary Thomas Shannon (202-647-4000) telling them to not recognize the coup regime's elections that are scheduled for November 29. President Zelaya must be reinstated! Statement by Honduran President Manuel Zelaya: PRESIDENCY OF THE REPUBLIC From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 6 16:55:42 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 23:55:42 -0000 Subject: [A-List] growing dispute about a Honduran government deal with Zelaya Message-ID: After a long, messy battle between Senator Jim DeMint and the Obama administration, Senator DeMint removed his holds on two key administration appointees whose nominations have been languishing pending the outcome over a battle involving the Honduras ouster of President Manuel Zelaya. In his statement on the Senate floor, DeMint lavished praise on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Shannon -- whose nomination as the next US Ambassador to Brazil DeMint also had on hold -- for yielding to his views that whether or not the Honduras legislature votes Zelaya back into office that the Obama administration will recognize the outcome of the coming November 29th elections as legitimate and fair. There is growing dispute about a Honduran government deal with Zelaya that the ousted leader now says the de facto government is not abiding by. Some suggest that Jim DeMint had some influence on pulling apart the Honduran deal with his own negotiations with the Obama administration over what was needed for the US to recognized the November election results. The great news is that Arturo Valenzuela, Professor of Government and Director of the Center for Latin American Studies in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, has now been confirmed as Thomas Shannon's successor as Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemispheric Affairs. Valenzuela served at the White House as Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs and Senior Director for Inter-American Affairs at the National Security Council in the second term of the Clinton administration. Only problem is that one of the other key players in this Shakespearian political drama, Tom Shannon (who Jim DeMint now thinks is great!) got stuck on the floor last night when recently appointed Senator George LeMiuex began to flex his Senatorial muscles by not allowing Shannon's nomination to be voted on with a big passle of other nominees who were unanimously approved by the Senate at 5:30 pm yesterday evening. Allegedly, the pro-embargo, anti-Castro crowd hijacked the Freshman Senator -- who will show great promise as a US Senator when he doesn't yield so publicly to the overtly crude and frivolous whims of fanatics who will lose the battle on Tom Shannon, but who want to waste the government's time. -- Steve Clemons publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-clemons/finally-arturo-valenzuela_b_348844.html&co _______________________________________________ Lasolidarity mailing list Post: Lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasolidarity After a long, messy battle between Senator Jim DeMint and the Obama administration, Senator DeMint removed his holds on two key administration appointees whose nominations have been languishing pending the outcome over a battle involving the Honduras ouster of President Manuel Zelaya. In his statement on the Senate floor, DeMint lavished praise on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Shannon -- whose nomination as the next US Ambassador to Brazil DeMint also had on hold -- for yielding to his views that whether or not the Honduras legislature votes Zelaya back into office that the Obama administration will recognize the outcome of the coming November 29th elections as legitimate and fair. There is growing dispute about a Honduran government deal with Zelaya that the ousted leader now says the de facto government is not abiding by. Some suggest that Jim DeMint had some influence on pulling apart the Honduran deal with his own negotiations with the Obama administration over what was needed for the US to recognized the November election results. The great news is that Arturo Valenzuela, Professor of Government and Director of the Center for Latin American Studies in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, has now been confirmed as Thomas Shannon's successor as Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemispheric Affairs. Valenzuela served at the White House as Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs and Senior Director for Inter-American Affairs at the National Security Council in the second term of the Clinton administration. Only problem is that one of the other key players in this Shakespearian political drama, Tom Shannon (who Jim DeMint now thinks is great!) got stuck on the floor last night when recently appointed Senator George LeMiuex began to flex his Senatorial muscles by not allowing Shannon's nomination to be voted on with a big passle of other nominees who were unanimously approved by the Senate at 5:30 pm yesterday evening. Allegedly, the pro-embargo, anti-Castro crowd hijacked the Freshman Senator -- who will show great promise as a US Senator when he doesn't yield so publicly to the overtly crude and frivolous whims of fanatics who will lose the battle on Tom Shannon, but who want to waste the government's time. -- Steve Clemons publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-clemons/finally-arturo-valenzuela_b_348844.html&co _______________________________________________ Lasolidarity mailing list Post: Lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasolidarity From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 6 17:01:45 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 00:01:45 -0000 Subject: [A-List] AP: El Salvador to honor priests killed by army in '89 Message-ID: <41100974BBA747C98B1E34EB8DB30F43@home9sg93n9r5y> ----- Original Message ----- From: Walter Lippmann To: CubaNews Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 5:38 PM Subject: [CubaNews] AP: El Salvador to honor priests killed by army in '89 El Salvador to honor priests killed by army in '89 (AP) ? 3 days ago SAN SALVADOR ? El Salvador's president says the country will award its highest honor to six Jesuit priests murdered by the army in 1989. President Mauricio Funes says the National Order of Jose Matias Delgado awards are a "public act of atonement" for mistakes by past governments. They will be presented on Nov. 16 to mark the date 20 years ago when soldiers killed Spanish-born university rector Ignacio Ellacuria, five other Jesuits, a housekeeper and her daughter. The killings sparked international outrage and tarnished the image of U.S. anti-communism efforts after it was found that some of the soldiers involved received training at Fort Benning, Georgia. Funes made the announcement on Tuesday. From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 6 17:11:12 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 00:11:12 -0000 Subject: [A-List] NYT: Honduras accord appears to unravel (US backs coup govt control) Message-ID: NYT: Honduras accord appears to unravel (US backs coup govt control) Posted to CN by: "Fred Feldman" ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Fri Nov 6, 2009 6:25 am (PST) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/07/world/americas/07honduras.html?_r=1&hp November 7, 2009 Honduras Deal Appears to Unravel By ELISABETH MALKIN MEXICO CITY An accord that would have unblocked the political standoff in Honduras has failed, the deposed president said Friday, a week after it was mediated by the United States. The deposed president, Manuel Zelaya, whose possible return to power was at the heart of the accord, is still a virtual prisoner in the Brazilian Embassy, where he took refuge six weeks ago after he secretly slipped back into Honduras. He is no closer to resuming his presidency, while the de facto president, Roberto Micheletti, and the people around him are still running the country. The accord also set Thursday as a deadline to name a unity government that would oversee preparations for a presidential election scheduled for this month. But none of this has happened. Critics said the accord was difficult to enforce because its only source of pressure was an American threat not to recognize the planned election. Mr. Zelaya said early on Friday that the accord failed after Mr. Micheletti moved to form a new government without him, Reuters reported. Mr. Zelaya had declined to name any members to the cabinet, Mr. Micheletti said, so he was going ahead without them. ?We?ve completed the process of forming a unity government,? Mr. Micheletti said in a televised speech quoted by Reuters. ?It represents a wide spectrum despite the fact that Mr. Zelaya did not send a list of representatives.? Mr. Zelaya said through a spokesman that the pact was dead and blamed the de facto government for its failure, Reuters said. As part of the deal, both Mr. Zelaya and Mr. Micheletti had agreed to put the question of Mr. Zelaya?s return to a vote in the Honduran Congress. But the accord set no deadline, and with congressional leaders yet to decide on a date for a vote, Mr. Zelaya seems unlikely to be returned to office. After threatening that it would not recognize the presidential election scheduled for Nov. 29 unless Mr. Micheletti signed on to the deal, the Obama administration hinted that it would accept the results even if the accord?s terms are not fully met. ?The bottom line is there will be no reversal of the coup d??tat,? said Kevin Casas-Zamora, a former vice president of Costa Rica and an analyst at the Brookings Institution. ?That cannot count as a diplomatic success.? American officials dismiss that conclusion, arguing that both sides have agreed to abide by Congress?s decision and that an election will resolve the crisis. The divisions in Honduras were on display on Thursday in Tegucigalpa, the capital, where Mr. Zelaya?s supporters were camped outside Congress to try to force a vote on his return. Regional splits were also appearing over how long the Honduran Congress could delay the vote and what the legislators? eventual decision should be. Ricardo Lagos, a former Chilean president who is on the verification commission set up to monitor the accord, said Thursday that Mr. Zelaya should be returned before the election. Critics say the de facto government appears to be stalling, expecting that once the elections go ahead, the international community will recognize them. What is more, they say, Mr. Shannon?s remarks on recognizing the elections leave the Obama administration with little leverage to enforce the accord. Christopher Sabatini, senior director for policy at the Council of the Americas, in New York, said that the Obama administration appeared willing to accept the elections? outcome rather than admit that there was no guarantee when and how Honduran legislators would vote. Richard Berry contributed reporting from Paris. This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 6 17:19:02 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 00:19:02 -0000 Subject: [A-List] AP: Zelaya: US-brokered pact for Honduran crisis fails Message-ID: <553AB0FDC03B4EE698B9D900683A61C4@home9sg93n9r5y> AP: Zelaya: US-brokered pact for Honduran crisis fails Posted to CN by: "Jane Franklin" janefranklin at hotmail.com Fri Nov 6, 2009 7:37 am (PST) Zelaya: US-brokered pact for Honduran crisis fails By JUAN ZAMORANO (AP) TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras Ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya said Friday that a U.S.-brokered pact failed to end a four-month political crisis after a deadline for forming a unity government passed. "The accord is dead," Zelaya told Radio Globo from from the Brazilian Embassy where he has been hold up under threat of arrest. "There is no sense in deceiving Hondurans." Forged last week with the help of U.S. diplomats, the pact gave the two sides until midnight Thursday to install a government with supporters of Zelaya and Roberto Micheletti, who was named interim president by Congress after Zelaya was ousted on June 28. Jorge Reina, a negotiator for Zelaya, said the pact fell apart because Congress failed to vote on whether to reinstate the deposed president before the deadline for forming the unity government. The pact did not require Zelaya's return to the presidency. It left the decision up to Congress. Zelaya interpreted that to mean that Congress had to vote on the issue by Thursday. Supporters of Micheletti, who was named interim president by Congress after Zelaya was ousted on June 28, disputed that, saying the pact required that members of the unity Cabinet be in place by Thursday but that there was no deadline for Congress to meet. "The de facto regime has failed to live up to the promise that, by this date, the national government would be installed. And by law, it should be presided by the president of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya," Reina said. Shortly before midnight, Micheletti announced that a unity government had been created even though Zelaya had not submitted his own list of members. Micheletti said the new government was composed of candidates proposed by political parties and civic groups. He did not name the new members. "Everybody, with the exception of Mr. Zelaya, recommended Hondurans to lead the institutions of our country as part of the new government," Micheletti said. He said the unity government "is representative of a large ideological and political spectrum in our country and complies strictly with the agreement" brokered last week. It was the latest setback for international efforts to resolve the Honduran standoff before Nov. 29 presidential elections, which several Latin American countries have vowed not to recognized if held under the coup-installed government. The United States has suspended millions of dollars in aid to the impoverished Central American nation. But Washington had hoped that having a unity government in place before the elections would end the diplomatic isolation of a country that is a traditional U.S. ally. The elections had been scheduled before Zelaya's ouster. Neither he or Micheletti are candidates. Hundreds of Zelaya supporters gathered outside Congress on Thursday to demand his reinstatement. The protesters said they will boycott the elections if Zelaya is not returned to power beforehand to serve out his constitutionally limited single term, which ends in January. Reina accused Micheletti of preparing "a great electoral fraud this November." "We completely do not recognize this electoral process," Reina said. "Elections under a dictatorship are a fraud for the people." The military ousted Zelaya over a dispute on whether to change the Honduran constitution. Opponents claimed Zelaya was trying extend his time in office by lifting the ban on presidential re-election. Zelaya denied that was his goal. Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 6 17:23:07 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 00:23:07 -0000 Subject: [A-List] PL: Accord to Solve Honduran Crisis Fails Message-ID: <2DA1A1E49CD84D47A67B3FF4C3C39006@home9sg93n9r5y> PL: Accord to Solve Honduran Crisis Fails Posted to CN by: "Walter Lippmann" walterlx at earthlink.net walterlx Fri Nov 6, 2009 10:33 am (PST) Accord to Solve Honduran Crisis Fails Tegucigalpa, Nov 6 (Prensa Latina) Honduran constitutional President Manuel Zelaya stated on Friday that the agreement to solve the crisis failed, due to the putschists' noncompliance with the agreements to reinstate him and constitute a unity government. "This agreement is a dead letter. Its non-fulfillment made it fail," said Zelaya to Globo radio station from Brazil embassy, where he has been staying since his return to the country on September 21. According to the legitimate president, people can not continue to be deceived with this kind of agreement, which only expresses the putschists' lack of willingness to solve the problem. A national reconciliation cabinet should have been created on November 5, according to what was agreed on October 30 by the constitutional government and the de facto regime. According to the law, this government should be led by the president elected by the Honduran people, said a press release signed by Zelaya. However, Head of the coup regime Roberto Micheletti announced, some minutes before midnight, the creation of a government in which not even a single member appointed by the President was represented. Zelaya announced that he did not know about the November 29 election process and accused the de facto regime of being preparing a huge political electoral fraud. This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 6 17:28:37 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 00:28:37 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Restitution of Zelaya Imperative, Rio Group Message-ID: <267F4CB523144F9C89586038BACE0BA1@home9sg93n9r5y> Fri Nov 6, 2009 10:35 am (PST) PL: Rio Group: Restitution of Zelaya Imperative Restitution of Zelaya Imperative, Rio Group Montego Bay, Jamaica, Nov 6 (Prensa Latina) The Rio Group foreign ministers made recognition of the November elections in Honduras conditional on immediate restitution of President Manuel Zelaya. At a Special Statement issued at the end of their meeting in this city, the foreign ministers termed Zelaya's unconditional restitution in power "imperative." Zelaya's restitution is an indispensable requirement for re-establishing constitutional order and democracy in Honduras, as well as normalization of relations of the Honduran Republic with the Rio Group, the text says. The statement also "calls vigorously to end harassment to Brazil's embassy in Tegucigalpa and guarantee its inviolability, that of the people under its protection, as well as freedom of movement of his personnel and the whole diplomatic body accredited to Honduras." The foreign ministers demanded no further delay for immediate and integral fulfillment of the Tegucigalpa-San Jose Agreement, signed on October 30 in the Honduran capital. From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Fri Nov 6 17:34:30 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 09:34:30 +0900 Subject: [A-List] The Inference of Fraud Message-ID: <20091107093430.1902f36a.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> What is not given but must be taken? False Flag Operations by David M Shapiro CUNY Academic Commons (October 31 2009) My favorite topic since 9/11 is the financial crisis. Some outstanding issues that I've yet to see credibly addressed by US leaders are the following: 1. Why did none of the financial institutions that allegedly needed (and actually received) TARP funds beginning in the Fall of 2008 not warn their shareholders of their precarious financial positions in prior public filings (for example, Forms 10-K / 10-Q)? 2. If senior management and the boards of directors of these financial institutions were genuinely caught short and did not possess actual knowledge of the precarious financial positions of the financial institutions under their stewardship, did they possess constructive knowledge (that is, they could have and should have known of the precarious financial condition)? 3. If they neither could have nor should known about the precariousness of the financial conditions of the financial institutions under their stewardship, how relevant and reliable were the accounting information systems of these financial institutions? 4. If the precariousness of the financial conditions was neither forecast nor capable of forecast (for example, the perfect storm), why did some entities (for example, hedge funds) take significant positions (for example, credit default swap protection from loss of value of Lehman Brothers debt) from which they benefited enormously after the public dissemination of the precariousness of the financial positions of the financial institutions was exploited by politicians (for example, US Congress), administrators (for example, US Treasury Secretary), and regulators (for example, Federal Reserve Bank of New York) to bail-out financial institutions' creditors? 5. If the financial institutions and the ultimate beneficiaries of the bail-outs (for example, financial institutions' creditors) were indeed 'too big to fail', why haven't the individuals responsible for creating the bail-outs acted forthwith to correct such bigness and systemic risk? 6. If the financial institutions (and their creditors) have largely recovered as a result of the bail-outs, why hasn't the US economy created more jobs? 7. If the financial institutions' responsibility is neither job creation in the US nor development of projects promoting the general welfare of the US, why were they so important that they had to be rescued by US taxpayers? The US taxpayers will support a bipartisan group (that is, the so-called Angelides Commission) to investigate the financial crisis. Some hope for a Pecora Commission redux. What are the odds that it will more closely resemble a 9/11 Commission redux? http://dshapiro32.commons.gc.cuny.edu/2009/10/31/false-flag-operations/ http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 6 17:52:45 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 00:52:45 -0000 Subject: [A-List] =?windows-1252?q?=22US-brokered_agreement_looks_to_have_?= =?windows-1252?q?strengthened_coup_instead_of_reversing_it=94?= Message-ID: VIEW The Real News ?Nothing resolved in Honduras: Widely-celebrated, US-brokered agreement looks to have strengthened coup instead of reversing it?: http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=4431 From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 6 17:57:50 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 00:57:50 -0000 Subject: [A-List] =?windows-1252?q?The_indigenous-campesino_organization_C?= =?windows-1252?q?OPINH_denounces_the_=93Guaymuras_Accords=94?= Message-ID: <0871FB2E3BDA4BA8A15E25EC8223F46E@home9sg93n9r5y> COPINH - CIVIC COUNCIL OF POPULAR AND INIDIGENOUS ORGANIZATIONS OF HONDURAS The indigenous-campesino organization COPINH denounces the ?Guaymuras Accords? In the face of the signing of the accords to seek a solution to the crisis generated by the military coup d'etat against the people of Honduras, COPINH emits the following communiqu?: 1. We have no trust in the negotiating commission of the coup regime, given that they have never demonstrated a willingness to reinstate the constitutional president of the republic. Its only purpose is to buy time to consolidate the objectives of the coup d'etat in looting the national treasury and imposing neoliberal projects of privatization of natural resources and state institutions. 2. We denounce the malicious and intentional attitude of the government of the United States of America, that takes ambiguous positions but, behind the scenes, has supported the coup-makers and, if not, how can they explain that in the kidnapping of President Manuel Zelaya Rosales they used the [U.S. military?s Honduran] Palmerola base? If the yankees had so much political will to contribute to the resolution of this crisis, why so much tolerance, patience and complacency with the coup-makers in lending themselves to a dialogue where they present deceiving agreements as a solution? 3. We call out people not to rest until we achieve the convoking of a popular and democratic national constitutional assembly, which should be made up of the different social sectors of the country such as women, feminists, youth, indigenous and black peoples, workers, the LGTB community, community councils, representatives of marginalized neighborhoods, teachers, artists, peasants, honest business people, intellectuals, professionals, the informal economy sector, alternative media, among others. 4. We urge the National Front of Popular Resistance to raise an initiative of dialogue and negotiation towards more dignified agreements in which the mediation shouldn't be to the liking and oversight of the yankee government, which has helped drive the coup d'etat against our people, but instead by people like Rigoberta Menchu, Adolfo P?rez Esquivel, democratic countries that make up the Bolivarian Alternative of the Americas (ALBA) and UNASUR, foundations like the Carter Foundation, social movements of the countries of Latin America and the world like the Landless Peoples Movement of Brazil, the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo of Argentina, the Scream of the Excluded, Jubilee South, the Convergence of Popular Movements of the Americas, the School of the Americas Watch, the platforms of solidarity with the Honduran people and others. For this the front should name a negotiating commission that understands that the coup-makers are perverse and that the State Department, the Pentagon and the U.S. government in general are driving the coup d'etat and proposing, as key points, the restitution of the President of the Republic Manuel Zelaya Rosales to govern for the time that the coup-makers robbed of his governing period, the installation of a national constitutional assembly and the dissolution of the coup congress, of the coup supreme court, of the coup public ministry, the reduction and purging of the armed forces, the definitive purging of the national police and the punishment of the people involved in the coup d'etat and the violation of human rights. 5. We urge once again to the candidates of the Democratic Unification Party, the Popular Independent Candidacy, the PINU party and the Liberals, who are in resistance, to be consistent and renounce, once and for all, participation in the electoral farce set up by the coup-makers. To our people we urge you not to participate in the electoral circus and to boycott that act of the coup-makers. 6. To the international solidarity we invite you to strengthen the support to the Honduran people not just as a principle of solidarity but for reasons of self-defense since if the coup-makers consolidate in Honduras the democratic spring of the peoples of the world and particularly the peoples of our America will end. With the ancestral force of Lempira, Iselaca, Mota and Etempica we raise our voices filled with life, justice, dignity, freedom and peace. HERE NOBODY IS GIVING UP / AQUI, NO SE RINDE NADIE * * * INTRODUCTION TO CPTRT'S RECENT REPORT DETAILING THE USE OF TORTURE BY THE COUP REGIME By the CPTRT (Center for the Prevention, Treatment, and Rehabilitation of Victims of Torture and their Families). Complete report in Spanish: http://www.cptrt.org/pdf/Tortura_Represion_Sistematica_GolpeEstado.pdf. Translated by Patricia Adams of the Quixote Center, www.quixote.org) The political military coup in Honduras, which took place on June 28, 2009, has special characteristics ? . The first component is the participation of the old followers of the National Security Doctrine that have continued practicing torture with impunity since the 80's and who are the principle military and police advisors of the de facto regime. The second component is the strategy of low intensity conflict, psychological torture, state terrorism, total suspension of constitutional guarantees, the state of siege and the presence of national and international hired assassins. The third element is that the coup is taking place in the country where one of the most important US military bases exists [Palmerola, 40 minutes north of Tegucigalpa, the capital city] and where international military trainings and maneuvers occur frequently. The fourth element is the alliance of economic, media, political, judicial, and religious powers in the country, that openly denies the coup, referring to it as a 'constitutional succession.' An alliance which also proclaims and justifies this military coup in the name of the law of God, peace, and democracy, all while keeping silent about murders, torture, and human rights violations. The fifth component is the condemnation of the coup as a military coup, by almost 100% percent of the world's countries, with the exception of United States, which condemns it as a coup but does not consider it to have been military in nature. The sixth component is that the coup is considered as being not only against Zelaya but against the entire people of Honduras, and is a threat to the stability of some Latin American governments. The seventh component is the existence of the popular response by the National Resistance Front Against the Military Coup, which has been protesting continuously for more than 120 days, despite the massive repression by brutal military and police force, the use of toxic gases, chemical weapons, intense noises, murders, persecution, political imprisonment and massive use of torture. The eighth component is that the coup has occurred in the context of an electoral process which censors and gags the freedom of expression, in which the de facto government has fierce control of more than 90% of the communications media, and through which a variety of media outlets and journalists were militarized and repressed, including Radio Globo, Cholusat Sur, Diario Tiempo, Canal 11, Radio Progreso and the newspaper El Libertador. The ninth element in that candidates from the opposition parties for the upcoming presidential, congressional, and mayoral elections have been subjected to torture, to being followed, to violent trauma and to murder. These facts are indicators of the restrictions on freedom and the civil and political rights of an electoral campaign process. The tenth component is a 60% increase in femicide, the violations of the rights of trans-gender people, as well as the persecution and racism against the indigenous and the Gar?funas. In this context, it is especially important to mention that since the sixth of October of 2009, 12 people affiliated with the Lenca indigenous organization COPINH have sought political asylum inside the Guatemala Embassy, that Augustina Flores, sister of COPINH leader Berta Caceres, was tortured by the police forces, and that the Lenca resistance leader Antoio Leiva was murdered. Additionally, on the 21st of October, Day of the Forces that are Armed against the people, the criminal policies of the de facto regime resounded clearly when the repressive forces of the Direction of Criminal Investigation were ordered to break in, terrorize and silence the language and culture of our brothers and sisters of Radio Flumabimeto and Radio Duruugubuty, radio stations of the Gar?funa peoples in the regions of Triunfo de la Cruz and San Juan, in the Bay of Tela, terrorizing 46 communities. The murder of leaders of the teachers movements has been another characteristic of this military coup: Roger Vallejo, Mart?n Rivera, Mario Fidel Contreras, and Eliseo Hern?ndez, as well as Jairo S?nchez, the President of the Union of INFOP Workers (SITRAINFOP), who was shot and eventually died from the wounds he sustained. Lastly, we wish to point out the enormous risk of human rights defense work: our staff has been threatened, followed, and shot at, and their phone lines have been tapped and cut. We are grateful for the international solidarity and support and for our organization, particularly we are thankful for the Research Centre for Torture (RCT DANIDA). This report is a product of team work and the vocation to ethical and responsible service of the CPTRT. We also take this opportunity to publicly recognize all the human rights organization, national and international, who are against the military coup. Juan Almendares Executive Director of the CPTRT RISE IN REPORTS OF TORTURE AND CRUEL, INHUMAN AND DEGRADING TREATMENT Tegucigalpa November 2, 2009: The CPTRT reports that the number of cases of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading (TCID) treatments has risen at an alarming rate and has become of means of political repression in the wake of the coup d'etat. Throughout these four months, the CPTRT alone has registered 475 cases of torture and TCID. Nonetheless, it is estimated that the number of total cases in considerably higher given the tendency of under-reporting for fear of reprisal or lack of trust in the judicial system. Between 2007 and the first half of 2009, CPTRT saw an average of 2.5 cases of torture each month, compared with 118.75 cases per month in the current context. The majority of victims of torture seen by CPTRT have been protestors that have shown a serious opposition to the coup, although members of Congress, advocates of the 4th ballot box process, and journalists have been targeted as well. [Translators note: The possible presence of a 4th ballot box was the subject of the non-binding survey President Manuel ?Mel? Zelaya tried to carry out on June 28th 2009, the day of the coup d'etat. If the results of the non-binding survey would have been positive, Zelaya could have used them to back his proposal to Congress for the presence of a 4th ballot box in the November general elections. If the Congress approved the presence of the 4th ballot box, the Honduran people would have been able to vote for the creation of a Constituent Assembly tasked with drafting a new Constitution.] The torture has been physical, psychological, and sexual and has been almost exclusively committed by the police and military. The torture has included both traditional and new methods, such as viscous blows to the body and throat, burns via the application of lit cigarettes to the body and genitals, use of gas, deprivation of water and food, humiliation, verbal abuse, sexual harassment, the threat of death, the threat of disappearance, and the threat of the use of electric shock, among others. GIVEN THE ABOVE, CPTRT: Demands that the Honduran state investigate, pursue and penalize those responsible for the crimes of torture and TCID, and demands that attention, reparation, and restitution be provided to the victims. Offers the reminder that torture is a crime against humanity that is not subject to a statute of limitations and that the passage of time does not make impossible either investigation of the crimes nor penalty of those responsible. Offers the reminder that the prohibition of torture is an obligation that Honduras assumed on a national level through the Constitution, and through the ratification of international instruments like Convention on Torture, among others. CPTRT states that the defense of human rights in the country has become a high risk activity for its staff, which has been threatened continuously through intimidation, being fired upon, followed, and threatened. Therefore, CPTRT urges the international community to undergo pertinent actions to protect the life of defenders and also makes a special call to the representatives of the EU to apply the European Guidelines of Human Rights Defenders. * * * From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 7 01:39:07 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 08:39:07 -0000 Subject: [A-List] BBC: Deal over Honduran crisis 'dead' Message-ID: <4A9C94B9FD54454C955B6C5A5C8C31B8@home9sg93n9r5y> BBC: Deal over Honduran crisis 'dead' Honduras has been suffering from a political crisis for four months A deal to resolve the political crisis in Honduras is "dead", ousted President Manuel Zelaya has said. He was speaking after interim leader Roberto Micheletti said he was forming a "unity government" without Mr Zelaya's representatives. The US government has expressed its disappointment over the breakdown of the accord, which they helped broker. Honduras has been shaken by a political crisis that began when Mr Zelaya was forced out of the country on 28 June. Speaking to journalists on Friday, State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said it was urgent that a unity government be created "immediately" and called on both sides to return to the negotiating table. He said the US government was "disappointed by the unilateral statements" made by Mr Zelaya's and Mr Micheletti's negotiating teams on Thursday. Mr Micheletti acted as a deadline passed for putting a power-sharing agreement into effect. The two rivals agreed to a power-sharing deal last week, with a deadline for it to be implemented by midnight on Thursday (0600 GMT Friday). But Mr Zelaya had warned on Thursday that he would withdraw from the deal unless Congress held a vote on his restoration to power. He has said elections planned for 29 November will not be valid unless he is restored to power first, though the agreement did not guarantee the ousted leader's restitution. 'Theatre' Interim authorities did not consider the Congressional vote demanded by Mr Zelaya to be an essential part of the agreement. They said the agreement set a deadline for the formation of a government, but not for Congress to meet. As the power-sharing deadline passed, Mr Micheletti said he had "finalised the process of confirming a unity government". This failure was as predictable as was the original coup which preceded it Richard, BBC reader, La Ceiba, Honduras Readers react to latest development "Everybody, with the exception of Mr Zelaya, recommended Hondurans to lead the institutions of our country as part of the new government," he said. Though Mr Zelaya had not submitted a list of names, Mr Micheletti said the government was "representative of a large ideological and political spectrum in our country and complies strictly with the agreement" signed last week. Mr Zelaya, who has been sheltering in the Brazilian embassy since his return to Honduras in September, responded by pronouncing the accord "dead". "It's absurd what they are doing, trying to mock all of us, the people who elected me and the international community that supports me," he said. "We've decided not to continue this theatre with Mr Micheletti." Mr Zelaya was ousted after planning to hold a non-binding public consultation to ask people whether they supported moves to change the constitution. His critics said the move was unconstitutional and aimed to remove the current one-term limit on serving as president and pave the way for his possible re-election From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 7 01:54:55 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 08:54:55 -0000 Subject: [A-List] IFCO/Pastors for Peace Update on Honduras: The Struggle continues!! Message-ID: From: IFCO To: Recipient list suppressed at null, null at null Subject: IFCO/Pastors for Peace Update on Honduras: President Zelaya Withdraws from the "Tegucigalpa/San Jose Agreement" The Struggle continues!! Date: Nov 6, 2009 4:01 PM IFCO/Pastors for Peace Update on Honduras: President Zelaya Withdraws from the "Tegucigalpa/San Jose Agreement" The Struggle continues!! On Friday, November 6th, President Zelaya withdrew from the "Tegucigalpa/San Jose Agreement" and released the following statement in which he describes the agreement as a failure. Thus the agreement which had been maneuvered by the US State Department is dead. Nevertheless the illegitimate coup government of Micheletti, with apparent approval of the US, has announced the formation of a so-called government of "Unity and National Reconciliation" without the participation of the representatives of the vast majority of people in Honduras or of Zelaya. IFCO/Pastors for Peace supports the position of integrity of Zelaya in withdrawing from this fraudulent agreement. In the 131 days since the coup d' etat the people of Honduras have not stopped for one moment in the struggle for a return to constitutional order in Honduras. The National Resistance Front of Honduras has called for a boycott of the Nov 29th elections, an election that will only serve to continue the coup government. The "Tegucigalpa/San Jose Agreement" is dead, but the likelihood is that the US government will continue to support the Nov 29th elections, and the results of the elections. Under the present conditions of the coup, how could there be free and fair elections? We need to be prepared for this. We need to keep the pressure on. Early next week IFCO/Pastors for Peace will send out an alert about what you can do to support the people of Honduras. This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 7 02:06:50 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 09:06:50 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Nothing Resolved in Honduras by Jesse Freeston, Bertha Oliva Message-ID: <2814871E865A4E8480F54BF63BED614D@home9sg93n9r5y> MR 07.11.09 Nothing Resolved in Honduras by Jesse Freeston Bertha Oliva, Comit? de Familiares de Detenidos Desaparecidos en Honduras (COFADEH): I believe that the accord was destined to come out bad. As a general rule, you can't sit down and negotiate under imposition and repression. This was what happened before, during, and after the agreement. . . . Jesse Freeston: The accord was broken by the United States. While the official US position has always been that Zelaya is the legitimate president of Honduras, the State Department's top official for Latin America, Assistant Secretary Thomas Shannon, while appearing on CNN en Espa?ol on Wednesday, pledged US support for the upcoming elections, regardless of whether or not Zelaya has returned to power beforehand. CNN en Espa?ol: "So, for the US, the case is that the crisis is all but over. The elections will be recognized on the 29th, and the Hondurans will resolve the question of Zelaya, whatever the result may be." Shannon: "The future of Honduran democracy is now in the hands of Hondurans." CNN en Espa?ol: "So, the US is done, and whatever happens, happens, and you will recognize whatever happens on the 29th." Shannon: "Yes, exactly." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This video was brought online by The Real News on 5 November 2009. The quotations above are excerpts from the video. See, also, previous reports by Jesse Freeston: "Clock Ticking in Honduras" (29 October 2009); "'Nothing Happening' in Honduras" (1 October 2009); "The Siege of Tegucigalpa" (24 September 2009); "Zelaya's Return to Honduras Met with Force" (22 September 2009); "Coup Inciting Revolution in Honduras?" (18 September 2009); "Mr. Zelaya Goes to Washington" (6 September 2009); "Honduran Resistance Goes It Alone" (26 August 2009); "Honduras: Where Does Washington Stand?" (5 August 2009); "Zelaya Just One of Millions" (23 July 2009); "The Honduran Battle for Washington" (21 July 2009); "Honduran Coup Resistance Growing" (6 July 2009); "Honduras under Siege" (3 July 2009); and "Military Coup in Honduras" (29 June 2009). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment | Trackback | Print -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 7 02:13:23 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 09:13:23 -0000 Subject: [A-List] MRZine: TeleSur, "Constitutional Government of Honduras Declares That the Tegucigalpa Agreement Has Failed" Message-ID: <44C83E83F4DF401091A18770E65B39E2@home9sg93n9r5y> TeleSur, "Constitutional Government of Honduras Declares That the Tegucigalpa Agreement Has Failed" The constitutional president of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, said the Tegucigalpa/San Jos? agreement failed, along with what was thought to be the attempt to end the political crisis in this Central American country. His declaration came after the unilateral formation of an alleged Government of Unity and Reconciliation by the de facto Honduran regime. . . . "A de facto president recognized by no one in the world cannot head a Government of Unity and Reconciliation," Zelaya said to Globo Radio. . . . "The whole process of reconciliation, which the government of the constitutional president, Manuel Zelaya, entered in complete good faith, was a pantomime of the putschists," said Reina. From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 7 02:29:31 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 09:29:31 -0000 Subject: [A-List] =?windows-1252?q?TIME=3A__Troubles_for_a_Deal_=97_and_fo?= =?windows-1252?q?r_Obama_=97_in_Honduras?= Message-ID: <1914D845D78C467CB4AC07D8F320C72B@home9sg93n9r5y> Troubles for a Deal ? and for Obama ? in Honduras By Tim Padgett / Tegucigalpa Friday, Nov. 06, 2009 Edgard Garrido / Reuters When the U.S. last week finally brokered a deal between ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya and the man who replaced him following the June 28 coup, de facto President Roberto Micheletti, observers wondered how the Obama Administration had won Micheletti's agreement. That's because the pact allowed for Zelaya to be restored to office before Honduras' Nov. 29 presidential election ? a prospect Micheletti had fiercely opposed. But as the dust settles, the more common question this week is, What was Zelaya thinking when he signed this accord? The Oct. 30 agreement, in fact, leaves it to the Honduran congress to decide whether the leftist Zelaya should be restored before the presidential vote (in which he's not a candidate). But Zelaya, still holed up in the Brazilian embassy in Tegucigalpa since sneaking back into the country from exile in September, appears to have grossly miscalculated the odds of the legislature voting in his favor, and that leaves a cloud of uncertainty hanging over the accord. On Friday, Zelaya told Radio Globo that the accord was "dead," adding that there was "no sense in deceiving Hondurans." (See pictures of the protests in Honduras.) It ought to have been apparent to Zelaya that when the pact was inked, only a quarter of the chamber's 128 deputies backed his reinstatement ? even his ruling Liberal Party is split on the issue ? and the math has barely budged since then. U.S. officials say they hoped that four months after the coup, the congress would be less of an anti-Zelaya hothouse and therefore more amenable to letting him finish the last three months of his term as the democratically elected President. But "restoring Zelaya creates too many domestic political complications," says restoration opponent Adolfo Facusse, a Honduran textile baron and head of the National Industrial Association. "The politicians fear it will be seen by their constituents as an evil thing." Says Honduran political analyst Efrain Diaz, "It's not very clear anymore that this was a smart deal for Zelaya to accept. At the end of the day, this doesn't really resolve the Honduran crisis." Zelaya and his backers suggest they were led to believe the accord made his restoration a precondition for international recognition of the results of the Nov. 29 election, and that the endorsement of congress was a mere formality. "The agreement didn't say the elections could be used as clothing to disguise a coup," says Jorge Arturo Reina, Zelaya's U.N. ambassador and his representative on a commission monitoring implementation of the accord. (U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis is also on the committee.) But the Zelaya camp's reading of the deal may have been naively optimistic. That much was clear this week when the deal's chief U.S. negotiator, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Thomas Shannon, confirmed that under its terms, the U.S. would recognize the election result even if congress declines to restore Zelaya. Shannon's statement prompted a frustrated Zelaya to send Secretary of State Hillary Clinton a letter asking her to "clarify to the Honduran people if the [U.S.] position condemning the coup d'?tat has been changed for modified." The coup leaders insist Zelaya was ousted because he had defied a Supreme Court ruling against holding a referendum on constitutional reform, which they claim sought to lift a ban on presidential re-election ? although this was not stated in the referendum question. The U.S. joined the international community in condemning the coup as an affront to Latin America's fledgling democracies, and demanded Zelaya's reinstatement. To back that position, it cut off more than $30 million in aid to Micheletti's de facto government, suspended U.S. entry visas for the coup's supporters and threatened not to recognize the election results. Still, the coupsters ? backed by conservative Republicans in the U.S. Congress angry over Obama's stance ? dug in, even while acknowledging that it was wrong to toss out Zelaya militarily. As a result, Washington for weeks now has been looking for a way to bless the November balloting with or without Zelaya's restoration. Zelaya had hoped that Shannon would also persuade the leading candidate in the presidential race, Porfirio Lobo, to instruct legislators from his opposition National Party to endorse Zelaya's reinstatement under the new accord. But in an interview with TIME, Lobo made it clear that this would not happen. "Micheletti and Zelaya made a pact, and as long as that pact is carried out the world has to recognize the elections as valid," he says. "So at this point, what does it matter which of them is in office when the election is held?" Lobo also knows that as long as the vote is sanctioned by the U.S., from whom Honduras gets the lion's share of its trade and aid, he needn't lose too much sleep over the fact that the rest of the world will probably still refuse to recognize his election if Zelaya is not restored. Congress was supposed to have voted on restoration by the end of this week, but the deputies are demanding more time to deliberate. The accord also requires the creation, by week's end, of a multiparty "unity" government to run Honduras until a new President takes office on Jan. 27. But the ongoing dispute over whether Zelaya or Micheletti will be President until then raises doubts over the appointment of such a government. If Zelaya is not restored, his supporters have vowed a boycott of the election and perhaps street demonstrations to impede it. In the plaza in front of Congress, backers of Zelaya, wearing his trademark cowboy hats, this week shouted, "No restoration, no election!" Says Marlin Saucedo, 45, owner of a small textile business, "We're not going to the voting booths like sheep for the oligarchs who led the coup." The Obama Administration is technically correct when it argues that last week's pact allows it to recognize the Nov. 29 election even without Zelaya's restoration ? a result that would let Obama wipe his hands of the Honduras mess while getting U.S. conservatives off his back. But analysts like Diaz warn that to Latin America and the rest of the world, "That would just return us to the same situation as before, leaving Honduras to face the international community with little credibility." Solis herself said this week after arriving in Honduras that "what happens here has implications regionally." And it could certainly have negative implications for Obama's credibility in the region if he is perceived to have brokered a deal that allowed a military coup to succeed. Then again, the U.S. President could always shift the blame by pointing out that it was Zelaya that signed the deal. Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1935803,00.html?xid=newsletter-daily#ixzz0WADxz85Z From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 7 02:43:44 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 09:43:44 -0000 Subject: [A-List] This Sunday: SOA Protest at the U.S. Southern Command in Miami, Florida Message-ID: This Sunday: SOA Protest at the U.S. Southern Command in Miami, Florida On Sunday November 8 2009 at 1:00pm at the US Southern Command, we will stand witness to the dead, the dead that died at the hands of SOA graduates. We will call "Presente" (we are here) when their names are read. Click here to download the flyer This year we will read 19 new names, the names of those who were killed opposing the coup in Honduras. 1. PEDRO MAGDIEL SALVADOR MU?OZ 2. ROGER ABRAHAM VALLEJO SORIANO 3. WENDY ELIZABETH AVILA (24) 4. JACOBO EUCEDA (18) 5. FRANCISCO ALVARADO 6. OLGA OSIRIS UCLES 7. JAIRO SANCHEZ 8. PEDRO PABLO HERNANDEZ 9. ISIS OBED MURILLO MENCIAS (19) 10. F?LIX ORLANDO MURILLO L?PEZ 11. MARIO FIDEL CONTRERAS MONCADA 12. RAM?N GARC?A 13. JUAN GABRIEL FIGUEROA TOME 14. ROGER BADOS 15. ELISEO HERNANDEZ JUAREZ (43) 16. JONATAN OSORIO (16) 17. MATEO ANTONIO LEIVA (50) 18. ANASTASIO BARRERA (55) 19. GABRIEL FINO NORIEGA We will also stand in solidarity with those who are resisting the coup in Honduras, for their struggle is our struggle. We will stand with all the people of Latin America and the Caribbean who feel the oppression of US Imperialism and the economic injustice of multinational corporations. "Join us on Sunday November 8". Close the School of the Americas U.S. Military out of Latin America End the Coup Post: Lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasolidarity From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 7 04:57:29 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 11:57:29 -0000 Subject: [A-List] =?windows-1252?q?Honduras=3A_Communiqu=E9_No=2E_33_of_th?= =?windows-1252?q?e_National_Front_of_Resistance_Against_the_Coup?= Message-ID: Original Message Subject: Honduras: Communiqu? No. 33 of the National Front of Resistance Against the Coup From: "The Organizer" Date: Thu, November 5, 2009 8:39 pm -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Communiqu? No. 33 The National Front of Resistance Against the Coup wishes to inform the Honduran people and the international community of the following: Whereas, 1. During the 131 days of continuous struggle, we have pushed for a peaceful solution to the political crisis in our country as a result of the coup d'?tat carried out by the Honduran oligarchy. In this period we have supported the efforts promoted by various national and international sectors, putting forward three key demands: (a) the return to constitutional order with the reinstatement of the legitimate president, Manuel Zelaya Rosales; (b) respect for the sovereign right to establish a National Constituent Assembly for the purpose of refounding our nation; and (c) punishment for those who have violated human rights. 2. The Tegucigalpa-San Jose agreement underscores the priority of returning to constitutional order and affirms, literally, the need to "return the holder of executive power to its pre-June 28 state through to January 27, 2010, which marks the end of the term of the current government." 3. The National Congress, co-author of the break with the constitutional order on June 28, is using delaying tactics by refusing to convene the full assembly of the Congress to revoke the decree that set up the de-facto regime. 4. The OAS and the U.S. government, which we consider to be an accomplice in the military coup, do not show an interest in the definitive departure of the coup perpetrators from political power. Therefore We Resolve That, 1. If by 12 midnight today, Thursday, November 5 -- at the latest -- President Jos? Manuel Zelaya Rosales is not reinstated, the National Front of Resistance Against the Coup will refuse to recognize the electoral process and its results. 2. We warn all organizations of the national Resistance that if President Zelaya were not to be reinstated within this time frame, they should be ready to carry out the actions necessary to deny any legitimacy to the electoral farce. 3. We call upon the international community to maintain its position of refusing to legitimize the de-facto regime and the elections of November 29. "We Are Resisting and We Shall Win!" Tegucigalpa, M.D.C. November 5, 2009 (translated from the Spanish by Alan Benjamin/The Organizer) Post: Lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasolidarity From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 7 05:05:22 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 12:05:22 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Honduran Coupists Delay Tactics Continue Message-ID: Honduran Coupists Delay Tactics Continue Tegucigalpa, Nov 5 (Prensa Latina) The Honduran National Congress has yet to define when to examine the restitution of Manuel Zelaya as President, stance that popular leaders describe as a delay by local coupists. Cuerpo : Members of the National Front against the Coup in Honduras are still near the National Congress building for a fourth consecutive day, to demand the restitution of Manuel Zelaya. Almost a week away from the agreement to solve the Honduran political crisis, the cupule of the legislative organ maintains the date in which it will summon parliamentarians in order to decide on the pact subscribed among the delegates of Zelaya and coupist leader Roberto Micheletti in suspense. For leftwing deputy Silvia Ayala, of the Unificacion Democratica Party, the delay of the unicameral parliament reflects the coupists? tactics trying to prolong the usurpation of the power, against the will of the Honduran people. In a demonstration in front of the Congress Ayala told the press that the Hondurans will maintain their protest to demand a convoking to the deputies to an extraordinary session where the reinstatement of Zelaya should be discussed. Diverse internal sectors, personalities and international organizations coincide in criticizing the slowness and the discrepancies when applying Tegucigalpa-San Jos?'s Agreement finally, signed the past October 30. According to the parliament's president, Jos? ?ngel Saavedra the organization will not delay to the debate on the return of the constitutional leader. Composed by 128 parliamentarians, the Congress will determine if it proceeds to bring the leadeship of the Executive Power to its previous state to June 28 until the conclusion of the current government period, January 27, 2010. This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 7 05:13:56 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 12:13:56 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Obama: American indigenous have been marginalized and humiliated for centuries. Message-ID: <99294A875F57479C9C112D9790C9877C@home9sg93n9r5y> And Honduras? -- JD Washington, Nov 5 (Prensa Latina) The Us President, Barack Obama recognized on Thursday that American indigenous have been marginalized and humiliated for centuries. The President admitted that indigenous people were expelled from their lands by colonizers, who brought also diseases, admitted the President during a conference in the White House with the 564 tribes' leaders recognized by the government. We have a history marked by violence, diseases and hardship. Treaty and promises were broken, said the Head of State. Besides they were robbed of their lands, religion, cultures and languages, added he. Obama showed prepared to help that sector, which has the greatest unemployment rates. Regarding this subject he signed an executive order that plans regular referendums between the administration and indigenous group to analyze their problems. He considered that tribes' situation is desperate due to marginalization provoked by American governments for years. Some communities have 80 percent of unemployment rate and do not have water or health services, and the education is precarious, remembered Obama. From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Sat Nov 7 07:44:42 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 23:44:42 +0900 Subject: [A-List] The Anti-Empire Report Message-ID: <20091107234442.91b29ede.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> by William Blum www.killinghope.org (November 04 2009) "It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets". - Voltaire Question: How many countries do you have to be at war with to be disqualified from receiving the Nobel Peace Prize? Answer: Five. Barack Obama has waged war against only Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia. He's holding off on Iran until he actually gets the prize. Somalian civil society and court system are so devastated from decades of war that one wouldn't expect its citizens to have the means to raise serious legal challenges to Washington's apparent belief that it can drop bombs on that sad land whenever it appears to serve the empire's needs. But a group of Pakistanis, calling themselves "Lawyers Front for Defense of the Constitution", and remembering just enough of their country's more civilized past, has filed suit before the nation's High Court to make the federal government stop American drone attacks on countless innocent civilians. The group declared that a Pakistan Army spokesman claimed to have the capability to shoot down the drones, but the government had made a policy decision not to. {1} The Obama administration, like the Bush administration, behaves like the world is one big lawless Somalia and the United States is the chief warlord. On October 20 the president again displayed his deep love of peace by honoring some eighty veterans of Vietnam at the White House, after earlier awarding their regiment a Presidential Unit Citation for its "extraordinary heroism and conspicuous gallantry". {2} War correspondent Michael Herr has honored Vietnam soldiers in his own way: "We took space back quickly, expensively, with total panic and close to maximum brutality. Our machine was devastating. And versatile. It could do everything but stop." {3} What would it take for the Obamaniacs to lose any of the stars in their eyes for their dear Nobel Laureate? Perhaps if the president announced that he was donating his prize money to build a monument to the First - "Oh What a Lovely" - World War? The memorial could bear the inscription: "Let us remember that Rudyard Kipling coaxed his young son John into enlisting in this war. John died his first day in combat. Kipling later penned these words: If any question why we died, Tell them, because our fathers lied." "The Constitution supposes what the history of all governments demonstrates, that the executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the legislature." - James Madison, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson (April 02 1798). A wise measure, indeed, but one American president after another has dragged the nation into bloody war without the approval of Congress, the American people, international law, or world opinion. Millions marched against the war in Iraq before it began. Millions more voted for Barack Obama in the belief that he shared their repugnance for America's Wars Without End. They had no good reason to believe this - Obama's campaign was filled with repeated warlike threats against Iran and Afghanistan - but they wanted to believe it. If machismo explains war, if men love war and fighting so much, why do we have to compel them with conscription on pain of imprisonment? Why do the powers-that-be have to wage advertising campaigns to seduce young people to enlist in the military? Why do young men go to extreme lengths to be declared exempt for physical or medical reasons? Why do they flee into exile to avoid the draft? Why do they desert the military in large numbers in the midst of war? Why don't Sweden or Switzerland or Costa Rica have wars? Surely there are many macho men in those countries. "Join the Army, visit far away places, meet interesting people, and kill them". War licenses men to take part in what would otherwise be described as psychopathic behavior. "Sometimes I think it should be a rule of war that you have to see somebody up close and get to know him before you can shoot him". - Colonel Potter, M*A*S*H "In the struggle of Good against Evil, it's always the people who get killed". - Eduardo Galeano After the terrorist attacks of September 11 2001, a Taliban leader declared that "God is on our side, and if the world's people try to set fire to Afghanistan, God will protect us and help us". {4} "I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job." - George W Bush, 2004, during the war in Iraq {5} "I believe that Christ died for my sins and I am redeemed through him. That is a source of strength and sustenance on a daily basis." - Barack Obama {6} Why don't church leaders forbid Catholics from joining the military with the same fervor they tell Catholics to stay away from abortion clinics? God, war, the World Bank, the IMF, free trade agreements, NATO, the war on terrorism, the war on drugs, "anti-war" candidates, and Nobel Peace Prizes can be seen as simply different instruments for the advancement of US imperialism. Tom Lehrer, the marvelous political songwriter of the 1950s and 1960s, once observed: "Political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize". Perhaps each generation has to learn anew what a farce that prize has become, or always was. Its recipients include quite a few individuals who had as much commitment to a peaceful world as the Bush administration had to truth. One example currently in the news: Bernard Kouchner, co-founder of Medecins Sans Frontieres which won the prize in 1998. Kouchner, now France's foreign secretary, has long been urging military action against Iran. Last week he called upon Iran to make a nuclear deal acceptable to the Western powers or else there's no telling what horror Israel might inflict upon the Iranians. Israel "will not tolerate an Iranian bomb", he said. "We know that, all of us". {7} There is a word for such a veiled threat - "extortion", something normally associated with the likes of a Chicago mobster of the 1930s ... "Do like I say and no one gets hurt". Or as Al Capone once said: "Kind words and a machine gun will get you more than kind words alone". The continuing desperate quest to find something good to say about US foreign policy Not the crazy, hateful right wing, not racist or disrupting public meetings, not demanding birth certificates ... but the respectable right, holding high positions in academia and in every administration, Republican or Democrat, members of the highly esteemed Council on Foreign Relations. Here's Joshua Kurlantzick, a "Fellow for Southeast Asia" at CFR, writing in the equally esteemed and respectable Washington Post about how - despite all the scare talk - it wouldn't be so bad if Afghanistan actually turned into another Vietnam because "Vietnam and the United States have become close partners in Southeast Asia, exchanging official visits, building an important trading and strategic relationship and fostering goodwill between governments, businesses and people on both sides ... America did not win the war there, but over time it has won the peace ... American war veterans publicly made peace with their old adversaries ... A program [to exchange graduate students and professors] could ensure that the next generation of Afghan leaders sees an image of the United States beyond that of the war." {8} And so on. On second thought, this is not so much right-wing jingoism as it is ... uh ... y'know ... What's the word? ... Ah yes, "pointless". Just what is the point? Germany and Israel are on excellent terms ... therefore, what point can we make about the Holocaust? As to America not winning the war in Vietnam, that's worse than pointless. It's wrong. Most people believe that the United States lost the war. But by destroying Vietnam to its core, by poisoning the earth, the water, the air, and the gene pool for generations, the US in fact achieved its primary purpose: it left Vietnam a basket case, preventing the rise of what might have been a good development option for Asia, an alternative to the capitalist model; for the same reason the United States has been at war with Cuba for fifty years, making sure that the Cuban alternative model doesn't look as good as it would if left in peace. And in all the years since the Vietnam War ended, the millions of Vietnamese suffering from diseases and deformities caused by US sprayings of the deadly chemical "Agent Orange" have received from the United States no medical care, no environmental remediation, no compensation, and no official apology. That's exactly what the Afghans - their land and/or their bodies permeated with depleted uranium, unexploded cluster bombs, and a witch's brew of other charming chemicals - have to look forward to in Kurlantzick's Brave New World. "If the US relationship with Afghanistan eventually resembles the one we now have with Vietnam, we should be overjoyed", he writes. God Bless America. One further thought about Afghanistan: The suggestion that the United States could, and should, solve its (self-created) dilemma by simply getting out of that god-forsaken place is dismissed out of hand by the American government and media; even some leftist critics of US policy are reluctant to embrace so bold a step - Who knows what horror may result? But when the Soviet Union was in the process of quitting Afghanistan (during the period of May 1988 to February 1989) who in the West insisted that they remain? For any reason. No matter what the consequences of their withdrawal. The reason the Russians could easier leave than the Americans can now is that the Russians were not there for imperialist reasons, such as oil and gas pipelines. Similar to why the US can't leave Iraq. Washington's eternal "Cuba problem" - the one they can't admit to. "Here we go again. I suppose old habits die hard", said US Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, on October 28 before the General Assembly voted on the annual resolution to end the US embargo against Cuba. "The hostile language we have just heard from the Foreign Minister of Cuba", she continued, "seems straight out of the Cold War era and is not conducive to constructive progress". Her 949-word statement contained not a word about the embargo; not very conducive to a constructive solution to the unstated "Cuba problem", the one about Cuba inspiring the Third World, the fear that the socialist virus would spread. Since the early days of the Cuban Revolution assorted anti-communists and capitalist true-believers around the world have been relentless in publicizing the failures, real and alleged, of life in Cuba; each perceived shortcoming is attributed to the perceived shortcomings of socialism - It's simply a system that can't work, we are told, given the nature of human beings, particularly in this modern, competitive, globalized, consumer-oriented world. In response to such criticisms, defenders of Cuban society have regularly pointed out how the numerous draconian sanctions imposed by the United States since 1960 have produced many and varied scarcities and sufferings and are largely responsible for most of the problems pointed out by the critics. The critics, in turn, say that this is just an excuse, one given by Cuban apologists for every failure of their socialist system. However, it would be very difficult for the critics to prove their point. The United States would have to drop all sanctions and then we'd have to wait long enough for Cuban society to make up for lost time and recover what it was deprived of, and demonstrate what its system can do when not under constant assault by the most powerful force on earth. In 1999, Cuba filed a suit against the United States for $181.1 billion in compensation for economic losses and loss of life during the first 39 years of this aggression. The suit held Washington responsible for the death of 3,478 Cubans and the wounding and disabling of 2,099 others. In the ten years since, these figures have of course all increased. The sanctions, in numerous ways large and small, make acquiring many kinds of products and services from around the world much more difficult and expensive, often impossible; frequently, they are things indispensable to Cuban medicine, transportation or industry; simply transferring money internationally has become a major problem for the Cubans, with banks being heavily punished by the United States for dealing with Havana; or the sanctions mean that Americans and Cubans can't attend professional conferences in each other's country. These examples are but a small sample of the excruciating pain inflicted by Washington upon the body, soul and economy of the Cuban people. For years American political leaders and media were fond of labeling Cuba an "international pariah". We don't hear much of that any more. Perhaps one reason is the annual vote in the General Assembly on the resolution, which reads: "Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba". This is how the vote has gone: Year Votes (Yes-No) No Votes 1992 59-2 US, Israel 1993 88-4 US, Israel, Albania, Paraguay 1994 101-2 US, Israel, Uzbekistan 1995 117-3 US, Israel, Uzbekistan 1996 138-3 US, Israel, Uzbekistan 1997 143-3 US, Israel 1998 157-2 US, Israel 1999 155-2 US, Israel, Marshall Islands 2000 167-3 US, Israel, Marshall Islands 2001 167-3 US, Israel, Marshall Islands 2002 167-3 US, Israel, Marshall Islands 2003 173-3 US, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau 2004 179-3 US, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau 2005 182-4 US, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau 2006 183-4 US, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau 2007 184-4 US, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau 2008 185-3 US, Israel, Palau 2009 187-3 US, Israel, Palau How it began, from State Department documents: Within a few months of the Cuban revolution of January 1959, the Eisenhower administration decided "to adjust all our actions in such a way as to accelerate the development of an opposition in Cuba which would bring about a change in the Cuban Government, resulting in a new government favorable to US interests". {9} On April 6 1960, Lester D Mallory, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs, wrote in an internal memorandum: "The majority of Cubans support Castro ... The only foreseeable means of alienating internal support is through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship ... every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba". Mallory proposed "a line of action which ... makes the greatest inroads in denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government". {10} Later that year, the Eisenhower administration instituted the suffocating embargo. Notes 1. The Nation (Pakistan English-language daily newspaper), October 10 2009 2. Washington Post, October 20 2009 3. Michael Herr, Dispatches (1991), page 71 4. New York Daily News, September 19 2001 5. Washington Post, July 20 2004, page 15, citing the New Era (Lancaster, Pennsylvania), from a private meeting of Bush with Amish families on July 9. The White House denied that Bush had said it. (Those Amish folks do lie a lot you know.) 6. Washington Post, August 17 2008 7. Daily Telegraph (UK), October 26 2009 8. Washington Post, October 25 2009 9. Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958-1960, Volume VI, Cuba (1991), page 742 10. Ibid, page 885 _____ William Blum is the author of:- Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War Two (Common Courage Press, 1995) Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower (Zed Books, 2002) West-Bloc Dissident: A Cold War Memoir (Soft Skull Press, 2002) Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire (Common Courage Press, 2004) Portions of the books can be read, and copies purchased, at http://www.killinghope.org and previous Anti-Empire Reports can be read at this website. To add yourself to this mailing list simply send an email to bblum6 at aol.com with "add" in the subject line. I'd like your name and city in the message, but that's optional. I ask for your city only in case I'll be speaking in your area. Or put "remove" in the subject line to do the opposite. Any part of this report may be disseminated without permission. I'd appreciate it if the website were mentioned. http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer75.html http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 7 11:45:45 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 18:45:45 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Mark Weisbrot: Ecuador and Bolivia are achieving remarkable growth because they reject conventional economic wisdom Message-ID: <3F84CA9FB57241B2A078070A862F420F@home9sg93n9r5y> Latin America's economic rebels Ecuador and Bolivia are achieving remarkable growth because they reject conventional economic wisdom Mark Weisbrot guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 28 October 2009 15.00 GMT Among the conventional wisdom that we hear every day in the business press is that developing countries should bend over backwards to create a friendly climate for foreign corporations, follow orthodox (neoliberal) macroeconomic policy advice and strive to achieve an investment-grade sovereign credit rating so as to attract more foreign capital. Guess which country is expected to have the fastest economic growth in the Americas this year? Bolivia. The country's first indigenous president, Evo Morales, was elected in 2005 and took office in January 2006. Bolivia, the poorest country in South America, had been operating under IMF agreements for 20 consecutive years, and its per-capita income was lower than it had been 27 years earlier. Evo sent the IMF packing just three months after he took office, and then moved to re-nationalise the hydrocarbons industry (mostly natural gas). Needless to say this did not sit well with the international corporate community. Nor did Bolivia's decision in May 2007 to withdraw from the World Bank's international arbitration panel, which had a tendency to settle disputes in favour of international corporations and against governments. But Bolivia's re-nationalisation and increased royalties on hydrocarbons has given the government billions of dollars of additional revenue (Bolivia's entire GDP is only about $16.6bn, with a population of 10 million people). These revenues have been useful for a government that wants to promote development, and especially to maintain growth during the downturn. Public investment increased from 6.3% of GDP in 2005 to 10.5% in 2009. Bolivia's growth through the current world downturn is even more remarkable in that it was hit hard by falling prices for its most important exports - natural gas and minerals - and also by a loss of important export preferences in the US market. The Bush administration cut off Bolivia's trade preferences that were granted under the Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act, allegedly to punish Bolivia for insufficient co-operation in the "war on drugs". In reality, it was more complicated: Bolivia expelled the US ambassador because of evidence that the US government was supporting the opposition to the Morales government, and the ATPDA revocation followed soon thereafter. In any case, the Obama administration has so far not changed the Bush administration's policies toward Bolivia. But Bolivia has proven that it can do quite well without Washington's co-operation. Ecuador's leftist president, Rafael Correa, is an economist who, well before he was elected in December 2006, understood and wrote about the limitations of neoliberal economic dogma. He took office in 2007 and established an international tribunal to examine the legitimacy of the country's debt. In November 2008 the commission found that part of the debt was not legally contracted, and in December Correa announced that the government would default on roughly $3.2bn of its international debt. He was vilified in the business press, but the default was successful. Ecuador cleared a third of its foreign debt off its books by defaulting and then buying the debt back at about 35 cents on the dollar. The country's international credit rating remains low, but no lower than it was before Correa's election, and it was even raised a notch after the buyback was completed. The Correa government also incurred foreign investors' wrath by renegotiating its deals with foreign oil companies to capture a larger share of revenue as oil prices rose. And Correa has bucked pressure from Chevron and its powerful allies in Washington to drop his support of a lawsuit against the company for alleged pollution of ground waters, with damages that could exceed $27bn. How has Ecuador done? Growth has averaged a healthy 4.5% over Correa's first two years. And the government has made sure that it has trickled down: healthcare spending as a percent of GDP has doubled, and social spending in general has expanded considerably from 5.4% to 8.3% of GDP in two years. This includes a doubling of the cash transfer programme to poor households, a $474m increase in spending for housing, and other programmes for low-income families. Ecuador was hit hard by a 77% drop in the price of its oil exports from June 2008 to February 2009, as well as a decline in remittances from abroad. Nonetheless it has weathered the storm pretty well. Other unorthodox policies, in addition to the debt default, have helped Ecuador to stimulate its economy without running too low on reserves. Ecuador's currency is the US dollar, so that rules out using exchange rate policy and most monetary policy for counter-cyclical efforts in a recession - a significant handicap. Instead, Ecuador was able to cut deals with China for a billion-dollar advance payment for oil and another $1bn loan. The government also has begun requiring Ecuadorian banks to repatriate some of their reserves held abroad, expected to bring back another $1.2bn, and it has started repatriating $2.5bn in central bank reserves held abroad in order to finance another large stimulus package. Ecuador's growth will probably come in at about 1% this year, which is pretty good relative to most of the hemisphere. For example, Mexico, at the other end of the spectrum, is projected to have a 7.5% decline in GDP for 2009. The standard reporting and even quasi-academic analysis of Bolivia and Ecuador says they are victims of populist, socialist, "anti-American" governments - aligned with Venezuela's Hugo Ch?vez and Cuba, of course - and on the road to ruin. To be sure, both countries have many challenges ahead, the most important of which will be to implement economic strategies that can diversify and develop their economies over the long run. But they have made a good start so far, by giving the conventional wisdom of the economic and foreign policy establishment - in Washington and Europe - the respect it has earned. From suzannedk at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 04:33:14 2009 From: suzannedk at gmail.com (Suzanne de Kuyper) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 12:33:14 +0100 Subject: [A-List] Fwd: When the Dollar Rallies, the Market will Crash In-Reply-To: <1102811626179.1101807978350.23602.3.27114018@scheduler> References: <1102811626179.1101807978350.23602.3.27114018@scheduler> Message-ID: When Ben of the smiling bedroom eyes Bernake was new to his present job, I noticed the master illusionist identity noted in this article. The presicely clipped beard an half moon of grandfatherly wisdom enshrined in an impeccable business appearance. And those wide, over large, middle eastern almond shaped eyes (think Omar Shariff's eyes, oh, my) never slitted in concern or annoyance, radiating calm pleasure of being the inside track Specialty? The Great Depression. Credentials? Awesome. Cadence of speech, metronomic in balanced meter, the quality of the sounds, calm impeccable diction, enunciation precise, timbre, masculine calm, thrust of the word process consistantly assertive, no tremors of emotions or of age. And not one mention of the healing legislations and other actions that brought peace to a terrified nation and world in 1933, not one word. His side kick at the time, the handsome iron jawed counterpart, were two proponents of a one-sided coin, "Fool Everyone" Which is one of the many reasons I suggest the whole fiscal crisis was a complete set up. The valueless dollar wipes out the war debts to China and Japan and all the countries whose belief in the dollar currency allowed the U.S. debt to become obscene, it's wars internationally criminal. It truly seems that the fiscal crisi is birthing the U.S. Worl War Empire. Why else would G.M. be so openly contemptuous of it's Opel deal with the Merkel government? U.S. NATO is demonizing Russia as it has been, with the help of it's genocidal trusted partner Israel, demonizing Iran. Merkel and Germany are getting closer and closer to Russia. A natural ally and neighbor. Devil's Advocate or maybe not. Suzanne suzannedk at gmail.com A short comment I sent in the a-list never commented on by anyone. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Global Research E-Newsletter Date: Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 5:43 PM Subject: When the Dollar Rallies, the Market will Crash To: suzannedk at gmail.com When the Dollar Rallies, the Market will Crash By Mike Whitney URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15919 Global Research, November 4, 2009 Interest rates. The Fed does not need slinky women in plunging necklines to peddle money. All it needs is low interest rates. When rates are pushed lower than the rate of inflation, the Fed provides a subsidy for borrowing. This is not as hard to grasp as it sounds. If I offered to give you $1.00 for very 90 cents you gave me in return, you would buy as many dollars from me as you could. The Fed operates the same way. It generates market activity by creating incentives for borrowing. Borrowing leads to speculation, and speculation leads to steadily rising asset prices. This is how the game is played. The Fed is not an unbiased observer of free market activity. The Fed drives the market. It fuels speculation and controls behavior by fixing interest rates. When Lehman Bros flopped last year, markets went into freefall. A sharp correction turned into a full-blown panic. The bubble burst and trillions of dollars in credit vanished in a flash. Trading in exotic debt-instruments stopped overnight. A global sell-off ensued. Markets crashed. For a while, it looked like the whole system might collapse. The Fed's emergency intervention pulled the system back from the brink, but the economy is still wracked with deflation. Billions in toxic waste now clog the Fed's balance sheet. The dollar has fallen like a stone. When the financial system blows up and credit is sucked down a capital-hole, the economy goes into a downward spiral. Businesses slash inventory and lay off workers, workers have to cut back on spending and credit. That creates less demand for products, which leads to more lay offs. This is the vicious circle policymakers try to avoid. That's why Fed chair Ben Bernanke wheeled out the heavy artillery and launched the most aggressive central bank intervention in history. The Fed dropped rates to zero, but its Quantitative Easing (QE) program (which monetizes the debt) actually pushes rates even lower to roughly negative 2 percent. Bernanke has underwritten every sector of the financial system with government guarantees. He has provided full-value loans for dodgy collateral which is worth only a fraction of its original value. The market can no longer operate without the Fed. The Fed IS the market, which is why it is foolish to talk about a "recovery". The idea of recovery implies a free-standing system based on supply and demand. But, for now, the government provides the demand, which is why there is no market and no recovery. Analysts at Goldman Sachs sum it up like this: "How much of the rebound in real GDP was due to the fiscal stimulus, and where do we stand in terms of the effects of stimulus thus far? Although precise answers are impossible at this juncture, several aspects of the report are consistent with our estimates that the fiscal package enacted in mid-February as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) would have accounted for virtually all of the growth reported for the third quarter." ( http://www.zerohedge.com/article/hedging-their-bets) Positive growth is an illusion created by government spending. The economy is still flat on its back. Consumer spending and credit are in sharp decline. Unemployment is steadily rising (although at a slower pace) and wages are flatlining with a chance of falling for the first time in 30 years. Deflationary pressures are building. The talk of a "jobless recovery" is intentionally misleading. Jobs ARE recovery; therefore a jobless recovery merely points to asset-inflation brought on by erratic monetary policy. Surging stocks shouldn't be confused with a genuine recovery. The Fed faces stiff headwinds ahead. Low interest rates can have unintended consequences. The "cheapness" of the greenback has made the dollar the funding currency for the carry trade. Investors are borrowing low cost dollars and using them to purchase higher interest assets elsewhere. The process, which is rapidly escalating, is fraught with peril as economist Nouriel Roubini points out in an article in the Financial Times: "Since March there has been a massive rally in all sorts of risky assets... and an even bigger rally in emerging market asset classes (their stocks, bonds and currencies). At the same time, the dollar has weakened sharply, while government bond yields have gently increased but stayed low and stable... But while the US and global economy have begun a modest recovery, asset prices have gone through the roof since March in a major and synchronized rally... Risky asset prices have risen too much, too soon and too fast compared with macroeconomic fundamentals. So what is behind this massive rally? Certainly it has been helped by a wave of liquidity from near-zero interest rates and quantitative easing. But a more important factor fueling this asset bubble is the weakness of the US dollar, driven by the mother of all carry trades. The US dollar has become the major funding currency of carry trades as the Fed has kept interest rates on hold and is expected to do so for a long time. Investors who are shorting the US dollar to buy on a highly leveraged basis higher-yielding assets and other global assets are not just borrowing at zero interest rates in dollar terms; they are borrowing at very negative interest rates... Every investor who plays this risky game looks like a genius ? even if they are just riding a huge bubble financed by a large negative cost of borrowing... ...This policy feeds the global asset bubble it is also feeding a new US asset bubble... The reckless US policy that is feeding these carry trades is forcing other countries to follow its easy monetary policy... This is keeping short-term rates lower than is desirable... So the perfectly correlated bubble across all global asset classes gets bigger by the day. But one day this bubble will burst, leading to the biggest co-ordinated asset bust ever: if factors lead the dollar to reverse and suddenly appreciate... the leveraged carry trade will have to be suddenly closed as investors cover their dollar shorts. A stampede will occur as closing long leveraged risky asset positions across all asset classes funded by dollar shorts triggers a co-ordinated collapse of all those risky assets ? equities, commodities, emerging market asset classes and credit instruments." ("The Mother of all Carry Trades Faces an Inevitable Bust", Nouriel Roubini, Financial Times) Everyone who watches the market has noticed the inverse correlation of stocks to the dollar. When the dollar fades, stocks soar. And when the dollar strengthens, stocks plunge. Eventually, the dollar will reverse-course and stage a comeback, probably when Bernanke stops his printing operations. That will trigger the next severe correction which will burst bubbles across all asset classes. Bernanke's success in reflating sagging asset prices has depended entirely on interest rate manipulation and liquidity injections. There's been no effort to patch household balance sheets, increase production, or strengthen overall demand. It's a clever trick by a master illusionist, but it has its costs. When the dollar rallies, markets will crash. And Bernanke will be responsible. Please support Global Research Global Research relies on the financial support of its readers. Your endorsement is greatly appreciated Subscribe to the Global Research e-newsletter Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article. To become a Member of Global Research The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor at yahoo.com www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner. For media inquiries: crgeditor at yahoo.com ? Copyright Mike Whitney, Global Research, 2009 The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15919 ? Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca Web site engine by Polygraphx Multimedia ? Copyright 2005-2007 Forward email http://ui.constantcontact.com/sa/fwtf.jsp?m=1101807978350&ea=suzannedk%40gmail.com&a=1102811626179 This email was sent to suzannedk at gmail.com by crgeditor at yahoo.com. Update Profile/Email Address http://visitor.constantcontact.com/d.jsp?p=oo&v=001Y9XAqyV8VF0P5VFIo8dIEgRMYPodUcIXhUEb881xtaGqUdIRBE2-qF2QaT2UzpSkdqSucGWj5qo%3D Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe(TM) http://visitor.constantcontact.com/d.jsp?p=un&v=001Y9XAqyV8VF0P5VFIo8dIEgRMYPodUcIXhUEb881xtaGqUdIRBE2-qF2QaT2UzpSkdqSucGWj5qo%3D Privacy Policy: http://ui.constantcontact.com/roving/CCPrivacyPolicy.jsp Email Marketing by Constant Contact(R) www.constantcontact.com GLOBAL RESEARCH | v | Montreal | Canada -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 14058 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091107/39276fb6/attachment.txt From ioriwase at mail.mohawknationnews.com Sat Nov 7 09:44:55 2009 From: ioriwase at mail.mohawknationnews.com (Mohawk Nation News) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 11:44:55 -0500 Subject: [A-List] MNN Rotino'shonni:onwe Justice System Message-ID: <01dc3279$40124$0cc94895142593@xnote> ROTINO?SHONNI:ONWE JUSTICE SYSTEM MNN. Nov. 7, 2009. Colonial tyrants are always trying to undermine any nation and peoples who assert inherent sovereignty. They refuse to resolve differences by peaceful and lawful means. Where do we go for protection and intervention? We don?t have military might. We can and must defend our ideas on how we are equal and each has a voice. Kaianereh?ko:wa provides a formula for peace. Our way is about how we use our mind. We balance out the easy and the difficult, and sort out the real from the make-believe. Stretching our consciousness physically, emotionally, intellectually and spiritually takes vigilance. [Mann, Barbara Alice. Iroquoian Women, the Gantowisas. Peter Lang. NY. 2000]. Questioning and asking for proof is the basis of our thinking. We look for an extended meaning to everything. This is almost impossible in a corrupt bureaucracy of privilege, empty rhetoric, tyranny and a system based on military might. We carry out rightness and fairness with the advice, guidance and wisdom of the people as a whole, keeping in mind the continuity of the genealogical information, history, traditions and values of our people. We are all legal advocates of peace and morality. In our way the people decide the suitable fate of the accused. Victims put the case before the people. The families of the accused participate. It is investigated. The accused are heard before the Council fires of the men and women of their clan, the Council of their nation, as well as the Council of the Confederacy. Should a clan feel unable to deal with an issue, they may pass the issue to other clans. Depending on the issue, the Six Nations Confederacy serves as a forum of appeal from individual and community issues that cannot be resolved at the community level. A decision is made. Decisions have to be justified, rational and follow the criteria and process of the Kaianereh?ko:wa. The accused have to answer to the people, their victims and their own families. Depending on the offense, the perpetrators are not jailed or could be banished. The families of the accused are held responsible for the damage they have caused. They help to compensate the injured. The defendant loses their voice only after a final decision. The four principles of Indigenous conduct are: first is natural law; second is truth as the highest point of being and justice when truth is applied to all matters; third is applying respect to all matters; and fourth is liberty and peace based on the first three principles. Those who do not follow the Kaianerehkowa have consciously converted to a foreign dogma, like the Camel Toe Treaty cult at Akwesasne or the band/tribal council system. They do not respect the Rotinoshonni:onwe as their political allegiance is to a foreign entity. [Wampum 58]. As aliens, they should be turned over to the colonial system. When Rotinol?shonni:onwe stray from the herd, it is only a matter of time before they are consumed by their colonial predators. The Kaianereh?ko:wa is scientific, based on our understanding of the natural world. Fascist rules are not legal or natural! They are created by a few to enslave the rest and steal or control all the resources. When people adhere to man-made doctrines based on greed and on illusions that cannot be proven, they are submitting to dishonesty, slavery or death. We must weigh all the objective realties and collectively become of one mind. [Splitting-the-Sky. Nov. 7, 2009]. We have to stay true to our roots or we will be driven off the path. Unfortunately many of our people have turned their backs on us and given up the struggle for our land which we hold for the future generations. They grab at the pie in the sky instead of remaining true to the Kaianereh?ko:wa. We have to use the criteria of peace, righteousness and power, to get the full picture. Especially we must listen to those we know and trust, who have extensive experience and who are or have been on the front lines. That's how we stay out of the colonial wilderness. We should be suspicious of strangers or dogmas asserted without proof that suddenly appear in our midst and offer false hope. They?ll say everything we want to hear and then they?ll stick it to us. They pose as Mohawks but usually answer to some foreign intel agency. These serpents in the grass are among us to divert, confuse and gather information. Kahentinetha MNN Mohawk Nation News, www.mohawknationnews.com kahentinetha2 at yahoo.com Note: Your financial help is needed and appreciated. Please send your donations by check or money order to ?MNN Mohawk Nation News?, Box 991, Kahnawake [Quebec, Canada] J0L 1B0. Or go to PayPal on MNN website. Nia:wen thank you very much. Go to MNN CULTURE category for more stories; New MNN Books Available now! From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 7 12:58:19 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 19:58:19 -0000 Subject: [A-List] real news Message-ID: <29309D36043F459398AD6EF345069DDC@home9sg93n9r5y> improved reception -- JD http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=4431 From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 7 13:09:59 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 20:09:59 -0000 Subject: [A-List] WALL STREET JOURNAL : Zelaya Says Honduras Deal Is Off, as Election Nears Message-ID: WALL STREET JOURNAL NOVEMBER 7, 2009. Zelaya Says Honduras Deal Is Off, as Election Nears By JOSE DE CORDOBA Ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya on Friday pulled out of an agreement that was supposed to solve the country's political crisis, leaving the next moves to voters in a presidential election on Nov. 29 -- and to Latin American leaders who will have to decide whether to accept the winner. "This deal is dead. The other side has failed to uphold their end," said Mr. Zelaya in a radio interview Friday. His move followed the Honduran Congress's failure to vote this week on reinstating him. Associated Press Honduras's ousted leader Manuel Zelaya, at the Brazil Embassy in Tegucigalpa, Friday, said a crisis pact was dead. . Mr. Zelaya and the interim government, led by President Roberto Micheletti, agreed a week ago to create a government of national unity and let the country's Congress decide on the issue of Mr. Zelaya's return to office, which has been the central issue of the crisis since he was removed on June 28. In return, the U.S., in what was a policy turnaround, said it would recognize this month's election even if Congress didn't return Mr. Zelaya to power, and would lift economic sanctions Washington had placed on Honduras, one of the hemisphere's poorest countries. After Mr. Zelaya's statement Friday, a U.S. State Department spokesman said the U.S. didn't consider the agreement to be dead. "Both sides need to return to the table and negotiate the formation of a national unity government," the spokesman said. Mr. Zelaya made his intention to withdraw from the agreement obvious late Thursday when he didn't submit a list of candidates for a unity government. Earlier, Mr. Micheletti's cabinet ministers had tendered their resignations to pave the way for the new government. On Friday morning, U.S. diplomats made a last-ditch, failed attempt to get Mr. Zelaya to submit names, according to a person close to the negotiations. U.S. officials had hoped that Honduras's Congress would reinstate Mr. Zelaya until his term ends in January in order to secure widespread international recognition for the election. But as days passed, it became clear Honduras' Congress was in no mood for a quick return of the controversial leader. It put off a vote and said it would wait for decisions on the legality of Mr. Zelaya's restitution from the country's Supreme Court and other institutions. Mr. Micheletti is likely to gain from the latest fracas. The Micheletti government, along with many Hondurans, says elections represent the best way out of the crisis, which has turned Honduras into an international pariah. If Mr. Zelaya's return does come to a vote in Congress, he is likely to lose. He would be facing the same legislators who on June 28 voted overwhelmingly to replace him. Mr. Zelaya's Liberal Party, which has a majority in Congress, is now split, while Honduras's other major party, the Nationalist Party -- whose candidate now is expected to win the election -- is solidly anti-Zelaya. Mr. Zelaya's withdrawal from the accord could put the U.S. at loggerheads with a number of Latin American countries who are insisting that the ousted president be restored to power as a necessary part of any political settlement in Honduras. Most of these countries, such as Nicaragua and Bolivia, are closely allied to Venezuela's President Hugo Ch?vez, Mr. Zelaya's most vocal supporter. But hemispheric heavyweight Brazil, which is increasingly seeking a higher profile role in Latin America, is also among the countries loudly demanding Mr. Zelaya's return. Mr. Zelaya was forced from the country by the army at the end of June after the Supreme Court ruled that he violated the constitution by trying to promote a referendum that critics said was aimed at keeping him in power beyond his term. Mr. Zelaya denies that was his intention. Republican Sen. Jim DeMint lifted a hold Thursday he had placed on two key Obama administration nominees to top Latin American posts. Mr. DeMint placed the holds because the State Department had suggested it might not recognize election results if Mr. Zelaya wasn't returned to power. The legislator said he had received assurances from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the U.S. would recognize the outcome of the elections "regardless of whether Manuel Zelaya is reinstated." Write to Jose de Cordoba at jose.decordoba at wsj.com Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A9 From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 7 13:23:33 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 20:23:33 -0000 Subject: [A-List] State Department's position on Honduras Message-ID: <5FD2384F3E584A42A93FEFF83B36107C@home9sg93n9r5y> For people with the stomach to try to figure out the State Department's position on Honduras, the ever-informative Honduras Coup 2009 blog has links to the transcript and video of yesterday's press briefing, along with analysis and key excerpts: http://hondurascoup2009.blogspot.com/2009/11/more-from-ian-kelleys-daily-press.html -- ================================================== David L. Wilson * Co-author, The Politics of Immigration: Questions & Answers: http://thepoliticsofimmigration.org Subscribe to the NY Activist Calendar; send a blank email to: nycalendar-subscribe at lists.riseup.net For online calendar, visit https://lists.riseup.net/www/arc/nycalendar ================================================== _______________________________________________ Lasolidarity mailing list Post: Lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasolidarity From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Sat Nov 7 20:14:21 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 12:14:21 +0900 Subject: [A-List] Credit as a Public Utility Message-ID: <20091108121421.41b0ea75.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> The Key to Monetary Reform by Richard C Cook Global Research (May 26 2007) We live in an era of deregulation, where economists and politicians speak of "the market", not government, as the appropriate vehicle for economic decisions. President Ronald Reagan said in his 1981 inaugural address, "Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem". This attitude has defined the US approach since then, including the Clinton years, when even a Democratic administration cut the size of the federal bureaucracy and tried to reduce its impact. The laissez-faire attitude has continued under President George W Bush, though resistance is appearing from the Democratic majority elected to Congress in 2006 with respect to selected issues such as the high cost of student loans. But if market-based economics is so wonderful, why do we have stagnating employee incomes, rapidly increasing control of wealth by the very rich, a middle class in decline, growing poverty, collapse of our manufacturing job base, a bursting housing bubble, resurgent commodity inflation, soaring but shaky stock prices, a trillion dollar war in the Middle East financed by runaway deficit spending, and capital markets dominated by predatory equity and hedge funds? Why and how has "the market" done so much damage to the many while enriching the few? On top of everything else is the exponential growth of debt. American households today are deeper in debt than at any time in history. So is the federal government. So are state and local governments. So is business. The only ones not in debt are the financial institutions and their controllers to whom everyone else owes money. Maybe this is what is really meant by "the market". Total US societal debt has been reliably estimated at $48 trillion dollars and growing. If we assume, on the low side, that the cost of this debt is six percent interest per year, that's about $3 trillion per year in interest payments alone. This is equivalent to almost a quarter of the entire US gross domestic product. It doesn't even count the repayment of the principle on the loans where repayment reduces the available purchasing power, thus making new loans constantly necessary. Debt is an albatross around the neck of every citizen and resident, every man, woman, and child. Things have become worse since 2005 when Congress passed a much more onerous bankruptcy law at the urging of the financial industry. Some types of debt, such as student loans and taxes, can never be forgiven. And as the debt ripples through the economy it makes everything else more expensive and turns individual financial problems into crises. It affects people's health, keeps them up at night with worry, and even drives many to alcohol, legal or illegal drugs, or even suicide. Worldwide, economic stresses and the need to constantly work harder and find new sources of income just to survive contribute to tension among nations and increase the chances of war or terrorism. Is this really the legacy of the most highly developed and productive economy in the history of the world? Hasn't something gone terribly wrong? Credit as a Public Utility In other recent reports the author has analyzed the structural causes whereby a developed economy like that of the US fails to generate sufficient purchasing power through wages, salaries, and dividends to balance the cumulative prices of goods and services. In order to compensate, nations have historically attempted to generate trade surpluses to boost their income earnings, often resulting in international rivalries and war. Over the last several decades, the US, with its chronic negative trade balance, has compensated for the gap between purchasing power and prices with debt of all types and in all sectors of the economy, both private and public. One effect of this general debt policy has been "dollar hegemony", whereby the dollars sent abroad to purchase products from countries like China come back in investment by the Chinese and other governments in the Treasury bonds that float the federal budget deficit. In his reports, the author has proposed a series of monetary reform initiatives that are based on the idea that credit, properly conceived, should be viewed as a public utility like water or electricity, not the exclusive private domain of the financial industry. Given the high degree of interest by readers in these ideas, the author has concluded that a more in-depth explanation of credit is needed. In particular, the author wishes to show that the concept of credit as a public utility is not a new idea. In fact it is inherent in the notion of a republic, a commonwealth of citizens, under which the US was founded, as well as other forms of government throughout history. What is really anomalous is not the idea that credit should be viewed as a public, not a private heritage, but that the notion of the private ownership of credit to be allocated under "market" conditions ever should have gained so much credence in the first place. Overview of the History of Credit from Ancient Times through the Bank of England The free market ideology current in the US and, increasingly, in other Western nations which today are losing touch with their former social democratic history, is the most extreme expression of private versus public control of community life anywhere in the world in the last 6,000 years. From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sun Nov 8 06:36:13 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:36:13 -0000 Subject: [A-List] [Hemispheric Brief] "Rethinking the Honduran Deal" Message-ID: <59E33D4A4C1840329CD6B140578CBE6D@home9sg93n9r5y> [Hemispheric Brief] "Rethinking the Honduran Deal" ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [Hemispheric Brief] "Rethinking the Honduran Deal" From: "J.F. String" Date: Sat, November 7, 2009 4:44 pm To: hemisphericdailybriefings at googlegroups.com My colleague and longtime Central America scholar David Holiday has written some thought-provoking reflections on Honduras following the disappointments of the last few days. I am cross-posting here at Hemispheric Brief. I encourage additional comments and/or further reactions from others who have been following the Honduran crisis over the last four months. For more, check out Davids blog, Central America and beyond. -jfs Rethinking the Honduras Deal David Holiday Where to start in commenting on Honduras? The Economist piece cited in Josh's news summary today was on the money in its skepticism of the deal. Many of the rest of us, naively thinking that the Administration knew what it was doing when it declared victory with the Accord, were wrong. There was so much "constructive ambiguity" to how this deal would play out that there were far too many loopholes. I thought that the Administration (and Shannon) would not have touted an accord if they didn't think Zelaya would not be restored to power, if they didn't think that there were the votes in Congress to do this. That's clearly the argument that Shannon used to persuade Zelaya to sign this. Indeed, on Friday, October 30th, the day after the accord, Shannon responded to the question about whether we might reach Nov. 29th elections with Micheletti still in power: There is not a timeline for the congress to take a decision and the negotiators were very clear on this. In fact, last night, Mr. Zelayas chief negotiator came out and said that the commission could not impose a timeline on the congress because it was an independent institution. But there is a political dynamic here and a political imperative for the congress to move quickly on this decision. It??Ts just not something that can be ignored in the short term. Granted, we all knew that there was no timeline, but statements like this plus reports from those close to Zelaya, indicated that there was reason to think that something would happen in Congress very quickly. That the National Party would see it in its interests to vote to return Zelaya to a basically powerless, caretaker post for a couple of months. My own reaction to the accord was too much influenced by the often-times synchronized nature of accords -- if one side does one thing, the other side responds. Like Zelaya, I looked at the accord and saw Nov. 5 as D-Day -- because why would Zelaya supporters deem to integrate a government of national unity and reconciliation if Zelaya were not restored to power? (Zelaya took logic that a step further -- the swearing in of a new and legitimate cabinet requires a legitimate president, i.e., Zelaya, to do the job.) Clearly we were not alone in this interpretation. In recent days, Lagos was clear that the return of Zelaya had to be part of the solution. On Tuesday, OAS Secretary General Insulza said: "La ??nica salida de paz es restablecer al Presidente (Manuel) Zelaya por el escaso tiempo que le queda en la presidencia.... "Yo espero que [el congreso] lo hagan pronto. No creo que lo vayan a hacer hoy d??a, pero lo ideal ser??a que lo hicieran ya." The accord just doesn't make sense from Zelaya's perspective unless he expected to be restored by Nov. 5th. It makes sense that Zelaya would not want to legitimate a "unity government" by sending hisrepresentatives to participate before he was restored to power. And now that they are not there, the only way he would (and should) accept being restored to power is to redesign the entire cabinet. And what are the chances of that happening? I realize this would be largely symbolic, as his own presidency would have been at this point, but such symbolism is incredibly important -- the symbolism of allowing a country to throw out a president, and getting away with it by simply holding elections and moving on. We started getting inklings of a far different interpretation of what we could expect to happen when Tom Shannon was quoted on CNN en Espanol a couple of days ago. (By the way, was that really the appropriate venue to finally be crystal clear about the US position?). In that 6-minute interview, Shannon clarified that Zelaya's return to power had nothing to do with the "unity government" or the elections -- that elections could happen without Zelaya's return, and the US would be okay with that. "Officially, whatever happens in this process, the United States will recognize what happens on the 29th?" the CNN reporter asked Shannon (my translation). "Si - exactamente," replied Shannon. At the same time, we now know that there were, in fact, incentives for the State Department's position. Indeed, The Hill reported last night that Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) released the hold on Shannon and Valenzuela's nominations, noting: Secretary Clinton and Assistant Secretary [of Western Hemisphere Affairs Tom] Shannon have assured me that the U.S. will recognize the outcome of the Honduran elections regardless of whether Manuel Zelaya is reinstated. I take our administration at their word that they will now side with the Honduran people and end their focus on the disgraced Zelaya. Today we have word that, no sooner had DeMint's hold been lifted on Shannon, than was another one placed by Senator George Lemieux (newly appointed Florida Republican to replace Mel Martinez). According an email circulating from DC advocacy groups, he has done so "at the behest of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC, which is still furious over Secretary Shannon's impeccable handling of the Cuba OAS resolution earlier this year." What's clear now is that this wasn't the great deal it was hyped up to be -- rather, it was a high-stakes poker game, and Zelaya got snookered. The US didn't "broker" or mediate this deal. All it did was weigh in one specific point about what the process would be to potentially return Zelaya to power -- i.e., send it to Congress, not the Supreme Court. Most all the other points were hardly different than what had been agreed upon weeks, if not months, ago. Now that the Guaymuras Accord has failed, it's the US government with egg on its face. The State Department's defines sucess as the mere fact that it had persuaded everyone to come to an agreement about the rules of this poker game. Who wins or loses would be beside the point -- and so it's time to declare victory and move on. In its hasty zeal to reach an agreement, and end a diplomatic headache, the State Department has given us "diplomacy on the cheap" (as one former US diplomat referred to it a few weeks ago) and a fundamentally worse situation. Why? The Economist (and one has to credit Michael Reid here) called it right when it predicted what would happen if Congress delayed: ...the united front against the coup in the outside world may buckle. The United States, which has already reopened its visa office in Tegucigalpa, the capital, appears willing to recognise the elections whether or not Congress votes to restore Mr Zelaya. But most of Latin America is unlikely to follow suit unless Mr Zelaya is reinstated before the ballot??"especially since the head of the electoral tribunal says that anyone calling for a boycott will be jailed. In addition to the ALBA countries, I think you can add Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Chile to the list of countries who do not recognize these elections, for starters. So hemispheric unity was shortlived, and the OAS will be more divided than before. Something else will have to budge to change this situation, as I rather doubt the US will be able to muster the two-thirds' vote needed to remove Honduras' suspension from the OAS. This is successful US diplomacy? And the consequences of this for Honduras? Again, the Economist: The army, having submitted to civilian authority for the past decade or more, has re-emerged as a political actor. An old-established two-party system is giving way to a far more polarising class divide. And the rule of law has been circumvented by both sides. ??oThis is the repetition of 100 years of Honduran history,??? says Mr D??az Arrivillaga. ??oIt??Ts the same ghosts: stopping communism, selective violations of human rights, constitutional breaches, and agreements among elites and caudillos sponsored by the United States. It??Ts nothing new.??? In one of the poorest countries in the region, that lack of novelty is all the more depressing. I fear we're in for months, if not years, of continued social and political conflict and unrest. -- Posted By J.F. String to Hemispheric Brief at 11/07/2009 01:29:00 PM --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hemisphericdailybriefings" group. To post to this group, send email to hemisphericdailybriefings at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hemisphericdailybriefings+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hemisphericdailybriefings?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- Lasolidarity mailing list Post: Lasolidarity at lists.mayfirst.org List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/lasolidarity From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sun Nov 8 06:46:46 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:46:46 -0000 Subject: [A-List] [Hemispheric Brief] "Rethinking the Honduran Deal" -- omission (apologies) Message-ID: RE: [Hemispheric Brief] "Rethinking the Honduran Deal" -- omission (apologies) I think this deserves cross posting. The present Honduran situation vis-a-vis the US in some ways resembles that of Ireland vis-a-vis Britain (then known as England) from the broken promises of the Home Rule crisis, 1910 on, to the slippery "truce by ordeal" which inevitably brought on a bloody civil war and partition. We used to refer in this context to "perfidious Albion", but US imperialism is repeating the moves. I think it is a mistake to see Micheletti as using a naive, good willed Disneyesque US. Rather, in these crafty maneuvers it makes more sense to see the US as using Micheletti, and as set to face down the pro-Zelaya Latin American states -- by further coups if possible. -- JD From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Sun Nov 8 07:19:23 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:19:23 -0000 Subject: [A-List] Chavez, who from the start condemned the negotiating track led by Costa Rican president Arias as a trap, will be vindicated Message-ID: Saturday, November 07, 2009 Why the Guaymuras Accord is a lost cause, and other Saturday morning musings Even if the parties were to go back to the negotiating table, it is quite clear that the Honduran Congress will not agree to reverse their June 28 acceptance of Zelaya's resignation letter (that's right - that would be the letter with the fake Zelaya signature) anytime soon. As I argued yesterday, that's a clear precondition for moving forward with the unity government. Lucia Newman, Aljazeera International's Latin America editor (and a respected former CNN correspondent and past winner of Maria Cabot Moors prize) noted Thursday: "There is a lot that has not been worked out; the most important point is whether or not [Zelaya] the deposed president will be returned to power [before elections scheduled for November 29]. I can tell you that the way the numbers look, it does not look good for Zelaya." And Tim Padgett has a quote from Pepe Lobo in the piece he filed yesterday for Time that demonstrates how hard it will be to push this back: "Micheletti and Zelaya made a pact, and as long as that pact is carried out the world has to recognize the elections as valid," he says. "So at this point, what does it matter which of them is in office when the election is held?" Lobo also knows that as long as the vote is sanctioned by the U.S., from whom Honduras gets the lion's share of its trade and aid, he needn't lose too much sleep over the fact that the rest of the world will probably still refuse to recognize his election if Zelaya is not restored. Other random readings this morning include the New York Times editorial , which has so many errors of fact and misinterpretation it's almost not worth reading. Rosemary Joyce laughs and cries at the State Department spokesperson's attempt to explain the inexplicable and defend the indefensible. For my money, the best editorials are always to be found in the Los Angeles Times, as in this Thursday editorial. In addition to OAS Secretary General Insulza's strong comments yesterday about the need to restore Zelaya, only Bloomberg (also consistently reliable source of information) appears to report on the call by the foreign ministers of the Rio Group (a group of 23 Latin American and some Caribbean countries that notably does not include the U.S. or Canada, but does include key US allies such as Colombia, Mexico and Peru) that Zelaya's restitution is "imperative" and an "indispensable requirement." Will Stibbens, Al Jazeera International's Washington Bureau Chief (and former Latin America regional editor of the the Associated Press Television Network) has a worthwhile editorial proclaiming the Honduran "oligarchy" to be the clear winners of this process so far. As for Zelaya: After a bold and deft campaign to regain power, and with the prize within his grasp, he committed a critical, strategic blunder. Zelaya believed that it would be enough to sacrifice his social project, and the mass movement that backed it, to convince his political enemies to restore him to the presidency. His representatives signed an agreement that categorically forbids the convening of a national constituent assembly, or any other form of popular referendum on the constitution, but without a written guarantee of a return to power for Zelaya. That was left up to the congress, who appear poised, in the face of US indifference, to deny him even this hollow victory. As for other winners and losers, Stibbens continues: What could have been a diplomatic victory for Washington, is now looking like another example of its clumsiness, which will end up exacerbating ideological divisions. If the agreement does collapse there will be repercussions, and collateral damage, throughout the region. Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan president who from the start condemned the negotiating track led by Costa Rican president Oscar Arias as a trap, will be vindicated. From nscchicago at igc.org Sat Nov 7 18:17:28 2009 From: nscchicago at igc.org (NSC WORKERS COOP) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 19:17:28 -0600 Subject: [A-List] HONDURAS - POST "AGREEMENT" Message-ID: Tom Baker here and the scam for the oligarchy is just another tool, respect for nothing We know by now that even the US arm wrestled "agreement" has fallen apart; there is none. The follownig are reports and statements - from the National Front of Resistance - from Zelaya . - from Tegus (Tegucigalpa, Tegus) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/html Size: 1347 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091107/4e91125f/attachment.txt -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/bmp Size: 1036854 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091107/4e91125f/attachment-0001.bin -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Panama Vicente Alba Subject: Fw: IFCO/Pastors for Peace Update on Honduras: President Zelaya Withdraws from the "Tegucigalpa/San Jose Agreement" The Struggle continues!! Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 18:47:47 -0800 (PST) Size: 6637 Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20091107/4e91125f/attachment-0004.eml From tal1 at cogeco.ca Sun Nov 8 09:40:14 2009 From: tal1 at cogeco.ca (Tony B.) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:40:14 -0500 Subject: [A-List] UN Affirms Goldstone Report Message-ID: <9213DEAAE23E448C94FAB2DF3AEFD9E9@TonyPC> U.N. Affirms Israeli-Hamas War Crimes Report By Thalif Deen November 06, 2009 -- UNITED NATIONS, Nov 5 (IPS) - A 575-page blistering report by Justice Richard Goldstone detailing war crimes in Gaza last December is refusing to die despite an aggressive Israeli smear campaign to kill it. The report, which was favourably voted by the 47-member Human Rights Council in Geneva last month, received overwhelming support Thursday in the 192-member General Assembly. The vote was 114 in favour and 18 against, with 44 abstentions. The 18 countries that voted against the resolution included the United States, Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and Israel. Ambassador Riyad Mansour, Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations, singled out Ireland, one of the few Western nations to vote for the resolution, for "supporting" it. He also noted that a "sizeable number of European nations" abstained on the resolution. Among the abstentions were Britain, France, Norway, Sweden, Spain, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Denmark and Greece. "The General Assembly sent a powerful message," he told reporters, adding that if Israelis do not comply, "We will go after them." The Assembly requested Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to report within three months on the implementation of the resolution. Among other things, the resolution calls upon both the Israelis and the Palestinians to undertake independent investigations of their own on the serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights laws during the 22-day conflict in Gaza in December. Still, Mansour said he rejects any equation of the "occupying power's aggression and crimes with actions committed in response by the Palestinian side". "We wish to clearly reaffirm that there is absolutely no symmetry or proportionality between the occupier and the occupied," he added. U.S. Ambassador Alejandro Wolff rejected the Goldstone report as "deeply flawed" and "unbalanced". He said the United States was fully committed to a two-state solution - Israel and Palestine - and will do nothing to hinder it. Last month, the 15-member Security Council debated the report but refused to take a vote primarily because of the opposition by the United States, a veto-wielding member of the Council. In Geneva, the Human Rights Council endorsed the report last month by a vote of 25 in favour, six against, 11 abstentions and five no-shows. The report was also the subject of a vote Tuesday by the U.S. House of Representatives, traditionally sympathetic towards Israel. That vote, condemning the report, was 344 in favour and 36 against. Nadia Hijab, senior fellow at the Washington-based Institute for Palestine Studies, told IPS the importance of the Goldstone Report is evident given the amount of effort Israel, the United States and their allies are investing in trying to bury it. She said irrespective of the strength or weakness of the General Assembly resolution, the report is important because of its very existence. Not only does it provide an authoritative basis for Palestinians seeking reparations and accountability, but it also puts the world on notice that international law must be upheld and impunity must end, she said. "It's simply not going to go away," said Hijab. The report, authored by a four-member international fact-finding mission headed by Justice Richard Goldstone, details war crimes charges against both Israel and the Palestinian militant group Hamas. The mission, and specifically Goldstone, has been politically crucified by pro-Israeli groups in the United States. The U.N. mission recommended that the Security Council require Israel to report to it, within the next six months, on investigations and prosecutions it should carry out with regard to the violations cited in the report. During the ruthless military operation, codenamed 'Operation Cast Lead,' the Israelis destroyed houses, factories, wells, schools, hospitals, police stations and other public buildings. The number of Palestinian killed during the conflict is estimated at between 1,387 and 1,417, mostly civilians, compared with four Israeli fatal casualties in southern Israel and nine soldiers killed during fighting, four of whom died as a result of friendly fire. The report also recommended that the Security Council set up its own body of independent experts to report to it on the progress of the Israeli investigations and prosecutions. "If the expert's reports do not indicate within six months that good faith, independent proceedings are taking place, the Security Council should refer the situation in Gaza to the Prosecutor in the International Criminal Court (ICC)," the report recommended. Hijab told IPS the Goldstone Report has already had an impact on the Israeli-Palestinian scene. "It will ensure that henceforth the Israeli state as well as Palestinian armed groups are more careful about the use of force," she said. In addition, she said, the initial misguided attempt by the leaders of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Palestinian Authority (PA) to "postpone" consideration has strengthened the hand of political parties and civil society in setting limits on how far the PA/PLO can go in their alliance with the U.S. and its erosion of Palestinian human rights. In short, the Goldstone Report has had a significant before it even reached the General Assembly, and it continues to be discussed the world over, Hijab declared. From tal1 at cogeco.ca Sun Nov 8 09:43:30 2009 From: tal1 at cogeco.ca (Tony B.) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:43:30 -0500 Subject: [A-List] Breaking the Australian Silence Message-ID: <5C800BACD9254370AAF6E01979A2B797@TonyPC> Breaking the Australian Silence In a speech at the Sydney Opera House to mark his award of Australia's human rights prize, the Sydney Peace Prize, John Pilger describes the "unique features" of a political silence in Australia: how it affects the national life of his homeland and the way Australians see the world and are manipulated by great power "which speaks through an invisible government of propaganda that subdues and limits our political imagination and ensures we are always at war -- against our own first people and those seeking refuge, or in someone else's country". By John Pilger November 06, 2009 ""Information Clearing House" -- -Thank you all for coming tonight, and my thanks to the City of Sydney and especially to the Sydney Peace Foundation for awarding me the Peace Prize. It's an honour I cherish, because it comes from where I come from. I am a seventh generation Australian. My great-great grandfather landed not far from here, on November 8th, 1821. He wore leg irons, each weighing four pounds. His name was Francis McCarty. He was an Irishman, convicted of the crime of insurrection and "uttering unlawful oaths". In October of the same year, an 18 year old girl called Mary Palmer stood in the dock at Middlesex Gaol and was sentenced to be transported to New South Wales for the term of her natural life. Her crime was stealing in order to live. Only the fact that she was pregnant saved her from the gallows. She was my great-great grandmother. She was sent from the ship to the Female Factory at Parramatta, a notorious prison where every third Monday, male convicts were brought for a "courting day" -- a rather desperate measure of social engineering. Mary and Francis met that way and were married on October 21st, 1823. Growing up in Sydney, I knew nothing about this. My mother's eight siblings used the word "stock" a great deal. You either came from "good stock" or "bad stock". It was unmentionable that we came from bad stock - that we had what was called "the stain". One Christmas Day, with all of her family assembled, my mother broached the subject of our criminal origins, and one of my aunts almost swallowed her teeth. "Leave them dead and buried, Elsie!" she said. And we did - until many years later and my own research in Dublin and London led to a television film that revealed the full horror of our "bad stock". There was outrage. "Your son," my aunt Vera wrote to Elsie, "is no better than a damn communist". She promised never to speak to us again. The Australian silence has unique features. Growing up, I would make illicit trips to La Perouse and stand on the sandhills and look at people who were said to have died off. I would gape at the children of my age, who were said to be dirty, and feckless. At high school, I read a text book by the celebrated historian, Russel Ward, who wrote: "We are civilized today and they are not." "They", of course, were the Aboriginal people. My real Australian education began at the end of the 1960s when Charlie Perkins and his mother, Hetti, took me to the Aboriginal compound at Jay Creek in the Northern Territory. We had to smash down the gate to get in. The shock at what I saw is unforgettable. The poverty. The sickness. The despair. The quiet anger. I began to recognise and understand the Australian silence. Tonight, I would like to talk about this silence: about how it affects our national life, the way we see the world, and the way we are manipulated by great power which speaks through an invisible government of propaganda that subdues and limits our political imagination and ensures we are always at war - against our own first people and those seeking refuge, or in someone else's country. Last July, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said this, and I quote: "It's important for us all to remember here in Australia that Afghanistan has been a training ground for terrorists worldwide, a training ground also for terrorists in South-East-Asia, reminding us of the reasons that we are in the field of combat and reaffirming our resolve to remain committed to that cause." There is no truth in this statement. It is the equivalent of his predecessor John Howard's lie that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Shortly before Kevin Rudd made that statement, American planes bombed a wedding party in Afghanistan. At least sixty people were blown to bits, including the bride and groom and many children. That's the fifth wedding party attacked, in our name. The prime minister was standing outside a church on a Sunday morning when he made his statement. No reporter challenged him. No one said the war was a fraud: that it began as an American vendetta following 9/11, in which not a single Afghan was involved. No one put it to Kevin Rudd that our perceived enemy in Afghanistan were introverted tribesmen who had no quarrel with Australia and didn't give a damn about south-east Asia and just wanted the foreign soldiers out of their country. Above all, no one said: "Prime Minister, There is no war on terror. It's a hoax. But there is a war of terror waged by governments, including the Australian government, in our name." That wedding party, Prime Minister, was blown to bits by one the latest smart weapons, such as the Hellfire bomb that sucks the air out of the lungs. In our name. During the first world war, the British prime minister David Lloyd George confided to the editor of the Manchester Guardian: "If people really knew [the truth], the war would be stopped tomorrow. But of course they don't know and they can't know." What has changed? Quite a lot actually. As people have become more aware, propaganda has become more sophisticated. One of the founders of modern propaganda was Edward Bernays, an American who believed that people in free societies could be lied to and regimented without them realising. He invented a euphemism for propaganda -- "public relations", or PR. "What matters," he said, "is the illusion." Like Kevin Rudd's stage-managed press conferences outside his church, what matters is the illusion. The symbols of Anzac are constantly manipulated in this way. Marches. Medals. Flags. The pain of a fallen soldier's family. Serving in the military, says the prime minister, is Australia's highest calling. The squalor of war, the killing of civilians has no reference. What matters is the illusion. The aim is to ensure our silent complicity in a war of terror and in a massive increase in Australia's military arsenal. Long range cruise missiles are to be targeted at our neighbours. The Rudd government and the Pentagon have launched a competition to build military robots which, it is said, will do the "army's dirty work" in "urban combat zones". What urban combat zones? What dirty work? Silence. "I confess," wrote Lord Curzon, viceroy of India, over a century ago, "that countries are pieces on a chessboard upon which is being played out a great game for the domination of the world." We Australians have been in the service of the Great Game for a very long time. Do the young people who wrap themselves in the flag at Gallipoli every April understand that only the lies have changed - that sanctifying blood sacrifice in colonial invasions is meant to prepare us for the next one?? When Prime Minister Robert Menzies sent Australian soldiers to Vietnam in the 1960s, he described them as a 'training team', requested by a beleaguered government in Saigon. It was a lie. A senior official of the Department of External affairs wrote this secret truth: "Although we have stressed the fact publicly that our assistance was given in response to an invitation by the government of South Vietnam, our offer was in fact made following a request from the United States government." Two versions. One for us, one for them. Menzies spoke incessantly about "the downward thrust of Chinese communism". What has changed? Outside the church, Kevin Rudd said we were in Afghanistan to stop another downward thrust. Both were lies. During the Vietnam war, the Department of Foreign Affairs made a rare complaint to Washington. They complained that the British knew more about America's objectives than its committed Australian ally. An assistant secretary of state replied. "We have to inform the British to keep them on side," he said. "You are with us, come what may." How many more wars are we to be suckered into before we break our silence? How many more distractions must we, as a people, endure before we begin the job of righting the wrongs in our own country? "It's time we sang from the world's rooftops," said Kevin Rudd in opposition, "[that] despite Iraq, America is an overwhelming force for good in the world [and] I look forward to working with the great American democracy, the arsenal of freedom .". Since the second world war, the arsenal of freedom has overthrown 50 governments, including democracies, and crushed some 30 liberation movements. Millions of people all over the world have been driven out of their homes and subjected to crippling embargos. Bombing is as American as apple pie. In his acceptance of the 2005 Nobel Prize for Literature, Harold Pinter asked this question: "Why is the systematic brutality, the widespread atrocities, the ruthless suppression of independent thought of Stalinist Russia well known in the West while American criminal actions never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it never happened. It didn't matter. It was of no interest." In Australia, we are trained to respect this censorship by omission. An invasion is not an invasion if "we" do it. Terror is not terror if "we" do it. A crime is not a crime if "we" commit it. It didn't happen. Even while it was happening it didn't happen. It didn't matter. It was of no interest. In the arsenal of freedom we have two categories of victims. The innocent people killed in the Twin Towers were worthy victims. The innocent people killed by Nato bombers in Afghanistan are unworthy victims. Israelis are worthy. Palestinians are unworthy. It gets complicated. Kurds who rose against Saddam Hussein were worthy. But Kurds who rise against the Turkish regime are unworthy. Turkey is a member of Nato. They're in the arsenal of freedom. The Rudd government justifies its proposals to spend billions on weapons by referring to what the Pentagon calls an "arc of instability" that stretches across the world. Our enemies are apparently everywhere -- from China to the Horn of Africa. In fact, an arc of instability does indeed stretch across the world and is maintained by the United States. The US Air Force calls this "full spectrum dominance". More than 800 American bases are ready for war. These bases protect a system that allows one per cent of humanity to control 40 per cent of wealth: a system that bails out just one bank with $180 billion - that's enough to eliminate malnutrition in the world, and provide education for every child, and water and sanitation for all, and to reverse the spread of malaria. On September 11th, 2001, the United Nations reported that on that day 36,615 children had died from poverty. But that was not news. Journalists and politicians like to say the world changed as a result of the September 11th attacks. In fact, for those countries under attack by the arsenal of freedom, nothing has changed. What has changed is not news. According to the great whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, a military coup has taken place in the United States, with the Pentagon now ascendant in every aspect of foreign policy. It doesn't matter who is president - George Bush or Barack Obama. Indeed, Obama has stepped up Bush's wars and started his own war in Pakistan. Like Bush, he is threatening Iran, a country Hillary Clinton said she was prepared to "annihilate". Iran's crime is its independence. Having thrown out America's favourite dictator, the Shah, Iran is the only resource-rich Muslim country beyond American control. It doesn't occupy anyone else's land and hasn't attacked any country -- unlike Israel, which is nuclear-armed and dominates and divides the Middle East on America's behalf. In Australia, we are not told this. It's taboo. Instead, we dutifully celebrate the illusion of Obama, the global celebrity, the marketing dream. Like Calvin Klein, brand Obama offers the thrill of a new image attractive to liberal sensibilities, if not to the Afghan children he bombs. This is modern propaganda in action, using a kind of reverse racism - the same way it deploys gender and class as seductive tools. In Barack Obama's case, what matters is not his race or his fine words, but the power he serves. In an essay for The Monthly entitled Faith in Politics, Kevin Rudd wrote this about refugees: "The biblical injunction to care for the stranger in our midst is clear. The parable of the Good Samaritan is but one of many which deal with the matter of how we should respond to a vulnerable stranger in our midst .. We should never forget that the reason we have a UN convention on the protection of refugees is in large part because of the horror of the Holocaust when the West (including Australia) turned its back on the Jewish people of occupied Europe who sought asylum." Compare that with Rudd's words the other day. "I make absolutely no apology whatsoever," he said, "for taking a hard line on illegal immigration to Australia . a tough line on asylum seekers." Are we not fed up with this kind of hypocrisy? The use of the term "illegal immigrants" is both false and cowardly. The few people struggling to reach our shores are not illegal. International law is clear - they are legal. And yet Rudd, like Howard, sends the navy against them and runs what is effectively a concentration camp on Christmas Island. How shaming. Imagine a shipload of white people fleeing a catastrophe being treated like this. The people in those leaking boats demonstrate the kind of guts Australians are said to admire. But that's not enough for the Good Samaritan in Canberra, as he plays to the same bigotry which, as he wrote in his essay, "turned its back on the Jewish people of occupied Europe". . Why isn't this spelt out? Why have weasel words like "border protection" become the currency of a media crusade against fellow human beings we are told to fear, mostly Muslim people? Why have journalists, whose job is to keep the record straight, become complicit in this campaign? After all, Australia has had some of the most outspoken and courageous newspapers in the world. Their editors were agents of people, not power. The Sydney Monitor under Edward Smith Hall exposed the dictatorial rule of Governor Darling and helped bring freedom of speech to the colony. Today, most of the Australian media speaks for power, not people. Turn the pages of the major newspapers; look at the news on TV. Like border protection, we have mind protection. There's a consensus on what we read, see and hear: on how we should define our politics and view the rest of the world. Invisible boundaries keep out facts and opinion that are unacceptable. This is actually a brilliant system, requiring no instructions, no self-censorship. Journalists know not what to do. Of course, now and then the censorship is direct and crude. SBS has banned its journalists from using the phrase "Palestinian land" to describe illegally occupied Palestine. They must describe these territories as "the subject of negotiation". That is the equivalent of somebody taking over your home at the point of a gun and the SBS newsreader describing it as "the subject of negotiation". In no other democratic country is public discussion of the brutal occupation of Palestine as limited as in Australia. Are we aware of the sheer scale of the crime against humanity in Gaza? Twenty-nine members of one family -- babies, grannies - are gunned down, blown up, buried alive, their home bulldozed. Read the United Nations report, written by an eminent Jewish judge, Richard Goldstone. Those who speak for the arsenal of freedom are working hard to bury the UN report. For only one nation, Israel, has a "right to exist" in the Middle East: only one nation has a right to attack others. Only one nation has the impunity to run a racist apartheid regime with the approval of the western world, and with the prime minister and the deputy prime minister ofb Australia fawning over its leaders. In Australia, any diversion from this unspoken impunity attracts a campaign of craven personal abuse and intimidation usually associated with dictatorships. But we are not a dictatorship. We are a democracy. Are we? Or are we a murdochracy. Rupert Murdoch set the media war agenda shortly before the invasion of Iraq when he said, "There's going to be collateral damage. And if you really want to be brutal about it, better get it done now." More than a million people have been killed in Iraq as a result of that invasion -- "an episode", according to one study, "more deadly than the Rwandan genocide". In our name. Are we aware of this in Australia? I once walked along Mutanabi Street in Baghdad. The atmosphere was wonderful. People sat in cafes, reading. Musicians played. Poets recited. Painters painted. This was the cultural heart of Mesopotania, the great civilisation to which we in the West owe a great deal, including the written word. The people I spoke to were both Sunni and Shia, but they called themselves Iraqis. They were cultured and proud. Today, they are fled or dead. Mutanabi Street has been blown to bits. In Baghdad, the great museums and libraries are looted. The universities are sacked. And people who once took coffee with each other, and married each other, have been turned into enemies. "Building democracy", said Howard and Bush and Blair. One of my favourite Harold Pinter plays is Party Time. It's set in an apartment in a city like Sydney. A party is in progress. People are drinking good wine and eating canap?s. They seem happy. They are chatting and affirming and smiling. They are stylish and very self aware. But something is happening outside in the street, something terrible and oppressive and unjust, for which the people at the party share responsibility. There's a fleeting sense of discomfort, a silence, before the chatting and laughing resumes. How many of us live in that apartment? Let me put it another way. I know a very fine Israeli journalist called Amira Hass. She went to live in and report from Gaza. I asked her why she did that. She explained how her mother, Hannah, was being marched from a cattle train to the Nazi concentration camp at Bergen-Belsen when she saw a group of German women looking at the prisoners, just looking, saying nothing, silent. Her mother never forgot what she called this despicable "looking from the side". I believe that if we apply justice and courage to human affairs, we begin to make sense of our world. Then, and only then, can we make progress. However, if we apply justice in Australia, it's tricky, isn't it? -- because we are then obliged to break our greatest silence - to no longer "look from the side" in our own country. In the 1960s, when I first went to South Africa to report apartheid, I was welcomed by decent, liberal people whose complicit silence was the underpinning of that tyranny. They told me that Australians and white South Africans had much in common, and they were right. The good people of Johannesburg could live within a few kilometres of a community called Alexandra, which lacked the most basic services, the children stricken with disease. But they looked from the side and did nothing. In Australia, our indifference is different. We have become highly competent at divide and rule: at promoting those black Australians who tell us what we want to hear. At professional conferences their keynote speeches are applauded, especially when they blame their own people and provide the excuses we need. We create boards and commissions on which sit nice, decent liberal people like the prime minister's wife. And nothing changes. We certainly don't like comparisons with apartheid South Africa. That breaks the Australian silence. Near the end of apartheid, black South Africans were being jailed at the rate of 851 per 100,000 of population. Today, black Australians are being jailed at a national rate that is more than five times higher. Western Australia jails Aboriginal men at eight times the apartheid figure. In 1983, Eddie Murray was killed in a police cell in Wee Waa in New South Wales by "a person or persons unknown". That's how the coroner described it. Eddie was a rising rugby league star. But he was black and had to be cut down to size. Eddie's parents, Arthur and Leila Murray, launched one of the most tenacious and courageous campaigns for justice I've known anywhere. They stood up to authority. They showed grace and patience and knowledge. And they never gave in. When Leila died in 2003, I wrote a tribute for her funeral. I described her as an Australian hero. Arthur is still fighting for justice. He's in his sixties. He's a respected elder, a hero. A few months ago, the police in Narrabri offered Arthur a lift home and instead took him for a violent ride in their bullwagon. He ended up in hospital, bruised and battered. That is how Australian heroes are treated. In the same week the police did this -- as they do to black Australians, almost every day - Kevin Rudd said that his government, and I quote, "doesn't have a clear idea of what's happening on the ground" in Aboriginal Australia. How much information does the prime minister need? How many ideas? How many reports? How many royal commissions? How many inquests? How many funerals? Is he not aware that Australia appears on an international "shame list" for having failed to eradicate trachoma, a preventable disease of poverty that blinds Aboriginal children? In August this year, the United Nations once again distinguished Australia with the kind of shaming once associated with South Africa. We discriminate on the basis of race. That's it in a nutshell. This time the UN blew a whistle on the so-called "intervention", which began with the Howard government smearing Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory with allegations of sex slavery and paedophile rings in "unthinkable numbers", according to the minister for indigenous affairs. In May last year, official figures were released and barely reported. Out of 7433 Aboriginal children examined by doctors, 39 had been referred to the authorities for suspected abuse. Of those, a maximum of four possible cases were identified. So much for the "unthinkable numbers". Of course, child abuse does exist, in black Australia and white Australia. The difference is that no soldiers invaded the North Shore; no white parents were swept aside; no white welfare has been "quarantined". What the doctors found they already knew: that Aboriginal children are at risk -- from the effects of extreme poverty and the denial of resources in one of the world's richest countries. Billions of dollars have been spent - not on paving roads and building houses, but on a war of legal attrition waged against black communities. I interviewed an Aboriginal leader called Puggy Hunter. He carried a bulging brief case and he sat in the West Australian heat with his head in his hands. I said, "You're exhausted." He replied, "Look, I spend most of my life in meetings, fighting lawyers, pleading for our birthright. I'm just tired to death, mate." He died soon afterwards, in his forties. Kevin Rudd has made a formal apology to the First Australians. He spoke fine words. For many Aboriginal people, who value healing, the apology was very important. However, the Sydney Morning Herald published a remarkably honest editorial. It described the apology as "a piece of political wreckage" that "the Rudd government has moved quickly to clear away . in a way that responds to some of its supporters' emotional needs". Since the apology, Aboriginal poverty has got worse. The promised housing programme is a grim joke. No gap has even begun to be bridged. Instead, the federal government has threatened communities in the Northern Territory that if they don't hand over their precious freehold leases, they will be denied the basic services that we, in white Australia, take for granted. In the 1970s, Aboriginal communities were granted comprehensive land rights in the Northern Territory, and John Howard set about clawing back these rights with bribery and bullying. The Labour government is doing the same. You see, there are deals to be done. The Territory contains extraordinary mineral wealth, especially uranium. And Aboriginal land is wanted as a radioactive waste dump. This is very big business, and foreign companies want a piece of the action. It is a continuation of the darkest side of our colonial history: a land grab Where are the influential voices raised against this? Where are the peak legal bodies? Where are those in the media who tell us endlessly how fair-minded we are? Silence. But let us not listen to their silence. Let us pay tribute to those Australians who are not silent, who don't look from the side - those like Barbara Shaw and Larissa Behrendt, and the Mutitjulu community leaders and their tenacious lawyer George Newhouse, and Chris Graham, the fearless editor of the National Indigenous Times. And Michael Mansell, Lyle Munro, Gary Foley, Vince Forrester and Pat Dodson, and Arthur Murray. And let us celebrate Australia's historian of courage and truth, Henry Reynolds, who stood against white supremacists posing as academics and journalists. And the young people who closed down Woomera detention camp, then stood up to the political thugs who took over Sydney during Apec two years ago. And good for Ian Thorpe, the great swimmer, whose voice raised against the intervention has yet to find an echo among the pampered sporting heroes in a country where the gap between white and black sporting facilities and opportunity has closed hardly at all. Silences can be broken, if we will it. In one of the greatest poems of the English language, Percy Shelley wrote this: Rise like lions after slumber In unvanquishable number. Shake your chains to earth like dew. Which in sleep has fallen on you. Ye are many - they are few. But we need to make haste. An historic shift is taking place. The major western democracies are moving towards a corporatism. Democracy has become a business plan, with a bottom line for every human activity, every dream, every decency, every hope. The main parliamentary parties are now devoted to the same economic policies -- socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor -- and the same foreign policy of servility to endless war. This is not democracy. It is to politics what McDonalds is to food. How do we change this? We start by looking beyond the stereotypes and clich?s that are fed to us as news. Tom Paine warned long ago that if we were denied critical knowledge, we should storm what he called the Bastille of words. Tom Paine did not have the internet, but the internet on its own is not enough. We need an Australian glasnost, the Russian word from the Gorbachev era, which broadly means awakening, transparency, diversity, justice, disobedience. It was Edmund Burke who spoke of the press as a Fourth Estate. I propose a people's Fifth Estate that monitors, deconstructs and counters the official news. In every news room, in every media college, teachers of journalism and journalists themselves need to be challenged about the part they play in the bloodshed, inequity and silence that is so often presented as normal. The public are not the problem. It's true some people don't give a damn - but millions do, as I know from the responses to my own films. What people want is to be engaged - a sense that things matter, that nothing is immutable, that unemployment among the young and poverty among the old are both uncivilised and wrong. What terrifies the agents of power is the awakening of people: of public consciousness. This is already happening in countries in Latin America where ordinary people have discovered a confidence in themselves they did not know existed. We should join them before our own freedom of speech is quietly withdrawn and real dissent is outlawed as the powers of the police are expanded. "The struggle of people against power, "wrote Milan Kundera, "is the struggle of memory against forgetting." In Australia, we have much to be proud of - if only we knew about it and celebrated it. Since Francis McCarty and Mary Palmer landed here, we've progressed only because people have spoken out, only because the suffragettes stood up, only because the miners of Broken Hill won the world's first 35-hour week, only because pensions and a basic wage and child endowment were pioneered in New South Wales. In my lifetime, we have become one of the most culturally diverse places on earth, and it has happened peacefully, by and large. That is a remarkable achievement - until we look for those whose Australian civilisation has seldom been acknowledged, whose genius for survival and generosity and forgiving have rarely been a source of pride. And yet, they remain, as Henry Reynolds wrote, the whispering in our hearts. For they are what is unique about us. I believe the key to our self respect -- and our legacy to the next generation -- is the inclusion and reparation of the First Australians. In other words, justice. There is no mystery about what has to be done. The first step is a treaty that guarantees universal land rights and a proper share of the resources of this country. Only then can we solve, together, issues of health, poverty, housing, education, employment. Only then can we feel a pride that comes not from flags and war. Only then can we become a truly independent nation able to speak out for sanity and justice in the world, and be heard. From tal1 at cogeco.ca Sun Nov 8 09:48:34 2009 From: tal1 at cogeco.ca (Tony B.) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:48:34 -0500 Subject: [A-List] ..Do you get the sense... Message-ID: <400012B269F64D78B390E478BE6CB190@TonyPC> ....Do you get the sense that Roberts is finally getting exasperated by it all?.. The Evil Empire By Paul Craig Roberts November 06, 2009 "Information Clearing House" -- -The US government is now so totally under the thumbs of organized interest groups that "our" government can no longer respond to the concerns of the American people who elect the president and the members of the House and Senate. Voters will vent their frustrations over their impotence on the president, which implies a future of one-term presidents. Soon our presidents will be as ineffective as Roman emperors in the final days of that empire. Obama is already set on the course to a one-term presidency. He promised change, but has delivered none. His health care bill is held hostage by the private insurance companies seeking greater profits. The most likely outcome will be cuts in Medicare and Medicaid in order to help fund wars that enrich the military/security complex and the many companies created by privatizing services that the military once provided for itself at far lower costs. It would be interesting to know the percentage of the $700+ billion "defense" spending that goes to private companies. In American "capitalism," an amazing amount of taxpayers' earnings go to private firms via the government. Yet, Republicans scream about "socializing" health care. Republicans and Democrats saw opportunities to create new sources of campaign contributions by privatizing as many military functions as possible. There are now a large number of private companies that have never made a dollar in the market, feeding instead at the public trough that drains taxpayers of dollars while loading Americans with debt service obligations. Obama inherited an excellent opportunity to bring US soldiers home from the Bush regime's illegal wars of aggression. In its final days, the Bush regime realized that it could "win" in Iraq by putting the Sunni insurgents on the US military payroll. Once Bush had 80,000 insurgents collecting US military pay, violence, although still high, dropped in half. All Obama had to do was to declare victory and bring our boys home, thanking Bush for winning the war. It would have shut up the Republicans. But this sensible course would have impaired the profits and share prices of those firms that comprise the military/security complex. So instead of doing what Obama said he would do and what the voters elected him to do, Obama restarted the war in Afghanistan and launched a new one in Pakistan. Soon Obama was echoing Bush and Cheney's threats to attack Iran. In place of health care for Americans, there will be more profits for private insurance companies. In place of peace there will be more war. Voters are already recognizing the writing on the wall and are falling away from Obama and the Democrats. Independents who gave Obama his comfortable victory have now swung against him, recently electing Republican governors in New Jersey and Virginia to succeed Democrats. This is a protest vote, not a confidence vote in Republicans. Obama's credibility is shot. And so is Congress's, assuming it ever had any. The US House of Representatives has just voted to show the entire world that the US House of Representatives is nothing but the servile, venal, puppet of the Israel Lobby. The House of Representatives of the American "superpower" did the bidding of its master, AIPAC, and voted 344 to 36 to condemn the Goldstone Report. In case you don't know, the Goldstone Report is the Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict. The "Gaza Conflict" is the Israeli military attack on the Gaza ghetto, where 1.5 million dispossessed Palestinians, whose lands, villages, and homes were stolen by Israel, are housed. The attack was on civilians and civilian infrastructure. It was without any doubt a war crime under the Nuremberg standard that the US established in order to execute Nazis. Goldstone is not only a very distinguished Jewish jurist who has given his life to bringing people to accountability for their crimes against humanity, but also a Zionist. However, the Israelis have demonized him as a "self-hating Jew" because he wrote the truth instead of Israeli propaganda. US Representative Dennis Kucinich, who is now without a doubt a marked man on AIPAC's political extermination list, asked the House if the members had any realization of the shame that the vote condemning Goldstone would bring on the House and the US government. The entire rest of the world accepts the Goldstone report. The House answered with its lopsided vote that the rest of the world doesn't count as it doesn't give campaign contributions to members of Congress. This shameful, servile act of "the world's greatest democracy" occurred the very week that a court in Italy convicted 23 US CIA officers for kidnapping a person in Italy. The CIA agents are now considered "fugitives from justice" in Italy, and indeed they are. The kidnapped person was renditioned to the American puppet state of Egypt, where the victim was held for years and repeatedly tortured. The case against him was so absurd that even an Egyptian judge order his release. One of the convicted CIA operatives, Sabrina deSousa, an attractive young woman, says that the US broke the law by kidnapping a person and sending him to another country to be tortured in order to manufacture another "terrorist" in order to keep the terrorist hoax going at home. Without the terrorist hoax, America's wars for special interest reasons would become transparent even to Fox "News" junkies. Ms. deSousa says that "everything I did was approved back in Washington," yet the government, which continually berates us to "support the troops," did nothing to protect her when she carried out the Bush regime's illegal orders. Clearly, this means that the crime that Bush, Cheney, the Pentagon, and the CIA ordered is too heinous and beyond the pale to be justified, even by memos from the despicable John Yoo and the Republican Federalist Society. Ms. deSousa is clearly worried about herself. But where is her concern for the innocent person that she sent into an Egyptian hell to be tortured until death or admission of being a terrorist? The remorse deSousa expresses is only for herself. She did her evil government's bidding and her evil government that she so faithfully served turned its back on her. She has no remorse for the evil she committed against an innocent person. Perhaps deSousa and her 22 colleagues grew up on video games. It was great fun to plot to kidnap a real person and fly him on a CIA plane to Egypt. Was it like a fisherman catching a fish or a deer hunter killing a beautiful 8-point buck? Clearly, they got their jollies at the expense of their renditioned victim. The finding of the Italian court, and keep in mind that Italy is a bought-and-paid-for US puppet state, indicates that even our bought puppets are finding the US too much to stomach. Moving from the tip of the iceberg down, we have Ambassador Craig Murray, rector of the University of Dundee and until 2004 the UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan, which he describes as a Stalinist totalitarian state courted and supported by the Americans. As ambassador, Murray saw the MI5 intelligence reports from the CIA that described the most horrible torture procedures. "People were raped with broken bottles, children were tortured in front of their parents until they [the parents] signed a confession, people were boiled alive." "Intelligence" from these torture sessions was passed on by the CIA to MI5 and to Washington as proof of the vast al Qaeda conspiracy. Amb. Murray reports that the people delivered by CIA flights to Uzbekistan's torture prisons "were told to confess to membership in Al Qaeda. They were told to confess they'd been in training camps in Afghanistan. They were told to confess they had met Osama bin Laden in person. And the CIA intelligence constantly echoed these themes." "I was absolutely stunned," says the British ambassador, who thought that he served a moral country that, along with its American ally, had moral integrity. The great Anglo-American bastion of democracy and human rights, the homes of the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights, the great moral democracies that defeated Nazism and stood up to Stalin's gulags, were prepared to commit any crime in order to maximize profits. Amb. Murray learned too much and was fired when he vomited it all up. He saw the documents that proved that the motivation for US and UK military aggression in Afghanistan had to do with the natural gas deposits in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. The Americans wanted a pipeline that bypassed Russia and Iran and went through Afghanistan. To insure this, an invasion was necessary. The idiot American public could be told that the invasion was necessary because of 9/11 and to save them from "terrorism," and the utter fools would believe the lie. "If you look at the deployment of US forces in Afghanistan, as against other NATO country forces in Afghanistan, you'll see that undoubtedly the US forces are positioned to guard the pipeline route. It's what it's about. It's about money, its about energy, it's not about democracy." http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23906.htm Guess who the consultant was who arranged with then Texas governor George W. Bush the agreements that would give to Enron the rights to Uzbekistan's and Turkmenistan's natural gas deposits and to Unocal to develop the trans-Afghanistan pipeline. It was Karzai, the US-imposed "president" of Afghanistan, who has no support in the country except for American bayonets. Amb. Murray was dismissed from the UK Foreign Service for his revelations. No doubt on orders from Washington to our British puppet. From shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp Sun Nov 8 16:24:12 2009 From: shimogamo at ashisuto.co.jp (Bill Totten) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 08:24:12 +0900 Subject: [A-List] Harnessing Hippogriffs Message-ID: <20091109082412.26fe124d.shimogamo@ashisuto.co.jp> by John Michael Greer The Archdruid Report (November 04 2009) Druid perspectives on nature, culture, and the future of industrial society One of the more interesting aspects of writing these essays is that I can never predict in advance what will get me a flurry of outraged responses each week. It's a fair bet that something always does; the collective conversation of the modern industrial world has become so overheated in the last decade or so that it's difficult to say much of anything without getting somebody in a swivet; still, what it is that sets off the swiveteers routinely catches me by surprise. Last week was no exception. Of all the things in that essay that might plausibly have launched the usual cries of outrage, the one that did so was an offhand reference to the free market fundamentalists of the Austrian school, many of whom insist that the proper solution to every economic problem is to let the market have its way. As it happens, in making that comment I was thinking specifically of Michael Shedlock aka Mish, whose blog {1} is one of the handful I read daily. {1} http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/ Mish is among the most thoughtful and articulate proponents of the Austrian school in today's blogosphere, and he has an excellent eye for the economic news that matters - which is by and large exactly the economic news that the rest of the media avoids covering. Very nearly the only thing on his blog that makes me roll my eyes is his repeated insistence that the market is always right and government regulation is always wrong; no matter how berserk the market gets, its vagaries are for the best, and any problems should be corrected by privatizing even more government functions. Now of course Mish is hardly an official spokesperson for the Austrian school, as if there were such a thing, but he's not exactly alone in his insistence, either. Enough people in the peak oil scene share similar views that it's probably necessary to say something about the free market and its potential for solving or creating problems during the twilight years of industrialism ahead of us. Any such comments need to be prefaced, though, by a reminder that a spectrum consists of something other than its two endpoints. Just as a great many people on the left have picked up the dubious habit of using labels such as "fascism" for any political system to the right of Hillary Clinton, a great many people on the right seem to have convinced themselves that any form of economic regulation at all is tantamount to some sort of neo-Marxist hobgoblin - a "socialist-communist-ecologist" system, to use a phrase that actually appeared in one of the comments fielded by last week's post. Now it bears remembering that drowning is not the only alternative to dying of dehydration; there's a middle ground that is noticeably more pleasant than either. The same principle also applies in economics. The experiment of having government own all the means of production in an industrial society, along the lines proposed by Marx, received a thorough test at the hands of the Communist bloc and failed abjectly. At the same time, the experiment of having government keep its hands off the economy altogether in an industrial society, along the lines proposed by a great many free-market proponents these days, received an equally thorough test, and failed just as dismally. The test took place a little earlier; in America, it ran from the end of the Civil War into the first decade of the twentieth century, and the result was a catastrophic sequence of booms and busts, the transfer of most of the nation's wealth to a tiny minority of wealthy people, the bitter impoverishment of nearly everyone else, and a level of social unrest that included two presidential assassinations and so many bomb attacks on the rich and their families that bomb-throwing anarchists became a regular theme of music-hall songs. Now it's always possible for theorists to contrast a Utopian portrait of a free-market economy against the gritty and unwelcome realities of extreme socialism, just as it's possible for people on the other side of the spectrum to contrast a Utopian portrait of a socialist economy against the equally gritty and unwelcome realities of unfettered capitalism. Both make great rhetorical strategies, since the human mind is easily misled by binary logic: if A is evil, it seems wholly reasonable to claim that the opposite of A must be good. The real world does not work that way, but this is hardly the only case in which rhetoric ignores reality. The problem with the rhetoric, however, may be stated a bit more precisely: however pleasant they look on paper, free markets do not exist. Strictly speaking, they are as mythical as hippogriffs. It occurs to me that some of my readers may not be as familiar with hippogriffs as they ought to be. (Tut, tut - what do they teach children these days?) For those who lack so basic an element in their education, a hippogriff is the offspring of a gryphon and a mare; it has the head, body, hind legs, and tail of a horse, and the forelimbs and wings of a giant eagle. Hippogriffs are said to be the strongest and swiftest of all flying creatures, which is why Astolpho rode one to the terrestrial paradise to recover Orlando's lost wits in Orlando Furioso, and why Juss rode one to the summit of Koshtra Pivrarcha to rescue Goldry Bluszco in The Worm Ouroboros. They are splendid creatures, no question; their only disadvantage, really, is the minor point that they don't happen to exist, and drawing up plans to use them as a new, energy-efficient means of air transport in the face of peak oil, for instance, will inevitably come to grief on that annoying little detail. Free markets are subject to essentially the same little problem. There have been many examples of market economies in history that were not controlled by governments, but there have been no examples of market economies that were not controlled, and if one were to be set up, it would remain a free market for maybe a week at most. Adam Smith explained why in memorable language in The Wealth of Nations (1776): "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or some contrivance to raise prices". When a market is not controlled by government edicts, religious taboos, social customs, or some other outside force, it will quickly be controlled by combinations of individuals whose wealth and strategic position in the market enable them to maximize the economic benefits accruing to them, by squeezing out rivals, manipulating prices, buying up their suppliers, bribing government officials, and the like: that is to say, behaving the way capitalists behave whenever they are left to their own devices. This is what created the profoundly dysfunctional economy of Gilded Age America, and it also played a very large role in setting up the current debacle. There's a rich irony here, in that the market economy portrayed in textbooks - in which buyers and sellers are numerous and independent enough that free competition regulates their interactions - is exactly the sort of commons that so many free market proponents insist should be eliminated wholesale in favor of private ownership. All commons systems, as Garrett Hardin pointed out in a famous essay a while back, are hideously vulnerable to abuse unless they are managed in ways that prevent individuals from exploiting the commons for their own private benefit. This year's Nobel laureate in economics, Elinor Ostrom, won her award for demonstrating that it's entirely possible to manage a commons so that Hardin's "tragedy of the commons" does not happen, and she's quite right - there have been many examples of successfully managed commons in history. Strip away the management that keeps it from being abused, however, and the free market, like any other commons, rapidly destroys itself. This does not mean that the best, or for that matter the only, alternative to the unchecked rule of corporate robber barons is Marxist-style state ownership of the economy; once again, dying from heatstroke is not the only alternative to dying from hypothermia. It means, rather, that something between these two extremes might be worth trying, especially if it can be shown by historical evidence to work tolerably well in practice. Of course this is what history shows; broadly speaking, economies that leave the means of production in private hands, but use appropriate regulation to harness their energies to the public good, consistently produce more prosperity for more people than either unfettered capitalism or extreme socialism. This being said, the midpoint between these extremes may not lie where today's conventional wisdom tends to place it. Consider an example from the not too distant past: a large industrial nation with a capitalist economy, but remarkably tough regulations restricting the growth of private fortunes and the abuses to which capitalist economies are so often prone. The wealthiest people in that nation paid more than two-thirds of their annual income in tax, and monopolistic practices on the part of corporations faced harsh and frequently applied judicial penalties. The financial sector was particularly tightly leashed: interest rates on savings were fixed by the government, usury laws put very low caps on the upper end of interest rates for loans, and hard legal barriers prevented banks from expanding out of local markets or crossing the firewall between consumer banking and the riskier world of corporate investment. Consumer credit was difficult enough to get, as a result, that most people did without it most of the time, using layaway plans and Christmas Club savings programs to afford large purchases. According to the standard rhetoric of free market proponents these days, so rigidly controlled an economy ought by definition to be hopelessly stagnant and unproductive. This shows the separation of rhetoric from reality, however, for the nation I have just described was the United States during the presidency of Dwight D Eisenhower: that is, during one of the most sustained periods of prosperity, innovation, economic development and international influence this nation has ever seen. Now of course there were other factors behind America's 1950s success, just as there were other factors behind the decline since then; still, it's worth noting that as the economic regulations of the 1950s have been dismantled - in every case, under the pretext of boosting American prosperity - the prosperity of most Americans has gone down, not up. It makes a good measure of how far we have come as a nation - and not in a useful direction - that the economic policies of one of the most successful 20th century Republican administrations would be rejected by most of today's Democrats as too far to the left. A case could be made, in fact, that far and away the most sensible thing the US Congress could do today, in the face of an economy that has very nearly choked to death on its own bubbles, is to reenact the economic legislation in place in the 1950s, line for line. (When you're hiking in the woods, and discover that you've taken a trail that leads someplace you don't want to go, your best bet is normally to turn around and go back to the last place where you were still going in the right direction.) Yet there's an interesting point that also ought to be made about the economic regulation of the 1950s. Outside of antitrust legislation, not that much of it applied to the economy of goods and services on any level, whether that of Mom and Pop grocery stores or big industrial conglomerates. The bulk of it, and very nearly all the strictest elements of it, focused on the financial industry. More broadly speaking, instead of regulating the production and consumption of goods and services, the economic policies of the Eisenhower era focused on regulating money: on ensuring that too much of it did not end up concentrated unproductively in too few hands, and on controlling its propensity to multiply as enthusiastically as rabbits on Viagra. The relative success of these measures points toward a distinction already made in these posts, and to practical steps that will be explored in next week's post. _____ John Michael Greer, The Grand Archdruid of the Ancient Order of Druids in America (AODA), has been active in the alternative spirituality movement for more than 25 years, and is the author of more than twenty books, including The Druidry Handbook (Weiser, 2006) and The Long Descent: A User's Guide to the End of the Industrial Age (New Society, 2008). He lives in Cumberland, Maryland. ? http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2009/11/harnessing-hippogriffs.html http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com http://www.ashisuto.co.jp From ioriwase at mail.mohawknationnews.com Sun Nov 8 14:56:19 2009 From: ioriwase at mail.mohawknationnews.com (Mohawk Nation News) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 16:56:19 -0500 Subject: [A-List] MNN Who's Knocking on Eastern Door? Message-ID: <01fdac49$40125$0cc97057754514@xnote> WHO?S KNOCKING ON THE EASTERN DOOR? OPERATION TYENDINAGA MNN. Nov. 7, 2009. Have we Mohawks become an unwitting pawn in a power struggle between some thugs? We are the Keepers of the Eastern Door of Great Turtle Island. Agents are hanging around us trying to gather information and destabilize us. Kanehsatake is a model on how to attempt to destroy a community, push a false leader and confuse everyone. Soon the band council will be declared as having mismanaged their funds. Tyendinaga will be put under third party management. Pro bono ambulance chasers will arrive to start class actions suits with nothing in it for us. The few Mohawks who vote in the colonial elections generally work for the band council. To control the outcome, Indian Affairs might place hundreds of names of strangers onto the list to vote by proxy. The story goes Cathie Duchene, a non-native, lived in British Columbia. She befriended some Indigenous and then left. Then the local businesses were raided by the RCMP. Somebody had provided intel. About 3 years ago she showed up at Sharbot Lake, just north of Kingston Ontario. A controversy was raging over some fake Algonquins trying to fraudulently settle a Haudenosaunee land claim. She tried to pass herself off as a Mohawk from Kanehsatake. She claimed to be speaking on behalf of the Six Nation Iroquois Confederacy. it looked like the OPP were protecting her. She lives well though she has no job that we know of. About a year ago Duchene moved to Tyendinaga, a Mohawk community on Lake Ontario. She is apparently running for band council chief, which the colonial Indian Act allows. She?s decked out in denims covered with warrior and confederacy emblems. She lies that she is a friend of the MNN editor, who is on record as calling her a Space Cadet and Cathie Lost-in-the-Woods. Dissension follows her. Recently the longhouse mysteriously burnt to the ground. Community members were quickly blamed. The current chief is here one minute and gone the next, zooming constantly between Indian Affairs and the Blue Heron casino off Highway 401. Cathie could step out of the race at the last minute to guarantee his victory. What is the end game? Prime Minister Stephen Harper wants to beef up Canada?s military and create a large inland base and port near the Canada-US border. Trenton Air Base is near Tyendinaga. The St. Lawrence-Great Lakes watershed is on unsurrendered sovereign Haudenosaunee Territory on which we have original title and autonomy. What if the US decides to take over Canada? An invasion is usually to take over political and economic power in order to steal oil, gas, minerals, water, lands, people, currency and whatever else they can get their hands on. The main cities of Canada are on Mohawk land ? Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal. Our communities are strategically located. Kahnawake is on the south shore across from Montreal. Kanehsatake is where the Ottawa River drains into the St. Lawrence. Akwesasne is just north of huge Fort Drum army base near Watertown NY. The US army could roll northward through Akwesasne near Cornwall, then move eastward to Montreal, northward to Ottawa and westward to Tyendinaga to take over Trenton base. Further west is Toronto and the Six Nations Mohawk community. According to the 1701 Great Peace of Montreal, also known as the Nanfan Treaty, they would need the permission of the 40 Indigenous signatory nations and the Confederacy to invade this part of Great Turtle Island. War has to be declared to legitimately take over our sovereign territory. If the US made a truce with us, could the Mohawk Nation and its allies end up controlling the colony of Canada? NYS already got their fingers burnt by trying to invade us in 1994. Some Iroquois tribal entities were making illegal agreements with NYS to collect taxes. They knew we would resist. NYS had a plan, Operation Gallant Piper. The National Guard was launching a surprise attack of the Seneca, Onondaga and Mohawks, who they thought presented the most resistance. The attack was to be secretly paid out of disaster relief funds. They knew the public would not approve. The Indigenous found out. The media publicized that public money was being used for war and stopped it. They cannot legally undermine our independent international sovereignty without our knowledge or consent. The Kaianere?ko:wa and the Two Row Wampum Agreement stand. Their brown-faced band and tribal puppets cannot regulate our sovereignty on behalf of the corporations. What is Operation Eastern Door? According to international law, only we can legitimately resolve issues relating to our inherent power on our territory and our relationships with other nations. Kahentinetha MNN Mohawk Nation News, www.mohawknationnews.com kahentinetha2 at yahoo.com Note: Your financial help is needed and appreciated. Please send your donations by check or money order to ?MNN Mohawk Nation News?, Box 991, Kahnawake [Quebec, Canada] J0L 1B0. Or go to PayPal on MNN website. Nia:wen thank you very much. Go to MNN TYENDINAGA category for more stories; New MNN Books Available now! From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Mon Nov 9 01:59:52 2009 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 08:59:52 -0000 Subject: [A-List] A Second Coup in Honduras - Havana Times.org Message-ID: <91F6B6528C55452C9AE90A0553FF4BE1@home9sg93n9r5y> COPINH: The trap of the accords of the Guaymuras-Tegucigalpa-San Jose Dialogue November 4, 2009 -- The Civil Council of Popular and Indigenous Organisations of Honduras (COPINH), in the face of the signing of the accords to seek a solution to the crisis generated by the military coup d'etat against the people of Honduras, submits the following communiqu?: 1. We have no trust in the negotiating commission of the coup regime given that they have never demonstrated a willingness to reinstate the constitutional president of the republic, and its only purpose is to buy time to consolidate the objectives of the coup d'etat in looting the national treasury and imposing neoliberal projects of privatisation of natural resources and state institutions. 2. We denounce the malicious and intentional attitude of the government of the United States of America, which takes on ambiguous positions but behind the scenes has supported the coup makers. If not, how can they explain that in the kidnapping of President Manuel Zelaya Rosales they used the [US] Palmerola base? If the yankees had so much will to contribute to the resolution of this crisis, why so much tolerance, patience and complacency with the coup makers in lending themselves to a dialogue where they present deceiving agreements as a solution? 3. We call on our people not to rest until we achieve the convoking of a popular and democratic national constitutional assembly, which should be made up of the different social sectors of the country such as women, youth, Indigenous and black peoples, workers, the LGTB community, community councils, representatives of marginalised neighbourhoods, teachers, artists, peasants, honest business people, intellectuals, professionals, the informal economy sector, alternative media, among others. 4. We urge the National Front of Popular Resistance to raise an initiative of dialogue and negotiation towards more dignified agreements in which the mediation shouldn't be [tied] to the liking and oversight of the yankee government, which has helped drive the coup d'etat against our people, but instead by people like Rigoberta Menchu, Adolfo P?rez Esquivel, democratic countries that make up the Bolivarian Alternative of the Americas (ALBA) and UNASUR, foundations like the Carter Foundation, social movements of the countries of Latin America and the world like the Landless Peoples Movement of Brazil, the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo of Argentina, the Scream of the Excluded, Jubilee South, the Convergence of Popular Movements of the Americas, the School of the Americas Watch, the platforms of solidarity with the Honduran people and others. For this the front should name a negotiating commission that understands that the coup-makers are perverse and that the US State Department, the Pentagon and the US government in general are driving the coup d'etat and proposing as key points the restoration of the President of the Republic Manuel Zelaya Rosales to govern for the time that the coup makers robbed of his governing period, the installation of a national constitutional assembly and the dissolution of the coup congress, of the coup supreme court, of the coup public ministry, the reduction and purging of the armed forves, the definitive purging of hte national police and the punishment of the people involved in the coup d'etat and the violation of human rights. 5. We urge once again to the candidates of the Democratic Unification Party, the Popular Independent Candidacy, the PINU party and the Liberals who are in resistance to be consistent and renounce once and for all participation in the electoral farce set up by the coupmakers. To our people we urge you not to participate in the electoral circus and to boycott that act of the coup makers. 6. To the international solidarity movement we invite you to strengthen the support to the Honduran people not just as a principle of solidarity but for reasons of self-defence since if the coup makers consolidate in Honduras the democratic spring of the peoples of the world and particularly the peoples of our America will end. With the ancestral force of Lempira, Iselaca, Mota and Etempica we raise our voices filled with life, justice, dignity, freedom and peace. HERE NOBODY IS GIVING UP! Honduras latin america multimedia US imperialism video Comments Sun, 11/08/2009 - 17:02 ? normd Berta C?ceres: "We only have one option. It is to struggle.'' From: http://hondurasresists.blogspot.com/2009/11/berta-caceres-we-only-have-one-option.html Berta C?ceres speech in Gracias, Lempira on November 1, 2009, with call from President Zelaya Berta C?ceres is a leader the Civil Council of Popular and Indigenous Organizations of Honduras (COPINH) and National Resistance Front Against the Coup to a meeting of the resistance from Gracias, Lempira on 11/1/09 -- With a live call during the speech from President Manuel Zelaya Good morning to everyone. At 127 days of heroic resistance of the Honduran people, we want to tell you that at this delicate juncture of the country's situation, the message of the Front [National Front of Popular Resistance against the Coup d'Eta] is that we shouldn't have a triumphalist attitude. We should also be realists. It is true, we could say that the backdrop of the agreement in and of itself is a proposal to reinstate President Zelaya. That is a hard reverse for the coup-makers. And it is a triumph for the honduran people and for the whole struggle including for international solidarity who has been accompanying what is happening in Honduras. But we have also said that upon re-establishing President Zelaya, upon reinstating him, it is also true that he is not going to enter the government with real power. I think we are all aware of that. We have an entire ?institutional system? that is the hands of the oligarchic power of this country. The public ministry, the supreme court, the attorney general, the supreme electoral council, the armed forces, the police, a congress that is mostly coup-backers. So the President enters with a tremendous limit to his ability to maneuver in favor of the Honduran people. We know that in him, in his heart, his strength continues but that these agreements we should understand were elaborated by an imperial policy and was the same one that caused the coup d'etat in Honduras. And I want to talk to you about that brothers and sisters, because we can't see the situation in the country in a segment of this historical moment of the country. We should see it in its general context, the causes of the coup. What was the cause of the coup? Because in that sense the oligarchy, the coup-makers, continue their strategy. We all know that the primary objective of the coup d'etat was to guarantee the continuation of a project of domination. That in essence is the reason for the coup d'etat. And also to strike against the project of integration of the Latin American and Caribbean people such as the Bolivarian Alternative of the Americas (ALBA). President Zelaya since the first moment he takes posession he says he won't give out any mining concessions. So here these men start condemning him. He rejects the acceptance speech the day that he took power that was sent to him by Carlos Flores Facuss? [one of the richest businessmen in Honduras], already written and Presidente Zelaya throws it aside. Carlos Flores Facuss? is one of the men who decides the destiny of this country. Then President Zelaya incorporates Honduras into PetroCaribe and in addition to that, submits to public licensing the national and international business and commerce of gas. In the first year that made Texaco, Esso and Shell lose more than $200 million. Brothers and sisters we should never forget the name of the coup-makers, whether they are transnational corporations, businessmen, or congressmen who serve the corrupt hackneyed political class who the Honduran people are tired of. And now we see that they submit to the interests of the oligarchy. President Zelaya that year incorporates Honduras into ALBA, that's the next thing. He also approves the Educators' Statute, which the so-called ?letter of intentions? which is the prescription of impositions of the International Monetary Fund, said shouldn't be approved. The President approves it. He does it against the International Monetary Fund. In addition to that he raises the minimum wage 60% compared to the cost of living. Another element, he vetoes or throws in the trash an inquisition decree that violates the rights of women ? the decree of the prohibition of birth control pills. These same coup-makers who now act outraged talking about morals, in a clear violation of the rights of women and of our self-determination, as if others need to make decisions for our bodies, advocate this medieval decree, which the President rejects and in addition gives scientific arguments for which he is vetoing it. Now the thug Micheletti through executive decrees went back to prohibiting birth control pills. President Zelaya had carried out this struggle alongside feminist and women's organizations. Another element, President Zelaya announces the necessity of the Soto Cano military base, known as Palmerola, beginning to function for civil use, and even though it was just a part of the base, we advocate its use towards that end. You know what funds he was going to use to do that? Funds from ALBA, with that he was going to convert that part of Palmerola for civilian use. All the strengthening of cooperation that he did amongst Honduras, Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador in other words with the rest of Latin America and the Caribbean, makes the U.S. uncomfortable. It makes them uncomfortable. And they paint him, and we have the evidente, that they begin to paint President Zelaya as a dangerous man who is getting cozy with Ch?vez, with communism, etc, etc. All the satanization that they have done to President Hugo Ch?vez and the Bolivarian revolutionary process, that satanization that comes from an international counter-revolutionary Cuban and Venezuelan ultra-right, who have financed this dictatorship. It is strengthened last year when in Honduras a man who is a herald of death and who the Central American people know well, John Dimitri Negraponte, comes to Honduras. John Dimitri Negraponte last year besides coming to announce some crumbs for buying logistical support for the army and the police, which is what he offered to Mel, also came an met in secret ? and nobody knew the purpose ? with Micheletti and with Carlos Flores Facuss? and with others of the big coup-makers who are those ten families of the oligarchy, we don't even have to list them because you all know who they are, I hope we all know who they are. So brothers and sisters, when Mel announces a consultation that opens the possibility that the Honduran people for the first time would have the human rights to be consulted, that opens the possibility of a national constitutional assembly, that is the limit that the rancid oligarchy of this country can handle. But in addition, remember, they are thinking this through in the middle of the global crisis of capitalism. Capitalism in order to exists needs to expand its markets and one of the ways of doing this is pillaging the riches and the strategic resources of our peoples, something which becomes complicated when the people rise up and struggle for their self-determination like in South America. That's why they have a systematic international media campaign against the entire process of South America. And they feel the fear of losing the air and military base they have always had. Do you know how many years the U.S. has been militarily occupying that base in Honduras? Does anybody know? 100 years brothers and sisters. We are coming up on 100 years. We should never again forget who are these coup-makers and why coup d'etats happen. With President Zelaya, another element that worries them is his enormous leaership and capacity to convene. No Honduran President in the fourth year of government had 69% sympathy, that had never been seen and that was before the coup. So brothers and sisters, what is the scenario we are faced with now? The U.S. at first designed a strategy with the oligarchy and the coup-makers ? this Shannon [State Department representative in Honduras at the time of this speech to negotiate an agreement] was here a week before the coup, meeting with the coup-makers. He told them to wait, to not resort to a coup yet but to maneuver with other strategies, with the supreme court, trying to satanize and spread lies about the acts of President Zelaya. Thomas Shannon himself was meeting with the coup-makers. The next stage was repression and militarization to put down the resistance. But they made a mistake, brothers and sisters, they made a mistake because they thought that the Honduran resistance would last four days and today it has now been 127 days of heroic resistance of the Honduran people. [Applause] Brothers and sisters, no country of the world would have sat down to talk about Honduras, no international mechanism neither the OAS nor the UN nor anybody would have sat down to talk about Honduras if it hadn't been for the struggle of the Honduran people, if we hadn't challenged the power of arms, if he hadn't concretized that chant which we have made our own, that ?they are afraid of us because we are not afraid.? That brothers and sisters is what has gotten the international community to sit down and talk about Honduras, otherwise nobody at those places would even know where our country is on the map. This recent advance, which is mild if you ask me, is not thanks to the high-ups in the Pentagon, it's not thanks to the U.S. who now wants to look like heroes and redeemers of the situation in our country, it is thanks to the resistance of the Honduran people. It is because we, as men and women, have fought, without stopping even though they have killed 25 brothers and sisters, even though there have been more than 4,000 illegal detentions ? statistics from three weeks ago. We have had brothers an sisters tortured, gassed, persecuted, followed and all the things you all have said here. But that strategy failed, because the U.S. now understands that they will never terrorize or paralyze our people. So they start another maneuver which is this dialogue. The U.S. find themselves obliged, because they couldn't through repression, through an insane dictatorship, they couldn't bend the Honduran people so they put their bets on the dialogue. Because we can't be deceived brothers and sisters, remember who Oscar Arias is. Oscar Arias played a nefarious role during the 80's in the armed conflicts in Central America. We should be clear who they are. So now with the dialogue, this agreement in the background represents and opens the possibility of the reinstatement of the President but in no place in the text does it state that President Zelaya must be reinstated. Nowhere brothers and sisters! And the coup-makers can maneuver and they will be in that campaign of wanting to undermine the strength of the resistance. Now we need to be very careful with this. The coup-makers might use, for example, point two about the renunciation of the convocation of a national constitutional assembly ? which is an objective of the resistance, the Honduran people have put it forth as an objective of this struggle ? which says that he has to abstain from making calls for the convoking of a national constitutional assembly directly or indirectly. To give an example of the types of maneuvers that these coup-makers might make, let's imagine that the President is reinstated and the people are asking what comes after the elections. The coup-makers coul interpret that if the President says, ?I call on the people to vote for the UD, for Cesar Ham or for Carlos H. Reyes, let's say, of whom both have in their program the proposal for the installation of a popular and democratic national constitutional assembly they coul then accuse the president of violating this agreement because it says that he can't speak of that directly or indirectly. [A phone call comes in from President Zelaya from the Brazillian embassy] President Zelaya: Hello. BC: Yes President we are here, you're speaking with Berta C?ceres, we are here, go ahead, we're listening. PZ: Ah, Berta, how are you, how great to hear you. Who else is there so I can say hi to everyone? BC: Yes, here a whole people is meeting from various municipalities of Lempira and Bishop Monse?or Luis Alfonso is also here as well as all of the leadership of the department of Lempira and they want to hear from you about the dialogue, the agreements, your call to resistance, to even the bases of the Liberal Party who are against the coup as well as the other forces and then ask questions possibly. PZ: Well, I have an appointment right now with the mass of Father Andr?s Tamayo but a few brief words along those lines. First, to Bishop Luis Alfonso Santos I must recognize that he has earned the heart of the Honduran people for his positions. Same to the resistance, to the resistance of Lempira and all other departments, I want to tell you that I as a Honduran citizen feel pride before the rest of the world because of your defense of democracy and seeing the birth from this Honduran people a brave people that has demonstrated its capacity. From now on nobody, absolutely nobody, will abuse this people because they know of its firm defense of its rights and interests. This is the highest glory in the world. Now I want to make a few brief comments about what is happening. The agreement is another triumph for us, just as was my arrival to Honduras, a triumpt for us. Just as has been the position of the international community. But with the agreement this struggle has not concluded and this agreement hasn't even been approved by the Congress yet. The spirit of the agreement is national reconciliation once the congress retracts its position of the 28th of June. From now forward I am asking it that with all respect it repeal the decree that approved Micheletti and took me out. I am asking it with respect because it is a power of the state, though it's true that it participated in every hour. Good is protecting us, the international community is accompanying us and we will make the glory of the Honduran people a new victory for democracy in the world. Thank you brothers and sisters and regards. [End of call] BC: Well what could be heard more or else clearly from the call is that we can't lower our level of organization of struggle because they have signed this, he is clear that even with this agreement itself he isn't even definitely going to be seated there until he is in the presidential house and after that we have to continue struggling. As I was saying about the state previous to June 28th, if we put ourselves in the mindset of the coup-makers, what wa the state of mind before the 28th? How did they view President Zelaya? They satanized him, they said we was crazy because of health problems, they were able to invent a false renunciation that the majority of the congresspeople endorsed. They said he was taking us to unconstitutionality, violating the constitution, etc, etc, this whole campaign that they had invented. So these are the traps that the coup-makers can put up. We should understand that this struggle doesn't end with the reinstatement of President Zelaya. And on the other side they are preparing another strategy. What is the strategy the coup-makers will use and that they are preparing? It is electoral fraud. Electoral fraud, brothers and sisters. Inflating statistics, they have their preferences, the U.S. and the coup-makers. I always talk about the U.S. because we shouldn't lose track of their role in the coup d'etat. Look at where those five military generals came out of ? the School of the Americas. And the financing that has come through the C.I.A., through the National Endowment for Democracy and the International Republican Institute who have financed the Democratic Civil Union... So sisters and brothers, we need to be clear, and this is my opinion, that this agreement benefits the coup-makers more. Now, as the President said his restitution is extremely important. In other words it is a pain for them, for the coup-makers, and it is a triumph for the Honduran people but we need to be conscious that this benefits the coup makers most. So brothers and sisters what we have to be clear about is that in a scenario of restitution the resistance has to take a position regarding the elections. And we need to identify the political and electoral forces or institutions who are in the resistance, who are really in the resistance. I have realized because I have been in Tegucigalpa almost this whole time I've practically had to live there and there are a lot of people who call the President and say, ?We are in resistance, here we are supporting the people,? but you realize that they're not there, brothers and sisters, that's it's pure nonsense! And the people know, you know, nobody will deceive you, you who have been frying up under the sun and looking like toasted iguanas. Here, we know who we are and there's no need for b.s.. And those people need to be exposed, because in their practice they are very similar to the coup-makers. So brothers and sisters in that scenario that the President is restituted and here I am speaking as a member of the team that is part of the independent people's candidacy of Carlos H. Reyes, because we have had meetings amongst the independent candidacy, the Democratic Unification Party, the part of the PINU party who is against the coup and the liberals against the coup, and we have decided that we should take a very mature step to carry forth a sole proposal as a presidential candidacy and this will be further defined and debated this week. Because if not, the same history will repeat brothers and sisters. This is something asked for by the resistance front, a all to us as political and electoral forces to create a coalition, a proposal that comes out as a consensus on one presidential candidate and a combo of congresspeople whether they are liberals against the coup, PINU, UD, as long as they are in the resistance that they are against the coup d'etat and that they have a position in favor of the national constitutional assembly, because the congress, brothers and sisters, is strategic. It is strategic. And we have to join forces not just the social ones because the social forces are also political because they make transformations, we need to push forward a process of joining political and social forces in favor of the installation of a national constitutional assembly. And also at the level of mayors. Basically the elections, if we participate, if they reinstate the President, would have to be between the resistance and the coup-makers, as simple as that brothers and sisters. What would happen if we made a single call with the people? If there is fraud we have to denounce it and we have to struggle like they struggled in Mexico against Felipe Calder?n, we should continue struggling. But what is strategic, is as much for having one presidential candidacy of the political and electoral forces of the resistance and of the national front of resistance as seeing the strategic importance of the national congress brothers and sisters. Because this struggle doesn't end with the reinstatement of Mel, it begins and he knows it. We know the President shares this belief. Now he won't be able to say it openly but we know that he shares it and he has been very respectful - and I am telling you this as someone who has been in the national leadership of the resistance - he has been very respectful of the decisions of the resistance. What comes next brothers and sisters? We need to raise ? not tomorrow, but today ? we need to raise our level of organization, of mobilization, of articulation, of coordination using all tools possible. Like what? Popular education and communication because the great media monopoly will continue in the hands of Ferrari, of Carlos Flores, of Canhuati, etc, etc.. So today more than ever we need to take advantage of this historic opportunity and consolidate the social force of the resistance and demand of the international community, of the United Nations and the Organization of American States that they recognize the resistance as a political reference point of popular forces in Honduras, just like the Sandinista Front was recognized in its time, just as the FMLN was recognized in its time. In this contect we are demanding that they recognize us as well. Because we will not going to just be spectators or observers of negotiations, we are the principle protagonists brothers and sisters. [Applause] We have to be decisive actors. Look, Fidel Castro said from the beginning, that the Honduran people will definitively have to create its own destiny. And that is wise brothers and sisters. That is very wise. It is a great truth. We don't need to wait and have others come to decide for us, negotiate for us, dialogue for us, right? We need to prepare. We may want to believe that after the restitution of Mel by Christmas we'll be eating a chicken, having fun, dancing, relaxing - but the hardest struggle comes after that. You know why? Because if the oligarchy, because of the actions to benefit the people that President Zelaya carried out, and and the growth of the political consciousness of the Honduran people in favor of a more just, more humane society worried the right, imperialism, the oligarchy, they are going to worry more when they see the installation of a people's national constitutional assembly become a reality. That's what we should really prepare for. What should we do? We should have the capacity for collective construction, for debate, for collective analysis which we may not have had a culture of in this country but since the 28th of June we have been developing. You hear debate in the market, in the taxi, in the bus, in the barrio. I've been to those marginal barrios in Tegucigalpa, to those neighborhoods at night, and you see and listen to the strength with which people propose that national constitutional assembly. We should learn to define, to build collectively the nature, the concepts, the content of that national constitutional assembly. We shouldn't wait any longer. We should do it. What are those contents? To take back our sovereignty, the self-determination of this country. To take back out mining and metalic resources that are in the hands of U.S. and Canadian transnationals, 30,000 square kilometers given away in concessions should be recovered in a national constitutional assembly. The subject of water, which is life, where these wretches have put forth a general waters law that privatizes even rain wayer, brothers and sisters. Who would have thought of that? This isn't a story, it says it there. It says they will privatize the hydric resources under ground, above ground, wetlands, the rivers. It's not possible? What for? For them to give them to Miguel Facusse, to Freddy Nasser... We need to recuperate that. Look, not one time are women mentioned in the constitution. How is that possible? How in a society where they talk of democracy and justice could the woman not even be mentioned? We are more than half of the population. In these large mobilizations, more than half of us are women. We are women and we are not there as decorations, that is a lie, that we are the weak sex is a fairytale brothers and sisters. We are here here because we believe that we don't just need to take down forms of domination from capitalism but also patriarchy. That is another form of domination as is racism. It has to be taken down. We want our economic, political, social and cultural rights and rights to reproductive and sexual health to be recognized, they are human rights. [Applause] In addition to that brothers and sisters take out the U.S. bases. Why do they need to be there? To prepare coups? Who in honduras believes them when they say that they didn't know that Mel was in that airplane that landed in Palmerola? Please. Audience member: They said the ambassador didn't know! BC: That they didn't know. Imagine, they said it publicly that they didn't know that Mel was in that airplane there before they took him to Costa Rica, please, not even a leaf