Follow by Email

Wednesday, May 1, 2019

Tell The Truth

Hypothesizing,

Caitlin Johnstone wonders what news about Venezuela would look like if it were honest, instead of propaganda for global empire.
Juan Guaido: I would like to be regarded as the interim president of Venezuela because the current president of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro, stands opposed to the interests of the political bodies with which I have aligned myself. Also, he stands opposed to my own personal ambitions of becoming powerful.
Washington, DC: We too would like for Juan Guaido to be regarded as the interim president of Venezuela, because the current President of Venezuela is too cozy in policy and practice with our geopolitical opponents. We would not mind this so much if Venezuela didn’t sit atop the world’s largest proven oil reserves. If we can’t control what happens to those oil reserves, we won’t be as dominant on the world stage as we otherwise would be.​..

 Mainstream media: The US government, and of course the powerful unelected individuals who run it from behind the scenes without any accountability or oversight from the public, is attempting to topple Venezuela’s only recognized government using starvation sanctions, CIA operations, and an open campaign to delegitimize the sitting president of that nation. They are doing this because controlling as much of the world’s oil supplies as possible helps them to control the world, and controlling the world is the thing that they want to do. These are the things we would be telling you if we weren’t owned by the same plutocratic class which owns the US government.

B​ut actually​...
Over a three-month period (1/15/19–4/15/19), zero opinion pieces in the New York Times and Washington Post took an anti–regime change or pro-Maduro/Chavista positionNot a single commentator on the big three Sunday morning talkshows or PBS NewsHour came out against President Nicol├ís Maduro stepping down from the Venezuelan government.
Of the 76 total articles, opinion videos or TV commentator segments that centered on or gave more than passing attention to Venezuela, 54 (72 percent) expressed explicit support for the Maduro administration’s ousterEleven (14 percent) were ambiguous, but were only classified as such for lack of explicit language. Reading between the lines, most of these were clearly also pro–regime change. Another 11 (14 percent) took no position, but many similarly offered ideological ammo for those in support.


​The deplorable Hillary Clinton.​
​ ​WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said during a television interview on Wednesday that the United States was prepared to take military action to stem the ongoing turmoil in Venezuela.
“Military action is possible. If that’s what’s required, that’s what the United States will do,” Pompeo said in an interview with Fox Business Network, but added that the United States would prefer a (much cheaper) peaceful transition of power in Venezuela.

​Deep state pro-wrestler, Robert Mueller lets Donald Trump out of headlock for saying "Uncle Sam", and joining the team.
Wasn’t Trump going to pursue “a new foreign policy that finally learns from the mistakes of the past”?
Yes, that was Trump’s campaign promise. So, what happened?
There are other signs of capitulation too; like providing lethal weapons to the Ukrainian military, or nixing the short-range nuclear missile ban, or joining the Saudi’s genocidal war on Yemen, or threatening to topple the government of Venezuela, or stirring up trouble in the South China Sea. At every turn, Trump has backtracked on his promise to break with tradition and “stop toppling regimes and overthrowing governments.” …’ At every turn, Trump has joined the ranks of the warhawks he once criticized.
Trump is now marching in lockstep with the foreign policy establishment. In Libya, in Sudan, in Somalia, in Iran, in Lebanon, he is faithfully implementing the neocon agenda. Trump “the peacemaker” is no where to be found, while Trump the ‘madman with a knife’ is on the loose.
Is that why Mueller let Trump off the hook? Was there a quid pro quo: “You follow our foreign policy directives and we’ll make Mueller disappear?
It sure looks like it.
http://www.unz.com/mwhitney/tit-for-tat-why-did-mueller-let-trump-off-the-hook/ 

A high level Pentagon official has admitted that US forces will be in Syria for "the long haul" and coupled his statement by declaring the territory contains “a lot of the oil resources and arable land.”
The unusually frank remarks were made this week by Michael Mulroy, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Middle East, while addressing a conference at the D.C. based Center for a New American Security (CNAS), months after President Trump appeared to have caved to his advisers, reversing course earlier this year from his stated goal of a full and rapid US troop exit from Syria.


"The increase in US spending was driven by the implementation from 2017 of new arms procurement programmes under the Trump administration," said Aude Fleurant, director of SIPRI's Arms and Military Expenditure (AMEX) programme.
The US figure alone of $649 billion was as much as the next eight highest military budgets...
Russia meanwhile dropped out of the top five spenders, with its military budget declining since 2016, said the report.  


​Investing in freedom with our Saudi friends...​
A UN-commissioned report by University of Denver also revealed that more Yemenis were dying of hunger, disease and the lack of health clinics and other infrastructure than from fighting...
"It's one of the highest-impact internal conflicts since the end of the Cold War. On par with Iraq, Sierra Leone, Liberia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo - conflicts with an impact on development that lasts for a generation."
According to Moyer, the vast majority of the victims of Yemen's conflict are children under five. The report says that one child dies from the war and its side effects every 11 minutes and 54 seconds.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/yemen-death-toll-surpass-230000-end-2019-un-report 

In the sharp light of spring it is clear that Macron’s winter strategy: the Great National Debate, has achieved nothing for the government and more tellingly perhaps, has further revealed Macron’s own incapacity to either change himself or shift course. As one anonymous French state official reportedly said: ‘Mitterrand gave them an extra week’s holiday, but Macron can’t manage anything’. He simply seems unable in any form to communicate with either the Gilets or the people of France. His constant speeches, with their casual insults and lack of empathy, remain one of the best recruitment tools the Gilets possess.
His recent pronouncements continue this trend. His promise to rebuild the cathedral in five years was met with scorn – ‘this is not a railway line’, said one commentator, while his invitation to the world (a typical empty gesture) angered and aroused traditionalists. Indeed, as has been widely reported, his endorsement of cash donations from billionaires, simply provided the Gilets with yet more free sticks to beat him and the state.​.. 
Above all, Macron is guilty of being one of those stupid/intelligent middle class people; the sort neo-liberalism delights in providing for us in many guises: administrators, legacy media editors, heads of departments, councillors, politicians. He is bright, he is buffed, he has aspiration, he can speak fluently on subjects for hours, yet for all of that, every speech he makes simply inflames the situation. And this, coupled with his inability to convey a shred of empathy and his apparent lack of understanding concerning both politics and national history, reveal him to be nothing so much as a messenger boy for the rich and the powerful. Once again none of this escapes the French population.​..
The dismissal of the Paris police chief and the calls by the state for the police to use greater violence and employ more weaponry, simple confirm the gridlock which has entangled the neo-liberal state and its bureaucratic class.​..
 And what of the Gilets? Well, they are everywhere. Every week Facebook is full of online Gilet house-parties, where films, discussion and reinforcement abound. When they don’t demonstrate they talk.. Nor, despite the toil required, is there any sign the people of France are quitting the movement. My roundabout still has people each week-end, as they have been every week-end through what was a cold and desolate winter, and in this they are simply duplicating events at the other twenty or so occupied roundabouts in Gers and all through France. Recently the group at my roundabout distributed a flyer saying that they were finding it difficult to continue every weekend and could others come and assist them, something which according to locals, met with an influx of new recruits. ‘Nous le faisons pour vous’ is their standard speech as they hand out flyers to passing motorists, almost all of whom appear friendly and sympathetic; something entirely to be expected, given all of them are locals.

  WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been sentenced to 50 weeks in prison for violating his bail and going into hiding at the Ecuadorian embassy, seven years ago, a sentence that comes just a day before a hearing is set to take place concerning his extradition to the U.S

​1) How can this happen if multinational corporations control the politicians of the powerful countries?​ 2) Who gets more of the money?
Introducing a global minimum effective corporate-tax rate on MNCs of between 20 and 25 per cent, as the ICRICT (of which I am a member) advocates, would greatly weaken these firms’ financial incentives to use so-called transfer pricing among their subsidiaries to shift recorded profits to low-tax countries. Moreover, a global minimum would end the race to the bottom in which countries lower their national tax rates to attract investment by MNCs.
These global tax revenues could then be allocated among governments according to factors such as the company’s sales, employment and number of digital users in each country—rather than on where multinationals decide to locate their operations and intellectual property.


There's three times more carbon in the soil than in the atmosphere – but that carbon's being released by deforestation and poor farming...
Hurting the soil affects the climate in two ways: it compromises the growth of plants taking in carbon from the atmosphere, and it releases soil carbon previously stored by worms taking leaf matter underground...
About 3.2 billion people worldwide are suffering from degraded soils, said IPBES chairman Prof Sir Bob Watson.
"That's a
lmost half of the world population. There’s no question we are degrading soils all over the world. We are losing from the soil the organic carbon and this undermines agricultural productivity and contributes to climate change. We absolutely have to restore the degraded soil we’ve got."

No comments:

Post a Comment