The latest Emmissions Gap report

https://public.wmo.int/en/media/press-release/landmark-united-science-report-informs-climate-action-summit

Global temperature rise is now 1.1C above pre-industrial times, if nations stick to current Nationally Defined Contribution plans, which they have not been doing yet, we would be on track to a 2.9-3.4C rise above pre-industrial times by 2100.

A 3.4C rise would be extremely catastrophic with far more extreme weather events as well as generally greater heat and desertification, melted ice, and sea level rise.  And by current actions we are far exceeding even that.  At 6C it's like a different planet, after enormous loss of species as well.

1) Plans need to be at least 3 times more ambitious.
2) New targets need to be met, not just promised.

Fossil fuel usage is on track to increase rather than decrease by 2030.

Instead, we need to nearly eliminate it by then.

US is one of the biggest dinosaurs, and with little forward planning.

Green New Deal to the max !!!

Chinese History

Want to Understand Chinese History? These 5 Events are the Key.

This looks like a pretty good synopsis, far better than I would have expected in National Interest.

I had no idea the Opium wars went back so far into the 19th century.

Most of the land mass of the USA was acquired by theft and brutality in the 19th century.

China is 7000 miles away, and it's not for USA to be supporting separatists and radicals there under any circumstances.

Except, helping them with a news platform, the way RT does in America; at least I think this sort of thing is legitimate.

Hong Kong's oligarchs are doing that well enough already, don't appear to need our help in that regards.

Be more concerned about other things than just debt

I agree with Krugman.  Debt isn't really much of a problem.  The MMT'ers go much farther in that direction, and I see Krugman as defining the "conservative" view, with the truth being somewhere in between.  This is nothing new for me.

What is a problem, is how we are utilizing our worker power.  We need to be doing the Green New Deal, and all of Bernie's other programs.

Regardless of whether they seem to increase debt.

In the long run, they will more than pay for themselves plus improve our way of life and prospects for survival.  When you have opportunities like that, you should take them.

Of course, we should also be taxing capital rents better and cutting our military expenditures to the proportion of a non-aggressive country such as Japan.  If we don't do that, not only will there be higher debt, we won't have the actual labor power to get the Green New Deal and all the other good things done.

If we simply keep slowly/quickly increasing debt while failing to do anything useful with the money, or even anything less than globally and wantonly destructive with the money--as we are doing now--we'll deserve what we get.

Ukranian Interference in 2016

The New York Times (and other US mainstream media) proclaims that Ukraine interference in the 2016 Presidential Election is a debunked conspiracy theory.  Oh, and that Biden's phone calls didn't cause the firing of the investigator of the company Hunter Biden worked for.  Both claims are easily proven false.

On the Ukranian interference, this is the easy connection to prove, since it's all from fairly major sources.  In March 2016, Ukranian-American DNC staffer Alexandra Chalupa went to the Ukranian embassy in Washington DC asking for dirt on Donald Trump.

The Ukranian government in 2016 had every reason to cooperate with the DNC, not the least because Trump had sounded very much like he was going to pursue a normalization of relations with Russia, when the Ukranian government was still (and still is) fighting a war with ethnic Russian separatists who have sometimes been helped by Russia.  And the Crimean annexation, which they hoped Washington could get reversed.  They wanted a "tough on Russia" leader in the USA.

Ukranians were not shy about admitting that they were hoping to swing the election to Hillary (quotes at link below).

What we do know, is that for the benefit of the DNC the Ukranian government delivered the "Black Book" allegedly showing payments to Manafort.  This led shortly to Manfort's being fired by the Trump campaign, and reinforcing the idea that Trump was colluding with Russia, as Hillary had begun alleging earlier in July 2016.

The "Black Book" was never proven authentic...it was allegedly recovered by Ukranian rebels before the party office building burned during the coup, and there are other suspicious details.  When Manafort was later convicted, it was because of unrelated tax fraud.

All of the above is documented in the link below, which itself includes links to more mainstream sources.

So there's one electoral influence operation, I believe there are others, but let that pass until I have better info at hand.

About Biden.  The New York TImes claims that the government investigator Shokin was not fired because he was getting too close to Biden's son.  Instead, they claim he was merely fired for poor performance, and the investigation was dormant anyway.

But in fact Shokin filed two cases in 2015, and in February 2015 he seized 4 large houses and a Rolls Royce from Zlochevsky.   Starting ten days later, Biden calls Poroshenko three times in one week with only one major aim: Flre Shokin.  Biden as VP had been instrumental in the Maidan coup and Poroshenko owed him.  A week later Shokin is fired.

BIden's last official appearance as VP was to an audience of Ukranian officials.

MoA - Biden's Intervention In Ukraine And Ukraine's 2016 Election Meddling Are Matters of Fact

MoA - Biden's Intervention In Ukraine And Ukraine's 2016 Election Meddli...

Debunking yet another MSM Ukrainegate Debunking

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/10/bidens-intervention-in-ukraine-and-ukraines-2016-election-meddling-are-matters-of-fact.html#more

Two State Solution is Dead, Yet also an Idol

https://mondoweiss.net/2019/10/the-two-state-solution-is-a-cruel-delusion-and-an-idol-in-washington

Racism and Capitalism

It's sometimes argued Capitalism works toward ending racism.  After all, maximizing production would mean getting the most out of everyone.

But it's not about maximizing production, it's about maximizing profit.  And if you can segment the workforce by race, it reduces the solidarity to resist capitalist wage extortion.  Meanwhile, actual production and quality suffer, but bottom feeder capitalists don't care, and they take over in an unregulated marke

Left to itself, a "free market" will only exacerbate racism.  Defeating racism takes education and political action.

Zuckerberg is Right and "Fact Checking" is Censorship

All around the left-verse I'm seeing calls for Facebook and other social media to have "Fact Checking."

As if such a thing were possible.

As if such a thing does not already have a long history of abuse.  In just the last few years, we've seen both Facebook and Twitter outsource "fact checking" to the likes of The Atlantic Council, a shill for NATO.

Zukerberg is absolutely correct in arguing for free speech, and letting the reader determine what the facts are.

He's wrong in that Facebook has already done quite a bit of this, at one time disempowering 100's of leftist and antiwar Facebook accounts.  They get rid of one right wing Alex Jones (good riddance) and then 100's of lefty sites are caught in the same elite-powered scam.  I think many of the disempowered sites may have gotten restoration...but I have not seen the full story yet.

Update: FAIR reports a barely reported story about British Psyop officer working at Twitter, and also that Facebook has partnered with The Weekly Standard (a conservative newspaper that heavily promoted the bogus story about Iraq having ties to Al Qaeda) for fact checking purposes.  Last year Facebook started working with the National Democratic Institute and the International Republican Institute as well as the pro-NATO Atlantic Council.

THIS IS ALWAYS THE WAY IT WORKS, AND WHY THERE MUST NOT BE CENSORSHIP!

The powerful will always enforce their point of view through censorship.  Any "facts" that they don't like are non-facts.  Any fabrications are mirages that they do like, are Facts.  They may also throw in a few more actual Facts to make it look good.

If you would seek the truth, you MUST read fully opposing viewpoints from their own mastheads.  And if either one of those is censored, or even mincing words to avoid censorship, it is not their full story, so your attempt to find the truth will be offset.

Zuckerberg's argument was long ago made by one of the wisest of all, Judge Brandeis.  And many more.

Meanwhile, we can look around at the calls for censorship and see who are not the good and wise people.

Right now, in case you had any doubt, a cheerleader for the New Cold War, US Imperialism, and Censorship, is DailyKOS.  I can hardly read their daily list anymore it's so full of crap.  Tweeters I follow have never had any doubt, going back at least to 2016 when they were endlessly trashing Bernie.  Still, many of my friends love it because it appears to be so anti-Trump.  Appearances can be deceiving.

Right along with them Dissent Magazine.  They were always somewhat marginally left, and some have long called them an Imperial Shill (for example, for all the negative stories about Cuba, and Bolivarian countries).

My response to endless encomiums to Kurds

It just tires me so much to keep hearing about Kurds.  If I didn't hear so much unwarranted praise being heaped on them, I'd just leave them alone.  One of my childhood friends I respected greatly was Kurdish.  But these endless encomiums are not really about Kurds.  They are about goading US to get back to war fighting against Syria/Russia.  Otherwise, the media wouldn't say a damn thing about Kurds.  How many of the other 100,000 ethnicities do you hear of on a daily basis?

What we need is secular states.  Like Syria+Iraq under secular Ba'athist regime which could make it work.  Generally speaking, as large as practical.  In a tough neighborhood, that's what we know works.

The idea that every ethnicity needs a state is nuts.

But useful, if your goal is to ensure all states are small and weak enough so as not to be a threat to Israel.

I think that was the Kinon plan, to cut Iraq and Syria in half, and even a bit out of turkey and Iran, to make Kurdistan.

That creates a big state that's a natural ally of Israel (or so they hoped) and a bunch of weak arab states.

Like, the Arab majority in the region is going to think that's fine and dandy.  NOT.

I understand that most people in the former "Rojava" proto state were NOT Kurds, and they did not like having Kurd warlords rule them, and they wanted Assad to rescue them.  (Assad was being held down in more strategically important northwest by foreign backed jihadis and repeated false flag claims.)

Indeed Syria itself (with 113 ethnicities) barely holds together.  And would have done so far better if US+Turkey+Qatar+SaudiArabia+Kurds+Israel had not decided to break it up.

But barely is better than not-at-all.

Sykes-Pikot were apparently not fools. It's apparently quite difficult to put anything else together, except perhaps the whole thing, which their selfish intent was not to.

And, of course, it should be done by regional referendums, if you were going to do it at all.

It's looking like it may take some time to learn these lessons, or even the one about leaving places 7,000 miles away well alone to let them figure it out, with no added weapons.

Originally "Syria" had very few Kurds.  The vast majority of Kurds (and people of Kurdish descent) is Turkey, where Kurdish ethnicity is not recognized.  A few took refuge in Syria, and next thing are part of a scheme to blow the country up.  That's gratitude.

Oh, yeah, but Kurds are communal "socialists."  Israel "tried" (claimed) to promote that at first, as they were stealing Arab villages to make communes.

There is no such thing as national socialism.  It's only socialism if it's pan-national.  It's only socialism if no one becomes or remains homeless.  Rinse, repeat.

The solution to the "Kurdish Problem" is ending Kurdish oppression in Turkey, where most are from and remain.

Bernie is The Youngest

My feelings exactly.  It's not just about Bernie, it's about our democratic socialist movement.  Right now, he's the only candidate who is really part of our movement, and we need to get started with him.  This is the new political alignment which will we hope will draw in all but the super rich.  New political alignments happen every 40 years, and we're due.  Trump is the other "new" alignment.  All the other candidates are part of the Reagan (Movement Conservative) vs Clinton (New DLC Democrat) alignment which started in 1980 and is now collapsing.  Holding to that is a sure loser.  I've had Trump Republicans tell me that Bernie is the only Democratic candidate they respect.  There is a good chance he could win more swing states.  He is THE most popular Senator in his home state of all Senators.  Warren is the 6th most unpopular Senator in her home state of Massachusetts, her "plans" are recently cooked up cheap copies of his lifelong ideas, and as much strength as she has, she is still no match for Bernie's energy and commitment to social change through social movements.

And FWIW, Biden is only 2 years younger than Bernie, and Bernie is far more energetic and alert than Biden.  Bernie is more energetic and alert than I am at 63.  He takes his health seriously.  He's not stuffed with Big Macs/

https://jacobinmag.com/2019/10/bernie-sanders-age-health-old-electability?

Rules of Thumb

1.  If a violent protest movement is called a Freedom or Democracy Movement on US mainstream media, that means it is a US backed Regime Change Movement (what leftists mean by Color Revolution).

1'. Another thing to look for, is how the protestors and police are characterized on US MSM.  If you are being made to sympathize with the protestors, it is a US backed Regime Change Movement.

1''. If you are being made to fear the "militants," then they are not officially US backed, but might be covertly operating as a US backed counterforce, which must be opposed by officially US backed forces, with other forces being ignored until it can be made to appear that they did something bad.

2.  If a protest is ignored by the US MSM, or almost entirely ignored, it possibly is a legitimate locally representative protest.

2.' If counterprotestors or counterforces are ignored, those must be the truly local representative ones, with their antagonists being the US backed Regime Change Movement.

3.  It also pays to bear in mind the US relationship with the country in which this is occurring.  If the country does not submit in every way to US whims, a protest is likely to represent a US backed movement, but this is a less reliable indicator than #1, at least, it seems like it might be, though offhand I can't think of any examples showing it to be a less reliable indicator.

4.  If a separatist group accepts US support for a regime change operation, it is morally entitled to less than nothing because of that reason.*  If the regime change is only partly successful, grim will be the rewards.  If the regime change is fully successful, the outlook is at best highly uncertain.  Separatist movements may or may not recognize and accept this immediately.  Who does not
recognize and accept it immediately is the Main Stream Media, and the War Politicians, who will endlessly pine for a return to the old illegal and unethical activities and support to keep the gravy train going, regardless of how much less successful such an operation will be the next time around.

(*To those who say it was my money, yes.  But I did not control that.  It was against my will, expressed though voting tendencies, protests, and letters.  And even if it were with my full assent, that would not grant it "moral entitlements," at least for the part that can't be fixed.  My country may be on the hook for cleanup and rebuilding, but not to a particular geopolitical outcome, which should never have been promised, and all such promises are understood as temporal and tentative.  In no event is a moral imperative for my country to continue illegal and immoral activities that should never have been started in the first place.)

5.  If history or context are ignored, it is because they are damning to the US backed side.  If myths and legends, religions, ethnicies, or "Freedom and Democracy" become the context,  it must be the US backed side, and for which the history is damning.

Free Speech on Facebook

Considering how bad many of Facebook's critics are on Free Speech, it's a wonder Facebook isn't far more censorious.  (I had hopes for this article, but it's another screed on the need to apply Fact Checking--aka censorship--to opinions the author doesn't like.)

Face it: there is no such thing as Fact Checking.  Every report has a Point of View.

The correct response is NOT censorship.

A good response would be automatic linking to reverse POV stories, so the reader can judge for themselves.

Democrats "split" on forever wars

Sadly, there isn't much "split."  Only Tulsi seems truly serious about ending forever wars and correctly called out US Imperialism in Syria.  Bernie claims to be committed to ending endless wars, but isn't willing to buck the establishment in calling spades spades as would be necessary in such an effort.  Warren even more weakly expresses some mixed feelings about endless wars.

ALL of the rest of the Democrats are Unrepentant Regime Changers.

Seeing their responses, I'm going to avoid speaking too kindly of Buttigieg and Klobuchar in future.

Here's a great summary by Phil Weiss of Mondoweiss:

‘Coffins off the plane’ — Dems split on Forever Wars – Mondoweiss

‘Coffins off the plane’ — Dems split on Forever Wars – Mondoweiss We are having a debate about anti-war policy in the Democratic Party, though liberal interventionists characteri...

Free Speech

Another reason for Freedom of Speech (which means, things we don't want to hear):

It is best to hear people explain themselves in their own words and/or those of their chosen representatives, in order to judge their ideas.

And so, thusly we must hear the words from racists, NAZI's, and so on.

When there is conflict, we should read both sides directly.

Here's a Syrian, celebrating the withdrawal of US from protection of Rojava.

Here's a Kurd, criticising Syrian and Russian actions.

Smearing Tulsi

Tulsi was the first candidate I contributed to, because of her as-yet-unique among Democratic candidates call for an end to all US wars.  She may have been the only candidate yet to denounce the recent attempts to coup Venezuela, and the endless US war in Syria (that we have now only partly withdrawn from...still at great condemnation from Democratic Party imperialists).  Though Bernie also calls for ending endless wars, he has never spoken as well about Venezuela and Syria, which have been endlessly demonized on US propaganda "news" (including National Propaganda Radio NPR).

I subsequently switched my support to Bernie, because he has a far richer response to domestic policy issues, AND he has been a leading candidate since before day one and still, AND he has stuck with his "defeat the billionaire establishment" message for decades and we need that kind of character who won't flake out and compromise everything as all other Presidents have when they actually reach the White House.  And, among all the other candidates, except Tulsi (and Gravel, who dropped out and endorsed both Bernie and Tulsi), he uniquely is the most antiwar among them.*  And I've had cover from some Palestinian rights advocates who also endorse Bernie.  While I believe that Tulsi means what she says, no one has more proven commitment than Bernie.

(*On Imperialism, as in domestic policy, Warren is not in the same league; though she also calls for ending Endless Wars.  But she sounds much more protective of Israeli human rights violations.  Bernie calls out Israeli violations, at least most of them--nobody except anti-Zionists still demand a 100% Right of Return for All Palestinian refugees--and needless to say none of our Presidential Candidates are anti-Zionists.)

Some time ago I had read the takedown of Tulsi at Jacobin and was quite convinced that it showed I had been duped.  However, in subsequent weeks, I followed threads and dialogues and decided that this takedown was actually racist.  There is no getting around the fact that Tulsi is a Hindu.  I would prefer it of course if she were an Athiest--as no other candidates are.  But given a choice between Christian, Jew, Muslim, or Hindu, I honestly don't care.  But some people will, especially Muslims.  As one might expect, at Jacobin the racism is very hard to pin down so it eluded me at first.  Other outlets have pumped the same message with less nuance, and of course less progressive antiwar tendency as well.

Now that Hillary has jumped into Tulsi-smearing, it's apparently OK for DailyKOS to do so as well.  I haven't had any need for DailyKOS in the past 4 years, but far too many of my friends still love it, strangely, even if they hate Hillary more than I do.  It appears most people are a lot like my late National Heathcare and Ronald Reagan loving mother--in not connecting the dots to show how one thing they like doesn't match the other.  And I'm not talking about "friendships" (we should ALL be friends).

One argument that appears in both of these misleading commentaries is the notion that it's racist to call out Islamic Extremism.

No it isn't!!!  And the USA (and Israel!) have been supporting vile Islamic Extremist groups in Syria and elsewhere for far too long (all the while claiming that they were fighting Islamic Extremism).  THIS IS PURE EVIL!!!  And Tulsi is the only Democratic politician to call this out.  (The GOP has long had Ron Paul.)

Now, it may well be true that Bannon has said a few nice things about Tulsi.  But that is his right, and it need not reflect badly on Tulsi herself either.  The war is not about personalities but ideas.   Even fools, idiots, and demagogues may have a few good ideas--in fact demagogues must have at least one good idea.

I see some claiming Bannon is a friend of Tulsi.  I don't know if that's true, and I don't care.  Benjamin Franklin said it best: We must be enemies of none.  People who follow these kinds of links attempting to smear people by their friendships should be the least trusted of all--they are hate mongers.

Likewise Fox News.  Back when I cavorted with nearby members of ISO, they had a very clear opinion about Fox News.  They said it was Far Better to watch the News on Fox than on so-called "liberal" networks like CNN and MSNBC.  On Fox News, they're not trying to hide where they're really coming from.  On CNN and MSNBC, it's all a game of diversion, fooling the lefter sheep to come back to the Imperial center.

While I respected that opinion, I couldn't much follow it, because I can hardly stand to listen to Fox News any longer than I can stand to listen to NPR.

More interesting data: when CNN and MSNBC virtually ignore Bernie, Fox News likes to cover him, and in fact was the only network to broadcast a recent and most uplifting Bernie rally in NYC.

This brings to mind 2016, when I had Republican contractors working on my house, seeing my Bernie sign, they said they respected him above all other Democrats.

Ultimately, to get anywhere near the kind of supermajorities we need to win in US politics, we are going to need to win people like this over.

I've decided that though I still can't listen to Fox News, or watch it, it might be useful to check up on what they are actually saying from time to time, as part of getting the whole picture.  THIS is how you MUST read the news, from truly oppositional sources.  Centrist sources are always fake, a thin veneer over a sheep shearing operation.  There is no such thing as Fair and Balanced, never was, never will be.


https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1186109742244139009

https://twitter.com/hashtag/BernieTulsi2020?src=hashtag_click

Clinton extending Russiagate Smears to fellow Democrats

"At long last, have you no sense of decency?"

 

Not that we needed any more proof of that, either back then or especially now with HRC, already one of our most distinguished war criminals and she didn't even need to become president to reach that status.

It's clear that every single good move (and there weren't many, amidst all the bad) of Obama in Foreign policy was over HRC's strenuous objections if not her ultimate resignation.  And the worst decisions, including coups in Libya, Honduras, Ukraine, and endless war in Syria, were things she was a key cheerleader for.

Why was Hillary Clinton replaced as Secretary of State? Why did she resign? - Quora

Why was Hillary Clinton replaced as Secretary of State? Why did she resi...

As is her want, I think this was a highly calculated decision on Clinton's part, either to not be associated with Obama,s plans to reestablish diplomatic relations with Cuba and negotiate a nuclear treaty with Iran, so as to avoid criticism from conservatives for doing so during her presidential run. It also allowed her to legally make millions giving speeches, as she would be prohibited from doing so while in office. It is consistent with her strategy of avoiding controversial issues, as her authorship of only three pieces of mundane legislation regarding infrastructure naming or renaming while in the Senate indicates. She Calculated that name recognition, experience, expedient issue flexibility based on opinion polls, and being the first female nominated would guarantee her entitlement to proceed to the presidency.

2.1k views · View Upvoters

Endless Religion

The coming end of Christian America

As even the strictest practitioners of laïcité must concede, major religious shifts like this will have equally major political effects — but we are in somewhat uncharted territory as to what those effects may be. In broad strokes, this decline keeps the U.S. trailing Western Europe's religious and political evolution: the end of Christianity as a default faith and a move toward left/right politics that can be roughly characterized as socialism against nationalist populism. Yet Europe can hardly provide a clear window to our future, not least because many European states have both multi-party parliamentary systems and state churches.

Sadly, it looks to me like USA will be forever stuck with Christianity, and a peculiarly mindless and totalitarian version as well.

State churches and parliamentary systems would probably have worked out better in the long run.  But those may not be the only factors:

1) Endless wars and Imperialism

2) Corrupt Chamber of Commerce subsidizing evangelicals

3) Lack of taxation on Churches and the Oligarchs who fund them

4) Neutered and boring "spectator" political system

5) Lack of alternative social amenities, perhaps by design

6) Mobster monopolies of drinking and fun establishments so they're all awful

7) Blue laws and drug prohibition

The "Dark Web"

Bari Weiss is the American Zionist attempting to repeat the success of Zionists in the UK and EU in redefining criticism of Israel as anti-Semitism.

That definition seems fine to the lights of the "liberal media" such as The Guardian, who have used that definition endlessly to smear Jeremy Corbyn, the finest politician in UK, as an anti-Semite.

The very name "Dark Web" is to sound evil and sinister.

But, it's actually the "liberal media" that serves the darkest forces in society in promoting endless wars, in large part through demonization.

We can pretend that the rot only began with Trump.  But in a wider perspective, endless wars against self-determination have been a feature of the last 120 years, long before there was a Web.  And at the very center of that, always, has been the liberal media, and always using the same techniques of demonization.

Now, the liberal media and it's allies would like to demonize and choke off the "dark web" to ensure they have a continuing monopoly on disinformation and demonization, so endless wars and other forms of sponsored corruption can continue

The Hong Kong Mega Thread:
https://twitter.com/DanielDumbrill/status/1185026676343758848?s=20

I've had fewer and fewer doubts that this is now Primarily a foreign violent separatist "Color Revolution."

I would say in general to my fellow revolutionaries.  Winning hearts and minds is the key to poltical victory.  Terrorizing all is the path to Fascism.  This is certain the later, not a poltical process.

In my dream world, other police forces would be studying the Hong Kong police force, which so far has done unbelievably well in handling this without causing death.  I doubt any Western country could come close.

I'm tending to think US is pushing this now because Trump leaning intelligence needs a corrupt regime change project, Democrats got theirs in Ukraine.

None of my friends are getting this, they consider US support fairly coincidental, and merely helping Hong Kongers mobilize for freedom and democracy.

Yet, they see RT America (which I consider fairly good, and generally the best TV news I know) as a foreign influence operation.

They don't see the things I do through my antiwar twitter contacts like Aaron Mate, and ConsortiumNews.  NPR and DemocracyNow are far left enough for them.

Russiagate is Mass Distraction

Green Party Candidate is correct about RussiaGate being mass distraction.

Also interesting discussion.

Not that I endorse voting Green, I generally don't.  (I voted Nader in 2000 and regretted it ever since.  Since then, I've voted straight Democratic.)

But at this point, I'd consider it, if the Democratic candidate is Hillary again, and perhaps even Biden.

Unlike Gore, who has distinguished himself after 2000 as a very good guy, Hillary continues to do the opposite, most recently with an attack on Tulsi Gabbard.

Hillary, more than anyone, holds on to the full Imperial Full Spectrum Dominance plan.

Mass Arrest Strategy

There is no doubt that we are a dangerous point in human affairs.  The Doomsday Clock now considers both Nuclear War and Global Heating as existential and imminent threats to humanity.

Massive changes are required now, and in everything, to reduce future harm from Global Heating.  Despite talking about these issues, only tiny changes have been made across the globe, but more in some places than others, to reduce and adjust to this incoming disaster.

Clearly, and just as Bernie Sanders has always said, we need a Political Revolution.  We need to take over the system and redirect it towards meeting human needs instead of profits, and toward building an alternative Green Socialist Society.

A political revolution is not merely a current crop of corrupt leaders becoming frightened and replaced by another crop of corrupt leaders.

Always, the most important thing, is to make other people feel our messages as well as we do.

That means, winning hearts and minds.  Politics.

Sometimes, when the media refuses to cover issues, and to get the message out, "non-violent" actions of the type long performed by Greenpeace are a good idea.  I am a long time supporter of both Greenpeace and the more academic Union of Concerned Scientists.

Color Revolution, small violence intended to discredit the State by striking back harder, is not a path to true freedom, democracy, or justice.  Color Revolution is a path to becoming an Imperial Pawn--to be successful it MUST have outside backers.  Color Revolution tactics in a closed political system produce Fascism.

While I think it's too early to rule the Climate Extinction group as illegitimate as some have, the protest attacking subway commuters (from the Financial District--a fact unmentioned by @OffGuardian) was clearly ill conceived.  Even if it is TO the Financial District, where many great crimes are performed, it does no good in "winning hearts and minds" to Green Socialism with an attack on subway commuting workers.

In general, violence is problematic and should be avoided.  Inconvenience should be highly targeted to the oligarchs and the oligarchy.  They are the ones who should tremble, not the 99.9%.

Agency: A Fallacious Argument

Dan Cohen has made what I believe is an excellent 9 minute video about the Hong Kong protests.  I completely agree they are essentially a foreign backed violent separatist movement.

Twitterer Israelblewupmyhome responds saying this Dan's video is racist, because it denies Agency to the Hong Kong youth.

Ultimately, it seems to me this Agency argument could be used to deny any influence of advertising, propaganda, monetary influence, fraud, etc.

There may be a limited validity to an Agency honoring rule, and that is in the context of meeting rules, to promote positive discourse rather than backstabbing.  However, even there, this is a questionable restriction on free speech.  Under some circumstances, however, such a rule may be necessary to complete a meeting within alotted time or other constraints, though in principle all speech inhibiting rules that fall short of ILA (Imminent Lawless Action) are undesireable.

This is not to say, in actual debate, one should avoid extraneous issues.  One should always focus on the actual arguments when possible, except in response to an array of fallacious arguments.

The fact is, people usually do not so much invent ideas as borrow them, and to fit other ideas they have borrowed.  People who buy into packages of arguments can be wrong about a large number of things that seem perfectly reasonable to them, because their environment has packaged an array of lies beforehand.  Once people have accepted an array of lies, it is very hard to get them to change their minds.  As was once said about Scientists, one has to wait for the old generation to die off.  Sometimes prevailing opinions can change faster than that, but then there may be regression later.

Examples of whole classes of people being wrong:

American Exceptionalism
Neoconservatism
Neoliberalism
Movement Conservatism
Zionism

If vast numbers of people can buy into false promises like those, why isn't it possible for large numbers of Hong Kong youth be persuaded to follow capitalist neo colonialism?  Wouldn't it be the reverse, that if somehow Hong Kong youth are alone in not being caught up in brainwashing, but everyone else is?

US Foreign Policy

Uncle Tungsten says it best

what is there to say but the joke that is US foreign policy has been around for at least a century. That country could be brilliant and egalitarian but it has been repeatedly plundered by its ruling class for way too long.  

It's people and public services are impoverished to the point where it is a beacon to no one and more likely the light of the statue of liberty signals dangerous shoreline and sunken dreams.

The Phone Call

Between Trump and Zelensky.

I would like to see a Truth and Reconciliation process examining the actions of previous Presidents, including Obama--and the Obama Administration--and Ukraine, in 2016.  And similar actions in other countries, going back at least to the Ford administration.

That's the only honest approach.  A partisan witch hunt is a waste of the people's time.  Next President will just do the same thing, combined with a better job of purging the CIA of reverse partisans first.

Meanwhile, after 3 years of fake and hyperbolic claims coming from Russiagate, I have grown extremely tired of all this ImpeachmentGate, which does in fact seem like an effort stemming from intelligence officials (like Brennan and Clapper) and foreign governments and agents to Control the President (keeping those endless wars going), if not actually remove him from office (I've been skeptical that they even intended to do this).  Russiagate was actually the Deep State itself trying to control the 2016 election and its aftermath--making sure any detente with Russia could not happen.  This appears to be the biggest crime of all, absolutely unmentioned in the Mainstream Media--which was the most active participant.

I've never trusted Intelligence Coups.  I think it's mainly about perpetuating Endless War.  And this looks like more of the same, starting with leaks from the CIA.

If Russiagate had never happened, I would be more interested in WhistleblowerGate.  But there appears to be an even greater evil than Trump--the Deep State which will do anything to continue Endless Wars.  I always knew this was true, it explains the Kennedy Assassination for example, but it's never been confirmed in so many visible ways.  It's no longer plausible to argue that the CIA is "under the control of the President" like some of my friends have long done.

What we need to do is abolish spy agencies.


Note: This has no bearing on the 7 truly impeachable Trump offenses I previously listed.  For one, NO previous president has used the kind of hate and violence provoking rhetoric Trump has in public speeches, and it is unacceptable for the president of a free country.

It appears in private conversation, Trump talks as nicely as anyone.  Even when, as in this case, he is alleged to have been delivering a threat.

And that's only what one should expect from Trumps schmoozing and deal making background.

He only plays Hitler on stage.  The tough guy, now Fearless Leader.  This is not funny at all, it is dangerous.

The Times View

The New York times describes the Turkish leader calling on Kurds to disarm.  There is much missing from this story...

In order to defend Imperialism, Endless Wars, and savage Donald Trump's decision to withdraw (better than the reverse), the Times doesn't mention the Syrian Government, Syrian Army (SAA) at all.  As if they don't exist.  As if Kurds are completely and utterly dependent on US, full stop.

I wanted to comment on this article, which is less than a day old, and comments are already closed.

In the MoonOfAlabama version, which at this point I trust more, SAA, Kurds, and the Russians are successfully defeating the Turkish supported jihadis.

Those are all forces which apparently don't exist, in the eyes of the Times.  Moon says this about the PKK Kurds and their Imperial backers:

After the defeat of ISIS the U.S. had no strategic reason to further pamper them. Only some wannabe imperialists in Washington DC and in Israel were urging to continue the relation.

Claims that this is now Resolved and a Russian Masterpiece may be slightly premature, but this should be the preferred outcome for peace loving people, and not endless continuation of the proxy "Civil War."

This discussion of the Syrian War includes links back to Ukraine as well.

Ukraine and Ukrainian nationals in the USA such as Chalupa were key players in concocting the Russiagate story which plagued Trump before the election in 2016, as well as afterwards and to this day.

The Syrian "Civil Uprising"

Wikipedia tells the story, many people believe, as the CIA wants to tell it (CIA spends much time editing the official record--Wikipedia).

But ignoring their adjectives, looking at the story, I don't see exactly what I'd call a Civil Uprising.

For one thing, it begins with extremist Jihadi grafitti in Arabic saying "The people want the fall of the regime."

This is not the same as, for example, the people want higher minimum wage, or any other such universally positive notion.

It's a direct attack on the legitimacy of the state.  A vague verbal attack anyway.

True, it doesn't pass the Brandeburg test in the USA (Imminent Lawless Action) so, the prosecution of such grafitti as more than the breaking of a civil ordinance against grafitti would represent "police state action."  (However, this is a standard of Free Speech rarely met even in US history, until 1969 at least.)

Allegedly one boy died as a result of torture afterwards.  That allegation was made by Qatar.  Syria claimed Qatar was responsible for the unrest in the first place--a not unreasonable claim.

Syria describes the situation quite differently.  It claims there was a call for Jihad, an armed fight ensued, and the boy tragically was caught in the crossfire.  He was taken directly to hospital but had already died.  This is not unreasonable either.

Given the events afterwards, looking back, it's reasonable to believe that the "Civil Uprising" did not start as civil as described in the West.  Syria was almost certainly framed by partly violent Color Revolution tactics.  The Syrian version of the story should be presumed the truer one, for the purposes of international relations.

And therefore Syria is the secular democratic state of Syria, and Bashir al Assad is a popular elected President.  If considered a Police State, most countries in the world would also be, making the term meaningless.

Demonization should be applied more liberally to one's own government than that of others.  That is the one a person is most directly responsible for.

We ought be the least critical of national "enemies," both because we are least responsible for them in a positive sense, most in a negative sense, and we should seek to end hostilities.  We should be the most critical of our national "friends," both because we enable their badness and should seek to end our favoratism that makes others suffer in comparison.

Curiously enough, Syria looks like what a secular United Arabia might look like, perhaps in a world where Greater Powers had not chopped up Arabia into small countries for better manipulation, and then, promoted Islamic Fundamentalism to drive out secular socialism.

Was Kurdistan the Answer or a Zionist Plot?

The leader of Kurds speaks in Foreign Policy (the magazine of The Council on Foreign Relations, the Council that pretends to rule the world, and actually does direct the world of endless and pointless US warfare).

If We Have to Choose Between Compromise and Genocide, We Will Choose Our People

If We Have to Choose Between Compromise and Genocide, We Will Choose Our... Mazloum Abdi The Kurds’ commander in chief explains why his forces are finally ready to partner with Assad and Putin.

For the Kurds to have what they wanted, Kurdistan, or Rojava, some countries would have to lose a lot of land.

Foreign sponsored separatist warfare is not the kind of process that international law considers legitimate, and probably shouldn't be until it can't be denied.

We should not have been promising them anything.  Trump denied they were promised anything.  However, according to the Kurd leader's story, they may have been promised security from Turkey, which of course was not delivered, in the end, after they had deconstructed their defenses against Turkey--a betrayal.  However, that promise of security from Turkey may have been made by Obama.

Kurdistan may be part of a Zionist plan to divide Arab countries so as to be less threatening to Israel.  I've seen a map where Kurdistan cuts across Iraq and Syria, reducing both to less than half their current size, and forming a buffer around Israel.  Kurds have been welcome in Israel but they had a big protest there this week.  They were expecting to influence US through Israel, as one of their two protectors (US and Israel).  It seems Israel didn't want the Kurds to be betrayed, Kurdistan has always been their plan, but they didn't sabotage Trumps withdrawal either.  So, in effect, the Kurds were betrayed by both US and Israel.  Israel has been strangely silent, perhaps because of all the other things Trump has done for them, or perhaps because of some future plan.

I've seen suggestion that Kurdistan is a very old Zionist plan, and it fits their view of things too: ethnic states.

Quite possibly, the best plan for all would have been United Arabia, especially just after WWII when it could have been a secular state.  THAT would have been the least desireable to Israel, and foreign powers.  Since then, US, UK, Israel and many others have backed the rise of Islamic Fundamentalism of various stripes everywhere, making a secular United Arabia impossible.

Greater Powers tend to prefer and promote separatism.  US and UK have a long history of this.  Smaller countries are weaker, less capable of self-defense, and easier to roll and exploit.

Meanwhile, this week US centrist Democrats are resurrecting Bolton, George W Bush, and Flynn because they all oppose Trump's limited withdrawal.

Curiously, many currently denouncing Trump are the same as who backed Turkish involvement in the Syrian war themselves earlier.

Case in point being Flynn.  He's long been a lobbyist for Turkey.  That seems to have been forgotten this week.

But centrist Democrats don't care.  Any enemy of Trump, especially if that enemy supports endless war, is a friend of centrist Democrats.  And even if they were a friend of Trump yesterday.

Medicare for All

My mother was an "American Firster" opposing FDR in the 1940's.  In the 1960's, she was a Movement Conservative before there were  Movement Conservatives.

She loved Reagan, as Governor of California (where we lived at the time).

But there could be nobody more in favor of National Healthcare.  She knew other countries had National Healthcare, and given her lifestyle as a frequently traveling single mother, she wanted National Healthcare More Than Anything.  She couldn't understand why we, in the richest country in the history of the world, couldn't have it.

I don't think she ever made the connection to Ronald Reagan as spokesman against Medicare.  When it was time to start getting Medicare herself, she thanked FDR for it.

Kenneth Arrow, one of the most famous nobel prize winning economists, wrote a paper in the 1950's showing that a private financed healthcare system could not work.

Peace in Syria

https://thegrayzone.com/2019/10/14/aaron-mate-ben-norton-syria-war-us-withdrawal-turkish-invasion/

It should have been done better.  But it's a rare day when ANY withdrawal from endless wars happens, and it is good this little bit finally happened.  The very best day would have been before they ever happened, and the next best day each day after that.

The idea of waiting until some "stabilization" occurs--that isn't really waiting, it's still trying to win.  Stability never happens so long as instability is actively supported.

Patrick Lawrence of Consortium News emphasizes how badly this withdrawal was done.  But in the end, he agrees, that the final re-connection of Kurds to Syria was a very good thing.

Commenters mostly take the Very Good Thing idea.

However, there's still Idlib...and it appears the US has not even begun to withdraw from there.

And Afghanistan, Yemen, Venezuela, Iran, and Russia.  We have terrorist sanctions and wars remaining to be resolved.

Stunning!

US is indeed pulling out of Syria, Kurds have called for Syrian Army to protect them for formerly US backed FSA mercenaries who are despicable, and Russia is making a deal with Turkey.  This is how the Empire (US) should go away!

Hurray!!!

There are still a few more wars to end.  This one was Obama's, and it used to be called "the Syrian Civil War" even though it was really a US proxy war on a friend of Russia and for that reason. It was started during the term of war mongering SOS Hillary Clinton spreading who was spreading FreedomAndDemocracy  through Color Revolutions around the Middle East and elsewhere--though the US has been trying to topple independent minded Baathist regimes in Syria since WWII.

If those other wars are ended too, it may put Trump in a completely different light.  I'd have to consider him preferable to war mongering DNC candidates like Biden, Harris, and Booker, with the exceptions being Bernie who has also called for full withdrawal from Middle East, I think, and Gabbard who has called for ending all these wars.

On the blogs I read, more and more, DNC types are the bigger war mongers.  I wouldn't count my victories until they are hatched, however, and maybe maintained awhile too, with an eye on CIA intrigues such as what's going on in Congress right now--which looks more and more as if it's intended to stop Trump from making too much Peace, as I started sensing last week.

Trump still equals BOLTON in the minds of many of my friends. They've been totally enthralled by the Impeachment, with all sorts of amazing stories about how it's all going to work out.  But I have still not heard one credible idea how Pence would be impeached also, and even getting Trump convicted by the Senate looks like a pipe dream still.  Or at least that seemed to be true last week.  Perhaps Peace changes things there.  Will the Senate Republicans rise up to protect the Empire from Peace?  This could be a real test of deep state loyalty for Republicans.

Update: This is a good start.  And then there is Iran.

The Real Story

Zelensky denies blackmail threat, says he wants to negotiate with Russia.

The Switch from Comedy to Tragedy for Ukraine's President Zelensky. Rapprochement with Putin? - Global Research

The Switch from Comedy to Tragedy for Ukraine's President Zelensky. Rapp... The recently-elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky keeps saying there was “no blackmail” in a July tele...

This helps me see the situation better.  Of course, Z cannot be allowed to negotiate with Russia.

Trump was supposed to have made THAT threat, instead of the Burisma suggestion.

Spooks called T for not following the script, of course never telling us that.

It's Bay of Pigs.  I knew it, just not where.