Organizing Notes

Bruce Gagnon is coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. He offers his own reflections on organizing and the state of America's declining empire....

My Photo
Name:
Location: Bath, Maine, United States

I grew up in a military family and joined the Air Force in 1971 during the Vietnam War. It was there that I became a peace activist.

Saturday, July 18, 2015

We Are a Killing Nation


We can kill them fast, or we can kill them slow.

See more here 

Friday, July 17, 2015

Greece Has Been Ruined by the Monetary Union



In a recent speech in Athens, Costas Lapavitsas says the Syriza plan was to achieve radical change within the Eurozone - and that's impossible.

Costas Lapavitsas is a professor of economics at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, and was elected as a member of the Hellenic Parliament for the left-wing Syriza party in the 2015 general election.

Nazis in Ukraine Moving Against U.S. Puppet Regime



Nazi units (Right Sector) are making a more aggressive move to topple the US puppet regime in Ukraine.  Now that many of the Nazi 'volunteer battalions' have been trained by the US Army they should be even more effective death squads.  The US has created a real mess inside Ukraine......

Right Sector fascists set up a checkpoint on the outskirts of Kiev on Sunday, following deadly clashes between the group and police in Mukachevo which reportedly caused two deaths and more injuries.

Right Sector and associated nationalists maintained a presence outside Kiev's Presidential Administration building, early Sunday morning, following a day of protest Saturday in which they called for the resignation of Minister of Internal Affairs Arsen Avakov and the resignation of police chiefs in the Transcarpathian region.

It appears the US is using the Nazi units to keep their puppet President Poroshenko in Kiev from making any peace agreements with the self-defense forces in eastern Ukraine.  Washington wants nothing but chaos and instability on Russia's border in order to force 'regime change' in Moscow.

You can get more background on all of this here and here

Thursday, July 16, 2015

Must Watch.....



More interesting and important revelations in this interview with Willy Wimmer.

Willy Wimmer - a former deputy of the German Bundestag, former state secretary of German defense ministry, former vice president of OSCE.

Return of Imperial Japan

Lots of Japanese Lawmakers Don't Want a Fighting ArmyJapanese troops could fight overseas for the first time since World War II.
Posted by AJ+ on Thursday, July 16, 2015

The Fight to Maintain Japan's Article 9

People rally in front of the Japanese Diet on Wednesday, as the ruling bloc bulldozed security bills through at a special committee of the Lower House


ARTICLE 9 (Japanese Constitution)

Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.

To accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.

The US wants Japan to throw out its post-WW II peace constitution (Article 9) and to join the Pentagon global military juggernaut aimed at Russia and China. The right-wing Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (the grandson of a WWII Japanese fascist military leader) in Tokyo is more than happy to accommodate the US plan for full spectrum dominance.  US Ambassador to Japan Caroline Kennedy (another 'good' Democrat) is there on the case to make sure it all happens without too much controversy.  But the Japanese peace movement is responding with large protests and more than 60% of the Japanese people oppose this move to war.

Japan has a long history of war making in the region.  The Japanese invaded Korea in 1592 on its way to China.  Then there was the Sino-Japanese war (1894-1895) between Japan and China.  The Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905) saw the Russians suffer a humiliating defeat by the Japanese Navy. During WW II again China and much of the Asia-Pacific was attacked and occupied by the imperial Japanese military.  

China and Russia are both on the alert as they witness a resurging Japanese militarist  Abe administration, cheered on by the US pivot of 60% of its military forces into the region, being aimed at China and Russia.

The US strategy is to get Japan to 'interpret Article 9 differently' - allowing its current Self Defense Forces to go out and engage in combat activity with the hyper-active US military not only in the Asia-Pacific but anywhere in the world.  The US has already made Japan (along with South Korea, Australia and New Zealand) full NATO 'partners'. 

The Japan Times report on the protests yesterday in Tokyo include the following:

“We have to stop the war legislation,” chanted participants from labor unions and pacifist organizations as banners flapped.

“We will not die for Abe. Don’t send young people to war,” they cried, referring to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

Participant Yukie Tomoda, from Tokyo’s Bunkyo Ward, said she feared the bills could raise the risk of Japan being involved in war.

Wednesday, July 15, 2015

Greek Tragedy



The Greek parliament has until the end of the day to swallow the austerity reforms demanded by the European creditors to get a third bailout. Two members from the finance ministry have already resigned over the bailout, comparing it to a tombstone. The government after all, came to power promising to put an end to austerity.

Going Out on a Limb....

Former Virginia Senator Jim Webb is now a candidate for president.  I believe he will be Hillary's choice for running mate



  • I'm going to go out on a limb on this one but I predict that Hillary will pick former Virginia Senator Jim Webb as her running mate once she secures the Democratic Party nomination.  During the Reagan administration Webb was Secretary of the Navy.  He has also served as a US Senator from Virginia, Assistant Secretary of Defense, Counsel for the House Veterans Affairs Committee, and Marine Corps officer. Over the years Webb has dabbled in both parties but ran for the Senate in 2006 as a Democrat.  He is sometimes called a "maverick" similar in a way to Sen. John McCain in that he is not always predictable.  That's just enough for loyal Democrats to take the bait. Webb would likely be helpful to Hillary in her presidential run because the former Virginia senator comes from one of the most heavily militarized states in the country that is still a key part of the bedrock south.  Webb recently complained on TV that Bernie Sanders was "Not my Democratic Party."  It's the perfect match as far as the war machine goes.  They'd love the team.  Webb could run the Pentagon and Hillary's job would be to neutralize the women, liberals, environmentalists, and the black community as she pushes Greek-style austerity to America.  Say good-bye Social Security and Medicare..... 
  • Today in the mail we received an award certificate from the city of Bath July 4 parade committee.  It appears that our local PeaceWorks group won the 'gold star' award for best "non-profit" group during the recent holiday parade attended by 10,000 Mainers - the biggest July 4 parade in the state.  The award was signed by the local chief of police (serving as chief judge) and I take it as recognition in our long local struggle to be taken seriously by the community as we work to convert Bath Iron Works from warship production to building light rail systems, wind turbines, or the like. If you didn't see our photos from that parade just click here
  • I taped my latest This Issue public access TV show today and had a wonderful guest.  Sherri Mitchell is a Penobscot from Indian Island here in Maine.  She came on the show to talk about current struggles native people in Maine (and across the nation) are having as politics is turning mean and nasty.  In our state right-wing Gov. LePage has been cruel on Indian issues and has destroyed much progress that had been made over the years in repairing the relationships between native people and the white community. Sherri spoke movingly about her family - told a great story about her grandfather which people will enjoy learning about.  She ended the show with a call for all people of good will to work together to help save precious life on our Mother Earth.  I'll post the show here once available - likely in 1-2 weeks time.
  • I am really impressed with an article by Mike Whitney that I posted on the blog yesterday.  He wrote an excellent piece digging under the surface of the Iran nuke deal.  Mike outlined a serious case that much of the Iran deal is part of the larger strategy the US-NATO is developing against Russia.  All about price of oil and natural gas and the market for supplying Europe - will fossil fuels come from Iran or Russia?  Gotta just 'love' the capitalists who always find a way to keep dividing the people against one another.
  • Long regarded University of Illinois Professor of International Law Francis Boyle has joined this Iran analysis discussion and agrees that the implications of the agreement went far beyond the nuclear weapons issue. “This is an attempt by the US to reintegrate Iran into the US imperial order for the Persian Gulf,” Boyle told Sputnik. Up to 1979, Iran served as “the imperial policeman throughout the Persian Gulf region for the US under the Shah, but this ended with the 1979 Islamic Revolution,” Boyle said. In the background to the successful agreement, “the US used the pretext of the nuclear issue to bludgeon Iran into submission by means of the economic sanctions,” he added. "I suspect this deal will have wide ranging implications stretching across the Middle East and Central Asia,” he said. “Iran has made a strategic choice to align itself with the US. Iran is potentially a useful partner to Washington in energy projects that work against Russian interests, not least of them pipelines serving to 'diversify' Europe's gas supplies,” Boyle said. The two countries might also now more openly seek to extend their cooperation in the struggle to roll back the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, Boyle concluded.

Tuesday, July 14, 2015

Why Obama Wants to Lift Sanctions on Iran



by Mike Whitney

        “It is essential to recognize that Iran does not currently have a nuclear weapons program, nor does it possess a nuclear weapon. On February 26, James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Ayatollah Khomenei, the supreme leader of Iran, ended his country’s nuclear weapons program in 2003 and “as far as we know, he’s not made the decision to go for a nuclear weapon.” This repeats the “high-confidence” judgement of the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) that was first made in November 2007.”

    -Micah Zenko, Putting Iran’s Nuclear Program in Context, Council on Foreign Relations

It always helps to start with the truth, and in Iran’s case, the truth is quite simple. Iran has no nuclear weapons, it has no nuclear weapons program, and it’s never been caught diverting nuclear fuel for other purposes. Iran has pursued nuclear technology for peaceful purposes alone.

These are the facts. They may not jibe with the lies propagated in the western media, but they are the facts all the same. Iran is not guilty of anything. It’s merely a victim of Washington’s power-crazy attempt to control vital resources in the Middle East and enhance Israel’s regional hegemony. That’s what’s really going on. It’s all geopolitics. It has nothing to do with nukes.

Media coverage of the so called nuclear negotiations in Laussanne and now in Vienna has focused maniacally on the number of centrifuges, IAEA monitoring programs, uranium enrichment capability, and myriad other arcane topics that are meant to divert attention from the fact that Iran has no nuclear weapons program and no interest in developing one. By poring over the details of these issues in excruciating detail, the reader is left feeling that Iran must be hiding something and therefore must pose a real threat to US national security. But of course that’s precisely what the authors of these articles hope to achieve, they want to pull the wool over the public’s eyes and get people to believe something that is transparently false. The fact is, Iran is not doing anything underhanded or illegal. They are merely demanding that their right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes under the terms of the NPT be respected. Iran will not allow itself to be bullied by the US or treated like a second class citizen. Iran has behaved honorably from the beginning, which is a helluva a lot more than can be said of the US.

The media doesn’t want to discuss the “additional protocols” that Iran accepted in order to build confidence among members on the United Nations, because then people would realize that Iran has gone the extra mile many times in the past only to be slapped with more spurious accusations of noncompliance or foul play. But where’s the evidence of noncompliance or foul play? There isn’t any. It’s all just fear-mongering speculation and vitriolic BS spewed by the dissembling media. There’s not a word of truth to any of it.

The media’s latest scam centers on the term “breakout time”, which refers to the amount of time it would take for Iran to build a nuclear weapon if it was so inclined, which it isn’t.

“Breakout time” is the new propaganda buzzword reiterated thousands of times in the media suggesting that Tehran is just hours away from building an atomic weapon that it will immediately use to annihilate Israel. It’s a ridiculous fairy tale that assumes that–since the US is a rouge-homicidal state that goes around bombing the bejesus out of anything that moves–that other states are bound to behave the same if given half a chance. This is wrong on many levels. First of all, Iran doesn’t want nukes and, secondly, leaders in other countries are not power-mad megalomaniacs whose only joy in life is reducing broad swathes of the planet to smoldering rubble. That behavior is particular to US leaders alone. Others don’t suffer from the same sociopathic disorder.

The nuclear issue has nothing to do Iran’s fictitious nuclear weapons program. That’s just a smokescreen. The real problem is that Iran is a sovereign country with an independent foreign policy. Washington doesn’t like independent nations. Washington likes nations that shut up and do what they’re told. Nations that refuse to take orders are Washington’s enemies, they’re placed on a hit list. And that’s where the sanctions come into play. Sanctions are the way that Washington weakens its enemies before bombing them to kingdom come. They’re the stick the US uses to beat its rivals into submission.

If you’ve been following the news lately, you know that something very strange is going on. The US has done an about-face and changed its policy towards Iran. It’s a shocking development. The US has maintained the same savage policy towards Cuba for 60 years without changing a thing. Whether the policy works or not, has never mattered; what matters is inflicting maximum pain on the people Washington’s doesn’t like. So why the sudden change with Iran? Why is Obama trying to reach an agreement with a country that US elites openly despise?

And, keep in mind, that what Obama’s doing is extremely unpopular with many powerful groups; the Congress, the media, Israel and even high ranking officials in his own State Department. Could it be that the powerbrokers who pull Obama’s strings and tell him what to do have suddenly seen the light and want to open a new era of reconciliation and friendship with Iran?

Of course not. No one believes that. The only reason Obama would strike a deal with Iran is because the US wants something in return. And the US does want something in return. The US wants a substitute for Russian gas flowing to the Europe so it can destroy Russia economically and implement its strategic plan to spread US power across Asia so US mega-corporations can maintain their dominant position in the global economy. Obama is playing nice with Iran so he can pivot to Asia as easily as possible.

So how plausible is it for Iran to replace Russian gas in the lucrative EU market?

Check out this clip from an article written in 2014 that anticipated the very scenario we see developing today, that is, the US trying to prevent an integrated EU-Russian free trade zone that would dwarf the US GDP and leave the exceptional nation to face years of precipitous decline. The article is titled “EU turns to Iran as alternative to Russian gas”:

    The European Union is quietly increasing the urgency of a plan to import natural gas from Iran, as relations with Tehran thaw, while those with top gas supplier Russia grow colder…

    “Iran is far towards the top of our priorities for mid-term measures that will help reduce our reliance on Russian gas supplies,” the source said. “Iran’s gas could come to Europe quite easily and politically there is a clear rapprochement between Tehran and the West.”….

    While sanctioned itself, Iran has the world’s second largest gas reserves after Russia and is a potential alternative given talks between Tehran and the West to reach a deal over the Islamic Republic’s disputed nuclear programme.

    “High potential for gas production, domestic energy sector reforms that are underway, and ongoing normalization of its relationship with the West make Iran a credible alternative to Russia,” said a paper prepared for the European parliament…

    “Given Russia’s current strategy politically, which is one of confrontation with Europe, I see the EU having little choice but to find alternative gas supplies,” he added…

    “Iran’s interest to deliver gas to Europe is very big. Parts of Iran’s economical and political elite as well as Western companies are preparing for an end of the sanctions,” said Frank Umbach, energy research director at King’s College in London…

    Iran has long lobbied to build a designated pipeline that would connect its huge South Pars gas field with European customers – the so-called Persian Pipeline.

    “It’s an extremely ambitious project,” Handjani said. “Even if half of it gets built it would be major accomplishment for both Europe and Iran.”…

    Independent feasibility studies show that if sanctions were to be eased and investments started soon, Iran could supply 10-20 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas a year to Turkey and Europe by the early 2020s.
    (EU turns to Iran as alternative to Russian gas, euractiv.com)


This is why Obama wants to ease sanctions; it’s because he needs to find an alternate source of gas for Europe while he prosecutes his war on Russia. Defeating Russia has become Washington’s top strategic priority. The United States is willing to risk everything –even nuclear war– to maintain its stranglehold on global power and to extend its hegemony into the next century.

~ Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK Press). Hopeless is also available in a Kindle edition. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com 

This Deal Could Prevent Another War



Lawrence Wilkerson is a retired United States Army soldier and former chief of staff to United States Secretary of State Colin Powell. Wilkerson is an adjunct professor at the College of William & Mary where he teaches courses on US national security. He also instructs a senior seminar in the Honors Department at the George Washington University entitled "National Security Decision Making."

Iran Deal Signed - Now Will U.S. Bring 'Missile Defense' Home?



Iran has reached an agreement to significantly limit its nuclear ability for more than a decade in return for lifting international oil and financial sanctions.  The agreement is between Iran and Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia, the United States, and the European Union.  The deal would not have likely been possible without the active participation of the Russian Federation.

Israel and Saudi Arabia will likely try to kill the deal as will the Republican led Congress in Washington.

Longtime peace worker Jan Oberg in Sweden writes about the deal:

Why Iran in focus and not all those who have nuclear weapons? Why 5 nuclear weapons states at the table, all violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty - telling Iran not to have what they have?

Why focus on Iran, not Israel which has nuclear weapons, much higher relative military expenditures, a record of violence?
All good questions for sure.  I'd like to add one more question into this stew.

The US has long maintained that the Pentagon's deployment of 'missile defense' (MD) systems into eastern Europe are not aimed at Russia but have been aimed at Iran's nuclear potential.  Of course this has always been nonsense but just for a moment let's pretend it was true.  The US was 'protecting' itself and Europe from a nuclear attack by Iran - even though Tehran had no nuclear weapons and no long-range delivery systems capable of hitting the US.

So now that this deal has been signed what is the need for the US to continue with its deployments of MD interceptors in Poland and Romania as well as on Navy destroyers in the Mediterranean, Black and Baltic seas?  And why the need for the Pentagon's MD radar in Turkey?  None of these systems will be needed.  Will Washington bring MD home?

Or will the US now search for, and find, another excuse to justify their destabilizing MD interceptors near the Russian border? 

Keep your eyes on that bouncing ball. 

Monday, July 13, 2015

This is a Coup



The thing that drives me crazy is the self-congratulatory hugs and kisses between the EU banksters and Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras.  It's clear that he sold his people out with this deal but he is enjoying it way too much - especially after he came to power campaigning against austerity! Where is the humility?

Just goes to show how the EU oligarchies reach into opposition parties is huge.  The Greek people must be stunned and furious after this betrayal by their own leadership.  Very sad.  It's truly a lesson to be careful with 'leaders' - they can turn on you and sell you out in a flash.

The Problem of Greece is not Only a Tragedy: It is a Lie


By John Pilger

An historic betrayal has consumed Greece. Having set aside the mandate of the Greek electorate, the Syriza government has willfully ignored last week’s landslide “No” vote and secretly agreed a raft of repressive, impoverishing measures in return for a “bailout” that means sinister foreign control and a warning to the world.

Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras has pushed through parliament a proposal to cut at least 13 billion euros from the public purse – 4 billion euros more than the “austerity” figure rejected overwhelmingly by the majority of the Greek population in a referendum on 5 July.

These reportedly include a 50 per cent increase in the cost of healthcare for pensioners, almost 40 per cent of whom live in poverty; deep cuts in public sector wages; the complete privatization of public facilities such as airports and ports; a rise in value added tax to 23 per cent, now applied to the Greek islands where people struggle to eke out a living. There is more to come.

“Anti-austerity party sweeps to stunning victory”, declared a Guardian headline on January 25. “Radical leftists” the paper called Tsipras and his impressively-educated comrades.  They wore open neck shirts, and the finance minister rode a motorbike and was described as a “rock star of economics”. It was a façade. They were not radical in any sense of that cliched label, neither were they “anti austerity”.

For six months Tsipras and the recently discarded finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis, shuttled between Athens and Brussels, Berlin and the other centres of European money power. Instead of social justice for Greece, they achieved a new indebtedness, a deeper impoverishment that would merely replace a systemic rottenness based on the theft of tax revenue by the Greek super-wealthy – in accordance with European “neo-liberal” values — and cheap, highly profitable loans from those now seeking Greece’s scalp.

Greece’s debt, reports an audit by the Greek parliament, “is illegal, illegitimate and odious”. Proportionally, it is less than 30 per cent that of the debit of Germany, its major creditor. It is less than the debt of European banks whose “bailout” in 2007-8 was barely controversial and unpunished.

For a small country such as Greece, the euro is a colonial currency: a tether to a capitalist ideology so extreme that even the Pope pronounces it “intolerable” and “the dung of the devil”. The euro is to Greece what the US dollar is to remote territories in the Pacific, whose poverty and servility is guaranteed by their dependency.

In their travels to the court of the mighty in Brussels and Berlin, Tsipras and Varoufakis presented themselves neither as radicals nor “leftists” nor even honest social democrats, but as two slightly upstart supplicants in their pleas and demands. Without underestimating the hostility they faced, it is fair to say they displayed no political courage. More than once, the Greek people found out about their “secret austerity plans” in leaks to the media: such as a 30 June letter published in the Financial Times, in which Tsipras promised the heads of the EU, the European Central Bank and the IMF to accept their basic, most vicious demands – which he has now accepted.

When the Greek electorate voted “no” on 5 July to this very kind of rotten deal, Tsipras said, “Come Monday and the Greek government will be at the negotiating table after the referendum with better terms for the Greek people”. Greeks had not voted for “better terms”. They had voted for justice and for sovereignty, as they had done on January 25.

The day after the January election a truly democratic and, yes, radical government would have stopped every euro leaving the country, repudiated the “illegal and odious” debt – as Argentina did successfully — and expedited a plan to leave the crippling Eurozone. But there was no plan. There was only a willingness to be “at the table” seeking “better terms”.

The true nature of Syriza has been seldom examined and explained. To the foreign media it is no more than “leftist” or “far left” or “hardline” – the usual misleading spray. Some of Syriza’s international supporters have reached, at times, levels of cheer leading reminiscent of the rise of Barack Obama. Few have asked: Who are these “radicals”? What do they believe in?

In 2013, Yanis Varoufakis wrote: “Should we welcome this crisis of European capitalism as an opportunity to replace it with a better system? Or should we be so worried about it as to embark upon a campaign for stabilising capitalism? To me, the answer is clear. Europe’s crisis is far less likely to give birth to a better alternative to capitalism …

“I bow to the criticism that I have campaigned on an agenda founded on the assumption that the left was, and remains, squarely defeated …. Yes, I would love to put forward [a] radical agenda. But, no, I am not prepared to commit the [error of the British Labour Party following Thatcher’s victory].

“What good did we achieve in Britain in the early 1980s by promoting an agenda of socialist change that British society scorned while falling headlong into Thatcher’s neoliberal trip? Precisely none.

What good will it do today to call for a dismantling of the Eurozone, of the European Union itself  …?”

Varoufakis omits all mention of the Social Democratic Party that split the Labour vote and led to Blairism. In suggesting people in Britain “scorned socialist change” – when they were given no real opportunity to bring about that change – he echoes Blair.

The leaders of Syriza are revolutionaries of a kind – but their revolution is the perverse, familiar appropriation of social democratic and parliamentary movements by liberals groomed to comply with neo-liberal drivel and a social engineering whose authentic face is that of Wolfgang Schauble, Germany’s finance minister, an imperial thug. Like the Labour Party in Britain and its equivalents among former social democratic parties such as the Labor Party in Australia, still describing themselves as “liberal” or even “left”,  Syriza is the product of an affluent, highly privileged, educated middle class, “schooled in postmodernism”, as Alex Lantier wrote.

For them, class is the unmentionable, let alone an enduring struggle, regardless of the reality of the lives of most human beings. Syriza’s luminaries are well-groomed; they lead not the resistance that ordinary people crave, as the Greek electorate has so bravely demonstrated, but “better terms” of a venal status quo that corrals and punishes the poor. When merged with “identity politics” and its insidious distractions, the consequence is not resistance, but subservience. “Mainstream” political life in Britain exemplifies this.

This is not inevitable, a done deal, if we wake up from the long, postmodern coma and reject the myths and deceptions of those who claim to represent us, and fight.

Can't Deny the Obvious US-NATO Aggression




This original video was a German interview with Willy Wimmer - former deputy of German Bundestag, former state secretary of German Defense Ministry, former vice president of OSCE.  He's an inside foreign policy player and lays out very clearly how the US has turned on the world in order to implement 'full spectrum dominance' on behalf of corporate interests.

For those still in denial about US intentions around the globe this is a good video to watch.  Remarkably we are presently finding, even amongst the ranks of key 'peace movement' leaders both in the US and around the world, that some are forcefully refusing to take seriously the analysis so well articulated in this video. 

It's rather shocking, as the Pentagon is in hyper-warfare mode on the Russian and Chinese borders, to see some 'professional peaceniks' essentially apologizing for US foreign policy moves and trying to pin the blame on Moscow or Beijing as being responsible to some equal degree for the aggression.

This blocking move by a few helps neutralize the forward organizing motion and articulation by some peace groups at this vital moment.

Wimmer makes the point in the video that in the 1990's when Bill Clinton was president he turned up the volume on NATO expansion toward the Russian border.  Clinton led the attack on and balkanization of Yugoslavia and kept the air war (No Fly Zones) over Iraq going.  When George W. Bush became president he pulled the US out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty with Russia and was responsible for shock and awe in 2003.  Obama has quickened the deployment pace of so-called 'missile defense' systems and NATO expansion along the Russian and Chinese borders that had led to further destabilization in those regions because of the offensive nature of these western operations.

It's all rather hard to miss if one is paying the slightest attention.  For some active peaceniks, who proclaim to be opponents of nuclear war, to now be virtually blind about current US-NATO moves along Russia's border leads one to question their sanity or their motives.  US-NATO expansion around Russia (and lately into the Asia-Pacific with NATO partnerships in Japan, South Korea, and Australia aimed at China) are obviously triggers for a war that could quickly turn nuclear.

Wake up and smell the coffee - or at the very least stop standing in the way as good people try to build opposition to US-NATO aggression.

Sunday, July 12, 2015

Supporting the People of Palestine



Dud Hendrick from Veterans for Peace about his recent trip to Palestine.

Global Surveillance Industry



Michael Ratner is President Emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) in New York and Chair of the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights in Berlin. He is currently a legal adviser to Wikileaks and Julian Assange. He and CCR brought the first case challenging the Guantanamo detentions and continue in their efforts to close Guantanamo. He taught at Yale Law School, and Columbia Law School, and was President of the National Lawyers Guild. His current books include Hell No: Your Right to Dissent in the Twenty-First Century America, and Who Killed Che? How the CIA Got Away With Murder.

Sunday Song