Monday, December 11, 2017

Edward Said: Claims to the Holy Land (Israel and the Occupation of Palestine)--Great Summary of the Situation

Saturday, December 09, 2017

Palestinians Resist Israel and its US Enabler -- Noura Erakat on @therealnews

Keiser Report: Corporatists Drowning People in Their Own Sewage in Alabama; Offering Billions to Bezos While We Live in Feudalism

"John Lennon’s Most Radical Message" by John Whitehead [POWER TO THE PEOPLE!]

Original at

You gotta remember, establishment, it’s just a name for evil. The monster doesn’t care whether it kills all the students or whether there’s a revolution. It’s not thinking logically, it’s out of control.
—John Lennon (1969)
Militant nonviolent resistance works.
Peaceful, prolonged protests work.
Mass movements with huge numbers of participants work.
Yes, America, it is possible to use occupations and civil disobedience to oppose government policies, counter injustice and bring about change outside the confines of the ballot box.
It has been done before. It can be done again.
For example, in May of 1932, more than 43,000 people, dubbed the Bonus Army—World War I veterans and their families—marched on Washington. Out of work, destitute and with families to feed, more than 10,000 veterans set up tent cities in the nation’s capital and refused to leave until the government agreed to pay the bonuses they had been promised as a reward for their services.
The Senate voted against paying them immediately, but the protesters didn’t budge. Congress adjourned for the summer, and still the protesters remained encamped. Finally, on July 28, under orders from President Herbert Hoover, the military descended with tanks and cavalry and drove the protesters out, setting their makeshift camps on fire. Still, the protesters returned the following year, and eventually their efforts not only succeeded in securing payment of the bonuses but contributed to the passage of the G.I. Bill of Rights.
Similarly, the Civil Rights Movement mobilized hundreds of thousands of people to strike at the core of an unjust and discriminatory society. Likewise, while the 1960s anti-war movement began with a few thousand perceived radicals, it ended with hundreds of thousands of protesters, spanning all walks of life, demanding the end of American military aggression abroad.
This kind of “power to the people” activism—grassroots, populist and potent—is exactly the brand of civic engagement John Lennon advocated throughout his career as a musician and anti-war activist.
It’s been 37 years since Lennon was gunned down by an assassin’s bullet on December 8, 1980, but his legacy and the lessons he imparted in his music and his activism have not diminished over the years.
All of the many complaints we have about government today—surveillance, corruption, harassment, political persecution, spying, overcriminalization, etc.—were used against Lennon. But that didn’t deter him. In fact, it formed the basis of his call for social justice, peace and a populist revolution.
Little wonder, then, that the U.S. government saw him as enemy number one.
Because he never refrained from speaking truth to power, Lennon became a prime example of the lengths to which the U.S. government will go to persecute those who dare to challenge its authority.
Lennon was the subject of a four-year campaign of surveillance and harassment by the U.S. government (spearheaded by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover), in an attempt by President Richard Nixon to have him “neutralized” and deported. As Adam Cohen of the New York Times points out, “The F.B.I.’s surveillance of Lennon is a reminder of how easily domestic spying can become unmoored from any legitimate law enforcement purpose. What is more surprising, and ultimately more unsettling, is the degree to which the surveillance turns out to have been intertwined with electoral politics.”
Years after Lennon’s assassination, it would be revealed that the FBI had collected 281 pages of surveillance files on him. As the New York Times notes, “Critics of today’s domestic surveillance object largely on privacy grounds. They have focused far less on how easily government surveillance can become an instrument for the people in power to try to hold on to power. ‘The U.S. vs. John Lennon’ … is the story not only of one man being harassed, but of a democracy being undermined.”
Such government-directed harassment was nothing new.
The FBI has had a long history of persecuting, prosecuting and generally harassing activists, politicians, and cultural figures, most notably among the latter such celebrated names as folk singer Pete Seeger, painter Pablo Picasso, comic actor and filmmaker Charlie Chaplin, comedian Lenny Bruce and poet Allen Ginsberg. Among those most closely watched by the FBI was Martin Luther King Jr., a man labeled by the FBI as “the most dangerous and effective Negro leader in the country.”
In Lennon’s case, the ex-Beatle had learned early on that rock music could serve a political end by proclaiming a radical message. More importantly, Lennon saw that his music could mobilize the public and help to bring about change.
For instance, in 1971 at a concert in Ann Arbor, Mich., Lennon took to the stage and in his usual confrontational style belted out “John Sinclair,” a song he had written about a man sentenced to 10 years in prison for possessing two marijuana cigarettes. Within days of Lennon’s call for action, the Michigan Supreme Court ordered Sinclair released.
While Lennon believed in the power of the people, he also understood the danger of a power-hungry government. “The trouble with government as it is, is that it doesn’t represent the people,” observed Lennon. “It controls them.”
By March 1971, when his “Power to the People” single was released, it was clear where Lennon stood. Having moved to New York City that same year, Lennon was ready to participate in political activism against the U. S. government, the “monster” that was financing the war in Vietnam.
The release of Lennon’s Sometime in New York City album, which contained a radical anti-government message in virtually every song and depicted President Richard Nixon and Chinese Chairman Mao Tse-tung dancing together nude on the cover, only fanned the flames of the government agents who had already targeted Lennon.
However, the official U.S. war against Lennon began in earnest in 1972 after rumors surfaced that Lennon planned to embark on a U.S. concert tour that would combine rock music with antiwar organizing and voter registration. Nixon, fearing Lennon’s influence on about 11 million new voters (1972 was the first year that 18-year-olds could vote), had the ex-Beatle served with deportation orders “in an effort to silence him as a voice of the peace movement.”
As Lennon’s FBI file shows, memos and reports about the FBI’s surveillance of the anti-war activist had been flying back and forth between Hoover, the Nixon White House, various senators, the FBI and the U.S. Immigration Office.
Nixon’s pursuit of Lennon was relentless and misplaced.
Despite the fact that Lennon was not plotting to bring down the Nixon Administration, as the government feared, the government persisted in its efforts to have him deported. Equally determined to resist, Lennon dug in and fought back. Every time he was ordered out of the country, his lawyers delayed the process by filing an appeal.
Finally, in 1976, Lennon won the battle to stay in the country and by 1980, he had re-emerged with a new album and plans to become politically active again. The old radical was back and ready to cause trouble.
Unfortunately, Lennon’s time as a troublemaker was short-lived.
Mark David Chapman was waiting in the shadows on Dec. 8, 1980, just as Lennon was returning to his New York apartment building. Ironically, Lennon had signed an autograph for Chapman earlier that evening outside his apartment building.
As Lennon stepped outside the car to greet the fans congregating outside, Chapman, in an eerie echo of the FBI’s moniker for Lennon, called out, “Mr. Lennon!”
Lennon turned and was met with a barrage of gunfire as Chapman—dropping into a two-handed combat stance—emptied his .38-caliber pistol and pumped four hollow-point bullets into his back and left arm. Lennon stumbled, staggered forward and, with blood pouring from his mouth and chest, collapsed to the ground.
John Lennon was pronounced dead on arrival at the hospital.
Much like Martin Luther King Jr., John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, Robert Kennedy and others who have died attempting to challenge the powers-that-be, Lennon had finally been “neutralized.”
Still, you can’t murder a movement with a bullet and a madman: Lennon’s legacy lives on in his words, his music and his efforts to speak truth to power.
As Yoko Ono shared in a 2014 letter to the parole board tasked with determining whether Chapman should be released: “A man of humble origin, [John Lennon] brought light and hope to the whole world with his words and music. He tried to be a good power for the world, and he was. He gave encouragement, inspiration and dreams to people regardless of their race, creed and gender.”
Lennon’s work to change the world for the better is far from done.
Peace remains out of reach. Activists and whistleblowers continue to be prosecuted for challenging the government’s authority. Militarism is on the rise, all the while the governmental war machine continues to wreak havoc on innocent lives.
For those of us who joined with John Lennon to imagine a world of peace, it’s getting harder to reconcile that dream with the reality of the American police state. And as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, those who do dare to speak up are labeled dissidents, troublemakers, terrorists, lunatics, or mentally ill and tagged for surveillance, censorship or, worse, involuntary detention. And it only seems to be getting worse.
As Lennon shared in a 1968 interview:
I think all our society is run by insane people for insane objectives… I think we’re being run by maniacs for maniacal means. If anybody can put on paper what our government and the American government and the Russian… Chinese… what they are actually trying to do, and what they think they’re doing, I’d be very pleased to know what they think they’re doing. I think they’re all insane. But I’m liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That’s what’s insane about it.”
So what’s the answer?
Lennon had a multitude of suggestions.
“If everyone demanded peace instead of another television set, then there’d be peace.”
“Produce your own dream. If you want to save Peru, go save Peru. It’s quite possible to do anything, but not to put it on the leaders….You have to do it yourself.”
“Peace is not something you wish for; It’s something you make, Something you do, Something you are, And something you give away.”
“Say you want a revolution / We better get on right away / Well you get on your feet / And out on the street / Singing power to the people.”
“If you want peace, you won’t get it with violence.”
Indeed, a revolution of any substance will not come about by way of violence. Government forces are armed to the hilt and waiting for that eventuality.
Fighting the evil of the American police state can only come about by way of conscious thoughts that are put into action. As Lennon sings in “Happy Xmas,” “War is over, if you want it.”
Do you want an end to war? Then stop supporting the government’s military campaigns. Do you want government violence against the citizenry to end? Then demand that your local police de-militarize. Do you want a restoration of your freedoms? You’ll have to get the government to recognize that “we the people”  are the masters in this relationship and government employees are our public servants.
The choice is ours.
The power (if we want it), as Lennon recognized, is in our hands.
“The people have the power, all we have to do is awaken that power in the people,” concluded Lennon. “The people are unaware. They’re not educated to realize that they have power. The system is so geared that everyone believes the government will fix everything. We are the government.”
For the moment, the choice is still ours: slavery or freedom, war or peace, death or life.
The point at which we have no choice is the point at which the monsters—the maniacs, the powers-that-be, the Deep State—win.
As Lennon warned, “You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.”

Thursday, December 07, 2017

Unlike US Embassy, Palestinians Will Not Be Moved -- Moustafa Barghouti @therealnews

Wildfires are Leveling LA Neighborhoods, Is There More to Come? -- Sharmini Peries @therealnews

Wednesday, December 06, 2017

Trump's 'Criminal' Jerusalem Move Could Backfire--Journalist Rami Khouri on @therealnews

Trump's Jerusalem Embassy Move Was Long in the Works -- Ali Abunimah on @therealnews

Saturday, December 02, 2017

Flynn Plea Shows Collusion WITH ... ISRAEL????

Tuesday, November 28, 2017

Beethoven - Moonlight Sonata - Kids & Drones By PlanetJose

Sunday, November 26, 2017

"Is the Keystone XL Pipeline a Done Deal?" -- Dimitri Lascaras Interviews Dallas Goldtooth on @therealnews

Friday, November 24, 2017

From the Eloquent Mr. Fish

Friday, November 17, 2017

Barghouti: Cambridge's Interference in BDS Event is 'Ludicrous'

As US Fuels War Crimes in Yemen, House Says US Involvement is Unauthorized [Still A Chance to Stop This War, Says Mark Weisbrot]

Call for Global Solidarity as "Harvey Weinstein Hired Israeli Spies to Silence His Victims"

Friday, November 10, 2017

What is the state of the Israel-UK relationship? -- [Regarding the UK Commemoration of Balfour Declaration]

Thursday, November 09, 2017

Vijay Prashad: 'The Only Way to Confront a War Economy is to Confront a Culture of War'-- @TheRealNews

Wednesday, November 08, 2017

Balfour Declaration – Palestinians Determined to Own Their History -- Marion Kawas

When I first met Palestinian refugees in camps across Lebanon in the 1970s, both in the south and around Beirut, I was surprised at the frequency with which I heard sentiments such as,
“Yes, we are well aware of how Israel and the US are working to dispossess our people, but we ultimately hold Britain responsible for the colonization of Palestine and the resulting ethnic cleansing and continuing Nakba.”

But as Theresa May and Benjamin Netanyahu (and others) gather to “celebrate” the destruction and dismemberment of the Palestinian nation, let them beware of the Palestinian will to survive and beware of its hunger and anger (to quote Mahmoud Darwish).

Here we are, 100 years on, in the supposedly enlightened 21st century, and the crude racism of colonialist exploits is still being heralded. Palestine was “a desert, a mosquito-infested swamp”, Palestinians needed to be “civilized”, and as the League of Nations covenant in 1919 noted about countries like Palestine, they “are inhabited by people not yet able to stand by themselves under the  strenuous conditions of the modern world.”

Such racism was standard for the era, let’s not forget Winston Churchill’s comments on Palestine to the 1937 Peel Commission.

Palestine “never will be cultivated by the Arabs”, he said and continued: “I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race…has come in and taken their place.”

Even in Canada, the late Prime Minister Mackenzie King “was effusive with praise for Zionism when he addressed the Ottawa convention of the Zionist Federation of Canada on 4 July 1922…he applauded Britain efforts (Balfour Declaration) in aid of the Zionist cause.”

But to celebrate such obscenities in this day and age, attached to the supremacist notion that you can guarantee a land you don’t own to another not even living there and completely bypass the rights of the indigenous people who have lived there for generations! What an outrage!

As Gideon Levy noted in a recent opinion piece in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz:

“There was never anything like it: an empire promising a land that it had not yet conquered to a people not living there, without asking the inhabitants”.

However, the window for such policies is quickly closing. History is on the side of the Palestinians, and support for the Palestinian cause is growing world-wide.

May, Netanyahu, and all others who blindly carry on as if the world is still living in the colonial racism of 100 years ago should take note:

Palestinians are determined to own their history, their present and their future. They are determined their voices should be the ones heard to explain their narrative.

And they are done with false peace plans that act as a cover for further dispossession and false leaders that are only advancing themselves.

And they will hold accountable all those who initiated, supported and continue to perpetuate and give cover for the Zionist settler-colonialist project.

– Marion Kawas is Chairperson of the Canada Palestine Association and co-host of Voice of Palestine. He contributed this article to Visit:

Sunday, November 05, 2017

Dick Gregory [Live at Harvard Stadium/Amandla Festival]--[Me: Admit We Don't Care Enough Unless We DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT]


Rattling the Bars: Herman Bell w/Eddie Conway--IMPORTANT on White Supremacist Prisons @therealnews

Friday, November 03, 2017

Empire Files: Trump Expands Police-State Crackdown on the Left -- DEMS??? What Do They Think??? CRICKETS.

Tuesday, October 31, 2017

CIA Whistleblower Reveals CIA Still Torturing - Here's How

Monday, October 30, 2017

Bernie Sanders Says U.S. Must Look to Canada for Better Health

Monday, October 23, 2017

Spooks and Cowboys, Gooks and Grunts Part 1 (1975) -- WATCH THIS VIETNAM DOCUMENTARY--Operation Phoenix

Wednesday, October 18, 2017

[Horrific] Somalia Bombing an Outgrowth of Foreign Meddling

Sunday, October 15, 2017

Seattle Has New Low Power Progressive Radio Station -- KODX-LP 96.9 FM Seattle Launch Event - October 5, 2017

MST3K - The Gumby Show: Robot Rumpus

Friday, October 13, 2017

United for Single Payer (Seattle) Asking Senators Cantwell and Murray to Co-Sponsor S.1804 (Medicare for All)


SENATOR CANTWELL  1 (202) 224-3441

SENATOR MURRAY  1 (202) 224-2621

For talking points and to help organize for Medicare for All, go to: or if you are in Seattle, United for Single Payer.

Monday, October 09, 2017

Lakota in America

Thursday, October 05, 2017

Big Capital May Punish the UK For Corbynomics [BUT Corbyn and Labour Have Massive Public Support!]

Wednesday, October 04, 2017

Max Kellerman is an EDUCATED MAN (On Kaepenick's protest)

Tuesday, October 03, 2017

"Empire Files: Israelis Speak Candidly to Abby Martin About Palestinians"

Saturday, September 30, 2017

Omali Yeshitela calls out white media...

US Ambassador to Israel Doesn’t Recognize Palestine - @MaxBlumenthal

Friday, September 29, 2017

Obama Actually Admits He's A Moderate Republican!

First Somali Jet Pilot in 1976 via Angry Arab News Service

From Angry Arab News Service

Monday, September 25, 2017

Ian Angus: Why We Need An EcoSocialist Revolution - Socialism 2013

Saluting the delegates of the inaugural People's Congress of Resistance

Friday, September 22, 2017

Netanyahu Targets Iran to Deflect From Occupation--@therealnews

Neocons and Hollywood Liberals Go to 'War' on Russia -- @aaronjmate and @maxblumenthal on @therealnews

Thursday, September 21, 2017

White Police, Black Unarmed Suspects -- Glen Ford @blkagendareport

The Ken Burns Vietnam "Documentary." Or Should I Just Watch Game of Thrones Again?-- Bruce Dixon @blkagendareport

Tuesday, September 19, 2017

Webinar: Incrementalism is an Obstacle to Improved Medicare for All -- Dr. Margaret Flowers

Thursday, September 14, 2017

Canada’s Danielle Martin Explains in a Few Words the Rationale of Single Payer [DR. MARTIN's STARTS AT MIN. 21]

Sunday, September 10, 2017

"Empire Files: From 1776 to Trump - White Mobs, Racist Heroes & Hidden History" -- @AbbyMartin intervews Prof Gerald Horne -- MUST WATCH

Saturday, September 09, 2017

"Israel's Jewish-Only Right of Return Displaces Palestinians for 2nd Time" -- @therealnews


Friday, September 08, 2017

"Who is Begging for War? We Have Such a Poor Understanding of the Conflict with North Korea" -- @VijayPrashad

Original Post:

US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley told the Security Council that North Korea was ‘begging for war.’ She said this in reference to the test of a thermonuclear – hydrogen – bomb by the North Korean military. ‘Enough is enough,’ said Ambassador Haley. ‘We have taken an incremental approach, and despite the best of intentions, it has not worked.’
Ambassador Haley made these comments at the UN Security Council, where there are five permanent members and ten rotating members. These five permanents members (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States) are all nuclear weapon powers. They are not on the Council permanently (with veto power) because they have nuclear weapons. There are declared nuclear weapon states (India, Israel and Pakistan) that do not have a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. It is an accident of history that gives these five countries the right to be the judges of the planet.
Each of these five permanent members of the UN Security Council is already in possession of a thermonuclear bomb. The United States tested its hydrogen bomb in 1952; the Soviets followed the next year. The British tested their bomb in 1958, with the Chinese following in 1967 and the French in 1968. That means that almost fifty years ago, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council already had a thermonuclear – namely hydrogen – bomb.
The US bomb tested in the Bikini Atoll in 1954 was a thousand times more powerful than the atomic bomb that the United States dropped on Hiroshima. The North Korean bomb is similar to the hydrogen bombs that are held by the permanent members of the UN Security Council. It is a bomb that could destroy New York City, Seoul or even Pyongyang.
There is something unseemly about the fact that we – humans – have accepted the presence of thermonuclear bombs in the arsenals of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council. The hyperventilation of these five hydrogen bomb powers to the North Korean test would bewilder a normal person, a person who sees world affairs with an element of rationality. What makes it morally impossible for North Korea to have a dangerous weapon of this magnitude, while it is seen as perfectly acceptable for the quivering finger of Donald Trump to rest on the button of a US inter-continental ballistic missile that carries a hydrogen bomb?
The View from Pyongyang.
Why is North Korea, this country with great economic uncertainty, making such a great effort to build a nuclear arsenal? Why not use its scarce resources to tend to its own people?
There are at least four important points to consider when studying why the North Koreans continue to build a nuclear arsenal. If these four points are seriously understood, then their actions appear less irrational than otherwise assumed.
  1. The War Has Not Ended: US Ambassador Nikki Haley says that the North Koreans are ‘begging for war.’ But North Korea has been in a permanent state of war against South Korea and its allies since June 1950. When the guns stopped firing in July 1953, the war did not end. There has been an armistice since 1953, but no peace treaty. The Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) is not a border between North and South Korea, but a tense border for hostilities that remain vital.’’
  1. The US Conduct in the War Is a Sign of Its Belligerence: Most US high school students study the history of World War II and the US war in Vietnam, but do not get taught the Korean war. They learn little of the great barbarity of the US bombing of that country, not only of the bridges on the Yalu River but of dams and schools, hospitals and factories, government offices and residential homes. During the active phase of the war, the United States dropped 635,000 tons of bombs (including 32,557 tons of napalm – a chemical weapon) on Korea – more than the US tonnage dropped in the entire Pacific theatre of World War II. On November 5, 1950, Far East Air Forces General George E. Stratemeyer wrote that the instructions he got from General Douglas MacArthur was that ‘every installation, every facility, and village in North Korea now becomes a military and tactical target.’ Three days later, the US bombers dropped 500 tons of incendiary bombs on Sinuiju, destroying 60% of the city. Almost all of the cities of Chosan, Hoeryong, Huichon, Koindong, Manpojin, Namsi, and Sakchu were destroyed. On December 30, Stratemeyer told his officers that they would now destroy North Korea’s four largest cities – Pyongyang, Hamhung, Hungnam and Wonsan. At the close of the bombing, eighteen of twenty-two major North Korean cities were levelled. This is data from the United States Air Force, not from North Korean textbooks. Every American should digest this history.
  1. George W. Bush Raises the Belligerence: In 1994, North Korea and the United States signed the ‘Agreed Framework’ for negotiations. This was a real breakthrough. In exchange for material demonstration that it would not increase its weapons programs, the North Koreans would be able to replace their aging Yongbyon nuclear reactor by two light water reactors. North Korea had – in 1985 – joined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). This was a major confidence builder for any negotiations. What the North Koreans wanted more than anything was for the US to draw down its troop levels in South Korea and to cease its provocative war games near the North Korean frontier. There are about 30,000 US troops in South Korea and 50,000 US troops in Japan – two detachments that threaten North Korea. The Clinton administration agreed to postpone the Team Spirit war games with South Korea. This was seen by the North as a major concession. Construction on the light water reactors began in August 2002. But this was already too late. In January of 2002, US President George W. Bush added North Korea into his ‘axis of evil.’ The three countries in that axis were Iraq, Iran and North Korea. In 2003, the US conducted a ‘regime change’ war against Iraq. The following year – in 2004 – the US pushed an isolation policy against Iran through the ‘nuclear threat’ agenda. The Europeans, driven to the wall by the war on terror, backed the US even though many European diplomats knew that there was no fire behind the smoke that the Americans claimed to see. North Korea, watching Baghdad being destroyed and Iran being threatened, walked away from the talks. Construction on the light-water reactor ended in 2006 and in 2009 the Six Party talks over peace with the North collapsed. George W. Bush’s ‘axis of evil’ speech pushed the North towards a reopened nuclear weapons agenda.
  1. Libya Gives Up Its Nukes and Finds Regime Change is the Answer: In 2003, Libya’s government led by Colonel Muammar Qaddafi decided to end its clandestine nuclear weapons program. At that time, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency – Mohamed ElBaradei said that he had a ‘gut feeling’ that Libya was about three to seven years away from building a nuclear weapon. But Libya decided to end that program, and the following year to end its chemical weapons program. By the end of 2004, then, Libya was largely without weapons of mass destruction – all removed voluntarily. The US promised the Libyans security guarantees for their removal of these weapons. But then, in 2011, the United States and NATO – under a UN mandate – conducted a ‘regime change’ operation against Libya. The country is now in great pain, destroyed by this regime change operation of 2011. The message to North Korea is clear – if you give up your nuclear weapons, you will be a victim of regime change.
You don’t need to understand Korean culture to see why the North Korean regime is obstinate to build up its nuclear shield. Unless the United States and its allies downgrade their threats against North Korea, there will be no possibility of peace in northwest Asia. Indeed, this no longer a regional struggle. The hydrogen bomb changes everything. This is a global catastrophe. It is necessary to demand the creation of a real process for peace, not belligerent talk from the UN chamber.
On these days, with nuclear war at the edge of our consciousness, it is worthwhile to read the diary of a Japanese doctor – Michihiko Hachiya – kept during and after the bombing of Hiroshima and published in 1955. Here, as war sits near us, is Dr. Hachiya on what he saw in the dim light after the bomb fell on his city,
‘There were the shadowy forms of people, some of whom looked like walking ghosts. Others moved as though in pain, like scarecrows, their arms held out from their bodies with forearms and hands dangling. These people puzzled me until I realized that they had been burned and were holding their arms out to prevent the painful friction of raw surfaces rubbing together. A naked woman carrying a naked baby came into view. I averted my gaze. Then I saw a naked man, and it occurred to me that, like myself, some strange thing had deprived them of their clothes. An old woman lay near me with an expression of suffering on her face; but she made no sound. Indeed, one thing was common to everyone I saw – complete silence.’
Vijay Prashad is professor of international studies at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut. He is the author of 18 books, including Arab Spring, Libyan Winter (AK Press, 2012), The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of the Global South (Verso, 2013) and The Death of a Nation and the Future of the Arab Revolution (University of California Press, 2016). His columns appear at AlterNet every Wednesday.

Monday, September 04, 2017

Hands Off Syria Coalition Presentation — Stephen Gowans (NYC)


"African Americans Fighting Fascism and Racism" -- Matthew Delmont

from the article linked above, a portion of a Langston Hughes poem (

“Looky here, America / What you done done / Let things drift / Until the riots come […] You tell me that hitler / Is a mighty bad man / I guess he took lessons from the ku klux klan […] I ask you this question / Cause I want to know / How long I got to fight / BOTH HITLER — AND JIM CROW.”

Sunday, September 03, 2017

Mainstream Media Misrepresents Hurricane Harvey's Climate Change Connection--WATCH THIS EXPLANATION. @therealnews

Saturday, September 02, 2017

Oldie But A Goody: "Clare Daly, Irish Parliament: Obama War Criminal & Hypocrite of the Century"

Free Palestine Vigil in Downtown Seattle -- Sept 2, 2017 --

For the most part, we handed out Disappearing Palestine postcards from If Americans Knew.

"The Murder of Seven White Helmets in Syria?"--Very Revealing Report by Max Blumenthal

Near the end of the video. Max reports pre-publishing threats to him regarding his Syrian work and on the FBI's surveillance of Americans' Facebooks for "fake news" of Russian origin.

Friday, September 01, 2017

Survey: Most Americans Accept Preemptive Nuclear Strike Against Iranian Civilians

A new survey published by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) suggests Americans are willing to make a first nuclear strike against Iran and kill millions of civilians in the process.
According to the report, entitled “Revisiting Hiroshima in Iran,” although the majority of Americans initially approved of President Harry S. Truman’s decision to drop the nuclear bomb in 1945 on two civilian populations in Japan, a poll conducted in 1998 showed the number of Americans who approved of the decision had dropped since the 1970s and 1980s. This trend carried on even until the early 2000s and arguably to the present day.
However, the new survey shows that many Americans continue to support nuclear warfare when posed with a hypothetical (albeit currently nonexistent) threat. As the survey notes, a clear majority of Americans “would approve of using nuclear weapons first against the civilian population of a nonnuclear-armed adversary, killing 2 million Iranian civilians, if they believed that such use would save the lives of 20,000 U.S. soldiers.”

Disasters Bring Out the Un-Capitalist in Us--@LeeCamp

Friday, August 25, 2017

New US Sanctions Against Venezuela to Cause Greater Economic Instability

#USA baldly trying to get rid of Maduro government.

CIA Retiree to John Pilger: "We'll Intervene ... When It's In Our Interest, and If You Don't Like It, Lump It! Get Used to it World!"

Rachel Maddow Promotes Stealing Afghan Minerals & Endless War--@jimmy_dore

Wednesday, August 16, 2017

Historian Gerald Horne: Trump Defends White Supremacy to Maintain Elite Power Structure

African-Americans need to realize they are seen as a social problem [the enemy] – Ajamu Baraka

Charlottesville: Race and Terror – VICE News Tonight on HBO -- MUST WATCH

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

How the World May End - John Pilger on Venezuela, Trump & Russia -- @afshinrattansi

Monday, August 14, 2017

Deandre Harris on Attack by White Supremacists in Charlottesville -- @therealnews

Sunday, August 13, 2017

Defense Department Brags About Killing 1 Million Koreans -- @jimmydore

Friday, August 11, 2017

EXCLUSIVE: 'We're living in 1984' - Roger Waters [great interview]

Pueblo Resurgence, White Revisionism: The Bloody Truth about the Santa Fe Entrada -- from The Red Nation Blog

Last year, dozens of Indigenous peoples, Pueblos, and their allies protested the annual racist celebration of the Santa Fe Entrada.
by Elena Ortiz and Jennifer Marley
Every fall the city of Santa Fe celebrates a revisionist historical account of the so-called “bloodless reconquest” of Santa Fe. Most New Mexicans have no idea of the origins of this celebration or its evolution. There are claims that the Entrada is the oldest community celebration in this country, but even that is historically inaccurate.
The first documented celebration of the reconquest of Santa Fe was in 1712. This celebration was primarily religious in nature with the main focus being  processions featuring the Corpus Christi and La Conquistadora. This version continued through the mid-1700’s. Then, in 1883, after a lapse of more than 100 years, the Fiestas was revived. As a way of promoting Santa Fe business and tourism, the focus shifted to a more civic celebration. Ironically, it was moved to the Fourth of July to coincide with US independence.
In 1919, Fiestas was reorganized and revitalized by mostly Eastern-educated, non-Native board members of the Museum of New Mexico and School of American Research. These outsiders, led by the much-heralded grave-robber Edgar Lee Hewitt, added elements to the celebration to make it more appealing to white tourists and visitors to Santa Fe. Hewitt, a well known anthropologist was known for unlawfully excavating remains and artifacts from holy Pueblo sites, and even trespassing into Pueblo residential homes without consent. Hewitt and his ilk also romanticized the Spanish colonial era through the creation of the contemporary Entrada with images of Catholic and military glory and a bygone era.
Soon this romantic enactment of Spanish conquest made it’s way into public schools with visits by a costumed Don Diego de Vargas and his murderous merry men. Such Disneyland historical celebrations glorify the Eurocentric Spanish heritage as the dominant narrative among a population of schoolchildren more likely to have indigenous, Latinx/Chicanx heritage than Spanish, thus marginalizing the very people they seek to convert.
In 1977 The All Indian Pueblo Council and the Eight Northern Pueblos expressed their condemnation of the Entrada. Because of this the Fiesta Council sent a letter to Eight Northern asking Pueblo vendors vacate their space underneath the portal at the Palace of the Governors during Fiesta. The Fiesta Council, it seems, only wanted Pueblo people to participate in Fiestas if they were willing to play the roles prescribed by the script celebrating their subjugation and humiliation at the hands of the conquistadors.
This marginalization of Native people should be anathema for a city whose main source of revenue is tourism and when one of the main draws for primarily white tourists are the vibrant Native communities and their artistic traditions. But it is evident in the amount of money doled out by the city to promote Fiestas which, in 2015 was $50,000 compared to $31,000 for Indian Market. Both of these monies come from lodgers’ tax whose sole purpose is to promote tourism to the city. Neither total includes the additional costs, such as an increased police presence. Interestingly enough, there were no SWAT team snipers on the rooftops around the Plaza during Indian Market like there were during Fiestas. Indian Market is the largest event of its kind in the world and brings in millions of dollars to Santa Fe every year, more so than any other single event — and certainly more than Fiestas.
Much like the original Entrada, last year the city of Santa Fe deployed armed men to defend its racist celebration against protesting Pueblo and Indigenous peoples. Pictured here, Santa Fe SWAT snipers survey peaceful Pueblo-led protests at the Plaza, the same place Spanish colonizers and missionaries hanged 70 Pueblo patriots.
How does this uneven allocation continue year after year? You only have to look at the demographics on the City Council to understand why. Mayor Javier Gonzales and Councilors Carmichael Dominguez and Ron Trujillo have all played De Vargas in the Entrada.
The Entrada itself is produced by Los Caballeros de Vargas, a non-profit Catholic ministry. The President of Los Caballeros, Joe Mier, describes the Entrada as “a celebration, not that we conquered anyone. It’s a religious celebration. That should be the main focus.”
If it is a religious celebration, then the use of public funds to promote it is in clear violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment which prohibits the use of religious symbols in public displays or celebrations, i.e. the “Separation of Church and State.” And it is a violation of our children’s civil rights to allow these murderous “religious figures” – Don Diego and his party — into the public schools.
The Entrada is a public commemoration of the Spanish conquest of the Southwest, supported by the Catholic Church through the Doctrine of Discovery. This legacy of settler colonialism serves only to perpetuate the myth of Euro-Spanish superiority and Indigenous, Mestizo, and Chicanx inferiority.
Santa Fe Fiesta Council president, Dean Milligan, was quoted in a recent article describing Native people on Native land as “outside agitators.” This narrative that frames Indigenous people as foreign and burdensome on their own land is not new. This is the same accusation that has been used for centuries to naturalize settlements occupying Native land. By making Native people “outsiders” or “foreigners” the settler seeks to replace the Native, naturalizing himself as the “new Native.” What this ideology allows is unrestricted access to Native land, resources, wealth, livelihood, and culture by occupying powers. We see that there is a very clear correlation to the normalization of reenactments of conquest and the normalization of resource extraction. It is with this in mind that we link our struggle to abolish revisionist history to the struggle to protect sacred sites. The growing struggle to protect Chaco Canyon a holy site Sacred to Pueblo people and DinĂ© people concerns alike must be centered as one of the many resistance efforts that the imagery and rhetoric of the Entrada and the fabricated history perpetuates actively erases.
The challenge to Abolish the Entrada does not stand apart from the centuries old history of resistance that Pueblo people continue to uphold.
As Native people we need to remember that before Don Diego De Vargas, the Fiesta Queen and La Conquistadora became conquest theater; before the Great Lie was constructed that has perpetuated the Santa Fe Fiestas celebration of Native cultural genocide; before Anglo Euro-centric marginalization of Native heritage in Northern New Mexico — there was the Pueblo Revolt.
“The Pueblo Indian Revolution of 1680,” writes Alfonso Ortiz, a Pueblo scholar from Ohkay Owingeh, “is to be understood most profoundly as an act of restoration by the ancestors. What was restored was life, peace and the freedom of the Pueblo people whose human, political and economic rights were routinely violated by the Spaniards of the 17th century. The ancestors knew that they must fully restore the ancient teachings ‘as it has been left among us from the time of the Earth’s dawn, when all was young and green’. Thus the vision of the beginning, a fresh ever-renewable and vigorous beginning had to be fully restored and reaffirmed or the Earth would die.”
Let us remember that when DeVargas returned Pueblo People did not submit to conquest. Let us remember the continued rebellion that took place in late December of 1692, after which DeVargas proceeded to hang 70 Pueblo warriors at a gallows that stood where the Entrada takes place to this very day.
Pueblo scholars like Herman Agoyo, Joe Sando, and Alfonso Ortiz remind us that without our spirit of resistance against colonialism we would not have held onto the depth of Traditions and ceremonial life that we have today. And in order for our traditions to flourish we must make it known that celebrations that erase our history and celebrate our conquest must come to an end.
It is our mandate, drawn from the legacy of our ancestors, to enact change where change is necessary, to show courage in the face of overwhelming odds and to work to restore, respect, and preserve that which we hold sacred.
Join the Pueblo People and The Red Nation on September 8 to protest the racist Santa Fe Entrada.
In the Spirit of Po Pay!

Sunday, August 06, 2017

Bannon and Blackwater Want to Outsource Afghan War -- STOP THE WAR ON THESE PEOPLE!

#FreePalestine Vigil Continues in Seattle, August 4, 2017 @Voices4Pals


Saturday, August 05, 2017

"War Is What the U.S. Does to Others" -- John Pilger

The title quote here come from this John Pilger article:

The genius Randy Newman wrote about this U.S. mania for violent world domination also:

Randy Newman - A Few Words in Defense of Our Country


Friday, August 04, 2017

Moral Principles and Flexible Sanctions -- Brian Cloughley [Some Bold Snarks Amidst These Sad Truths]


There is generally a degree of hypocrisy about the imposition of sanctions on a country by another country or group of countries. Those who inflict sanctions assert that their target has done something terribly wrong which will be corrected following its recognition that superior beings are setting an international example of flawless moral rectitude, but it is doubtful that such perfection exists.
If the sanctioning countries were in reality superior in moral behaviour to everyone else on the planet, this might possibly excuse sanctioning in some cases; but at times the unwelcome fact emerges that imposing sanctions is usually an act of sanctimonious humbug.
Take India and Pakistan, for example. India conducted nuclear tests in May 1998 and Pakistan followed suit «to even the score» in an ill-advised counterstroke. There was outrage in Washington. President Clinton, notable for his high moral standards, declared that India’s tests «clearly create a dangerous new instability in their region and... I have decided to impose sanctions against India». Then he took the same action against Pakistan.
Both countries were subjected to severe economic penalties at the instigation of Washington. The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund were forbidden to help them, and there were all sorts of other punishments. The western world, and especially Israel, which had been quietly producing nuclear weapons for years, expected sanctions to have the effect of halting the nuclear weapons programmes of both countries.
The US Assistant Secretary for South Asian Affairs quoted the President’s righteous indignation to the Senate by repeating that «this action by India not only threatens the stability of the region, it directly challenges the firm international consensus to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction».
But today India and Pakistan each have about 130 nuclear warheads in bombs and ballistic missiles and their nuclear weapons programmes are at full throttle. There has been massive nuclear proliferation. So what could have happened? Why didn’t sanctions work?
What happened was that another paragon of moral rectitude, George W Bush (he of «we found the Weapons of Mass Destruction» after his catastrophic invasion of Iraq) decided to remove sanctions on India and Pakistan because, as his spokesman explained, «We intend to support those who support us. We intend to work with those governments that work with us in this fight [against terrorism]».
As the great Groucho Marx once said, with a cynical eye on the world around him,
The latest sanctions on Russia are a prime example of malevolent spite, and are intended to make life as difficult as possible for its citizens in the hope that they will revolt and overthrow President Putin, just as sanctions on Cuba were intended to have Cubans topple President Castro, if the CIA couldn’t murder him first. (They tried many times.) The US has sanctioned Cuba for almost sixty years, but, as observed by the Cato Institute, «The embargo has been a failure by every measure. It has not changed the course or nature of the Cuban government. It has not liberated a single Cuban citizen...»
Obama tried to end the mindless, petty, spiteful anti-Cuba campaign, but the psychotic Trump got things back to normal by announcing introduction of even harsher sanctions, including a ban on tourism. That will teach these evil people to support their government. The workers in ports and airfields and hotels and night clubs and restaurants will condemn Washington, and not their government, for destroying their jobs.
Then there were the years of sanctions against Iraq which penalised its citizens to a criminal degree. The US attitude was summed up by Ambassador Madeleine Albright, who was asked on television if she considered the deaths of half a million Iraqi children a reasonable result of US sanctions. She replied «This is a very hard choice, but we think the price is worth it». This callous, pitiless, utterly heartless statement was indicative of US official policy — which continues, world-wide.
But that’s what sanctions are all about. And the latest bout of gutter vindictiveness centres on Russia. To the joy of the sabre-rattlers, and especially of NATO, so desperately seeking a reason for its continued existence, the Cold War has begun again.
But there’s a little problem for the warmongers...
Unfortunately for US national pride, there are some things for which it has to rely on Russia, and a difficulty for Washington is that US astronauts are ferried to and from the International Space Station in Russian rockets, and that some American rockets rely on Russian engines.
So among its vicious measures to try to punish Russia the US Congress didn’t include sanctions that might be awkward for their space programmes. There were no mainstream media reports about this embarrassing tap-dancing, but one observation was that «Officials at Orbital ATK [an American aerospace and military equipment manufacturer] and ULA [a Lockheed-Boeing space venture] breathed sighs of relief as the US Senate voted overwhelmingly to exempt rocket engines from a sanctions bill targeting Iran and Russia. The amendment to the sanctions measure exempted RD-180 engines used by ULA in the first stage of its Atlas V booster and the RD-181 engines Orbital ATK uses in the first stage of its Antares launch vehicle. Both engines are produced by NPO Energomash of Russia».
And the really funny thing is that the Atlas V rocket launches US spy satellites. On 1 March NASA reported the seventieth mission by an Atlas V, when «a final launch verification took place at T-16 seconds, leading to the start sequence of the RD-180 engine at the base of the Atlas V core at T-2.7 seconds». It would be too much to expect them to admit that the RD-180 is made in Russia.
The US Senate and House of Representatives support imposition of sanctions all round the world on the most principled grounds — except when their actions would interfere with the profits of the US aerospace industry and Washington’s ability to spy on Russia from space.
The International Space Station is a heart-warming example of US-Russia teamwork which is anathema to every Senator and member of the House of Representatives. Not one of them has ever mentioned the gratitude the US owes Russia for its many years of willing cooperation. As recorded by NASA on 28 July — at the height of the Senate’s war-crazed anti-Russia hysteria — «This morning, a trio of astronauts will make their way to the International Space Station, launching on top of a Russian Soyuz rocket from Kazakhstan. They will join the three astronauts already living on board the ISS».

Groucho Marx put it so well by saying «Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others». He was joking, but the US Congress is deadly serious. What a bunch of pathetic hypocrites.