James Petras

Introduction: There is ample evidence that the Obama Presidency has pulled the US political spectrum further to the Right. On most domestic and foreign policy issues Obama has embraced extremist positions surpassing his Republican predecessor and in the process devastating what remained of the peace and social movements of the past decade.

Moreover, the Obama Presidency has laid the groundwork for the immediate future promising a further extension of regressive policies following the presidential elections: cuts in Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare. Incumbents and their opposition compete over hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign funding from wealthy donors, which they will have to repay in the post-election period in billion dollar handouts, subsidies, tax abatements, anti-labor and environmental policies. Not a single positive proposal was put forth by the Obama campaign but numerous militarist and regressive social policies were articulated. The Obama campaign ran a fear campaign, playing off of the reactionary proposals of the Romney-Tea Party alliance: a cover for his own record of unprecedented military spending, sequential wars, immigrant expulsions, mortgage foreclosures and Wall Street bailouts.

In the process, critical liberals have crossed the line, surrendering their integrity by deflecting attention from Obama’s militarist-socially regressive policies to focus on “opposing Romney” as a “greater evil”: progressives and critical liberals have multiplied and magnified the duplicity of the Obama political apparatus. In the name of opposing the current ‘greater evil’ (Romney) they dare not enumerate and specify the wanton political crimes and monumental socio-economic injustice perpetrated by their “lesser evil” candidate (Obama). Will the “progressives” ever play honest and publically state: we back Obama in “swing states” because he has “only” murdered 10,000 Afghans, 5,000 Iraqis, is starving 75 million Iranian’s via sanctions, gives $3 billion for Israeli displacement of millions of Palestinians, personally oversees the arbitrary executions of US citizens and promises an extended kill list … because Romney promises to be worse … Expecting honesty from the proponents of ‘lesser eviles’ is as farfetched as taking serious their criticisms between elections.

The political damage incurred by the social movements and US working class under the Obama presidency is unprecedented and has laid the groundwork for further social regression and greater imperial bellicosity.

More »

Stephen Lendman

A previous article discussed what perhaps is the most perilous time in world history. American-led Western societies are waging war on humanity.

Imperial war is a way of life. Social democracies are being eliminated. Freedom is on the chopping block to be crushed. Elections are meaningless and farcical. America's are the worst. They mock legitimacy. Money power controls them. It runs the country and most societies. People have no say. They're ill-served and stomped on by governments in bed with corporatist rogues.

Media scoundrels serve wealth and power interests. Managed news misinformation is featured. Former Wall Street Journal writer Greg Jaffe now writes on military issues for the Washington Post. His latest article calls the world "safer." Measured by most relevant statistics, he says, America and the world "have never been safer." No legitimate journalist would claim it. No respectable editor would publish it. At a time Western nations wage permanent war, crack down repressively against dissent, and inflict unprincipled hardships on people, Jaffe claims "global statistics point undeniably toward progress in achieving greater peace and stability." He credits massive military spending. He advocates "peace through strength." He wants more of the same at a time America spends more than the rest of the world combined.

Unprincipled amounts of dollars devoted to foreign and domestic militarism make everyone less safe. Humanity may be destroyed to save it. Nuclear war is possible. The Middle East cauldron could erupt in mushroom-shaped cloud destruction. Nuclear winter could follow. When America and other nuclear powers consider these type weapons king-sized hand grenades, the worst of all outcomes is possible.

More »

James Petras

Skyline of London's financial district, "City of London"

Introduction: Whenever financial swindlers prosper at the expense of investors or a bank jiggers interest rates to bugger their competitors or tax evaders flee fiscal crises or rent gouging petrol monarchies recycle profits or oligarchs pillage economies and drive millions to drink, drugs and destitution they find a suitable secure sanctuary in London.

They are wooed and pursued by big British realtors eager to sell them multi-million dollar estates, trophy properties and landmark mansions. Pompous and pretentious British academics convince them to send their progeny to six digit private schools, promising them that when they graduate they will be speaking English through their nasal cavities, rolling their r’s and mastering the art of eloquent but vacuous elocution. British governments, Labor Liberal and Conservative, in the best and most hypocritical legal traditions, fashion the legal loopholes to attract the biggest and wealthiest parasites of the world.

Crime Wave Sweeps City of London: A veritable crime wave[1] has invaded the City of London, where millionaire investment bankers cook the books for billionaire clients and bilk the Treasury to pay their fines and flout the Law. Courses in business ethics are obligatory at Oxford and Cambridge since it has become standard operating procedure for mega-swindlers to plead guilty ,to pay a fine and avoid jail and to solemnly promise to never, ever, flout the law….. until the next mega-deal.

More »

Stephen Lendman

On October 7, Venezuelans get to choose between Bolivarianism under Chavez and Henrique Capriles Radonski's corporatism they rejected resoundingly in 1998. Polls show they'll do it again. IVAD late August results show Chavez ahead 55% to 34%. Only 10% of Venezuelans are undecided. Eight major July polls showed Chavez leading by 15 - 27%. Subsequent ones weeks later revealed his support remains strong. Few doubt October's outcome. At issue is only by how much. On December 16, regional elections follow.

In late August, Chavez warned that opposition forces plan to declare victory before electoral results are announced. They'll say they won, reject National Electoral Council (CNE) totals, and claim fraud. They'll call for violence, destabilization and US help. "They are gearing up….with some allies in the world, some media, some social organizations to claim victory," said Chavez. "We know they are capable of anything." He urged respect for official results, adding:

"We will support the National Electoral Council. We call on all sectors to respect the referee, the Constitution, the laws."

Capriles' economic advisor, Ricardo Hausmann, said his campaign will announce its own results independently of official ones. Ultimas Noticias editor Eleazar Díaz Rangel said they'll "claim fraud (and won't) recognize the people's will."

Since Chavez took office in February 1999, 15 national and regional elections were held. Independent observers declared them open, free and fair. America's Carter Center calls Venezuela's electoral system one of the world's most reliable. Around 200 or more international observers will monitor October 7 voting. Expect confirmation of another exemplary democratic process. It puts America's to shame and then some. US federal and many regional ones lack legitimacy. Big money controls them. Ordinary people have no say.

Venezuelans however get the real thing. They're not about to accept pre-Chavez harshness. They want no part of corporatism at their expense.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Photo: Schumer calls the Jerusalem platform omission a 'mistake'. Luckily for the delegates, they saw their mistake in time and hastily corrected the platform. You see, AIPAC knows all there is to know about democracy. Paraphrasing Orwell's Animal Farm, we now happily bleat: All animals are chosen, but some are more chosen than others. - Or if you like, "Napoleon is always right." -Ed.

On Wednesday evening, Democrat convention delegates took three voice votes calling Jerusalem Israel's capital. Each time, nays sounded louder than yeas.

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa chaired the convention. Despite boos and no votes more audible than yes ones, he declared rewriting platform language policy. Doing so violates international law and justice. Obama caved to AIPAC and other Israeli Lobby organizations. Pandering to Lobby pressure and Israeli lawlessness is policy. Palestinians don't matter so ignore them. Spurning international law is OK.

In 1947, the UN designated Jerusalem an international city under a UN Trusteeship Council. The area includes Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and Beit Sahour. It encompasses Christian and Muslim holy sites. After Israel's 1947-48 War of Independence, it was divided between Israel and Jordan. During Israel's 1967 Six-Day War, East Jerusalem was captured and occupied. It remains so lawlessly today.

More »

Stephen Lendman

March 5, 2012: Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses
the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

AIPAC is a destructive, malevolent, evil force. It's heading Washington for war.

AIPAC is an unregistered foreign agent. It calls itself "America's Pro-Israeli Lobby." It's represented Israeli interests since 1953. Virtually no one in Congress confronts it. Doing so is a career-ender. It has enormous influence over US Middle East policies affecting Israel, including war and peace. It disseminates disinformation, lies and hate. It viciously attacks opponents. It calls Iran "the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism and is racing toward a nuclear weapons capability." It manufactures threats to promote fear. It wants the Islamic Republic destroyed. It targets other regional states. It wants unchallenged Israeli regional dominance. James Petras says AIPAC's sole purpose "is to ensure Israel’s unchallenged military and political power over a huge region from North Africa to the Persian Gulf."

Its annual meeting "is the most outrageous public display of Zionist-Jewish power as it shapes US foreign policy." It threatens "to drag the US into another major war in the Middle East - this time against Iran." Doing so is lawless, madness, and self-destructive.

More »

Stephen Lendman

ICRC hasn't been doing all that much for the Palestinians either...

Progressive News Hour regular James Petras once said most NGOs skim 90% of donations for themselves. They're predators, not humanitarians. They serve political agendas for profit. They avoid denouncing governmental patrons providing financing. They don't link neoliberal exploitation and human rights violations to imperial agendas. They support wrong over right. They prey on the world's vulnerable. They commit flagrant abuses for self-enrichment and close ties to top government officials. ICRC is no exception. More on it below.

On July 18, Security Council members again vote on a Western resolution. Russia and China vetoed two earlier ones. They reject one-sided proposals. They advance the ball for war. This one includes UN Charter Chapter VII provisions. They range from economic sanctions to blockades or military intervention if other measures fail. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov rejects Chapter VII authorization. [He said]:

We will vote against the U.N. Security Council resolution on Syria if it is not based on the Geneva agreements.

Geneva language left much to be desired. It agreed on

"facilitat(ing) a Syrian led political process," but overstepped at the same time. Contrary to international law, it accepted "agreed guidelines and principles for a political transition that meets the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people."

Syrians had their say earlier. They overwhelmingly adopted a new constitution by national referendum. First time ever parliamentary elections were held. Turnout was high. Voting went smoothly. Independent monitors judged the process open, free and fair. Why repeat what's already accomplished? Most important is that international law prohibits interfering in the internal affairs of other countries. Doing so in Geneva or elsewhere lacks legitimacy.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Photo: Enrique Peña Nieto, presidential candidate for the Revolutionary Institutional Party (PRI), flashes his election ink-stained thumbs after he cast his vote in the general election, accompanied by his wife Angelica Rivera and four of their six children: Paulina, left, Alejandro, second left, Regina, center, and Sofia, right, in Atlacomulco, Mexico, Sunday, July 1, 2012. Mexico's more than 79 million voters went to the polls Sunday to elect a president, who serves one six-year term, as well as 500 congressional deputies and 128 senators.

Like its northern neighbor, wealth and power dominate Mexican politics. Elections are notoriously tainted. Populist candidates are excluded. The late John Ross said Mexico perfected the art of electoral theft.

Longstanding problems fester. For millions, they're unbearable. They include extreme poverty, unemployment, underemployment, deep-seated private and public corruption, drug-related crime and violence, and political repression.

Beyond lip service, none of the candidates addressed them. Conditions are worse now than years earlier. Sunday's election changed nothing. Privately, Nieto assured Washington that business as usual will continue.

More »

Stephen Lendman

Growing numbers of Jews oppose Israeli policies. American ones want a relationship this destructive ended. So do millions of people worldwide.

Strategic interests largely benefitting Israel, not shared values, are at issue. Washington doesn't provide the Jewish state more aid than all other nations combined because of historic binding ties.

On March 25, 1948, Harry Truman met secretly with Chaim Weizmann (Israel's first president). He pledged support for the future Jewish state. Minutes after midnight on May 15, 1948, America was the first country to extend recognition.

A special relationship began. Thereafter it's grown financially, politically, militarily, diplomatically, and counterproductively. Israel clearly benefits. America loses more than it gains. Serious reassessment is long overdue.

On many issues mattering most, the Israeli tail wags the US dog, whether or not Washington's interests are served.

Both countries threaten world peace. United they endanger humanity. On February 9, 2010, an Intelligence Squared debate resolved: "The US should step back from its special relationship with Israel," saying:

"Israel believes America’s special relationship is vital. It is, certainly, to Israel. But what about for the US? Israel has no oil, enemies in many places, and a tendency to defy Washington when it perceives its own interests to be threatened, which is not infrequently."

Does America's relationship do more harm than good? Is it time to step back and reconsider? These and related issues weren't resolved. Raising them publicly served a purpose.

A packed New York University student union showed people want answers they haven't gotten. Together these pariah states menace humanity. Breaking up is long overdue.

More »

Roger Tucker

The recent open letter Granting No Quarter: A Call for the Disavowal of the Racism and Antisemitism of Gilad Atzmon, apparently written by Ali Abunimah, has come as a shock to many people, including yours truly. Not only have the Zionists colonized Palestine and subjected them to a permanent campaign of genocide, but as anyone who has been paying attention knows, they have colonized the Western democracies, turning them into obedient puppets. Now it appears that they have also colonized the Palestine Solidarity movement.

At the end of this essay are links to a number of responses supporting Atzmon and what he stands for. These cover the ground pretty well, but I’d like to add a critical look at the language used by Abunimah et al and some of the notions underlying such terminology. I’ll start with the title itself, which begins with the curious phrase “Granting No Quarter.” The phrase is familiar to anyone who has read books or seen films based on British naval warfare set in the 18th or early 19th centuries. - this is as extreme as it gets. This from a group of mostly Palestinian supporters of the Palestinian struggle against Israel in opposition to another such supporter. That is sufficiently mind-boggling in itself, but Ali Abunimah, and I would assume at least some of his fellow signatories, are also supporters of One Democratic State as the solution to the basic conflict in the Middle East, as is Atzmon. Some fundamental and portentous difference, beyond a mere dispute about strategy or tactics, must be responsible for such a total and uncompromising attack on a seemingly close ally. It allows for no debate, no compromise – no quarter offered or accepted.

Some observers have implied that Ali & Co. have actually gone over to the enemy, or may have been Zionist agents from day one, and that the Jewish members of these Solidarity groups are acting as their handlers. For the sake of argument, I’m going to assume that is not so, that they are perfectly sincere in considering themselves loyal to the Palestinian cause as they conceive it. Looking at the signatories of the Letter we find some successful academics, Abunimah and Massad being the most prominent. They have prospered as unofficially sanctioned spokesmen for the Palestinian cause in the US and have no incentive to rock the boat. If they presented any perceived danger to tribal Jewry, they would likely find themselves on the street, as has happened to a number of academics, many of them Jewish, who have dared to challenge the predominant Jewish narrative. This points to a simple motivation based on economic and professional self-interest, but I believe there’s more to it than that.

More »