by Thierry Meyssan

For Thierry Meyssan, by taking to the streets, the French have become the first Western population to take personal risks to oppose financial globalisation. Although they do not realise it, and still imagine that their problems are exclusively national, their enemy is the same force that crushed the region of the African Great Lakes and a part of the Greater Middle East. In order to understand the project which inextricably unites these apparently disparate events, we have to take a step back.

The cause of Western recession

International relations experienced a profound change with the paralysis of the Soviet Union in 1986, when the State was unable to control the civilian nuclear incident in Tchernobyl [1], then with the revocation of the Warsaw Pact in 1989, when the East German Communist Party [2] destroyed the Berlin Wall, and finally, with the dissolution of the USSR in 1991.

At that time, the President of the United States, George Bush Sr., decided to demobilise one million soldiers and devote the efforts of his country to its own prosperity. He wanted to transform US hegemony within its zone of influence, and expand it into that of the leader of the world, the guarantor of world stability. With that, he laid the foundations for a « New World Order », first of all in the speech he gave side by side with British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, at the Aspen Institute (2 August 1990), then during his speech to Congress (11 September 1990), announcing operation « Desert Storm » [3].

The world of the après-Soviet Union is one of free circulation, not only of merchandise, but also world capital, under the unique control of the United States. In other words, the passage from capitalism to financialisation – not the triumphant culmination of free exchange, but an exacerbated form of colonial exploitation of the whole world, including the West. Within the space of a quarter of a century, the major US fortunes have multiplied many times, and the global wealth of the world has increased considerably.

‘They are undesirable & they must feel it’

Lindholm Island - Denmark - © Google Maps
Denmark will send rejected asylum seekers to live on a remote island. Located in the freezing Baltic Sea, the island is currently home to animal research laboratories and crematoria.

"If you are unwanted in Danish society, you should not be a nuisance to ordinary Danes,” immigration minister Inger Støjberg wrote in a Facebook post on Friday. “They are undesirable in Denmark and they must feel it!”

The island, Lindholm, sits in an inlet of the Baltic Sea, about two miles from the nearest shore. Around 100 rejected asylum seekers and criminal immigrants will be sent to live there, and will be required to check in daily with authorities there, or face jail. Ferry service to the island is infrequent, and one of the boats serving the island is reportedly named the ‘Virus’, a reference to the contagious animal disease research center currently occupying the island.

The plan was agreed upon by Denmark’s ruling centrist Venstre party, and the more right-wing Danish People’s Party, as part of annual budget negotiations.

While Venstre may have been looking for votes to secure its budget plan, the People’s Party is looking to take the hardest line on immigration.

by

 

CIA - licence to kill ?

Given that we have all [in the USA] been born and raised under a regime that has the CIA, hardly anyone questions the power of the CIA to assassinate people. The CIA’s power of assassination has become a deeply established part of American life.

Yet, the Constitution, which called the federal government into existence and established its powers, does not authorize the federal government to assassinate people.

If the proponents of the Constitution had told the American people that the Constitution was bringing into existence a government that wielded the power to assassinate people, there is no way that Americans would have approved the deal, in which case they would have continued operating under the Articles of Confederation.

Under the Articles, the powers of the federal government were so weak, it didn’t even have the power to tax, much less the power to assassinate people. That’s because our American ancestors wanted it that way. The last thing they wanted was a federal government with vast powers.

In fact, the purpose of the Constitutional Convention was simply to amend the Articles of Confederation. During the 13 years of operating under the Articles, problems had arisen, such as trade wars between the states. The convention was intended to fix those problems with amendments to the Articles.

Inventor of the Web Prepares to Launch Web 3.0, Predicts Privacy Revolution

By  25 November 2018

Sir Tim-Berners-Lee

The inventor of the World Wide Web, Sir Tim Berners-Lee (shown), believes that “the web has evolved into an engine of inequity and division; swayed by powerful forces who use it for their own agendas.” To correct that and “restore the power and agency of individuals on the web,” Berners-Lee is preparing to re-invent the web.

Due to the growing prevalence of the twin evils of data-mining and data-manipulation, the web — created to be a free and open platform — has instead become a place where users find themselves robbed of both their privacy and easy access to reliable information on which they could base sound decisions. Take as just one example, the Cambridge Analytica breach of Facebook last year. By the time the dust settled and the smoke cleared, at least 50 million (and possibly as many as 87 million) users had their data harvested and used to manipulate their (and their friends’) votes in the 2016 presidential election.

By Janet Phelan

    Human suffering worldwide / Image credit: A. Freda Art

A proliferation of human rights agencies now litter the political landscape. While these organizations and agencies profess to honor and protect human rights at large, a scrutiny of the activity of these international organizations indicates that they are highly tilted towards protecting and buttressing the agenda of the US, both at home and abroad.

I was recently asked to address a human rights conference in Atlanta, Georgia on the topic of what obstacles are encountered when one attempts to engage international human rights organizations. The idea of an American doing so is strange to many. Does not the US have its own mechanisms for dealing with human rights abuses?

WHY WOULD AN AMERICAN SEEK JUSTICE ABROAD?

On paper, indeed this is so. However, in practice we have found ourselves in a human rights crisis in the US that is of a considerable magnitude. The fact that the mainstream media veers away from reporting on this US human rights crisis does not in any way diminish its reality. As a result of this crisis, US citizens are having their most fundamental rights violated, and in many cases, losing not only their freedom, not only their property, but in many cases, losing their lives. Our press remains largely silent, averting its collective gaze.

Wiki Leaks founder Julian Assange speaks from the Ecuador Embassy after Sweden's director of public prosecutions. Vianney Le Caer/REX Shutterstock
By - Contributing Editor -
 

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who has been inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London since the summer of 2012, is back in the news. Last week, word of a sealed federal indictment involving him leaked out.

The news came out in a strange way, via an unrelated case in Virginia. In arguing to seal a federal child endangerment charge (against someone with no connection to Wikileaks), the government, ironically, mentioned Assange as an example of why sealing is the only surefire way to keep an indictment under wraps.

“Due to the sophistication of the defendant and the publicity surrounding the case,” prosecutors wrote, “no other procedure is likely to keep confidential the fact that Assange has been charged.”

Assange’s lawyer Barry Pollack told Rolling Stone he had “not been informed that Mr. Assange has been charged, or the nature of any charges.”

Trump Signs Bill to Further Protect Critical Infrastructure,

Including Pandemic Delivery System

Where "Protection" and "Security" means Oppression and Tyranny

It’s a sad day when protection equals assault, and when events such as the President signing H.R. 3359, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Act of 2017, is heralded as protecting the nation when in fact this legislation further protects a system which will devastate the nation.

It has been a long standing modus operandi of the United States to disguise its most dangerous projects as protection. Following the events of September 11, 2001 and the subsequent anthrax attacks, the US Congress rushed to pass a massive piece of legislation which ended up putting us in exquisite danger. Embedded in the USA Patriot Act was Section 817, the Expansion of the Biological Weapons Statute, which gave the US government immunity from violating its own biological weapons laws.

By ERIC MATARA - DN - November 16 2018
Members of the Ogiek community during a past function. The Ogiek community has accused the government of foot-dragging in putting into effect a landmark ruling by the African Court on Human and People's Rights in Arusha, Tanzania on their eviction from Mau Forest. PHOTO | FILE | NATION MEDIA GROUP

The Ogiek community has accused the government of foot-dragging in putting into effect a landmark ruling by the African Court on Human and People's Rights in Arusha, Tanzania on their eviction from Mau Forest, one year after judgement was issued.

The community led by its council of elders chairman, Mr Joseph Towett, said on Wednesday that the government had failed to implement the judgment that was issued in May 2017.

The Ogiek say that, despite the government on November 10, 2017 gazetting a task force to implement the judgment, nothing has been done and the community continues to suffer in silence due to historical injustices.

Julian Assange has been secretly charged in the USA,

prosecutors reveal inadvertently in court filing

Prosecutors inadvertently revealed that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been charged under seal, according to a recently unsealed court filing in an unrelated case.

Planned expulsion may not go ahead as Rohingya go into hiding while aid agencies warn return is too dangerous.

 

Hundreds of thousands of Rohingya who fled Myanmar, citing rape, murder and arson, will not be forcibly repatriated, Bangladesh's Rohingya Relief and Repatriation Commissioner has said.

"No one will be forced back to Myanmar," Abul Kalam told Al Jazeera.

Bangladesh is scheduled to send back an initial group of 2,260 Rohingya from 485 families, in line with a bilateral plan agreed by the two governments in October.

But the move has been opposed by the United Nations' refugee agency and aid groups who say the long-persecuted minority cannot be forced back, causing confusion over whether the repatriations would go ahead.

"They survived atrocities so it's natural they fear to go back," Kalam said.

More than 700,000 Rohingya fled to Bangladesh last year to escape a brutal army crackdown in Myanmar's Rakhine state last year, accusing government soldiers and local Buddhists of massacring families, burning hundreds of villages and carrying out mass gang rape.

Myanmar denies the allegations, saying security forces were battling armed rebels.

A drafted memo by the United Nations Human Rights Committee calls for abortion to be decriminalized everywhere. (Photo: mizoula/Getty Images)
The United Nations Human Rights Committee drafted a memo saying that abortion and physician-assisted suicide should be universal human rights.

The memo, or “general comment” on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, calls for abortion to be decriminalized everywhere. Nations and states should “not introduce new barriers and should remove existing barriers [to abortion] … including barriers caused as a result of the exercise of conscientious objection by individual medical providers,” it said, Crux Now reported Thursday.

The committee that put forward the draft is headed by former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet, according to Crux. Aborting an unborn baby was illegal in Chile until August 2017 when the nation’s lawmakers ruled to decriminalize abortion in the cases of rape, fatal fetal abnormalities, and when the mother’s life is in danger.

December 2018
S M T W T F S
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31