Category: Analysis
Violence & death across Middle East after Trump’s Jerusalem move

Declassified Docs Prove US Repeatedly Promised Russia No NATO Eastward Expansion
| December 12, 2017 | 8:31 pm | Analysis, Russia, USSR | No comments

https://sputniknews.com/world/201712121059942275-us-russia-east-europe-expansion-nato/

Declassified Docs Prove US Repeatedly Promised Russia No NATO Eastward Expansion

Reagan and Gorbachev

Declassified Docs Prove US Repeatedly Promised Russia No NATO Eastward Expansion

© Sputnik/ Yuryi Abramochkin
World

Get short URL
14431

NATO expansion was a key issue as the US, Western European and Soviet leaders negotiated the reunification of Germany.

US and Western European leaders repeatedly promised their Soviet and Russian counterparts in the early 1990s that NATO would not expand into Eastern Europe, according to a series of declassified documents posted by George Washington University’s National Security Archive on Tuesday.

“US Secretary of State James Baker’s famous “not one inch eastward” assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was part of a cascade of assurances about Soviet security given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991,” a press release summarizing the document cache stated.

NATO expansion was a key issue as US, Western European and Soviet leaders negotiated the reunification of Germany, in which the alliance’s boundaries would presumably encompass the former East Germany.

READ MORE: ‘Tragic Mistake’: How the Fall of the Berlin Wall Helped NATO in Eastern Europe

The cache includes a cable from the US Embassy in Bonn informing Washington that German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher had urged NATO to rule out an “expansion of its territory towards the east, i.e. moving it closer to the Soviet borders.”

At the time, Genscher also proposed excluding East Germany from NATO’s security umbrella after German reunification.

In subsequent years NATO has expanded beyond the former East Germany to include 13 Eastern European countries, the latest being Montenegro’s admission in June 2017.

NATO Expansion in Europe

Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, have repeatedly stated that the United States failed to uphold its promises, adding that the Ukranian conflict following the 2014 coup that installed a pro-Western government in Kiev has served as a pretext for additional deployments in Europe.

Nevertheless, in 2016, the alliance has decided to approve sending four multinational battalions to each of the Baltic states — namely Lithiania, Latvia and Estonia — and Poland.Most recently, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that the alliance would maintain increased presence in the Baltic states and Eastern Europe “as long as necessary” after the alliance’s members had agreed on instituting a new adaptive command structure to improve the alliance’s ability “to improve the movement of military forces across Europe.”

When Donald Trump Falsifies History
| December 11, 2017 | 7:18 pm | Analysis, Donald Trump, Imperialism, Russia, socialism, UK | No comments

Monday, December 11, 2017

When Donald Trump Falsifies History

A response to U.S. President Trump’s blatant falsification of historical events.
 
By Nikos Mottas.


Donald Trump seems to have his own version of history. A version that falsifies completely the real historical events. The tycoon- turned President of the USA- decided to demonstrate his ignorance (or, perhaps, ability to distort history) during a Republican Party’s rally in Pensacola, Florida on December 8th. 

 
What did Trump say? Among others, the U.S. President said the following“We are the nation that dug out the Panama Canal, won two world wars, put a man on the moon and brought communism to its knees”.
Apparently, Trump thought that he addresses a crowd of illiterate idiots who were cheering at his moronic proclamations. But, unfortunately for Trump, not everyone is ignorant of historical events.
 
1. The U.S. didn’t win two world wars. The First World War (WW1) began in 1914 and ended in 1918. The United States entered the war just a year before the end, in 1917. Britain, France and Russia were the major countries which bore the burden of war, while the U.S. claimed some victories over the heavily damaged German army when the later were unable to provide enough arms or food to their troops. 
 
As for the Second World War (WW2), Trump is falsifying the historical truth too. Because, it was the Soviet Union – the Red Army and the people of the USSR- which actually defeated the Nazis. Someone must inform Trump about the epic battle of Stalingrad. Someone must tell him about the conquer of Berlin by the soldiers of the Red Army. 
 
The United States’ government had declared war against Nazi Germany in 1941, but it didn’t actively involved in warfare until 1944. The focus of the U.S. was on the Pacific Front, against the Japanese. By the time of the so-called “D-Day”, the Red Army had already won major battles against the Nazis, bringing the frontline close to Berlin.

The Soviet Union paid the highest price in casualties- more than 24 million people (troops and civilians) died during WW2. The respective casualties for the U.S. were approximately 420,000 people. Is Mr. Trump or any of his supporters aware of that? 

2. The U.S. President said that his country “put a man on the moon”. Indeed, astronaut Neil Armstrong was the first man to walk on the moon. However, the first person to journey into outer space wasn’t an American, but a Soviet, Yuri Gagarin. Gagarin’s spacecraft “Vostok” completed an orbit on the Earth on April 12, 1961.

Someone must inform President Trump- in case he doesn’t know- that the world’s first artificial satellite was “Sputnik-1” which was launched on October 4, 1957.

3. Donald Trump also said that the U.S. “brought communism to its knees”. This is a major argument frequently used by the various apologists of capitalism, especially after the counter-revolutionary events of 1989-1991. Trump repeats this convenient- for imperialism- narrative about the supposed “triumph” of capitalism over socialism. However, the reality is far from the grandiose nonsense expressed by Mr. Trump and his like-minded.

Socialism didn’t “collapse”; it was the opportunist counter-revolution that prevailed in the USSR and the socialist countries in Eastern Europe in the end of 1980s. The counter-revolution consistued the last act of a process which led to the distortion of the revolutionary character of the Communist Party, the strengthening of social inequalities and ultimately to social regression. The roots of the reasons which led to the victory of the counter-revolution in the USSR goes back to the decisions of the 20th Congress of the CPSU. 

International imperialism played its own role in the long-term strengthening and promotion of the the counter-revolutionary forces, but it wasn’t an imperialist intervention that led to the overthrow of Socialism. The truth exists in the various deviations from the laws of socialist construction and the weaknesses in solving existing issues of Socialism with capitalist tools, which led to the prevalence of counter-revolution. 

 
Tsipras and Erdogan, both enemies of the working class in Greece and Turkey

Saturday, December 9, 2017

Tsipras and Erdogan, both enemies of the working class in Greece and Turkey

https://communismgr.blogspot.com/2017/12/tsipras-and-erdogan-both-enemies-of.html
By Nikos Mottas.
The visit of the Turkish President Erdogan in Greece has concluded. A lot of things were said in front of cameras and, certainly, even more behind closed doors. We could write about several conclusions regarding the undisputable upgrade of Ankara’s assertions against Greece’s sovereign rights, the unacceptable demand for the revision of the Treaty of Lausanne, the pretexts of President Erdogan regarding minorities, etc.
However, if we would like to summarize the very essense of Erdogan’s visit, we must briefly- and clearly- point out the following:
  • Both President Erdogan, as well as the Greek leadership, repeated in their public statements the (trite) wishes about “good neighborly relations”, “mutual respect”, “friendship” and “peace” between the two countries. All these are empty words, taking into account that within the framework of imperialism, within the framework of the NATO alliance – members of which are both countries – actual friendship and peace cannot exist. This is a given and multiple times proven in the passage of history truth. Therefore, with these words, Tsipras and Erdogan do not deceive each other, but they deceive together the Greek and Turkish people.
  • Erdogan’s visit took place in a period when both his government and the coalition government of SYRIZA-ANEL, are facing a series of internal problems. From its side, the AKP government faces serious social and political issues (e.g. Zarrab case, social polarization, inflation increase, devaluation of the Turkish lira, etc) and has every reason to try to disorient the popular masses from the actual problems. The- albeit temporary- change of the political agenda is also beneficial for the SYRIZA-ANEL government which, in the name of the “3rd evaluation”, crushes working-people’s rights.
  • The confrontation regarding the Treaty of Lausanne has overshadowed a very significant aspect of the meeting. This aspect has to do with the economic agreements and business deals between sections of the Greek and Turkish capital. Mr. Erdogan came to Greece as the representative of the strongest part of the Turkish bourgeois class, whose interests he wishes to promote. It is certain that the working people on both sides of the Aegean have nothing to gain from the business between Greek and Turkish capitalists. On the contrary, both governments in Athens and Ankara are moving towards an increasingly antipeople-reactionary way, enhancing, in one way or another, the exploitation of the working masses and the crush of labor rights.
  • Both Tsipras and Erdogan are consciously lying and deceiving their people when they talk about supposed solutions to a series of issues (Cyprus, Aegean, Refugee waves, etc) within the framework of NATO and the EU. It has been proved, in the most explicit way, that these imperialist organisations do not consist part of whatever kind of solution but, on the contrary, they are integral part of the problem. It is therefore clear that within the Euroatlantic framework no issue can be solved for the benefit of the people, taking into account that these matters are inseparably linked to powerful inter-imperialist competitions, totally foreign to peoples’ interests.
Given the above and on the background of the Greek government’s dithyrambs about Erdogan’s “historic visit”, we bring in our minds the words of the great communist poet Nazim Hikmet who, in August 1952, in a letter addressed to his “Greek brothers”, were talking about “Two Turkeys and two Greeces”. The real and the fake. The independent and the slavish one.
Today, there is the Turkey of Erdogan, AKP and the kemalist bourgeois opposition, but also the Turkey of the working people who are facing persecutions, repression and capitalist barbarity. Likewise, there is the Greece of Tsipras, Mitsotakis and the bourgeois parties, but also the Greece of the working-people’s movement which resists to the strategy of the capital.
Today, there is the Turkey of a handful of monopolies- modern sultans- which are exploiting the wealth produced by the Turkish people, as well as the Turkey of the poor neighborhoods of Istanbul, of the labor unions, of the Turkish communists who struggle in very adverse conditions. On the other side of the Aegean, there the Greece of the wealthy large industrialists and shipowners, as well as the Greece of the workers, of the strikers, of the poor strata.
The actual meaning of the Greek-Turkish friendship will never be expressed by any Tsipras or Erdogan. This meaning was expressed, in a unique way, by the great Nazim Hikmet: “The people of Turkey and Greece give a totally different meaning to the Greek-Turkish friendship. For them, the friendship means a common struggle for the freedom of their homeland. For national independence, for the happiness, in order to be able to taste side by side in the fraternal table of friendship, the bread and the olives of their own country.”
 
Originally published in Greek in atexnos.gr.
 
* Nikos Mottas, a Phd student, is the editor-in-chief of In Defense of Communism
The Anti-Empire Report #153

By William Blum – Published December 5th, 2017

Cold War Number One: 70 years of daily national stupidity

Cold War Number Two: Still in its youth, but just as stupid

https://williamblum.org/aer/read/153

“He said he absolutely did not meddle in our election. He did not do what they are saying he did.” – President Trump re Vladimir Putin after their meeting in Vietnam.

Putin later added that he knew “absolutely nothing” about Russian contacts with Trump campaign officials. “They can do what they want, looking for some sensation. But there are no sensations.”

Numerous US intelligence agencies have said otherwise. Former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, responded to Trump’s remarks by declaring: “The president was given clear and indisputable evidence that Russia interfered in the election.”

As we’ll see below, there isn’t too much of the “clear and indisputable” stuff. And this of course is the same James Clapper who made an admittedly false statement to Congress in March 2013, when he responded, “No, sir” and “not wittingly” to a question about whether the National Security Agency was collecting “any type of data at all” on millions of Americans. Lies don’t usually come in any size larger than that.

Virtually every member of Congress who has publicly stated a position on the issue has criticized Russia for interfering in the 2016 American presidential election. And it would be very difficult to find a member of the mainstream media which has questioned this thesis.

What is the poor consumer of news to make of these gross contradictions? Here are some things to keep in mind:

How do we know that the tweets and advertisements “sent by Russians” -– those presented as attempts to sway the vote -– were actually sent by Russians? The Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), composed of National Security Agency and CIA veterans, recently declared that the CIA knows how to disguise the origin of emails and tweets. The Washington Post has as well reported that Twitter “makes it easy for users to hide their true identities.”  Even if these communications were actually sent from Russia, how do we know that they came from the Russian government, and not from any of the other 144.3 million residents of Russia?

Even if they were sent by the Russian government, we have to ask: Why would they do that? Do the Russians think the United States is a Third World, under-developed, backward Banana Republic easily influenced and moved by a bunch of simple condemnations of the plight of blacks in America and the Clinton “dynasty”? Or clichéd statements about other controversial issues, such as gun rights and immigration? If so, many Democratic and Republican officials would love to know the secret of the Russians’ method. Consider also that Facebook has stated that 90 percent of the alleged-Russian-bought content that ran on its network did not even mention Trump or Clinton.

On top of all this is the complete absence of even the charge, much less with any supporting evidence, of Russian interference in the actual voting or counting of votes.

After his remark suggesting he believed Putin’s assertion that there had been no Russian meddling in the election, Trump – of course, as usual – attempted to backtrack and distant himself from his words after drawing criticism at home; while James Clapper declared: “The fact the president of the United States would take Putin at his word over that of the intelligence community is quite simply unconscionable.”

Given Clapper’s large-size lie referred to above, can Trump be faulted for being skeptical of the intelligence community’s Holy Writ? Purposeful lies of the intelligence community during the first Cold War were legendary, many hailed as brilliant tactics when later revealed. The CIA, for example, had phoney articles and editorials planted in foreign newspapers (real Fake News), made sex films of target subjects caught in flagrante delicto who had been lured to Agency safe houses by female agents, had Communist embassy personnel expelled because of phoney CIA documents, and much more.

The Post recently published an article entitled “How did Russian trolls get into your Facebook feed? Silicon Valley made it easy.” In the midst of this “exposé,” The Post stated: “There’s no way to tell if you personally saw a Russian post or tweet.”  So … Do the Cold Warriors have a case to make or do they not? Or do they just want us to remember that the Russkis are bad? So it goes.

An organization in the Czech Republic with the self-appointed name of European Values has produced a lengthy report entitled “The Kremlin’s Platform for ‘Useful Idiots’ in the West: An Overview of RT’s Editorial Strategy and Evidence of Impact”. It includes a long list of people who have appeared on the Russian-owned TV station RT (formerly Russia Today), which can be seen in the US, the UK and other countries. Those who’ve been guests on RT are the “idiots” useful to Moscow. (The list is not complete. I’ve been on RT about five times, but I’m not listed. Where is my Idiot Badge?)

RT’s YouTube channel has more than two million followers and claims to be the “most-watched news network” on the video site. Its Facebook page has more than 4 million likes and followers. Can this explain why the powers-that-be forget about a thing called freedom-of-speech and treat the station like an enemy? The US government recently forced RT America to register as a foreign agent and has cut off the station’s Congressional press credentials.

The Cold War strategist, George Kennan, wrote prophetically: “Were the Soviet Union to sink tomorrow under the waters of the ocean, the American military-industrial establishment would have to go on, substantially unchanged, until some other adversary could be invented. Anything else would be an unacceptable shock to the American economy.”

Writer John Wight has described the new Cold War as being “in response to Russia’s recovery from the demise of the Soviet Union and the failed attempt to turn the country into a wholly owned subsidiary of Washington via the imposition of free market economic shock treatment thereafter.”

So let’s see what other brilliance the New Cold War brings us. … Ah yes, another headline in the Post(November 18, 2017): “British alarm rising over possible Russian meddling in Brexit”. Of course, why else would the British people have voted to leave the European Union? But wait a moment, again, one of the British researchers behind the report “said that the accounts they analyzed – which claimed Russian as their language when they were set up but tweeted in English – posted a mixture of pro-‘leave’ and pro-‘remain’ messages regarding Brexit. Commentators have said that the goal may simply have been to sow discord and division in society.”

Was there ever a time when the Post would have been embarrassed to be so openly, amateurishly biased about Russia? Perhaps during the few years between the two Cold Wars.

In case you don’t remember how stupid Cold War Number One was …

  • 1948: The Pittsburgh Press published the names, addresses, and places of employment of about 1,000 citizens who had signed presidential-nominating petitions for former Vice President Henry Wallace, running under the Progressive Party. This, and a number of other lists of “communists”, published in the mainstream media, resulted in people losing their jobs, being expelled from unions, having their children abused, being denied state welfare benefits, and suffering various other punishments.
  • Around 1950: The House Committee on Un-American Activities published a pamphlet, “100 Things You Should Know About Communism in the U.S.A.” This included information about what a communist takeover of the United States would mean:Q: What would happen to my insurance?A: It would go to the Communists.

    Q: Would communism give me something better than I have now?

    A: Not unless you are in a penitentiary serving a life sentence at hard labor.

  • 1950s: Mrs. Ada White, member of the Indiana State Textbook Commission, believed that Robin Hood was a Communist and urged that books that told the Robin Hood story be banned from Indiana schools.
  • As evidence that anti-communist mania was not limited to the lunatic fringe or conservative newspaper publishers, here is Clark Kerr, president of the University of California at Berkeley in a 1959 speech: “Perhaps 2 or even 20 million people have been killed in China by the new [communist] regime.” One person wrote to Kerr: “I am wondering how you would judge a person who estimates the age of a passerby on the street as being ‘perhaps 2 or even 20 years old.’ Or what would you think of a physician who tells you to take ‘perhaps 2 or even twenty teaspoonsful of a remedy’?”
  • Throughout the cold war, traffic in phoney Lenin quotes was brisk, each one passed around from one publication or speaker to another for years. Here’s U.S. News and World Report in 1958 demonstrating communist duplicity by quoting Lenin: “Promises are like pie crusts, made to be broken.” Secretary of State John Foster Dulles used it in a speech shortly afterward, one of many to do so during the cold war. Lenin actually did use a very similar line, but he explicitly stated that he was quoting an English proverb (it comes from Jonathan Swift) and his purpose was to show the unreliability of the bourgeoisie, not of communists.“First we will take Eastern Europe, then the masses of Asia, then we will encircle the United States, which will be the last bastion of capitalism. We will not have to attack. It will fall like an overripe fruit into our hands.” This Lenin “quotation” had the usual wide circulation, even winding up in the Congressional Record in 1962. This was not simply a careless attribution; this was an out-and-out fabrication; an extensive search, including by the Library of Congress and the United States Information Agency failed to find its origin.
  • A favorite theme of the anti-communists was that a principal force behind drug trafficking was a communist plot to demoralize the United States. Here’s a small sample:Don Keller, District Attorney for San Diego County, California in 1953: “We know that more heroin is being produced south of the border than ever before and we are beginning to hear stories of financial backing by big shot Communists operating out of Mexico City.”Henry Giordano, Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 1964, interviewed in the American Legion Magazine: Interviewer: “I’ve been told that the communists are trying to flood our country with narcotics to weaken our moral and physical stamina. Is that true?”

    Giordano: “As far as the drugs are concerned, it’s true. There’s a terrific flow of drugs coming out of Yunnan Province of China. … There’s no question that in that particular area this is the aim of the Red Chinese. It should be apparent that if you could addict a population you would degrade a nation’s moral fiber.”

    Fulton Lewis, Jr., prominent conservative radio broadcaster and newspaper columnist, 1965: “Narcotics of Cuban origin – marijuana, cocaine, opium, and heroin – are now peddled in big cities and tiny hamlets throughout this country. Several Cubans arrested by the Los Angeles police have boasted they are communists.”

    We were also told that along with drugs another tool of the commies to undermine America’s spirit was fluoridation of the water.

  • Mickey Spillane was one of the most successful writers of the 1950s, selling millions of his anti-communist thriller mysteries. Here is his hero, Mike Hammer, in “One Lonely Night”, boasting of his delight in the grisly murders he commits, all in the name of destroying a communist plot to steal atomic secrets. After a night of carnage, the triumphant Hammer gloats, “I shot them in cold blood and enjoyed every minute of it. I pumped slugs into the nastiest bunch of bastards you ever saw. … They were Commies. … Pretty soon what’s left of Russia and the slime that breeds there won’t be worth mentioning and I’m glad because I had a part in the killing. God, but it was fun!”
  • 1952: A campaign against the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) because it was tainted with “atheism and communism”, and was “subversive” because it preached internationalism. Any attempt to introduce an international point of view in the schools was seen as undermining patriotism and loyalty to the United States. A bill in the US Senate, clearly aimed at UNESCO, called for a ban on the funding of “any international agency that directly or indirectly promoted one-world government or world citizenship.” There was also opposition to UNESCO’s association with the UN Declaration of Human Rights on the grounds that it was trying to replace the American Bill of Rights with a less liberty-giving covenant of human rights.
  • 1955: A US Army 6-page pamphlet, “How to Spot a Communist”, informed us that a communist could be spotted by his predisposition to discuss civil rights, racial and religious discrimination, the immigration laws, anti-subversive legislation, curbs on unions, and peace. Good Americans were advised to keep their ears stretched for such give-away terms as “chauvinism”, “book-burning”, “colonialism”, “demagogy”, “witch hunt”, “reactionary”, “progressive”, and “exploitation”. Another “distinguishing mark” of “Communist language” was a “preference for long sentences.” After some ridicule, the Army rescinded the pamphlet.
  • 1958: The noted sportscaster Bill Stern (one of the heroes of my innocent youth) observed on the radio that the lack of interest in “big time” football at New York University, City College of New York, Chicago, and Harvard “is due to the widespread acceptance of Communism at the universities.”
  • 1960: US General Thomas Power speaking about nuclear war or a first strike by the US: “The whole idea is to kill the bastards! At the end of the war, if there are two Americans and one Russian, we win!” The response from one of those present was: “Well, you’d better make sure that they’re a man and a woman.”
  • 1966: The Boys Club of America is of course wholesome and patriotic. Imagine their horror when they were confused with the Dubois Clubs. (W.E.B. Du Bois had been a very prominent civil rights activist.) When the Justice Department required the DuBois Clubs to register as a Communist front group, good loyal Americans knew what to do. They called up the Boys Club to announce that they would no longer contribute any money, or to threaten violence against them; and sure enough an explosion damaged the national headquarters of the youth group in San Francisco. Then former Vice President Richard Nixon, who was national board chairman of the Boys Club, declared: “This is an almost classic example of Communist deception and duplicity. The ‘DuBois Clubs’ are not unaware of the confusion they are causing among our supporters and among many other good citizens.”
  • 1966: “Rhythm, Riots and Revolution: An Analysis of the Communist Use of Music, The Communist Master Music Plan”, by David A. Noebel, published by Christian Crusade Publications, (expanded version of 1965 pamphlet: “Communism, Hypnotism and the Beatles”). Some chapters: Communist Use of Mind Warfare … Nature of Red Record Companies … Destructive Nature of Beatle Music … Communist Subversion of Folk Music … Folk Music and the Negro Revolution … Folk Music and the College Revolution
  • 1968: William Calley, US Army Lieutenant, charged with overseeing the massacre of more than 100 Vietnamese civilians in My Lai in 1968, said some years later: “In all my years in the Army I was never taught that communists were human beings. We were there to kill ideology carried by – I don’t know – pawns, blobs, pieces of flesh. I was there to destroy communism. We never conceived of old people, men, women, children, babies.”
  • 1977: Scientists theorized that the earth’s protective ozone layer was being damaged by synthetic chemicals called chlorofluorocarbons. The manufacturers and users of CFCs were not happy. They made life difficult for the lead scientist. The president of one aerosol manufacturing firm suggested that criticism of CFCs was “orchestrated by the Ministry of Disinformation of the KGB.”
  • 1978: Life inside a California youth camp of the ultra anti-communist John Birch Society: Five hours each day of lectures on communism, Americanism and “The Conspiracy”; campers learned that the Soviet government had created a famine and spread a virus to kill a large number of citizens and make the rest of them more manageable; the famine led starving adults to eat their children; communist guerrillas in Southeast Asia jammed chopsticks into children’s ears, piercing their eardrums; American movies are all under the control of the Communists; the theme is always that capitalism is no better than communism; you can’t find a dictionary now that isn’t under communist influence; the communists are also taking over the Bibles.
  • The Reagan administration declared that the Russians were spraying toxic chemicals over Laos, Cambodia and Afghanistan – the so-called “yellow rain” – and had caused more than ten thousand deaths by 1982 alone, (including, in Afghanistan, 3,042 deaths attributed to 47 separate incidents between the summer of 1979 and the summer of 1981, so precise was the information). Secretary of State Alexander Haig was a prime dispenser of such stories, and President Reagan himself denounced the Soviet Union thusly more than 15 times in documents and speeches. The “yellow rain”, it turned out, was pollen-laden feces dropped by huge swarms of honeybees flying far overhead.
  • 1982: In commenting about sexual harassment in the Army, General John Crosby stated that the Army doesn’t care about soldiers’ social lives – “The basic purpose of the United States Army is to kill Russians,” he said.
  • 1983: The US invasion of Grenada, the home of the Cuban ambassador is damaged and looted by American soldiers; on one wall is written “AA”, symbol of the 82nd Airborne Division; beside it the message: “Eat shit, commie faggot.” … “I want to fuck communism out of this little island,” says a marine, “and fuck it right back to Moscow.”
  • 1984: During a sound check just before his weekly broadcast, President Reagan spoke these words into the microphone: “My fellow Americans, I am pleased to tell you I have signed legislation to outlaw Russia, forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.” His words were picked up by at least two radio networks.
  • 1985: October 29 BBC interview with Ronald Reagan: asked about the differences he saw between the US and Russia, the president replied: “I’m no linguist, but I’ve been told that in the Russian language there isn’t even a word for freedom.” (The word is “svoboda”.)
  • 1986: Soviet artists and cultural officials criticized Rambo-like American films as an expression of “anti-Russian phobia even more pathological than in the days of McCarthyism”. Russian film-maker Stanislav Rostofsky claimed that on one visit to an American school “a young girl trembled with fury when she heard I was from the Soviet Union, and said she hated Russians.”
  • 1986: Roy Cohn, who achieved considerable fame and notoriety in the 1950s as an assistant to the communist-witch-hunting Senator Joseph McCarthy, died, reportedly of AIDS. Cohn, though homosexual, had denied that he was and had denounced such rumors as communist smears.
  • 1986: After American journalist Nicholas Daniloff was arrested in Moscow for “spying” and held in custody for two weeks, New York Mayor Edward Koch sent a group of 10 visiting Soviet students storming out of City Hall in fury. “The Soviet government is the pits,” said Koch, visibly shocking the students, ranging in age from 10 to 18 years. One 14-year-old student was so outraged he declared: “I don’t want to stay in this house. I want to go to the bus and go far away from this place. The mayor is very rude. We never had a worse welcome anywhere.” As matters turned out, it appeared that Daniloff had not been completely pure when it came to his news gathering.
  • 1989: After the infamous Chinese crackdown on dissenters in Tiananmen Square in June, the US news media was replete with reports that the governments of Nicaragua, Vietnam and Cuba had expressed their support of the Chinese leadership. Said the Wall Street Journal: “Nicaragua, with Cuba and Vietnam, constituted the only countries in the world to approve the Chinese Communists’ slaughter of the students in Tiananmen Square.” But it was all someone’s fabrication; no such support had been expressed by any of the three governments. At that time, as now, there were few, if any, organizations other than the CIA which could manipulate major Western media in such a manner.

NOTE: It should be remembered that the worst consequences of anti-communism were not those discussed above. The worst consequences, the ultra-criminal consequences, were the abominable death, destruction, and violation of human rights that we know under various names: Vietnam, Chile, Korea, Guatemala, Cambodia, Indonesia, Brazil, Greece, Afghanistan, El Salvador, and many others.

Al Franken

Poor Al, who made us laugh for years on Saturday Night Live, is now disgraced as a woman molester – not one of the worst of the current pathetic crop, but he still looks bad. However, everything is relative, and it must be pointed out that the Senator is guilty of a worse moral transgression.

The erstwhile comedian would like you to believe that he was against the war in Iraq since it began. But he went to that sad country at least four times to entertain American troops. Does that make sense? Why does the Defense Department bring entertainers to military bases? To lift the soldiers’ spirits of course. And why does the military want to lift the soldiers’ spirits? Because a happier soldier does his job better. And what is the soldier’s job? For example, all the charming war crimes and human-rights violations in Iraq that have been documented in great detail for many years. Didn’t Franken know what American soldiers do for a living?

Country singer Darryl Worley, who leans “a lot to the right,” as he puts it, said he was far from pleased that Franken was coming along on the tour to Iraq. “You know, I just don’t understand – why would somebody be on this tour if they’re not supportive of the war? If he decides to play politics, I’m not gonna put up with it.”

A year after the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, Franken criticized the Bush administration because they “failed to send enough troops to do the job right.”  What “job” did the man think the troops were sent to do that had not been performed to his standards because of lack of manpower? Did he want them to be more efficient at killing Iraqis who resisted the occupation? The volunteer American troops in Iraq did not even have the defense of having been drafted against their wishes.

Franken has been lifting soldiers’ spirits for a long time. In 2009 he was honored by the United Service Organization (USO) for his ten years of entertaining troops abroad. That includes Kosovo in 1999, as imperialist an occupation as you’ll ever want to see. He called his USO experience “one of the best things I’ve ever done.”  Franken has also spoken at West Point (2005), encouraging the next generation of imperialist warriors. Is this a man to challenge the militarization of America at home and abroad?

Tom Hayden wrote this about Franken in 2005 when Franken had a regular program on the Air America radio network: “Is anyone else disappointed with Al Franken’s daily defense of the continued war in Iraq? Not Bush’s version of the war, because that would undermine Air America’s laudable purpose of rallying an anti-Bush audience. But, well, Kerry’s version of the war, one that can be better managed and won, somehow with better body armor and fewer torture cells.”

While in Iraq to entertain the troops, Franken declared that the Bush administration “blew the diplomacy so we didn’t have a real coalition,” then failed to send enough troops to do the job right. “Out of sheer hubris, they have put the lives of these guys in jeopardy.”

Franken was implying that if the United States had been more successful in bribing and threatening other countries to lend their name to the coalition fighting the war in Iraq the United States would have had a better chance of WINNING the war.

Is this the sentiment of someone opposed to the war? Or in support of it? It is actually the mind of an American liberal in all its depressing mushiness.

To be put on the tombstone of Western civilization

On November 15, 2017, at Christie’s auction house in New York City, a painting was sold for $450,312,500.

Notes

  1. Washington Post, November 12, 2017
  2. Washington Post, October 10, 2017
  3. Washington Post, November 15, 2017
  4. Reuters, November 12, 2017
  5. Washington Post, November 2, 2017
  6. Wikipedia entry for George Kennan
  7. Sources for almost all of this section can be found in William Blum, “Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire” (2005), chapter 12; or the author can be queried at bblum6@aol.com
  8. Washington Post, February 16, 2004
  9. Ibid.
  10. Star Tribune, Minneapolis, March 26, 2009
  11. Huffington Post, June 2005
  12. Washington Post, February 16, 2004

Any part of this report may be disseminated without permission, provided attribution to William Blum as author and a link to williamblum.org is provided.

The Real Causes of Deficits and the US Debt (Next Phases in Trump Fiscal Strategy)
| December 7, 2017 | 8:43 pm | Analysis, Donald Trump, Economy, Jack Rasmus | No comments

The Real Causes of Deficits and the US Debt (Next Phases in Trump Fiscal Strategy)

The Real Causes of Deficits and the US Debt (Next Phases in Trump Fiscal Strategy)

With the Senate and House all but assured to pass the US$4.5 trillion in tax cuts for businesses, investors, and the wealthiest 1 percent households by the end of this week, phases two and three of the Trump-Republican fiscal strategy have begun quickly to take shape.

Phase two is to maneuver the inept Democrats in Congress into passing a temporary budget deficit-debt extension in order to allow the tax cuts to be implemented quickly. That’s already a ‘done deal’.

Phase three is the drumbeat growing to attack social security, Medicare, food stamps, Medicaid, and other ‘safety net’ laws, in order to pay for the deficit created by cutting taxes on the rich. To justify the attack, a whole new set of lies are resurrected and being peddled by the media and pro-business pundits and politicians.

Deficits and Debt: Resurrecting Old Lies and Misrepresentations

Nonsense like social security and Medicare will be insolvent by 2030. When in fact social security retirement fund has created a multi-trillion dollar surplus since 1986, which the U.S. government has annually ‘borrowed’, exchanging the real money in the fund created by the payroll tax and its indexed threshold, for Treasury bonds deposited in the fund. The government then uses the social security surplus to pay for decades of tax cuts for the rich and corporations and to fund endless war in the middle east.

As for Medicare, the real culprit undermining the Medicare part A and B funds has been the decades-long escalating of prices charged by insurance companies, for-profit hospital chains (financed by Wall St.), medical devices companies, and doctor partnerships investing in real estate and other speculative markets and raising their prices to pay for it.

As for Part D, prescription drugs for Medicare, the big Pharma price gouging is even more rampant, driving up the cost of the Part D fund. By the way, the prescription drug provision, Part D, passed in 2005, was intentionally never funded by Congress and George Bush. It became law without any dedicated tax, payroll or other, to fund it. Its US$50 billion plus a year costs were thus designed from the outset to be paid by means of the deficit and not funded with any tax.

Social Security Disability, SSI, has risen in costs, as a million more have joined its numbers since the 2008 crisis. That rise coincides with Congress and Obama cutting unemployment insurance benefits. A million workers today, who would otherwise be unemployed (and raising the unemployment rate by a million) went on SSI instead of risking cuts in unemployment benefits. So Congress’s reducing the cost of unemployment benefits in effect raised the cost of SSI. And now conservatives like Congressman Paul Ryan, the would be social security ‘hatchet man’ for the rich, want to slash SSI as well as social security retirement, Medicare benefits for grandma and grandpa, Medicaid for single moms and the disabled (the largest group by far on Medicaid), as well as for food stamps.

Food stamp costs have also risen sharply since 2008. But that’s because real wages have stagnated or fallen for tens of millions of workers, making them eligible under Congress’s own rules for food stamp distribution. Now Ryan and his friends want to literally take food out of the mouths of the poorest by changing eligibility rules.

They want to cut and end benefits and take an already shredded social safety net completely apart–while giving US$4.5 trillion to their rich friends (who are their election campaign contributors). The rich and their businesses are getting $4.5 trillion in tax cuts in Trump’s tax proposal—not the $1.4 trillion referenced in the corporate press. The $1.4 trillion is after they raise $3 trillion in tax hikes on the middle class.

Whatever financing issues exist for Social Security retirement, Medicare, Medicaid, disability insurance, food stamps, etc., they can be simply and easily adjusted, and without cutting any benefits and making average households pay for the tax cuts for the rich in Trump’s tax cut bill.

Social security retirement, still in surplus, can be kept in surplus by simply one measure: raise the ‘cap’ on social security to cover all earned wage income. Today the ‘cap’, at roughly US$118,000 a year, exempts almost 20 percent of the highest paid wage earners. Once their annual salary exceeds that amount, they no longer pay any payroll tax. They get a nice tax cut of 6.2 percent for the rest of the year. (Businesses also get to keep 6.2% more). Furthermore, if capital income earners (interest, rent, dividends, etc.) were to pay the same 6.2% it would permit social security retirement benefits to be paid at two thirds one’s prior earned wages, and starting with age 62. The retirement age could thus be lowered by five years, instead of raised as Ryan and others propose.

As for Medicare Parts A and B, raising the ridiculously low 1.45 percent tax just another 0.25 percent would end all financial stress in the A & B Medicare funds for decades to come.

For SSI, if Congress would restore the real value of unemployment benefits back to what it was in the 1960s, maybe millions more would return to work. (It’s also one of the reasons why the labor force participation rate in the U.S. has collapsed the past decade). But then Congress would have to admit the real unemployment rate is not 4.2 percent but several percentages higher. (Actually, it’s still over 10 percent, once other forms of ‘hidden unemployment’ and underemployment are accurately accounted for).

As for food stamps’ rising costs, if there were a decent minimum wage (at least US$15 an hour), then millions would no longer be eligible for food stamps and those on it would significantly decline.

In other words, the U.S. Congress and Republican-Democrat administrations have caused the Medicare, Part D, SSI, and food stamp cost problems. They also permitted Wall St. to get its claws into the health insurance, prescription drugs, and hospital industries–financing mergers and acquisitions activity and demanding in exchange for lending to companies in those industries that the companies raise their prices to generate excess profits to repay Wall St. for the loans for the M&A activity.

The Real Causes of Deficits and the Debt

So if social security, Medicare-Medicaid, SSI, food stamps, and other social safety net programs are not the cause of the deficits, what then are the causes?

In the year 2000, the U.S. federal government debt was about US$4 trillion. By 2008 under George Bush it had risen to nearly US$9 trillion. The rise was due to the US$3.4 trillion in Bush tax cuts, 80 percent of which went to investors and businesses, plus another US$300 billion to U.S. multinational corporations due to Bush’s offshore repatriation tax cut. Multinationals were allowed to bring US$320 billion of their US$750 billion offshore cash hoard back to the U.S. and pay only a 5.25 percent tax rate instead of the normal 35 percent. (By the way, they accumulated the US$750 billion hoard was a result of Bill Clinton in 1997 allowing them to keep profits offshore untaxed if not brought back to the U.S. Thus the Democrats originally created the problem of refusing to pay taxes on offshore profits, and then George Bush, Obama, and now Trump simply used it as an excuse to propose lower tax rates for repatriated the offshore profits cash hoard of US multinational companies. From $750 billion in 2004, it’s now $2.8 trillion).

So the Bush tax cuts whacked the U.S. deficit and debt. The Bush wars in the middle east did as well. By 2008 an additional US$2 to US$3 trillion was spent on the wars. Then Bush policies of financial deregulation precipitated the 2007-09 crash and recession. That reduced federal tax revenue collection due to collapse economic growth further. Then there was Bush’s 2008 futile $180 billion tax cut to stem the crisis, which it didn’t. And let’s not forget Bush’s 2005 prescription drug plan–a boondoggle for big pharmaceutical companies–that added US$50 billion a year more. As did a new Homeland Security $50 billion a year and rising budget costs.

There’s your additional US$5 trillion added by Bush to the budget deficit and U.S. debt–from largely wars, defense spending, tax cuts, and windfalls for various sectors of the healthcare industry.

Obama would go beyond Bush. First, there was the US$300 billion tax cuts in his 2009 so-called ‘recovery act’, mostly again to businesses and investors. (The Democrat Congress in 2009 wanted an additional US$120 billion in consumer tax cuts but Obama, on advice of Larry Summers, rejected that). What followed 2009 was the weakest recovery from recession in the post-1945 period, as Obama policies failed to implement a serious fiscal stimulus. Slow recovery meant lower federal tax revenues for years thereafter.

Studies show that at least 60 percent of the deficit and debt since 2000 is attributable to insufficient taxation, due both to tax cutting and slow economic growth below historical rates.

Obama then extended the Bush-era tax cuts another US$803 billion at year-end 2010 and then agreed to extend them another decade in January 2013, at a cost of US$5 trillion. The middle east war spending continued as well to the tune of another $3 trillion at minimum. Continuing the prescription drug subsidy to big Pharma and Homeland Security costs added another $500 billion.

In short, Bush added US$5 trillion to the US debt and Obama another US$10 trillion. That’s how we get from US$4 trillion in 2000 to US$19 trillion at the end of 2016. (US$20 trillion today, about to rise another US$10 trillion by 2027 once again with the Trump tax cuts fast-tracking through Congress today).

To sum up, the problem with chronic U.S. federal deficits and escalating Debt is not social security, Medicare, or any of the other social programs. The causes of the deficits and debt are directly the consequence of financing wars in the middle east without raising taxes to pay for them (the first time in U.S. history of war financing), rising homeland security and other non-war defense costs, massive tax cuts for businesses and investors since 2001, economic growth at two thirds of normal the past decade (generating less tax revenues), government health program costs escalation due to healthcare sector price gouging, and no real wage growth for the 80 percent of the labor force resulting in rising costs for food stamps, SSI, and other benefits.

Notwithstanding all these facts, what we’ll hear increasingly from the Paul Ryans and other paid-for politicians of the rich is that the victims (retirees, single moms, disabled, underemployed, jobless, etc.) are the cause of the deficits and debt. Therefore they must pay for it.

But what they’re really paying for will be more tax cuts for the wealthy, more war spending (in various forms), and more subsidization of price-gouging big pharmaceuticals, health insurance companies, and for-profit hospitals which now front for, and are indirectly run by, Wall St.

Jack Rasmus is the author of the recently published book, “Central Bankers at the End of Their Ropes: Monetary Policy and the Coming Depression.” He blogs at jackrasmus.com and his twitter handle is @drjackrasmus.

Some Recent ‘Tweets’ Summarizing Senate-House Tax Cut Proposals
| December 7, 2017 | 8:38 pm | Analysis, Donald Trump, Jack Rasmus | No comments

Some Recent ‘Tweets’ Summarizing Senate-House Tax Cut Proposals

Some Recent ‘Tweets’ Summarizing Senate-House Tax Cut Proposals

by Dr. Jack Rasmus,

Republicans will now ‘sharpen their knives’ to go after grandma and grandpa, to cut social security and medicare–and medicaid for single moms and disabled, to pay for $2T deficit (not $1 or $1.5T) in Trump tax cuts

Senate bill means beginning of the end of ACA healthcare Act: Ending individual mandate will raise premiums for all by minimum 10% in 2018 and more thereafter. 4 million will immediately drop; 13m will drop by 2027, per independent estimates.

Senate tax bill means 3200 of the richest 0.1% households no longer will pay inheritance tax whatsoever; the remaining 1800 will have new threshold of $22 million before paying. Fewer than 0.1% households will now pay Inheritance tax.

Senate version off Trump Tax cuts reshuffles the House bill: Corps still get $1.5T; pass thru business $476B;Multinational corps $500B + bigger loopholes for real estate, autos, oil, depreciation=$3T business cuts paid by $3T tax hikes for middle class.

Trump’s latest ‘big lie’: the tax cuts “will cost me millions”. Trump’s 2005 tax returns show he paid only paid taxes due to AMT; doubling AMT exemption will halve his taxes. Trump’s 500 ‘business income pass through’ companies also gain from rate cut from 39.6% to 25% (or less 23% in Senate)

Multinational US corps past history with 2005 repatriation tax windfall tax cut (from 35% to 5.25%) showed 90% of windfall was used for stock buyback, dividends, and financing mergers and acquisitions.

Trump Tax cut based on faulty economic theory: give business more disposable income & they will invest it short run, leading to jobs, wages, GDP. US businesses now sit on $2 trillion cash in US +$2.8T offshore. If they aren’t investing with $4.8T, why would they with another $3t?

Senate tax bill deficit of $1 trillion based on absurd assumptions of economic growth. Past historical GDP trend for next decade will at least double the $1 to $2 trillion deficit or more. Decade from now, US debt will exceed $30 trillion