Politics and Justice Without Borders
Global Community Newsletter main website


Volume 13 Issue 9 July 2015

Global citizens moving forward to SoulLife God Promised Land.

Joseph Germain Dufour, Prophet of God, Founder and Spiritual Leader of the Global Community,President, Global Community, Global Parliament, Global Community WebNet Ltd.
Germain Dufour
Founder and Spiritual Leader of Global Community

I am SoulLife God
I am SoulLife God

Life is my domain. My Guiding Souls help evolution in small ways.
I am SoulLife God. Life is my domain. My Guiding Souls help evolution in small ways.

Table of Contents

I.   SoulLife God call for action Note
II.   Global Vision we live by Introduction
III.   Global Community Ethics Note
IV.   Global Community Ministries Note
V.   The new Promised Land by SoulLife God Note

Authors of research papers and articles on global issues for this month

Lionel Anet, M'Hamed Bouyahia (2), Shamus Cooke, Guy Crequie (7), Mike Faulkner, Pope Francis, Mike Gaworecki, Ivan Jubert Guimarães, Daily Take Team, the Thom Program Hartmann, AJ Hartnett, Stephanie Kirchgaessner and John Hooper, Tomgram: Michael Klare, Michael T. Klare, Christiane Kliemann, Jon Kofas, Alex Lantier Reynard Loki (2), Charles Mercieca (2), George Monbiot, Donny Moss,Joyce Nelson, Alisa Opar, Tim Radford, Robert Reich, Leo Semashko, Valerie Tarico, Andre Vltchek, Eric Zuesse (2)

Lionel Anet, The Futility Of Expecting Peace And Honesty Under Capitalism The Futility Of Expecting Peace And Honesty Under Capitalism
Shamus Cooke, Syrian War Set To Re-Explode  Syrian War Set To Re-Explode
Guy Crequie, La 9e conférence d'examen du TNP vient de se terminer, sans consensus, à New York ! La 9e conférence d'examen du TNP vient de se terminer, sans consensus, à New York !
Mike Faulkner, Russia, Ukraine And The West: In Defence Of History Against Falsification Russia, Ukraine And The West: In Defence Of History Against Falsification
Pope Francis, "Care For Our Common Home" Mother Earth Care For Our Common Home Mother Earth
Mike Gaworecki, Fracking Flowback From California Oil Wells Contains High Levels Of Carcinogenic Chemicals  Fracking Flowback From California Oil Wells Contains High Levels Of Carcinogenic Chemicals
Daily Take Team, the Thom Hartmann Program, Capitalism Could Kill All Life On Earth Capitalism Could Kill All Life On Earth
AJ Hartnett, Are You Ready for the Biggest Environmental Catastrophe of Our Lifetime? Are You Ready for the Biggest Environmental Catastrophe of Our Lifetime?
Stephanie Kirchgaessner and John Hooper, Pope Francis Warns of Destruction of Earth's Ecosystem in Leaked Encyclical Pope Francis Warns of Destruction of Earth's Ecosystem in Leaked Encyclical
Tomgram: Michael Klare, Superpower in Distress Superpower in Distress
Michael T. Klare, Delusionary Thinking in Washington: The Desperate Plight of a Declining Superpower Delusionary Thinking in Washington: The Desperate Plight of a Declining Superpower
Christiane Kliemann, Are We Prepared To Change To Prevent Climate Change? Are We Prepared To Change To Prevent Climate Change?
Jon Kofas, Is there A Single Development Model That Works? Is there A Single Development Model That Works?
Alex Lantier, Poll Finds Mass Opposition In Europe To War Drive vs. Russia Over Ukraine  Poll Finds Mass Opposition In Europe To War Drive vs. Russia Over Ukraine
Reynard Loki, Climate Change Is Killing People Around the World and It's Only Going to Get Worse Climate Change Is Killing People Around the World and It's Only Going to Get Worse
Reynard Loki, Is a Bomb Train Rolling Through Your Community? Is a Bomb Train Rolling Through Your Community?
Charles Mercieca, Peace Education: Source of National Unity and Global Harmony Peace Education: Source of National Unity and Global Harmony
Charles Mercieca, Endless Knowledge and Great Wisdom in your Hands  Endless Knowledge and Great Wisdom in your Hands
George Monbiot, Why We Fight For The Living World: It's About Love, And It's Time We Said So Why We Fight For The Living World: It's About Love, And It's Time We Said So
Donny Moss, Jane Goodall: “We’re Destroying the Planet”  Jane Goodall: We’re Destroying the Planet
Joyce Nelson, Is Canada Turning into a Police State? Is Canada Turning into a Police State?
Alisa Opar, 5 Ways the Trans-Pacific Partnership Could Ruin the Environment  5 Ways the Trans-Pacific Partnership Could Ruin the Environment
Tim Radford, Earth Has Warmed As Usual, With No Slowdown Earth Has Warmed As Usual, With No Slowdown
Robert Reich, Robert Reich: Obama Shouldn't Just Halt the Keystone Pipeline -- He Should Toss It in the Trash Robert Reich: Obama Shouldn't Just Halt the Keystone Pipeline -- He Should Toss It in the Trash
Leo Semashko, The GPS sixth Chapter in English for your discussion until 30 May The GPS sixth Chapter in English for your discussion until 30 May
Valerie Tarico, 9 Things You Think You Know About Jesus That Are Probably Wrong 9 Things You Think You Know About Jesus That Are Probably Wrong
Andre Vltchek, V-Day: Russia's Perpetual Fight Against Fascism  V-Day: Russia's Perpetual Fight Against Fascism
Eric Zuesse, U.S. & Europe Boycott Russia's Celebration Of Its 9 May 1945 Victory Over Hitler  U.S. & Europe Boycott Russia's Celebration Of Its 9 May 1945 Victory Over Hitler
Eric Zuesse, Nazism of Ukraine's Western-Backed Government Is Hidden by Western ‘News' Media Nazism of Ukraine's Western-Backed Government Is Hidden by Western ‘News' Media


Articles and papers from authors


Day data received Theme or issue Read article or paper
 June 19, 2015
Pope Francis Warns of Destruction of Earth's Ecosystem in Leaked Encyclical
by Stephanie Kirchgaessner and John Hooper , Rome
Vatican condemns early release of document in which pontiff calls on people to change their lifestyles and energy consumption or face grave consequences

June 16, 2015 "Information Clearing House" - "The Guardian" - Pope Francis will this week call for changes in lifestyles and energy consumption to avert the “unprecedented destruction of the ecosystem” before the end of this century, according to a leaked draft of a papal encyclical. In a document released by an Italian magazine on Monday, the pontiff will warn that failure to act would have “grave consequences for all of us”.

Francis also called for a new global political authority tasked with “tackling … the reduction of pollution and the development of poor countries and regions”. His appeal echoed that of his predecessor, pope Benedict XVI, who in a 2009 encyclical proposed a kind of super-UN to deal with the world’s economic problems and injustices.

According to the lengthy draft, which was obtained and published by L’Espresso magazine, the Argentinean pope will align himself with the environmental movement and its objectives. While accepting that there may be some natural causes of global warming, the pope will also state that climate change is mostly a man-made problem.

“Humanity is called to take note of the need for changes in lifestyle and changes in methods of production and consumption to combat this warming, or at least the human causes that produce and accentuate it,” he wrote in the draft. “Numerous scientific studies indicate that the greater part of the global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases … given off above all because of human activity.”

The pope will also single out those obstructing solutions. In an apparent reference to climate-change deniers, the draft states: “The attitudes that stand in the way of a solution, even among believers, range from negation of the problem, to indifference, to convenient resignation or blind faith in technical solutions.”

The leak has frustrated the Vatican’s elaborate rollout of the encyclical – a papal letter to bishops – on Thursday. Its release had been planned to come before the pope’s trip to the US, where he is due to address the United Nations as well as a joint meeting of Congress.

Journalists were told they would be given an early copy on Thursday morning and that it would be released publicly at noon following a press conference. Cardinal Peter Turkson, who wrote an early draft of the encyclical, and Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, a noted climate scientist in Germany, were expected to attend the press conference. On Monday evening, the Vatican asked journalists not to publish details of the draft, emphasising that it was not the final text. A Vatican official said he believed the leak was an act of “sabotage against the pope”

The draft is not a detailed scientific analysis of the global warming crisis. Instead, it is the pope’s reflection of humanity’s God-given responsibility as custodians of the Earth.

At the start of the draft essay, the pope wrote, the Earth “is protesting for the wrong that we are doing to her, because of the irresponsible use and abuse of the goods that God has placed on her. We have grown up thinking that we were her owners and dominators, authorised to loot her. The violence that exists in the human heart, wounded by sin, is also manifest in the symptoms of illness that we see in the Earth, the water, the air and in living things.”

He immediately makes clear, moreover, that unlike previous encyclicals, this one is directed to everyone, regardless of religion. “Faced with the global deterioration of the environment, I want to address every person who inhabits this planet,” the pope wrote. “In this encyclical, I especially propose to enter into discussion with everyone regarding our common home.”

According to the leaked document, the pope will praise the global ecological movement, which has “already travelled a long, rich road and has given rise to numerous groups of ordinary people that have inspired reflection”.

In a surprisingly specific and unambiguous passage, the draft rejects outright “carbon credits” as a solution to the problem. It says they “could give rise to a new form of speculation and would not help to reduce the overall emission of polluting gases”. On the contrary, the pope wrote, it could help “support the super-consumption of certain countries and sectors”.

The document is not Francis’s first foray into the climate debate. The pontiff, who was elected in 2013, has previously noted his disappointment with the failure to reach a global accord on curbing greenhouse gas emissions, chiding climate negotiators for having a “lack of courage” during the last major talks held in Lima, Peru.

Francis is likely to want to influence Republicans in Washington with his remarks. Most Republicans on Capitol Hill deny climate change is a man-made phenomenon and have staunchly opposed regulatory efforts by the Obama administration.

The encyclical will make for awkward reading among some Catholic Republicans, including John Boehner, the Republican speaker of the House. While many Republicans have praised the pope, it will not be unprecedented for them to make a public break with the pontiff on the issue of global warming.

© 2015 Guardian News and Media Limited

See also -

Pope urges changes to avoid 'unprecedented damage' from climate change: The Pope paints an apocalyptic picture in which the world’s poorest are the biggest victims of a web of environmental, human, financial and ethical degradation that puts the entire planet at risk.

  Read Pope Francis Warns of Destruction of Earth's Ecosystem in Leaked Encyclical
 June 18, 2015 "Care For Our Common Home" Mother Earth
by Pope Francis, Countercurrents


An extract from Pope Francis’s encyclical on the environment, Laudato Si

The Earth, our home, is beginning to look more and more like an immense pile of filth. In many parts of the planet, the elderly lament that once beautiful landscapes are now covered with rubbish. Industrial waste and chemical products utilised in cities and agricultural areas can lead to bioaccumulation in the organisms of the local population, even when levels of toxins in those places are low. Frequently no measures are taken until after people’s health has been irreversibly affected.

These problems are closely linked to a throwaway culture which affects the excluded just as it quickly reduces things to rubbish. To cite one example, most of the paper we produce is thrown away and not recycled. It is hard for us to accept that the way natural ecosystems work is exemplary: plants synthesise nutrients which feed herbivores; these in turn become food for carnivores, which produce significant quantities of organic waste which give rise to new generations of plants. But our industrial system, at the end of its cycle of production and consumption, has not developed the capacity to absorb and reuse waste and by-products. We have not yet managed to adopt a circular model of production capable of preserving resources for present and future generations, while limiting as much as possible the use of non-renewable resources, moderating their consumption, maximizing their efficient use, reusing and recycling them. A serious consideration of this issue would be one way of counteracting the throwaway culture which affects the entire planet, but it must be said that only limited progress has been made in this regard.

The climate is a common good, belonging to all and meant for all. At the global level, it is a complex system linked to many of the essential conditions for human life. A very solid scientific consensus indicates that we are presently witnessing a disturbing warming of the climatic system. In recent decades this warming has been accompanied by a constant rise in the sea level and, it would appear, by an increase of extreme weather events, even if a scientifically determinable cause cannot be assigned to each particular phenomenon. Humanity is called to recognise the need for changes of lifestyle, production and consumption, in order to combat this warming or at least the human causes which produce or aggravate it. It is true that there are other factors (such as volcanic activity, variations in the Earth’s orbit and axis, the solar cycle), yet a number of scientific studies indicate that most global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxides and others) released mainly as a result of human activity. Concentrated in the atmosphere, these gases do not allow the warmth of the sun’s rays reflected by the Earth to be dispersed in space. The problem is aggravated by a model of development based on the intensive use of fossil fuels, which is at the heart of the worldwide energy system. Another determining factor has been an increase in changed uses of the soil, principally deforestation for agricultural purposes.

Many of those who possess more resources and economic or political power seem mostly to be concerned with masking the problems or concealing their symptoms, simply making efforts to reduce some of the negative impacts of climate change. However, many of these symptoms indicate that such effects will continue to worsen if we continue with current models of production and consumption. There is an urgent need to develop policies so that, in the next few years, the emission of carbon dioxide and other highly polluting gases can be drastically reduced, for example, substituting for fossil fuels and developing sources of renewable energy. Worldwide there is minimal access to clean and renewable energy. There is still a need to develop adequate storage technologies. Some countries have made considerable progress, although it is far from constituting a significant proportion. Investments have also been made in means of production and transportation which consume less energy and require fewer raw materials, as well as in methods of construction and renovating buildings which improve their energy efficiency. But these good practices are still far from widespread.


The human environment and the natural environment deteriorate together; we cannot adequately combat environmental degradation unless we attend to causes related to human and social degradation. In fact, the deterioration of the environment and of society affects the most vulnerable people on the planet: both everyday experience and scientific research show that the gravest effects of all attacks on the environment are suffered by the poorest. For example, the depletion of fishing reserves especially hurts small fishing communities without the means to replace those resources; water pollution particularly affects the poor who cannot buy bottled water; and rises in the sea level mainly affect impoverished coastal populations who have nowhere else to go. The impact of present imbalances is also seen in the premature death of many of the poor, in conflicts sparked by the shortage of resources, and in any number of other problems which are insufficiently represented on global agendas. It needs to be said that, generally speaking, there is little in the way of clear awareness of problems which especially affect the excluded. Yet they are the majority of the planet’s population, billions of people.

These days, they are mentioned in international political and economic discussions, but one often has the impression that their problems are brought up as an afterthought, a question which gets added almost out of duty or in a tangential way, if not treated merely as collateral damage. Indeed, when all is said and done, they frequently remain at the bottom of the pile. This is due partly to the fact that many professionals, opinion makers, communications media and centres of power, being located in affluent urban areas, are far removed from the poor, with little direct contact with their problems. They live and reason from the comfortable position of a high level of development and a quality of life well beyond the reach of the majority of the world’s population. This lack of physical contact and encounter, encouraged at times by the disintegration of our cities, can lead to a numbing of conscience and to tendentious analyses which neglect parts of reality. At times this attitude exists side by side with a “green” rhetoric. Today, however, we have to realise that a true ecological approach always becomes a social approach; it must integrate questions of justice in debates on the environment, so as to hear both the cry of the Earth and the cry of the poor.


The same mindset which stands in the way of making radical decisions to reverse the trend of global warming also stands in the way of achieving the goal of eliminating poverty. A more responsible overall approach is needed to deal with both problems: the reduction of pollution and the development of poorer countries and regions. The twenty-first century, while maintaining systems of governance inherited from the past, is witnessing a weakening of the power of nation states, chiefly because the economic and financial sectors, being transnational, tends to prevail over the political. Given this situation, it is essential to devise stronger and more efficiently organised international institutions, with functionaries who are appointed fairly by agreement among national governments, and empowered to impose sanctions. As Benedict XVI has affirmed in continuity with the social teaching of the Church: “To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago”. Diplomacy also takes on new importance in the work of developing international strategies which can anticipate serious problems affecting us all.


Since the market tends to promote extreme consumerism in an effort to sell its products, people can easily get caught up in a whirlwind of needless buying and spending. Compulsive consumerism is one example of how the techno-economic paradigm affects individuals. Romano Guardini had already foreseen this: “The gadgets and technics forced upon him by the patterns of machine production and of abstract planning mass man accepts quite simply; they are the forms of life itself. To either a greater or lesser degree mass man is convinced that his conformity is both reasonable and just”. This paradigm leads people to believe that they are free as long as they have the supposed freedom to consume. But those really free are the minority who wield economic and financial power. Amid this confusion, postmodern humanity has not yet achieved a new self-awareness capable of offering guidance and direction, and this lack of identity is a source of anxiety. We have too many means and only a few insubstantial ends. The current global situation engenders a feeling of instability and uncertainty, which in turn becomes “a seedbed for collective selfishness”. When people become self-centred and self-enclosed, their greed increases. The emptier a person’s heart is, the more he or she needs things to buy, own and consume. It becomes almost impossible to accept the limits imposed by reality. In this horizon, a genuine sense of the common good also disappears. As these attitudes become more widespread, social norms are respected only to the extent that they do not clash with personal needs. So our concern cannot be limited merely to the threat of extreme weather events, but must also extend to the catastrophic consequences of social unrest. Obsession with a consumerist lifestyle, above all when few people are capable of maintaining it, can only lead to violence and mutual destruction.

Yet all is not lost. Human beings, while capable of the worst, are also capable of rising above themselves, choosing again what is good, and making a new start, despite their mental and social conditioning. We are able to take an honest look at ourselves, to acknowledge our deep dissatisfaction, and to embark on new paths to authentic freedom. No system can completely suppress our openness to what is good, true and beautiful, or our God-given ability to respond to his grace at work deep in our hearts. I appeal to everyone throughout the world not to forget this dignity which is ours. No one has the right to take it from us.

Pope Francis’s encyclical is published in full by the Vatican here

Pope Francis is Pope of the Catholic Church, a title he holds ex officio as Bishop of Rome, and Sovereign of the Vatican City

 May 5, 2015
Russia, Ukraine And The West: In Defence Of History Against Falsification
by Mike Faulkner, Countercurrents

According to one dictionary definition the term “propaganda” should be understood as “information, ideas, opinions etc. propagated as a means of winning support for, or fomenting opposition to, a government, institution etc.” There is nothing here to indicate whether the information, ideas and opinions propagated need be true or false.

Thus, to take a simple example, the US occupation for more than a century of Cuban territory at Guantanamo Bay for use as a naval base, is a fact. To state that fact is to speak the truth. It is also a fact that the treaty by which the US came into possession of Guantanamo was imposed upon Cuba against the will of its people, with the threat that failure to accept it would result in the US occupation of the island. It is also a fact that since 1959 the Cuban government has refused to accept the rent from the US for Guantanamo, claiming, truthfully, that the territory housing the base belongs to Cuba and that the US has no legitimate right to be there. All of this factual information and the truthful expression of opinion by the Cuban government, most recently by President Raul Castro, demanding its return to Cuba, has been reiterated consistently for the past 56 years. The demand for the return of Guantanamo may be regarded as “winning support for” the Cuban government, or “fomenting opposition to” the US government. In that case such a demand could, according to the definition, be regarded as propaganda. It would, nevertheless be a just demand on the basis of a truthful presentation of the facts.

“Propaganda” has a derogatory ring to it. It is usually taken for granted that all propaganda must be mendacious, involving deliberate falsification intended to deceive its recipients and persuade them to accept what the propagandists know to be untrue. It may be readily accepted that in many cases this is indeed what propaganda is about. But not necessarily in all cases. During the Second World War following the Battle of Stalingrad, the National Committee for a Free Germany, composed largely of captured German officers who had turned against Hitler, broadcast messages to the Wehrmacht calling on them to surrender. One of these took the form of a clock ticking off the seconds with a voice-over in German informing the demoralized German soldiers that one of their number was dying every second on the Eastern Front, and leaving the sound of the clock ticking away. It was frighteningly effective propaganda. At that time, it was also true. Even propaganda involving deliberate falsehoods may be justified at times.

The radical journalist Claude Cockburn recounts (Cockburn Sums Up. 1981) how in 1936, during the Spanish Civil War, he filed a news report, purportedly from Tetouan in Spanish Morocco, in which he claimed to witness a full-scale revolt by Moorish soldiers against the Spanish army. It was intended to persuade the government of Leon Blum in France that Franco might lose the war and thus persuade him (Blum) to lift his arms embargo on the Spanish Republicans. No such revolt had happened. Cockburn made it up. After the Second World War he was roundly condemned for having engaged in “Black” propaganda, by Labour MP Richard Crossman. When Cockburn reminded Crossman that he himself had engaged in exactly such propaganda exercises to deceive the Nazis during the war, Crossman’s response was that “Black” propaganda “may be necessary to war, but most of us who practiced it detested what we were doing.” “Was it then possible” Cockburn retorted, “ that throughout the life and death struggle our propagandists had all along taken the view that their paramount duty was to be gentlemen, and not to tell lies, however damagingly misleading these might be to the enemy?” With his unfailing wit he characterized Crossman’s stance as “a comfortable ethical position, if you can stop laughing.”

It is difficult to argue convincingly that all propaganda is bad and morally indefensible. Most people would agree that during the Second World War what Crossman referred to as “black” propaganda was necessary and morally defensible when employed by the anti-fascist forces fighting the Nazis. But all propaganda employed by the Nazis and fascists was indefensible and morally deplorable. It depends entirely on the cause in which it was employed: propaganda in support of barbarism and genocide, or propaganda for humanity and liberation.

Josef Goebbels, Propaganda Minister of the Third Reich, (in today’s parlance Hitler’s Director of Communications), bequeathed to the post-war world one salient lesson which he drew from the development of radio and the cinema in the 1930s. He knew that the most effective propaganda method for shaping public opinion in an advanced, literate capitalist society was one which persuaded people that they were not being subjected to propaganda at all. Most of the films they watched had no overt political content, but crucially, some did; the various news media persuaded most Germans that the racism, ethnic nationalism and anti-semitism they peddled simply echoed their own sentiments of patriotism and natural deference to leaders who deserved their trust and loyalty. German life, despite its evident militarisation, was thoroughly petit-bourgeois. The minority who were not taken in, learned, for the most part, to keep their heads down. Everyone was well aware that there were concentration camps for those who stuck their necks out. Most tried not to think about such things.

Today it is becoming more obvious than ever that we are subjected to a form of propaganda that owes a great deal to the pioneering work of Dr. Goebbels. There is no need for the threat of incarceration for those who refuse to consent to the dominant political narratives of the day. In Britain, despite the likelihood that the forthcoming general election will produce a hung parliament and that there could be something of an electoral earthquake in Scotland, there appears to be little awareness about the increasing gravity of the international situation. Wherever one looks – the Middle East, the exodus from Libya with hundreds drowning daily in the Mediterranean, Greece, Ukraine – there is evidence of deepening and unmanageable crises. But potentially the most dangerous of all is the growing Western rhetoric of revived cold war hostility towards Russia. It is impossible to understand this without looking at the part that the Soviet Union played in the Second World War.

Russia and the Falsification of History

One does not need to be an admirer of Vladimir Putin to recognize that his stand in confronting the Western powers and NATO over Crimea and Ukraine is justified. A few relevant facts, readily available but seldom mentioned in the mainstream media, are worth recording:

There are more than one thousand US and NATO military bases around the world. 737 of them are outside the USA. Since its establishment in 1949 with 12 founding members, NATO has steadily expanded to a present membership of 28 states. 12 of these are former members of the Warsaw Pact in Eastern Europe including Poland and the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The US has increased its military forces in Poland and NATO’s control over Baltic airspace on Russia’s borders. There are 116,000 US military personnel in Europe.

Outposts defending US corporate power and not national safety, American military bases represent a constant threat to peace in every region they are deployed. Few things illustrate the meaning of American exceptionalism better than this sprawling network of offensive installations. Be sure to click TWICE on this graph for accurate resolution.

Russia has a military presence in nine countries. All but two of them (Vietnam and Syria) were formally part of the Soviet Union. The Russian naval base at Sevastopol on the Black Sea in Crimea was retained after the collapse of the Soviet Union on lease from the Ukrainian government. The significance of Sevastopol for Russia is not simply due to its strategic geopolitical importance on the Black Sea. It is also because of its history, and in particular its determined resistance to the Nazi invaders during the 9 month siege of 1941/2 and the heroism of its defenders and citizens in the terrible final assault that overwhelmed them.

Anyone who genuinely wants to understand Russian concerns about the steady military expansion of the US and the NATO states on its western borders cannot afford to ignore the titanic part played by the Soviet Union in the defeat of Nazi Germany and its allied fascist satraps in the Second World War. But the mainstream western media and the political elites whose politics they endorse, have no interest in dealing truthfully with this. In fact, for 70 years they have propagated a mendacious, deliberately falsified, revisionist account of this history. Throughout the decades of the cold war the major part played by the Soviet Union in the wartime alliance against Hitler was ignored or downplayed. After 1945 the myth, concocted by ideologues in the United States and supinely accepted by their foreign acolytes, was propagated that Moscow was at the centre of a world-wide communist conspiracy aimed at world domination, and that the Soviet Union was the totalitarian successor to Nazi Germany, bent on military aggression against countries of the “Free World” in Europe and Asia. Only the United States it was claimed, as the beneficent protector of the “Free World” through its formidable nuclear arsenal and its global network of military bases, together with its subordinate allies in NATO, SEATO, and CENTO, could stop the communists from dominating the world. The Soviet Union and the communist-ruled states in Europe associated with it, no longer exist. But US and NATO military power has gone from strength to strength since then. The permanent arms economy that was the main expression of US and NATO power can only justify its continued existence and relentless growth by inventing new enemies against whom it has to defend “freedom-loving peoples.”

BELOW: “The Gustav”, a giant railway gun used by the Nazis in their assault on Sevastopol.


The Second World War was the most colossal armed struggle in history. It is no exaggeration to say that had German imperialism in the form of the Nazi Third Reich triumphed in that war, the genocidal barbarism that it brought wherever its rule extended would may well have spelled the end of human civilization. It is estimated that 60 million people lost their lives between 1939 and 1945 in the war. This is about 3% of the world’s population in 1939. If we compare fatalities for four member states of the wartime alliance against the Axis (which excludes of course many other participant nations), the discrepancies are striking. The figures in brackets are the percentages of the country’s total population:

United States....... 420.000 (0.32%)
United Kingdom ..450.000 (0.90%)
France.................. 550.000 (1.36%)
Soviet Union......... 26.6 million (14.2%)

The Soviet fatalities in World War Two amounted to more than 1% of the world’s 1939 population. There is no parallel to the heroism and scale of the sacrifice of the Soviet people in that war. Americans, in particular, cannot begin to understand the dimensions of this catastrophe, for it is simply mind-boggling. It is as if the United States had emerged from a war with every single man, woman and child killed in the states of California, Texas, and New York, combined. (1)

Turning to the US and EU response to last year’s referendum in Crimea and the conflict in eastern Ukraine, it is worth repeating here a passage from an article that appeared in this column at the time of the referendum in March last year, including the extract from The Road to Stalingrad, John Erickson’s magisterial study of the Soviet Union at war.

“In that book he recounts in great detail the Soviets’ last ditch defence of Sevastopol in June 1942. General Manstein’s 11th Army subjected the fortifications to ‘27 days of relentless bombardment and savage attacks which raged on by the hour as each Soviet position had to be smothered in men and fire before opposition was literally blotted out…Each fort had to be blown out of the ground in which they were anchored with all their concrete and steel. Even when cracked open the forts fought on. Riflemen fought in gas masks and smoking stench…A sea of fire rolled relentlessly on Sevastopol.’ Erickson describes how Soviet soldiers, having fired their last rounds blew themselves up with their guns as German infantrymen closed in for the kill. The siege lasted 250 days, from 30.October 1941 to 4. July 1942. At least 18,000 Russians were killed and 95,000 were captured. After the fall of the city the Nazi Einsatzgruppen moved in and began the systematic genocide of the Jews. Ukrainian nationalist collaborators in the Crimea asked the Nazi authorities to be allowed to liquidate the Jews themselves. Manstein was promoted by Hitler to the rank of Field Marshal. Sevastopol, after its final liberation from German occupation in 1944 received the title “Hero City”. These events, like the 1941 defence of Moscow, the three- year-long siege of Leningrad, the unparalleled resistance and final victory at Stalingrad have been engraved on the memory and consciousness of generations of Russians.”

It is perhaps unnecessary to add anything to this in order to convey a sense of what the Crimea and Sevastopol mean to the Russian people and why it is that the millions who died in defending their homeland in “The Great patriotic War” are remembered and honoured with such reverence.

There are No Fascists in Kiev!

So outrageous has been the western media distortion of the situation in Ukraine, presenting the Maidan coup as a democratic revolution or peaceful transition to democracy, that the pro-Washington FP Group had to admit in March 2014 that yes, “There are Bad Guys in the Kiev government.“ Rabid fascists and antisemites such as Right Sector, the Azov Battalion and Svoboda have either been ignored or described euphemistically as “nationalists”. At any rate, it has been claimed that such groups are insignificant and that they play no role in the Kiev government or in the activities of the Ukrainian army in the East. FP Group has had to come clean, reporting that when the State Department ridiculed Putin’s “false claims” and assured Americans that the “far right” were not represented in parliament, they were wrong. Putin’s claims were not false. They were true. Likewise, the former RT presenter Liz Wahl, who was feted in the west when she quit the station, falsely claimed that Ukraine had no neo-Nazis. Prior to the March 2014 referendum the fascist group, Svoboda, demanded that, despite the fact that 60% of Crimean people speak Russian as a first language, all government business be conducted in Ukrainian. They also pushed for the repeal of a law against “excusing the crimes of fascism.” The FP Group reporter admitted that “more than a few of the protesters who toppled Yanukovych , and of the new leaders in Kiev, are fascists.” After March 2014 Svoboda held 25% of Ukrainian ministries, including defence. Members of Right Sector held the posts of prosecutor general and Deputy Chair of Parliament. Another Right Sector MP founded the “Joseph Goebbels Political Research Centre” and described the Holocaust as “a bright period in human history.” US Senator John McCain shared a platform with Svoboda chief Tyahnbok, embracing him with the message “The Free World is with you; America is with you.”

Most Western commentary on Russia and the Ukraine seems either duplicitous or ignorant, sometimes both. Few and far between are those who have serious knowledge and experience of Russia. Few care a jot that both the Ukraine and Georgia were for hundreds of years part of the historic Russian state. Seldom mentioned is the fact that the solemn promise made to Gorbachev at the time of Germany’s reunification in 1990 that NATO would “not expand one inch to the East” was casually cast aside by Clinton. Ignored is the warning by 92-year-old George F. Kennan (who did understand Russia) in 1996 that “Expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold war era.” Ignored are the views of Steven F. Cohen, one of the few US Russian scholars to place the blame for the present crisis where it belongs.

The cohort of new cold war ideologues and mediocrities that passes for the leadership of the Western world moves on from the chaos and carnage they have caused in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and elsewhere to commemorate the 70th anniversary of VE Day on May 8th. In so doing they will, with straight faces, issue grave warnings about the threat we all face from Russia. They will absent themselves from the celebrations in Moscow on May 9th and pretend that Victory in Europe in 1945 was won entirely by the armed forces of Britain and the United States.

Senior Contributing Editor Mike Faulkner is a British citizen. He lives in London where for many years he taught history and political science at Barnet College, until his retirement in 2002. He has written a two-weekly column, Letter from the UK, for TPJ Magazine since 2008. Over the years his articles have also appeared in such publications as Marxism Today, Monthly Review and China Now. He is a regular visitor to the United States where he has friends and family in New York City. Contact Mike at mikefaulkner@greanvillepost.com


  Read Russia, Ukraine And The West: In Defence Of History Against Falsification
 May 8, 2015
V-Day: Russia's Perpetual Fight Against Fascism
by Andre Vltchek , Countercurrents

Trust between the West and Russia is broken. It has been for quite some time, but now it is broken irreversibly. A good thing, because what kind of trust there could be between fascist imperialism and the forces that are fighting for the freedom ofmankind?

It is really easy to trick the Russian people. It takes very little to gain their trust; sometimes only a kind smile, a handfulof loving words, a few sincerely sounding pledges and promises. Russians can be easily ‘bought' with kindness. They are very trusting, vulnerable people.  

When approached with tenderness and sympathy, they soonopen their hearts,they share their last piece of bread withthe hungry,offer their shirts to those who are cold.

Come to a Russian witha pledge of eternal love, devotion even friendship, and chances are that all doors will be opened to you, and defenses let down.

Maybe he or she would one day utter: “Please, never, never betray me.” But no guarantees would be asked for, no written agreements produced, no contracts signed.

Because of this trust and openness, millions, tens of millions of Russians died!


Russians gave everything to the world; they fought for humanity. They opened their hearts and their doors. They fed those who were in dire need, often starving.

At the end they were betrayed, again and again…. And again!

In a spineless world based on individualism, profits, and servility, it is easy, all too easy to betray someone who is kind, someone who gives. Tyrants are rarely betrayed, because loyalty towards them is based on fear, self-preservation, or mercantile self-interest. In the corrupt, cowardly world constructed by the West and by its religions, loyalty is upheld only throughterror.

Despite horrible betrayals and the savagery directed at the Russian people throughout the history, they never really “learned the lesson”, never perfected Western-style cynicism, and never mastered the art of sacrificing others for their self-interests.

All accords with Russia were broken, whenever it suited invaders. The Scandinavians wiped out countless Russian lives, and so did the Germans, French, Poles, Brits, North Americans and Czechs, to name just a few. Russians never really ‘punished' anybody, in the Protestant, Anglo-Saxon way. Punishment is mainly puritan, Protestant rubbish; the Russian way of thinking is too quixotic for that.  

The West lied to Lenin, to Stalin, to Khrushchev and finally to Gorbachev.  The West has been lying to Putin and about Putin.

Betrayed, Russia would go through unimaginable agony, through fire and devastation, through despair. It would bury millions of its sons and daughters. Perhaps no other nation on earth has gone through a terror of such magnitude.  

Then, suddenly, it would rise from its knees, slowly and frighteningly, showing all its might,its size, determination and strength. Injured and betrayed, but proud and enormously beautiful in its sacred rage, it would lift up its heavy sword, straighten its back, dry its tears, and walk directly towards the enemy.  

Russia always fights open battles, fights them honestly. Oceans of blood are spilled, mostly those of the Russian people.

Unlike the West, Russia does not use carpet-bombing, drones or nuclear weapons to kill millions of civilians, in order to secure the Victory. It is always men against men. It is tens of thousands of tanks as during the Kursk Battle, or millions of soldiers at Stalingrad.  

Nobody could or can defeat Russia, because its wrath, as its love, is great and pure. Russia never really lost. Its injured heart was full of loveand poetry even as its mailed fists were smashing the despots, usurpers and mass murderers. It is also because almost all wars that Russia ever fought were just wars - wars for the survival of its people, but also for the survival of the entire humanity.  


70 years since the great Victory! 70 years since Soviet people saved the world by smashing Nazism. 70 years since they, almost immediately, joined yet another fight, against Western imperialism and colonialism.

20 or perhaps 27 million Soviet people, mainly Russians, lost their lives defending our planet against Hitler's hordes. Then hundreds of millions of others dedicated their lives to building a much better, and egalitarian world.

Without Soviet Union, without the Russian people, there would be no freedom, no independence for Asian, African and the Middle Eastern countries. There would be no revolutions possible in Latin America.

This is why the West hated Soviet Union, and that is why it hates Russian people. It lost its colonies, it lost its propaganda war, and it lost its monopoly on defining everything under the sun.

Only bigots could repeat the most toxic of Western propaganda lies of comparing Nazi Germany with Stalinist Soviet Union. But I will write much more on the topic in the near future. Nazism can be only compared to European and North American imperialism, to colonialism. They are both made from the same stuff, and the Soviet Union smashed, defeated, both! Russia is now holding the old Soviet banner.

The Western chauvinists and xenophobes are now fighting for control over the planet, even for their own survival. Unless they divide Russia, China and Latin America, they are finished. They know it! Unless they smear all that is pure and optimistic about the nations resisting their monstrous regime, their days are numbered.


On May 9 1945, the entire world changed. Humanity began moving forward, again. Slowly, unevenly, often making terrible blunders, and detours, but forward nevertheless! Colonial shackles began breaking. People on all continents were dreaming again, about true freedom, equality and the brotherhood of men. That beautiful red flag flying from the roof of the Reichstag in Berlin made these dreams possible.

The Soviet people proved that human dignity and freedom are worth any sacrifice. The Victory Ode was written with their blood, in the most generous way, so it could inspire and shape generations to come!

But the greed and nihilism of the West refused to die. Its obsession with controlling and plundering the world reached an unimaginable peak. All the forces of the Empire were mobilized. Light and hope were confronted by darkness and cynicism. Beautiful and pure dreams were antagonized by corruption. In an orgy of dirty tricks and deceives, the Soviet Union was destroyed.

In one single historical moment, the oppressed of the world lost their most powerful guardian.

What followed was complete horror. The Empire began destabilizing one country after another: in Africa, Asia, in the Middle East and even in the former Eastern block. Millions of people died, exposed, unprotected, totally abandoned.

The Fascist hordes thought that this time they had won. In Moscow, Yeltsin, an alcoholic and lackey of the West, began shooting his own people on the street, and bombing his own Parliament. That was “democracy” the newspapers in Paris, London and New York wrote almost immediately. This was what the West dreamed about: a weak destabilized Russia, on its knees, at mercy of the Empire.

I travelled to Moscow and Siberia. I saw Russian scientists in Novosibirsk selling their libraries in the bitter cold, at metro stations. I saw old war veterans begging, selling their medals. I saw Russian workers starving, their salaries unpaid for months.

Then something happened. Russia refused to stay on its knees. It rapidly detected the lies coming from abroad; it recognized the trap. The Russian people understood that what horrible invasions never achieved, the deceptions and dirty games of the fascist Empire managed to attain in just a few short, dreadful years.

Russia had to raise or die, as always in the history. It rose. Indignant and determined! And as always in the past, when it stood up confronting the evil, it was doing it for its own people, but also for the entire humanity!

Russia regrouped, during the last decade, under the Russian flag. It is not perfect and not as ‘socialist' as many of us would like it to be, but there is a great Soviet inertia in Russia's foreign policy, as there is a great pride and determination to improve the world, to protect the weak.

70 years since the Great Victory! This year, Russia is not only celebrating great anniversary. It is rejoicing over its rebirth.



Andre Vltchek 's revolutionary grandfather and grandmother

I am Russian. I was born in Russia, and my mother is half Russian and half Chinese. But even my Chinese part comes from Kazakhstan, from a former Soviet republic. My grandfather, Hussein, was a top ‘commissar', equivalent to a cabinet minister, an ethnic Chinese, a linguist, a man who died many decades before I was born.  

I grew up in Czechoslovakia. My father, a scientist, comes from Europe. Since early age I lived in New York, but then I hit the road, and never stopped until now. I am an internationalist. But deep inside, I am Russian.

I don't know whether I qualify to be a Russian. As a kid, I used to have Soviet passport. My happiest moments in life were when I was a child and my mother took me, every summer, to Prague airport, where I was taken to a plane departing for Leningrad. My grandmother was waiting at the other end.

My grandmother, Elena, was not just some ordinary babushka. She was a fighter, a woman who struggled against Nazis, who defended her beloved city, her Leningrad. She dug trenches, confronted German tanks, and was decorated twice.  Yet she was the kindest woman I ever met in my life. She thought me how to love poetry and literature. She told me hundreds of stories, some beautiful, some frightening. Thanks to her, I became a writer, a Russian writer, although I write my fiction exclusively in English and most of my latest films were made in Spanish.

Almost my entire Russian family died there, in Leningrad, during the Siege, decades before I was born.

Every year, during two summer months, my grandmother spoilt me silly. Or I thought she did. Now I understand that for her, it was like a cultural combat, an attempt to inject into me all that was great about Russia.

She saved for ten months, and then when I came to visit her, she took me to the opera houses and the theatres, to the museums and the parks surrounding Leningrad. She cooked delicious food for me. She also took me, at least once a year, to Piskarevskoe Cemetery, where the enormous statue of the Motherland spreads her arms in grief. “Nobody is forgotten and nothing is forgotten”, the golden letters are carved into the granite. 1.5 million died during the Siege of Leningrad, and many are buried there, in countless rows of mass graves.

I grew up. I became a writer and a filmmaker; I circled the globe. But wherever I went, these simple words followed me, were engraved into my psyche. My grandmother was always with me, too, and so were the city, the sacrifice, and the Victory!

I don't know whether it objectively makes me a Russian. But I feel and act as one.


To be Russian... By now, ‘Russian' is not only a nationality; it is a verb. It means: to stand against oppression, against Western imperialism, to be building bridges between the countries that are resisting Western imperialist terror.

And there are many “new Russians” now. Not those from Yeltsin era, not the capitalist buffoon characters! No, the “New Russians” I am talking about are both patriots and internationalists. And some of them have often not a single drop of Russian blood. But they are proudly defending the world, and they are joining forces with Russia, China and Latin America in their determined struggle for better planet.

I know several great new Russians. Some are my comrades, like renowned Canadian international lawyer, poet, novelist and thinker, Christopher Black. Like Peter Koenig, Swiss economist, who left the World Bank in total disgust, then turned around and openly attacked the establishment. Or like my ‘compa', Patrice Greanville, a New Yorker/ Chilean/ Argentinean chief editor of legendary “The Greanville Post”.

These people are working relentlessly, smashing the lies that the Empire is spreading throughout the world: lies about Russia, lies about the Soviet Union, about the Second World War, and about Western imperialism.


For centuries, Russia was stabbed and deceived by outsiders. It was fooled, tricked, ravished.  

Many countries that Russia liberated betrayed her in the most vulgar manner. Czechs and Poles desecrated monuments to its soldiers – to those boys who sacrificed their lives for Prague and Warsaw at the end of the Second World War. Eastern Europe opened its doors to NATO and the European Union. Out of pragmatic selfishness, people abandoned beautiful ideals, including Internationalism, and instead joined the oppressors of mankind – the Empire.  

The more these countries prostitute themselves, the more bellicosely they are willing to shout Western propaganda slogans, directly insulting and provoking first the Soviet Union, and lately Russia. The pitiful and avaricious lackeys and collaborators with Western imperialism have been, continuously and desperately, searching for at least some moral justification for their betrayal. They have twisted history and invented facts.  They unleashed aggression against those who have been defending the usurped and plundered parts of the world.  

Recently, the West triggered the conflict in Ukraine, where it helped to overthrow legitimate government in Kiev. Then, immediately, it began fueling hysterical anti-Russian sentiments. But the more obvious the situation became, the louder were the voices of the anti-Russian pact, in both Western and Eastern Europe.  

Ukraine, Syria, and Libya – all these conflicts prove that no logic applies anymore. The West wants to destroy the countries that stand in its way to total global control, and it will try to reach its goals, by any and all means. The propaganda apparatus is always ready to justify any terrorist act committed by North America and Europe. No international legal mechanisms are available to protect the victims.

Only great force can prevent the tragedy. Russia is that force. China is another. That is why the Empire is terrified by the rise of those two great nations.

Yes, this time, after all those centuries of pain and suffering, Russia is not alone. It is standing tall, and it can finally count on its friends. Some of the greatest minds on earth are joining forces with it. Forget about Eastern Europe! The mightiest country on our planet – China – repeats again and again: “China and Russia are each other's most important strategic partners”. It is clear that they will not allow this planed to go down in flames!

The entirety of revolutionary Latin America is with Russia and so are dozens of other independent and proud nations worldwide.

In the Middle East and Africa, in South America and many parts of Asia, Russia is increasingly seen as an enormous moral force. Russia is synonymous with hope. Not for those in North America and Europe, but for those who were, for centuries, suffering under their boot.

Whenever I speak publicly, in Eritrea or South Africa, India, China, even Timor-Leste, people want to hear about Russia. What will Russia do next to prevent attacks against Syria or Iran, against Venezuela?

I always say: “Russia is alive and well! And so are its friends, from China to Venezuela and Cuba!”

I never lose hope. I repeat: I sincerely believe that soon we will defeat colonialism and fascism, and build one beautiful society on this scarred but wonderful planet. And it will be created on the ideals we are now commemorating and celebrating.

“The 70th Anniversary of great Victory! Thank you for saving the world! Congratulations, Russia!”

And then I roll up my sleeves and work, day and night - for Leningrad, for what my grandmother stood for, and for Russia and for the humanity.  


Andre Vltchek is a philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He covered wars and conflicts in dozens of countries. His latest books are: “Exposing Lies Of The Empire” and  “Fighting Against Western Imperialism”. Discussion with Noam Chomsky:On Western Terrorism. Point of No Return is his critically acclaimed political novel. Oceania - a book on Western imperialism in the South Pacific. His provocative book about Indonesia: “Indonesia – The Archipelago of Fear”. Andre is making films for teleSUR and Press TV. After living for many years in Latin America and Oceania, Vltchek presently resides and works in East Asia and the Middle East. He can be reached through his website or his Twitter.

  Read V-Day: Russia's Perpetual Fight Against Fascism
 May 10, 2015
U.S. & Europe Boycott Russia's Celebration Of Its 9 May 1945 Victory Over Hitler
by Eric Zuesse, Countercurrents

At first, a few progressive heads-of-state in Europe were appalled at U.S. President Barack Obama's pressure for them to reject Russia's invitation to an upcoming 9 May 2015 celebration of victory against Hitler, and Czech President Milos Zeman even came out publicly saying, in a conspicuous face-slap to Obama, on 3 January 2015, that the U.S. overthrow of Ukraine's democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014 had been a coup and that “only poorly informed people” were comparing that to Czechoslovakia's own “Velvet Revolution” against communism on 29 December 1989. Zeman even said that Ukraine's 22 February 2014 U.S. overthrow of Yanukovych, or the event (under the cover of public demonstrations at the) “Maidan, was not a democratic revolution” but instead a coup. Or, as the head of Stratfor, the private CIA firm, has acknowledged, it was even “the most blatant coup in history,” because it was so well doumented in videos taken by bystanders at the time, as well as by internal intelligence leaks (such as this and this). So: indeed, “only poorly informed people” didn't know about it. (And some still don't.)

On 2 January 2015, the progressive Zeman — a passionate opponent of Hitler and of his Nazis and their nazism — courageously stated his intention to go to Moscow for its upcoming May 9th victory-over-Nazism celebration; but, on 8 April 2015, the Czech deputy prime minister, who leads a conservative party, caved to pressure from the U.S. Ambassador, and said that Zeman would have to do it at his own personal expense if at all; and, so, two days later, on April 10th, Zeman said that he wouldn't attend — the pressure from the U.S. was just too great.

Then, on 3 May 2015, France's Boulevard Voltaire, as translated at Fort Russ, reported that no Western leader would be attending, and Fort Russ headlined on May 9th, “Putin ‘all by himself in Red Square' — with the leaders of half the planet.” (The only Western official to attend is Greece's Speaker of Parliament.) Obama had, indeed, succeeded at blocking virtually all Western representation at Russia's 70th-Anniversary victory celebration against nazism.

Mr. Obama had earlier paid homage to Hitler, the historical founder of nazism or racist fascism, by making the U.S., on 21 November 2014, one of only three countries in the entire world to vote against a resolution at the United Nations condemning the recent upsurge in racist fascism in many countries. Although Hitler wasn't even mentioned in it, Obama had his U.N. representative vote against it — vote against condemning Hitler's ideology.

Even before that, in February 2014, Obama was the first-ever U.S. President to perpetrate a coup overthrowing a democratically elected head-of-state and installing a racist-fascist, or ideologically nazi, regime to replace it. This is what he did in Ukraine. 

That regime subsequently engaged in an ethnic-cleansing campaign, which Obama supports. 

All of this is due to Obama's obsession to defeat Russia, which, of course, is adjoining Ukraine, which proximity makes Obama's takeover of Ukraine especially useful for his main foreign-policy goal of defeating Russia.

According to Western accounts, the whole problem started on 21 November 2013, right after Ukraine's freely elected President Viktor Yanukovych announced his rejection of the EU's offer, but America's planning for the coup actually started back in Spring of 2013, not after 21 November 2013; and Yanukovych had good reason to reject the EU's offer, because it would have cost Ukraine an estimated $160 billion. So, that account in Western media is demonstrably false, insofar as it pertains to what had actually caused those public demonstrations. It was Obama's determination to defeat Russia.

Obama's TPP and TTIP international-trade deals are part of that — to lock out both Russia and China. But Obama even opposes the policy, which is already in place in all industrialized countries except America, and even in some underdeveloped countries, that basic healthcare is not a privilege that should be available only to persons who have the financial ability to pay for it, but is instead a basic human right, which must be made available to all citizens regardless of how rich they are. 

Obama even places higher priority on defeating Russia than on defeating ISIS and Al Qaeda.

Some people say that none of this can be true, because it doesn't fit with Obama's rhetoric. But no intelligent person trusts his rhetoric anymore. Too much is established by his record, for anyone today still to be trusting his mere rhetoric. But anyway, as President he has argued to the U.S. Supreme Court (and the Court unanimously agreed) that the right to lie in politics is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and cannot be limited by any state.



Eric Zuesse

Russia's Victory Over Nazi Germany

  Read U.S. & Europe Boycott Russia's Celebration Of Its 9 May 1945 Victory Over Hitler
 May 14, 2015
Nazism of Ukraine's Western-Backed Government Is Hidden by Western ‘News' Media
by Eric Zuesse, Countercurrents

The pro-Nazi core of the Ukrainian government that was installed by the U.S. in February 2014 is too well-documented to be denied, and so the West's major propaganda media (self-styled as being ‘news' media) instead simply hide it — most don't report any of it, but a few report snippets along with excuses to make individual events seem like aberrations, not the core, which they actually are.

Here is a photo from Russia's "Life News" on May 13th, headlining “Soldiers of ‘Azov' Teach Students to Shoot a Grenade Launcher and Throw Grenades":

That “wolfsangel” insignia on their T-shirts is Ukraine's version of the German Nazis' original, which is shown here from the ADL:


And here it is in an ad for a wolfsangel T-shirt:

And here it is in a flag at a rally by the Right Sector organization, which is the gang that goes back to Ukraine's Nazis during World War II and that actually constituted the foot-soldiers the Obama Administration hired to bring the present, racist-fascist, Ukrainian Government, into power February 2014:

And here is a video that gives the Hitlerite history of the Right Sector:



And here is the Right Sector's leader, the man who actually organized the overthrow:


And here are the Azov Battalion displaying a photo of their hero Hitler:


And here they are dancing and shouting “White Power!”:


And here is a video showing how Obama brought Ukraine's far-right into power:


And here is Obama's agent Victoria Nuland telling her flunky Geoffrey Pyatt whom to choose to be the leader of the new Ukraine that would become installed 22 days later:


And here's the shock when the EU's officials found that the overthrow of Yanukovych was a coup, nothing legitimate, which had brought to power the new government, this pro-EU junta:


And here's the ethnic-cleansing campaign that Obama's Ukrainian regime subsequently carried out, bombing whole regions that resisted the Obama junta's legitimacy to rule over them:


And here's more shown of that (and you see troops from both Azov and Right Sector, plus some plain military conscripts, doing the killing in these scenes):


How much of this, which has been shown in Russia and in other countries that aren't yet controlled by the U.S., has been shown also on the nightly 'news' in the West, and reported in ‘news'papers such as The New York Times, and the Frankfurter Algemeine Zeitung — 'news' organizations that deny these realities, whenever they're brought up, but that can provide no counter-evidence and therefore prefer to ignore altogether these realities, even while claiming to 'report the news'?

But how else can democracy be killed, than by such a coordinated campaign to hide reality and deceive the masses? After all, what you've just now seen documented here is “Leftist.” But it's also reality. So: fascist regimes need to hide it.

And, similarly, how much coverage, and how much public discussion and debate, occurred about the Obama regime's having made the U.S. one of only three nations in the entire world that voted in the U.N.'s General Assembly against a resolution condemning the recent rise (in unnamed nations) of racist fascism and ethnic cleansing, and of Holocaust-denial? (Ukraine and Canada were the other two nations.)

News-cleansing fits well with ethnic-cleansing.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They're Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity, and of  Feudalism, Fascism, Libertarianism and Economics.


Eric Zuesse

Ukraine Nazism

  Read Nazism of Ukraine's Western-Backed Government Is Hidden by Western ‘News' Media
 May 14, 2015
Syrian War Set To Re-Explode
by Shamus Cooke, Countercurrents

The Syrian war stalemate appears to be over. The regional powers surrounding Syria — especially Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, and Jordan — have re-ignited their war against the Syrian government. After over 200,000 dead and millions of refugees, the U.S. allies in the region recently re-committed to deepening the war, with incalculable consequences.

The new war pact was made between Obama’s regional darlings, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, who agreed to step up deeper military cooperation and establish a joint command in the occupied Syrian region of Idlib.

Turkey and Saudi Arabia are now openly backing Islamic extremists under the newly rebranded “Conquest Army.” The on-the-ground leadership of this “new” coalition consists of Jabhat al-Nusra — the “official” al-Qaeda affiliate — and Ahrar al-Sham, whose leader previously stated that his group was the “real al-Qaeda.”

The Huffington Post reports:

“The Turkish-Saudi agreement has led to a new joint command center in the northeastern Syrian province of Idlib. There, a coalition of groups — including Nusra and other Islamist brigades such as Ahrar al-Sham that Washington views as extremist — are progressively eroding Assad's front. The rebel coalition also includes more moderate elements of the Free Syrian Army that have received U.S. support in the past.”

The article admits that the Free Syrian Army — that Obama previously labeled as “moderates” and gave cash and guns to — has been swallowed up by the extremist groups.

This dynamic has the potential to re-engulf the region in violence; deep Saudi pocketbooks combined with reports of looming Turkish ground forces are a catastrophe in the making.

Interestingly, the Saudi-Turkish alliance barely raised eyebrows in the U.S. media. President Obama didn’t think to comment on the subject, let alone condemn it.

The media was focused on an odd narrative of Obama reportedly being “concerned” about the alliance, but “disengaged” from what two of his close allies were doing in a region that the U.S. has micromanaged for decades.

It seems especially odd for the media to accept that Obama has a “hands off” approach in Syria when at the same time the media is reporting about a new U.S. program training Syrian rebels in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey.

It’s inconceivable that Obama would coordinate deeply with Turkey to set up a Syrian rebel training camp on Turkish soil, while at the same time be “disengaged” from the Turkish-Saudi war coalition in Syria.

One possible motive behind the fake narrative of “non-cooperation” between Obama and his Turkish-Saudi allies is that the U.S. is supposed to be fighting a “war on terrorism.”

So when Turkey and Saudi Arabia announce that they’re closely coordinating with terrorists in Syria — like al-Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham — Obama needs an alibi to avoid being caught at the crime scene. He’s not an accomplice, simply “disengaged.”

This is likely the reason why Obama has insisted that his new “moderate” rebels being trained in Turkey will fight ISIS, not the Syrian government. But this claim too is ridiculous.

Is Obama really going to throw a couple hundred newly-trained “moderate” Syrian rebels at ISIS while his Turkish-Saudi allies focus all their fire on the Syrian Government? The question answers itself.

The media has made mention of this obvious conundrum, but never bothers to follow up, leaving Obama’s lame narrative unchallenged. For example, the LA Times reports:

“The White House wants the [U.S. trained rebel] proxy force to target Islamic State militants, while many of the Syrian rebels — and the four host nations [where Syrian rebels are being trained] — want to focus on ousting Syrian President Bashar Assad.”

The article simply shrugs its shoulders at the irreconcilable. The article also fails to mention that Obama’s “new” training camps aren’t new at all; he’s been arming and training Syrian rebels since at least 2012, the only difference being that the “new” training camps are supposedly meant to target ISIS, compared to the training camps that were openly used to target the Syrian government.

Here’s the LA Times in 2013:

“The covert U.S. training [of Syrian rebels] at bases in Jordan and Turkey began months before President Obama approved plans to begin directly arming the opposition to Syrian President Bashar Assad, according to U.S. officials and rebel commanders.”

This is media amnesia at its worse. Recent events can’t be understood if the media doesn’t place events in context. In practice this “forgetfulness” provides political cover to the Obama administration, shielding his longstanding direct role in the Syrian war, allowing him to pretend to a “passive,” “hands off” approach.

When it was reported in 2012 that the Obama administration was funneling weapons to the Syrian rebels, the few media outlets that mentioned the story didn’t bother to do any follow up. It simply fell into the media memory hole. After the weapons funneling report came out, Obama incredulously stated that he was only supplying “non lethal” support to the rebels, and the media printed his words unchallenged.

Consequently, there was no public discussion about the consequences of the U.S. partaking in a multi-nation proxy war against Syria, a country that borders war ravaged Iraq.

In 2013 when Obama announced that he would be bombing the Syrian government in response to a supposed gas attack, the U.S. media asked for no evidence of the allegation, and strove to buttress Obama’s argument for aggression.

And when Pulitzer Prize winner Seymour Hersh wrote an article exposing Obama’s lies over the aborted bombing mission, the article didn’t see the light of day in the U.S. media. Critically thoughtful voices were not welcome. They remain unwelcome.

In 2015 direct U.S. military intervention in Syria remains a real possibility. All the conditions that led to Obama’s decision to bomb Syria in 2013 remain in place.

In fact, a U.S. intervention is even more likely now that Turkey and Saudi Arabia are fighting openly against the Syrian government, since the Saudi-Turkish alliance might find itself in a key battle that demands the special assistance that only the U.S. air force can offer.

Unsurprisingly, there has been renewed discussion of a U.S. enforced “no fly zone” in Syria. ISIS doesn’t have an air force, so a no fly zone would be undeniably aimed at the Syrian government to destroy its air force. The new debate over a “no fly zone” is happening at the same time as a barrage of new allegations of “chemical weapons” use are being made against the Syrian government.

If a no fly zone is eventually declared by the Obama Administration it will be promoted as a “humanitarian intervention, that strives to create a “humanitarian corridor” to “protect civilians” — the same rhetoric that was used for a massive U.S.-led NATO bombing campaign in Libya that destroyed the country and continues to create a massive refugee crisis.

As the Syrian war creates fresh atrocities the Obama administration will be pressured to openly support his Saudi-Turkish allies, just as he came out into the open in 2013 when he nearly bombed the Syrian government.

History is repeating itself. But this time the stakes are higher: the region has already been destabilized with the wars in Iraq, Libya, and Syria, and the regional conflicts have sharpened between U.S. allies on one hand, and Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Russia on the other.

Such a volatile dynamic demands a media willing to explain the significance of these events. The truth is that Obama has been a proxy war president that has torn apart the Middle East as badly as his predecessor did, and if the U.S. public remains uninformed about developing events, an even larger regional war is inevitable.

Shamus Cooke is a social service worker, trade unionist, and writer for Workers Action (www.workerscompass.org) He can be reached at shamuscooke@gmail

  Read Syrian War Set To Re-Explode
 May 27, 2015
Capitalism Could Kill All Life On Earth
by The Daily Take Team, the Thom Hartmann Program, Countercurrents


Are we going to let capitalism destroy life on Earth?

According to 99 percent of climate scientists – we'll know by the end of the century.

Scientists have agreed for three decades about what is causing atmospheric temperatures to rise – humans are burning Earth's carbon resources to fuel economic activity.

But even before we knew what was causing the temperature to rise – scientists warned about the dire global impacts of a two degree increase in atmospheric temperatures.
Earth's climate has been basically stable for hundreds of thousands of years.

But that changed during the industrial revolution - when Great Britain realized the potential of coal-powered steam engines.

Soon continental Europe and the US followed suit.

And more than 150 years later – coal, oil and natural gas dominate the global politics and economics: wars are fought over oil; communities are destroyed for coal; and increasingly scarce water supplies are poisoned by natural gas extraction.

The Earth has already warmed about one degree Celsius above pre-industrial levels – which means we have to change our energy system completely before the Earth warms another degree in order to avoid the catastrophic impacts of climate change.

Is it possible?

Scientists say "Yes!" - BUT it will require us to take bold and immediate steps towards a completely renewable energy system.

The technology exists – the shortfall is in investment.

According to the IMF – oil companies get $5.3 trillion in subsidies worldwide per year.

And the oil companies pay only a portion – if any – of the environmental costs of ripping fossil fuels from the ground and burning the CO2 into the atmosphere.

In other words, every living human being and government are paying for coal, oil, and gas companies to profit from the destruction our planet.

And that's not a market failure – that's how the market was set up.

Capitalism as we know it isn't the solution – it's the problem.

In a report in "Nature Climate Change" – scientists point out that we can keep temperatures below 1.5 degrees Celsius – if every country takes bold and immediate action to deploy current clean energy and limit the use of fossil fuels.

The biggest failure in our system is that there is no price on carbon.

Burning fossil fuels and releasing carbon into our atmosphere has very real costs that corporations aren't paying for – costs that are being kicked down the road for future generations.

In America, we've let the fossil fuel industry become so profitable that it relentlessly funds campaigns and lobbies to keep oil subsidies in place and weaken environmental regulations - all at the expense of our communities and our planet.

Our current oligarchs claim that renewable power isn't efficient or cheap enough to be competitive or to reliably replace fossil fuels – but that's just not true.

Solar, wind, and wave technology are all ready to be deployed at large scales – and Denmark, Germany, the UK and China, among others, are doing it right now.

Our transportation system is ready for renewables – solar roadways in the Netherlands are proving more effective than expected – and over two dozen models of electric cars are now out on the market.

Our households are ready for renewables: LED lightbulbs and high efficiency appliances mean that households use less energy – and affordable rooftop solar means that households can meet a lot their own energy needs.

We can make renewables competitive if we just cut subsidies to oil and coal companies and enforce our clean air and clean water regulations – but that means getting money out of politics so that legislation is written in the interest of communities and the planet - instead of corporations.

Capitalism is great at creating profits and products – but it doesn't care about environmental justice.

Capitalism doesn't care whether we restore our forests and soils so that the planet can begin to reabsorb the carbon we've dumped into the atmosphere.

Capitalism doesn't care whether streams are poisoned or if the air is noxious – it doesn't care if a river burns because of pollution – and it doesn't care if another technology is 'cleaner' - unless the 'dirty' option becomes unprofitable.

That's why we need both more regulation of the fossil fuel industry - and public investments into clean energy like solar and wind.

Capitalism is to make money - but a government like our republic is put into place to protect the people from those whose quest for money harms society. We cannot replace democratic government with capitalism – and climate change proves this.

In fact - climate change challenges capitalism at its very root – is an economy really growing when all the costs are dumped on society while a handful of corporations and billionaires take all the profits?

Science says that we can keep global temperatures from rising another half degree – but it can't be left to a private sector that makes its profits from leaving the costs to everybody else.

It's time for a New Green Deal – we need to stop directly and indirectly subsidizing the fossil fuel industry and we need to invest in a large-scale deployment of current clean energy technologies – one that will create permanent, sustainable jobs, and protect the Earth for future generations.

This article was first published on Truthout. Truthout is the original site of publication.

  Read Capitalism Could Kill All Life On Earth
 June 7, 2015
Is there A Single Development Model That Works?
by Jon Kofas , Countercurrents

In the post-Communist era now more than two decades old, many people around the world are questioning what is the best economic development model? One reason for such a question is the very deep recession of 2008-present that has thrown many economies into a downward spiral of unemployment, rising public and private sector debt, and lack of rapid growth in the remainder of the decade. So, what are some models of modern economic development and to what degree do they improve people's lives, and do economic growth and development alone account for human happiness - with the broader meaning of the latter term?

The mode of production that determines the social order has been capitalism that has evolved from the Commercial Revolution in the 16th century to globalization in the late 20th-early 21st century. Under the world-system of capitalism, there have been different models of development in the history of capitalism, determined to a large degree by the shifts from the primary sector of production (agriculture, forestry, mining and fisheries) to the secondary sector (manufacturing) and to the tertiary (service) and high tech/biotechnology sector.

Before analyzing some models of economic development, it is instructive to consider the following questions about “development economics”.

a) What development model best serves the needs of the people, presumably all people and not just the financial and or political, military, bureaucratic elites?

b) Is it possible to separate politics from economics and speak in terms of pure economics instead of a system of political economy and social structure?

c) Is there such a thing as "the perfect" or 'ideal' system that can be applied perfectly in practice as it may appear in theory, whether such a system is market-based, statist, or some model based on a mixture?

d) Different countries would require to adopt variations of different models depending on their natural resources, labor force, level of current development.

e) Change is required to models of political economy to keep up with changes in the real economy and society."

f) As perfect as they may be in theory for any given society, economic models in practice do not mean very much, simply because the decision on what policies to pursue are always taken by those who command economic and political power. Add to the equation the factor of corruption and the model is coffee table reading material.

g) There is no such thing as the ideal model in theory that is not in practice a mixture of several theories. For example, is the US a "free market model" economy when in essence it has been practicing corporate welfare economics for decades? Is Indonesia a neoliberal economy under an Islamic regime, similar to Malaysia, Turkey, and now Egypt and Tunisia? Is China a statist economy or a mixed economy that allows a heavy dose of free enterprise?

Can there be a development model that serves all people based on social justice?

In the 19th century, there were a number of intellectuals from Adam Smith to Karl Marx who believed that it was possible to have an economic system that best served all people. However, Smith was an advocate of free market economic development, while Marx believed only Communism, the natural state of human beings, can best serve the people by eliminating elites, not reinforcing them.

Because people have differing views on what best serves society, that is, best serves every person equally in every respect in institutional terms, most economic models are necessarily based on what best serves interest groups within society. There are of course economic development models that claim to best serve everyone, including Socialist and Communist models, but in practice some sectors and some individuals are better served even by those models, as history has clearly demonstrated in the 20th century, than other groups in society. In short, as Jean-Paul Sartre and many others correctly maintained, there will always be elites in society, and that means that no economic model can possibly be free of that reality. Another way to view this is that there is no such thing as an economic development model that is "objective", because models are rooted in everything from investment to terms of trade that invariably benefit certain groups and not society as a whole.

Should GDP growth be the sole criteria for human happiness?

It is true that in world public opinion polls the top ten "happiest countries" are those that we consider developed economically, that is, those with diversified economies and high incomes. This is an indication that in the age of materialism where the value system is rooted in wealth and the security provided to maintain it people believe their happiness hinges on things associated primarily with material possessions. However, national economic growth and development do not necessarily translate into individual happiness, if a percentage of the population, anything above 10%, lives in chronic poverty.

Moreover, human happiness is also predicated on spiritual fulfillment for many non-Western societies. In the early 1970s, Bhutan rejected GDP as the sole criterion for progress, asserting that quality of life, social progress and the psychological well being of people are significant indicators to take into account. The Bhutan example became the UN standard as well. Although this is something that can be used as distraction by those trying to justify socioeconomic injustice by arguing why do people need material improvement when they have spiritual fulfillment, it is important to note that we cannot use the Western material criterion alone for it does not reflect the human experience worldwide.

Defining "Development"

The term development in economics does not mean the same thing for an advocate of "dependency theory" as it does for a monetarist. Nor does it necessarily mean the same thing for an advocate of sustainable development in India vs. one in Canada. For this reason, I need to lay some groundwork for this synoptic perspective of what the term means to intellectuals and politicians who do not share common views.

1. Centrally-planned models.

The old Soviet centrally-planned economy from the 1920s until the early 1980s was a model in which the command economy was rooted. The government decided on productivity and investment by sector as well as absorption of the surplus labor force from one sector by the other, not to satisfy consumer demand, but rather to meet the greater societal or national needs as the state defined them. In varying degrees, this model became a prototype for Eastern Europe after 1945, and for Cuba, Vietnam, North Korea, and China under Mao.

Development was measured by the state in terms of meeting production quotas, though in practice, the bureaucracy falsified reports to make productivity appear much better than it was. In the end, such a non-consumption-geared economy did not translate into rising living standards across the board, but it did absorb the surplus labor force and it tried to meet essential needs such as housing, health, and education. Command economies had enormous problems, not only because their civilian economies failed to meet mass consumer demand, but also because of the emphasis on durable goods focus vs. consumer goods, and heavy military spending that absorbed resources otherwise needed for the civilian economy. In practice, the politically-connected elites (the 'new class' linked to the Communist Party) benefited, while the broader masses lagged behind and lacked basic freedoms that many of them valued, such as freedom of worship, expression, and others that are common in open societies of the Western World.

2. Quasi-statist and neo-corporatist models.

Government permits free enterprise, but invests heavily in certain industries and/or subsidizes others even if they show chronic deficits instead of profits, because it deems it is in the 'national economic' interest. It is difficult to argue that quasi-statism and neo-corporatism, both of which are inter-related and have many aspects to them, are alike in South Korea as in Brazil, or in Russia as in Argentina and Venezuela. The common denominator is heavy government involvement in investment with the intent to promote certain sectors, trade regulation intended to promote national capitalism and not permit international capital to determine economic planning, and strengthening the state structure so that the private sector, especially foreign capital does not have a dominant role.

After the Second World War, a number of countries, including Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, among others, began to adopt 'top-down' development models so they can help build sectors such as steel industry, shipbuilding, and others. This model in varying degrees found expression in Brazil, Argentina after 2001, post-Communist Russia, even Spain in the late 1980s-early 1990s before the wave of neoliberalism swept the EU that had itself aspects of corporatism and quasi-statism as a regional bloc rooted in heavy subsidies of certain sectors.

The quasi-statist model is also operating in a number of countries as different as Norway and Saudi Arabia. There is the Norwegian development model, (to some extent also practiced in other Scandinavian countries) essentially a variation of Keynesian economics, is rooted in a strong state structure that relies on a solid welfare state with a private competitive sector backed by the social-democratic state.

The benefits of this model are that there is a sense of national control over the economy, vs. foreign capital control, thus it is an issue of national sovereignty prevailing in the age of globalization. Another benefit is that the state helps to plan for the country's future with the intent of long-term development that presumably would meet the needs of the majority of the people. Moreover, the nation retains a strong national capitalist class that is able to compete internationally instead of becoming subservient to exporters from developed core countries.

How well has this model worked? The examples of South Korea, Taiwan, all of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) indicate that the national economies experience phenomenal growth. This does not mean, however, that the wealth is evenly spread across the population.It is true that South Korea, and Taiwan developed a middle class on the basis of this model and it is also true that the fastest middle class growth is taking place in the BRICS. However, the world's largest percentage of poor live in the BRICS. With the promise that national economic growth and development will some day in the future translate into individual prosperity the quasi-statist countries can continue to operate as they do until such time as the broader masses rise up and demand results filter down to them.

3. Neo-classical (free enterprise) model.

The classical free enterprise system theory of Adam Smith and its apologists in the 20th century, from the neo-classical advocates (Robert Solow and T. W. Swan) to Milton Friedman and the Chicago School that rejected Keynesian economics in favor of rigid monetarism that is an integral part of the neo-classical movement. Productivity and capital accumulation based on a fiscal system that favors capital, allows maximal freedom of capital movement and investment and limits organized workers' rights that inhibit capital expansion and accumulation are at the core of this school of thought.

With many variations, the neo-classical school and its advocates ranging from supply side economics to neoliberalism and monetarism as expressed by IMF-World Bank economists as well as purists of the classical theory made a major comeback in the 1980s and they have triumphed ever since. In practice, the theory never worked as its advocates claim, because the state became a vehicle to transfer massive income from the welfare state to corporate welfare, thus a form of statism was part of this model. Moreover, the model in practice proved to have many flaws as it permitted numerous scandals from banking to corporate corruption and investor fraud on which fortunes of the very few were built at the expense of the general economy.

The market-oriented growth and development model is presumably one that takes place under an open, free and democratic society where free market forces trade, invest and consume with minimal government intervention. This is the theory. In reality, the role of government is very heavy in every aspect from monetary to fiscal policy, and society is not nearly as free and open as one would argue in theory. The quasi-police state methods of the US, everything from illegally tapping into the private phone records of millions of people to denying due process to anyone that government has the right to brand terrorist indicate a slippery slope toward authoritarian capitalism. "The National Security Agency and the FBI are tapping directly into the central servers of nine leading U.S. Internet companies, extracting audio and video chats, photographs, e-mails, documents, and connection logs..."

Putting aside the reality that economic models necessarily work within a political system that makes all kinds of lofty claims about what best serves "the people", let also consider that many people actually believe that if the "national economy" is performing well, so will they, because they identify with the nation-state, even though they as individuals may be in the lower socioeconomic strata and derive no benefits from any growth and development. This is the case in many countries, most notably the US. The latest (June 2013) Department of Labor report shows that labor costs are the lowest since 1947 when the US began keeping records. Hourly compensation continues to sink, most notably in the manufacturing sector that was historically the best-paying sector for workers. This trend of downward socioeconomic mobilization has been a reality for the past three decades, but the US economy continues to develop and grow, though without such development translating into income growth for the middle class and workers.

There are variations of authoritarian capitalist models found in many non-Western countries such as Saudi Arabia but also in a number of African nations. This model allows for free enterprise, it rests on one or very few sources for economic growth and development, and it has a strong state monopolized by authoritarian regimes, invariably more corrupt than countries where there is some semblance of checks and balances. There is the Indonesian, Malaysian, Turkish model of neoliberalism under Islamic regimes; something that is now spreading across other Muslim nations, including Tunisia and Egypt. This model is an integral part of the neoliberal one under globalization.

Clearly, there are models today that result in tremendous GDP growth, but that does not translate to upward socioeconomic mobility and the qualitative and quantitative growth of a middle class. For example, the result of globalization, especially from 2007 to the present, is that the middle class in the US and EU has been shrinking, while it has expanded in Asia and to some degree in Latin America and parts of Africa. Therefore, versions of the neoliberal model of development that the US and EU have been pursuing has resulted in downward socioeconomic mobility for the most advanced nations as well as semi-developed ones in Southern Europe. Nevertheless, more than half of the middle class in in North America and EU, while the vast majority of the poor are in the non-Western world.

According to OECD statistics, "In 2009 the middle class included 1.8 billion people, with Europe (664 million), Asia (525 million) North America (338 million) accounting for the highest number of people belonging to this group. ... The size of the “global middle class” will increase from 1.8 billion in 2009 to 3.2 billion by 2020 and 4.9 billion by 2030. The bulk of this growth will come from Asia: by 2030 Asia will represent 66% of the global middle-class population and 59% of middle-class consumption, compared to 28% and 23%, respectively in 2009..."

One paradox in economics is that it is possible to have growth without development (vertical growth), or growth accompanied by underdevelopment as in the case of African, Latin American and some Asian countries that are relying on one or two export products, while using the proceeds to import everything else. This kind of dependency has been characteristic of the core-periphery divide in the capitalist world system for the past five centuries; for there is a vast difference between an undeveloped country enjoying self-sufficiency and an underdeveloped that one that is financially, commercially and industrially dependent on the advanced capitalist (core) countries. Moreover, there is a vast difference between a country experiencing ephemeral growth owing to the availability of some export product –let us say oil – and sustainable development that leads to diversified economic development and greater self-sufficiency.


The idea that there is any model that can possibly reflect "human behavior" and its idiosyncratic proclivities assumes that there is such a thing as a "uniform generic model" of human behavior, rather than "atomic action constraints, as determined genetically and by cultural conditioning". In fact, the reason I argue that there cannot be a perfect model, is because I made certain assumptions about human nature, namely that the irrational tendencies play a far greater role than the rational.

This is a very old argument rooted in the philosophical debates that goes back to the 17th century (Hobbes and Locke) and continuing in the Age of Reason as well as the 19th century when Marx and Mill who relied on the rationalist tradition to formulate significant political theories on which society could build. In short, just as a scientific theory can provide solid and unquestioned answers, similar philosophical models of political economy could do the same, at least this was the assumption. But can scientific certainty be applied to economic models, given that they must in the end apply to human beings that are neither neutrons nor algebraic equations? Are the domains of economics, political science, sociology and social science as "scientific" as mathematics, chemistry and physics, or are we ultimately dealing with a question of societal structure based on a social contract? To what degree is the social contract itself modeled after rationalist assumptions, as was the case for both Jon Locke and Karl Marx and F. Engels, is a legitimate issue. However, the matter of societal organization, mode of production, is subject to historical dynamics (dialectical materialism, to be sure, but certainly not limited to it).

Is there a single development model that works best to serve the people of all countries around the world; like us say the neoliberal that IMF, World Bank, European Central Bank, US and EU governments are promoting globally as the panacea? Economic development models, whether like that of the US, or regional bloc one like the one of the European Union, are always designed down to the smallest detail to serve and promote the privileged socioeconomic and political elites, within the boundaries of what the middle class and working class will tolerate so there would not be social unrest or revolt.

Development models under capitalism are not intended to foster greater upward socioeconomic mobility, but to further concentrate capital in the hands of the privileged elites that enjoy policy influence. The social safety net, social welfare measures within varying degrees that have been in place in many countries around the world are now threatened by the neoliberal model that encourages the erosion of welfare measures amid an era of downward pressure on wages and limited opportunities for youth suffering high unemployment. These are explosive social conditions that could result in social upheaval if the trend continues.

Lower global poverty, gender equality, basic education and health care, and a sustainable future for all people are desirable goals of many human-centered rather than market-focused people for the past two centuries. The question is which development model can achieve such goals i9f the political economy is structured to serve narrow class interests. Not any time in the near future, or in the next half century do I expect systemic changes in the neoliberal political economy. On the contrary, statistics indicate that there is regression in the areas of social progress. Why? I repeat that people who have economic and political (military/police) power always prevail, while the broader masses of the population, middle classes and workers continue to demand social justice. The social dialectic (Marxian-based "dialectical social theory") leads me to conclude that concessions will be made to the broader masses only when absolutely necessary to preserve the status quo.

Jon Kofas is a retired university Professor from Indiana University.

  Read Is there A Single Development Model That Works?
 June 7, 2015
The Futility Of Expecting Peace And Honesty Under Capitalism
by Lionel Anet, Countercurrents

During pre-capitalist civilisation, competition and its avoidance was its hallmark, it’s the reason for the strata that separated the people who could do and have whatever. But no mater, competition will occur when there’s inequality. Capitalism has gradually replaced the inherited stratified static society with a fluid one controlled with competition for wealth, measured with fiat money. That intensified the competition, which increased the clout of winners to boost their share of the world’s wealth and political power. We can live with unfairness within human society even with its wars, but nature can no longer sustain that life style, therefore, we can’t either.

Then, we must drastically reduce our demands on nature or die. The most wasteful and destructive activities are preparation for high tech wars, and the fighting to test the weaponry, and take assets, all of them are incredibly destructive so, its peace or perish. Nevertheless wars are an important part of civilisation; furthermore capitalism has evolved to a global status, therefore we could regard wars as revolutions. Those conflicts by their nature are very messy with unknowable outcomes and inflicting unbearable pain on people and nature. To save an environment that can sustain 9 billion people, we must have peace; but, it’s impossible to have peace in competitive societies that’s also changing the climate to an unliveable one.

Competition for wealth and power has a feedback loop, which is, having succeeded in a competitive endeavour that brings more wealth; it therefore increases the chance of winning in more of the same due to the extra power that wealth brings. To avoid the advantage of that extra wealth brings to a few individuals; up to 1970s it was contradicted by the negative feed backs the governments imposed on wealth, mainly taxes. But neoliberals reversed that by giving positive feed backs to the wealthy. This has changed the ratio in the wealth distribution in society where in 1970s we reach the minimum difference between the rich and poor, while today we are getting to the maximum divergence of wealth tolerable. Negative feedbacks such high rate of taxes on high earners and to avoid difficulties and conflicts - positive feedback, which is, society spending on health, education, public transport, and food supply such as fresh fruit and vegetables. That’s essential for peace

Peace for social beings is a state of cooperation where individuals can take pleasure helping each other so that we can all share in the participation of receiving and giving, as a part of nature. Where the success of an individual is regarded as a success for everyone and ones feeling of security is enhanced by how well others are doing, furthermore, because it’s both safe to be honest and with no obvious benefit to be dishonest people will tend to be more honest even for a psychopath.

On the other hand when money is so important as it is today, competition for it is the key to success and the more one has the more important one is and the more power one has especially in democracies. Capitalist democracies are the most competitive social system to ever exist, and cartels, monopolies, and trusts are the ultimate winners of competition. The goal of business is to be above competition, which is to have a competitive advantage preferably a monopoly, and that’s the logical outcome of competition. As neoliberals took over the economy, industrial worker had fraternal relationships that held them together; that was gradually replaced with competition within that working class.

Competitive relations have conflicts that are either overtly violent or covertly mean; they contrast with peaceful relationships that are cooperative, supportive, safe, and predictable. Unlike competition, cooperation doesn’t require forsaking ones feeling of comradeship, because we then see people as potential friend instead of probable enemies. While to be successful in a competitive milieu requires a deceptive friendliness, secrecy, ruthlessness, hard work, focuses on one’s success, cunningness, and looking for winnable conflicts.

We have never experienced peace during civilisation; we only have had times of supressed violence, which we call peace. Therefore, it’s hard for us to think of peace as anything but the absent of war, which still has the supressed conflicts for dominance, and that’s not peace because the conflicting tension within competition is still there.

What we need today is honesty; we already have the knowledge to ensure our survival and a good life for all. Knowing is of no use, unless we have the right equipment, or system to use that knowledge, for instance before people used the wheel they had the knowledge of it, but they didn’t have the material for the axle, they had to wait until iron axle were made. Today we have the knowledge to save ourselves but we don’t have the socioeconomic system to implement it.
When one considers our population is due to reach 9 billion by the middle of this century, with a degraded environment especially water resources, the options to maintain life for today’s young is limited. The only way we can survive is to attain a state of peace throughout the world. As pointed out that condition can only be achieved when we have rescinded our need to compete and renew relations that are fair and honest. It’s necessary to achieve that state of fairness, so that all people in a common endeavour worldwide are able to be adequately fed and housed, without destroying nature of its life.

A sustainable socioeconomic system can only be, at this stage, fair and honest, because of our overpopulation that will overwhelm the degrading resources. We will need to stabilised and then reduce our population to below half of what it will be. Not an impossible task, although it may never have been achieved voluntarily, but it’s a necessity now. People can and have achieved remarkable feat when there’s a clear need for action and if we have that common need to survive we will all survive cohesively, or we all perish competitively.

The knowledge in the world community is there that would enable us to survive. But our political and ‘economic’ leaders have more immediate concerns to acquire more power to maintain or raise their position in the system. Not realising it, in pursuit of that on a global scale will annihilate them, their family and their opponents. No one has a long-term interest in maintaining the status quo, in today’s terms it might mean even less than a few decades.

Capitalism’s controling agent is competition, which numbs honesty and that dominates all fields of life, resulting in gross unfairness, which is a twin of dishonesty. The twins are inseparable as are the twins of fairness and honesty; ‘fairness’ in capitalism is the right to exploit people, preferably legally.

The continuing increasing dishonesty sanction by the system is justified by our education. We have tertiary courses in public relation; their main job is the difficult task of convincing people to do what is against their interest. In conjunction with that is the government pursuit work, of deception, like spending on offensive military hardware and calling it defence.

Competition has a further important asset for the few billionaires, it sets the tone of society, which glorifies and envies winners and despise losers. But that is accepting a disparity in the allocation of all resources, which is the right to have more power than others, with a better life style, good health care, able to get better legal advice, and so on. Competition’s purpose is to create inequality of importance, which in capitalism are wealth and power, and that is unfair and is not only dishonest, but the competition justifies and glorifies the exploitation.

  Read The Futility Of Expecting Peace And Honesty Under Capitalism
 June 11, 2015
Are We Prepared To Change To Prevent Climate Change?
by Christiane Kliemann , Countercurrents


What is needed to get us out of our comfort zone and fight for our children’s future?

If you ask, let’s say, a seven year old, it’s all pretty clear. If it’s the way we live, consume and produce that causes climate change, why don’t we simply stop it and start doing things differently? And if there are millions of people too poor even to meet their basic needs, why don’t we tell the rich to share a bit of their overflow so that there is enough for all?

We may consider this cute and naïve, we may laugh and say, “Look, it’s not all that easy, there are too many complexities and interdependencies and lock-ins and path-dependencies. It’s OK, when you’re older you’ll understand. Our economy needs to grow for us to keep up the good life. It needs to grow to get more people out of poverty, to secure return on investments, and to create jobs in place of those that fell away due to rationalization. We cannot simply stop the machine for something abstract like climate change: this would lead to recession, social unrest and chaos. We have to keep up our economic system to secure social stability, pension schemes and state budgets”—as if social instability, unemployment and wars on resources were not already well on their way.

Questioning the underlying system logic

These are all robust arguments hardly ever questioned—following the logic of homo economicus that individual profit and competition are the best means to achieve the higher common good. But what if this system logic itself was the root cause of our environmental and social crises—climate change above all—and needed to be replaced by something new to secure our survival on this planet? What if we have constructed a whole system of theories, models, technologies and defence mechanisms just to deny the simple truth? What if the seven year old was right and we do need to change our lives in an unprecedented way, and concentrate all our efforts on the required systemic transformation in the face of climate change and the underlying crisis of civilization?

Mark Lynas and others made the case that questioning the paradigm of economic growth is kind of politically extreme, but what if it turned out that climate stability and growth are indeed incompatible and that such “extremity” is in fact required? That keeping up economic growth, “green” or otherwise, is not in line with the physical reality of the planet, regardless of what we might wish?

In the end, it all boils down to the question of decoupling economic growth from greenhouse-gas emissions (and the use of other natural resources in the case of other no less important planetary boundaries). However, despite the tremendous efforts that are being invested to convince us that energy efficiency, renewables and new technologies will do the trick, decoupling in absolute terms remains highly unlikely if not impossible in a growing economy.

The limits to growth are real

According to economist Tim Jackson, from 1990 to 2007 the global carbon intensity of technology decreased annually by an average of 0.7 %. At the same time, global population increased by 1.3 % while the average income increased by 1.4 %. These numbers reveal that the efficiency gains (relative decoupling) didn’t even make up for population growth and income increase, so the overall emissions actually went up.

In order to avoid dangerous climate change in the future, we would need to achieve an annual carbon intensity decrease of at least 7 %, a figure ten times greater than that achieved from 1990 to 2007. The relating scenario only accounts for a moderate population and income increase, and maintains the gap between developing and developed countries. If the developing countries were to catch up with industrialized living standards, which is the more likely trajectory, this would even require a 55 times lower carbon intensity by 2050. Is this realistic?

While a recent high-level report claims that climate action and economic growth can go hand in hand, it doesn’t even attempt to prove the probability of absolute decoupling—leaving its core message a mere assertion. The reason behind it: among the multitude of studies dealing with decoupling and the related rebound-effects, there is not one that could prove absolute decoupling as a realistic scenario considering the relevant facts and figures.

Standing up to vested interests

This leads us to the question of whose interests are actually at stake in case the growth fetish gets criticized by a larger public¨—which can also explain the tireless attempts to prevent this from happening by the military-industrial complex, the fossil fuel industry, the agroindustry, the aviation and automotive industry, to mention only a few (no, electric or driverless cars are not sustainable, despite what the industry tries to make us believe). Given the vast financial and political power of the global players in these and other sectors, it is no wonder that governments are usually putty in the hands of their interest groups. These play with our fears and assure us that their profitability is essential for keeping our jobs—knowing that politicians fear nothing more than rising unemployment rates.

And indeed, in the current system, this fear of losing one’s job often forces people to choose between a secure livelihood and ethical principles – and to continue to work in jobs that are obviously damaging for the environment. So if a global bottom-up climate movement is to succeed against these vested corporate interests, it has to push just as hard for alternative solidarity structures and job opportunities. In the end, it’s not the corporations that we need, but secure livelihoods—which can be provided in many different ways.

Facing our defence mechanisms

At the same time it is not enough to point fingers at others and blame “the system” or “the industry” or “the politicians” when our own interests are deeply intertwined with that of the economy we are living in. Aren’t most of us quite happy in our comfort zones enjoying all the superficial pleasures the globalized consumer culture can provide? It’s definitely not those who are less fortunate and have to struggle to make ends meet who are to blame. It’s the average and above average consumers in the Global North and the rich in the Global South who are gobbling up resources that the earth cannot sustain. It’s our Western consumer lifestyle that inherently depends on the exploitation of nature and other people, particularly women—be it in the form of cheap labour, environmental racism or direct deprivation – e.g. by destroying people’s livelihoods for our hunger for resources.

So if we want politicians and governments to act and take on the “Great Transition” towards a secure and liveable future as their utmost priority, we first have to give up our defence mechanisms and stop justifying our own role. We have to bring across that we are really serious about changing the economy and changing our lives, and that we won’t accept any excuse. Otherwise they can rely on us being too deeply attached to our cars, fancy holidays and long-haul flights, globalized supply chains and ever more electronic gadgets—even at the expense of the millions of deaths, increasing violence, wars on resources and ever stronger environmental disasters.

Shaping a global movement for change

If the movement gets its priorities right, the largest parts of the global population have much to gain. Even the rich and privileged might prefer the prospect of a materially simpler life in a social and economic environment that fosters wellbeing in a healthier sense than the current one. Luckily, there are already many ideas, proposals and concepts available to secure the good life for all while maintaining a healthy planet—in democratic and participative ways.

The widespread belief that the white male hypocrites from Silicon Valley and their likes will save us through technological innovations is yet another symptom of our collective denial. These will neither be ecologically sustainable, nor democratic; they will just tighten our dependence on increasingly complex technologies from large monopolist corporations. We tend to forget that the real driver behind such innovations is not change, but the attempt to keep up our business-as-usual capitalist economy and prevent it from collapse—thereby securing cash flow into the pockets of the usual suspects.

Now back to the seven year old, for whom the solutions are so simple, so apparent. Don’t you think it’s high time we listen to our children, get out of our comfort zone and do all we can to safeguard the Earth for them? Consume less, share more and stand up against fossil fuels, urban sprawl, destructive infrastructures and resource extractivism. And, above all, fight for an economy that can fulfil everyone’s basic needs within the natural boundaries of a healthy planet.

Christiane Kliemann is a German freelance journalist focusing on postgrowth, alternative economy and social change. A member of the organizing team of the Degrowth 2014 Conference, she has worked in communications at the UNFCCC secretariat and as an editor at German broadcaster Deutsche Welle. Currently she is running the blog for the German degrowth web-portal and preparing to move to the eco-village Sieben Linden.

  Read Are We Prepared To Change To Prevent Climate Change?
 June 11, 2015
Poll Finds Mass Opposition In Europe To War Drive vs. Russia Over Ukraine
by Alex Lantier , Countercurrents


The findings of a poll published yesterday by the Washington, DC-based Pew Research Center, showing broad opposition in Europe to a NATO war with Russia, underscore the anti-democratic character of the US-led war drive against Russia over Ukraine.

The poll was formulated to elicit answers as favorable as possible to US and NATO policy, particularly in regard to a possible war with Russia. The poll questionnaire did not once raise that Russia and NATO both have nuclear weapons, or inquire about the respondents’ willingness to risk nuclear war. As a result, the poll vastly underestimates public opposition to war.

The main question on war was whether NATO member states should fight a defensive war against Russia, if Russia “got into a serious military conflict with one of its neighboring countries that is our NATO ally.” In such a situation, Article 5 of the NATO Charter on collective self-defense would require all NATO member states to declare war on Russia.

Despite having framed the question in a manner intended to elicit support for such a supposedly defensive war, the Pew poll found broad opposition among Europeans. Fifty-eight percent of Germans, 53 percent of the French population and 51 percent of Italians opposed fighting even a defensive war with Russia to protect a NATO member.

This is not, however, the character of the war that now threatens to erupt. NATO is not playing a defensive role in Ukraine, which is not a NATO member state. The Ukrainian crisis erupted after the US and the European powers backed a fascist-led putsch against a pro-Russian government in Kiev in February 2014, bringing to power an ultra-right regime that launched a civil war against pro-Russian areas of eastern Ukraine. With US and Russian missile forces on heightened alert and NATO land, air and naval forces engaged in continuous exercises on Russia’s borders, the world stands on the verge of a catastrophic war provoked by Washington and its European allies.

Popular sentiment emerged most clearly when the Pew poll inquired about initiatives NATO is threatening to pursue in Ukraine. Asked about NATO arming the Kiev regime against Russia, a policy being pushed by the Obama administration, majorities or pluralities opposed the measure in every European country surveyed except Poland, where 50 percent supported arming Kiev.

Fully 77 percent of Germans opposed NATO arming Kiev, versus only 19 percent who supported it. The poll found 65 percent opposition versus 22 percent support in Italy, 66 versus 25 percent in Spain, 59 versus 40 percent in France, and 45 versus 42 percent in Britain.

Opposition within Germany, where the government, the media and sections of academia have been waging a relentless propaganda campaign in support of militarism, was particularly strong. A mere 38 percent of Germans said Russia was a danger to NATO member states on its borders, and only 29 percent blamed Moscow for the violence in Ukraine.

These findings constitute a devastating indictment of last year’s Kiev putsch and the ensuing US-led war drive against Russia, which have been backed by governments across Europe. While workers are kept in the dark about the true dangers of a war that they do not want, NATO is pressing ahead with reckless policies overwhelmingly rejected by the European population.

The findings of the Pew poll among Ukrainians expose the claims of Washington and the European imperialist powers that they are supporting Ukraine against Russia in order to defend a nascent democratic regime threatened by Russian aggression. The Kiev regime is imposing brutal austerity measures demanded by the Western banks and using increasingly authoritarian and violent means to suppress internal opposition among Ukraine workers.

Kiev’s war against Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine, fought with the aid of the CIA and various fascistic militias, is being carried out in flagrant disregard of the wishes of the Ukrainian people. According to the Pew poll, more than twice as many Ukrainians want to settle the conflict with the separatists through negotiations (47 percent) than with force (23 percent).

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko’s policies on these issues are widely unpopular, with 57 percent of the population opposing both his handling of the eastern Ukraine conflict and his posture toward Russia.

The domestic policies of the Kiev regime are no less unpopular. Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk’s disapproval rating is 60 percent.

With the Ukrainian currency in a state of collapse, waves of mass layoffs taking place, and the government hiking the prices of key utilities, the Pew poll shows 94 percent of the people viewing Ukraine’s economic situation as “bad.” Fifty-five percent of Ukrainians have concluded that the Kiev regime does not respect personal freedoms.

The Pew poll also interviewed Russian respondents, finding a surge in distrust towards NATO, seen as a threat by 81 percent of Russians, as well as general hostility towards Obama (86 percent negative) and German Chancellor Angela Merkel (66 percent). While Putin’s opposition to NATO’s intervention in Ukraine has boosted his approval ratings to 88 percent, there is broad distrust of the oligarchic regime he leads, which emerged from the restoration of capitalism in the USSR. Some 69 percent of Russians and 34 percent of Ukrainians said in the poll that the dissolution of the USSR was bad for their country.
The results of the Pew poll underscore the disastrous political implications of the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, nearly a quarter century ago. Combined with the collapse and plundering of Soviet industry, the dissolution of the USSR geo-strategically crippled Russia, throwing open vast areas of the former Soviet Union to NATO’s reactionary intrigues. Above all, the emergence of a criminal oligarchy ruling Russia weakened the opposition that had existed in the international and particularly the European working class to imperialist threats against the USSR.

The preparation of the NATO powers for an all-out war with Russia that could incinerate the planet is colliding with deeply rooted anti-war sentiment in Europe, the United States and worldwide. The very fact that the Pew poll was commissioned is itself a sign of mounting concern in ruling circles internationally over mass opposition to war.

The ruling elites of the imperialist countries have made clear, however, that they intend to ignore popular sentiment and proceed with their campaign against Russia. The New York Times, in its report on the Pew poll, presented the mass opposition to war as a “challenge” to US and NATO war plans that needs to be overcome.

It cited former US Ambassador to NATO Ivo Daalder, who called for continued propaganda in support of military action against Russia, saying that, “it will take a serious effort by the alliance to convince its public of the need to prepare for, deter, and, if necessary, respond to a Russian attack.”

The Times added that, “public opinion is not always decisive in shaping NATO policy.” It continued: “President Ronald Reagan managed to win sufficient European backing to deploy Pershing II and ground-launched cruise missiles on the [European] Continent despite a substantial peace movement.”

The Times’ reference to the US deployment of Pershing II missiles in Europe during the 1980s is particularly significant. US officials are now discussing escalated missile deployments in Europe and the possibility of launching pre-emptive missile strikes against targets inside Russia.

  Read Poll Finds Mass Opposition In Europe To War Drive vs. Russia Over Ukraine
 June 12, 2015
Earth Has Warmed As Usual, With No Slowdown
by Tim Radford, Countercurrents

Forget about the so-called “hiatus” in global warming. The planet’s average temperatures are notching up as swiftly now as they did 20 or 30 years ago.

A team of US researchers has looked again not just at the data for the last 60 years but at how it has been collected, and done the sums again. They conclude, in the journal Science, that the “estimate for the rate of warming during the first 15 years of the 21st century is at least as great as the last half of the 20th century. These results do not support the notion of a ‘slowdown’ in the increase of global surface temperature rise.”

But first, the story-so-far. Climate sceptics have repeatedly claimed that global warming has slowed or stopped. This was not the case: 13 of the hottest years ever recorded have all occurred in the last 14 years, and 2014 was the hottest of them all.

But when climate scientists looked at a graph of the rise of temperatures in the last 60 years, they saw – or thought they saw – a distinct drop in the rate of increase in global average temperatures in the last 15 years.

This apparent dip became the subject of a whole series of studies. Researchers had never expected the rise to follow a straight line – all sorts of natural climate cycles would naturally affect annual records – but the rate of increase was slower, and more sustained in its slowness, than anyone could explain, especially as there had been no drop in the greenhouse gas emissions that drive global warming.

Data anomalies

Some proposed that the expected extra heat in the atmosphere had been drawn down into the great oceans and others that an unnoticed increase in volcanic activity had helped screen the sunlight and cool the atmosphere unexpectedly. Yet another group looked not at average temperature patterns but the change in the frequency of heat waves and saw a different kind of rise.

Yet another group wondered if the problem might be only apparent: more complete data from many more parts of the world might combine to tell a different story. Thomas Karl and colleagues at the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration in the US made this their starting point.

They looked again at how the data had been collected, and the gaps that might have appeared. Sea surface temperatures, for instance, were at different periods collected by bucket from a ship’s deck, by readings aboard surface drifting and moored buoys or by engine-intake thermometers in ships’ engine rooms, and there could be subtle differences not accounted for.

There were very few readings from the Arctic, yet the Arctic is by far the fastest-warming region of the planet, and the pattern of land-based temperature readings, too, repaid re-examination.

By the time the NOAA team had finished, the recalibrated figures told a different story. Between 1998 and 2012, the world warmed at the rate of 0.086°C per decade, more than twice the rate of 0.039°C per decade measured by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The new figure is much closer to the rate estimated for the decades 1950 to 1999, at 0.113°C per decade. And the new analysis lifts the rate of warming from 2000 to 2014 to 0.116°C per decade, which if anything is an acceleration, not a slowdown.

British climate scientists have welcomed the finding: it is however the finding of just one group and, like all such research, will be accepted more readily if it can be separately replicated.

“This study makes the important point that we need to look really carefully at data quality and issues of instrument change,” said Piers Forster, professor of climate change at the University of Leeds, UK.

”Yet there are several legitimate judgment calls made when combining datasets to make a global mean-time series. I still don’t think this study will be the last word on this complex subject.”

But Peter Wadhams, a professor of ocean physics at the University of Cambridge, UK, called the study careful and persuasive, and said: “I think it shows clearly that the so-called ‘hiatus’ does not exist and that global warming has continued over the past few years at the same rate as in earlier years.”

  Read Earth Has Warmed As Usual, With No Slowdown
 June 17, 2015
Why We Fight For The Living World: It's About Love, And It's Time We Said So
by George Monbiot, Countercurrents

Pope Francis reminds us that our relationship to the natural world is about love, not just goods and services

Who wants to see the living world destroyed? Who wants an end to birdsong, bees and coral reefs, the falcon’s stoop, the salmon’s leap? Who wants to see the soil stripped from the land, the sea rimed with rubbish?

No one. And yet it happens. Seven billion of us allow fossil fuel companies to push shut the narrow atmospheric door through which humanity stepped. We permit industrial farming to tear away the soil, banish trees from the hills, engineer another silent spring. We let the owners of grouse moors, 1% of the 1%, shoot and poison hen harriers, peregrines and eagles. We watch mutely as a small fleet of monster fishing ships trashes the oceans.

Why are the defenders of the living world so ineffective? It is partly, of course, that everyone is complicit; we have all been swept off our feet by the tide of hyperconsumption, our natural greed excited, corporate propaganda chiming with a will to believe that there is no cost. But perhaps environmentalism is also afflicted by a deeper failure: arising possibly from embarrassment or fear, a failure of emotional honesty.

I have asked meetings of green-minded people to raise their hands if they became defenders of nature because they were worried about the state of their bank accounts. Never has one hand appeared. Yet I see the same people base their appeal to others on the argument that they will lose money if we don’t protect the natural world.

Such claims are factual, but they are also dishonest: we pretend that this is what animates us, when in most cases it does not. The reality is that we care because we love. Nature appealed to our hearts, when we were children, long before it appealed to our heads, let alone our pockets. Yet we seem to believe we can persuade people to change their lives through the cold, mechanical power of reason, supported by statistics.

I see the encyclical by Pope Francis, which will be published on Thursday, as a potential turning point. He will argue that not only the physical survival of the poor, but also our spiritual welfare depends on the protection of the natural world; and in both respects he is right.

I don’t mean that a belief in God is the answer to our environmental crisis. Among Pope Francis’s opponents is the evangelical US-based Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, which has written to him arguing that we have a holy duty to keep burning fossil fuel, as “the heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament proclaims his handiwork”. It also insists that exercising the dominion granted to humankind in Genesis means tilling “the whole Earth”, transforming it “from wilderness to garden and ultimately to garden city”.

There are similar tendencies within the Vatican. Cardinal George Pell, its head of finance, currently immersed in a scandal involving paedophile priests in Australia, is a prominent climate change denier. His lecture to the Global Warming Policy Foundation was the usual catalogue of zombie myths (discredited claims that keep resurfacing), nonsequiturs and outright garbage championing, for example, the groundless claim that undersea volcanoes could be responsible for global warming. There are plenty of senior Catholics seeking to undermine the pope’s defence of the living world, which could explain why a draft of his encyclical was leaked. What I mean is that Pope Francis, a man with whom I disagree profoundly on matters such as equal marriage and contraception, reminds us that the living world provides not only material goods and tangible services, but is also essential to other aspects of our wellbeing. And you don’t have to believe in God to endorse that view.

In his beautiful book The Moth Snowstorm, Michael McCarthy suggests that a capacity to love the natural world, rather than merely to exist within it, might be a uniquely human trait. When we are close to nature, we sometimes find ourselves, as Christians put it, surprised by joy: “A happiness with an overtone of something more, which we might term an elevated or, indeed, a spiritual quality.”

He believes we are wired to develop a rich emotional relationship with nature. A large body of research suggests that contact with the living world is essential to our psychological and physiological wellbeing. (A paper published this week, for example, claims that green spaces around city schools improve children’s mental performance.)

This does not mean that all people love nature; what it means, McCarthy proposes, is that there is a universal propensity to love it, which may be drowned out by the noise that assails our minds. As I’ve found while volunteering with the outdoor education charity Wide Horizons, this love can be provoked almost immediately, even among children who have never visited the countryside before. Nature, McCarthy argues, remains our home, “the true haven for our psyches”, and retains an astonishing capacity to bring peace to troubled minds.

Acknowledging our love for the living world does something that a library full of papers on sustainable development and ecosystem services cannot: it engages the imagination as well as the intellect. It inspires belief; and this is essential to the lasting success of any movement.

Is this a version of the religious conviction from which Pope Francis speaks? Or could his religion be a version of a much deeper and older love? Could a belief in God be a way of explaining and channelling the joy, the burst of love that nature sometimes inspires in us? Conversely, could the hyperconsumption that both religious and secular environmentalists lament be a response to ecological boredom: the void that a loss of contact with the natural world leaves in our psyches?

Of course, this doesn’t answer the whole problem. If the acknowledgement of love becomes the means by which we inspire environmentalism in others, how do we translate it into political change? But I believe it’s a better grounding for action than pretending that what really matters to us is the state of the economy. By being honest about our motivation we can inspire in others the passions that inspire us.

This column also appeared on the Guardian.

George Monbiot is the author of the best selling books The Age of Consent: a manifesto for a new world order and Captive State: the corporate takeover of Britain. He writes a weekly column for the Guardian newspaper. Visit his website at www.monbiot.com

  Read Why We Fight For The Living World: It's About Love, And It's Time We Said So
 March 6, 2015
9 Things You Think You Know About Jesus That Are Probably Wrong
by Valerie Tarico , AlterNet

Jesus has been described as the best known figure in history, and also the least known. If you mentioned the name “Jesus” and someone asked Jesus who, you might blink. Or laugh. Even people who don’t think Jesus was God mostly believe they know a fair bit about him. You might be surprised that some of your most basic assumptions about Jesus are probably wrong.

We have no record of anything that was written about Jesus by eyewitnesses or other contemporaries during the time he would have lived, or for decades thereafter. Nonetheless, based on archeological digs and artifacts, ancient texts and art, and even forensic science, we know a good deal about the time and culture in which the New Testament is set. This evidence points to some startling conclusions about who Jesus likely was—and wasn’t.

Married, not single. When an ancient papyrus scrap was found in 2012 referring to the wife of Jesus (most likely a forgery), some Catholics and Evangelicals were scandalized at the very thought. But unlike the Catholic Church, Jews have no tradition of celibacy among religious leaders. Ancient writers documented exceptions like the Apostle Paul or the Essene sect precisely because they violated the norm. In the Gospels, Jesus iscalled rabbi; and all great rabbis that we know of were married.  A rabbi being celibate would have been so unusual that some modern writers have argued that Jesus must have been gay. But a number of ancient texts, including the canonical New Testament, point to a special relationshipbetween Mary Magdalene and Jesus. For example, the non-canonical Gospel of Phillip says, “[Jesus] loved her more than all the disciples, and used to kiss her often on her [mouth].”

2. Cropped hair, not long.Jewish men at the time of Christ did not wear their hair long. A Roman triumphal arch of the time period depicts Jewish slaves with short hair. In the Apostle Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, he addresses male hair length. “Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair, it is degrading to him?” (1 Corinthians 11:14 NRSV). During the 1960s, conservative Christians quoted this verse to express their disgust against the hippy movement and to label it anti-Christian.

3. Hung on a pole, not necessarily a cross.For centuries scholars have known that the Greek New Testament word “stauros,” which is translated into English as cross, can refer to a device of several shapes, commonly a single upright pole, “torture stake” or even tree. The Romans did not have a standard way of crucifying prisoners, and Josephus tells us that during the siege of Jerusalem, soldiers nailed or tied their victims in a variety of positions. Early Christians may have centered on the vertical pole with a crossbeam because it echoed the Egyptian ankh, a symbol of life, or the Sumerian symbol for Tammuz, or because it simply was more artistically and symbolically distinctive than the alternatives. Imagine millions of people wearing a golden pole on a chain around their necks.

4. Short, not tall. The typical Jewish man at the time of the Roman Empire would have been just over five feet tall, which makes this a best guess for the height of Jesus. That he is typically depicted taller derives from the mental challenge people have distinguishing physical stature from other kinds of stature. Great men are called “big men” and “larger than life.” In ancient times they often were assigned divine parentage and miraculous births, and the idea that Jesus was uniquely divine has created a strong pull over time to depict him as taller than is likely. A good illustration of this is the Shroud of Turin, which is just one of many such Jesus-shrouds that circulated during medieval times and which bears the image of a man closer to six feet in height.

5. Born in a house, not a stable. The miraculous birth story of Jesus is a late, maybe second-century addition to the Bible, and it contains many fascinating mythic elements and peculiarities. But the idea that Jesus was born in a stable was added to the Christmas story even later. In the original narrative, Joseph and Mary probably would have stayed with relatives, and the phrase “no room for them in the inn (gr: kataluma)” is better translated “no room for them in the upper room." Later storytellers did not understand that people of the time might bring animals into their ground floor, as in Swiss housebarns, and they assumed that the presence of a manger implied a stable.

6. Named Joshua, not Jesus. The name Joshua (in Hebrew Y'hoshuʿa meaning “deliverance” or “salvation”), was common among Jews in the Ancient Near East as it is today. Joshua and Jesus are the same name, and are translated differently in our modern Bible to distinguish Jesus from the Joshua of the Old Testament, who leads the Hebrew people to the Promised Land. In actuality, the relationship between the two figures is fascinating and important. Some scholars believe that the New Testament gospels are mostly historicized and updated retellings of the more ancient Joshua story, with episodes interwoven from stories of Elisha and Elijah and Moses. A modern parallel can be found in the way Hollywood writers have reworked Shakespearean tropes and plot elements into dozens of modern movies (though for a very different purpose).

7. Number of apostles (12) from astrology, not history. Whether Jesus had 12 disciples who ranked above his other devotees is an open question, as their names vary from list to list. Since the Gospels echo the story of Joshua, the “12” apostles most immediately mirror the 12 tribes of Israel. But the number 12 was considered auspicious by many ancient people, including the Israelites, and the 189 repetitions of the number 12 in the Bible ultimately may derive from the same pre-historical roots as the 12 signs of the zodiac and 12 months of the year. Astrotheology or star worship preceded the Hebrew religion, and shaped both the Bible and world religions more broadly. One might point to the 12 Olympian gods or 12 sons of Odin, or 12 days of Christmas or 12 “legitimate” successors to the prophet Mohammed.

8. Prophecies recalled, not foretold. Even people who aren’t too sure about the divinity of Jesus sometimes think that the way he fulfilled prophecies was a bit spooky, like the writings of Nostradamus. In reality, Scooby Doo could solve this one in a single episode with three pieces of information: First, Old Testament prophecies were well known to first-century Jews, and a messianic figure who wanted to fulfill some of these prophecies could simply do so. For example, in the book of Matthew, Jesus seeks a donkey to ride into Jerusalem “that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet” (Matthew 21:4). Second, “gospels” are a genre of devotional literature rather than objective histories, which means that the authors had every reason to shape their stories around earlier predictions. Third, scholars now believe that some Bible texts once thought to be prophecies (for example in the Book of Revelation) actually relate to events that were current or past at the time of writing.

9. Some Jesus quotes not from Jesus; others uncertain. Lists of favorite Jesus sayings abound online. Some of the most popular are the Beatitudes (blessed are the meek, etc.) or the story of the woman caught in adultery (let he who is without sin cast the first stone) or the Golden Rule (do unto others as you would have them do unto you, which, we are told, sums up the Law and the Prophets).

Which words are actually from Jesus? This question has been debated fiercely by everyone from third-century Catholic Councils to the 20th-century Jesus Seminar. Even Thomas Jefferson weighed in, but much remains unclear. The New Testament Gospels were written long after Jesus would have died, and no technology existed with which to record his teachings in real time, unless he wrote them down himself, which he didn’t.

We can be confident that at least some of the wise and timeless words and catchy proverbs attributed to Jesus are actually from earlier or later thinkers. For example, the Golden Rule was articulated before the time of Christ by the Rabbi Hillel the Elder, who similarly said it was the “whole Torah.” By contrast, the much-loved story of the woman caught in adultery doesn’t appear in manuscripts until the fourth century. Attributing words (or whole texts) to a famous person was common in the Ancient Near East, because it gave those words extra weight. Small wonder then that so many genuinely valuable insights ended up, in one way or another, paired with the name of Jesus. 

The person of Jesus, if indeed there was such a  person, is shrouded in the fog of history leaving us only with a set of hunches and traditions that far too often are treated as knowledge. The “facts” I have listed here are largely trivial; it doesn’t really matter whether Jesus was tall or short, or how he cut his hair. But it does matter, tremendously, that “facts” people claim to know about how Jesus saw himself, and God and humanity are equally tenuous.

The teachings attributed to Jesus mix enduring spiritual and moral insights with irrelevancies and Judaica and bits of Iron Age culture, some of which are truly awful. That leaves each of us, from the privileged vantage of the 21st century, with both a right and a responsibility to consider the evidence and make our own best guesses about what is real and how we should then live. A good starting place might be a little more recognition that we don’t know nearly as much as we’d like to think, and a lot of what we know for sure is probably wrong.

Valerie Tarico is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington and the founder of Wisdom Commons. She is the author of "Trusting Doubt: A Former Evangelical Looks at Old Beliefs in a New Light" and "Deas and Other Imaginings." Her articles can be found at Awaypoint.Wordpress.com.
  Read 9 Things You Think You Know About Jesus That Are Probably Wrong
 March 18, 2015
Is Canada Turning into a Police State?
by Joyce Nelson, CounterPunch, AlterNet

Back in 2006, the newly elected Prime Minister of Canada, right-wing Conservative Stephen Harper warned that “You won’t recognize Canada when I’m through with it.” After nine grueling years, that’s already true in many ways. But now, Harper is going even further in his re-make of the country. Under new and pending legislation, Canada is moving rapidly towards the creation of a police state, with major curtailments of civil liberties. In recent weeks, the Harper Conservatives have introduced and/or passed several pieces of legislation that run roughshod over Canadians’ Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Constitutional rights, giving draconian powers to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS).

There’s Bill C-13, the highly unpopular online spying legislation, which received Royal Assent on Dec. 9, 2014. The Bill allows warrantless internet surveillance through the collection by CSIS of Canadians’ everyday internet use. The Bill contains broad new police powers, including several new warrants for surveillance, tracking and gathering of bank information. Bill C-13 has been vehemently opposed by more than 60 Canadian organizations. OpenMedia’s David Christopher says that “important parts of this legislation have already been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.” [1]

There’s Bill C-44, which expands the surveillance powers of CSIS globally, while granting anonymity protection to CSIS informants and allowing for new conditions under which Canadian citizenship can be revoked. This bill passed third reading on February 2 and is now with the Senate. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) has called this bill “highly problematic.” [2]

There’s Bill C-639, introduced on Dec. 3, which impinges on the Constitutional right of assembly and would criminalize people exercising their democratic right to public protest. And there’s Bill C-51, the Anti-Terrorism Act 2015, introduced on Jan. 30, containing draconian measures that verge on the creation of a police state. These two bills are the focus in this article because they both refer to protection of “critical infrastructure.”

They are therefore crucial with regard to ongoing Canadian protests against tarsands export pipeline proposals: Enbridge’s proposed Northern Gateway pipeline (from Alberta to northern B.C.); Enbridge’s Line 9 reversal (from southern Ontario to Montreal); TransCanada’s proposed Energy East pipeline (from Alberta to New Brunswick); and Kinder Morgan’s proposed Trans Mountain pipeline expansion (from Alberta to southern B.C.).

Being In the Way

On December 3, Conservative Member of Parliament (MP) Wai Young (Co-chair of the Canada-China Legislative Association) introduced Bill C-639, a private member’s bill to amend the Criminal Code.

The Bill creates a new criminal office for anyone who “destroys or damages any part of a critical infrastructure; renders any part of a critical infrastructure dangerous, useless, inoperative or ineffective; or obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use, enjoyment or operations of any part of a critical infrastructure.”[3] This amendment would criminalize peaceful and (currently) lawful protests if they interfere even temporarily with broadly defined “critical infrastructure.” The Bill imposes a mandatory minimum sentence of two to 10 years and fines of $500 to $3,000.

Bill C-639 defines “critical infrastructure” as “services relating to energy, telecommunications, finance, health care, food, water transportation, public safety, government and manufacturing, the disruption of which could produce serious adverse economic effects or endanger the health or safety of Canadians.” The bill received backing from Minister of Justice/Attorney General Peter MacKay, who said it would “help secure all facets of critical infrastructure.” [4]

Toronto lawyer Ed Prutschi told the National Post in December the fact that energy infrastructure was including in this definition has one obvious purpose: “It would have application for pipeline protests.” [5] He noted that the legislation doesn’t necessarily require any damage to have been done, just that a person be in the way – as many people were during a protest in Burnaby, B.C. late last year against Kinder Morgan’s TransMountain pipeline expansion. As the National Post noted, Wai Young is the MP for the Vancouver South political riding, which is adjacent to Burnaby Mountain, where protests occurred.

From November 19 to 27, at least 100 protesters were arrested for crossing a police line in a municipal conservation area on Burnaby Mountain where Kinder Morgan crews have been doing preliminary work – even before approval of the pipeline project – in preparation for tunneling.

During Question Period on Dec. 8, New Democratic Party (NDP) justice critic Francois Boivin, MP for Gatineau, Quebec, called Bill C-639 “scary” and said it “bans protests” and “has obvious constitutional problems. It defines critical infrastructure as being just about anything. In this country, people have a right to lawful protest and assembly. Legal experts are already raising concerns about the constitutionality of Bill C-639.” [6]

Borrowing Tactics from Dictators

The B.C. Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) considers Bill C-639 a direct attack on the Canadian Constitution and Charter rights, and says the Harper government is “borrowing tactics from dictatorial governments.” [7]

The BCCLA slammed Bill C-639 while its Executive Director Josh Paterson was in Bangkok, having been invited to a UN meeting. “We are at the United Nations to cry foul on Canada’s latest attempt to criminalize peaceful protest,” Paterson said in a news release of Dec. 15. “Now striking flight attendants and kids protesting pipelines on Burnaby Mountain could be considered criminals? Either of these lawful protests could count as a crime under this law if they interfere with something of economic value. That is simply ridiculous and it violates the fundamental freedoms of Canadians.”

The UN Special Rapporteur on the freedom on assembly and association is conducting a global investigation examining how the freedoms of peaceful assembly are being violated around the world to smooth the path for corporate resource development.

Paterson further stated, “We are meeting in Bangkok with representatives from non-democratic countries where protest is a serious crime. It is humiliated for Canada to be borrowing tactics from dictatorial governments.” He added, “Canada has not only broken with our own constitution in criminalizing protest, spying on First Nations, and denouncing community groups, it’s also breaking its international commitments to protect the freedom of expression and freedom of assembly of Canadians.”


Justice Minister MacKay said in the Dec. 3 press release that Bill C-639 “is the product of extensive, cross-Canada consultation, consistent with our Government’s priority to create safer communities.” [8] But the bill is obviously based on a March 2011 report written by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) Critical Infrastructure Intelligence Team, which consulted primarily with private energy companies.

The document, recently obtained by Carleton University criminologist Jeff Monaghan, warned, “Environmental ideologically motivated individuals including some who are aligned with radical, criminal extremist ideology pose a clear and present criminal threat to Canada’s energy sector…The Canadian law enforcement and security intelligence community have noted a growing radicalized faction of environmentalists who advocate the use of criminal activity to promote the protection of the natural environment.” [9] This is the same RCMP Critical Infrastructure Intelligence team that spied on Quebec residents opposed to shale gas/fracking development, among others.

The RCMP report, and Wai Young’s proposed legislation – which she said she crafted at the urging of industry [10] – dovetail with the Canada-U.S. Beyond the Border Action Plan. That Plan is the result of perimeter security and economic integration talks launched by Canada and the U.S. in 2010. The protection of shared critical infrastructure is listed as a priority in security documents on the government’s Beyond the Border website.

The documents state: “Canada and the United States share a significant quantity of critical infrastructure assets and systems, including pipelines, the electric grid, and transportation systems. It is imperative that our countries work together to protect these assets. To effectively do this, our governments will require a close collaboration with the private sector, as they own much critical infrastructure in question. It makes sense to start with a pilot project, in this case New Brunswick-Maine, to learn how best to work together on each of the elements.” [11]

That cross-border pilot project policing effort has been delayed since July 2013 because the U.S. requested that its cross-border police officers be exempt from Canadian law. Coverage by Canadian Press of internal RCMP briefing notes regarding this “sovereignty issue” temporarily stymied the project. [12]

But on October 28, 2014, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry was in Ottawa to express condolences for the loss of two Canadian soldiers killed in separate “lone wolf” attacks (deemed “terrorist”) in Canada. Kerry said the U.S. and Canada would “work quietly and carefully” to strengthen security between the two countries, “making certain that every possible stone is turned over, every possible policy is reviewed because our obligation is obviously to protect our citizens.” [13]

After Kerry’s October visit, the Harper government had apparently been waiting for the right time to introduce a “critical infrastructure protection bill.” That came during the Burnaby Mountain protests, leading to the tabling of Bill C-639.

Then came the Charlie Hebdo shootings in Paris on Jan. 7. Just weeks later, on Jan. 30, the Harper government introduced Bill C-51, the Anti-Terrorism Act 2015.

Bill C-51

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association says this bill “broadens CSIS’s powers significantly” and “may criminalize legitimate speech.” [14] The bill authorizes CSIS to block Canadian websites, and it defines “terrorist propaganda” as “any writing, sign, visible representation or audio recording that advocates or promotes the commission of terrorism offences in general.” Because of the vagueness of the phrasing, the CCLA notes it could have a “potential chilling effect on academics and journalists and bloggers,” who could face up to five years in prison if their writing is judged to have somehow encouraged “terrorism.”

Bill C-51 vaguely defines “terrorism” as any “activity that undermines the security of Canada,” including “interference with critical infrastructure,” but also “interference with the capability of the Government of Canada in relation to…the economic or financial stability of Canada.”

C-51 exempts “lawful advocacy, protest, dissent and artistic expression” from being considered as threat to the security of Canada, but as a Globe & Mail editorial (Feb. 1) stated, “…how well do governments define those things in times of ‘great evil’?” [15]

The bill also lowers the threshold for “preventive arrests;” makes it easier to place people on no-fly lists; gives authorities the power to hold suspected “terrorists” without charge for seven days (instead of three); allows a judge to impose up to a year of house arrest on someone who has not been charged or convicted of any crime; and it allows CSIS agents to “disrupt” threats to Canadian security – a blatant extension of CSIS powers beyond intelligence-gathering and into policing.

Bill C-51 also allows people to be detained if they “may” have terrorist plans. As the BCCLA’s policy director Michael Vonn warned in a news release, “Criminalizing people’s words and thoughts is misguided and won’t make Canadians any safer.” [16] Vonn and others have said the bill is likely unconstitutional.
In Parliament on Feb. 2, Green Party leader Elizabeth May asked Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney if the new anti-terrorism Bill C-51 “will apply to nonviolent civil disobedience, such as that against pipelines?” Blaney did not directly answer the question, saying only that terrorism “is a criminal act and those who goes [sic] against the Criminal Code will meet the full force of the law.” May told MPs they “must not allow the Conservatives to turn CSIS into a secret police force.” She has written that Bill C-51 is not about terrorism, it’s “about creating a secret police. It’s the death of freedom.” 17]

Current Hearings

On March 10, the federal Public Safety Committee began hearings on Bill C-51, with dozens of witnesses scheduled to give expert testimony on the bill during nine meetings in March. The Harper government is hoping to pass the legislation before summer.

The B.C. Civil Liberties Association has just released (March 11) its “Six Things Protesters Need to Know about Bill C-51” – a useful warning for people across Canada. [18] Their analysis notes: “When you think of being secure, you likely think of being safe from physical danger. But Bill C-51 defines security as not only safeguarding public safety, but also preventing interference with various aspects of public life or ‘the economic or financial stability of Canada.’ With this definition, a separatist demonstration in Quebec that fails to get a proper permit, a peaceful logging blockade by First Nations, or environmentalists obstructing a pipeline route could all be seen as threats to national security.” Whether or not a group is deemed a national security threat “may hinge on whether their cause is politically popular or in line with the views of the government.”

Regarding freedom of expression, the BCCLA states: “It’s unclear even to experts exactly what kinds of speech and protest activity may be considered threats to national security if the bill passes; the average Canada has little hope of feeling confident that their legitimate political activity hasn’t inadvertently crossed the line. Bill C-51’s expansive language means many Canadians will likely choose not express themselves – even in completely legal ways – rather than risk prosecution. Legitimate speech will be chilled, and our democracy will be worse off for it.”

Regarding “preventative arrests and detention,” the BCCLA notes, “Innocent people could be arrested and detained on mere suspicion of future dangerousness.”

Now we know why the Harper government has been building all those new prisons.

  Read Is Canada Turning into a Police State?
 February 25, 2015
Robert Reich: Obama Shouldn't Just Halt the Keystone Pipeline -- He Should Toss It in the Trash
by Robert Reich, RobertReich.org AlterNet

The President says he’ll veto the Keystone XL pipeline. He should do more, and put an end to the project altogether. He has the authority. Oil from Alberta’s tar sands is the dirtiest in the world – causing not just serious environmental damage when it’s extracted but also when and if it leaks out along its route from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. Please tell the White House to veto it permanently.



Robert B. Reich has served in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton. He also served on President Obama's transition advisory board. His latest book is "Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future." His homepage is www.robertreich.org.

  Read Robert Reich: Obama Shouldn't Just Halt the Keystone Pipeline -- He Should Toss It in the Trash
 February 25, 2015
Fracking Flowback From California Oil Wells Contains High Levels Of Carcinogenic Chemicals
by Mike Gaworecki, DeSmogBlog AlterNet

Adding to the already lengthy list of reasons to be concerned about the disposal of oil industry wastewater in California, the Center for Biological Diversity says it has found dangerous levels of toxic and carcinogenic chemicals such as benzene and toluene in fracking flowback.

Flowback is a fluid that floats up to the surface of fracked wells that contains clays, dissolved metal ions and total dissolved solids (such as salt) in addition to chemical additives used in the fracking process.

As such, flowback is a component of oil industry wastewater, and one of the chief reasons why the wastewater must be disposed of in a very cautious manner.

In California, where the toxic and cancer-causing chemicals were found to be present in flowback by the CBD, oil industry wastewater is not, unfortunately, disposed of in a cautious manner.

The most common wastewater disposal method is to inject it underground. It was recently revealed that California regulators have allowed hundreds of injection wells to pump wastewater into aquifers protected under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. Regulators also permitted thousands more wells to inject fluids from “enhanced oil recovery” techniques like acidization and cyclic steam injection into protected aquifers.

Wastewater is also sometimes stored in pits, but again, California regulators have failed to enforce proper safeguards. Clean Water Action released a report last year detailing thethreat to California's air and water from the open, unlined pits used to store much of the oil industry's toxic wastewater. According to the report, at least 432 of these pits are currently in use in California, most of them operating with an expired permit or no permit at all.

“Cancer-causing chemicals are surfacing in fracking flowback fluid just as we learn that the California oil industry is disposing of wastewater in hundreds of illegal disposal wells and open pits,” said Hollin Kretzmann, the CBD lawyer who conducted the analysis. “Gov. Brown needs to shut down all the illegal wells immediately and ban fracking to fight this devastating threat to California’s water supply.”

It wasn’t just the chemicals Kretzmann found in fracking flowback that are a cause for concern, either. Laxe enforcement of reporting rules make it hard to determine the true extent of the problem, though the CBD still found enough to raise serious questions about the threats flowback fluid poses to public health:

• High chromium-6 levels: Chromium-6 was found in fracking flowback at levels up to 2,700 times the recommended level set by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.

• Missing reports: At least 100 fracking flowback tests are missing from the reporting website managed by California’s Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources, in violation of state law.

• Missing benzene data: Only 329 of the 479 fracking fluid chemical tests on the state oil agency’s website measured for benzene.

*bull; Benzene common: Of those 329 chemical tests that measured for benzene, 323 detected benzene while only six did not.

• Dangerous toluene levels: Toluene, a toxin that can affect the central nervous system and harm developing fetuses, was found to exceed federal-mandated limits for drinking water 118 times.

In some cases, benzene levels in fracking flowback were over 1,500 times the level the federal government says is safe for drinking water. Both chromium-6 and benzene are known carcinogens.

California is the country’s third-largest oil producing state, with some 20% of its oil production coming from fracked wells, according to a recent study that also found that half of all new wells drilled in the past decade use fracking.

Mike Gaworecki is an activist, writer, and musician who lives in San Francisco. He is the online campaigner for RAN's Forests program. Find Mike on Twitter:@MikeG2001

  Read Fracking Flowback From California Oil Wells Contains High Levels Of Carcinogenic Chemicals
 April 24, 2015
Are You Ready for the Biggest Environmental Catastrophe of Our Lifetime?
by AJ Hartnett, Huffington Post, AlterNet

"Nero fiddled while Rome burned." -- Unknown

I am a surfer and have been since 13 years of age. Being a surfer, you develop an innate sense of weather patterns and their impact on the sea. Cold fronts, warm fronts, low pressure systems, hurricanes, nor'easters, etc. The weather and how nature reacts to changing air patterns become part of your make-up as you seek out the waves. It's been a lifetime of learning and watching nature do its thing. I am a waterman with a love of science and data. Enter Antarctica.

Antarctica has been on my mind thanks to the folks at HBO's VICE ("The Definitive Guide to Enlightened Information" as they call themselves). Big chunks of that continent are falling into the sea. And the team at VICE have done a stellar job reporting the facts. The deniers can blow all the smoke they want, but as you watch this spectacle unfold, history, pictures, science, data and nature do not lie.

Antarctica is a beautiful and majestic continent. There is a purity about this land mass that you don't get anywhere else on the planet. It holds 90% of the world's ice and 70% of the world's fresh water. Antarctica is 1.5 times the land mass of the continental United States.

The entire continent is at risk, but the big changes that are taking place now are in West Antarctica (WA). The disruption in the ecosystem there is poised for acceleration in the months and years ahead—and it will be rapid. The effects will be felt across the planet. Just ask the folks in Bangladesh now. Theirs is one of the most low-lying countries on Earth.

Millions are currently being displaced from their coastal homes due to perpetual rising waters—a quiet and permanent tsunami taking over their lives; Venice, Italy, now under water 100 days each year; parts of Miami Beach now starting to experience consistent flooding on a regular basis (as a former resident I have seen it first hand); the people of the Maldives in the Indian Ocean quickly losing their small island nation to water. Shanghai, Amsterdam and Bangkok are among hundreds of low-lying cities that will likely start to experience consistent rising waters if they have not already.

We have been watching a version of WA collapse take place in Greenland over the years, and from the data that scientists have been able to pull, we are 60 years ahead of worst-case scenarios for ice loss there. Precedent has been set in Greenland as we are readied for the main catastrophic environmental event of our lifetime now unfolding in Antarctica.

Trust me, I very much want to be wrong on this scenario, but all the signs and science are there in alignment. In WA, adjacent to Pine Island Bay, a portion of the Pine Island Glacier the size of Singapore broke off and tumbled into the bay in 2013. Then in 2014 an American Geophysical Union report took things a few steps further showing that the West Antarctic ice sheet is actually melting away. At some point soon, West Antarctic trouble spots like Pine Island Glacier, Thwaites, Haynes, Pope, Smith and Koehler Glaciers are all going to be at risk to massive melting.

As this trend accelerates, the world as we know it will be re-mapped. A four-foot sea level rise will mean no more Florida Keys and no Miami Beach; the New York City subway system and parts of NYC under water.

The same alarm bells that were rung for Greenland are now being rung for Antarctica. The results will be exponentially worse. We are talking 70 percent of the planet's fresh water. Imagine being in Manhattan watching skyscrapers and apartment buildings collapsing around you every day. This is what scientists are witnessing in WA currently. Nary a word is reported. Hillary at Chipotle wins that prize last week.

So what exactly is being done to address this Antarctic crisis? President Obama feels the urgency: "This is the first generation to feel the impact of climate change and the last with the opportunity to do something about it." But it falls on deaf ears with the loyal opposition.

Worldwide, it is about what you think. There is a lot of chatter but not much action. World leaders are not equipped to deal with issues of this magnitude and they all seem to be in paralysis mode. The fringe right in the USA continues to deny it exists and plays political gamesmanship. God forbid the current crop of political presidential candidates think globally for five minutes and spend a little time and effort with the subject.

A helicopter ride with the teams studying and recording the changes taking place in the region would be worthy of someone with presidential aspirations—especially if land masses and large population segments are going to be displaced around the world. Across the board, it's political gamesmanship of the worst sort—both nationally and internationally. Media coverage and conversation is pathetic on the subject. So we watch and wait while the biggest issue of our time unfolds in a vacuum.

Non-scientific pundits financed by big oil and the Koch Brothers make unsubstantiated claims that Antarctic ice is at its highest levels ever. The sad thing is that they can't even distinguish between sea and land ice as they make their proclamations and what that difference means. Rigorous science and hard data are not part of their vernacular.

The team at VICE spent time in Antarctica with glaciologist Dr. Eric Rignot from University of California at Irvine. Here are some key points taken from their visit:

- Glacial retreat is not limited to just Antarctica. Southern Chile is also seeing glacial retreat that is not part of the natural cycle. In the last 10 to 20 years glaciers are retreating more than in the last century. It's like changing the speed limit on the freeway from 55 mph to 550 mph.

- What is happening in Southern Chile is a precursor to what is going to happen on the Antarctic peninsula. We are in for some big trouble and big-time sea level rise according to Dr. Rignot. Extreme weather is taking hold in Southern Chile, too. A rain event categorized as "14 years of rain in one day" took place last month.

- There are constant NASA flights over Antarctica to measure ice volume and thickness with highly sensitive optical instruments, lasers, ice penetrating radar and more for data collection and ice mapping so changes can be tracked over time. Results from this massive amount of data collection over the years show rapid ice loss. Since 1992 ice has been retreating rapidly along with surface elevation.

- The westerly wind patterns in Antarctica in the last 40 years are stronger than in the past thousand years. The winds are circulating faster. And this pushes the subsurface warm water closer to the glaciers and closer to Antarctica. The end result, you push more ocean heat toward the glaciers thus the glaciers will retreat faster and faster which then turns into sea level rise.

- The glacier retreat rate in WA over the last 10 years has tripled their melt rates; some of the swiftest glacier retreat compared to any ice melt in the world. A kilometer per year. We are too far along to stop the WA sea ice retreat. It is going to fall apart, no matter what.

- There will be a one meter sea level rise in West Antarctic trouble spots like Pine Island Glacier, Thwaites, Haynes, Pope, Smith and Koehler Glaciers. That is just a start. If these areas retreat as predicted, it will mean the rest of Western Antarctica will follow, which would translate to 3-5 meter sea level rise: roughly 6-15 feet. One meter would be a global catastrophic event. This is something humanity is not ready for on a global scale, and it's about to happen, says Dr. Rignot.

- Atmospheric temps have risen 3 degrees Celsius since the 1950s in West Antarctica. It is one of the fastest growing temp areas on the planet, according to the British Antarctic Survey.

Dr. Andrew Clark of the British Antarctic Survey, Palmer Station Antarctica, concurs:

- Where climate change may not be obvious to us in the U.S. and Britain yet, you can come to Antarctica and see the changes before your eyes.

- For generations to come there is no stopping this trend. It will continue.

- Everyone will be impacted, but especially low-lying countries and land masses near the sea.

All of this gives me pause (a long one) for thought as we begin to track the impact around the world of this impending sea level rise and other new and noteworthy world weather events.

In closing, no wonder the traditional news business is in big trouble. The lack of coverage and sense of urgency is woeful—misplaced priorities big time. If there was ever a business model that needed radical and deep disruption, it's news. I could go on and on about what ails the news business and some prescriptions for change, having been in the business my entire adult life, but I will save that for another post. Save to say, we need nightly reports from West Antarctic on the events taking place there. How do we make Antarctica sexy and TMZ-worthy?

AJ Hartnett is a writer, surfer, business development executive and health and wellness advocate. Follow him on Twitter @ajhartnett.

  Read Are You Ready for the Biggest Environmental Catastrophe of Our Lifetime?
 April 24, 2015
Is a Bomb Train Rolling Through Your Community?
by Reynard Loki, AlterNet

A Danger on Rails is a new short documentary by filmmaker and journalist Jon Bowermaster that examines the danger posed by crude oil trains. Coal-black and appropriately ominous looking, these trains carry highly flammable crude oil and have been an increasingly common—and worrisome—sight across the United States.

"I live in the Hudson Valley and see these trains daily; Albany is a major hub, and trains traveling south down the Hudson River toward mid-Atlantic refineries hug its shores," writes Bowermaster in a New York Times op-ed piece accompanying the video. "Every day on the East Coast, as many as 400,000 barrels of this explosive mixture travel through our backyards over shaky bridges, highways and overpasses."

"The transport of petroleum products up and down the river to the port of Albany is not new," said Roger Downs, conservation director at the Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter, in the film. "We've been doing that for the better part of a hundred years. What is new is that this is a crude product that isn't part of a local economic consumption pattern."

The oil comes from North Dakota, extracted from a section of the Bakken formation, a 200,000-square-mile rock formation that also underlies Montana and parts of Canada.

Bowermaster, a 30-year resident of the Hudson Valley, notes that Safety and Homeland Security officials have referred to these trains as potential terrorist weapons.

"Bakken crude is different from other crude oil," said Downs. "It has a flash point less than 74 degrees. It's shipped in these containers called DOT-111s, a containment unit meant for liquids, not necessarily hazardous materials."

Earlier this year, crude oil trains derailed and exploded in West Virginia and Ontario. In July 2013, 47 people were killed when a similar train derailed and exploded in Quebec.

"The Transportation Safety Board has said 85 percent of these cars should not be handling this sort of petroleum," said Paul Gallay, the president of Riverkeeper, a Hudson River environmental watchdog group, in the film. "One hundred and twenty cars on some of these trains, 30,000 gallons of fuel per car, a very volatile fuel. When it comes down to it, each of these train cars is like a rolling bomb."

Riverkeeper is calling on the federal government to take immediate action, including limiting the length and speed of crude oil trains, in order to protect communities and the environment before the next disaster occurs.

The group is also asking New York State citizens to urge Governor Cuomo and Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx to ban the use of inappropriate DOT-111 cars for transporting crude oil and open a public process for developing new rules and regulations governing oil transportation.

"The Department of Transportation has estimated that...there will be 15 major accidents in the United States this year alone," said Bowermaster. "I hope we will do our best to prevent them."

  Read Is a Bomb Train Rolling Through Your Community?
 May 1, 2015 Jane Goodall: “We’re Destroying the Planet”
by Donny Moss, Their Turn, AlterNet

On the topic of our planet’s future, Jane Goodall, the legendary chimpanzee researcher, does not mince words: “How is it possible that the most intellectual creature that has ever walked on planet earth is destroying its only home?” Dr. Goodall, who is 81, spends 300 days year traveling the world in an effort to save it. The biggest problem, she says, is climate change. And the biggest culprit? Animal agriculture.

In a lecture to hundreds of fans in NYC on April 15th, Dr. Goodall explained that agribusinesses are clearing rainforests in the Amazon to graze cattle and grow crops to feed them. Without rainforests – the “lungs of the earth” – the planet’s ability to convert carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas, into oxygen is compromised.

Even more harmful than CO2, Goodall said, is the methane gas emitted in cow farts. As developing countries adopt Western diets heavy in animal protein, more methane and CO2 are released into the atmosphere, further warming the planet and jeopardizing our ability to inhabit it.

During her talk, Dr. Goodall described some of the other destructive effects of animal agriculture, including land and water pollution, antibiotic resistance, depletion of fresh water resources and animal cruelty, which is was motivated her to go veg. In a recent interview with the Toronto Globe & Mail, she said, “I became a vegetarian because of the horrendous suffering on factory farms and in abattoirs.”

Jane Goodall paints a grim picture of the state of the planet, but she is hopeful that humans will work together to save ourselves from ourselves. And she offers some advice that each of us can put into action today:

Go vegetarian.Consume less. The more we buy, she argues, the more natural resources we extract from the planet. How much stuff do we really need?Improve the environment in our own communities. Goodall’s Roots Shoots program, which has chapters in 130 countries, is helping people plant trees, clean rivers and perform other community services in their own backyards.

At the end of her presentation, Dr. Goodall showed a video of a newly-released captive chimpanzee hugging her when she emerged from her crate and realized she was home in the jungle. Goodall uses this remarkable event to point out that, as intelligent as chimps are, their brains are far less powerful than those of humans. And she left the audience with a challenge—to harness the brainpower that we’ve used to damage the planet to save it.

Donny Moss is a NYC-based animal rights activist. In 2008, Moss made the award-winning film BLINDERS that documents NYC’s controversial horse-drawn carriage trade. From 2009 – 2013, he led a successful campaign to end the political career of an elected official running for mayor who blocked animal protection legislation in NYC for eight years.
  Read Jane Goodall: We’re Destroying the Planet
 May 22, 2015
5 Ways the Trans-Pacific Partnership Could Ruin the Environment
by Alisa Opar, AlterNet
Here’s something for conspiracy theorists: In order to gain access to a certain document, members of Congress must descend to the basement of the Capitol, hand over their cell phones and other electronic devices, and enter a secured, soundproof room. Then they can’t speak to the public about what they glean from their visit.

What’s so hush-hush? A draft of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), an enormous international trade agreement that 12 nations, including the United States, Japan, and Australia, have been hashing out in secret for the last half-decade. It’s a big deal: The dozen national economies make up nearly 40 percent of global GDP.

The agreement may be shrouded in mystery, but in recent weeks President Obama and some Democratic members of Congress have been publicly sparring over it—trading barbs during press conferences, on national television, and elsewhere. Critics contend the TPP would allow multinational companies to weaken environmental and labor rules here at home; the administration maintains the partnership is good for the American people and economy.

On Thursday the Senate voted to start debate on giving the president “fast-track” authority to negotiate the deal—a move that would limit Congress to voting yes or no once the nations finalize the pact. Next, the battle will move to the House.

Despite the cloak of secrecy around the TPP, sparking concerns among green groups about everything from increased fracking to tainted seafood. “We do not believe that the rules in the TPP will be strong enough nor enforced enough to be able to lift up environmental standards outside the United States,” says Ilana Solomon, director of the Sierra Club’s responsible trade program. “At the same time, rules in the agreement could severely threaten environmental and climate policy in the States and abroad.”

On that note, here are five ways the TPP could affect the West.

Frack Attack

Many conservationists are concerned that the TPP could spur more fracking. To understand why that is, bear with me for a quick (and appalling) explanation.

The greatest tool that the TPP gives foreign corporations is a provision “buried in the fine print of the closely guarded draft,” as Senator Elizabeth Warrenputs it. This is the “investor state dispute settlement” (ISDS), which grants multinationals the power to sue any government that interferes with their business. Yep, if some pesky regulation in a TPP country is hurting a corporation’s bottom line, it can sue for “millions to billions of dollars,” says Jake Schmidt, director of NRDC’s international program (disclosure). This has happened in other agreements with similar language, Schmidt says. He points out that nearly 500 ISDS cases have been brought, including a Swedish company that sued Germany because it decided to phase out nuclear power after Japan’s Fukushima disaster, and a Delaware-based oil and gas company, Lone Pine Resources, which is suing the Canadian government under NAFTA for more than $250 million because Quebec placed a moratorium on fracking.

Speaking of fracking, “The TPP would expand the export of fossil fuels and pave the way to more fracking, and therefore more emissions,” says Solomon. “It’s a major deal because Japan is one of the countries in TPP and happens to be the biggest importer of natural gas.” Photo: Stuart Rankin

To export natural gas to another country, the U.S. Department of Energy must first assess whether sending the fuel overseas is consistent with the public interest. The Energy Department, however, loses its authority to regulate exports to countries with which the United States has a trade agreement. The TPP would force it to automatically give those exports the green light. You can see where this is going. Countries that sign onto the TPP, whether the original 12 or those that join later (as China is expected to), will be able to import gas from here, then have the power to sue over any future fracking moratoria or bans around the West. (Existing anti-fracking measures, like those in communities in Colorado, California, New Mexico, and Texas, wouldn’t be affected, says Schmidt.)

Similarly, the trade deal could spur more coal-mining in the West. While U.S. consumption of the dirty fuel has been on the decline, TPP countries, including Japan, Malaysia, and Vietnam, are relying more and more on coal to keep the lights on.

Air and Water Woes

With increased fossil-fuel development comes more water and air pollution. Fracking, for instance, has been shown to contaminate local aquifers and drinking water. Adding insult to injury, considering the four-year drought gripping the West, the drilling method is also a water-intensive process. Fracking sullies the air, too; one of the by-products released, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, has been linked to cancer and respiratory ailments. Coal production comes with its own set of toxic consequences, including degraded waterways, habitat fragmentation, and health risks like pulmonary disease. And, of course, whatever fossil fuels we pull out of the ground will contribute to global carbon emissions (and that ginormous climate change problem whose effects we’re already feeling).

Fill ’er Up

The TPP's environmental effects would extend beyond wells and mines. Once fossil fuels are out of the ground, they’re on the move across the country and then around the world. As recent experience has shown, there’s no guarantee of safe transport either by pipeline or train.

By the time the fuels wind up in export terminals, extensive damage to the coastal environment has already been done. Constructing such terminals requires dredging sensitive estuaries to make room for massive tankers, and, of course, facilitates the burning of the fossil fuels being transported. Opposition has blocked some proposed facilities and delayed approval of others, such as an LNG terminal near Astoria, Oregon, for several years (the Energy Department gave it the OK last year). “Oregon has a number of proposed LNG terminals,” says Solomon, and the TPP could remove roadblocks to their construction.

Fishy Business

Americans love fish. Each year we eat nearly 5 billion pounds of seafood, or about 15.8 pounds of fish and shellfish per person. Most of that—up to 90 percent—is imported, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Of course, we aren’t the only ones with a penchant for tilapia and tuna. To meet demand, the global fishing industry is dramatically depleting stocks all over the world, while fish farms pollute waterways.  

The environment chapter of the TPP attempts, but ultimately fails, to address overfishing. It has language about prohibiting shark-finning, preventing illegally caught fish from entering international trade, and having regional fisheries managers institute best practices. Sounds good, right? Wait. “The right words are going to be in the chapter,” says Solomon, “but it won’t have any teeth.” That’s because the pact doesn’t requirecountries to abide by these provisions. “The only thing legally binding is ‘must’ or ‘shall,’ ” says Schmidt, “and what we’ve seen is a lot of ‘strive’ and ‘endeavor.’ I’m not sure how you’d penalize a country for not ‘striving’ or ‘endeavoring.’ ”

So the fish we import could still be illegally caught. And what’s more, the United States wouldn’t be able to ban imports of products not up to our safety standards. Shrimp aquaculture in Vietnam and Malaysia, for instance, uses pesticides and antibiotics that are forbidden in the States. “The TPP will bring a tidal wave of dangerous fish imports that will swamp the border inspectors who cannot keep up with the tainted aquaculture imports today,” said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, in a press release.

Dirty Laundry

China has long been known as the world leader in cheap apparel manufacturing, but Vietnam is now billing itself as the best cheaper option. If the TPP comes to pass, tariffs on clothing between the United States and Vietnam will drop to zero, from 17.2 percent. With its use of excessive amounts of water, energy, and harmful chemicals, the textile industry makes the clothes we wear dirty—even if we never see the pollution. China, which produces more than 50 percent of the world’s fabric, is trying to clean up its act. But green groups are increasingly concerned about clothing made in Vietnam, which already dumps huge amounts of untreated sewage into its waterways. “Vietnam is in the Mekong Delta, in this pristine place,” says Schmidt. “Expanding the apparel industry could seriously draw down water resources and contaminate enormous quantities of water.”

While the TPP, which negotiators hope to finalize by the end of the year, is the most immediate concern, the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), a trade deal between the United States and European Union, is also worrying environmentalists. Supporters of these massive agreements often dismiss concerns that they will diminish environmental standards and other regulations at home. After all, they say, under any of the existing free trade agreements, the United States has never lost a legal case against it.

But that’s no guarantee of future success, says Schmidt. “It’s true the United States has not lost,” he says. “It’s also true that the United States is not immune to loss. Great laws and great lawyers do lose sometimes.”

Alisa Opar is Earthwire's Western correspondent. She is also the articles editor at Audubon magazine, and has written for many publications about science and the environment.
  Read 5 Ways the Trans-Pacific Partnership Could Ruin the Environment
 June 5, 2015
Climate Change Is Killing People Around the World and It's Only Going to Get Worse
by Reynard Loki , AlterNet

In February, President Obama said that the media "absolutely" overstates the risk of terrorism, while many more lives are claimed by climate change and epidemics. Mike Huckabee shot back, telling Fox News, "I assure you that a beheading is much worse than a sunburn."


Perhaps the GOP climate denier and presidential contender should take a trip to India, where a heat wave has claimed the lives of more than 1,800 people, making it the deadliest.

While climate deniers may disagree, the increase in extreme weather events around the world — and the deaths they cause — is linked to climate change. The India Meteorological Department (IMD), the nation's weather agency, analyzed long-term data from over 100 weather stations and confirmed that as global warming has taken effect, heat waves have become more frequent and more intense, increasing by a third over the past 50 years.

The IMD researchers assert that "the huge increase in the heat wave days during the last decade is mainly caused by the increase in the events associated with three El Niño years (2002, 2004 and 2009)." They say that the deaths in the country following El Niño years in 2003, 2005 and 2010 corroborate this trend.

A 2014 study led by Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation found that climate change could double the frequency of super El Niño events. “Under greenhouse warming the eastern equatorial Pacific warms faster than the surrounding regions ... making it easier to have maximum SST (sea surface temperatures) in the eastern equatorial Pacific, and hence more occurrences of extreme El Nino events,” said the study's lead researcher Wenjun Cai.

In a paper written with scientists at the Indian Institute of Tropical Meteorology in Pune, Raghu Murtugudde of the Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center at the University of Maryland asserts that global warming may account for bigger heat events around the world than El Niños. "An important factor about heat waves is that as you warm the temperatures, say due to global warming, the extremes tend to increase more in percentage," he said.

"On account of 0.8 degree warming during the past hundred years, one must expect more heat waves even without an El Niño. El Niño will increase the atmospheric temperature and hence add to the problems created by global warming," said J. Srinivasan, chairman of the Divecha Centre for Climate Change at the Indian Institute of Science.

Deadly tornadoes, floods

As India tries to cope with killer heat, tornadoes and flooding from epic downpours have killed 17 in Texas, 14 in northern Mexico and six in Oklahoma, with nine people missing. And while weather forecasters have been reluctant to connect these extreme weather events to climate change, scientific studies have made the link. A 2014 study by researchers at Florida State University found that changes in atmospheric heat and moisture brought on by global warming may be causing an increase in the frequency and severity of tornadoes in the U.S., while a recent Climate Central report found that the unprecedented amount of rainfall in Texas and Oklahoma "suggest[s] a possible climate change signal, where a warming atmosphere becomes more saturated with water vapor and capable of previously unimagined downpours."

RELATED: As Carbon Emissions Continue to Increase, So Will Extreme Downpours

With the drought broken by going to the other extreme, Texas has undergone what has been called "weather whiplash," with more than 90 percent of the state declared at risk for flash flooding. On Monday, Texas governor Greg Abbott declared a state of disaster in 24 counties.

Indeed, Texans are familiar with killer climate: With 883 fatalities reported between 1959 and 2014, the state leads the nation in the number of fatalities due to flash and river floods. Pennsylvania comes in second, with 254 flood-related fatalities.

Extreme weather events aren't the only way that climate change is taking lives. According to a 2014 World Health Organization (WHO) report, climate change is expected to cause approximately 250,000 additional deaths per year between 2030 and 2050 — not just from heat stress (38,000), but also from malnutrition (95,000), malaria (60,000) and diarrhea (48,000). This is all due to the fact that climate change "affects the social and environmental determinants of health — clean air, safe drinking water, sufficient food and secure shelter," say the report's authors.

The agency points out that each of the last three decades has been successively warmer than any preceding decade since 1850, with extreme high temperatures contributing directly to deaths from cardiovascular and respiratory disease. They give as an example the European heat wave during the summer of 2003 that claimed more than 70,000 excess deaths.

RELATED: Conservatives Go Berserk After Bill Nye Links Texas Floods to Climate Change

Jeremy Hess, an Emory University physician and epidemiologist who has studied the relationship between climate change and health, said that the WHO findings are "a significant step forward in the global estimation of projected disease burden associated with climate change." But was careful to note that the morbidity estimates "are almost certainly an underestimate," as a lack of data prevents getting a full picture of the relationship between climate and health.

A 2012 report by DARA International commissioned by 20 governments to study the human and economic costs of climate change arrived at higher estimates than WHO, linking 400,000 annual deaths worldwide to climate change, and projecting deaths to increase to over 600,000 per year by 2030. The number goes up when they considered the health effects of burning fossil fuels, separate from climate change-related effects.


Global communitycan figure out a way to reduce the effects of climate change, many places around the world will be dealing with more killer climate. For Indians, relief from the monsoon rains cannot come soon enough. An no matter what Mike Huckabee thinks, sunburn is the least of their concerns.
  Read Climate Change Is Killing People Around the World and It's Only Going to Get Worse
 May 22, 2015
The GPS sixth Chapter in English for your discussion until 30 May
by Leo Semashko,
Peace comes from Harmony

Global Peace Principles and Values. Global Axiology (.docx) Global Peace Principles and Values. Global Axiology

Dear GHA English-speaking friends,

I am happy to send you in attachment the GPS 6th Chapter (39 pages) in my editing of the English articles and English translation of the Russian articles (except Julia Budnikova’s article of Nicholas Roerich, which will be sent later) for your discussion for 7 days, until 30 May inclusively. The first six chapters are the book half of its 12 chapters.

The Chapter includes articles of 18 English-speaking coauthors of GPS, so please be attentive and do not miss your own article. I invite you to edit any part of this chapter, but especially your own article, and check the bibliography. Please underline all of your changes in the text by red color that I saw them. Your silence will be a sign for me of your consent with my editing your article.

The GPS principles, discussed in the Russian edition, are supplemented by three new principles: justice, humanism and victory of peace over war due by the reduction some of articles. The articles about these principles (5 pages) are sent separately to discuss for the GHA Russian-speaking members.

I like to express my special thanks to the GHA Secretary General Dr. Subhash Chandra of India for his initiating of a new article in this chapter.

I ask you, please, to keep all the text technical parameters: its fonts, margins, size, alignment, etc. Thank you for your active participation in this important discussion. Together with it we cross half of our book in English, we have to be published in early January 2016.

With love, best harmony wishes,

Dr. Leo Semashko,
GHA President,

Dr Leo Semashko:

State Councillor of St. Petersburg, Russia;
Philosopher, Sociologist and Peacemaker from Harmony;
Director: Tetrasociology Public Institute;
Founding President, Global Harmony Association (GHA) since 2005;
Director, GHA Website "Peace from Harmony":
Global Peace Science from Harmony:
Peace Science Video: http://youtu.be/hbxY5lREOeA;
  Read The GPS sixth Chapter in English for your discussion until 30 May
 May 23, 2014  
Peace Education: Source of National Unity and Global Harmony

Dr. Charles Mercieca

by Charles Mercieca
Charles Mercieca, Ph.D.
International Association of Educators for World Peace
Dedicated to United Nations Goals of Peace Education
Environmental Protection, Human Rights & Disarmament
Professor Emeritus, Alabama A&M University
Hon President & Professor, SBS Swiss Business School, Zurich
The Webster Dictionary of the English Language describes peace as a “state of tranquility; freedom from war; cessation of hostilities; and harmony.” In a peaceful community, we notice a great serenity radiating in the hearts of its members. Genuine peace emanates from the inside. It is implanted in the mind and heart of every human being from the moment of birth. Our job is to pull this element out from the inside as to share it with others.

Educational Process in Perspective

Considering that the world is confronted with a multitude of problems, the development and preservation of peace requires an educational process that is meant to enrich our lives. This would enable us to use our human potential more effectively as to become a part of a harmonious global community. The source of happiness in life is harmony. The car we drive moves smoothly if the four tires have an equal amount of air. If not, we may not have a pleasant trip.

Peace education consists in enabling people to lead a happy life through the development of their human resources for constructive purposes. The traditional saying has been: “Make someone happy and you will be happy too.” The development and achievement of peace and harmony creates for us a win-win situation. That means everyone is a winner and no one a loser. A careful study of history demonstrates that in struggles and wars everyone is a loser and no one a winner. These negative elements always lead to lose-lose situation.

We all recall the outcome of World War II. The Germans lost the war and their economy collapsed and people were poor everywhere. Most of their houses were destroyed as well as most of their medical and school facilities. On the other hand, the British won the war and their economy equally collapsed and people were poor everywhere. Not only so, but in spite of winning the war, the British Empire disintegrated and collapsed!

When the various members of our body are in good shape, they all work together in harmony and we do feel comfortable and healthy as a result. When one or more of such members ceases to be in good shape, then we develop what may be termed to be a health problem of some kind. This may lead to a lot of inconvenience, especially if we start feeling pain of one kind or another. When the people of a nation work together toward the achievement of a common goal, we notice dedication and cooperation, which soon bring about harmony.

On Creating our Own Destiny

We are all familiar with the traditional saying: What goes around comes around. When we provide others with benefits of any kind, soon we will find ourselves surrounded with plenty of blessings, even much more than expected. If we were to analyze carefully all human conflicts that developed over the past 6,000 years of recorded history, we would soon discover that, quite often, the source of such problems could always be traced to some governmental sources. When the Soviet Union collapsed, many took a sigh of relief. They believed world peace was just around the corner.

In fact, many talked of the so called “peace dividend,” little they knew that the weapons industry and the military industrial complex were determined not go out of business. Hence, mafia type of groups spread all over the world to create conflicts without limit, most of which resulted in civil wars. This, they firmly believed, would justify the continued manufacture and sales of endless weapons. Some members of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) have attested to this in books they wrote after they decided to leave it.

The US military would intervene in any country where the natives elected democratically a government that was not pleasing to the USA. To quote one instance, when the people of Chile elected Salvatore Allende, who promised the people free health care and free education to all citizens along with adequate residential facilities for the homeless, the USA labeled him as a socialist and vouched that he should go. And we know the rest of the story. The CIA intervened afterwards and had him killed!

We have witnessed here that for the USA, peace consists of its imposition on other countries in a way that US big business is enabled to confiscate good resources, even to the detriment of the native population. This explains why the saintly Pope John Paul II said in Mexico during the decade of the eighties: “World peace is possible and it will eventually come but only after two of the greatest evils of the 20th century are gone – communism and capitalism, because they both achieve their objectives through the exploitation of people.”

Peace Education provides us with the solution of all problems that stem mostly from political corruption. This explains the well know saying: “Money talks,” which explains the story of briberies that take place behind closed doors. We can never have national unity if our politicians continue to promote the welfare of some to the exclusion of that of others. This explains why in the sphere of character and personality we are literally creating monsters that prove to be so brutal and vicious. Our secret of success lies in our faith in righteousness and in our hope that the good we genuinely seek will eventually triumph.

Importance of Global Harmony

All people of all nations are like the various part of our body. When every single part of our body works in cooperation with the other members of the body, everything moves smoothly. We enjoy life and all those around us are bound to benefit. However, when segments of our body become sick, cease to work constructively together, then we experience the creation of surmountable problems. This explains why obstacles created in our global community may go out of control in a way that may lead to surmountable suffering unnecessarily.

Speaking on the art of happiness, some ascetical writers tell us that it does not take us much to achieve joy in our heart. If we treat others well, we will be treated likewise to our eventual joy. This is what global harmony is all about. We need to help others to the best of our ability in order to lead a life of perfect fulfillment. The focus of peace education should always be on making all people, from every walk of life and profession working together harmoniously.

One Canadian Jesuit priest once exhorted his students saying: “When you pray keep in mind that everything depends on God; without Him you are incapable of doing anything. However, when then you leave the scene of prayer and go to work, keep in mind that everything depends on you; without you the Almighty God feels powerless and cannot achieve anything unless you make constructive contributions to the best you can in your life’s mission.” In recent decades the tendency among some of the leading governments has been to prepare for war as a means to achieve peace!

This philosophy constitutes a contradiction since war always consists of violence. We do know that violence breeds violence and more violence breeds more violence. Wars do not have anything constructive to offer. They are always meant to really destroy the infrastructure of cities and kill millions of people mercilessly most of whom are women, children the elderly and the sick. The major focus of peace education should always be love and service to all people without exception. This will bring us to national unity and global harmony.
  Read Peace Education: Source of 
National Unity and Global Harmony
 June 1, 2014  
Endless Knowledge and Great Wisdom in your Hands

Dr. Charles Mercieca

by Charles Mercieca
Charles Mercieca, Ph.D.
International Association of Educators for World Peace
Dedicated to United Nations Goals of Peace Education
Environmental Protection, Human Rights & Disarmament
Professor Emeritus, Alabama A&M University
Hon President & Professor, SBS Swiss Business School, Zurich
For the next several weeks go through the websites here below and try to learn from each one as much as possible. The result would be: Accumulation of great knowledge and Acquisition of tremendous wisdom.

Global Harmony Association (GHA)

Spiritual Culture for Harmonious Civilization
Citizens of Earth!
Unite in harmony for love, peace, justice, fraternity and happiness!

Global Harmony Association (GHA)

Since February 15, 2005, GHA is an international NGO uniting more than 500 members in 56 countries and more than one million participants from the GHA collective members in 80 countries.
Web: www.peacefromharmony.org

GHA 8 books and 50 projects list of social harmony, global peace and harmonious education:

Board: 35 GHA members from 16 countries
GHA Founder and President: Dr. Leo Semashko
Address: St. Petersburg, Russia
E-mail: leo.semashko@gmail.com Web:

GHA Mission is:
To bring peace from harmony and to pave a conscious way for harmonious civilization on scientifically based ‘ABC of Harmony’ through harmonious education and GPS
GHA Video: Social Genome of Peace from Harmony -

GHA Message on
Children’s Priority and Protection Day,
June 1, 2015

In English: http://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=292
In Russian: http://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=ru_c&key=328

Yagnin Oleg, 10 years. Ukraine, Donetsk, School 7.
When the guns are silent ...

Teach children.

Dear children, parents, teachers, and grandparents:

Today, on June 1st, 2015, the Global Harmony Association (GHA) is happy to congratulate you with Children’s Priority and Protection Day on the GHA Harmonious Era Calendar (since 2005) and wish you a life, health and happiness!

This year the world media, almost every day, bring us the terrible facts of the children’s murder and violence around the world. Nobel Peace Prize laureate Mairead Corrigan said the killing by the US and Britain of 750 thousand Iraqi children during the war in this country, which is tantamount to genocide, but for which no one answered


Save the children

Thousands of children are killed or injured in the Donbass, expelled from the country by the civil war of the military junta in Ukraine with the support of the US and NATO. (To this is dedicated the exhibition of children's drawings of Donbass, one of which we publish below, and more details about them, see here: http://peacefromharmony.org/?cat=ru_c&key=647).

For these "feats", the United States intends to nominate Ukraine President for the Nobel Peace Prize, as reported by the Western sources


This is outrage of moral turpitude! In Western countries, children slave trade, pedophilia and all range of child abuse and neglect is growing. Now they are increased by removal of children from the family by democratic government, as it happened in Norway, where about 25% of the children are selected in orphanages. The same is happening in other European countries. Another world is also not lagging behind the leading Western crimes against children. The US and NATO militarism is preparing for new generations the nuclear war


In these conditions mankind can protect children and overcome their universal neglect and violence by the Global Peace Science (GPS), which was firstly created in the GHA and published in January 2015:


GPS is the first and sole in the world the social science, which claims priority to children and proves its social necessity. But its implementation is not possible in the traditional militaristic democracy of the West and USA, built on the economic antagonism, which neglects children. The priority of children is only possible in the new, harmonious democracy through open in GPS the harmonious classes of population – SPHERONS and through their institution of children's suffrage executed by parents.

Traditional democracy rejects this institution, under various pretexts; therefore it remains lethal for children in all senses. The priority for this democracy is war and profit, not children and peace, which can only become a priority for the harmonious democracy of SPHERONS, the essence and institutions which are disclosed in GPS.

We congratulate you on the Children Protection Day and we invite you to explore GPS to call governments of the world to ensure children's priority transforming democracy to its first target was children, not war!

The war against children: http://www.segodnia.ru/content/140222

Dr. Leo Semashko,
GHA President, Russia,
Editor, Global Peace Science
  Read Endless Knowledge and Great Wisdom in your Hands
 March 3, 2015

by Guy Crequie

Guy Crequie

Email: guy.crequie@wanadoo.fr
Guy CREQUIE Global file
Ecrivain français à finalité philosophique. Blog http://guycrequie.blogspot.com
Je ne suis pas, loin s’en faut, un expert des questions climatiques. Cependant si la philosophie met en relation le rapport global de notre pensée et de notre action aux faits et aux êtres, ceux-ci étant insérés dans un environnement naturel, il ne peut être indifférent aux conditions de notre existence.

Le changement climatique : ce n’est pas que l’évolution de notre consommation d’énergie, c’est aussi celle de notre réduction des émissions mondiales de CO2. Certes, de bonnes décisions ont été prises comme celle du fonds vert de 200 milliards visant à permettre aux PVD (pays en voie de développement) de trop consommer des combustibles fossiles mettant en danger la planète.

L’un des enjeux du sommet mondial pour le climat qui se tiendra à Paris en décembre 2015, est celui de convaincre de grands pays pollueurs comme la Chine, les Usa et l’Inde…..De signer un accord et de de s’y engager promptement en actes significatifs. La Chine est consciente des enjeux et elle investit déjà dans des villes en énergies renouvelable, mais elle a l’enjeu de son développement.

Le changement climatique est étroitement lié au développement durable, lequel, traite de toutes les conditions éducatives, économiques, sociales, culturelles….et qui passe par un rôle accru de l’OMC (organisation mondiale du commerce) pour favoriser une émulation et régulation favorisant le respect de l’environnement.

Le sommet de Paris sera le 21e du genre, et il est absolument vital qu’il débouche sur des décisions concrètes énergiques après l’échec de celui de Copenhague en 2009. Certes à Lima au Pérou en décembre 2014, les Etats avec l’injonction du Secrétaire général de l’ONU : Ban KI MOON semblent avoir retrouvé une volonté de faire ! Cependant les discours ne suffisent plus, il faut des actes rapides et significatifs.

La pédagogie initiée est celle de ne pas décider depuis l’ONU ou les réunions d’experts des propositions centralisées ; mais que chaque pays fixe et décide lui-même de sa contribution. Ceci, afin d’aboutir à une somme d’engagements suffisants afin de ne pas dépasser d’ici 2050 un réchauffement climatique de 2 degrés Celsius déjà lourd de conséquences. Actuellement au rythme actuel, sans modification urgente de nos émissions, le réchauffement se situe autour de 4°

La question se pose du type d’accord qui surviendra au sommet de Paris et pour quels engagements ? Il serait dramatique qu’un accord obtenu se limite au minimum commun. Il vaudrait mieux : quitte à appréhender le risque d’un échec qu’un accord survienne à un niveau en correspondance avec l’état de la planète laissée à la nouvelle génération dans 20 ans en 2030, et aux autres à venir. Pour cela, il faudra mettre devant leurs responsabilités la conscience des dirigeants d’Etats. Sinon, il sera trop tard !

Au rythme actuel de la pollution des mers et des océans et de la pêche industrielle, nous risquons de ne plus avoir de poissons dans les filets de pêche d’ici 30 ou 50 ans ! Ceci alors que nombre d’espèces animales et végétales sont en voie de disparition ou ont déjà disparues.

L’exploitation par fracturation du gaz de Schiste, les conflits armés et l’usage d’armes toxiques, l’exploitation des pétroles lourds, la déforestation aggravée, la montée du niveau des océans, les déserts qui avancent,….Bref, notre espace se rétrécit, ceci, alors que la population globale croît. 9 milliards et demi telle est la population mondiale prévue à l’horizon 2050 !

Si l’arctique et l’antarctique continuent à voir anormalement fondre la glace, alors, le méthane dégagé le sera à un niveau 25 fois supérieur à celui des émissions de gaz carbonique.

Le déplacement des populations, des tensions alimentaires, énergétiques, contribueraient à accroître les conflits armés, les dysfonctionnements alimentaires, de santé, démographiques…Dans un pays comme le Niger par exemple : le désert avance de 5 kilomètres par an, et dans ce pays, les femmes ont en moyenne 6 enfants qu’il faudra élever et nourrir.

En 2 siècles, nous avons bouleversé la nature comme elle ne l’a jamais été durant des millénaires. L’homme n’existait pas encore, lorsque la planète a connu son réchauffement à la fin de l’ère primaire.

Le réchauffement climatique pose des exigences qui concernent les nouvelles technologies, l’écologie industrielle, la bio- diversité, l’éthique de la responsabilité, l’efficacité énergétique, l’entreprenariat social, etc… Créer également des emplois nouveaux, sauvegarder une planète terre en paix = ne s’agit-il pas d’enjeux majeurs ?

Un nouveau monde est à construire avec intelligence. Avec la perte de surfaces : le PIB (produit intérieur brut) mondial peut diminuer, ceci, alors qu’il y a une population plus grande à nourrir et qu’il y a ce besoin impérieux d’accorder un % plus important de celui-ci aux énergies renouvelables. L’Union Européenne de ce point de vu si critiqué sur d’autres aspects de son fonctionnement peut-être une référence : Depuis1990, elle a réduit son émission de CO2 de 20% et ambitionne moins 40% d’ici 2030. D’autres peuvent le faire : un grand pays comme l’Inde disposant d’ingénieurs et technologie de pointe est capable d’innovations ! Plus que des injonctions, il est vital de produire des solutions à Paris en décembre 2015 pour construire un mode de développement durable facteur de paix et d’harmonie. Ce que nous subissons aujourd’hui provient des dégâts occasionnés au milieu du XXe siècle. Sans décisions rapides et qualitatives et quantitatives, la nouvelle génération dans 20 ans héritera d’une planète invivable, conduite au déclin, et qui connaîtra des drames et tensions de toutes sortes : politiques, économiques, sociales, ethniques, religieuses…

Nos élus politiques doivent envisager le XXI e siècle non pas encore avec la vision du XXe, mais plutôt avec celle du XXII e. Comment construire un monde civilisé et développé compatible avec les défis d’humanité ?

La baisse de la natalité dans ce cadre est bien entendu un enjeu en certaines contrées. Celle-ci concerne certes l’éducation de centaine de millions de jeunes filles. Cependant contrairement à certains experts qui ne parlent que d’elles = cela concerne également les garçons. La femme enfante, mais l’homme fournit la semence !

La Co- responsabilité, l’égalité des devoirs, sont aussi un facteur progressiste de conscience de la responsabilité des 2 sexes pour perpétuer la vie sur notre planète. Après le protocole de Kyoto lequel en 1997 avait inauguré des normes contraignantes à atteindre, en 2015, il faut des dispositions plus contraignantes encore mise en œuvre d’urgence, ceci pour notre survie !

Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Ecrivain français observateur social à finalité
philosophique-messager de la culture de la paix de l’UNESCO- représentant français d’ONG internationales de paix et d’harmonie.


I am not, far is necessary myself some, an expert of the climatic questions. However if philosophy connects the report of our thought and our action at the facts and the beings, those being inserted in a natural environment, it cannot be indifferent to the conditions of our existence.

Climate change: it is not that the evolution of our energy consumption, it is also that of our reduction of the world CO2 emissions. Admittedly, good decisions were taken as that of the funds green of 200 billion aiming at making it possible the DEVELOPING COUNTRIES (country in the process of development) to consume fossile fuels too much endangering planet.

One of the challenges of the world summit for the climate which will be held in Paris in December 2015, is that to convince of large countries pollutants like China, the USA and India ..... to sign an agreement and of to engage there promptly in significant acts.

China is conscious of the challenges and it invests already in cities in energies renewable, but it has the challenge of its development.

The climate change is closely related to the sustainable development, which, milked of all the conditions educational, economic, social, cultural….and which passes by an increased role of WTO (worldwide organization commercial) to support an emulation and regulation supporting the respect of the environment.

The Summit of Paris will be the 21e of the kind, and it is absolutely vital that it leads to energetic concrete decisions after the failure of that of Copenhagen in 2009. Admittedly in Lima in Peru in December 2014, States with the injunction of the General secretary of UNO: Ban KI MOON seem to have found a will to make! However the speeches are not enough any more, are needed fast and significant acts. Initiated pedagogy is that not to decide since UNO or the meetings of experts of the centralized proposals; but that each country fixes and decides itself of its contribution. This, in order to lead to a sum of sufficient commitments in order not to exceed by 2050 a climate warming of 2 degrees Celsius already full of consequences. Currently at the current rhythm, without urgent modification of our emissions, the warming is around 4°

Does the question arise type of agreement which will occur at the Summit of Paris and for which commitments? It would be dramatic that an agreement obtained is limited at least common. It would be better: since it is necessary to apprehending the risk of a failure which an agreement occurs on a level in correspondence with the state of planet left with the new generation in 20 years in 2030, and with the others to come. For that, it will be necessary to put in front of their responsibilities the conscience for the leaders of States. If Not, it will be too late!

With the current rhythm of the ocean and marine pollution and industrial fishing, we are likely not to more have fish in the fishing nets from here 30 or 50 years! This whereas many animal species and vegetable are in the process of disappearance or already disappeared.

Exploitation by fracturing of Schist gas, armed conflicts and the use of toxic weapons, the exploitation of heavy oils, worsened deforestation, the rise of the level of the oceans, the deserts which advance,….In Short, our space narrows, this, whereas the global population grows. 9 billion and half such is the world population envisaged by 2050!

If the Arctic and the Antarctic continue to abnormally see melting the ice, then, released methane will be it on a level 25 times higher than that of the gas emissions carbonic.

The displacement of the populations, of the tensions food, energy, would contribute to increase the armed conflicts, the food dysfunctions, of health, demographic… In a country like Niger for example: the desert advances of 5 kilometers a year, and in this country, the women have on average 6 children whom it will be necessary to raise and nourish. In 2 centuries, we have upsets nature as it never was it during millenia. The man did not exist yet, when the planet knew its warming at the end of the primary era.

Climate warming poses requirements which relate to new technologies, industrial ecology, organic diversity, the ethics of the responsibility, energy efficiency, the social entreprenariat, etc… to also Create does new jobs, to safeguard a planet cover over with soil in peace = doesn't act of major stakes?

A new world is to be built with intelligence. With the loss of surfaces: the GDP (gross domestic product) world can decrease, this, whereas there is a larger population to nourish and that there is this imperative need to grant % more important of this one to renewable energies.

European Union of this point of considering if criticized on other aspects of its operation perhaps a reference: Depuis1990, it reduced its CO2 emission of 20% and seeks less 40% by 2030. Others can do it: a large country like India laying out engineers and state-of-the-art technology is capable of innovations!

More than of the injunctions, it is vital to produce solutions in Paris in December 2015 to build a mode of sustainable development factor of peace and harmony. What we undergo today comes from the damage caused in the middle of the 20th century. Without fast and qualitative and quantitative decisions, the new generation in 20 years will inherit an intolerable planet, led to the decline, and which will know dramas and tensions of all kinds: policies, economic, social, ethnic, religious…

Our political elected officials must consider not the XXI E century still with the vision of 20th, but rather with that of the XXII E. How to build a world civilized and developed compatible with the challenges of humanity?

The fall of the birthrate within this framework is of course a challenge in certain regions. This One relates certainly to the education of hundred million young girls. However contrary to certain experts who do not speak that they = that also concerns the boys. The woman gives birth to, but the man provides the seed!

The Co-responsibility, the equality of the duties, are also a factor progressist of conscience of the responsibility for the 2 sexes to perpetuate the life on our planet. After the protocol of Kyoto which in 1997 had inaugurated constraining standards to reach, in 2015, one needs more constraining provisions still put in emergency work, this for our survival!

Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Social observant French Writer with finality
philosophical-messenger of the culture of the peace of UNESCO representing French of ONG international of peace and harmony.
 April 8, 2015

by Guy Crequie

Guy Crequie

Email: guy.crequie@wanadoo.fr
Guy CREQUIE Global file
Ecrivain français à finalité philosophique. Blog http://guycrequie.blogspot.com
Mes 2 contributions pour le congrès CUPHI III relatives à la paix et à la philosophie pour le XXI e siècle n’ont pas été édités par les organisateurs contrairement à leurs engagements, et des personnes que je pensais être des amis et dont certains ont été publiés en France par mon intervention = restent étrangement silencieux démontrant les limites de leur amitié et de leur courage.

Alors, censuré sur le continent latino-américain, il me reste la pensée des autres pour contribuer aux enjeux de l’humanisme contemporain menacé par le libéralisme intransigeant sans éthique ni miséricorde et par le terrorisme international principalement islamiste qui se nourrit de la pauvreté et de l’absence de connaissances sur l’histoire des religions et sur la pensée en général.

Martin Luther KING a lancé cette célèbre formule « la justice est indivisible « relaté par the trumpet of conscience, New York, Harper et Row,1967,p. 24. Il y a 2 ans, le Pape François a mentionné » sa remise en cause largement diffusée du système capitaliste actuel en précisant « Il n’est pas possible, a –t-il dit, que le fait qu’une personne âgée réduite à vivre dans la rue meure de froid ne soit pas une nouvelle, tandis que la baisse de deux points en bourse en soit une… »Exhortation apostolique du Pape François article 53,p. 32, repris sur l site internet d magazine « la Vie »

GC = peut ajouter le moindre frémissement de la notation des agences de notation provoque émoi et commentaires politiques et médiatiques de par le monde : et moins bruyamment : les suicides quotidiens de jeunes, artisans, agriculteurs, ouvriers, cadre surmenés, chômeurs désespérés, ou militaires et policiers trop stressés……………… Au XXI e siècle encore des femmes (trop ), mais aussi des hommes, meurent quotidiennement sous les coups de leur conjoint .

De nos jours encore :ces mots du Mahatma GANDHI à un ami sont particulièrement pertinents : » Rappelle- toi le visage de l’homme le plus pauvre ou le plus faible que tu aies pu voir, et demande toi si la démarche que tu envisages pourrait lui être d’une quelconque utilité : de par le monde ce qui est appelé les minorités culturelles et religieuses par rapport à la dominante dans leur pays ou région restent marginalisées, discriminées, menacées, et parfois assassinées :récemment il a été beaucoup été question de atrocités commises par DAESCH, AL QAIDA, ou autres mouvances, mais des Bahaïes, kurdes, amérindiens, indiens, africains, ou autres autochtones vivent parfois menacés.

La philosophe politique américaine Martha C. NUSSBAUM a dénoncé mainte situations d’enfants, personnes âgées, handicapés, les femmes bafouées dans leur dignité ou non respectées pour leurs droits fondamentaux et elle condamne l’utilitarisme = je cite » Ainsi la grande souffrance et le malheur d’une seule personne peuvent être compensés par le fait qu’une majorité possède une immense bonne fortune. Ici, une réalité morale d’une importance extrême, primordiale : « le fait que chaque personne ne vit qu’une seule vie a été effacée…. » Frontiers of justice, Disability, nationality, Species membership , Cambridge (Massachusetts, Harvard University Press 206,p. 237.

Déjà, dans les années 30, le pédagogue japonais Tsunesaburo MAKIGUCHI indiquait : »Quelquefois, les êtres humains en se souciant exagérément de l’opinion de la société, se satisfont d’un mode de vie où ils ne font réellement ni le bien, ni le mal, ou dans lequel le bien qu’ils réalisent est très limité.

Sans doute : devrions nous méditer ces paroles du célèbre psychologue et psychanalyste célèbre pour son œuvre sur la conceptualisation de l’identité :je veux nommer Erik H.ERIKSON aurait précisé : « Vivre ensemble(….) veut dire que les étapes de la vie d’un individu sont inter vivantes, c’est-à-dire qu’elle s’enclenchent telles un engrenage dans les étapes de la vie des autres qui le font avancer, tout comme lui-même les fait avancer… »

Annah ARENDT, spécialiste de la théorie politique a appelé le XX e siècle celui des réfugiés, et le XXI ème engagé hélas confirme ce verdict avec l’exode massif de personnes fuyant les problèmes économiques de leur pays ,les dictatures sanglantes ou le terrorisme assassin. Elle écrivait : »Quelque chose de bien plus fondamental que la liberté et la justice, en l’occurrence les droits des citoyens est en jeu quand l’appartenance à la communauté dans laquelle on est né n’est plus une conséquence logique et la non appartenance une question de choix… » Traduction française les origines du totalitarisme Edition Gallimard 2002.

Ce jour, je terminerais par ce court extrait de la récente proposition pour la paix (sa 32 ème depuis1983 )adressée le 26 janvier 2015 à Ban KI MOON, Secrétaire général de l’ONU par Monsieur Daisaku IKEDA. Cet extrait résume bien l’impérieuse nécessité de notre temps « Les deux conditions nécessaires à la résolution des problèmes mondiaux sont la participation de tous les Etats et la collaboration entre les Nations Unies et la société civile.

Sous des formes diverses selon leurs spécificités, je pense que des ONG comme IFLAC, UNILETRAS, GHA, impulsée par Léo SEMASHKO, SGI, la nouvelle organisation de paix créée par Maria CRISTINA et Bruce COOK, les recherches du Professeur GALTUNG ;celles du centre de Boston, de l’institut TODA, d’autres y contribuent.

Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Ecrivain observateur social
Représentant français d’ONG internationales de paix et d’harmonie
Messager de la culture de la paix de l’UNESCO


My 2 contributions for congress CUPHI III relating to peace and philosophy for the XXI E century were not published by the organizers contrary to their commitments, and of the people that I thought of being friends and of which some were published in France by my intervention = remain quiet curiously showing the limits of their friendship and their courage.

Then, censured on the Latin-American continent, there remains to me the thought of the others to contribute to the challenges of the contemporary humanism threatened by intransigent liberalism without ethics nor mercy and by the mainly islamist international terrorism which nourishes poverty and absence of knowledge on the history of the religions and the thought in general.

Martin Luther King launched this famous formula “justice indivisible “is reported by the Trumpet of conscience, New York, Harper and Row, 1967, p. 24. 2 years ago, the Pope François mentioned” his largely diffused reconsideration of the current capitalist system by specifying “It is not possible, he said, that the fact that an elderly person reduced to live in the street dies of cold is not a news, while the fall of two points out of purse is one… ” Apostolic Exhortation of the Pope François article 53, p. 32, taken again on L website D magazine “Life”

GC = can add the least quivering of the notation of the credit rating agencies causes agitation and comments political and media all over the world: and less loudly: the daily suicides of young people, craftsmen, farmers, blue-collar workers, tallies overworked, despaired, or military unemployed and too stressed police officers ..................

In the XXI E century still of the women (too much), but also of the men, die daily under the blows of their spouse.

Nowadays still:these words of Mahatma GANDHI to a friend are particularly relevant: ” Points Out you to it face of the poorest man or weakest that you could see, and asks you if the approach that you consider could be to him of any utility: all over the world what is called the cultural and religious minorities compared to the dominant one in their country or area remain marginalized, discriminated, threatened, and sometimes assassinated:recently it was been much question of atrocities made by DAESCH, AL-QAIDA, or other mobilities, but of Bahaïes, Kurdish, Amerindians, Indians, African, or others autochtones live sometimes threatened.

The political philosopher American Martha C. NUSSBAUM denounced many situations of children, elderly people, handicapped people, the women ridiculed in their dignity or not respected for their basic rights and she condemns utilitarianism = I Thus quote” the great suffering and the misfortune of only one person can be compensated by the fact that a majority has an immense good fortune. Here, a moral reality of extreme, paramount importance: “the fact that each person did not see that only one life was unobtrusive…. ” Frontiers of justice, Disability, nationality, Species membership, Cambridge (Massachusetts, Harvard University Close 206, p. 237.

Already, in the Thirties, the Japanese pedagog Tsunesaburo MAKIGUCHI indicated: ” Sometimes, the human beings while worrying exaggeratedly about the opinion of the company, are satisfied with a lifestyle where they really do neither good, nor the evil, or in which although they realize is very limited.

Undoubtedly: should contemplate us these words of the famous psychologist and psychoanalyst famous for his work on the conceptualization of the identity:I want to name Erik H.ERIKSON would have specified: “To Live together (….) wants to say that the stages of the life of an individual are inter alive, i.e. it just like engage such gears in the stages of the life of the others which advance it, itself the fact of advancing…”

Annah ARENDT, specialist in the political theory called the XX E century that of the refugees, and the XXI ème committed alas assure to this verdict with the massive exodus people fleeing the economic problems of their country, the bloody dictatorships or terrorism assassin. She wrote: ” Something of good more fundamental than freedom and justice, in fact the civil rights is concerned when the membership of the community in which one was born is not any more one logical consequence and nonthe membership a question of choice…” French Translation the origins of totalitarianism Edition Gallimard 2002.

This day, I would finish by this short extract of the recent proposal for the peace (its 32 ème depuis1983) addressed on January 26th, 2015 to Ban KI MOON, General secretary of UNO by Mr Daisaku IKEDA. This extract summarizes well the pressing need for our time “the two requirements with the resolution of the world problems are the participation of all the States and collaboration between the United Nations and the civil society.

In various forms according to their specificities, I think that of ONG like IFLAC, UNILETRAS, GHA, impelled by Léo SEMASHKO, SGI, the new organization of peace created by Maria CRISTINA and Bruce COOK, research of Professor GALTUNG;those of the center of Boston, the institute TODA, others contribute to it.

Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Social observant Writer
French Representative of ONG international of peace and harmony
Messenger of the culture of the peace of UNESCO
 April 10, 2015

by Guy Crequie

Guy Crequie

Email: guy.crequie@wanadoo.fr
Guy CREQUIE Global file
Ecrivain français à finalité philosophique. Blog http://guycrequie.blogspot.com
LA CONFERENCE INTERNATIONALE DE PARIS SUR LE CLIMAT = UNE NOUVELLE FACON d’ESPERER ? (Sinon : le dépérissement annoncé et progressif de notre planète)

Cop SIGNIFIE (Conférence of the parties.) Parties = concerne les pays qui ont avalisé la Convention de Rio sur le climat en 1992. Cette 21 ème édition sera en France. Elle est prévue au Bourget à quelques encablures de Paris du 30 novembre au 11 décembre.

Ce sera un événement exceptionnel : il est attendu environ 20.000 participants : Etats, experts, ONG, dirigeants d’entreprises, médias, représentants d’Institutions internationales…

Tous sont conviés à un enjeu majeur : réduire les émissions à effet de serre de manière drastique, ceci, afin d’empêcher que la température de notre planète déjà fragilisée ne dépasse pas le seuil d’alarme de 2 degrés qui correspondrait à la température moyenne de l’année 1990 à l’échelle du monde.*

Or jusqu’ici, de manière générale ces sortes de grande messe n’ont jamais débouché en actes sur des décisions à la hauteur des enjeux.

Cette fois ci, un échec serait dramatique pour l’évolution de notre vécu sur cette planète. Approximativement depuis une vingtaine d’années, ce qui est appelé : (CCNUCC) fixait un objectif global de réduction et partageait ensuite le fardeau entre la quarantaine de pays les plus développés. La méthode utilisée était celle dite du haut en bas, laquelle par expérience n’a été efficace que dans certains pays (essentiellement ceux de l’UE (Union Européenne.)Tentons d’en expliquer les raisons ?

Initialement, la Chine premier pays pollueur mondial n’était pas encore concernée, n’étant pas encore un pays développé. S’agissant des Etats –Unis habitué à fixer leurs normes, ils ont toujours refusé qu’une instance extérieure même internationale leur dicte quoi faire en matière de carbone. Il est ce triste constat : depuis l’échec de la conférence mondiale de 2009 à Copenhague, l’ambition de la conférence de 2015 à Paris est de modifier la stratégie. C’est la méthode dite du bas vers le haut qui est préconisée !

Cela signifie : que d’ici juin 2015, tous les pays sont conviés à signifier quel sera leur apport à la CCUNCC ! Celle-ci devant en contrôler la véracité.

L’espoir ou la croyance sont : que plutôt qu’un accord cadre international à minima de principe respecté par certains et ignoré par d’autres démontre au total son inefficacité, à contrario, que les engagements pris par chaque pays l’engage davantage. C’est ce qui est espéré et envisagé par les experts qui ont prôné cette façon d’agir.

Certes, ils ne sont pas totalement utopiques : ils s’attendent à ce que les efforts promis par des pays comme l’Inde, la Chine, l’Afrique du sud, les pays du golfe, les Etats-Unis d’Amérique restent une sorte de service minimum. Cependant, ils espèrent que le système proposé devienne au fil du temps plus exigeant et contraignant favorisant l’ambition et la mobilisation des pays.

Ainsi : intelligence et sagesse sauront-elles coexister pour sauver notre planète et préserver les générations futures ? La volonté réelle des dirigeants politiques pour la survie du genre humain en osmose avec l’environnement naturel, afin d’ éviter d’autres catastrophes, des exodes massifs, des conflits..= dépend de la réponse à cet enjeu énoncé ci-dessus.

Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Ecrivain observateur social
Messager de la culture de la paix de l’UNESCO
Représentant français d’ONG internationales de paix et d’harmonie.


(If Not: the announced and progressive deterioration of our planet)

COP MEANS (Conference of the parts.)

Parts = relates to the countries which endorsed the Convention of Rio on the climate in 1992. This 21st edition will be in France. It is envisaged in Le Bourget with some cables of Paris from November 30th to December 11th.

It will be an extraordinary event: it is expected approximately 20,000 present: States, experts, ONG, managers of undertakings, media, representatives of International institutions…

All are invited to a major stake: to reduce the emissions for greenhouse effect in drastic manner, this, in order to prevent that the temperature of our already weakened planet does not exceed the alarm threshold of 2 degrees which would correspond to the average temperature of the year 1990 at the level of the monde.*

However up to now, in a general way these kinds of great mass never led in acts to decisions worthy of challenges.

This time Ci, a failure dramatic for the evolution of our would be lived on this planet. Roughly since about twenty years, which is called: (CCNUCC) a total objective of reduction fixed and divided then the burden between forty the most developed countries. Was the method used that known as the top in bottom, which by experiment was effective only in certain countries (primarily those of the EU (European Union.) Tentons to explain the reasons of them?

Initially, China first country world pollutant was not concerned yet, not being yet a developed country. As regards the United States accustomed to set their norms, they always refused that an even international external authority dictates what to them to make as regards carbon. It is this sad report: since the failure of the world conference of 2009 in Copenhagen, the ambition of the conference of 2015 in Paris east to modify the strategy. It is the method known as of the bottom to the top which is recommended!

That means: how by June 2015, all the countries are invited to mean what a will be their contribution with the CCUNCC! This One having to control the veracity of it.

The hope or the belief is: that rather than an international master agreement with minima of principle respected by some and ignored by others its inefficiency shows on the whole, with contrario, than the commitments made by each country engages it more. It is what is hoped and considered by the experts who preached this way of acting.

Admittedly, they are not completely utopian: they expect that the efforts promised by countries like India, China, South Africa, the countries of the gulf, the United States of America remain a kind of minimum service. However, they hope that the system suggested becomes more demanding and constraining in the course of time supporting the ambition and the mobilization of the countries.

As Follows: will intelligence and wisdom be able to coexist to save our planet and to preserve the future generations? Negative image of the political leaders for the survival of mankind in osmosis with natural environment, in order to avoid other massive catastrophes, exoduses, conflicts.= depends on the answer to this challenge stated above.

Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Social observant Writer
Messenger of the culture of the peace of UNESCO
French Representative of ONG international of peace and harmony.
 April 18, 2015

by Guy Crequie

Guy Crequie

Email: guy.crequie@wanadoo.fr
Guy CREQUIE Global file
Ecrivain français à finalité philosophique. Blog http://guycrequie.blogspot.com
A environ deux ans de la fin de son second mandat présidentiel que peut-on dire du bilan du Président OBAMA en contribution pour l’amélioration du climat international pour la paix et l’harmonie ?

Certes, il y eut les fameux discours de Prague et du Caire, lesquels avec sa réalité d’Afro-américain élu à la tête des Etats –Unis d4amérique suscita une espérance planétaire et sans nul doute tout ceci contribua à sa réception du Prix Nobel de la paix ! Cependant, depuis, le bilan est bien plus mitigé qu’éloquent.

Pour la diplomatie américaine le réchauffement diplomatique récent avec Cuba et l’actuel Président Raoul CASTRO permet de passer Cuba de la liste des pays terroristes à celui d’une destination touristique !

Avec l’Iran : la politique américaine veut oublier des souvenirs amers : ceux de la prise d’otages de l’Ambassade des Etats –Unis à Téhéran en 1979, laquelle fut suivie de l’opération désastreuse manquée par Jimmy CARTER, laquelle coûtera à ce dernier sa réélection en 1980. Alors également récemment, le pré-accord sur le nucléaire iranien conclu à Lausanne et qui doit être avalisé d’ici la fin juin es estimé téméraire pour la politique internationale américaine, ceci, tant l’hostilité est grande relativement à cet accord dans une partie du congrès et chez des alliés : israélien et saoudien. Certes il peut se prévaloir d’avoir réussi l’une de ses ambitions lors de son arrivée à la maison blanche en 2009 : réhabiliter l’image des Etats –Unis passablement dégradée par deux guerres ruineuses, impopulaires et coûteuses en vies humaines = celles d’Afghanistan et d’Irak qui écornèrent l’image de Georges W. BUSCH.

Cependant ces deux points qu’il espère mettre à son crédit restent tempérés par une image de déception et désillusion le concernant. Son statut certes important en terme d’image de Premier Président Noir dans un pays où existent encore des discriminations à l’égard des noirs et des Hispaniques et ce qui est appelé : des bavures policières .Egalement, a -t-il fait preuve de vision et d’un usage adéquat de la puissance américaine sur la scène internationale même si aujourd’hui il doit compter avec l’affirmation de pays émergents comme la Chine, L’Inde, le Brésil..

Il reste le Président du pays capitaliste le plus puissant où les intérêts économiques et militaires passent encore souvent avant celui des peuples ! Face aux convulsions qui ébranlent le monde arabo-musulman, ses hésitations, changements, ont été désarmants et la situation en Syrie resteront l’un des échecs de son second mandat. Quant au dossier israélo-palestinien chacun jugera, appréciera, personnellement la situation me semble presque plus grave que lors de son accession au pouvoir/

Si Hillary CLINTON qui fut sa rivale en 2008 pour l’élection présidentielle puis sa secrétaire d’Etat lors de son premier mandat sera peut-être son successeur ? le conflit russo- ukrainien, ses relations exécrables avec Vladimir POUTINE, ses relations ambivalentes avec la puissance chinoise restent des dossiers compliqués qui contribuent à ce monde incertain et dangereux qu’il n’aura pas contribué à faire avancer vers la paix !

Cuba et l’Iran, feront- ils oublier le reste du bilan et avec l’Iran rien n’est encore définitivement joué : les Ayatollahs conservent l’influence idéologique qui a ses traductions politiques. A suivre !

Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Ecrivain français-Observateur social
Messager de la culture de la paix de l’UNESCO


At approximately two years of the end of its second presidential mandate which can one say of the assessment of President OBAMA in contribution for the improvement of the international climate for peace and the harmony?

Admittedly, there was the famous speech of Prague and of Cairo, which with its reality of Afro-American elected in charge of the United States d4americ caused a planetary hope and without any doubt all this contributed to its reception of the Nobel Prize of peace! However, since, the assessment is mitigated much more than eloquent.

For the American diplomacy the recent diplomatic warming with Cuba and current President Raoul CASTRO make it possible to pass Cuba of the list of the terrorist countries to that of a tourist destination!

With Iran: the American policy wants to forget bitter memories: those of the taking of hostages of the Embassy from the United States in Teheran in 1979, which was followed by the disastrous operation missed by Jimmy Carter, which will cost this last his re-election in 1980. Then also recently, the preliminary agreement on the Iranian nuclear power concluded in Lausanne and which must be endorsed by the end of June are considered bold for the American international policy, this, so much the hostility is large compared to this agreement in part of the congress and at allies: Israeli and Saoudi.

Admittedly it can be prevailed to have made a success of one of its ambitions at the time of its arrival at the White House in 2009: to rehabilitate the image of the United States passably degraded by two ruinous, unpopular and expensive wars in human lives = those of Afghanistan and Iraq which chipped the image of Georges W. BUSCH.

However these two points which he hopes to put at his credit remain moderate by an image of disappointment and disillusion concerning. Its statute certainly important in term of image of First President Noir in a country where exist still discriminations with regard to the blacks and of the Hispanic ones and what is called: police burs.Also, he showed vision and of an adequate use of the American power on the international scene even if today he must take into account the assertion of emerging countries like China, India, Brazil.

There remains the President of the capitalist country most powerful where the economic interests and soldiers still often pass before that of the people! Vis-a-vis the convulsions which shake the world arabo-Muslim, its hesitations, changes, were disarming and the situation in Syria will remain one of the failures of its second mandate. As for the israélo-Palestinian file each one will judge, appreciate, personally the situation seems almost more serious to me than at the time of its accession to the power

If Hillary Clinton who was her rival in 2008 for the presidential election then her Secretary of State at the time of its first mandate is perhaps her successor? the Ukrainian Russo conflict, its execrable relations with Vladimir PUTIN, his ambivalent relationships to the Chinese power remain complicated files which contribute to this dubious and dangerous world that it will not have contributed to advance towards peace! Cuba and Iran, will make they forget the remainder of the assessment and with Iran nothing is still definitively played: the Ayatollahs preserve the ideological influence which has its political translations. To follow!

Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Writer social French-Observer
Messenger of the culture of the peace of UNESCO
Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Ecrivain observateur social
Messager de la culture de la paix de l’UNESCO
Représentant français d’ONG internationales de paix et d’harmonie.
 April 22, 2015

by Guy Crequie

Guy Crequie

Email: guy.crequie@wanadoo.fr
Guy CREQUIE Global file
Ecrivain français à finalité philosophique. Blog http://guycrequie.blogspot.com
La France a évité un attentat dans une Eglise, la méditerranée devient un cercueil maritime ou depuis quelque temps des milliers de personnes y meurent :certaines des catastrophes qui concernent des centaines de morts victimes de passeurs sans scrupules et d’une espérance malheureusement fausse que l’Europe est un nouvel Eldorado sont médiatisées mais combien ne le sont pas !

En Syrie pour ne prendre que cet exemple la situation dramatique est la suivante : Plus de 200.000 morts depuis 2011, 7,5 millions de déplacés à l’intérieur de la Syrie, Près de 4 millions de réfugiés à l’intérieur de la Syrie, 3,8 millions de ces réfugiés sont accueillis dans seulement 5 pays :Turquie, Liban, Jordanie, Irak, Egypte…Lesquels pour la plupart d’entre eux vivent l’instabilité politique et économique. 12 millions de personnes auraient besoin d’une aide humanitaire d’urgence !De parle monde près de 380.000 personnes sont identifiées comme ayant besoin d’une aide pour une réinstallation dans un pays étranger. …..

Dans un autre domaine faute de coopération la Cour pénale internationale ne peut pas poursuivre et juger des criminels de crimes de guerre, de crimes contre l’humanité et de génocides …Ceci car des Etats refusent de collaborer ou freinent les recherches entreprises.

La Cause climatique atteint sa phase d’alerte et si la conférence internationale de Paris échouait faute d’engagements concrets des Etats = nous laisserions à la génération suivante et aux autres une planète irrémédiablement en déclin…

Dans cette situation les criminels, les terroristes ,les délinquants de tous polis font l’actualité des médias !par contre, ceux qui silencieusement se mobilisent, proposent agissent, se déplacent pour la paix et les droits et devoirs humains sont ignorés par les responsables politiques voire censurés par des médias… Dans cette situation où la planète commence à brûler : il faut des mesures fortes et fédératrices

Une organisation internationale comme l’ONU doit être entièrement revisitée et réorganisée :le seul fonctionnement basé sur la réalité d’Etats nation égoïstes et individuels ne correspond plus aux exigences planétaires. Non seulement la société civile doit y être représentée de façon plus conséquente et avec des pouvoirs de délibération, mais cette organisation en certaines situations prévues par la juridiction internationale et soigneusement contrôlées, doit disposer de certains pouvoirs supra nationaux.

Dans l’immédiat, il y faudrait une AG (Assemblée générale de l’ONU) discutant et proposant cette réforme débattue également lors d’un prochain G20 élargi à toutes les Institutions représentatives continentales et inter continentales.

Le temps presse, l’urgence appelle l’intelligence des consciences et la mobilisation des énergies des Etats, Institutions diverses, ONG,……Sinon notre décadence apparaît engagée.

Copyright Guy CREQUIE, poète, écrivain et chanteur
Ecrivain français- Observateur social
Messager de la culture de la paix de l’UNESCO
Représentant français d’ONG internationales de paix et d’harmonie
Lauréat de l’Académie Européenne des arts
Docteur Honoris Causa de l’Académie mondiale de la culture et des arts
Diplôme de médaille d’or par la société académique française « Arts-Sciences-Lettres »couronnée par l’Académie française

Engagé depuis 1967 à titre individuel et dans des organisations collectives pour la paix et les droits et devoirs humains = je commence sérieusement à fatiguer devant tant d’indifférence, d’impuissance, ou de course privilégiée par certains aux pouvoirs personnels et aux réélections …Au 1 janvier 2016 = excédé par ce qui se passe, à 72 ans je compte mettre un terme à ma vie publique. Si de simples citoyens sont capables de faire des suggestions aux puissants de ce monde = qu’attendent ceux-ci pour s’y atteler à la hauteur des enjeux : et de notre planète terre et des milliards d’humains qui y résident !


France avoided an attack in a Church, the Mediterranean becomes a maritime coffin or for some time thousands of people die there:some of the catastrophes which relate to hundreds of dead victims of the frontier runners without scruples and an unfortunately false hope that Europe is a new Eldorado are popularized through the media but how much are not it!

In Syria not to take that this example the dramatic situation is the following one: More Than 200,000 deaths since 2011, 7.5 million moved inside Syria, Nearly 4 million refugees inside Syria, 3.8 million these refugees is accommodated in only 5 countries:Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt… Which for most between them live political instability and economic. 12 million people would need a humanitarian aid urgently!About world nearly 380,000 people speaks are identified like needing a help for a reinstalment in a foreign country. .....

In another field for lack of co-operation the International Criminal Court cannot continue and to judge criminals of war crimes, crimes against humanity and of genocides… This bus of the States refuse to collaborate or slow down research undertaken.

The climatic Cause reaches its phase of alarm and if the international conference of Paris failed fault of concrete commitments of the States = we would leave with the following generation and the others an irremediably declining planet…

In this situation the criminals, the terrorists, the delinquents of all polished make the topicality of the media!on the other hand, those which silently are mobilized, propose act, move for peace and the human rights and duties are ignored by the political officials even censured by media… In this situation where the planet starts to burn: are needed strong and federator measurements

An international organization as UNO must be entirely revisited and reorganized:the only operation based on the reality of States nation egoists and individual does not correspond any more to the planetary requirements. Not only the civil society must be represented there in a more consequent way and with advisorys power, but this organization in certain situations envisaged by the international jurisdiction and carefully controlled, must have certain powers supra national.

In the immediate future, one would need for it AG (General Assembly of UNO) discussing and proposing this reform also discussed at the time of forthcoming G20 widened at all the continental representative Institutions and inter continental.

Time presses, the urgency calls the intelligence of the consciences and the mobilization of energies of the States, various Institutions, ONG, ...... If Not our decline appears committed.

Copyright Guy CREQUIE, poet, writer and singer
Social Observant French Writer
Messenger of the culture of the peace of UNESCO
French Representative of ONG international of peace and harmony
Award-winning of the European Academy of arts
Docteur Honoris Causa of the world Academy of the culture and arts
Diploma of gold medal by the French academic company “Art-Science-Letters” crowned by the French Academy

Engaged since 1967 with in an individual capacity and in collective organizations for the human peace and rights and duties = I seriously start to tire in front of such an amount of indifference, of impotence, or of race privileged by some with the personal powers and the re-elections… At January 1st, 2016 = exceeded by what occurs, at 72 years I intend to put an end to my public life. So of ordinary citizens are able to make suggestions with powerful of this world = until those wait to harness itself there worthy of challenges: and of our planet covers over with soil and the billion human which resides there!

Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Ecrivain observateur social
Messager de la culture de la paix de l’UNESCO
Représentant français d’ONG internationales de paix et d’harmonie.
 May 14, 2015

by Guy Crequie

Guy Crequie

Email: guy.crequie@wanadoo.fr
Guy CREQUIE Global file
Ecrivain français à finalité philosophique. Blog http://guycrequie.blogspot.com
Les Etats-Unis autorisent le forage de pétrole et de gaz dans l’Arctique

Selon Le Monde.fr avec AFP | 12.05.2015 à 00h52 • Mis à jour le 12.05.2015 à 01h00

Le gouvernement américain a autorisé lundi 11 mai le groupe pétrolier Shell à réaliser, sous conditions, des forages de pétrole ou de gaz dans l’océan arctique, une décision contre laquelle les associations de défense de l’environnement sont vent debout.

Abigail Ross Hopper, directrice générale de l’agence fédérale chargée de la gestion des océans (Boem), a assuré qu’un « niveau élevé d’exigence » avait été retenu afin de protéger l’écosystème de la région de la mer de Chukchi, où le groupe pétrolier anglo-néerlandais a été autorisé à lancer des forages. Les besoins de subsistance et les traditions culturelles des habitants originaires de l’Alaska seront également préservés, a assuré le département de l’intérieur, qui est également chargé de l’environnement.

L’approbation de ce projet « est une étape importante qui montre la confiance que les autorités de régulation (lui) accordent », a estimé Curtis Smith, porte-parole de Shell aux Etats-Unis, ajoutant que les permis encore nécessaires devaient être accordés « dans les temps » afin que les opérations puissent commencer cet été. « Dans l’intervalle, nous continuerons à mener des tests et à nous préparer (…) pour être à la hauteur des exigences que les différents acteurs et les autorités de régulation attendent de la part d’un groupe opérant dans l’Arctique », a-t-il ajouté.

« Un des endroits les plus importants de la terre »

Le programme d’exploration de Shell en Alaska a pris plusieurs années de retard. Après avoir obtenu une autorisation de l’administration Obama pour réaliser des forages en 2012, le groupe avait été contraint de les suspendre la même année en raison d’une série de problèmes techniques. En 2013, le département de l’intérieur a finalement levé son autorisation, exigeant que tous ces problèmes soient résolus.

L’annonce du département de l’environnement a provoqué de vives réactions de la part des ONG environnementales. « Une nouvelle fois, notre gouvernement s’est précipité pour approuver un projet d’exploration mal conçu dans l’un des endroits les plus reculés et les plus importants de la terre », a déploré Susan Murray, vice-présidente d’Oceana. « Shell n’a pas démontré qu’il était disposé à opérer de manière responsable dans l’Arctique », a-t-elle ajouté, déplorant que le groupe pétrolier ait été autorisé à « mettre en danger nos ressources océaniques ».

Les associations environnementales mettent en garde contre les conséquences d’un accident dans les eaux gelées de l’Arctique. Selon elles, il aurait un impact encore plus grand que celui de 2010 dans le Golfe du Mexique, lorsque l’explosion de la plateforme pétrolière Deepwater Horizon, exploitée par le groupe pétrolier britannique BP, avait entraîné la mort de 11 personnes et le déversement de 4,9 millions de barils de brut dans la mer.

Commentaire de Guy CREQUIE

Le Président Barack OBAMA a reçu le prix Nobel de la paix, ceci car au début de son mandat de Président des Etats –Unis d’Amérique il portait sur sa personne de premier Président Afro-américain l’espérance mondiale d’un changement positif pour notre avenir sur les cinq continents. Cependant depuis :il y a eu certes ses discours de Prague relativement au désarmement progressif de l’armement nucléaire et celui du Caire laissant espérer une situation apaisé et équilibrée dans le dialogue avec les pays Arabes et plus largement le monde Musulman. Et actuellement son bilan est marqué par le sceau de sa démission concernant l’exigence d’un accord de paix entre palestiniens et israéliens respectant le deux parties avec 2 Etats vivant en sécurité. Puis, la situation syrienne après le désastre de l’intervention en Irak et celle toujours incertaine en Afghanistan. Tout ceci a contribué à l’émergence de Daech avec ce qui en résulte dans la progression du terrorisme international qui rêve d’un nouveau Califat universel, et à qui d’autres mouvances de l’Islamisme radical ont prêté allégeance.

L’autorisation donnée pour les forages dans L’arctique malgré toutes les garanties et celles réaffirmées antérieurement par le Président OBAMA s’agissant de sa préoccupation de sauvegarder la planète sont une nouvelle fois annulées par les Etats - Unis restent d’abord le pays représentatif du capitalisme international intransigeant pour lequel le marché roi est la devise sans miséricorde, ni éthique.

Avec l’Amazonie et sa déforestation, poumon à oxygène de notre planète terre, le réchauffement climatique avec la fonte des glaces dans l’Arctique et l’Antarctique et les lourds dangers pour notre écosystème déjà menacé. Cela fait espérer à contrario, pour les grandes firmes internationales, des perspectives dans le domaine du transport fluvial et des marchandises, et des perspectives colossales de réserves (environ 20% des possibilités mondiales) et de profit financier relativement aux forages pour découvrir des gisements de gaz et de pétrole..

Quelles conséquences pour l’effet de serre, le réchauffement climatique, l’équilibre du monde marin : animal, végétal, minéral…Malgré les propos rassurants, nous disposons d’exemples antérieurs où les erreurs humaines ou les colères de la nature ont provoqué des drames, et cette décision en provoquera d’autres. Face à cette décision de l’administration américaine, et avant la rencontre internationale de décembre sur le climat en France = rencontre lourde de conséquences pour notre devenir et surtout celui des générations futures = va-t-on entendre les protestations des Instances internationales, du Secrétaire général de l’ONU, du G20, de l’Union Européenne,….J’attends de voir sans y croire !

Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Ecrivain observateur social
Messager de la culture de la paix de l’UNESCO
Représentant français d’ONG internationales de paix et d’harmonie.



The United States authorizes the gas and oil drilling in the Arctic

According To Monde.fr with AFP | 12.05.2015 at 00:52 • Updated 12.05.2015 at 01:00

The US government authorized Monday, May 11 the oil group Shell to carry out, under conditions, of gas or oil drillings in the Arctic Ocean, a decision against which defense associations of the environment are fiercely.

Abigail Ross Hopper, chief executive officer of the federal agency in charge of the management of the oceans (Boem), ensured that a “elevated level of requirement” had been retained in order to protect the ecosystem from the area of the sea of Chukchi, where the Anglo-Dutch oil group was authorized to launch drillings. The needs for subsistence and the cultural traditions of the inhabitants originating in Alaska will be also preserved, ensured the department of the interior, which is also in charge of the environment.

The approval of this project “is a big step which shows confidence that the regulatory authorities (him) grant”, estimated Curtis Smith, spokesperson of Shell in the United States, adding that the licenses still necessary were to be granted “in times” so that the operations can begin this summer. “In the interval, we will continue to carry out tests and to prepare us (…) to be worthy of requirements that the various actors and the regulatory authorities wait on behalf of an operative group in the Arctic”, he added.

“One of the most important places of the ground”

The exploration program of Shell in Alaska took several years of delay. After having obtained an authorization of the administration Obama to carry out drillings in 2012, the group had been constrained to suspend them the same year because of a series of engineering problems. In 2013, the department of the interior finally raised its authorization, demanding that all these problems are solved.

The announcement of the department of the environment caused environmental strong reactions on behalf of ONG. “Once again, our government precipitated to approve a project of exploration badly conceived in one of the most moved back places and most important of the ground”, Susan Murray, vice-president of Oceana regretted. “Shell did not show that it was laid out to operate in a responsible way in the Arctic”, she added, deploring that the oil group was authorized “to endanger our oceanic resources”.

Environmental associations warn against the consequences of an accident in cold water of the Arctic. According To them, it would have an impact even larger than that of 2010 in the Gulf Of Mexico, when the explosion of the oil platform Deepwater Horizon, exploited by the oil group British BP, had involved the death of 11 people and the discharge of 4.9 million crude barrels in the sea.

Comment of Guy CREQUIE

President Barack Obama received the Nobel Prize of peace, this because at the beginning of its mandate of President of the United States of America it carried on its person of first President Afro-américain the world hope of a positive change for our future on the five continents. However since:there were certainly its speeches of Prague compared to progressive disarmament of the nuclear armament and that of Cairo letting hope for a situation alleviated and balanced in the dialog with the Arab countries and more largely the Muslim world. And currently its assessment is marked by the seal of its resignation concerning the requirement of a peace agreement between Palestinian and Israeli respecting the two parts with 2 States living in safety. Then, the Syrian situation after the disaster of the always dubious intervention in Iraq and that in Afghanistan. All this contributed to the emergence of Daech with what results from it in the progression from the international terrorism which dreams of a new universal Caliphate, and with which other mobilities from the Radical Islam lent allegiance.

The authorization given for drillings in the Arctic despite everything the guarantees and those reaffirmed before by President OBAMA as regards her concern to safeguard planet are cancelled once again by the United States remain initially the country representative of the intransigent international capitalism for which the market king is the currency without mercy, nor ethics.

With Amazonia and its deforestation, lung with oxygen of our planet covers over with soil, climate warming with the cast iron of the ices in the Arctic and the Antarctic and the heavy dangers to our ecosystem already threatened. That made hope with contrario, for the large international firms, of the prospects in the field for the river transport and the goods, and the colossal prospects for reserves (approximately 20% of the world possibilities) and for financial profit compared to drillings to discover gas fields and for oil.

Which consequences for the greenhouse effect, climate warming, the balance of the marine world: animal, plant, mineral… In Spite Of the reassuring remarks, we have former examples where the human errors or angers of nature caused dramas, and this decision will cause others of them. Vis-a-vis this decision of the American administration, and before the international meeting of December on the climate in France = meeting fraught with consequences for our becoming and especially that of the future generations = one will hear the protests of the International authorities, of the General secretary of UNO, G20, of the European Union,….I wait to see without believing in it!

Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Social observant Writer
Messenger of the culture of the peace of UNESCO
French Representative of ONG international of peace and harmony.
 June 6, 2015
La 9e conférence d'examen du TNP vient de se terminer, sans consensus, à New York !

by Guy Crequie

Guy Crequie

Email: guy.crequie@wanadoo.fr
Guy CREQUIE Global file
Ecrivain français à finalité philosophique. Blog http://guycrequie.blogspot.com
Les armes atomiques sont désormais plus menaçantes encore.

Les commentaires seront peu médiatisés en France. Stratégiques, techniques, politiques ou moraux, ils émaneront de celles et ceux qui se sont déjà résolument engagés pour vivre dans un monde débarrassé des armes nucléaires. Si par accident ces commentaires prenaient trop de place, nul doute que les représentants de l’état réciteraient alors leur crédo sur ces armes de non-emploi, sur leur sécurité absolue qui interdit tout accident, et sur les efforts que la France fait pour réduire son arsenal au strict minimum !

Les Etats dotés d’armes nucléaires, qui à l’instar de la France ne veulent pas s’en débarrasser, ont imposé au reste du monde leur vision d’une sécurité internationale construite sur la menace permanente. C’est inacceptable ! Le Chef de l’Etat et le gouvernement doivent changer d’attitude. Devant la mobilisation internationale grandissante, la parole de la France ne peut rester figée dans une rhétorique datant de la guerre froide!

La délégation du Mouvmanif-TNP-NY-2015ement de la Paix salue l’initiative de l’Autriche, qui entraine derrière elle 107 pays convaincus de renforcer l’arsenal juridique pour condamner la fabrication, les essais et la détention d’armes nucléaires.

Cet engagement de l’Autriche, devenu à New York l’Engagement Humanitaire, et l’accueil de la Palestine comme Etat partie au traité sont pour l’instant les points positifs de cette conférence. Une lueur d’espoir somme toute, après quatre années de travail intense au sein de la campagne ICAN pour obtenir l’interdiction des armes nucléaires!

Loin d’être démobilisée par une stratégie diplomatique qui place la France du mauvais côté de l’Histoire, la délégation du Mouvement de la Paix appelle la population française à poursuivre ensemble les actions, pour qu’enfin les armes atomiques soient, au même titre que les autres armes de destruction massive, interdites et éliminées.

La délégation du Mouvement de la Paix

le 02 juin 2015

The 9th conference of examination of the NPT has just finished, without consensus, in New York

The atomic weapons are from now on more menaçantes still.

The comments will be popularized through the media little in France. Strategic, technical, political or moral, they will emanate from those and those which were already resolutely committed living in a world removed from the nuclear weapons. So by accident these comments took too much place, there is no doubt that the representatives of the state would then recite their creed on these weapons of not-employment, their absolute safety which prohibit any accident, and on the efforts that France makes to reduce its arsenal to the strict minimum!

The States equipped with nuclear weapons, which following the example of France do not want to get rid some, imposed on the rest of the world their vision of an international security built on the permanent threat. It is unacceptable! The Head of State and the government must change attitude. In Front Of the growing international mobilization, the word of France cannot remain fixed in a rhetoric dating from the cold war!

The delegation of the Mouvmanif-NPT-NY-2015EMENt of Peace greets the initiative of Austria, which involves behind it 107 countries convinced to reinforce the legal arsenal to condemn the manufacturing, the tests and the detention of nuclear weapons.

This commitment of Austria, become in New York the Humane Commitment, and the reception of Palestine as State left to the treaty are for the moment the positive points of this conference. A glimmer of hope altogether, after four years of intesive work within countryside ICAN to obtain the prohibition of the nuclear weapons!

Far from being demobilized by a diplomatic strategy which places France on the bad side of the History, the delegation of the Movement of Peace invites the French population to continue the actions together, so that finally the atomic weapons are, as well as the other weapons of mass destruction, prohibited and eliminated

Copyright Guy CREQUIE
Ecrivain observateur social
Messager de la culture de la paix de l’UNESCO
Représentant français d’ONG internationales de paix et d’harmonie.
  Read  La 9e conférence d'examen du TNP vient de se terminer, sans consensus, à New York !
 May 28, 2015
Superpower in Distress
by Tomgram: Michael Klare

Think of this as a little imperial folly update -- and here's the backstory.  In the years after invading Iraq and disbanding Saddam Hussein’s military, the U.S. sunk about $25 billion into “standing up” a new Iraqi army.  By June 2014, however, that army, filled with at least 50,000 “ghost soldiers,” was only standing in the imaginations of its generals and perhaps Washington.  When relatively small numbers of Islamic State (IS) militants swept into northern Iraq, it collapsed, abandoning four cities -- including Mosul, the country’s second largest -- and leaving behind enormous stores of U.S. weaponry, ranging from tanks and Humvees to artillery and rifles.  In essence, the U.S. was now standing up its future enemy in a style to which it was unaccustomed and, unlike the imploded Iraqi military, the forces of the Islamic State proved quite capable of using that weaponry without a foreign trainer or adviser in sight.

In response, the Obama administration dispatched thousands of new advisers and trainers and began shipping in piles of new weaponry to re-equip the Iraqi army.  It also filled Iraqi skies with U.S. planes armed with their own munitions to destroy, among other things, some of that captured U.S. weaponry.  Then it set to work standing up a smaller version of the Iraqi army.  Now, skip nearly a year ahead and on a somewhat lesser scale the whole process has just happened again.  Less than two weeks ago, Islamic State militants took Ramadi, the capital of Anbar Province.  Iraqi army units, including the elite American-trained Golden Division, broke and fled, leaving behind -- you’ll undoubtedly be shocked to hear -- yet another huge cache of weaponry and equipment, including tanks, more than 100 Humvees and other vehicles, artillery, and so on.

The Obama administration reacted in a thoroughly novel way: it immediately began shipping in new stocks of weaponry, starting with 1,000 antitank weapons, so that the reconstituted Iraqi military could take out future “massive suicide vehicle bombs” (some of which, assumedly, will be those captured vehicles from Ramadi).  Meanwhile, American planes began roaming the skies over that city, trying to destroy some of the equipment IS militants had captured.

Notice anything repetitive in all this -- other than another a bonanza for U.S. weapons makers?  Logically, it would prove less expensive for the Obama administration to simply arm the Islamic State directly before sending in the air strikes.  In any case, what a microcosm of U.S. imperial hubris and folly in the twenty-first century all this training and equipping of the Iraqi military has proved to be.  Start with the post-invasion decision of the Bush administration to totally disband Saddam’s army and instantly eject hundreds of thousands of unemployed Sunni military men and a full officer corps into the chaos of the “new” Iraq and you have an instant formula for creating a Sunni resistance movement.  Then, add in a little extra “training” at Camp Bucca, a U.S. military prison in Iraq, for key unemployed officers, and -- Voilà! -- you’ve helped set up the petri dish in which the leadership of the Islamic State movement will grow.  Multiply such stunning tactical finesse many times over globally and, as TomDispatch regular Michael Klare makes clear today, you have what might be called the folly of the “sole superpower” writ large. Tom

Delusionary Thinking in Washington 
The Desperate Plight of a Declining Superpower 
By Michael T. Klare

Take a look around the world and it’s hard not to conclude that the United States is a superpower in decline. Whether in Europe, Asia, or the Middle East, aspiring powers are flexing their muscles, ignoring Washington’s dictates, or actively combating them. Russia refuses to curtail its support for armed separatists in Ukraine; China refuses to abandon its base-building endeavors in the South China Sea; Saudi Arabia refuses to endorse the U.S.-brokered nuclear deal with Iran; the Islamic State movement (ISIS) refuses to capitulate in the face of U.S. airpower. What is a declining superpower supposed to do in the face of such defiance?

This is no small matter. For decades, being a superpower has been the defining characteristic of American identity. The embrace of global supremacy began after World War II when the United States assumed responsibility for resisting Soviet expansionism around the world; it persisted through the Cold War era and only grew after the implosion of the Soviet Union, when the U.S. assumed sole responsibility for combating a whole new array of international threats. As General Colin Powell famously exclaimed in the final days of the Soviet era, “We have to put a shingle outside our door saying, ‘Superpower Lives Here,’ no matter what the Soviets do, even if they evacuate from Eastern Europe.”

Imperial Overstretch Hits Washington

Strategically, in the Cold War years, Washington’s power brokers assumed that there would always be two superpowers perpetually battling for world dominance.  In the wake of the utterly unexpected Soviet collapse, American strategists began to envision a world of just one, of a “sole superpower” (aka Rome on the Potomac). In line with this new outlook, the administration of George H.W. Bush soon adopted a long-range plan intended to preserve that status indefinitely. Known as the Defense Planning Guidance for Fiscal Years 1994-99, it declared: “Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union.”

H.W.’s son, then the governor of Texas, articulated a similar vision of a globally encompassing Pax Americana when campaigning for president in 1999. If elected, he told military cadets at the Citadel in Charleston, his top goal would be “to take advantage of a tremendous opportunity -- given few nations in history -- to extend the current peace into the far realm of the future. A chance to project America’s peaceful influence not just across the world, but across the years.”

For Bush, of course, “extending the peace” would turn out to mean invading Iraq and igniting a devastating regional conflagration that only continues to grow and spread to this day. Even after it began, he did not doubt -- nor (despite the reputed wisdom offered by hindsight) does he today -- that this was the price that had to be paid for the U.S. to retain its vaunted status as the world’s sole superpower.

The problem, as many mainstream observers now acknowledge, is that such a strategy aimed at perpetuating U.S. global supremacy at all costs was always destined to result in what Yale historian Paul Kennedy, in his classic book The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, unforgettably termed “imperial overstretch.” As he presciently wrote in that 1987 study, it would arise from a situation in which “the sum total of the United States’ global interests and obligations is… far larger than the country’s power to defend all of them simultaneously.”

Indeed, Washington finds itself in exactly that dilemma today. What’s curious, however, is just how quickly such overstretch engulfed a country that, barely a decade ago, was being hailed as the planet’s first “hyperpower,” a status even more exalted than superpower. But that was before George W.’s miscalculation in Iraq and other missteps left the U.S. to face a war-ravaged Middle East with an exhausted military and a depleted treasury. At the same time, major and regional powers like China, India, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey have been building up their economic and military capabilities and, recognizing the weakness that accompanies imperial overstretch, are beginning to challenge U.S. dominance in many areas of the globe. The Obama administration has been trying, in one fashion or another, to respond in all of those areas -- among them Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and the South China Sea -- but without, it turns out, the capacity to prevail in any of them.

Nonetheless, despite a range of setbacks, no one in Washington’s power elite -- Senators Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders being the exceptions that prove the rule -- seems to have the slightest urge to abandon the role of sole superpower or even to back off it in any significant way. President Obama, who is clearly all too aware of the country’s strategic limitations, has been typical in his unwillingness to retreat from such a supremacist vision. “The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation,” he told graduating cadets at West Point in May 2014. “That has been true for the century past and it will be true for the century to come.”

How, then, to reconcile the reality of superpower overreach and decline with an unbending commitment to global supremacy?

The first of two approaches to this conundrum in Washington might be thought of as a high-wire circus act.  It involves the constant juggling of America’s capabilities and commitments, with its limited resources (largely of a military nature) being rushed relatively fruitlessly from one place to another in response to unfolding crises, even as attempts are made to avoid yet more and deeper entanglements. This, in practice, has been the strategy pursued by the current administration.  Call it the Obama Doctrine.

After concluding, for instance, that China had taken advantage of U.S. entanglement in Iraq and Afghanistan to advance its own strategic interests in Southeast Asia, Obama and his top advisers decided to downgrade the U.S. presence in the Middle East and free up resources for a more robust one in the western Pacific.  Announcing this shift in 2011 -- it would first be called a “pivot to Asia” and then a “rebalancing” there -- the president made no secret of the juggling act involved.

“After a decade in which we fought two wars that cost us dearly, in blood and treasure, the United States is turning our attention to the vast potential of the Asia Pacific region,” he told members of the Australian Parliament that November.  “As we end today’s wars, I have directed my national security team to make our presence and mission in the Asia Pacific a top priority.  As a result, reductions in U.S. defense spending will not -- I repeat, will not -- come at the expense of the Asia Pacific.”

Then, of course, the new Islamic State launched its offensive in Iraq in June 2014 and the American-trained army there collapsed with the loss of four northern cities. Videoed beheadings of American hostages followed, along with a looming threat to the U.S.-backed regime in Baghdad. Once again, President Obama found himself pivoting -- this time sending thousands of U.S. military advisers back to that country, putting American air power into its skies, and laying the groundwork for another major conflict there.

Meanwhile, Republican critics of the president, who claim he’s doing too little in a losing effort in Iraq (and Syria), have also taken him to task for not doing enough to implement the pivot to Asia. In reality, as his juggling act that satisfies no one continues in Iraq and the Pacific, he’s had a hard time finding the wherewithal to effectively confront Vladimir Putin in Ukraine, Bashar al-Assad in Syria, the Houthi rebels in Yemen, the various militias fighting for power in fragmenting Libya, and so on.

The Party of Utter Denialism

Clearly, in the face of multiplying threats, juggling has not proven to be a viable strategy.  Sooner or later, the “balls” will simply go flying and the whole system will threaten to fall apart. But however risky juggling may prove, it is not nearly as dangerous as the other strategic response to superpower decline in Washington: utter denial.

For those who adhere to this outlook, it’s not America’s global stature that’s eroding, but its will -- that is, its willingness to talk and act tough. If Washington were simply to speak more loudly, so this argument goes, and brandish bigger sticks, all these challenges would simply melt away. Of course, such an approach can only work if you’re prepared to back up your threats with actual force, or “hard power,” as some like to call it.

Among the most vocal of those touting this line is Senator John McCain, the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee and a persistent critic of President Obama. “For five years, Americans have been told that ‘the tide of war is receding,’ that we can pull back from the world at little cost to our interests and values,” he typically wrote in March 2014 in a New York Times op-ed. “This has fed a perception that the United States is weak, and to people like Mr. Putin, weakness is provocative.” The only way to prevent aggressive behavior by Russia and other adversaries, he stated, is “to restore the credibility of the United States as a world leader.” This means, among other things, arming the Ukrainians and anti-Assad Syrians, bolstering the NATO presence in Eastern Europe, combating “the larger strategic challenge that Iran poses,” and playing a “more robust” role (think: more “boots” on more ground) in the war against ISIS.

Above all, of course, it means a willingness to employ military force. “When aggressive rulers or violent fanatics threaten our ideals, our interests, our allies, and us,” he declared last November, “what ultimately makes the difference… is the capability, credibility, and global reach of American hard power.”

A similar approach -- in some cases even more bellicose -- is being articulated by the bevy of Republican candidates now in the race for president, Rand Paul again excepted. At a recent “Freedom Summit” in the early primary state of South Carolina, the various contenders sought to out-hard-power each other. Florida Senator Marco Rubio was loudly cheered for promising to make the U.S. “the strongest military power in the world.” Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker received a standing ovation for pledging to further escalate the war on international terrorists: “I want a leader who is willing to take the fight to them before they take the fight to us.” 

In this overheated environment, the 2016 presidential campaign is certain to be dominated by calls for increased military spending, a tougher stance toward Moscow and Beijing, and an expanded military presence in the Middle East. Whatever her personal views, Hillary Clinton, the presumed Democratic candidate, will be forced to demonstrate her backbone by embracing similar positions. In other words, whoever enters the Oval Office in January 2017 will be expected to wield a far bigger stick on a significantly less stable planet. As a result, despite the last decade and a half of interventionary disasters, we’re likely to see an even more interventionist foreign policy with an even greater impulse to use military force.

However initially gratifying such a stance is likely to prove for John McCain and the growing body of war hawks in Congress, it will undoubtedly prove disastrous in practice. Anyone who believes that the clock can now be turned back to 2002, when U.S. strength was at its zenith and the Iraq invasion had not yet depleted American wealth and vigor, is undoubtedly suffering from delusional thinking. China is far more powerful than it was 13 years ago, Russia has largely recovered from its post-Cold War slump, Iran has replaced the U.S. as the dominant foreign actor in Iraq, and other powers have acquired significantly greater freedom of action in an unsettled world. Under these circumstances, aggressive muscle-flexing in Washington is likely to result only in calamity or humiliation.

Time to Stop Pretending

Back, then, to our original question: What is a declining superpower supposed to do in the face of this predicament?

Anywhere but in Washington, the obvious answer would for it to stop pretending to be what it’s not. The first step in any 12-step imperial-overstretch recovery program would involve accepting the fact that American power is limited and global rule an impossible fantasy. Accepted as well would have to be this obvious reality: like it or not, the U.S. shares the planet with a coterie of other major powers -- none as strong as we are, but none so weak as to be intimidated by the threat of U.S. military intervention. Having absorbed a more realistic assessment of American power, Washington would then have to focus on how exactly to cohabit with such powers -- Russia, China, and Iran among them -- and manage its differences with them without igniting yet more disastrous regional firestorms. 

If strategic juggling and massive denial were not so embedded in the political life of this country’s “war capital,” this would not be an impossibly difficult strategy to pursue, as others have suggested. In 2010, for example, Christopher Layne of the George H.W. Bush School at Texas A&M argued in the American Conservative that the U.S. could no longer sustain its global superpower status and, “rather than having this adjustment forced upon it suddenly by a major crisis… should get ahead of the curve by shifting its position in a gradual, orderly fashion.” Layne and others have spelled out what this might entail: fewer military entanglements abroad, a diminishing urge to garrison the planet, reduced military spending, greater reliance on allies, more funds to use at home in rebuilding the crumbling infrastructure of a divided society, and a diminished military footprint in the Middle East.

But for any of this to happen, American policymakers would first have to abandon the pretense that the United States remains the sole global superpower -- and that may be too bitter a pill for the present American psyche (and for the political aspirations of certain Republican candidates) to swallow. From such denialism, it’s already clear, will only come further ill-conceived military adventures abroad and, sooner or later, under far grimmer circumstances, an American reckoning with reality.

Michael T. Klare, a TomDispatch regular, is a professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College and the author, most recently, of The Race for What’s Left. A documentary movie version of his book Blood and Oil is available from the Media Education FoundationFollow him on Twitter at @mklare1.

Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook. Check out the newest Dispatch Book, Nick Turse’s Tomorrow’s Battlefield: U.S. Proxy Wars and Secret Ops in Africa, and Tom Engelhardt's latest book, Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a Single-Superpower World.

Copyright 2015 Michael T. Klare

  Read Superpower in Distress
 March 30, 2015
by Ivan Jubert Guimarães, Bresil


Nós ainda não estamos preparados para viver em paz aqui na Terra. Desde que o mundo é mundo, o homem vive em guerra pelos mais variados motivos, poder, posses, riquezas e até mesmo inveja.
A primeira guerra ocorreu quando Caim matou Abel. Talvez você diga que este fato não foi uma guerra, mas um assassinato. E o que é uma guerra senão um assassinato coletivo? Pois em todas as guerras, além de soldados, morrem muitos civis, entre eles crianças, mães e idosos.
Vivemos em um mundo de dualidades, onde cada coisa tem seu inverso, ou seja, bom e mau, bonito e feio, caro e barato, preto e branco, escuridão e luz, guerra e paz, e por aí vai.
A paz só existe se existir guerra. Caso não existissem as guerras como saberíamos o que é paz?
Paz não é apenas a ausência de guerras ou de conflitos bélicos ou pessoais. Estar em paz significa estar bem consigo mesmo e enquanto o homem não se sentir bem consigo mesmo, ele não viverá em paz. Sua insatisfação o levará a procurar no outro aquilo que falta dele e aí vai gerar a discórdia
Soldados não fazem as guerras, já que estas são decididas em mesas de reuniões e terminam também em mesas de reuniões.
Soldados são mortos, mutilados, prisioneiros e aqueles que voltam para suas casas sem ferimentos no corpo voltam feridos na alma e muitos deles já nem são bem recebidos em suas famílias, não conseguem emprego e acabam perdendo tudo o que possuíam antes.
Se a guerra for curta, se é que pode existir uma guerra curta, o soldado serve no campo de batalha por dois anos e depois recebe a baixa do serviço e volta para casa. Para ele a guerra acabou, talvez ele se sinta aliviado, mas estará em paz?
A verdadeira paz é um estado de espírito, de calma e de repouso. No dia-a-dia, em sua cidade, ele vai se deparar com outra guerra, seja para conseguir um emprego, reconquistar o amor da família e ele vai se sentir de lado, pois um soldado ex-combatente só é visto como herói no dia do desembarque em seu país. Depois, é tratado como delinquente, maltrapilho, vagabundo e outras coisas.
Para ser realmente feliz o homem precisa voltar-se para dentro de si mesmo, reconhecer-se, admitir que ele não é perfeito e nem o dono da verdade. É preciso aprender a respeitar o outro. Se agir assim, ele não entrará em conflito e viverá sempre em paz!


Nous ne sommes toujours pas prêts à vivre en paix, ici sur terre. Étant donné que le monde est monde, l'homme vit dans la guerre par les motifs plus variés, la puissance, la possessions, la richesse et la même l'envie.
La guerre s'est produite quand Caïn tua Abel. Vous pourriez dire que ce fait n'était pas une guerre, mais un meurtre. Et ce qui est une guerre ou un meurtre de masse ? Comme dans toutes les guerres, en plus des soldats sont tués de trop nombreux civils, parmi les personnes âgées, des mères et des enfants.
Nous vivons dans un monde de dualité, où chaque chose a sa réciproque, c'est-à-dire, bon et mauvais, beau et laid, cher et pas cher, noir et blanc, ténèbres et lumière, guerre et paix et ainsi de suite. Paix n'existe que si il y a pas de guerre. S'il n'y a pas de guerre, comment pourrions-nous savoir ce qu'est la paix ?
La paix n'est pas juste l'absence de guerre ou de conflits belliqueux ou personnels. Être en paix, c'est être vous-même et alors que l'homme ne se sent pas bien dans lui-même, il ne vivra pas en paix. Insatisfaction mène la recherche pour les autres ce que vous lui manquez et puis va générer de discorde
Soldats ne font pas de guerres, puisque ceux-ci sont décidés dans les tables de réunion et tables de bout aux réunions.
Soldats sont tués, mutilés, prisonniers et ceux qui rentrent chez eux sains et saufs dans le corps reviennent blessé dans l'âme et beaucoup d'entre eux ne sont pas bien accueillies dans leur famille, ils ne peuvent pas d'emploi et finissent par perdre tout ce qu'ils possédaient avant.
Si la guerre est courte, si est-ce qu'il peut y avoir une guerre courte, le soldat sert sur le champ de bataille pendant deux ans et reçoit ensuite la basse et de service à la maison. Pour lui, que la guerre est finie, peut-être qu'il se sent soulagé, mais être en paix ?
La vraie paix est un état d'esprit, de calme et de repos. Au quotidien, dans votre ville, il sera confronté à une autre guerre, que ce soit obtenir un emploi, de reconquérir l'amour de la famille et il vous sentirez côté parce qu'un soldat vétéran est seulement considéré comme un héros le jour de votre arrivée dans votre pays. Est considéré comme délinquant, bum, bum et d'autres choses.
Pour être vraiment heureux homme a besoin de sauvegarder en lui-même, reconnaître, admettre qu'il n'est pas parfait et aucun n'est propriétaire de la vérité. Il faut apprendre à respecter l'autre. Si vous agissez comme ça, il n'entrera pas en conflit et vivra pour toujours dans la paix !


We are still not ready to live in peace, here on Earth. Since the world is world, man lives in the war for various reasons, the power, the possessions, wealth and the same envy.
The war occurred when Cain killed Abel. You could say that this was not a war, but a murder. And what is a war or a mass murder? As in all wars, in addition to soldiers are killed too many civilians, among the elderly, mothers and children.
We live in a world of duality, where every thing has its inverse, i.e., good and bad, beautiful and ugly, expensive and cheap, black and white, light and darkness, war and peace and so on.
Peace exists only if there is no war. If there's no war, how could we know what What is peace?
Peace is not just the absence of war or warlike or personal conflicts. Be in peace, is to be yourself and while human feels good in himself, he will not live in peace. Dissatisfaction leads the search for others that you miss him and will then generate discord
Soldiers do not wars, since these are decided in meeting tables and end in meeting tables.
Soldiers are killed, mutilated, prisoners, and those who return home safe and sound in the body come back hurt in the soul and many of them are not well received in their family, they cannot use and end up losing everything they owned before.
If the war is short, if what is there may be a short war, the soldier serves on the battlefield for two years and then receives the bass and home service. For him, the war is over, perhaps he feels relieved, but be in peace?
True peace is a State of mind, calm and rest. Every day, in your city, he will be faced with another war, whether to get a job, to win back the love of the family and you feel side because that a veteran soldier is only considered as a hero the day of your arrival in your country. Is considered as offender, bum, bum and other things.
To be truly happy man needs to save itself, acknowledge, admit that it is not perfect and neither is owner of the truth. We must learn to respect the other. If you act like that, he would not enter into conflict and will live always in peace!


Estamos todavía no está listos para vivir en paz, aquí en la tierra. Puesto que el mundo es mundo, el hombre vive en la guerra por varias razones, el poder, las posesiones, riqueza y la misma envidia.
La guerra se produjo cuando Caín mató a Abel. Se podría decir que esto no era una guerra, sino un asesinato. Y ¿qué es una guerra o un asesinato en masa? Como en todas las guerras, son además los soldados mataron a muchos civiles, entre los ancianos, madres y niños.
Vivimos en un mundo de dualidad, donde cada cosa tiene su inverso, es decir, bueno, malo, hermoso y feo, caro y barato, blanco y negro, luz y oscuridad, guerra y paz y así sucesivamente.
Paz existe sólo si no hay guerra. Si no hay guerra, cómo podíamos saber lo que

¿Qué es la paz?
La paz no es sólo la ausencia de guerra o conflictos bélicos o personales. Estar en paz, es para ser tú mismo y mientras humano se siente bien en sí mismo, lo hará no vivir en paz. Insatisfacción lleva a la búsqueda de otros que le echo de menos y luego va a generar discordia
Soldados hacer no guerras, ya que estos se deciden en el cumplimiento de las tablas y terminan en las mesas de reuniones.
Soldados son asesinados, mutilados, los presos y aquellos que vuelven a casa sano y salvo en el cuerpo vienen atrás heridas en el alma y muchos de ellos no son bien recibidos en su familia, no pueden usar y terminan todo lo que poseían antes perdiendo.
Si la guerra es corta, si lo que existe puede ser una guerra corta, el soldado sirve en el campo de batalla desde hace dos años y luego recibe los graves y servicio a domicilio. ¿Para él, la guerra terminó, tal vez se siente aliviada, pero estar en paz?
Verdadera paz es un estado de ánimo, tranquilidad y descanso. Cada día, en su ciudad, deberán afrontar otra guerra, ya sea conseguir un trabajo, para reconquistar el amor de la familia y se siente parte porque un soldado veterano sólo es considerado como un héroe el día de su llegada a su país. Se considera como delincuente, vagabundo, vago y otras cosas.
Para ser verdaderamente feliz hombre necesita para salvarse a sí misma, reconocer, admitir que no es perfecto y tampoco es dueño de la verdad. Debemos aprender a respetar a la otra. Si actúas así, él no entraría en conflicto y vivirá siempre en paz!


Мы все еще не готовы жить в мире, здесь на земле. Поскольку мир-это мир, человек живет в войне для различных причин, власть, имущество, богатство и же зависть.
Войны произошел, когда Каин убил Abel. Можно сказать, что это не война, а убийство. И что такое война или массовые убийства? Как и все войны, помимо солдат, убили слишком много гражданских лиц, среди стариков, матерей и детей.
Мы живем в мире двойственности, где каждая вещь имеет свое обратное, то есть, хорошие и плохие, красивые и уродливые, дорого и дешево, черный и белый, свет и тьма, войны и мира и так далее.
Мир существует только в том случае, если нет никакой войны. Если нет никакой войны, как мы знаем что Что такое мир?
Мир — это не просто отсутствие войны или воинственного или личных конфликтов. Быть в мире, это быть самим собой и хотя человека чувствует себя хорошо в себе, он будет не жить в мире. Неудовлетворение ведет поиск других недоставать его и затем будет генерировать раздора
Ду солдаты не войны, так как они определяются в решении таблицы и заканчиваются в Конференц столы.
Солдат убиты, искалечены, заключенных и те, кто вернулся домой целым и невредимым в организме приходят обратно больно в душе и не многие из них хорошо поступают в их семье, они не могут использовать и в конечном итоге потерять все, что они владели раньше.
Если война является коротким, если то, что есть, может быть короткой войны, солдат служит на поле боя в течение двух лет и затем получает бас и обслуживание на дому. Для него война закончилась, возможно он чувствует облегчение, но быть в мире?
Истинный мир — это состояние ума, спокойствия и отдыха. Каждый день в вашем городе, он столкнется с другой войны, ли устроиться на работу, чтобы вернуть любовь семьи и вы чувствуете стороне, потому что ветеран солдат только рассматривается как герой в день вашего прибытия в вашей стране. Рассматривается как преступника, бум, бум и другие вещи.
Чтобы быть действительно счастливым, что нужно человеку, чтобы спасти себя, признать, признать, что это не идеальный и не является владельцем истины. Мы должны научиться уважать других. Если вы действуете так, он не вступит в конфликт и всегда будет жить в мире!

 April 3, 2015
by M'Hamed Bouyahia, Congo RDC


Je veux vivre à ma façon et non à la façon des autres
Mon enfance n'a été qu' un ténébreux orage traversée par le soleiL
Je veux vivre pour respirer , pour frémir à la brise matinale
Violences ,conflits guerre , ont fait un tel ravage que dans mon cœur je souffre
Je ferme les yeux sous un soleil trop vif, et sous les obus meurtriers
Je veux vivre pour serrer dans mes doigts une poignée de sable
Mais voilà aujourd’hui huit je suis au milieux de la bataille
Je ne prendrais pas les armes , je luterais avec mes mots de paix
Je veux vivre pour courir pied nus sur les rochers , pour crier
Hurler et siffler si j' en ai envie sans la peur dans le ventre
Je veux voir tout ce que l' on peut voir dans une vie avant de mourir
Tout ce qui est possible de voir d' entendre et sentir toutes les odeurs de la terre
Je lutterai toujours pour dominer la paix et un jour nous la gagnerons
Je veux vivre pour avoir des amis et non des ennemis, pour embrasser une fille
Je veux partir avec mon amour au delà des frontières comme deux colombe blanches
Je ne veux pas vivre comme un mouton mais comme un bélier
Tous les hommes réunis à la même table chantant le refrain de la paix ,
Comme ce serait beau , signant une indestructible union
Debout frères du monde entier arrachons l' herbe du vice
Ensemençons l' amour,malgres les pièges et supplices
Je ne veux pas vivre en tendant la joue gauche pour me réduire à néant
Sous nos yeux , chaque jour , la misère est féconde de malheur
Voltigeant sur les eaux de la sagesse éternelle; chantant des airs fraternels
Sachant à jamais que tous les hommes sont frères par un DIEU UNIQUE !


I want to live my way and not like others
My childhood has been a dark storm crossed by the Sun
I want to live to breathe, to shudder at the morning breeze
Violence, war conflicts, have made such havoc in my heart I suffer
I close my eyes under a too bright sun, and the deadly shells
I want to live to tighten in my fingers a handful of sand
But that's today eight I'm in the middle of the battle
I'd not take weapons, I luterais with my words of peace
I want to live to run bare foot on the rocks, for crying out loud
Scream and whistle if I want without fear in the belly
I want to see everything that the can be seen in a life before dying
All that is possible to see hear and feel all the smells of the Earth
I vainly fire always to dominate peace and one day we will win
I want to live to have friends and not enemies, to kiss a girl
I want to leave with my love beyond the borders as two Dove White
I don't want to live like a sheep but as a RAM
All men together at the same table singing the chorus of peace,
As it would be beautiful, signing an indestructible union
Standing brothers around the world snatch vice grass
Ensemençons love, despite the traps and tortures
I don't want to live by extending his left cheek to reduce me to nil
Before our eyes, each day, misery is fertile of doom
Fluttering on the waters of eternal wisdom; singing of the fraternal air
Forever knowing that all men are brothers by one God!


Quiero vivir mi manera y no como otros
Mi infancia ha sido una tormenta oscura atravesada por el sol
Quiero vivir para respirar, para estremecer a la brisa matutina
Violencia, conflictos bélicos, han hecho tantos estragos en mi corazón yo sufro
Cierro los ojos bajo un sol brillante y los proyectiles mortales
Quiero vivir para apretar en mis dedos un puñado de arena
Pero eso es hoy ocho años que estoy en medio de la batalla
No tomaría las armas, que luterais con mis palabras de paz
Quiero vivir para correr los pies desnudos en las rocas, por amor de Dios
Gritar y silbar si quiero sin miedo en el vientre
Quiero ver todo lo que el puede verse en una vida antes de morir
Todo lo que es posible ver oír y sentir todos los olores de la tierra
En vano fuego siempre para dominar la paz y un día que vamos a ganar
Quiero vivir para tener amigos y no enemigos, para besar a una chica
Quiero irme con mi amor más allá de las fronteras como dos paloma blanca
No quiero vivir como una oveja, sino como un carnero
Todos los hombres juntos en la misma mesa cantando el coro de la paz,
Como sería hermoso, firmando una Unión indestructible
Hermanos de pie alrededor el mundo envión vice pasto
Ensemençons amor, a pesar de las trampas y las torturas
No quiero vivir mediante la ampliación de su mejilla izquierda para reducir a cero el me
Ante nuestros ojos, cada día, miseria es fértil de doom
Revoloteando en las aguas de la eterna sabiduría; canto del aire fraternal
Siempre sabiendo que todos los hombres son hermanos por Dios!


Eu quero viver a minha maneira e não como outros
Minha infância foi uma tempestade negra, atravessada por do sol
Eu quero viver para respirar, a sacudir a brisa da manhã
Violência, conflitos de guerra, fizeram tais estragos no meu coração, eu sofro
Eu fecho meus olhos sob um sol muito brilhante e as conchas mortais
Eu quero viver para apertar os meus dedos um punhado de areia
Mas isso é hoje oito anos que estou no meio da batalha
Eu não tomaria armas, eu luterais com minhas palavras de paz
Eu quero viver para correr de pés descalços nas pedras, pelo amor de Deus
Gritar e assobia se quiser sem medo na barriga
Quero ver tudo o que o pode ser visto em uma vida antes de morrer
Tudo isso é possível ver ouvir e sentir todos os cheiros da terra
Vaidosamente fogo sempre para dominar a paz e um dia que venceremos
Eu quero viver, ter amigos e não inimigos, beijar uma garota
Eu quero sair com meu amor para além das fronteiras como duas pomba branca
Não quero viver como uma ovelha, mas como um carneiro
Todos os homens juntos na mesma mesa cantando o refrão da paz,
Como seria bonito, assinando uma União indestrutível
Irmãos em pé ao redor do mundo arrebatar vice grama
Ensemençons amar, apesar das armadilhas e torturas
Não quero viver, estendendo sua bochecha esquerda para me reduzir a zero
Diante de nossos olhos, cada dia, miséria é fértil de doom
Flutuando sobre as águas da sabedoria eterna; canto do ar fraternal
Para sempre, sabendo que todos os homens são irmãos, por Deus!


Я хочу жить мой путь и не нравится другим
Мое детство была темная буря, перешли от солнца
Я хочу жить дышать, дрожат на утренний бриз
Насилие, военные конфликты, сделали такой хаос в моем сердце, я страдаю
Я закрываю глаза под слишком яркое солнце и смертоносные снаряды
Я хочу жить, чтобы затянуть в мои пальцы, горсть песка
Но это сегодня, восемь, я нахожусь в середине битвы
Я бы не взять оружие, я luterais с моими словами мира
Я хочу жить, чтобы запустить босиком на скалах, для плакать вне loud
Крик и свист, если я хочу без страха в живот
Я хочу видеть все, что можно увидеть в жизни перед смертью
Все, что можно видеть слышать и чувствовать все запахи земли
Я тщетно огонь всегда доминировать мир и один день, когда мы победим
Я хочу жить у друзей и не врагов, чтобы поцеловать девушку
Я хочу оставить с моей любовью за пределами как два белых голубя
Я не хочу жить как овца, но как БАРАНА
Все люди вместе за одним столом, пение хора мира,
Как было бы красиво, подписание нерушимый союз
Постоянный братья во всем мире вагина вице трава
Ensemençons любовь, несмотря на ловушки и пытки
Я не хочу жить, расширяя его левую щеку мне уменьшить до нуля
Перед нашими глазами каждый день страдания плодородной из doom
Развевающиеся на водах вечной мудрости; пение братского воздуха
Навсегда, зная, что все люди-братья, один Бог!

 June 3, 2015
by M’Hamed Bouyahia, Algérie


Du soudan au Rwanda en passant par le Burundi,O toi paix ou es tu

De l’Éthiopie au Congo sans oublier la Tchétchénie,qui réduit les rancœurs
On entend des pleurs et des effroyables cris.je luterais toujours
Des cris déchirants, des cris de tortures, des cris de terreur,
Des cris de famine, de misère et d’horreur,un jour nous gagnerons
Fruit des guerres et des sectes sources de tous les malheurs syllabe de flamme
Causés par des hommes à la quête effrénée du pouvoir,violences conflits guerre DROITS DE L’HOMME DANS LA PAIX …DROITS DE L’HOMME DANS LA PAIX …
Du soudan au Rwanda en passant par le Burundi,O toi paix ou es tu
De l’Éthiopie au Congo sans oublier la Tchétchénie,qui réduit les rancœurs
On entend des pleurs et des effroyables cris.je luterais toujours
Des cris déchirants, des cris de tortures, des cris de terreur,
Des cris de famine, de misère et d’horreur,un jour nous gagnerons
Fruit des guerres et des sectes sources de tous les malheurs syllabe de flamme
Causés par des hommes à la quête effrénée du pouvoir,violences conflits guerre
Qui méconnaissent nos droits et oublient leur devoirs synonyme de bonheur
C’est un enfant,orphelin de père et mère,c est le pépiement d un oiseau blessé
Qui a trempé dans ses larmes amères,de l’ aurore au crépuscule Pour vous faire vivre à travers sa plume,que l’ azur de son organisme soit conservé
Sa dernière heure et malgré la souffrance qui dévore son âme et son cœur
Il réussit tout de même à faire son portrait qui est soumis a une balance non truquée
Qui est celui d’un homme parfait.en une indestructible union main dans la main
Pieds grêles, complètement nu s’il n’est pas en guenilles,il regarde le monde
Acculturé, exploité, massacré comme de vulgaire chenilles,les âmes pétrifies
• Affamé, illettré et parfois cannibale malgré lui.n'ayant plus d amis
Éternel notre Dieu disait, soldats en béquilles ,voleurs et destructeurs
Paix sur la terre , vous rabaissez toutes les femmes qui vous ont engendrés
Je vous ai donne la paix, terre profanée!! vies humiliées par vos mains
Je vous laisse la paix pour que vous viviez dans le jardin d EDEN
Mais qu’aviez vous fait !vous avez arrosez les champs de votre sang
Tous ses bienfaits? Que je vous ai attribué , vous les avez mis à l enfer
Et du Monde que moi Dieu tout puissant voulait merveilleux et parfait?
• Chaque jour les méfaits,car des cadavres à mes pieds tombent par milliers .
S’il faut vous détruire tous , qu’allez-vous gouvernez, dans ce jardin
Qui après vous prendront-ils le relais,dans le silence de la mort
Alors il est temps!Oui temps de monter au créneau et clamer l’arrêt des bombes
Nous voulons la paix !Que nos droits soient reconnus et respectés,
Aimer nos mamans à travers leurs contes de fées dans la détente parfaite
Sans inquiétudes,sans voir une main criminelle posée sur un fusil
Dans,la paix,la liberté et la grande quiétude,chantant des airs d amitié fraternelle
• Après ces vœux,son effroyable récit,notre orphelin accablé des maux de l’ existence
Que rien n’est autant sacré comme la VIE, que tous les hommes sont frères
Que ma mort puisse vous grandir,parmi toutes ses inhumaines guerres
Lave vos esprits pour que vous puissiez réfléchir.de cette ardente détresse
Hommes d’Afrique, d’Asie et du monde entier
Crions à tue-tête levez le poing :O vie toute joie, de paix et d harmonie
• Que tous les peuples privés d’ amour se relèvent le cœur remplie de joie .


Sudán a Ruanda vía Burundi, O paz o estás
Desde Etiopía hasta Congo sin olvidar a Chechenia, que reduce la amargura
Significa lágrimas y algunos terribles luterais cris.je siempre
Gritos desgarradores gritos de tortura, los gritos de terror,
Gritos de hambre, miseria y horror, algún día que vamos a ganar
Fruto de las guerras y las fuentes de todas las sectas desgracias sílaba llama
Causado por el hombre para la búsqueda frenética de poder, guerra conflicto de violencia
Que ignoran nuestros derechos y olvidar sus deberes de felicidad sinónimo
Es un niño, huérfano de padre y madre, c es el canto de pájaro herido
Que ha empapado de lágrimas amargas, amanecer hasta el anochecer
Para que usted pueda vivir a través de su pluma, el azul de su organización a ser preservado
Su última hora y a pesar de sufrir que devora su alma y su corazón
Todavía se las arregló para hacer su retrato que se somete no ha instalado las escalas
Es un hombre parfait.en una Unión indestructible de la mano
Pies delgados, completamente desnudos no es desigual, se ve en el mundo
Acculturé, funcionado, masacrados como vulgares orugas, almas pétrifies
Hambrientos, analfabetos y a veces caníbal a pesar lui.n' tener más amigos d
Dijo que nuestro Dios eterno, soldados con muletas, ladrones y destructores
Paz en la tierra, baja todas las mujeres que le han generado
Tengo da paz, tierra profanada! vive humillado por las manos
Os dejo la paz que vive en el jardín del Edén
Pero, qué has hecho! riegas los campos en la sangre
¿Todos sus beneficios? Tengo asignado, las pones en el infierno
¿Y el mundo que yo Dios Todopoderoso maravillosa y perfecta?
Daño cada día, porque cae muerto a mis pies por miles.
Si destruimos todos, qué regirán, en este jardín
Después de tomar el relevo, en el silencio de la muerte
Entonces es hora! Sí tiempo para montar el nicho y proclamar la sentencia de bombas
Queremos la paz! Que nuestros derechos son reconocidos y respetados,
Amo a nuestras madres a través de sus cuentos de hadas de la relajación perfecta
Sin preocupaciones, sin ver una mano criminal en un arma
En paz, libertad y gran tranquilidad, cantando canciones d amistad fraternal
Después de estos votos, la terrible historia, nuestra huérfana abrumado por los males de la existencia
Que nada es tan sagrado como la vida, que todos los hombres son hermanos
Que mi muerte puede crecer entre todas sus guerras inhumanas
Lave sus mentes para que puedas reflechir.de esta angustia ardiente
Hombres de África, Asia y el mundo
Grito en voz alta levantar el puño: Oh vida todo alegría, paz y armonía d
Que todos los pueblos privados de amor son el corazón lleno de alegría.


Sudan to Rwanda via Burundi, O you peace or are you
From Ethiopia to Congo without forget Chechnya, which reduces the bitterness
Mean tears and some appalling cris.je luterais always
Heart-rending cries, the cries of torture, cries of terror,
Cries of hunger, misery and horror, one day we will win
Fruit of wars and the sources of all misfortunes sects syllable flame
Caused by men to the frantic quest for power, violence conflict war
Who ignore our rights and forget their synonymous with duties of happiness

It is a child, an orphan of father and mother, c is the d chirping bird injured
Which has drenched in bitter tears, dawn to dusk
For you to live through his pen, the azure of its organization to be preserved
His last hour and despite suffering who devours his soul and his heart
He still managed to make his portrait that is submitted has not rigged scales
That is a man parfait.en an indestructible union hand in hand
Slender feet, completely naked is not ragged, he looks at the world
Acculturé, operated, massacred as vulgar caterpillars, souls pétrifies
Hungry, illiterate and sometimes Cannibal despite lui.n' having more friends d
Eternal our God said, soldiers with crutches, thieves and destroyers
Peace on Earth, you lower all the women that have generated you
I have gives peace, desecrated land! lives humiliated by your hands
I leave you the peace that you live in the garden of EDEN
But what have you done! you water the fields in your blood
All its benefits? I have you assigned, you put them in hell
And the world than me Almighty God want wonderful and perfect?
Every day harm, because dead at my feet fall by the thousands.
If we destroy you all, what will you govern, in this garden
After you take the relay, in the silence of death
Then it's time! Yes time to assemble the niche and proclaim the judgment of bombs
We want peace! That our rights are recognized and respected,
Love our moms through their fairy tales in the perfect relaxation
Without concerns, without seeing a criminal hand on a gun
In, peace, freedom and great tranquility, singing tunes d brotherly friendship
After these vows, the appalling story, our orphan overwhelmed with the evils of the existence
That nothing is as sacred as life, that all men are brothers
That my death can you grow up among all its inhumane wars
Wash your minds so that you can reflechir.de this fiery distress
Men from Africa, Asia and the world
Cry loudly raise your fist: O life all joy, peace and harmony d
That all peoples deprived of love are the heart filled with joy.


Sudão para Ruanda através do Burundi, Ó paz você ou você
Da Etiópia ao Congo sem esquecer a Chechênia, que reduz a amargura
Quer dizer lágrimas e algumas terríveis cris.je luterais sempre
Gritos de cortar o coração, os gritos de tortura, gritos de terror,
Gritos de fome, miséria e horror, um dia que venceremos
Fruto das guerras e as fontes de todas as seitas infortúnios sílaba chama
Causada por homens para a busca frenética pelo poder, guerra de conflito de violência
Que ignorar os nossos direitos e esquecer seus deveres de felicidade sinônimo
É uma criança, um órfão de pai e mãe, c é o d Gorjeio pássaro ferido
Que tem mergulhado em lágrimas amargas, amanhecer ao anoitecer
Para você viver na sua caneta, o azure de sua organização para ser preservado
Sua última hora e apesar de ter sofrido que devora a sua alma e seu coração
Ele ainda conseguiu fazer seu retrato enviado não fez escalas
É um homem parfait.en uma União indestrutível de mãos dadas
Pés delgados, completamente nuas não é irregular, ele olha para o mundo
Acculturé, operado, massacrados como lagartas vulgares, almas pétrifies
Famintos, analfabetos e às vezes canibal apesar lui.n' ter mais amigos d
Disse que nosso Deus eterno, soldados com muletas, ladrões e destróieres
Paz na terra, todas as mulheres que têm gerado você baixar
Tenho que dá paz, profanada terra! vive humilhado por suas mãos
Deixo-vos a paz que mora no jardim do Éden
Mas o que você fez! você molha os campos no seu sangue
Todos os seus benefícios? Eu tenho você atribuído, você colocá-los no inferno
E o mundo do que eu, Deus todo-poderoso quer maravilhoso e perfeito?
Todos os dias mal, porque morto aos meus pés caem aos milhares.
Se destruirmos a todos vocês, o que irá governar, neste jardim
Depois de tomar o relé, no silêncio da morte
Então está na hora! É hora de montar o nicho e proclamar o juízo de bombas
Queremos paz! Que nossos direitos são reconhecidos e respeitados,
Amamos as nossas mães através de seus contos de fadas no relaxamento perfeito
Sem preocupações, sem ver uma mão criminosa em uma arma
Em, paz, liberdade e tranquilidade grande, cantando músicas d amizade fraternal
Após estes votos, a terrível história, nosso órfão sobrecarregado com os males da existência
Que nada é tão sagrado como a vida, que todos os homens são irmãos
Que minha morte pode crescer entre todas as suas guerras desumanas
Lave suas mentes para que você possa reflechir.de esta angústia ardente
Homens da África, Ásia e o mundo
Grito bem alto levantar o punho: Oh vida tudo alegria, paz e harmonia d
Que todos os povos privados de amor são o coração cheio de alegria.


Судан в Руанду через Бурунди, O вы мир или вы
Из Эфиопии в Конго не забудьте Чечни, который уменьшает горечь
Всегда означает слезы и некоторые ужасные luterais cris.je
Душераздирающие крики, крики пыток, крики террора,
Крики голода, страданий и ужасов, один день, когда мы победим
Плоды войн и источники всех несчастий сект слог пламени
Вызванные мужчин в отчаянные поиски власти, насилия конфликт война Кто игнорируют наши права и забыть их синонимом обязанности счастья
Это ребенок, сирота, отца и матери, c d щебетание птиц получили ранения
Который обливаясь горькими слезами, рассвета до заката
Для вас жить через его пера, azure ее организации должны быть сохранены
Его последний час, несмотря на страдания, кто пожирает его душа и сердце его
Он до сих пор удалось сделать его портрет, который представляется не сфальсифицированы весы
Это parfait.en человек нерушимый союз рука об руку
Стройные ноги, полностью голый не рваные, он смотрит на мир
Acculturé, эксплуатация, убиты как вульгарная гусениц, души pétrifies
Голодные, неграмотных и иногда Каннибал несмотря на lui.n' иметь больше друзей d
Вечный наш Бог сказал, солдат с костылями, воров и эсминцев
Мир на земле, вы ниже всех женщин, которые вызвали вас
У меня дает мира, осквернили землю! живет униженным ваши руки
Я оставляю вам, мир, что вы живете в РАЙСКОМ саду
Но то, что вы сделали! вода поля в вашей крови
Все его преимущества? У меня есть вам назначен, вы поместите их в аду
И чем меня Всемогущий Бог прекрасный и совершенный?
Каждый день вред, потому что мертвых на ноги упасть на тысячи.
Если мы уничтожить вас всех, что будет вам регулировать, в этом саду
После того, как вы берете реле, в молчании смерти
Затем пришло время! Да время собрать свою нишу и провозгласить решение бомб
Мы хотим мира! Что наши права признаются и соблюдаются,
Любят наши мамы через свои сказки в идеального отдыха
Без проблем, не видя преступной рукой на пистолет
В мир, свобода и Великого спокойствия, петь мелодии d братской дружбы
После этих обетов ужасающие история, наши сироты перегружены с зол существования
Что ничего же священны, как жизнь, что все люди-братья
Что моей смерти вы можете расти среди всех его бесчеловечной войны
Вымойте ваши умы, так что вы можете reflechir.de этот огненный дистресс
Мужчины из Африки, Азии и всего мира
Плакать громко поднять свой кулак: O жизнь все радости, мира и гармонии d

Что все народы, лишенные любви сердца наполнены радостью.

Du soudan au Rwanda en passant par le Burundi,O toi paix ou es tu
De l’Éthiopie au Congo sans oublier la Tchétchénie,qui réduit les rancœurs
On entend des pleurs et des effroyables cris.je luterais toujours
Des cris déchirants, des cris de tortures, des cris de terreur,
Des cris de famine, de misère et d’horreur,un jour nous gagnerons
Fruit des guerres et des sectes sources de tous les malheurs syllabe de flamme
Causés par des hommes à la quête effrénée du pouvoir,violences conflits guerre
Qui méconnaissent nos droits et oublient leur devoirs synonyme de bonheur
C’est un enfant,orphelin de père et mère,c est le pépiement d un oiseau blessé
Qui a trempé dans ses larmes amères,de l’ aurore au crépuscule
Pour vous faire vivre à travers sa plume,que l’ azur de son organisme soit conservé
Sa dernière heure et malgré la souffrance qui dévore son âme et son cœur
Il réussit tout de même à faire son portrait qui est soumis a une balance non truquée
Qui est celui d’un homme parfait.en une indestructible union main dans la main
Pieds grêles, complètement nu s’il n’est pas en guenilles,il regarde le monde
Acculturé, exploité, massacré comme de vulgaire chenilles,les âmes pétrifies
• Affamé, illettré et parfois cannibale malgré lui.n'ayant plus d amis
Éternel notre Dieu disait, soldats en béquilles ,voleurs et destructeurs
Paix sur la terre , vous rabaissez toutes les femmes qui vous ont engendrés
Je vous ai donne la paix, terre profanée!! vies humiliées par vos mains
Je vous laisse la paix pour que vous viviez dans le jardin d EDEN
Mais qu’aviez vous fait !vous avez arrosez les champs de votre sang
Tous ses bienfaits? Que je vous ai attribué , vous les avez mis à l enfer
Et du Monde que moi Dieu tout puissant voulait merveilleux et parfait?
• Chaque jour les méfaits,car des cadavres à mes pieds tombent par milliers .
S’il faut vous détruire tous , qu’allez-vous gouvernez, dans ce jardin
Qui après vous prendront-ils le relais,dans le silence de la mort
Alors il est temps!Oui temps de monter au créneau et clamer l’arrêt des bombes
Nous voulons la paix !Que nos droits soient reconnus et respectés,
Aimer nos mamans à travers leurs contes de fées dans la détente parfaite
Sans inquiétudes,sans voir une main criminelle posée sur un fusil
Dans,la paix,la liberté et la grande quiétude,chantant des airs d amitié fraternelle
• Après ces vœux,son effroyable récit,notre orphelin accablé des maux de l’ existence
Que rien n’est autant sacré comme la VIE, que tous les hommes sont frères
Que ma mort puisse vous grandir,parmi toutes ses inhumaines guerres
Lave vos esprits pour que vous puissiez réfléchir.de cette ardente détresse
Hommes d’Afrique, d’Asie et du monde entier
Crions à tue-tête levez le poing :O vie toute joie, de paix et d harmonie
• Que tous les peuples privés d’ amour se relèvent le cœur remplie de joie .


Sudán a Ruanda vía Burundi, O paz o estás
Desde Etiopía hasta Congo sin olvidar a Chechenia, que reduce la amargura
Significa lágrimas y algunos terribles luterais cris.je siempre
Gritos desgarradores gritos de tortura, los gritos de terror,
Gritos de hambre, miseria y horror, algún día que vamos a ganar
Fruto de las guerras y las fuentes de todas las sectas desgracias sílaba llama
Causado por el hombre para la búsqueda frenética de poder, guerra conflicto de violencia
Que ignoran nuestros derechos y olvidar sus deberes de felicidad sinónimo
Es un niño, huérfano de padre y madre, c es el canto de pájaro herido
Que ha empapado de lágrimas amargas, amanecer hasta el anochecer
Para que usted pueda vivir a través de su pluma, el azul de su organización a ser preservado
Su última hora y a pesar de sufrir que devora su alma y su corazón
Todavía se las arregló para hacer su retrato que se somete no ha instalado las escalas
Es un hombre parfait.en una Unión indestructible de la mano
Pies delgados, completamente desnudos no es desigual, se ve en el mundo
Acculturé, funcionado, masacrados como vulgares orugas, almas pétrifies
Hambrientos, analfabetos y a veces caníbal a pesar lui.n' tener más amigos d
Dijo que nuestro Dios eterno, soldados con muletas, ladrones y destructores
Paz en la tierra, baja todas las mujeres que le han generado
Tengo da paz, tierra profanada! vive humillado por las manos
Os dejo la paz que vive en el jardín del Edén
Pero, qué has hecho! riegas los campos en la sangre
¿Todos sus beneficios? Tengo asignado, las pones en el infierno
¿Y el mundo que yo Dios Todopoderoso maravillosa y perfecta?
Daño cada día, porque cae muerto a mis pies por miles.
Si destruimos todos, qué regirán, en este jardín
Después de tomar el relevo, en el silencio de la muerte
Entonces es hora! Sí tiempo para montar el nicho y proclamar la sentencia de bombas
Queremos la paz! Que nuestros derechos son reconocidos y respetados,
Amo a nuestras madres a través de sus cuentos de hadas de la relajación perfecta
Sin preocupaciones, sin ver una mano criminal en un arma
En paz, libertad y gran tranquilidad, cantando canciones d amistad fraternal
Después de estos votos, la terrible historia, nuestra huérfana abrumado por los males de la existencia
Que nada es tan sagrado como la vida, que todos los hombres son hermanos
Que mi muerte puede crecer entre todas sus guerras inhumanas
Lave sus mentes para que puedas reflechir.de esta angustia ardiente
Hombres de África, Asia y el mundo
Grito en voz alta levantar el puño: Oh vida todo alegría, paz y armonía d
Que todos los pueblos privados de amor son el corazón lleno de alegría.


Sudan to Rwanda via Burundi, O you peace or are you
From Ethiopia to Congo without forget Chechnya, which reduces the bitterness
Mean tears and some appalling cris.je luterais always
Heart-rending cries, the cries of torture, cries of terror,
Cries of hunger, misery and horror, one day we will win
Fruit of wars and the sources of all misfortunes sects syllable flame
Caused by men to the frantic quest for power, violence conflict war
Who ignore our rights and forget their synonymous with duties of happiness

It is a child, an orphan of father and mother, c is the d chirping bird injured
Which has drenched in bitter tears, dawn to dusk
For you to live through his pen, the azure of its organization to be preserved
His last hour and despite suffering who devours his soul and his heart
He still managed to make his portrait that is submitted has not rigged scales
That is a man parfait.en an indestructible union hand in hand
Slender feet, completely naked is not ragged, he looks at the world
Acculturé, operated, massacred as vulgar caterpillars, souls pétrifies
Hungry, illiterate and sometimes Cannibal despite lui.n' having more friends d
Eternal our God said, soldiers with crutches, thieves and destroyers
Peace on Earth, you lower all the women that have generated you
I have gives peace, desecrated land! lives humiliated by your hands
I leave you the peace that you live in the garden of EDEN
But what have you done! you water the fields in your blood
All its benefits? I have you assigned, you put them in hell
And the world than me Almighty God want wonderful and perfect?
Every day harm, because dead at my feet fall by the thousands.
If we destroy you all, what will you govern, in this garden
After you take the relay, in the silence of death
Then it's time! Yes time to assemble the niche and proclaim the judgment of bombs
We want peace! That our rights are recognized and respected,
Love our moms through their fairy tales in the perfect relaxation
Without concerns, without seeing a criminal hand on a gun
In, peace, freedom and great tranquility, singing tunes d brotherly friendship

After these vows, the appalling story, our orphan overwhelmed with the evils of the existence
That nothing is as sacred as life, that all men are brothers
That my death can you grow up among all its inhumane wars
Wash your minds so that you can reflechir.de this fiery distress
Men from Africa, Asia and the world
Cry loudly raise your fist: O life all joy, peace and harmony d
That all peoples deprived of love are the heart filled with joy.




Go to the top of the page