Tuesday, December 30, 2014
Has the IMF Been Reformed? » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
Has the IMF Been Reformed? » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
Value Added Tax (VAT) is the IMF’s ‘poor tax’ because it hits poor people far harder than it does the wealthy, as a percentage of income. IMF orthodoxy forever represents regime maintenance for financial imperialism, even if that requires innovative semantics. But as a unit, BRICS is actually a subimperial (not anti-imperial) project. It reinforces not only prevailing world financial policies, but also do-nothing-until-it’s-too-late climate change mitigation. The BRICS represent not ‘competition,’ but collusion in financial imperialism.
Value Added Tax (VAT) is the IMF’s ‘poor tax’ because it hits poor people far harder than it does the wealthy, as a percentage of income. IMF orthodoxy forever represents regime maintenance for financial imperialism, even if that requires innovative semantics. But as a unit, BRICS is actually a subimperial (not anti-imperial) project. It reinforces not only prevailing world financial policies, but also do-nothing-until-it’s-too-late climate change mitigation. The BRICS represent not ‘competition,’ but collusion in financial imperialism.
Monday, December 29, 2014
Sunday, December 28, 2014
Friday, December 26, 2014
Wednesday, December 24, 2014
Tuesday, December 23, 2014
Saturday, December 20, 2014
American Exceptionalism and American Torture
American Exceptionalism and American Torture
In 1964, the Brazilian military, in a US-designed coup, overthrew a liberal government and proceeded to rule with an iron fist for the next 21 years. In 1979 the military regime passed an amnesty law blocking the prosecution of its members for torture and other crimes. That’s how they handle such matters in what used to be called The Third World. In the First World, however, they have no need for such legal niceties. In the United States, military torturers and their political godfathers are granted amnesty automatically, simply for being American, solely for belonging to the “Good Guys Club”.
In 1964, the Brazilian military, in a US-designed coup, overthrew a liberal government and proceeded to rule with an iron fist for the next 21 years. In 1979 the military regime passed an amnesty law blocking the prosecution of its members for torture and other crimes. That’s how they handle such matters in what used to be called The Third World. In the First World, however, they have no need for such legal niceties. In the United States, military torturers and their political godfathers are granted amnesty automatically, simply for being American, solely for belonging to the “Good Guys Club”.
Israel, Netanyahu and Misuse of Holocaust
Israel, Netanyahu and Misuse of Holocaust
The use of historical suffering is standard fare for the descendants. The descendants of history’s victims tend to be the modern day avengers. History’s record is not so much to be righted as washed, cleansed and made anew.
Non-Violence and the Lost Message of Jesus. There is no such Thing as a ‘Just War’
Non-Violence and the Lost Message of Jesus. There is no such Thing as a ‘Just War’
It is precisely because of this ‘bad’ theology that we need, from our spiritual or religious leaders, a clear message and an unambiguous proclamation that violence is not the way of Jesus, violence is not the way of Christianity, and that armaments, nuclear weapons, militarism and war must be abolished and replaced with a more human and moral way of solving our problems without killing each other.
Non-Violence and the Lost Message of Jesus. There is no such Thing as a ‘Just War’
Non-Violence and the Lost Message of Jesus. There is no such Thing as a ‘Just War’
It is precisely because of this ‘bad’ theology that we need, from our spiritual or religious leaders, a clear message and an unambiguous proclamation that violence is not the way of Jesus, violence is not the way of Christianity, and that armaments, nuclear weapons, militarism and war must be abolished and replaced with a more human and moral way of solving our problems without killing each other.
Thursday, December 18, 2014
China needs clear strategy to help Russia - Global Times
China needs clear strategy to help Russia - Global Times
Russia's foreign exchange reserves still boast about $400 billion, which means, unlike immediately following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the well-being of the Russian people will not be severely impacted in the short term. Although the threat of collapse is still far away, Russia will go through a long-running winter instead of a temporary storm.
China has become a significant factor that determines Russia's strategic environment. Seeking China's support is one of Russia's most realistic options.
Russia's foreign exchange reserves still boast about $400 billion, which means, unlike immediately following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the well-being of the Russian people will not be severely impacted in the short term. Although the threat of collapse is still far away, Russia will go through a long-running winter instead of a temporary storm.
China has become a significant factor that determines Russia's strategic environment. Seeking China's support is one of Russia's most realistic options.
Monday, December 15, 2014
Russia and Turkey’s Gas Deal Can Save Europe and the World?
Russia and Turkey’s Gas Deal Can Save Europe and the World?
Some analysts have looked at the low prices and attractive terms which Russia have offered to its partners, including China, and now Turkey and India, regarding energy markets. Some have said that Putin is showing Russian weakness with such a low price. Others, more accurately have said that Putin is broad in thinking, and is focusing more on market share than market price. This is a fair point, and closer to the truth.
The bigger picture we can draw from all of this is a Russia that is thinking long term, and issues like stability are more important than quarterly fluctuations. It is committed to building a multi-polar world which will save the world from the US Empire, save Europe from itself, and enable conditions for sovereignty and development in whole regions like the Balkans, Middle-east, Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
The bigger picture we can draw from all of this is a Russia that is thinking long term, and issues like stability are more important than quarterly fluctuations. It is committed to building a multi-polar world which will save the world from the US Empire, save Europe from itself, and enable conditions for sovereignty and development in whole regions like the Balkans, Middle-east, Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
Saturday, December 13, 2014
Friday, December 12, 2014
Time to boycott Israel? - Head to Head - Al Jazeera English
Time to boycott Israel? - Head to Head - Al Jazeera English
Yes please; until they humble themselves before their King - Jesus
Yes please; until they humble themselves before their King - Jesus
Thursday, December 11, 2014
The CIA chained him to the floor and froze him to death. But who was Gul Ruhman? - Stop the War Coalition
The CIA chained him to the floor and froze him to death. But who was Gul Ruhman? - Stop the War Coalition
This is what happens in the wild West; its nothing new! The CIA is just spreading democracy and enforcing human rights.
This is what happens in the wild West; its nothing new! The CIA is just spreading democracy and enforcing human rights.
Seconds After Saying ‘Jesus Died For Our Sins,’ CNN Cuts Off NFL Star In A Despicable Way
Seconds After Saying ‘Jesus Died For Our Sins,’ CNN Cuts Off NFL Star In A Despicable Way
Jesus is Lord of all - Just like that, after He paid the ultimate price on the cross.
Jesus is Lord of all - Just like that, after He paid the ultimate price on the cross.
Wednesday, December 10, 2014
Sunday, December 7, 2014
Six mistakes the West makes in dealing with Putin - English pravda.ru
Six mistakes the West makes in dealing with Putin - English pravda.ru
Six mistakes the West makes in dealing with Putin
The West estimated Vladimir Putin's behavior at Europe-Asia Summit in Milan as challenging and negligent. Indeed, everyone was expecting a "breakthrough," but Putin did not justify anyone's expectations. Why is that? In dealing with the Russian president, Western officials allow insults, put Russia into line with worst enemies and do not hide the wish to destroy Russian statehood and faith.
How could Putin be late for the meeting with Merkel, pretending that he had more important things in Belgrade, The New York Times resented in a long article devoted to the Milan summit. Afterwards, Putin defiantly went to Berlusconi "for truffles", where he was partying till four a.m.. This describes Putin as an irresponsible politician, because at six a.m., he had a scheduled "pivotal" meeting with Poroshenko, the newspaper wrote.
"For Mr. Putin, the helter-skelter blitz through Milan was only the latest demonstration of an unpredictable, often theatrical, diplomatic style that he has employed during the Ukraine crisis to throw his rivals off balance," the article said. Putin may "face a tougher reception when he travels next month to a Group of 20 summit meeting in Brisbane, Australia," the authors of the article assumed.
Here is a more specific quote to the point of our article. "He didn't say that progress was made," said Valentino Valentini, a longtime aide to Mr. Berlusconi who was present for their meeting. "The impression was that their positions were still far apart.""
How so? Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov explained. "The goal of Western sanctions is not to resolve the crisis in Ukraine, but to make Russia change its stance on key and most fundamental questions and to accept the position of the West, - Sergei Lavrov said on Saturday in an interview with NTV. - In fact, the true purpose of their restrictions permeates through their statements and actions - to remake Russia," Lavrov said. The Russian Foreign Minister said that even though Western politicians say nothing about the need to change the regime in Russia, but "some marginalized officials in Europe say such phrases," he said.
Let's brush aside Lavrov's everlasting diplomatic comme il faut. In fact, the situation is much tougher. Samuel Phillips Huntington in his "Clash of Civilizations?" from 1993 wrote about the true purpose of the West. According to him, the West is determined to destroy Orthodoxy or subordinate Orthodoxy to Western principles. We can see how, for example, the British were doing it for centuries. They fought against Russia in the Crimean War (1852-1856), were opposed to Russia's stronger positions in the Balkans and Central Asia, they got Russia involved in World War I, were active participants in the Entente during the struggle against the young Soviet power, they developed plans to seize oil fields of the Caucasus after Hitler's possible victory, they were preparing for a preventive strike during the Cold War. Today, murderers and thieves, who escaped from Russia, find political asylum in the UK. British prime ministers have always been at the forefront of accusing Russia of "aggression" - David Cameron is no exception.
According to Huntington, it goes about the destruction of the Slavic culture and the Russian statehood, which is based on Orthodoxy. Even communism has Orthodox roots. Statehood came to Russia from Byzantium, and in this model, law will never be first priority, because for Orthodox believers, morality, friendship and justice is above law. Remember Russia's reunion with the Crimea, and what Putin said in Belgrade: "Russia does not sell friendship." The Byzantine model stipulates for the unification of equal peoples in one state with the help of love, rather than with the help of the Western melting pot model, which is governed by strict laws.
Given that the faith has been a reason for countless wars for centuries, the merger of two civilizations is impossible. This is not necessary due to the law of the dialectical development of the universe. Even Yeltsin, who sold everything he could to the West, warned: one should not expand NATO to the east, forgetting that Russia has a "nuclear briefcase." Putin has recently reiterated this idea by saying that the current conflict was a conflict between nuclear powers.
A second conclusion from the clash of civilizations is Orthodoxy, and, consequently, Russia has her own ideal picture of the world order. The imposition of another project is perceived as an attack on the foundations of statehood.
President Putin - is not a "mini-Gorbachev," as The New York Times wrote. He is not a huckster like Poroshenko, but a statesman, who will continue his efforts to make Russian, Orthodox model flourish. Putin's prime goal for the time being is to make sure that the West sees Russia as a full partner. Russia lost this reputation during the time of Gorbachev and Yeltsin. For the time being, the West does not understand that and hopes that sanctions will break Russia.
Huntington does not say that unity is possible in the struggle of opposites. This is nonetheless possible, but only when one has skills in finding compromises. What do the Anglo-Saxons need to understand?
First. All types of "Eastern partnerships" are impossible without consulting Russia. One needs to understand that Putin will not allow NATO bases to appear on the territory of Ukraine. He will adequately respond to extra military threats - the deployment of the missile defense system and rapid response forces.
Second. Do not teach us how to live. Putin will pursue protectionist policies to protect the Orthodox civilization, restrict the activities of Western NGOs that undermine the constitutional structure of Russia and morality of its people. Russia is not strong for its economy, but it is strong for something that the West can not understand - it is strong for its soul.
Third. The Russian president will behave accordingly to your behavior. If you consistently topple Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Yanukovych, it is reasonable to guess who is next on your list. Noteworthy, each candidate for toppling would at first be demonized in Western media. The same is happening with regard to Putin. Suffice it to mention numerous offensive comparisons to Hitler and "shirt-fronting" threats, because this is the language the "aggressor" understands (we're talking about Australian Prime Minister Abbott).
Fourth. If Obama puts Russia on the second place on the list of global threats, please expect an adequate reaction.
Fifth. Re-read memoirs of German, French and other conquerors of Russia. Sending you all sorts of "messages" is not Putin's way - he will act on the basis of national interests. "Do not expect that once taken advantage of Russia's weakness, you will receive dividends forever. Russians always come for their money. And when they come - they will not rely on the Jesuit agreement you signed, that supposedly justify your actions. They are not worth the paper it is written. Therefore, with the Russians you should use fair play or no play," said Otto von Bismarck.
Sixth. Your approach to world affairs has a destructing effect that everyone sees. There is a large group of countries behind Russia that have not yet decided to take Russia's side. If a moment comes, they will not doubt to do it.
Lyuba Lulko
Pravda.Ru
How could Putin be late for the meeting with Merkel, pretending that he had more important things in Belgrade, The New York Times resented in a long article devoted to the Milan summit. Afterwards, Putin defiantly went to Berlusconi "for truffles", where he was partying till four a.m.. This describes Putin as an irresponsible politician, because at six a.m., he had a scheduled "pivotal" meeting with Poroshenko, the newspaper wrote.
"For Mr. Putin, the helter-skelter blitz through Milan was only the latest demonstration of an unpredictable, often theatrical, diplomatic style that he has employed during the Ukraine crisis to throw his rivals off balance," the article said. Putin may "face a tougher reception when he travels next month to a Group of 20 summit meeting in Brisbane, Australia," the authors of the article assumed.
Here is a more specific quote to the point of our article. "He didn't say that progress was made," said Valentino Valentini, a longtime aide to Mr. Berlusconi who was present for their meeting. "The impression was that their positions were still far apart.""
How so? Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov explained. "The goal of Western sanctions is not to resolve the crisis in Ukraine, but to make Russia change its stance on key and most fundamental questions and to accept the position of the West, - Sergei Lavrov said on Saturday in an interview with NTV. - In fact, the true purpose of their restrictions permeates through their statements and actions - to remake Russia," Lavrov said. The Russian Foreign Minister said that even though Western politicians say nothing about the need to change the regime in Russia, but "some marginalized officials in Europe say such phrases," he said.
Let's brush aside Lavrov's everlasting diplomatic comme il faut. In fact, the situation is much tougher. Samuel Phillips Huntington in his "Clash of Civilizations?" from 1993 wrote about the true purpose of the West. According to him, the West is determined to destroy Orthodoxy or subordinate Orthodoxy to Western principles. We can see how, for example, the British were doing it for centuries. They fought against Russia in the Crimean War (1852-1856), were opposed to Russia's stronger positions in the Balkans and Central Asia, they got Russia involved in World War I, were active participants in the Entente during the struggle against the young Soviet power, they developed plans to seize oil fields of the Caucasus after Hitler's possible victory, they were preparing for a preventive strike during the Cold War. Today, murderers and thieves, who escaped from Russia, find political asylum in the UK. British prime ministers have always been at the forefront of accusing Russia of "aggression" - David Cameron is no exception.
According to Huntington, it goes about the destruction of the Slavic culture and the Russian statehood, which is based on Orthodoxy. Even communism has Orthodox roots. Statehood came to Russia from Byzantium, and in this model, law will never be first priority, because for Orthodox believers, morality, friendship and justice is above law. Remember Russia's reunion with the Crimea, and what Putin said in Belgrade: "Russia does not sell friendship." The Byzantine model stipulates for the unification of equal peoples in one state with the help of love, rather than with the help of the Western melting pot model, which is governed by strict laws.
Given that the faith has been a reason for countless wars for centuries, the merger of two civilizations is impossible. This is not necessary due to the law of the dialectical development of the universe. Even Yeltsin, who sold everything he could to the West, warned: one should not expand NATO to the east, forgetting that Russia has a "nuclear briefcase." Putin has recently reiterated this idea by saying that the current conflict was a conflict between nuclear powers.
A second conclusion from the clash of civilizations is Orthodoxy, and, consequently, Russia has her own ideal picture of the world order. The imposition of another project is perceived as an attack on the foundations of statehood.
President Putin - is not a "mini-Gorbachev," as The New York Times wrote. He is not a huckster like Poroshenko, but a statesman, who will continue his efforts to make Russian, Orthodox model flourish. Putin's prime goal for the time being is to make sure that the West sees Russia as a full partner. Russia lost this reputation during the time of Gorbachev and Yeltsin. For the time being, the West does not understand that and hopes that sanctions will break Russia.
Huntington does not say that unity is possible in the struggle of opposites. This is nonetheless possible, but only when one has skills in finding compromises. What do the Anglo-Saxons need to understand?
First. All types of "Eastern partnerships" are impossible without consulting Russia. One needs to understand that Putin will not allow NATO bases to appear on the territory of Ukraine. He will adequately respond to extra military threats - the deployment of the missile defense system and rapid response forces.
Second. Do not teach us how to live. Putin will pursue protectionist policies to protect the Orthodox civilization, restrict the activities of Western NGOs that undermine the constitutional structure of Russia and morality of its people. Russia is not strong for its economy, but it is strong for something that the West can not understand - it is strong for its soul.
Third. The Russian president will behave accordingly to your behavior. If you consistently topple Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Yanukovych, it is reasonable to guess who is next on your list. Noteworthy, each candidate for toppling would at first be demonized in Western media. The same is happening with regard to Putin. Suffice it to mention numerous offensive comparisons to Hitler and "shirt-fronting" threats, because this is the language the "aggressor" understands (we're talking about Australian Prime Minister Abbott).
Fourth. If Obama puts Russia on the second place on the list of global threats, please expect an adequate reaction.
Fifth. Re-read memoirs of German, French and other conquerors of Russia. Sending you all sorts of "messages" is not Putin's way - he will act on the basis of national interests. "Do not expect that once taken advantage of Russia's weakness, you will receive dividends forever. Russians always come for their money. And when they come - they will not rely on the Jesuit agreement you signed, that supposedly justify your actions. They are not worth the paper it is written. Therefore, with the Russians you should use fair play or no play," said Otto von Bismarck.
Sixth. Your approach to world affairs has a destructing effect that everyone sees. There is a large group of countries behind Russia that have not yet decided to take Russia's side. If a moment comes, they will not doubt to do it.
Lyuba Lulko
Pravda.Ru
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Monday, November 17, 2014
Transforming Mongolia-Russia-China Relations: The Dushanbe Trilateral Summit :: JapanFocus
Transforming Mongolia-Russia-China Relations: The Dushanbe Trilateral Summit :: JapanFocus
The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 12, Issue 44, No. 1, November 10, 2014. Transforming Mongolia-Russia-China Relations: The Dushanbe Trilateral SummitAlicia Campi The trilateral summit among the presidents of Mongolia, China, and Russia, on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) at Dushanbe, Tajikistan on September 11, 2014, was the culmination of a deliberate summer whirlwind policy blitz of Mongolian President Tsakhia Elbegdorj to position his country to take advantage of deepening Sino-Russian economic relations. Concerned that a “great game” to create a new version of the Eurasian Silk Road was being played out without any Mongolian input, Mongolia’s activist president used the celebrations around the commemoration of different anniversaries in Sino-Mongol and Mongol-Russian relations to make certain that his two powerful neighbors did not proceed with transportation and energy cooperation without taking into account the role of a mineral-rich Mongolia. The landlocked Northeast Asian nation is seeking to become an international transportation hub and at the same time diversify its mineral exports. This spotlight trilateral summit moment in Mongolian-Chinese-Russian relations, together with the trips of Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin to Mongolia a few weeks previous, attracted attention, bordering on concern, of other Eurasian countries, the European Union, and the United States who do not fully comprehend Mongolia’s strategy.
A Spring and Summer of Bilateral Summits in Shanghai and Ulaanbaatar The Dushanbe summit came at a time when both China and Russia have serious foreign policy challenges in their home regions—China in the South China and East China seas involving clashes with Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam among others, and Russia in Ukraine resulting in increasingly crippling economic sanctions. Mongolia, for its part, has had a precipitous decline of over 62% in foreign direct investment (FDI) and reduction of its growth rate to 5.3% (one-half of 2013’s 11.8%) in the first half of 2014.1 This was connected to concern over Mongolia’s vacillating investment legal regime and a slowdown in sales of coal to China. All of these factors propelled increased cooperation among the three nations in the first half of 2014—initially seen via a series of bilateral meetings. The first example was the planning among the leaders when they were in Shanghai on May 20, 2014 at the Fourth Summit of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia over the timing of the Xi and Putin visits to Mongolia. President Xi had agreed to go to Ulaanbaatar to celebrate 65 years of Sino-Mongolian diplomatic relations and announce a new push towards energizing China’s strategic partnership with Mongolia. Putin’s Mongolian visit, ostensibly to celebrate the 75th anniversary of the Soviet-Mongol victory over an invading Japanese army in 1939 at Khalkhin Gol (Nomonhan), was aimed at jumpstarting Russian’s morbid economic relations with its former Cold War satellite whose trade and investment picture has been monopolized for over a decade by China. Originally it seems that Xi and Putin mulled over the possibility of holding a trilateral gathering in Ulaanbaatar in August, but this timetable ultimately was rejected because Putin decided to squeeze in a 5 hour visit to Mongolia instead on September 3rd as part of a swing through the Russian Far East. Mongolian officials told this writer they believe that while Putin was in Shanghai, he also agreed to not oppose Chinese proposals for deeper investment and economic ties with Mongolia in exchange for China’s support for Russian plans on modernizing and developing rail links with Mongolia.2
Mongolia hosted Chinese President Xi’s state visit on August 21-22. Mongolian leaders deemed the visit very successful in signaling Chinese recognition of the value of stronger political and economic ties to Mongolia, as well as for Chinese acquiescence to Mongolia’s desire to develop trilateral cooperation among China, Russia and Mongolia on a shared vision for a new Silk Road economic corridor. The Chinese signed 26 documents with the Mongols, and Xi’s personal offer, in his address to the Mongolian parliament which was broadcast live on both Mongolian and Chinese television, for the Mongols to participate in his “China Dream” initiative was seen in Mongolia as a positive gesture by the government and domestic press. However, Mongolian blogs resonated with nervous chatter about Chinese hegemonic ambitions fueled by Xi’s strange recital of a famous Mongolian nationalist poem in which he called Mongolia his “native land.”3 Mongolia and China signed a Joint Declaration on relations that set a bilateral trade target of $10 billion by 2020 (up from $6.2 billion in 2013) under a "three-in-one" cooperation model, integrating mineral exports, infrastructure construction and financial cooperation. The Chinese side promised to provide Mongolia 1.3 billion RMB [US$260 million] of aid within 3 years for major economic projects and to possibly grant a soft loan in the amount of RMB 1 billion [$162.7 million]. The presidents of Mongol Bank and Chinese National Bank agreed to an increase of the currency swap exchange from 10 billion to 15 billion RMB to provide foreign currency to Mongolia’s domestic market. The five new transportation agreements may prove the most significant of all in that they relate to the future of Eurasian economic integration and Sino-Russo-Mongolian cooperation on regional rail projects. These were 1) Inter-Governmental Agreement on “access to the seaport and transit transport” 2) Inter-Governmental General Agreement on development of cooperation of the railway transit transport 3) Inter-Governmental MOU on Development of Railway Cooperation 4) MOU between Ministry of Road and Transportation of Mongolia and Railway Authority of People’s Republic of China on renewal of the “Mongolia and China Border Railway Agreement” and 5) Agreement on “Mongolia-China Border Port Management Cooperation Commission” between National Council of Border Port of Mongolia and General Customs Office of People’s Republic of China. The latter document designated six Chinese seaports, including Tianjin, Dalian, and Jinzhou, for the transit of Mongolian exports to overseas markets. A key breakthrough for the landlocked Mongolia was the agreement that two-thirds of Mongolian goods transported on Chinese rails would be destined for the Chinese market while one-third would be for export via Chinese seaports to third countries. Border crossing co-operation and access to rail capacity within China were promised, and four new Mongolian ports (Shiveekhuren, Bichigt, Gashuunsukhait and Nomrog) were opened for rail transport. New tariffs and additional volume for Mongolian cargo on Chinese railroads were established, and China also gave Mongolia a 40% discount on current transportation tariffs. The big catch to all of these agreements is the necessity to secure ratification by the Mongolian parliament, which remains divided on new rail links to China and which size rail gauge to use.
Not two weeks later the Mongols welcomed Russian President Putin’s visit as visual proof of a new era in Russian economic investment in Mongolia to balance nearly total Chinese monopolization (89% in 2013) of Mongolia’s foreign trade. The 14 bilateral agreements signed were vaguer than those with China, but of greater importance was Putin’s political message that Russia had not forgotten Mongolia. What is most interesting about the rail projects covered in the Russo-Mongolian agreements is the potential impact on Sino-Russian rail cooperation. An example is the electrification and construction of a second track for the 1100 km (684 mile) rail from Mongolia’s northern border with Russia through the planned Sainshand minerals processing industrial zone in the Gobi to Zamyn Uud on the Chinese border. Russo-Mongolian cooperation also covered exploring development of a western Mongolian railway line joining Russia and China for Russian exports to China, India and Pakistan, as well as researching utilizing the 230 km (143 miles) Choibalsan–Erentsav eastern railway for transit goods into northeast China. During the press conference that Putin held at the end of the Mongolian visit, he singled out bilateral transport cooperation: “This is a very important sector for Mongolia, and it is in our interests too to increase Mongolia’s transit potential. Mongolia is located between Russia and China after all. We are big trade and economic partners and have bilateral trade with China that will come to $64 or already $65-67 billion this year. It therefore makes sense to put Mongolia’s transport possibilities to greater use than is the case today.”4 Dushanbe Trilateral Summit The Mongols in the spring had begun to talk publicly about a trilateral summit meeting taking place in Ulaanbaatar. When it finally occurred in Dushanbe, President Elbegdorj particularly hailed the meeting as a historically significant first in the history of the three countries5 and suggested it take place every three years in Mongolia. Both Xi and Putin expressed their general interest but did not confirm the venue and timing. President Xi proclaimed that the trilateral summit was of “great significance to deepening mutual trust among the three parties, and pushing forward regional cooperation in Northeast Asia.”6 He said that his Silk Road Economic Belt initiative meshed well with Russia's transcontinental rail plans and Mongolia's desire to build up a China-Mongolia-Russia economic corridor in its Talyn Zam [Steppe Road] program. However, he cautioned that if this concept were to succeed, the three nations needed to strengthen traffic interconnectivity, facilitate cargo clearance and transportation, and build a transnational power grid.7 As for Putin, he noted that: “Things discussed at this meeting create the appropriate mechanism to discuss and resolve the largest projects to be implemented by us in the future, and we agreed to promote our cooperation in this regard.” Moreover, the Russian leader asserted that the geographic proximity of Mongolia, Russia and China facilitated long-term projects in infrastructure, energy and mining: “We have things to discuss and we find it important, feasible and useful to establish a regular dialogue.”8 Many foreign observers saw the Dushanbe meeting as proof of China and Russia’s deepening coordination, especially regarding Mongolia and the greater Eurasian continent. However, equally discussed was the concern of Mongolia’s “third neighbors” about the real intentions of President Elbegdorj. Despite the strong democratic record of Elbegdorj from his days in the streets as one of the key protest leaders who brought down Mongolia’s communist government in 1990 and the fact that the plethora of agreements with both China and Russia to improve Eurasian transportation connections through Mongolia also should help Turkey, Europe, Japan and South Korea to become stronger regional trade partners, Mongolia’s new strategy has caught many, including in the restless foreign investor community, off guard. When a Mongolian delegation visited New York and Washington in connection with President Elbegdorj’s speech to the United Nations General Assembly in late September, its members were met with a barrage of questions from American officials about the future of Mongolian allegiance to its policy of reaching beyond its two border neighbors to integrate into the world economy (the so-called ‘third neighbor policy’), as if Mongolia were returning to a pre-democratic mentality. This concern, while understandable, arises from a lack of understanding of Mongolia’s overall trade predicament and its limited options to find a way forward. After 20 years of unsuccessful efforts to find new trade partners other than its two border neighbors for its minerals and animal by-products, Mongols of all political persuasions came to recognize that they cannot ameliorate the Chinese monopoly over their economy without careful development of real transport and pipeline alternatives to their present poor infrastructure. Following World Bank and IMF advice to just build new roads and rail spurs south to service the Chinese market would merely perpetuate the dependence on China, yet it may be necessary in the short- and mid-term to keep the economy afloat. A longer term strategy of reviving Russian economic investment in Mongolia and building transport infrastructure north to link with the Trans-Siberian rail system as well as promoting Mongolia as a reliable and cheaper alternative for Sino-Russian transit traffic within a greater Eurasian transit zone are absolute necessities. Moreover, Elbegdorj and many other Mongolian policymakers are clever enough to recognize that the Chinese-Russian political rapprochement, which is based on economic self-interest, can only profit Mongolia if Mongolia is seated at the negotiating table and participating in drafting new transport and energy growth models. Thus the U.S. and other democracies should be supportive of Mongolia’s strategy of trust building as possibly leading to greater Northeast Asian political stability and being economically beneficial to American allies such as Japan, South Korea, and Australia.
Progress after Dushanbe Since the tripartite summit, the Mongols have moved to maintain the momentum of Sino-Russo-Mongolian cooperation. Elbegdorj announced after the SCO that Ulaanbaatar would host a meeting on implementing the Railway Transit Transportation agreements just signed among the three governments and set up a working group to study linking Central Asia’s natural gas fields to China and South Korea through Mongolia via Russia’s “Western Corridor of Natural Gas.”9 The Mongolian government on October 15th at the 18th regular meeting of the Mongolian-Russian Intergovernmental commission on trade, economic, science and technical cooperation initiated a Steppe Road highway project together with the Russian company Dalistroimachanizasiya to develop a 997 km highway, 1100 km high voltage electrical line, gas and oil pipeline from Altanbulag at the northern border through Ulaanbaatar to Zamin Uud on the southern border.10 On October 20th an MOU for a high speed rail line project linking Beijing and Moscow through Mongolia was signed by Russia and China during a visit to Moscow by the Premier of the PRC State Council Li Keqiang. This new passenger train project would reduce the 7000 km journey from 6 days to 2. Cost projections for the new rail line are set at US$ 230 billion on a 5-year construction time schedule.11 The line would parallel the route of the present Ulaanbaatar Railway, which likely would be turned over solely to freight traffic. A few days later in Mongolia’s parliament a draft bill was approved that permits for the first time narrow-gauge (1,435 mm) railroad spurs from coal processing plants to the Chinese border for transporting raw minerals (Tavantolgoi-Gashuunsukhait, Sainshand-Zamiin Uud, and Khuut-Bichigt), contingent on agreement on border crossing cooperation between Mongolia and China. The Russian wide gauge (1,520 mm) spurs were approved for Arts Suuri-Erdenet, Tavantolgoi-Sainshand-Baruun-Urt-Khuut-Choibalsan, and Khuut-Numrug, while the Sainshand and Zamiin Uud lines were eliminated from the government’s proposed plan because of the new Sino-Russo rail agreement.12 The above-mentioned transport and energy projects clearly indicate that Mongolia is now well positioned in the middle of Chinese and Russian plans to expand their transportation cooperation throughout the Eurasian region. This trend is likely to continue, particularly with the continuing delay on the development of the second phase of the giant Rio Tinto-controlled copper and gold deposit at Oyu Tolgoi. That project has been touted as inextricably linked to Mongolia’s economic development. While that assessment is still true, Mongolia has many domestic factors to consider before coming to a final solution on how to proceed. With the indecision and delay, western investors have grown weary and leery of entering into big new mining projects in Mongolia at the central government level which might be derailed by local and environmental groups locked out of the original negotiating processes. Also, many Mongols are uncomfortable with the present reality of major western companies acting as middlemen to move Mongolian raw minerals to Chinese customers—a pattern that further strengthens Chinese monopoly over its economy.
Mongolia now has an alternative to this type of foreign investment—increase its role as a transit corridor in the region as it simultaneously develops its dual rail gauge infrastructure in a more balanced manner so that its products are better able to reach new trade partners, and it profits in transit fees from exploding Sino-Russian trade. Ultimately this plan could break China’s stranglehold on Mongolian trade by helping Japan, South Korea, Southeast Asia and Vietnam sell their goods as alternatives to Chinese ones to Mongolia, especially if North Korean ports are developed to avoid Vladivostok congestion. Also, a modernized rail system across Eurasia would permit Turkey, the Middle East, Iran, and Europe to grow their trade with Mongolia in a substantive fashion. However, the ever present danger of this new game plan lies in Mongolia’s ability to manage the influence of the Sino-Russian partnership in its domestic political scene. Mongolian history tells us that rising Chinese and Russian economic ties brought strong political pressures and even bloody competition. As the 21st century progresses, the challenge of balancing economic benefit and national security remains key for Mongolian leaders.
Alicia Campi has a Ph.D. in Mongolian Studies from Indiana University, was involved in the preliminary negotiations to establish U.S.-Mongolia bilateral relations in the 1980s, and served as a diplomat in Ulaanbaatar. She has a Mongolian consultancy company (U.S.-Mongolia Advisory Group), and writes and speaks extensively on Mongolian issues. She has published over 80 articles and book chapters on contemporary Mongolian, Chinese, and Northeast Asian issues, and advises Chinese and western financial institutions on Mongolian investment, particularly in the mining sector. She is the author of The Impact of China and Russia on U.S.-Mongolian Political Relations in the 20th Century. Recommended citation: Alicia Campi, "Transforming Mongolia-Russia-China Relations: The Dushanbe Trilateral Summit", The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 12, Issue 44, No. 1, November 10, 2014. Related articles • MK Bhadrakumar, Sino-Russian Alliance Comes of Age: Geopolitics and Energy Politics • Geoffrey Gunn, Southeast Asia’s Looming Nuclear Power Industry • MK Bhadrakumar, Russia, Iran and Eurasian Energy Politics Notes 1 Economic growth in Mongolia decelerated sharply from 8.7% year on year in the final quarter of 2013 to 7.5% in the first quarter of 2014 and to 3.8% in the second, as stimulus was partly withdrawn and foreign direct investment plunged by 62.4%, tamping down investment by 32.4%. ADB, Asian Development Outlook 2014 Update (Manila, 2014). 2 Author’s interviews, Ulaanbaatar, August 7-8, 2014. 3 From the Natsagdorj poem, “My Native Land.” Xi read this to open his August 21, 2014 speech to the Mongolian parliament. 4 “Answers to journalists’ questions following a working visit to Mongolia,” President of Russia website (September 3, 2014). 5 With the exception of a tripartite meeting held almost a century ago at the level of vice foreign ministers. G. Purevsambuu, “First-ever summit held between Presidents of Mongolia, Russia, and China,” The Mongol Messenger(September 19, 2014). 6 “China, Russia, Mongolia to Create Economic Corridor,” thebrickspost (September 12, 201). 7 Mongol Messenger (September 19, 2014); website of President of Mongolia (September 11, 2014). 8 Mongol Messenger (September 19, 2014). 9 Elbegdorj speech, website of President of Mongolia (September 11, 2014). 10 “B. Ooluun, “1000 km highway planned to connect China and Russia,” The Mongol Messenger (October 17, 2014). (October 20, 2014). 12 “State Policy on Railway Transportation finally approved,” Montsame (October 24, 2014). | |||||||
Can China Contain America? by John V. Walsh -- Antiwar.com
Can China Contain America? by John V. Walsh -- Antiwar.com
Can China Contain America?
by John V. Walsh, November 17, 2014
"Can America Contain China?" it is often asked in the West. But given America’s endless wars and assaults on the developing nations of the world, the question ought to be, "Can China Contain America"? Or at least, can China restrain the U.S. from doing more damage in East Asia and perhaps elsewhere in the developing world?
Last week Obama went to Beijing for the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit as the representative of the West and its centuries old grand project in East Asia. And what has that project been? History tells us that the West with its missionaries and soldiers, Obama’s predecessors, bathed the region in suffering and bloodshed. A short and incomplete list includes: the Opium Wars on China, the war on the Philippines, the nuclear bombing of Japan, the Korean and Vietnam wars, the bombings that laid waste Laos and Cambodia, the bloody CIA coup in Indonesia, and the military assault on the Korean movement to overthrow the Park dictatorship.
And that thumbnail history merely recounts the Anglo-American contribution to the European rape of East Asia. For centuries, every two bit Western European power with a little bit of advanced military technology was in on the plunder in the Western Pacific.
Obama went to East Asia to say in essence: "We are not finished yet. The Indispensable Nation must dominate everywhere. We departed when the Vietnamese humiliated us and drove us from the neighborhood. But we are back. We are pivoting."
Even before Obama departed the U.S., his "pivot" to the Western Pacific had come a cropper, because the U.S. is nostril deep in the swamp of the Middle East, thanks to the Israel lobby, and because the U.S. has driven Russia into an embrace with China by engineering a fascist-infested coup in Ukraine. True to form, just before climbing aboard the imperial 747 bound for Beijing, Obama could not resist wading a little deeper into the Middle East swamp and dispatched another 1500 ground troops to the killing fields of Iraq.
On the eve of the APEC summit, the Russia-China connection came alive as Presidents Putin and Xi closed a major petroleum pipeline deal that will bring into China the supply of natural gas that the U.S. has managed to deny Europe by its coup in Kiev. This pipeline, the so-called Western or Altai line, is the second from Russia to China, the first one having been agreed upon last May, with much fanfare. These land routes provide China with abundant petroleum resources that cannot be interdicted at sea by the massive U.S. Navy. This enhances the security of the Middle Kingdom in the face of the pivot. Thus, the deal goes far beyond symbolism. With it the American naval behemoth becomes less relevant as an instrument of U.S. dominance, although it is not one wit less burdensome to the U.S. taxpayer for that.
The talk at APEC was all about economics, which is going to determine the shape of the world to come. China’s economy is now slightly larger than that of the U.S. in terms of Purchasing Power Parity and on its way to become the equal of the U.S. in absolute terms within a decade. China relentlessly pursues economic growth and the overall stability that it demands. What did Obama have to offer? There he was peddling his Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal, which is to include Japan and 10 other Pacific nations but to exclude China. He says with a straight face that its purpose is not to contain or isolate China although that is precisely what it is designed to do. The TPP, however, is not making much headway, because it is written in secret by and for U.S. corporate and financial monoliths. Other countries will not take the TPP bait if there is little or nothing in it for them.
Some Western commentators saw the Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific (FAATP) as a Chinese riposte to the TPP. But although China pushed hard to move the FAATP forward at the APEC meeting and won approval for it among all 21 attendees, it is not a new idea, nor even a Chinese idea. It was there from the beginning when APEC was created in 1989, according to Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien who praised China for pushing for the next step to realize the pact, which is a study that will take two years. Lee said that when the FAATP is finally created, it will benefit all countries in the region and be one of the largest free trade areas in the world.
Similarly China has taken the lead in forming the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), which will provide capital for badly needed investment in the region. The need for investment is estimated at $8 trillion; China has put in the first $100 billion and will host the headquarters in Beijing. The bank was formally inaugurated in October just a few weeks before the APEC meeting and included 21 countries: China, India, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Brunei, Cambodia, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Laos, Myanmar, Mongolia, Nepal, Oman, Qatar, Sri Lanka, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam. Australia, Indonesia, South Korea did not join despite the interest they expressed a year earlier – a turnaround that was due to U.S. pressure. It is hard to believe that the U.S. is not trying to isolate and weaken China, that is, "contain" it by yanking other countries out of an arrangement that would benefit them.
But whatever the U.S. may attempt at this point, China has sufficient military strength to repel an attack by the West – although not to launch one. With that and its economic strength, China should be able to provide to the world alternatives to the diktats of the West. The BRICS may be the first sign of that. And China’s economic and infrastructure projects in Asia extending all the way to Europe herald a new and welcome multipolar world as outlined here.
The U.S. is busy in many corners of the world bombing, sanctioning and generally sowing misery and discord – most especially in the Middle East. In East Asia it has so far been pursuing a policy of isolating China and building military alliances against it. China, in contrast, has been busy getting rich and encouraging others to do the same. The U.S. is touting guns; China is banking on butter. Which is better for humanity?
John V. Walsh can be reached at John.Endwar@gmail.com
Banking on a new outlook for the future | GulfNews.com
Banking on a new outlook for the future | GulfNews.com
What brings all these countries and economic blocs together is the need to break up the US monopoly and dominance over financial relations. This is possible through the establishment of parallel or alternative institutions in view of the weak US economy and its deteriorating structural problems. Without shale oil and gas production it would have deteriorated further.
How Russia and Putin's Alliances Will Challenge U.S. Hegemony - Equities.com Global Financial Community
How Russia and Putin's Alliances Will Challenge U.S. Hegemony - Equities.com Global Financial Community
Putin is taking a leadership role in the creation of an international alliance among four of the ten most populous countries on the planet—its combined population constitutes over 40% of the world’s total, just short of 3 billion people. It encompasses the two fastest-growing global economies. Adding Iran means its members would control over half of all natural gas reserves. Development of Asian pipeline networks would boost the nations of the region economically and tie them more closely together.
If Putin has his way, the SCO could not only rival NATO, it could fashion a new financial structure that directly competes with the IMF and World Bank. The New Development Bank (AKA the BRICS Bank), created this past summer in Brazil, was a first step in that direction. And that could lead to the dethroning of the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency, with dire consequences for the American economy.
China’s Silky Road to Glory » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
China’s Silky Road to Glory » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
When Little Dubya Bush came to power in early 2001, the neo-cons were faced with a stark fact: it was just a matter of time before the US would irreversibly lose its global geopolitical and economic hegemony. So there were only two choices; either manage the decline, or bet the whole farm to consolidate global hegemony using – what else – war.We all know about the wishful thinking enveloping the “low-cost” war on Iraq – from Paul Wolfowitz’s “We are the new OPEC” to the fantasy of Washington being able to decisively intimidate all potential challengers, the EU, Russia and China.
When Little Dubya Bush came to power in early 2001, the neo-cons were faced with a stark fact: it was just a matter of time before the US would irreversibly lose its global geopolitical and economic hegemony. So there were only two choices; either manage the decline, or bet the whole farm to consolidate global hegemony using – what else – war.We all know about the wishful thinking enveloping the “low-cost” war on Iraq – from Paul Wolfowitz’s “We are the new OPEC” to the fantasy of Washington being able to decisively intimidate all potential challengers, the EU, Russia and China.
BRICS leaders dissatisfy with slow action on IMF reform - CCTV News - CCTV.com English
BRICS leaders dissatisfy with slow action on IMF reform - CCTV News - CCTV.com English
In a statement released after the meeting, the leaders agreed that the slow action on IMF reforms undermined the "legitimacy and credibility" of IMF.
Sunday, November 16, 2014
Russia Shuns Dollar as Putin Strengthens Ties with China - NASDAQ.com
Russia Shuns Dollar as Putin Strengthens Ties with China - NASDAQ.com
Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/article/russia-shuns-dollar-as-putin-strengthens-ties-with-china-20141114-00417#ixzz3JJ3jDnBb
Russian President Vladimir Putin reiterated on Friday that he wants to strengthen ties with China, and avoid using the dollar for bilateral trade. Data from China's central bank suggest that companies are already starting to shun the U.S. currency.
In an interview with the Russian news agency Tass, Mr. Putin said that oil giant Rosneft is working with a major Chinese corporation to receive renminbi as a payments for a significant flow of oil.
"We're moving away from the diktat of the market that denominates all the commercial oil flows in U.S. dollars," Mr. Putin said.
Russian companies are increasingly shifting to direct renminbi-ruble trading to settle their imports and exports with Asia.
Turnover in direct transactions in the two currencies soared to $1.2 billion over the course of October, from $307 million in September and as low as $52 million in July, according to data available on the website of the China Foreign Exchange Trading System, the trading division of China's central bank.
"Volumes are picking up as both countries aren't against using their own currencies instead of the dollar for mutual transactions. I expect the turnover to grow," said Evgeny Gavrilenkov, a currency strategist at Sberbank.
The Moscow Exchange reported a record daily turnover of 1.5 billion yuan ($245 million) against the ruble on October 16.
"The Moscow Exchange cooperates with China's largest banks to promote the use of the two national currencies in settlement between Russian and Chinese companies," a spokesperson at the exchange said.
Ruble-yuan trading was launched by the Moscow Exchange in 2010 but failed to gain significant interest from Russian companies until October, just after the U.S. and Europe widened their sanctions against the country.
To further strengthen cooperation, the exchange signed an agreement with the Bank of China in October and is currently negotiating with Chinese authorities the launch of new services to investors on the Chinese and Russian markets.
"Sanctions on Russia will undoubtedly encourage ties with other countries, particularly China," said Andy Seaman, fund manager at Stratton Street Capital LLP which manages a renminbi bond fund.
"The Chinese currency is already likely to be the third most actively traded currency in the world by the end of 2015 and greater trade links between Russia and China can only accelerate the internationalization of the renminbi," he added.
Still, despite the recent rapid growth, direct trading volumes between the two currencies remain tiny compared with the overall size of the market.
Direct sterling-renminbi trading, which started in June 2014 had a turnover of about $2 billion in October. Each day, total average currency-trading flows through the Moscow Stock Exchange stand at around $23 billion.
"Russian corporates are very interested in denominating in renminbi in the future. But the significance of direct trading volumes offshore remains limited until [there is] more access to onshore Chinese markets, " said Jinny Yan, director of renminbi solutions at Standard Chartered.
Write to Chiara Albanese at chiara.albanese@wsj.com
Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/article/russia-shuns-dollar-as-putin-strengthens-ties-with-china-20141114-00417#ixzz3JJ3jDnBb
Did Russia and China just sign a death warrant for U.S. LNG exports?
Did Russia and China just sign a death warrant for U.S. LNG exports?
Russia and China have signed two large natural gas deals in the last six months as Russia turns its attention eastward in reaction to sanctions and souring relations with Europe, currently Russia's largest energy export market.
But the move has implications beyond Europe. In the department of everything is connected, U.S. natural gas producers may be seeing their dream of substantial liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports suffer fatal injury because of Russian exports to the Chinese market, a market that was expected to be the largest and most profitable for LNG exporters. Petroleum geologist and consultant Art Berman--who has been consistently skeptical of the viability of U.S. LNG exports--communicated in an email that Russian supply will force the price of LNG delivered to Asia down to between $10 and $11, too low for American LNG exports to be profitable.
Thursday, November 13, 2014
The Full Letter Written By The FBI To Martin Luther King Has Been Revealed
One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/13/2014 08:55 -0500
The Full Letter Written By The FBI To Martin Luther King Has Been Revealed
Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
Martin Luther King, Jr. is one of my personal heroes. Not just because of his outsized contribution to the civil rights movement, but because of his leadership capabilities and emphasis on non-violent civil disobedience. It also goes without saying, that this wasn’t just a great orator with enlightened tactics, he was also a highly intelligent man with a strong sense of history. This is on full display in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” which I highlighted in the piece: Martin Luther King: “Everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was Legal.” Here are some of his timeless words.
One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice.Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.So the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice?
Naturally, a man that utters such words and who also has a considerable following would not appeal to the thug in charge of the FBI at the time, J. Edgar Hoover. So what did Mr. Hoover do? He sent a letter to Dr. King, pretending to be a black person and implied that he should kill himself. None of this is news, but until the New York Times released it yesterday, copies of this letter had always been partly redacted. We now have the uncensored version. Here it is:
Now ask yourself a question. Is the FBI any more ethical today than it was back then? I would argue certainly not. After all, it had a file on on tech prodigy Aaron Swartz, who wasdriven to suicide by the feds. Now imagine what the FBI could do to political dissidents in a world in which they have a backdoor into all your electronic devices, which is precisely what it wants.
So the next time you think to yourself “so what, I have nothing to hide,” think again. You don’t know what the future holds, do you really want the status quo to have everything you’ve ever done or said accessible in an electronic file on you? What about the threat this poses to other people who put themselves in the arena of fighting for social change? Do you want the FBI to be able to do to them what they did to MLK but 10x worse? Think deeply about that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)