The Great Dispossession: A Massive Financial Crisis Is Pending. The WEF’s “Great Reset” Means “The Re-institutionalization of Feudalism”

Part III

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

Read Parts I and II:

WEF’s Great Reset: The Great Dispossession. The Loss of Property Rights in Financial Assets. “Own Nothing Be Happy”

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, April 11, 2024

The Great Dispossession: Turning Our Property in Financial Assets Into the Property of “Secured Creditors”

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, April 16, 2024


In Part 1, I explained that the next financial crisis will be bailed out not with central bank money creation but with our stocks, bonds and bank balances.

In Part 2, I explained the multi-year quiet regulatory changes that dispossessed us of our property.

In Part 3, I explain David Rogers Webb’s conclusion that a massive financial crisis is pending in which our financial assets are the collateral underwriting the derivative and financial bubble and will result in the loss of our assets but leave us with our debts as happened to those whose banks failed in the 1930s.

Webb begins with the economic formula that the velocity of circulation of money times the money supply equals nominal Gross Domestic Product. V x MS = GDP.

The velocity of circulation is a measure of how many times a dollar is spent during a given period of time, e.g., quarterly, annually. A high velocity means people quickly spend the money that comes into their hands. A low velocity means people tend to hold on to money.

Velocity impacts the Federal Reserve’s ability to manage economic growth with money supply changes. If the velocity of money is falling, an expansionist monetary policy will not result in rising GDP. In such a situation, the Federal Reserve is said to be “pushing on a string.” Instead of pushing up GDP, money supply increases push up the values of financial assets and real estate resulting in financial and real estate bubbles.

WEF’s Great Reset: The Great Dispossession. The Loss of Property Rights in Financial Assets. “Own Nothing Be Happy”

Webb notes that falls in velocity are precursors of financial crises. A multi-year sharp fall in velocity preceded the stock market crash in 1929 and the Great Depression that gave birth to regulatory agencies. The 21st century is characterized by a long-term fall in velocity that has reached the lowest level on record, while stocks and real estate have been driven to unprecedented levels by years of zero interest rates. When this bubble pops, we will be dispossessed.

Will the bubble pop?

Yes. The Fed suddenly and rapidly moved from zero to 5% interest rates, a reversal of the policy that drove up prices of stocks and bonds. The Fed raises rates by reducing money supply growth, thus removing the factor supporting high stock prices and collapsing the value of bonds. This results in a lowering of the value of stocks and bonds serving as collateral for loans, which, of course, means the loans and the financial institution behind them are in trouble. Bonds have already taken a hit. The stock market is holding because participants believe the Fed is about to reverse its interest rate policy and lower rates.

Webb notes that the official data show that the velocity of money collapsed in the 21st century while the Fed introduced “quantatative easing.” He makes the correct point that when the velocity of money collapses, the Fed is pushing on a string. Instead of money creation fueling economic growth, it produces asset bubbles in real estate and financial instruments, which is what we have at the present time.

When after more than a decade of near zero interest rates, the Fed raises interest rates it collapses the values of financial portfolios and real estate and produces a financial crisis.

As the authorities have set in place a system that bails out secured creditors with our bank deposits, stocks, and bonds, we will have no money and no financial assets to sell for money. People with mortgaged homes and businesses will lose them, as they did in the 1930s, when they lost their money due to bank failures. People with car payments will lose their transportation. The way the system works is you lose your money but not your debts.

The secured creditors are the creditors of the troubled institutions. Ultimately, the secured creditors are the mega-banks defined as “privileged creditors.”

The collapse of financial asset values in 1929 resulted in the failure of 9,000 banks (see this). Bank failure meant that you lost the money you had in the bank. It means the same thing today regardless of deposit insurance, because your deposits have been turned into collateral for creditors. Moreover, FDIC deposit insurance is a joke. The FDIC’s assets are in the billions. Bank deposits are in the trillions. The Dodd-Frank Act prioritized derivatives over bank depositors, so a bank account holder is in line behind derivative claims. Apparently, FDIC insurance claims will be issued in the form of issuance of stock in a failed bank.

It has all happened before, but not on the scale of what is pending.

Under the regulatory regime in place, financial collapse today means that money will be drained from the economy and be concentrated along with all wealth in a few hands. A modern-day economy cannot function without money and without companies that serve as distributors of food, goods, and services. Webb notes that it is a perfect opportunity for central banks to introduce Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) with which they have been experimenting.

The provision of CBDC to the population would provide a money supply and income to a population in total chaos and restore order to a grateful population. But it would also give total control to rulers. Webb quotes Augustin Carstens, general manager of the Bank for International Settlements who says that the key difference between present day currency and Central Bank Digital Currency is that with CBDC the central bank will know how each person uses their allotment of digital currency which gives the central bank absolute control over you via the capability to regulate your purchases, to turn off disapproved purchases, to discipline dissenters. You will be supplied with the means of life as long as you have a good social credit score, which means that you are a non-dissenter of official narratives.

Webb believes that this result is the intent of the regulatory changes and corresponds to the World Economic Forum’s agenda: “you will own nothing.” There is much in the regulatory documents that support Webb’s belief. For example, the Single Resolution Board’s 2022 Guidance for Banks to prepare for “solvent wind-down,” is an indication that an event is in the works. The Single Resolution Board’s Work Program 2023 states: “The year 2023 will be the last of a transitional period for the establishment of the main elements of the resolution framework in the Banking Union.” In other words, everything is in place.

Whether Webb is correct that the regulatory regime that has been put in place amounts to a deliberate restoration of feudalism under high tech management or whether the new rules are the unintended consequence of the rulers’ drive for security is not important. The relevant point is that the next financial crisis will dispossess us not only of our pensions and financial assets but also of our freedom and independence. If the past is a guide, the next financial crisis is close at hand.

If the mega-rich and the large financial intermediaries can be made aware of the situation, it is in their own self-interest to convince Congress to use its law-making power to unwind the regulatory system of dispossession that has been created. But the hour grows late.

Ordinary people are dismissive of the World Economic Forum and its agenda of “you will own nothing and be happy,” but this is a mistake.

The WEF was founded 53 years ago and has over the half century recruited many of the important people in business, finance, and politics. If you are not a WEF member and attendee at Davos, you are lower down on the totem pole. Social, political, and intellectual standing depends on membership. It is important to understand that The Great Reset means the re-institutionalization of feudalism.

Note that we are also being dispossessed of our food and farmers of the use of their land:

No Farmers No Food: Will You Eat The Bugs?” is an Epoch Original documentary exposing the hidden agenda behind global “Green Policies,” the untold stories of farmers forced out of business, the disruption this will have on our food supply, and why edible bugs are suddenly being pushed to the fore as a “Global Green Solution.”

EpochTV program “Facts Matter” host Roman Balmakov investigates the rapidly changing landscape of our global food source—the farming industry—through interviews with farmers in The Netherlands, Sri Lanka, and the United States. This is the next global crisis that is being ignored by the world’s media.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Paul Craig Roberts is a renowned author and academic, chairman of The Institute for Political Economy where this article was originally published. Dr. Roberts was previously associate editor and columnist for The Wall Street Journal. He was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy during the Reagan Administration. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

The original source of this article is Global Research

Copyright © Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Global Research, 2024

https://www.globalresearch.ca/massive-financial-crisis-pending/5854903

Not in Our Name! An Angry German Voice Speaks Out Against the German Federal Government’s Complicity in the Gaza Genocide

By Hermann Ploppa

Nicaragua’s accusation before the International Court of Justice is that Germany is actively participating in the genocide committed by the Israeli armed forces in the Gaza Strip. And I as a German learned in school that I have to resist when genocide is happening in front of my eyes.

I can hardly recognize my homeland Germany. Now people are talking about “fitness for war” again.

We’re supposed to march East again.

And please don’t show cowardice in front of the enemy!

We must make even more sacrifices for the German armament efforts. Hardness! Relentless harshness!

The people who are trumpeting like that don’t have a brushed hairstyle and they don’t wear military boots at all.

These are the same people who were just singing about understanding, tolerance and peace.

These are the people who, a quite short time ago, spoke out in favor of treating other peoples and ethnic groups with respect. And now we have this immature eternal teenage girl as head of the venerable Foreign Office, who behaves more imperialist, racist and colonialist than all German foreign ministers before her.

Which inevitably means that countries in the southern hemisphere deny Ms. Baerbock the essential diplomatic protocol. But I don’t want to deal with that embodiment of all embarrassment any further. You can insult green politicians as much as you want. However, here you only ever meet the shooting gallery figures on whom the people’s anger is unleashed, while the actual masterminds of this misery can sit back and relax.

After all, over 600 ministry officials have issued a public statement protesting support for the genocide in the Gaza Strip.

The signatories of this declaration did not introduce themselves with their real names. Can we seriously still expect these people to come out? After all the acts of feudalistic despotism that we experienced during the difficult Corona period? Where judges were prosecuted and subjected to home searches simply because they made a supposedly improper court ruling? Where the head of a health authority was reprimanded because he contradicted the official narrative about a pandemic?

No, the 600 ministry officials did it completely right. The misused state apparatus knows that there are still courageous self-thinkers in its ranks. And that the usurpers of our state apparatus must be careful. As long as the dissidents remain anonymous in the state apparatus, they can intervene at the crucial moment in accordance with the German constitution, the Grundgesetz. And for the benefit of the common good, as they once swore. There are these decent servants of the people with backbone, namely in the military, in the police, in the judiciary and in the government apparatus. And, as we know, now also in the German mainstream media.

And the 600 upright people in the public service address their open letter to the most important members of the federal government and tell them:

“… we are addressing you because, as federal civil servants and public servants, we are committed to the fundamental principles of the Grundgesetz. Article 25 sentence 1 of the Grundgesetz gives a general order to apply the law with regard to international law. According to the Federal Constitutional Court, this provision means that ‘the general rules of international law find their way into the German legal system without a transformation law, i.e. directly, and take precedence over German domestic law.’ Israel is committing crimes in Gaza that are in obvious contradiction to international law and thus stand by the Basic Law, to which we as federal civil servants and public servants are obliged. The Federal Republic of Germany supports politically, economically and militarily Israel’s policy in Gaza and the other Palestinian territories occupied in violation of international law. It is therefore our duty as federal employees to criticize this federal government policy and to remind us that the federal government must strictly observe the constitution and international law.”[1]

To put it bluntly again: the federal government can suck up as many laws and regulations as it wants.

Justifying Collective Punishment: Israel’s Assault on Gaza

They are all void if they are not compatible with higher international law.

It’s bad when the federal government has to be reminded of this so clearly from outside. The open letter points out that the Gaza Strip, with its approximately two million residents, has been bombed into rubble and ash by the Israeli armed forces since October 7th last year, so much so that life there is de facto no longer possible.

This led the International Court of Justice on January 26 this year to condemn the actions of the Israeli forces in the Gaza Strip as “plausible acts of genocide.”

We have to be clear that the war in the Gaza Strip is not a so-called “symmetrical war” – that is, a war in which two armed forces with approximately the same strength fight against each other on the battlefield.

No, the Gaza war is an “asymmetric war”: a fully equipped and armed army fights a defenseless civilian population – until this civilian population either flees or is completely annihilated. The Netanyahu regime’s argument that it is fighting a Hamas army in a symmetrical way is not convincing. Hamas was able to claim some kind of residual vegetation in the underground tunnels. Militarily, Hamas plays no role at all – apart from a few sniper attacks on isolated Israeli soldiers. Potentially and verbally allied forces of Hezbollah and Iran have so far largely kept a low profile out of fear of Israeli nuclear bombs. The last attacks of Iran against Israel demonstrate this military weakness of the opponents of Israel in a clear manner.

Germany’s support for the Ukrainian armed forces at least refers to the symmetrical constellation of two supposedly equally strong armed forces waging a war of attrition. In contrast, Germany’s support of Israel’s asymmetric war against Palestinian civilians has clearly crossed the red line of international law. A lawsuit brought by the state of Nicaragua against Germany for precisely this reason is cheekily rejected by German lawyers at the International Court of Justice as “baseless”. The employees of the public broadcaster Tagesschau cannot essentially contradict this fact in their reporting. They resort to the popular method of framing: if Nicaragua is undoubtedly right on this issue, then this complaint must at least be discredited by branding the Nicaraguan government as “authoritarian”[2]. It should be noted that the Ortega government assumed responsibility through free and correct elections.

But the framing doesn’t help at all. The respected Swedish institute SIPRI has found that almost all governments in the world have found the conduct of the Israeli armed forces so disreputable for many years that they have discreetly withdrawn from the arms deal with Israel[3]. Only two unconditional supporters of Israel’s rearmament remain. Please guess who these two could be. That’s right: the USA was the largest arms supplier to the Israeli armed forces in 2023 with 53 percent. This is closely followed by the Federal Republic of Germany, with 47 percent of Israel’s arms imports. And because other countries refuse to deliver weapons to Israel, the share of German equipment deliveries to Israel has increased tenfold from 2022 to 2023!

In addition, the federal government of Germany has temporarily frozen payments to the refugee organization UNRWA[4].

Not for the 2.4 million displaced Palestinians in Jordan, some of whom have been languishing in miserable camps for generations. And also not for their 600,000 fellow sufferers in Syria, or the half a million fellow sufferers in Lebanon[5]. No. But specifically the aid money for the two million Palestinians who are crowded together in the Gaza Strip and who face extinction at any moment. Who have no food, no medicine, no hospitals, no schools and no universities.

And no roof over their head. Even drinking water is no longer available in sufficient quantities.

The glorious German federal government is consistently withholding aid money for our fellow human beings in the Gaza Strip. Unlike the European Union, Spain, Canada, Sweden, Ireland, Denmark and Australia, which froze their aid funds for a short time, but have now even increased their aid payments. Only Germany remains loyal to the continued starvation of the Palestinians. I am in Spain right now. The German attitude cannot be conveyed to anyone here.

Even the Tagesschau correspondent Thilo Spanhel in Cairo is bravely trying to remedy the German filter bubble a bit by reporting that Germany’s reputation has been massively and permanently ruined by the recent solo attempts on the Gaza issue[6]. As I already said, a red line has been crossed here by the current federal government. And please don’t give anyone the impression that a possible new government coalition as the successor to the so called “Ampel-Koalition” (i.e. the Social Democrat SPD, the ecologist Green Party, and the liberal FDP) would act differently on the Gaza issue. Please just take a look at the X-Twitter statements from prominent opposition politicians to be cured of all illusions on this issue.

In contrast, all previous German politicians have distinguished themselves through their sense of proportion and modesty when it comes to the Middle East problem.

For example, there was the legendary SPD politician Hans-Jürgen Wischnewski, who repeatedly successfully mediated between Arabs and Israelis and was therefore given the affectionate nickname “Ben Wisch”.

Or the former FDP Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, who was unable to speak out against an attack on Libyan leader Gaddafi that violated international law at the crucial meeting of the UN Security Council, but with his abstention from the vote signaled to the Arab world that Germany disapproved of the attack. As foreign minister of an American colony, he can only answer with one abstention[7]. That was received.

The Arabs also knew that Germany had to perform a dance on raw eggs due to its special history. The special German history also means that Germany has not had any colonies since the end of the First World War. And while the anger in the Third World against the colonial powers France and Great Britain can still be felt everywhere today, the Germans have earned a high reputation in these countries over the decades through their equally humble, competent and humane demeanor.

The Germans can organize many things well without much nonsensical chatter. You hear that everywhere. No amount of transatlantic re-education propaganda can deny this. The Germans as respectful partners and as people who can listen well. This has given us, among other things, good business relationships in future markets. All of that has now been shattered by supporting the genocide in Palestine in just a few months.

I don’t want to give the impression that it’s just about good business.

The indescribable misery of innocent people is unbearable!

And the fact that we have to increase this suffering with our tax money, which is not exactly small, is simply unacceptable.

We must raise our voice clearly: these crimes against international law are not happening in our name!

And what we do has nothing to do with “anti-Semitism”.

The overwhelming majority of Jews worldwide strongly condemn the crimes of the Netanyahu government, and these courageous people are expressing their protest in the streets.

Let’s not let these friends of ours alone with their courage.

When it comes to the Gaza issue, of all things, we really don’t have to take a special German Sonderweg[a concept lined to rise of Nazism]

Let’s remember what we once learned in school: if another genocide occurs before our eyes, then our first civic duty is to resist this crime.

*

AI Translation from German.

Minor Revisions by Global Research 

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Notes

[1]  https://diefreiheitsliebe.de/politik/600-bundesbeamte-fordern-von-bundesregierung-waffenlieferungen-an-israel-umgehend-einzustellen/

[2] https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/europa/deutschland-nicaragua-klage-102.html

[3] https://counter-investigations.org/investigation/german-arms-exports-to-israel-2003-2023

[4] https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/asien/stopp-finanzierung-unrwa-100.html

[5] https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/892835/umfrage/registrierte-palaestinensische-fluechtlinge-nach-gebiet/

[6] https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/asien/nahost-krieg-rolle-deutschland-100.html

[7] https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/libyen-enthaltung-in-der-uno-wie-es-zu-dem-deutschen-jein-kam-a-752676.html 

The original source of this article is Global Research

Copyright © Hermann Ploppa, Global Research, 2024

https://www.globalresearch.ca/angry-german-voice-speaks-germany-complicity-gaza-genocide/5854948

A Brief History of Kill Lists, From Langley to Israel’s AI System Called “Lavender”

By Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies

The Israeli online magazine +972 has published a detailed report on Israel’s use of an artificial intelligence (AI) system called “Lavender” to target thousands of Palestinian men in its bombing campaign in Gaza. When Israel attacked Gaza after October 7, the Lavender system had a database of 37,000 Palestinian men with suspected links to Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ).

Lavender assigns a numerical score, from one to a hundred, to every man in Gaza, based mainly on cellphone and social media data, and automatically adds those with high scores to its kill list of suspected militants. Israel uses another automated system, known as “Where’s Daddy?”, to call in airstrikes to kill these men and their families in their homes.

The bodies of Palestinians killed in Israeli strikes are buried in a mass grave in Khan Younis. Photo credit: Al-Jazeera

The report is based on interviews with six Israeli intelligence officers who have worked with these systems. As one of the officers explained to +972, by adding a name from a Lavender-generated list to the Where’s Daddy home tracking system, he can place the man’s home under constant drone surveillance, and an airstrike will be launched once he comes home.

The officers said the “collateral” killing of the men’s extended families was of little consequence to Israel.

“Let’s say you calculate [that there is one] Hamas [operative] plus 10 [civilians in the house],” the officer said. “Usually, these 10 will be women and children. So absurdly, it turns out that most of the people you killed were women and children.”

The officers explained that the decision to target thousands of these men in their homes is just a question of expediency. It is simply easier to wait for them to come home to the address on file in the system, and then bomb that house or apartment building, than to search for them in the chaos of the war-torn Gaza Strip. 

The officers who spoke to 972+ explained that in previous Israeli massacres in Gaza, they could not generate targets quickly enough to satisfy their political and military bosses, and so these AI systems were designed to solve that problem for them. The speed with which Lavender can generate new targets only gives its human minders an average of 20 seconds to review and rubber-stamp each name, even though they know from tests of the Lavender system that at least 10% of the men chosen for assassination and familicide have only an insignificant or a mistaken connection with Hamas or PIJ.  

The Lavender AI system is a new weapon, developed by Israel. But the kind of kill lists that it generates have a long pedigree in U.S. wars, occupations and CIA regime change operations. Since the birth of the CIA after the Second World War, the technology used to create kill lists has evolved from the CIA’s earliest coups in Iran and Guatemala, to Indonesia and the Phoenix program in Vietnam in the 1960s, to Latin America in the 1970s and 1980s and to the U.S. occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. 

Image: Patch worn by Phoenix Program operatives. (Photo Credit: Tuxxmeister / Wikimedia Commons CC BY-SA 3.0)

Patch worn by Phoenix Program operatives

Just as U.S. weapons development aims to be at the cutting edge, or the killing edge, of new technology, the CIA and U.S. military intelligence have always tried to use the latest data processing technology to identify and kill their enemies.

The CIA learned some of these methods from German intelligence officers captured at the end of the Second World War. Many of the names on Nazi kill lists were generated by an intelligence unit called Fremde Heere Ost (Foreign Armies East), under the command of Major General Reinhard Gehlen, Germany’s spy chief on the eastern front (see David Talbot, The Devil’s Chessboard, p. 268).

Gehlen and the FHO had no computers, but they did have access to four million Soviet POWs from all over the USSR, and no compunction about torturing them to learn the names of Jews and communist officials in their hometowns to compile kill lists for the Gestapo and Einsatzgruppen.

After the war, like the 1,600 German scientists spirited out of Germany in Operation Paperclip, the United States flew Gehlen and his senior staff to Fort Hunt in Virginia. They were welcomed by Allen Dulles, soon to be the first and still the longest-serving director of the CIA. Dulles sent them back to Pullach in occupied Germany to resume their anti-Soviet operations as CIA agents. The Gehlen Organization formed the nucleus of what became the BND, the new West German intelligence service, with Reinhard Gehlen as its director until he retired in 1968.

After a CIA coup removed Iran’s popular, democratically elected prime minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1953, a CIA team led by U.S. Major General Norman Schwarzkopf trained a new intelligence service, known as SAVAK, in the use of kill lists and torture. SAVAK used these skills to purge Iran’s government and military of suspected communists and later to hunt down anyone who dared to oppose the Shah. 

By 1975, Amnesty International estimated that Iran was holding between 25,000 and 100,000 political prisoners, and had “the highest rate of death penalties in the world, no valid system of civilian courts and a history of torture that is beyond belief.”

How America Spreads Global Chaos

In Guatemala, a CIA coup in 1954 replaced the democratic government of Jacobo Arbenz Guzman with a brutal dictatorship. As resistance grew in the 1960s, U.S. special forces joined the Guatemalan army in a scorched earth campaign in Zacapa, which killed 15,000 people to defeat a few hundred armed rebels. Meanwhile, CIA-trained urban death squads abducted, tortured and killed PGT (Guatemalan Labor Party) members in Guatemala City, notably 28 prominent labor leaders who were abducted and disappeared in March 1966.

Once this first wave of resistance was suppressed, the CIA set up a new telecommunications center and intelligence agency, based in the presidential palace. It compiled a database of “subversives” across the country that included leaders of farming co-ops and labor, student and indigenous activists, to provide ever-growing lists for the death squads. The resulting civil war became a genocide against indigenous people in Ixil and the western highlands that killed or disappeared at least 200,000 people.

This pattern was repeated across the world, wherever popular, progressive leaders offered hope to their people in ways that challenged U.S. interests. As historian Gabriel Kolko wrote in 1988,

“The irony of U.S. policy in the Third World is that, while it has always justified its larger objectives and efforts in the name of anticommunism, its own goals have made it unable to tolerate change from any quarter that impinged significantly on its own interests.”

When General Suharto seized power in Indonesia in 1965, the U.S. Embassy compiled a list of 5,000 communists for his death squads to hunt down and kill. The CIA estimated that they eventually killed 250,000 people, while other estimates run as high as a million.

Twenty-five years later, journalist Kathy Kadane investigated the U.S. role in the massacre in Indonesia, and spoke to Robert Martens, the political officer who led the State-CIA team that compiled the kill list.

“It really was a big help to the army,” Martens told Kadane. “They probably killed a lot of people, and I probably have a lot of blood on my hands. But that’s not all bad – there’s a time when you have to strike hard at a decisive moment.”

Kathy Kadane also spoke to former CIA director William Colby, who was the head of the CIA’s Far East division in the 1960s. Colby compared the U.S. role in Indonesia to the Phoenix Program in Vietnam, which was launched two years later, claiming that they were both successful programs to identify and eliminate the organizational structure of America’s communist enemies.  

The Phoenix program was designed to uncover and dismantle the National Liberation Front’s (NLF) shadow government across South Vietnam. Phoenix’s Combined Intelligence Center in Saigon fed thousands of names into an IBM 1401 computer, along with their locations and their alleged roles in the NLF. The CIA credited the Phoenix program with killing 26,369 NLF officials, while another 55,000 were imprisoned or persuaded to defect. Seymour Hersh reviewed South Vietnamese government documents that put the death toll at 41,000

How many of the dead were correctly identified as NLF officials may be impossible to know, but Americans who took part in Phoenix operations reported killing the wrong people in many cases. Navy SEAL Elton Manzione told author Douglas Valentine (The Phoenix Program) how he killed two young girls in a night raid on a village, and then sat down on a stack of ammunition crates with a hand grenade and an M-16, threatening to blow himself up, until he got a ticket home.  

“The whole aura of the Vietnam War was influenced by what went on in the “hunter-killer” teams of Phoenix, Delta, etc,” Manzione told Valentine. “That was the point at which many of us realized we were no longer the good guys in the white hats defending freedom – that we were assassins, pure and simple. That disillusionment carried over to all other aspects of the war and was eventually responsible for it becoming America’s most unpopular war.”

Even as the U.S. defeat in Vietnam and the “war fatigue” in the United States led to a more peaceful next decade, the CIA continued to engineer and support coups around the world, and to provide post-coup governments with increasingly computerized kill lists to consolidate their rule.

After supporting General Pinochet’s coup in Chile in 1973, the CIA played a central role in Operation Condor, an alliance between right-wing military governments in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay and Bolivia, to hunt down tens of thousands of their and each other’s political opponents and dissidents, killing and disappearing at least 60,000 people. 

The CIA’s role in Operation Condor is still shrouded in secrecy, but Patrice McSherry, a political scientist at Long Island University, has investigated the U.S. role and concluded,

“Operation Condor also had the covert support of the US government. Washington provided Condor with military intelligence and training, financial assistance, advanced computers, sophisticated tracking technology, and access to the continental telecommunications system housed in the Panama Canal Zone.”

McSherry’s research revealed how the CIA supported the intelligence services of the Condor states with computerized links, a telex system, and purpose-built encoding and decoding machines made by the CIA Logistics Department. As she wrote in her bookPredatory States: Operation Condor and Covert War in Latin America:

“The Condor system’s secure communications system, Condortel,… allowed Condor operations centers in member countries to communicate with one another and with the parent station in a U.S. facility in the Panama Canal Zone. This link to the U.S. military-intelligence complex in Panama is a key piece of evidence regarding secret U.S. sponsorship of Condor…”

Operation Condor ultimately failed, but the U.S. provided similar support and training to right-wing governments in Colombia and Central America throughout the 1980s in what senior military officers have called a “quiet, disguised, media-free approach” to repression and kill lists. 

The U.S. School of the Americas (SOA) trained thousands of Latin American officers in the use of torture and death squads, as Major Joseph Blair, the SOA’s former chief of instruction described to John Pilger for his film, The War You Don’t See:

“The doctrine that was taught was that, if you want information, you use physical abuse, false imprisonment, threats to family members, and killing. If you can’t get the information you want, if you can’t get the person to shut up or stop what they’re doing, you assassinate them – and you assassinate them with one of your death squads.”

When the same methods were transferred to the U.S. hostile military occupation of Iraq after 2003, Newsweek headlined it “The Salvador Option.” A U.S. officer explained to Newsweek that U.S. and Iraqi death squads were targeting Iraqi civilians as well as resistance fighters.

“The Sunni population is paying no price for the support it is giving to the terrorists,” he said. “From their point of view, it is cost-free. We have to change that equation.”

The United States sent two veterans of its dirty wars in Latin America to Iraq to play key roles in that campaign. Colonel James Steele led the U.S. Military Advisor Group in El Salvador from 1984 to 1986, training and supervising Salvadoran forces who killed tens of thousands of civilians. He was also deeply involved in the Iran-Contra scandal, narrowly escaping a prison sentence for his role supervising shipments from Ilopango air base in El Salvador to the U.S.-backed Contras in Honduras and Nicaragua. 

In Iraq, Steele oversaw the training of the Interior Ministry’s Special Police Commandos – rebranded as “National” and later “Federal” Police after the discovery of their al-Jadiriyah torture center and other atrocities.

Bayan al-Jabr, a commander in the Iranian-trained Badr Brigade militia, was appointed Interior Minister in 2005, and Badr militiamen were integrated into the Wolf Brigade death squad and other Special Police units. Jabr’s chief adviser was Steven Casteel, the former intelligence chief for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) in Latin America.

The Interior Ministry death squads waged a dirty war in Baghdad and other cities, filling the Baghdad morgue with up to 1,800 corpses per month, while Casteel fed the western media absurd cover stories, such as that the death squads were all “insurgents” in stolen police uniforms. 

Meanwhile U.S. special operations forces conducted “kill-or-capture” night raids in search of Resistance leaders. General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of Joint Special Operations Command from 2003-2008, oversaw the development of a database system, used in Iraq and Afghanistan, that compiled cellphone numbers mined from captured cellphones to generate an ever-expanding target list for night raids and air strikes. 

The targeting of cellphones instead of actual people enabled the automation of the targeting system, and explicitly excluded using human intelligence to confirm identities. Two senior U.S. commanders told the Washington Post that only half the night raids attacked the right house or person.

In Afghanistan, President Obama put McChrystal in charge of U.S. and NATO forces in 2009, and his cellphone-based “social network analysis” enabled an exponential increase in night raids, from 20 raids per month in May 2009 to up to 40 per night by April 2011.

As with the Lavender system in Gaza, this huge increase in targets was achieved by taking a system originally designed to identify and track a small number of senior enemy commanders and applying it to anyone suspected of having links with the Taliban, based on their cellphone data.

This led to the capture of an endless flood of innocent civilians, so that most civilian detainees had to be quickly released to make room for new ones. The increased killing of innocent civilians in night raids and airstrikes fueled already fierce resistance to the U.S. and NATO occupation and ultimately led to its defeat.

President Obama’s drone campaign to kill suspected enemies in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia was just as indiscriminate, with reports suggesting that 90% of the people it killed in Pakistan were innocent civilians. 

And yet Obama and his national security team kept meeting in the White House every “Terror Tuesday” to select who the drones would target that week, using an Orwellian, computerized “disposition matrix” to provide technological cover for their life and death decisions.    

Looking at this evolution of ever-more automated systems for killing and capturing enemies, we can see how, as the information technology used has advanced from telexes to cellphones and from early IBM computers to artificial intelligence, the human intelligence and sensibility that could spot mistakes, prioritize human life and prevent the killing of innocent civilians has been progressively marginalized and excluded, making these operations more brutal and horrifying than ever.

Nicolas has at least two good friends who survived the dirty wars in Latin America because someone who worked in the police or military got word to them that their names were on a death list, one in Argentina, the other in Guatemala. If their fates had been decided by an AI machine like Lavender, they would both be long dead.

As with supposed advances in other types of weapons technology, like drones and “precision” bombs and missiles, innovations that claim to make targeting more precise and eliminate human error have instead led to the automated mass murder of innocent people, especially women and children, bringing us full circle from one holocaust to the next.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Medea Benjamin is the cofounder ofCODEPINK for Peace, and the author of several books, includingInside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran

Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher for CODEPINK and the author ofBlood on Our Hands: The American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq.

Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies are the authors of War in Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict, published by OR Books in November 2022. They are regular contributors to Global Research.

Featured image is from Shutterstock

The original source of this article is Global Research

Copyright © Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies, Global Research, 2024

https://www.globalresearch.ca/kill-lists-langley-lavender/5854918

Peter Schiff: The Data Looks Grim for the Dollar

SchiffGold.com

Peter’s back in Puerto Rico this week for his podcast after another week of record gold prices. In this episode, he discusses media coverage of inflation, this week’s CPI report, and Bitcoin’s weakening price relative to gold.

Peter starts by recapping this week’s price action and movements in the dollar’s strength. The dollar is currently performing better than other foreign currencies, but that doesn’t mean it’s doing well:

“The dollar index was up today, but that doesn’t mean the dollar was up. Gold tells you the dollar was down. What the rising dollar index tells you in an environment of a rising gold price is that the dollar is losing value. It’s just losing less value than the euro— or losing its value more slowly than the euro or the pound or the yen. That’s what’s happening. I mean, if I’m going backwards at 10 miles an hour and there’s a car next to me going backwards at 20 miles an hour, relative to that car, I’m going forwards. But I’m not. I’m actually going backwards. I’m just going backwards more slowly than the other car.”

The financial press is either completely oblivious to the reasons gold is surging or they’re choosing to provide political cover to policymakers responsible for inflating the dollar:

“Like I said with the canary and the coal mine, instead of recognizing, ‘Gee, gold’s going up because of inflation,’ they’re making up other reasons for why gold’s going up. Like the Canary died of a heart attack. ‘Gold’s going up because of geopolitical risk.’ They don’t want to admit that gold’s going up because of inflation, because the Fed is making a mistake, because these rate cuts are wrong, because they should be hiking rates. So they [the press] do this whole segment on inflation, and they don’t even mention gold.”

With persistent evidence of inflation, the media is at least starting to question the narrative that we need more interest rate cuts:

“They’re now starting to say, ‘Hmm, maybe we’re not going to get any cuts.’ They’re not saying that we’re going to get hikes. … They are starting to question the validity of the cuts, but nobody is questioning the reality of the fact that they should never have stopped hiking— that that’s what the rising gold price is signaling, that interest rates are too low and that they need to go up. Not just in the US, they need to go up everywhere. … Everybody has to raise rates sharply. I’m not talking about ‘mamby-pamby’ quarter point rate hikes. We need 200 basis point hikes.”

Gold’s and silver’s bullish streaks bode well for the metals, but not for Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies:

“The price of Bitcoin is down to about 18.6 ounces of gold. The high was 27 two and a half years ago. So we’re getting deeper into bear market territory. None of these Bitcoiners want to acknowledge this. Despite all the hype, ETFs, all this big rally, Bitcoin never made a new high in real money. And it may not.”

Wednesday’s CPI came in hot again, with a 0.4 percent increase from last month. Year-over-year inflation is now at 3.5%, which is not close to the Fed’s 2% target:

“If you were objective and just looking at the CPI, you would say, ‘Oh, we better hike rates. Inflation is going up, not down.’ But they’re still saying, ‘No, no, no, we’re expecting to cut rates.’ Why? Based on what would you expect to cut rates? Certainly not based on the data. The data doesn’t support a rate cut.”

Between increasing institutional demand for gold and strong evidence of future inflation, the fate of the dollar does not look good:

“Imagine how much stronger [gold’s] going to be when the dollar is going down, and it will go down. And if anything, the rising gold price is what will cause the dollar to go down, because at some point when gold gets high enough, there will be a stampede into gold by foreign central banks, by the public, by hedge funds, pension funds, and endowments. And where are they going to get the money to buy all that gold? They’re going to use dollars. So the dollar is going to get killed. It has no chance against gold.”

The next few months will be critical for the American and global economies. If the Fed continues its inflationary policy, it will spell disaster and worsen the coming crisis.

This originally appeared on SchiffGold.com.

The Great Dispossession Part 3

By Paul Craig Roberts

PaulCraigRoberts.org

In Part 1, I explained that the next financial crisis will be bailed out not with central bank money creation but with our stocks, bonds and bank balances.

In Part 2, I explained the multi-year quiet regulatory changes that dispossessed us of our property.

In Part 3, I explain David Rogers Webb’s conclusion that a massive financial crisis is pending in which our financial assets are the collateral underwriting the derivative and financial bubble and will result in the loss of our assets but leave us with our debts as happened to those whose banks failed in the 1930s.

Webb begins with the economic formula that the velocity of circulation of money times the money supply equals nominal Gross Domestic Product. V x MS = GDP.

The velocity of circulation is a measure of how many times a dollar is spent during a given period of time, e.g., quarterly, annually. A high velocity means people quickly spend the money that comes into their hands. A low velocity means people tend to hold on to money.

Velocity impacts the Federal Reserve’s ability to manage economic growth with money supply changes. If the velocity of money is falling, an expansionist monetary policy will not result in rising GDP. In such a situation, the Federal Reserve is said to be “pushing on a string.” Instead of pushing up GDP, money supply increases push up the values of financial assets and real estate resulting in financial and real estate bubbles.

Webb notes that falls in velocity are precursors of financial crises. A multi-year sharp fall in velocity preceded the stock market crash in 1929 and the Great Depression that gave birth to regulatory agencies. The 21st century is characterized by a long-term fall in velocity that has reached the lowest level on record, while stocks and real estate have been driven to unprecedented levels by years of zero interest rates. When this bubble pops, we will be dispossessed.

Will the bubble pop?

Yes. The Fed suddenly and rapidly moved from zero to 5% interest rates, a reversal of the policy that drove up prices of stocks and bonds. The Fed raises rates by reducing money supply growth, thus removing the factor supporting high stock prices and collapsing the value of bonds. This results in a lowering of the value of stocks and bonds serving as collateral for loans, which, of course, means the loans and the financial institution behind them are in trouble. Bonds have already taken a hit. The stock market is holding because participants believe the Fed is about to reverse its interest rate policy and lower rates.

Webb notes that the official data show that the velocity of money collapsed in the 21st century while the Fed introduced “quantatative easing.” He makes the correct point that when the velocity of money collapses, the Fed is pushing on a string. Instead of money creation fueling economic growth, it produces asset bubbles in real estate and financial instruments, which is what we have at the present time.

When after more than a decade of near zero interest rates, the Fed raises interest rates it collapses the values of financial portfolios and real estate and produces a financial crisis.

As the authorities have set in place a system that bails out secured creditors with our bank deposits, stocks, and bonds, we will have no money and no financial assets to sell for money. People with mortgaged homes and businesses will lose them, as they did in the 1930s, when they lost their money due to bank failures. People with car payments will lose their transportation. The way the system works is you lose your money but not your debts.

The secured creditors are the creditors of the troubled institutions. Ultimately, the secured creditors are the mega-banks defined as “privileged creditors.”

The collapse of financial asset values in 1929 resulted in the failure of 9,000 banks. Bank failure meant that you lost the money you had in the bank. It means the same thing today regardless of deposit insurance, because your deposits have been turned into collateral for creditors. Moreover, FDIC deposit insurance is a joke. The FDIC’s assets are in the billions. Bank deposits are in the trillions. The Dodd-Frank Act prioritized derivatives over bank depositors, so a bank account holder is in line behind derivative claims. Apparently, FDIC insurance claims will be issued in the form of issuance of stock in a failed bank.

It has all happened before, but not on the scale of what is pending.

Under the regulatory regime in place, financial collapse today means that money will be drained from the economy and be concentrated along with all wealth in a few hands. A modern-day economy cannot function without money and without companies that serve as distributors of food, goods, and services. Webb notes that it is a perfect opportunity for central banks to introduce Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) with which they have been experimenting.

The provision of CBDC to the population would provide a money supply and income to a population in total chaos and restore order to a grateful population. But it would also give total control to rulers. Webb quotes Augustin Carstens, general manager of the Bank for International Settlements who says that the key difference between present day currency and Central Bank Digital Currency is that with CBDC the central bank will know how each person uses their allotment of digital currency which gives the central bank absolute control over you via the capability to regulate your purchases, to turn off disapproved purchases, to discipline dissenters. You will be supplied with the means of life as long as you have a good social credit score, which means that you are a non-dissenter of official narratives.

Webb believes that this result is the intent of the regulatory changes and corresponds to the World Economic Forum’s agenda: “you will own nothing.” There is much in the regulatory documents that support Webb’s belief. For example, the Single Resolution Board’s 2022 Guidance for Banks to prepare for “solvent wind-down,” is an indication that an event is in the works. The Single Resolution Board’s Work Program 2023 states: “The year 2023 will be the last of a transitional period for the establishment of the main elements of the resolution framework in the Banking Union.” In other words, everything is in place.

Whether Webb is correct that the regulatory regime that has been put in place amounts to a deliberate restoration of feudalism under high tech management or whether the new rules are the unintended consequence of the rulers’ drive for security is not important. The relevant point is that the next financial crisis will dispossess us not only of our pensions and financial assets but also of our freedom and independence. If the past is a guide, the next financial crisis is close at hand.

If the mega-rich and the large financial intermediaries can be made aware of the situation, it is in their own self-interest to convince Congress to use its law-making power to unwind the regulatory system of dispossession that has been created. But the hour grows late.

Ordinary people are dismissive of the World Economic Forum and its agenda of “you will own nothing and be happy,” but this is a mistake. The WEF was founded 53 years ago and has over the half century recruited many of the important people in business, finance, and politics. If you are not a WEF member and attendee at Davos, you are lower down on the totem pole. Social, political, and intellectual standing depends on membership. It is important to understand that The Great Reset means the re-institutionalization of feudalism.

Note that we are also being dispossessed of our food and farmers of the use of their land: “No Farmers No Food: Will You Eat The Bugs?” is an Epoch Original documentary exposing the hidden agenda behind global “Green Policies,” the untold stories of farmers forced out of business, the disruption this will have on our food supply, and why edible bugs are suddenly being pushed to the fore as a “Global Green Solution.”

EpochTV program “Facts Matter” host Roman Balmakov investigates the rapidly changing landscape of our global food source—the farming industry—through interviews with farmers in The Netherlands, Sri Lanka, and the United States. This is the next global crisis that is being ignored by the world’s media.

The Best of Paul Craig Roberts

Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, has been reporting shocking cases of prosecutorial abuse for two decades. A new edition of his book, The Tyranny of Good Intentions, co-authored with Lawrence Stratton, a documented account of how americans lost the protection of law, has been released by Random House. Visit his website.

Copyright © Paul Craig Roberts

The Delusion of Liberal Democracy

Trying to define ‘that thing’ we have

Zork (The) Hun

Heavily loaded expressions are flying around in the public conversation about ‘fascism’, racism, ‘xenophobia’ ‘socialism’, ‘communism’, ‘capitalism’ and most importantly: ‘democracy’ with almost as many interpretations as speakers. What makes all of them interesting is the way they are used, the instinctual certainty about their meaning and the assumption that their understanding and interpretation is widely shared. The looser the definition, the greater the scope of its possible use.

Still, one must wonder what is in the head of the person in the picture above. What is her (his? their?) concept of democracy (and the fascism implied on the placard)?
One could wonder what is in the heads of the antifa folks about Putin’s denazification efforts. Do they see him as a comrade? Will they agree on the meaning of fascism?

One should wonder what was in the heads of the 2000 mules exposed in Dinesh di Souza’s documentary of the same title. Were they ‘saving democracy’ with their obviously criminal activities?

As we should also wonder what is in the heads of the many thousands of operatives actively working on stealing the next US presidential election. It requires tens of thousands of operatives to strategically distribute millions of illegal immigrants into swing states and voting districts and to provide them with the documents and mail-in ballots to vote.

What is in the heads of their handlers? Do they see themselves as the defenders of democracy by destroying its most basic principles? Is a democracy that can only be maintained by massive fraud worth preserving? Can it even be called democracy?
Although they would not state it publicly, most democrats seem to think ‘YES’ and prove it with their actions, but the answer is ‘NO’ according to a comment I just received to my previous post. @treece thinks that the US is already fascist state.
She has a point, but is she right?

“I think the predominate problem in America is Fascism. This is evident through the fasces symbolism displayed behind the podium in the United States House of Representatives. The fasces was the origin of the name of the Nationalist Fascist Party of Italy (from which the term fascism is derived).

Is fascism the best way to describe the present state of Western liberal democracies? Isn’t it distinct enough to deserve its own name?

In practice, the words ‘democracy’, ‘capitalism’ and ‘liberalism’ are used to describe “that thing we have” or to mean whatever the speaker chooses it to mean – “neither more nor less”.
They are just vague descriptors of the things that we are for or against.

Do I know the answer? No, but we can start thinking about it. I already wrote several posts about democracy; you can find the links at the end of this post. They are dealing with the conceptual problems with sets of pragmatic questions to show why it cannot work.

To find an answer, to know where we are and why, we have to know what the terms we use mean and how did we get to where we are. Let’s start with the terms:

  • Democracy is a fundamentally flawed concept. It has more problems than merits.
    • It is, by design, the tyranny of the majority
    • It cannot exist without some degree of delegation which makes it inherently corruptible.
    • It is a blunt instrument destined to surrender its decision-making power to ever growing bureaucracies
  • Democratic socialism and crony capitalism are oxymorons. Sort of….
    They are just lame attempts to explain away the inherent problems of democracy.
    ‘Democratic socialism’ is socialism, but not the bad kind, you see, as it is redeemed by the goodness of democracy. It is socialism, because that is what “the people” want; shown through their democratically expressed general will.
    ‘Crony capitalism’ shouldn’t blamed on the flaws of democracy, but on the evils of profit driven exploitative capitalism.
  • Liberalism has a split personality. Well, I should say it is utterly confused. Just do a quick search on the ‘History of liberalism’ to understand what I mean. It is a big subject that would deserve a post on its own. What matters for this conversation is the split that started about a hundred years ago in America which was founded on the ideas of Hobbes and Lock, on the ideas of personal freedom and responsibility, natural rights and equal opportunity.
    The political left of the time got tainted with the eugenics of the Fabian socialist and the epistocratic arrogance of the authoritarian progressives like Woodrow Wilson.
    They needed a new label, so they hijacked the word ‘liberalism’ to mean various ‘universal’ and ‘human’ rights to other people’s money, managed by a benevolent, redistributive government.
    Classical liberalism means individual liberty with personal responsibilities while modern liberalism means economic and social privileges without obligations.
    This means the liberal democratic welfare state with various groups competing for a bigger slice of the shared resources and an ever growing bureaucracy controlling it.
    It also means, of course, all the libertine stuff of selfish, irresponsible licentiousness and the celebration of hedonism and perversion.

None of it is sustainable. The irreparably corrupt liberal democratic welfare state of the USA with its global hegemonic role is dying in front of our eyes. The rest of the Western world and their global organizations are on the same path.

Die digitalen Bücherverbrennungen

„Das war ein Vorspiel nur,
dort wo man Bücher verbrennt,
verbrennt man auch am Ende Menschen.“
(Heinrich Heine 1797-1856)

 Auf eine gegenwärtig mehr im Verborgenen stattfindende Form der immer mehr anschwellenden totalitären Meinungs-Unterdrückung weisen der bekannte Medizin-Kritiker Dr. Gerd Reuther und die Historikerin Dr. Renate Reuther im Eingangs-Essay ihres neuen Buches „Wer schweigt, hat schon verloren“ hin.1. Suchmaschinen und Buchhändler finden auf einmal keine Bücher oder Artikel mehr, da sie politisch unerwünscht sind, Bibliotheken entledigen sich unkorrekter Bestände. Was heute im digitalen Raum nur von Computern gefunden wird, kann auch von Computern verborgen gehalten werden. „Die digitalen Scheiterhaufen lodern“ im Dienste der „Informations-Inquisition“. Wir danken Herrn und Frau Reuther für die Erlaubnis zum Abdruck des Essays. (hl)

Bücherverbrennung 1933 in Deutschland, Auftakt für die eigentliche „Hinrichtung des Ungeistes“ (Wikipedia)


Wer sucht, der findet – immer weniger

 Von Gerd und Renate Reuther


Die digitalen Scheiterhaufen lodern in der Hitze leistungs-starker Supercomputer. Die sozialen Netzwerke löschen und manipulieren. Bibliotheken haben sich unerwünschter Bestände entledigt. Archive hüten wieder „Giftschränke“ verbotener Literatur. Die Buchhändler wissen, was nicht verfügbar sein soll. Suchmaschinen finden nicht mehr, sondern verschweigen. Die Informations-Inquisition läuft auf Hochtouren. Ein Aufschrei ist selbst unter der kritischen Minderheit der Bevölkerung kaum vernehmbar. Das unbeschwerte, aber feige Leben ist verlockender.

Zunächst waren es nur bestimmte Themen, bei denen Suchmaschinen ausschließlich befangene Treffer lieferten. Inzwischen sind die Ergebnisse der meisten Anfragen zu Desinformationsmüll verkommen. Recherchen nach Personen, die ein Buch verfasst haben, produzieren seitenlang Treffer von Händlern, die das Werk listen. Über andere, sogar aktuellere Aktivitäten des Autors behauptet man, nichts zu wissen. Publikumsverlage sind für unangepasste Autoren längst außer Reichweite. Als „rechts“ diffamiert, werden Selbstdenkern Vortragsorte verwehrt. Feuilletons ignorieren sie. Wer nur noch auf Internet-Blogs veröffentlichen kann, weil er Unerwünschtes sagt, wird unsichtbarer.

Schlimm ist nicht nur das Verlöschen von Personen, Fakten und Meinungen. Fast noch schlimmer ist, dass viele Menschen diese manipulierte Recherchezensur gar noch für die Grenzen des Wissens halten. Nutzer von Apps hat man bereits in schrumpfende Käfige der Erkenntnis gesteckt. Die Welt wird enger. Könnte dies die wahre Bedeutung von „global village“ aus Sicht der Erfinder sein? Was Google nicht hat, brauchen Sie nicht.

Wer schließlich nichts mehr findet, ist wohl genauso glücklich wie diejenigen, die nichts mehr besitzen. Das hatten wir in Europa schon mehrfach: unter den Feudalherren und im Sozialismus – ob der nun „national“ oder kommunistisch verbrämt war. Selig sind die, welche nichts besitzen und arm im Geiste sind.

Aber gibt es nicht Alternativen zu Google? Dem Namen nach schon, den Ergebnissen nach nicht. Die entscheidenden Informationen bekommen Sie bei DuckDuckGo & Co. genauso wenig. Meist unterscheiden sich die nutzlosen Treffer nur in ihrer Reihung. Was bringen Suchanfragen, wenn Ergebnisse nur die Narrative des Mainstreams bestätigen und Unerwünschtes nicht mehr liefern? Dann macht es wenig Sinn, überhaupt noch zu suchen.

Das gilt auch für die vorgebliche Online-Enzyklopädie Wikipedia, von deren ursprünglicher Zielsetzung als umfassende Wissenssammlung kaum etwas übrig ist. Wikipedia ist zu einer systematisch zensierten und manipulierten Waffe gegen unliebsame Fakten, Meinungen und Personen verkommen. Selbst Larry Sanger, einer der Mitbegründer, bestätigt dies in einem Interview, in dem er feststellt, dass „die Tage von Wikipedias rückhaltloser Verpflichtung zur Neutralität längst Geschichte sind.“ Mit dem Digital Services Act der EU werden die Lügen von Wikipedia, Youtube und den sozialen Netzwerken überdies zur allein zulässigen Wahrheit gekürt.
Wer anderes von sich gibt, dem drohen Sanktionen.

Aber keine Angst, die Älteren von uns wissen noch, wie das geht: ein Leben ohne Google und die anderen Verdummungsalgorithmen. Es gibt noch gedruckte Bücher und das eigene Gehirn. Es gab ein Leben vor Google, wie vor Smartphones. Es gibt auch eines danach. Und es wird viel besser sein, wenn wir uns wieder auf unsere eigenen Wahrnehmungen, Recherchen und Zweifel stützen.

Not macht bekanntlich erfinderisch. Es gab immer Zeiten, in denen Wissen und Denken verboten war. Vielleicht brauchen wir – wie im Irland des 19. Jahrhunderts – wieder einmal Heckenschulen, um Sprache, Kultur und Fakten an die nächste Generation weiterzugeben. Oder wir werden als „Buchmenschen“ wie im Roman „Fahrenheit 451“ des amerikanischen Schriftstellers Ray Bradbury (1920-2012) durch die Wälder wandeln und Bücher auswendig lernen. Bisher fand sich meist ein Weg, um der Tyrannei der Unwissenheit zu trotzen. Unser indoktriniertes Gehirn würde es uns danken.

—————————————

1   Gerd und Renate Reuther: Wer schweigt, hat schon verloren, Leipzig 2024

Partido Comunista de Chile presidirá por primera vez la cámara baja

Por primera vez en la historia, el Partido Comunista de Chile (PCCh) dirigirá la Cámara de Diputados tras la elección de Karol Cariola como presidenta de la instancia legislativa.

Pese a las maniobras de la oposición, Cariola logró imponerse por 76 votos frente a la propuesta de la derecha y del partido Demócratas, Joanna Pérez, con 75.

Desde el 2022 le tocaba el turno al PCCh para encabezar la cámara baja, pero la oposición incumplió el acuerdo pactado por los partidos políticos y ahora pretendía bloquear también su asunción.

En la vicepresidencia de ese organismo quedaron los legisladores Gaspar Rivas, del Partido de la Gente, y Eric Aedo, de la Democracia Cristiana.

Cuba celebra 63 años de proclamación socialista

Cuba celebra hoy el aniversario 63 de la proclamación del carácter socialista de su Revolución.

Dicha declaración ocurrió durante las honras fúnebres de las víctimas de los bombardeos estadounidenses a distintos puntos del territorio nacional, como preludio de la invasión mercenaria por Playa Girón, provincia de Matanzas, en 1961.

Ante la multitud congregada cerca del cementerio Cristóbal Colón, en La Habana, el máximo líder cubano, Fidel Castro, expresó: esta es la revolución socialista y democrática de los humildes, con los humildes y para los humildes.

Y por esta revolución de los humildes, por los humildes y para los humildes, estamos dispuestos a dar la vida, agregó.

Los asistentes con los fusiles en alto, expresaron su decisión de defender la patria, por lo que la fecha pasó a la historia nacional como Día del Miliciano.

En la víspera, el 15 de abril, aviones enemigos camuflados con la insignia de las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias atacaron el aeropuerto de Ciudad Libertad, la base aérea de San Antonio de los Baños y el aeropuerto de Santiago de Cuba.

El día 17, una brigada armada, entrenada y transportada por la Agencia Central de Inteligencia de Estados Unidos desembarcó por la Ciénaga de Zapata.

Luego de 60 horas de duros combates fueron derrotados los mercenarios, que se rindieron

al atardecer del día 19, y esta acción representó, al decir de Fidel Castro, la primera gran derrota del imperialismo en América Latina.

Comunistas piden al gobierno francés buscar la paz en Oriente Próximo

El Partido Comunista Francés (PCF) instó al gobierno del presidente Emmanuel Macron a adoptar todas las medidas necesarias para lograr la paz en el Oriente Próximo, en un escenario de escalada entre Irán e Israel.

En un comunicado compartido en las redes sociales por su secretario nacional Fabien Roussel, la organización también demandó a París trabajar por un alto el fuego inmediato y permanente en la Franja de Gaza, un territorio palestino devastado por más de seis meses de agresión israelí, en represalia por el ataque perpetrado por Hamas el 7 de octubre.

Francia debe tomar la iniciativa de una coalición internacional de Estados que compartan estos objetivos para asegurar la seguridad colectiva de los pueblos del Oriente Próximo, sobre la base del Derecho Internacional, las resoluciones de la ONU y los principios de su Carta, subrayó.

Asimismo, el PCF pidió al gobierno galo sumarse a la iniciativa de España, Irlanda y Noruega para reconocer al Estado de Palestina.

De acuerdo con los comunistas, son los pueblos los que pagan el precio de la escalada de tensiones en la región, “en la que el gobierno de extrema derecha de Benjamin Netanyahu continúa la masacre en masa en Gaza y la depuración étnica y los asesinatos contra palestinos en Cisjordania y Jerusalén Este”.

El fin de semana Irán lanzó más de 300 misiles y drones hacia Israel en respuesta al bombardeo del 1 de abril en su Consulado en Damasco, Siria, donde murieron varias personas, entre ellas comandantes del Cuerpo de la Guardia Revolucionaria Islámica.

La fuerza política condenó estos actos y todos los que compliquen aún más el panorama en el Oriente Próximo.

La región está sentada sobre un barril de pólvora y el PCF reafirma su solidaridad con sus pueblos y fuerzas de paz, señaló en el texto con un llamado a detener el engranaje de la guerra.

Al respecto, denunció la inacción y “la complicidad culpable” de occidente en la situación imperante en esa parte del mundo, por la escandalosa política de doble rasero que ejecuta.

Создайте подобный сайт на WordPress.com
Начало работы