Tuesday, June 24, 2014

June 24: The most important news story - ever.....

.....No, it doesn't get a lot of space It has almost no information in it. And it's hidden in yesterday's (June 23) paper in a small section at the bottom of p. A2. Did the editor deliberately hide it?

I don't think so. I think the editor just didn't have a clue how important the story is. I've noticed that news, especially foreign news, seems to be chosen at random - or with a toss of the dice. There's no reason to believe that the editors have the remotest clue about which stories are more important. That might explain why the op ed columns written by staff writers are almost always trivial and even vapid.  They just don't know any better.

The story is that the US tested an anti-missile missile from a base in the Pacific. That's a missile to destroy another missile - say, a nuclear missile - coming in to attack. The attacking missile in this case was  fired by an aircraft. It was successfully intercepted and destroyed,

So why is that the most important news item you will ever see? I'll come back to that at the end of this post.

The editorial is the usual pimping for the oil industry.  I admit to being an alarmist in this issue. I'm sounding the alarm because we are destroying ourselves by encouraging the belief that we can go on forever using fossil fuels. Anyone who is not an alarmist on this issue is as big a numbskull as the oil industry is callous and uncaring.

The debate on climate change is over - over a long time a long time ago. It's happening. We are already seeing a profound effect in a decline of life on land and in the seas. Please don't babble nonsense about how we don't have a substitute for such fuels.

I know we don't. And whether we have one doesn't matter a damn because the change will go on and destroy us whether we have a substitute or not. Get used to it. There are some things we simply cannot  have no matter how much we want them or expect them. And the more we put off dealing with that, the quicker we die.
An Egyptian born man with Canadian citizenship has been sentenced to seven years in Egyptian prisons after a farcical trial, condemned  for doing his job - reporting the news. There are really two stories here.

In the famous "Arab Spring", Egypt became a democracy, and elected a government. The government was, it's true, strongly Moslem. But who Egyptians elect in a democratic society is nobody else's business.

The American government which claims to be a world leader and encourager of democracy spoke highly of the Arab Spring. But the reality is that no American government in history has ever brought democracy to anybody. Instead, it has installed dictatorships all over the world - and most especially in South America. Any country foolish enough to reject the American dictator gets disposed of.  Haiti is a good example When Haitians overthrew the dictator and elected a president, the US sent troops to send the president into exile. Then the American government set up a rigged democracy with a puppet president - something like New Brunswick.

The American government will tolerate a democracy only if it toes the line. It breaks those that  are in any way independent.  That's why, when the elected Egyptian president was overthrown by the army, and rigged elections were held to elect generals to leadership positions, there was no whisper of complaint from Obama.

So far, that military  government has sentenced over a thousand people to death, trying hundreds at a time in a trial that might last ten minutes. Almost all of them were members of the opposition. And Obama hasn't said boo.

Now they're arresting reporters for reporting what's going on.  One of them is a Canadian. And Harper, who is supposed to defend Canadians and who gives fiery speeches about Israel and the Ukraine, has said almost nothing.

Across Canada, journalists are calling Harper gutless. But that's not true. Well, it may be true. But that's not the case here. The case here is that Harper has no principles whatever.

He supports Israel because there is a high organized Jewish voting bloc that will vote for him. He supports Ukraine to get the Ukrainian-Canadian vote. There is no such bloc of voters in Canada that is either of Afghan or Egyptian descent. So it they get unfairly jailed, the're on their own.

A gutless man can be forgiven. It's a human failing. An unprincipled man is contemptible.

For wastage of space, the June 24 paper sets a new record with a whole page of an interview with the Assistant Commissioner of the New Brunxwick RCMP. It's a standard Mazerolle kiss-up interview that tells us very little.

A6 has a very interesting article by Tess Allen, reporting on demands for a far, far deeper investigation of the Lac Megantic disaster. That makes sense. The investigation that took place was pure coverup. I  have no idea had the influence to rig such a coverup. But it was certainly someone so wealthy, he doesn't need to pay income tax.

C1 has a long, long story  on the fighting in Iraq that tells us nothing. The real story is a very short one.
The American government does not like the elected prime minister of Iraq. He doesn't do what Obama and co. want him to do. So they want to get rid of him. Through its connections with Saudi Arabia, it has supported the attack on Iraq. The reason they are not intervening is because they are using the invasion to put pressure on the PM to step down.

The replacement they have in mind is a pretty slimy character named Chalibi. He is the man who originated the myth that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and so gave Bush and Blair their excuse for a war that killed a million and a half Iraqis.

That's it. Oh, the US also wants Iraq broken up as Syria is being broken up and as Lebanon will be. The idea is to encourage sectarian hatreds and fears in the rejoin. The breaking up of states will prevent any of them from becoming powerful, and will create permanent instability. The sectarian hatreds will also cause Moslems to waste their efforts in fighting each other.

All of this will, of course, mean massive poverty, hunger, suffering, refugees. But we will no doubt send  missionaries to comfort them.

Oh, yeah. The anti-missile missile story.

A news editor with any sense of what is happening in the world would not have run that story. He would have looked for something that told us more. He would have asked questions. Consider -
1.Why did the US government announce the test and its results? This is not normal for military tests.
2. Why have the test at all? The US knows the anti-missile system works. The whole world knows. That's why the US has been installing anti-missile sites all over the world and, especially, close to the borders of Russia and China.
3. It's also noticeable that the European Union is not crazy about the drive for a war with Russia.  Very, very few national leaders in the union are being quoted on the issue. The one who guessed most interviews is General Rasmussen, leader of the NATO troops. That's because he's the only one who's all in favour of a war.

The story was released because this is meant as a warning to Russia and China - especially to Russia. The rules of modern warfare have been changed. Nobody is much afraid of the US army. For all its size, for all its budget (roughly equal to the rest of the world put together), the US military has been almost a joke for its performances against small and poor countries like Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

The European Union is reluctant with good reason. This is a war that could go nuclear, and it is right next door. Nuclear explosions, even if intercepted and exploded in mid-flight could have disastrous effects on Europe.

The test was a show piece, intended to warn Russia that it could block Russian nuclear missiles. That's why the news was released to the media.

No big deal? Actually, it's a very big deal.

Since World War ll, the planet has survived because all major powers had the bomb. Any nuclear attack would draw a counter-attack. That deterred any attack. It was called mutual retaliation or mutual deterrence. It wasn't perfect by a long shot. Some day, somebody was almost certain to attack. But it has saved us for sixty years.

But no more. The US can, it thinks,block retaliation with its anti-missile missiles. So mutual deterence no longer exists One country can now, it's thought, attack without fear of retaliation. The message of that test was to rub the  warning home.

So what happens?

1. Perhaps Putin will surrender. But that won't be enough. The people who control the US will insist on US dominance of the Russian economy. Then the threat will  be repeated for China and whoever is left.
2. Or,  at some point along the way, some country will say no. Then there will be an attack. When that happens, depend on Israel to seize its chance to nuke Iran. And I h ave no idea where it might go from there.

Obama has publicly and recently announced that he is committed with every fibre of his being to "American Exceptionalism". What that means is that the US has the right to rule the world as, in effect, a world dictator.

If it sounds insane, that's because it is. For a start, it would mean polluting the planet to a degree it cannot withstand. Then there's the proven fact that the US military does not have the capacity to maintain such a rule with conventional weapons.

But it's easy to fall into insanity in a country with an inflated notion of its place in the world, with big business, obsessed with greed, in control of the nation, and racist in the sense that all people who are not American are inferior.

Make no mistake. With the anti-missile, the era of restraint in the use of nuclear weapons has ended.

As well, the American play has to be made very, very soon because all that power and all that money are disappearing fast.

That's why this is the most important news story you will ever read.


  1. Sorry dude, I HAVE to nitpick. This time I like about 95% of it, and this isn't even a disagreement but more an addition. The example of Haiti IS a very instructive one, however, the LEAD proponent of ousting Aristide was NOT the americans, but the canadian government, who set up a meeting in Quebec with the US and France (although its true that it was US force that was used, the initial instigator was Canada). And the reason Canada wanted him gone can be explained in two words: SNC Lavalin.

    I can still remember when this was a hot button issue, I vaguely remember one of the canadian satire shows had a bunch of kids asking questions of politicians during an election campaign, and one kid asked a guy from the NDP (this may have been before Layton, I just remember that it was NDP, but it wasn't Layton, not that I imagine he'd have acted differently) about the 'Haiti issue' and I remember the guy laughing and saying "no way am I going to comment on that". The kid is probably an adult now and doesn't bother to vote.

  2. I didn't know about that level of Canadian involvement. The US,of course, would have had its own motives. I certainly wouldn't have invaded just as a favour to Canada.

    The most disgraceful part of it for Canada was that we sent "peacekeepers" which put a gloss on what was really a serious abuse of peacekeeping since they were really there to slap down the locals.

    I see that four of the parties support raising the minimum wage to put an end to poverty in NB. That's absurd. A minimum wage IS poverty. Part of the solution is to narrow the wage gap. But nobody's talking about that.
    So far, I don't get a sense that any party has a clear sense of direction.

  3. canadahaitiaction.ca

  4. Here's the specific link: