Monday, April 01, 2019

'Humanitarian' colonialism

"How the Battle Over Israel and Anti-Semitism Is Fracturing American Politics" (Thrall).  The JYT, of all places ("It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all"), covers the ((('donor'))) problem of the Democrats, and the schwartzer problem faced by 'American' Khazars.

Tweet (Matt Kennard):
"Watching liberal elites reaction to rise of fascism across world at this moment makes it much easier to understand how the 1930s happened. Liberal elites hate socialism much more than fascism. Fascism lets them keep their money. Just fact."
Tweet (William Owen) (as cynical as Canadian Liberals are, there is no question that this is a huge deterioration in the party):
"It's true. If means anything, it means that the and it's supporters should not be working with Donald freaking Trump to overthrow a democratically elected government in "
"Vietnam to Venezuela: US Interventionism and the Failure of the Left" (Reed). Although Venezuela is such a striking example because of the contrast between the good done by the elected government and the massive humanitarian disaster that a Guido coup would bring in, this kind of problem with the 'left' isn't new.  'Humanitarian' colonialism (remember the monsters who push 'responsibility to protect'?).  Part of The Clarification.
"As Steve Striffler points out in his timely new book, Solidarity: Latin America and the US Left in the Era of Human Rights, human rights discourse gained currency as a framework for critique of U.S. foreign policy in the 1970s partly because it gave liberals a way to claim moral high ground in criticizing the Nixon administration for its support of horrible dictatorships in Latin America without confronting the imperialist political objectives they shared with Nixon. At the same time, those dictatorships extirpated or drove underground much of the left in the region; therefore, in the absence of a vibrant left with which to align, progressives in the U.S. committed to a politics of international solidarity with Latin America also increasingly were drawn toward human rights discourse. As Striffler indicates, this orientation toward a fundamentally non-political approach to international solidarity would have serious consequences down the line. He stresses the important role the Central America peace movement, and the Committee In Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (CISPES)—which was a committed, ideologically left  organization—in particular, played in challenging the Reaganite agenda for the region and even mitigating the carnage the U.S. and its allies were able to perpetrate. He notes as well, however, regarding the broader solidarity movement that “lack of a mass-oriented organization limited the movement’s capacity to act with coherence, with focus, or with the kind of political power necessary for changing the fundamentals of U.S.-Latin American relations.”
The extent to which human rights discourse has displaced discussion of actual differences of and conflicts over political program also has facilitated military interventionism. What qualify as human rights abuses can be amorphous, and transgressions can exist in the eye of the beholder. How, for instance, does the United States not figure among the world’s worst human rights violators with the highest per capita rate of incarceration, a third of its population with no or inadequate access to health care, the most extreme inequality in the world, indefinite incarceration at Guantánamo and elsewhere without due process or trial, extrajudicial killings of American citizens and others around the world? As Striffler argues regarding the emergent mobilization in the U.S. against Pinochet’s human rights violations in Chile,
Liberal versions of human rights offered an anti-interventionism that was politically soft, one whose central requirement was that the US government not support military regimes that committed the grossest of human rights violations (in itself a worthy goal). The politics and policies of these regimes, as well as the politics of their opponents, were essentially irrelevant, as were the deeper motivations of the U.S. government and corporations in other parts of the world. This is an anti-interventionism that moves beyond the politics of the Cold War by ignoring it, in effect declaring traditional politics irrelevant and left solidarity obsolete, undesirable, or anachronistic (Solidarity, 117)."
Tweet (Dollars Horton Official):
"it still blows my mind that the pod save america guys talked Warren into doing a dna test and inadvertently dealt her candidacy a mortal blow right out the gate"
So incredibly stupid you really have to wonder if she was tricked into it as part of a conspiracy to prevent her from having any chance (her policy ideas are in many cases to the left of Bernie, making her a dangerous possible President, although, as usual for the Republican turned Democrat, I have grave doubts that she is sincere, though even insincere raising of these issues makes many 0.1%ers nervous).

"HARPER: ISLAMOPHOBES REINVENT THEMSELVES AS SINOPHOBES".  Mostly connected to the general idea that huge wars and American militarism are 'good for the Jews'.

"Former Spy Accused Of Anti-Semitism Eyeing Senate Run" (Pink).

"EU would delay Brexit again to let UK hold a second referendum" (Stone).  The Eurotrash are terrified that in five years a separated Britain will be flying high (and serving as an excellent model for every country not Germany still stupid enough to be in the union), while the 'trash, unable to stop sucking at the American teat and breaking away from the model of the hegemon, will be stuck in a Europe on the brink of being turned into a nuclear wasteland.  All the nonsense we're seeing is an attempt to stop Brexit while pretending they don't care.

The tragic deterioration of Counterpunch. It shouldn't shock us that the culprits see no problem.

"Video-Forensics: The “forbidden” Christchurch video24 discrepancies that thrill “hoaxers”" (Eggert) (reminds me a lot of Oklahoma City, where law enforcement lost control of the people they had intended to infiltrate the extremist group, and then had to scramble to cover up the embarrassment of having effectively aided in the attack):
"By now we know that Tarrant was a member of the right-wing Knights Templar Order, which, among others, has the goal to “infiltrate Islamist groups to report their terrorist plans to the authorities” https://www.zeit.de/2012/21/DOS-Breivik/seite-3.
How is it that one thinks of intelligence work looking at this vita?
Now there are rules with most secret services: the employees are meant to investigate, and may behave appropriate to the investigated milieu. “Heil Hitler” and Nazi gestures (not yet reported by Tarrant) are allowed, expressing extremist views, as well. The execution of terrorist attacks, however, does not belong in the work spectrum. But right here Tarrant seems to have “ended up”. Apparently he recently attracted attention with wild propaganda on the Internet – and should then have resorted to arms. This last stage of life must not be fact based, it could also be ascribed to him, by others.
Anyone who deals in detail with intelligence services, will find a very popular “trick” to manifest a desired political narrative on the one hand and to prevent, on the other hand, clarifications by police and media: the planting of enemy agents or liaisons in dirty events.
 and:
"There is a video showing the “arrest”. The professional action – the car was rammed – may indicate that the “arrest” was part of the ongoing training.
Considering Tarrants vita, which suggests anti-terrorist activities, the headline could read: How special forces correctly retire a colleague. In fact, the New Zealand Herald reports that Australian snipers participated in this or an accompanying exercise and were also seen near the crime scenes.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz//nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12213956&ref=clavis
If Tarrant was part of it, that would explain how he managed to bring his weapons into the country. But how did he get out of control? Or: Did he at all? All that is still in the dark. The police authorities withhold information. According to media reports, the arresting staff of the exercise forces are just beginning their annual leave and, of course, their names are kept secret. And: the pixelated face of the arrested shown in court raises the question of whether it even IS the Australian at all."
and (the face sure doesn't look like it belongs on the body, but that might be an artifact of the way we see the video):
"The driver intentionally swings the camera over to his face at one point, allowing to ‘recognize’ him. It’s the only ‘evidence picture’ because there is no surveillance camera footage of the attacked mosques. The mask-like face seen in the car video may well be that of today’s “offender” Brenton Tarrant. But it looks like it has been cut out and does not fit in with the body, or -the stills show it particularly clear – the body seems too far behind the head. Post production comes into mind.
https://s3.ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/images.deccanchronicle.com/dc-Cover-m482e2r1n2tei6lsvek9ovrvb3-20190315141031.Medi.jpeg
https://moderndiplomacy.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Brenton-Tarrant.jpg https://fijisun.com.fj/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Brenton-Tarrant-750×403.jpg"
Then a long list of examples of post-production work on the video (most of which back up the idea that the video was made by somebody just walking into the mosque without a gun, with the gun and sound effects added later).  The sheer volume of anomalies makes a compelling case that this is some kind of training video which was then souped up in post-production to make a terrorist attack video.  Of course, as in all of these cases, the conspiracy theorists are left with the impossible problem of having to explain how the victims were killed with the use of concepts like 'crisis actors', and then the bald denial that anybody was killed in the face of massive evidence to the contrary, which immediately destroys all credibility for the conspiracists.
blog comments powered by Disqus