Happy New Year!

2017 is over. I wish the new year is more peaceful and prosperous than the last one. I hope for a miracle because we seem determined to destroy ourselves. We are doing it on two fronts:

1. By not doing enough to reverse the climate change, and 
2. By increasing the chances of a nuclear war.

On issue # 1, most of the world is trying to push things in the right direction, but the USA remains opposed to take its share of responsibility. Instead, it dropped all pretenses and is now ruled by the most dangerous organization in human history, which controls all branches of power.

On issue # 2, we see an aggressive militaristic USA blaming Russia (and its "dictator" Putin), or North Korea, or China, or Iran... for everything that is wrong in the World, even though most of the problems are of USA's own doing. Instead of resolving conflicts, the USA creates them.

Because of its superpower status, the USA plays the major role in both of humanity's existential problems. Unfortunately, they play a negative role, and drag the entire World to disaster.

The global warming goes on steadily and its disastrous effects are usually seen as acts of God by most people. The capitalist system is fundamentally unsuited to deal with a problem that requires limiting consumption and growth, but the USA, which was trying to limit or sabotage all international climate change initiatives, will never allow any altering of this destructive system.

The fundamental reasons for the increased risks of nuclear war are not much different. The USA's military-industrial complex needs an enemy for its existence and growth. The main-stream media (MSM) portrays the NATO as a "defensive" alliance. It was created to counter the "Soviet threat". The Soviet Union collapsed more than a quarter of a century ago, but the NATO remained. And not only that - it grew up, and tries to grow further...

Of course, the idea that the NATO is a defensive alliance is preposterous. No NATO country has ever been attacked by another country! But the NATO has been waging wars all around the globe.

I am often surprised how many Europeans believe in the myth that NATO is a force for peace. NATO is an instrument of the US empire. In the words of Lord Ismay, the 1^st NATO secretary general, the original goal of NATO was to “keep the Soviet Union out, the Americans in, and the Germans down”. To understand the current goal of NATO, watch here George Friedman, the boss of Stratfor, or listen to Noam Chomsky.

Without the MSM the growth of the military-industrial complex (and NATO) would not be that easy. It would be difficult to justify all the wars if people had accurate information and knew what is going on. The fact that most Americans don't know much history and even less about their country's atrocities abroad, demonstrates the success of the US corporate media in justifying the American policy. The objectivity of the media is getting worse every year. Laws get tightened, the pressure against whistleblowers is growing, and people like Julian Assange are deprived of freedom, even if there is no legal basis for that. Who would dare to leak something like this after the ordeal of Chelsea Manning?

It is painful to watch the blind belief of so many people that "it's just that crazy Trump", and if we impeach him, everything will get better. The problems is not Trump, but the corrupt system that made him possible. I don't see anything good after Trump's removal, if the system remains. The only difference will be the new face on top of the same machine. Only a Christian fundamentalist can believe that Pence will be a better president than Trump!

Do you remember Obama? Do you remember the hopes that he would end the Bush era militarism? The only thing that Obama changed was the rhetoric. He was a smarter, more eloquent salesman for the same policy. Not surprisingly, the US military footprint increased. The drone-strikes, the mass surveillance, the war on whistleblowers... all these increased under Obama. 

According to the US constitution, the Congress has the power to declare war, but the last time that was done was in 1942. Was USA in peace with the rest of the World since then? Not at all. It is hard to count the number of wars the USA was engaged since the end of the WWII. Every administration, including Obama's, finds pretexts to justify whatever wars they want. 

Now we have Trump and he also tries to show his strength by giving more power to the military. The pattern is so obvious. Every US president gives more power to the military-industrial complex. The only exception is probably Kennedy and we know how he ended...

So, the only hope for the World is if the USA changes its policy, but I don't see how this can happen before it changes its system. Some very smart people foresee the end of the US empire, but I don't see how this can happen without violence. 

In theory, the non-violent change can come through democratic elections, but this would require at a minimum, to end the money influence on politics and an objective media that reports the real news. Unfortunately, the rich and powerful elites are increasing their wealth, and together with it, their grip on the government and the media. The latter does its job superbly - keeping the US population ignorant, confused, and divided, so that it continues to vote against its own interest. Therefore, it is most likely that the change comes with the collapse of the system, but this can easily lead to internal and/or external violence. Given the number of weapons in the USA, including the nuclear weapons, the violent end of the US empire might mean the end of life on Earth...

To end this post on a positive note, I must admit that I cannot imagine every possibility. Therefore, non-violent change in the USA and anywhere else in the World is possible. Miraculous changes in human consciousness and society are possible. Let's hope for a miracle in the new 2018!

Week 41, 2017

Stephen Cohen, the top US expert on Russia, continues his lonely battle against the MSM [1, 2]. As usually, he debunks the lies told by the MSM and the danger of this anti-Russian hysteria. Probably the most surprising news for the Westerners will be to hear that Russia has overcome the recession caused by the low oil prices and successfully battles the Western sanctions. Contrary to what you hear on the MSM, what is failing is the policy of isolating Russia. The only thing that these sanctions can achieve is to cement the Russia-China alliance, but as it should be clear from Prof. Mearsheimer this can only benefit China, at the USA expense...

Now I want to turn to another topic, because I had a conversation this week where we talked that we need more women in politics. I agree in principle - women are more cooperative, and on average, could give us better politicians. But the most famous women politicians do not fulfill our expectation. This could be because there are not enough of them, but it could also be because the political problems we have a systemic. I think that the leaders we get are largely the product of the system in place. Therefore, when a woman comes on top as a leader in USA for example, we should not expect much change. I could give Thatcher and Madeleine Albright as example of terrible female politicians, who are responsible for the death and suffering of a lot of people, but our conversation turned to Hillary Clinton and I promised to back up with facts my claim that she was, and still is, a horrible choice for the USA, and even more so for the World.
There are already books on why Hillary Clinton lost the presidential elections last year, including by Hillary herself. So, there is plenty of information out there, but many people still believe in the fantasy that she and her supporters are presenting. Clinton's wing of the democratic party, which de facto controls the party, is one of the main forces behind the Russia-gate. The tragedy is that in pursuit of this fantasy the Democrats are going in bed with the neocons. As a result, there is practically no opposition to war in the US politics anymore. There are plenty of peace loving people in the USA, and the strongest peace activists that I know of are American, but they are outside the mainstream, and they have no way of stopping anything the USA government does.
So, contrary to what the MSM is telling us (mainly blaming Putin), here are some real reasons for Hillary's loss:

• Hillary had no policy that could convince people to vote for her - this is probably not a very important reason because in US most people do not vote on issues, but on images. However, despite all the money she got, she and her election machine failed to create a convincing image. They struggled to overcome everything that made her look bad. Things like her foundation, speeches to Wall Street, the rigging of the primaries against Bernie Sanders, etc. Therefore, it should not be a surprise, that:
• Hillary lacked support - you could not see this on the MSM because she had the support of the US rich and powerful elites. To see the truth, one had to rely on social media or sources outside the mean-stream. The picture presented by the MSM was so disconnected from the reality, that the reality became the domain of the comedians: here is Jimmy Dore, showing the crowds for Bernie and Hillary. And here is what people could see on social- and other non-MSM media.
• Hillary, together with her opponent, were the most hated presidential candidates in US history.
• Hillary could not win the working-class people because her voting track-record and positions were well known. People knew her hypocrisy because she supported NAFTA and was the candidate of Wall Street and the rich elites... (I used Barack Obama's words here, but I can show that he was not less of a hypocrite) 
• Hillary, as the Democratic candidate, should be the opposite of the climate-denying Republican party, but she could not excite even the environmentalists. And finally,
• Hillary was the candidate of the war machine. 

Of course, I cannot show all the reasons why Hilary is bad and why she lost. I simply tried to list some of the stuff that I have seen since the US elections started. And please, note that I did not point to right-wing, or Republican-leaning sources. If my goal was to throw mad at her, or bring some extreme points of view, I could have looked in other places...

week 40, 2017

This post could be called "The Russia-Gate Hysteria".
For the last year I had to read or listen something on this topic almost daily because it was impossible to avoid it. From the start it was looking like a propaganda effort because it either lacked facts, or it was based on "anonymous", or "intelligence" sources (that is, sources specialized in misinformation).
Even the occasional news that claimed to have been based on some facts, rather than earlier propaganda, turned out to be exaggerations, or were later retracted. Despite this the anti-Russian hysteria continues. It reached such scale that it is accepted as an axiom, i.e. without proof, and most Americans do not realize that it is based on racism, xenophobia, homophobia, and demagoguery.
I listen to the excitement of some friends (and tried to cool them down) who probably continue to hope that Russia gate will bring down Trump, but I did not write anything on this issue since January because what I wrote then is still valid. There have been new "developments" only in the sense that the hysteria grows bigger and bigger. There are no new facts. Only more efforts to cast a large enough net with the hope that something real will get caught.
It is astonishing to watch how most of the Western intellectuals play their role, like this highly paid journalist and author, instead of fulfilling their responsibility (which is to question the actions of those in power). I remember how I tried to explain to an American friend that nowadays the Western media is making propaganda on a level that I haven't seen in my life in communist Bulgaria. His response was that he cannot believe that there are no good people among the hundreds of professionals that work in his favorite Washington Post. Of course, there are good people in WaPo, but they are not the ones determining its editorial policy. The fact that WaPo is owned by a super-rich and unscrupulous Jeff Bezos should be enough to doubt anything in that newspaper, but my American friend, like most Westerners, believe in the objectivity of their news media.
There are a few truth warriors that dare to question or criticize the wisdom behind this propaganda, but they have no platform, and now the "deep state" is trying to squeeze even the few small independent (still surviving) news outlets by starving them from funding. One of these truth warriors is Stephen F. Cohen. Thanks to his high credentials as Russia expert, he was a leading commentator in the MSM for decades, but since the Ukrainian crisis he is no longer allowed there for the obvious reasons. Luckily, his wife is the editor of The Nation, and he can still publish there. Another one is Chris Hedges, who left The New York Times soon after he delivered this speech, in his efforts to educate his brainwashed fellow Americans...
To end this post on the anti-Russian hysteria, I recommend this article by a Professor of History at the Central Washington University. I have not seen any better, or more in dept analysis of the issue.

week 39, 2017

I decided that I should stop waiting for the time to write and publish a big blog piece because that time never comes...
Instead, I should simply write a few words each week, even if I don't have much time for research in order to find the best sources to make my point. Maybe that will lower the quality of my posts, but now I want to do it more as a record of my thoughts about the state of the world peace and the propaganda I see daily...
So, what am I thinking after week 39?
My biggest concern remains the USA - it goes crazier and drags Europe, and the rest of the World with itself. The hypocrisy and the propaganda to justify the wrongdoings of the West have no limits...
Let's look at the North Korea issue. We hear the demands that it abandons its nuclear program, we hear that Kim Jong-un is irrational, that N. Korea's nuclear and missile tests are provocations, etc. This all maybe true, but what if it all is in reaction to the American actions. As usual, the Western media does not tell us much about the history or circumstances that led to the "illegal", or "irrational" actions. So, please go to the trustworthy Consortiumnews.com and read about the Korean history, which may help you understand that "suicidal dictatorship" [1, 2]. The second of the two articles is especially important because it gives the policy options and analyzes them.
Even if we accept the propaganda that N. Korea is the worst dictatorship in the world, shouldn't we stop for a minute and ask ourselves: Why is it irrational to get WMD, if the evidence shows that the only way for a country to survive American efforts for "regime change" is to have WMD?
Every "dictator" that agreed to give up their pursuit of WMD got killed, and his country destroyed.
Is it irrational to fear a country that you are technically at war with, that has bombed you until its pilots complained that "there are no targets left", that is sanctioning you, and threatening you with "fire and fury like the world has never seen before"?
Let's not forget that this blog is also about propaganda. Today's media giants are instruments of propaganda, and the "Don't Be Evil" Google is showing us how it is done, but I will try to write more about that another time...
In relation to today's topic, I made a Google search for "Korean war casualties" and here is a snapshot of the result:

Do you notice something? You don't see North Koreans in the first page of search results although most of the human casualties were North Koreans. I guess for Google, or for the sources they rely on, North Koreans are not humans...
Anyway, after some digging, I found various numbers and it turns out that North Korea lost between 20% and 30% of its population! Here is a quote from General Curtis LeMay, as quoted in [Richard Rhodes, “The General and World War III,” The New Yorker, June 19, 1995, p. 53]:

“After destroying North Korea’s 78 cities and thousands of her villages, and killing countless numbers of her civilians, [General] LeMay remarked, “Over a period of three years or so we killed off – what – twenty percent of the population.”

In order to comprehend what North Korea suffered, consider that during World War II the UK lost 0.94% of its population, France lost 1.35%, China lost 1.89% and the US lost 0.32%.
I know that my American friends find it difficult to believe that their nation can be seen as doing something evil, but that is probably because in every country the school history books are written to make the students in that nation feel good. If Americans could somehow comprehend what their leaders, secret services, and army, are doing to the rest of the world, they may not be so proud of their nation. Unfortunately, they are easily led to believe all kind of falsehoods in order to justify whatever their leaders want to do and make them feel good about it.
I mentioned Americans, but we, the Europeans are just as guilty, if not even more so. The reason is, because we can stand up to the American crazy policies. We, as their allies, can say "no" without fear of being destroyed, but we don't do it... We support them instead...
So, when we look at the facts (not the spin by the MSM) it should not be surprising that the North Koreans can be a little paranoid by their fear of a Goliath that they are technically at war with, but more importantly, we should understand that it is not irrational to seek a weapon that can deter that Goliath, i.e. the development of their own WMD.
This is not just the opinion of an amateur like me, this is also the opinion of six former high-level experienced U.S. government officials. You may have heard at least the names of the William Perry and George Shultz. They wrote that "Kim Jong Un is not irrational and highly values preserving his regime... Talking is not a reward or a concession to Pyongyang and should not be construed as signaling acceptance of a nuclear-armed North Korea. It is a necessary step to establishing communication to avoid a nuclear catastrophe. The key danger today is not that North Korea would launch a surprise nuclear attack. Instead the primary danger is a miscalculation or mistake that could lead to war.”
Unfortunately, we have US administration that is highly irrational and pushes the World on the path to destruction. Note that I am not saying Trump! The media makes a lot of noise about Trump, but he is just a clown. The problem is the "deep state", but almost all "progressives" in USA are now so busy getting rid of Trump that they support all war-mongers and that same "deep state" that keeps Trump on a leash.
The US democracy is a mirage. People vote, leaders and faces change, but the policy remains the same...
My few words for this week became quite a lot. So, it is time to stop.

Basics of International Relations

I usually complain about the naivety of majority of Western citizens because they easily believe even the most ridiculous "justifications" given to us by politicians or the MSM. In my discussions on politics, I often use moral arguments against the Western policy, its unfairness and hypocrisy. So, when I watched this lecture by Prof. Mearsheimer (one of my favorite sources of information and analysis on international politics), I thought that I should avoid the moral arguments and rely only on logic.
Anyway, the lecture does not change my view that the anti-Russia hysteria and propaganda are dangerous and unfair. But the lecture shows that the current policy is also illogical, stupid, even idiotic, as Prof. Mearsheimer says...

The New Allegations Against Syria Using Chemical Weapons

We had it before: red lines against the use of chemical weapons, certainty that the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad is responsible, and calls to punish him, or at least remove him from power, as if peace and democracy will flourish when we remove him...
Just like with many other issues before, we don't need evidence, we have to believe what the USA or other Western leaders are telling us. Even if there is no logic in any of the allegations, the Western mean-stream media (MSM) does an excellent job in convincing us that what they tell us is the truth. No matter how many times we have been lied to by, e.g CIA or pundits with obvious agenda and history of lies, we have to believe them because "they know", or they "have seen the evidence".
I am tired of arguing on issue after issue, in conversation after conversation, that we need evidence and we need proof before making judgments or rush into actions. I am tired of asking where the USA/Western actions lead us?
The hold of the MSM on the public opinion is so strong, that whenever I try to give another perspective, I find myself looking like a "conspiracy theorist" or an idiot. No matter how uninformed the other person is, or how well informed I feel on any issue, the reality is that the propaganda does its job - people form an opinion and accept the MSM "logic". Whatever argument or perspective I try to give, people fall in line behind the Western policies, and do not realize how all reasons for defending "our (Western) side" are loosing their meaning when we commit evil or illegal acts, such as wars...
OK, enough complaining. For those who can read, I will give a few links on the most recent use of chemical weapons in Syria. A good place to start is this article, which gives some historical background, summarizes the theories about the incident, and discusses the logic behind them. And here is an article that questions the legality of USA's rush into action. Isn't that the job of the MSM to ask these questions? Instead of asking these questions, the MSM proclaimed that Trump just became president after firing the 59 Tomahawks into Syria!
Why peace activist and anyone who questions the system and those in power have to go to the alternative media? What was the purpose of a free media? Why is the Western MSM so uniform on foreign policy issues? Why aren't we disturbed that the MSM acts as a propaganda outlet for those in power - justifying their illegal actions, instead of questioning them? Why is the European media so much in sink with the USA media giants? Why is Swedish media presenting so one-sided picture of the Syrian conflict, relying on information from the "moderate rebels", and ignoring or disbelieving the only Scandinavian peace activist that went to Syria?
When we listen to the Western MSM, pundits, or politicians, they often point to the the 2013 use of chemical weapons as the previous incident in which Obama showed weakness because he did not enforce his "red line". I have not met anyone, who knew that this incident was later proven to be a "false flag attack", i.e. an incident committed by the so-called "moderate rebels" on civilians in their territory in order to blame Assad and get the West involved in the conflict. Back then, the MSM did precisely what it does now - blamed Assad without proof, relying on people that wanted regime change in Syria for decades, and they repeated it so many times that it is the accepted "fact" nowadays. Back then, I relied on alternative, but reliable sources, like this one, and was saying to everyone that the truth might be different, but how can people believe me and disbelieve their favorite newspaper or TV news show?
Am I a "conspiracy theorist" for relying on alternative media? Yes, a lot of the alternative media promotes conspiracy theories, but that's why we have brains - to think and process the information we get. That's why I trust Consortiumnew.com instead of PropOrNot.
Can anyone read the sources I cite and call me a "conspiracy theorist"? How can any reasonable person read the articles I give above, compare them to any "analysis" or "report" on the same issues in the Western MSM and tell me that I rely on "fake news" websites, "conspiracy theories", or "Russian propaganda". I actually wonder how can any sane person continue to rely on the MSM after reading any of my sources? The articles I suggest are examples of serious journalism, or professional analysis, relying of facts, and presenting various points of view. The MSM on the other hand, are full of propaganda and bias. I wonder, how can people continue to rely on NYT, WaPo, and the rest, after being lied so many times?
For those who have the stomach for "Russian propaganda", here is Chris Hedges interview on RT, with Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton, who publish on Alternet - a site I've never heard before, but which we should follow, if we don't want to be blinded by the MSM.
I don't know what more to say. I am trying to read less news because I want to preserve my sanity, but whenever I go to the news, I keep my critical attitude because I have no doubt that we are living in very dangerous times and we are subjected to propaganda beyond anything I've seen during the Communist era.

Remembering Saddam Hussein

The CIA analyst, John Nixon, who interrogated Saddam Hussein has written a book about the ex-Iraqi dictator. Most of us do not have time to read books, especially about irrelevant dead dictators, but I strongly recommend watching the interview with this man whose job in CIA was to study and analyze Saddam (the 2nd part of the interview is here).
It is worth remembering how the MSM portrayed Saddam before, during, and after the invasion of Iraq. According to our free Western media, Saddam (just like Milošević and Gaddafi) was an evil dictator, who was torturing and killing his own people. He even gassed his own people (just like Bashar al-Assad more recently), and he was compared to Hitler (just like Vladimir Putin and all of the previously mentioned "evil dictators").
Remember everything you heard or read about Saddam and listen to the guy whose job was to analyze Saddam, and who interrogated him until he was executed. That should help you understand and interpret the current news, if you haven't yet realize that the goal of the MSM is not to inform you, but to brainwash you. Every time you hear about a new "Hitler", or any "evidence" against that new "Hitler", you should remember Saddam and... be skeptical!
If anyone could somehow strip all the spin and propaganda from the numerous articles and "news" about these "evil dictators", it should be obvious that these dictators do not come even close to the worst dictatorships in the world (e.g. Saudi Arabia), which happen to be friendly with USA, and therefore, cannot be criticized. If there is anything common for these three Middle Eastern dictators, it is that they were secular, in the case of the two dead ones, socialist leaders, who despite their efforts did not manage to (always) please the USA and ended up as "enemies" of the Empire.
I am not saying that Saddam, Gaddafi, and al-Assad, were/are not dictators. Yes, they were/are dictators, but they were/are not the worst ones, and therefore, we should not rush to remove them. Even if we ignore all the lies and manipulations designed to fool us that Iraq, Libya, and Syria were supporting or harboring terrorist, let's ask ourselves how can a criminal act, such as war (in fact, war is "the supreme international crime", according to Article 39 of the United Nations Charter), can be used to correct the crimes of a dictator? How can a crime be corrected by committing the supreme crime?
What the "regime change" adventures in Iraq, Libya, and Siria, did achieve? We destroyed three peaceful, secular, multi-cultural, and multi-ethnic countries and turned them into failed states that are now breeding grounds for terrorists. Congratulations!