Quantcast
Channel: mediachecker
Viewing all 820 articles
Browse latest View live

Document: JPMorgan Chase Bets $10.4 Billion on the Early Death of Workers (banker deaths)

$
0
0

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: March 24, 2014

Families of young JPMorgan Chase workers who have experienced tragic deaths over the past four months, have been kept in the dark on many details, including the fact that the bank most likely held a life insurance policy on their loved one – payable to itself. Banks in the U.S., as well as other corporations, are allowed to make multi-billion dollar wagers that their profits from life insurance policies on employees will outstrip the cost of paying premiums and other fees. Early deaths help those wagers pay off.

According to the December 31, 2013 financial filing known as the Call Report that JPMorgan made with Federal regulators, it has tied up $10.4 billion in illiquid, long term bets on the death of a large segment of its employees.

The program is known among regulators as Bank Owned Life Insurance or BOLI. Federal regulators specifically exempted BOLI in passing the final version of the Volcker Rule in December of last year which disallowed most proprietary trading or betting for the house. Regulators stated in the rule that “Rather, these accounts permit the banking entity to effectively hedge and cover costs of providing benefits to employees through insurance policies related to key employees.” We have italicized the word “key” because regulators know very well from financial filings that the country’s mega banks are not just insuring key employees but a broad-base of their employees.

Just four of the largest U.S. banks, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Citigroup hold over $53 billion in investments in BOLI according to 2013 year-end Call Reports. Death benefits from life insurance is purchased at a multiple to the amount of the investments, meaning that $53 billion is easily enough to buy $1 million life insurance policies on 159,000 employees, and potentially a great deal more. Industry experts estimate that the total face amount of life insurance held by all banks in the U.S. on their employees now exceeds half a trillion dollars.

When the General Accountability Office (GAO) looked into the matter for Congress in 2003 and 2004, it found the insidious practice of continuing the life insurance even after the employee had left the company – nullifying any ability to consider him or her a “key” to the business. The GAO wrote: “Unless prohibited by state law, businesses can retain ownership of these policies regardless of whether the employment relationship has ended.” The GAO found that multiple companies held life insurance policies on the same individual.

In 2006, Congress passed the Pension Protection Act which included a section on these policies. Instead of outlawing BOLI and its corporate sibling, Corporate Owned Life Insurance (COLI), Congress grandfathered all of the millions of previously issued policies while tweaking a few tax and reporting rules.

One bedrock of insurance law dating back to the 19th Century is that a party must have an insurable interest in the life of another person in order to take out an insurance policy. The U.S. Supreme Court held in Warnock v. Davis in 1881 that “in all cases there must be a reasonable ground, founded upon the relations of the parties to each other, either pecuniary or of blood or affinity, to expect some benefit or advantage from the continuance of the life of the assured. Otherwise the contract is a mere wager, by which the party taking the policy is directly interested in the early death of the assured. Such policies have a tendency to create a desire for the event. They are, therefore, independently of any statute on the subject, condemned, as being against public policy.”

While it is highly questionable that rank and file employees are “key” to the success of a business, there is certainly no question that their contribution to the business ends when they terminate their employment. And yet, somehow, banks are allowed to collect death benefits on terminated workers right under the nose of State insurance regulators. The explanation is likely the secrecy which surrounds these policies, limiting knowledge of death payments to just the bank and the insurance company.

One reason banks are enamored with taking out policies on other people’s lives and keeping the practice as hush-hush as possible with the willing consent of regulators is that the gullible U.S. taxpayer who bailed out the banks to the tune of trillions of dollars from 2008 to 2010 and is now subsidizing too-big-to-fail through an implied permanent Federal backstop, is also subsidizing these death wagers. Both the buildup in the cash value of the policy over time and the payment of the death benefit are tax-free income to the bank; the more workers they insure, the more tax-free income they receive to help their bottom line; and the less corporations pay in their share of Federal income taxes, shifting more and more of the burden to the struggling middle class.

Banks have also exploited other tricks with the billions invested in these policies. JPMorgan is the assignee for Patent number 5,806,042 at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, titled “System for Designing and Implementing Bank Owned Life Insurance (BOLI) With a Reinsurance Option.” Noteworthy features of this scheme include the following:

“The purposes of the consent requirements and statutory requirements for insurable interest are to insure that a bank does not take out a death benefit policy on the life of an employee which exceeds the bank’s loss. In general, a bank may take out a death benefit policy in the amount which is a multiple of 8-10 times the annual compensation of that employee…”

“Reinsuring the BOLI plan by a captive insurance subsidiary of the parent bank or holding company allows the bank to augment the cash value gains of the BOLI plan by providing cash revenue sources from fee income associated with investment and trust management. Reinsurance also minimizes the impact to the bank’s profit and loss statement by keeping the assets within the corporate structure of the bank holding company…”

“The administrative support subsystem performs periodic sweeps of social security records to identify death claims for covered employees who have terminated or retired…”

Whether JPMorgan is providing its own reinsurance through an affiliate or just suggesting this patented idea to others is unknown. What is known is that JPMorgan has multiple insurance subsidiaries in both the U.S. and the U.K. When the final Volcker Rule was published, it carried this notation in footnote 1813: “This requirement is not intended to preclude a banking entity from purchasing a life insurance policy from an affiliated insurance company.”

It is doubtful that regulators are fully aware that BOLI assets may actually remain under the control and management of the banks, rather than the insurance companies providing the death benefits.

On March 15 of last year when Senator Carl Levin opened the hearing on the $6.2 billion in losses of depositors’ money in the exotic derivative bets by JPMorgan’s London Whale trading fiasco, he chastised the bank for failing to make loans to worthy businesses. Levin said JPMorgan had “the lowest loan-to-deposit ratio of the big banks, lending just 61 percent of its deposits out in loans.” Apparently, said Levin, “it was too busy betting on derivatives to issue the loans needed to speed economic recovery.”

Ina Drew, the head of the Chief Investment Office (CIO) at JPMorgan responsible in 2012 for overseeing the London Whale trades (who has since left the firm) revealed in her testimony to Levin’s committee that she was also overseeing the “company-owned-life-insurance portfolio…”

Drew testified:

“The CIO engaged in a wide range of asset-liability management activities. As of the first quarter of 2012, the CIO managed the Company’s $350 billion investment securities portfolio (this portfolio exceeded $500 billion during 2008 and 2009), the $17 billion foreign exchange hedging book, the $13 billion employee retirement plan, the $9 billion company-owned-life insurance portfolio, the strategically-important MSR hedging book, and a series of other books including the cash and synthetic credit portfolios.”

Banking used to be a simple business to understand. The bank took in insured deposits and then loaned out the money at a higher rate than it paid on the deposits to people needing loans to buy homes, to start new businesses or expand existing ones. But then came the 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, which had kept commercial banks separate from Wall Street trading houses since the Great Depression, and the partial repeal of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 which had barred commercial banks from merging with insurance companies.

As a result of those repeals through legislation known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, Wall Street’s behemoth banks are more dangerous than at any time since the 1929 crash. The banks are essentially everywhere you don’t want your insured deposits to be. Each mega bank now owns thousands of other businesses in fields like insurance, mergers and acquisitions, stock and bond underwriting, securitizations, commodities trading, structuring of exotic derivative bets, and the latest – making tens of billions of dollars in wagers on the deaths of their own employees.

Because nothing in the banks’ financial filings break out the number of lives the company has insured; how far down in rank the company insures its workers; or the total amount of life insurance it has in force, Wall Street On Parade sent two emails to two of JPMorgan’s top media relations personnel asking those questions. We gave them four days to respond. Despite pointing out that the questions go to the heart of the quality of earnings of JPMorgan Chase, an issue to which shareholders are entitled to transparency under U.S. securities laws, neither individual responded.

Because regulators have become willful enablers to some of the worst practices on Wall Street, the Wall Street worker must now look out for himself. Various state laws prohibit BOLI without the consent of the insured. New York State’s Department of Financial Service says this about BOLI policies on employees residing within New York: “Under some insurance programs, New York State insurance regulations require that employees approve the purchase of life insurance at initiation of coverage and have a notification and terminate right when they leave employment. Procedures that standardize notification and documentation should exist to ensure compliance with these insurance requirements and other applicable laws and regulations. Failure to comply could jeopardize the tax benefits associated with the insurance.”

Notice the big penalty for banks that don’t comply; they could simply lose the tax benefits.

http://wallstreetonparade.com/2014/03/document-jpmorgan-chase-bets-10-4-billion-on-the-early-death-of-workers/

This is an insurance in “lost workers” – workers who move on to other companies or otherwise, iow, not suicides which aren’t acceptable under life insurance.

Wall Street is a Mega Casino which can make any wagers they feel like since they’re going to be bailed out by the tax-payers, thee and me.



Banker Deaths Leave Industry Concerned as Coroners Probe

$
0
0

Ben Moshinsky
Bloomberg
March 24, 2014

Coroners in London are preparing to investigate two apparent suicides as unexpected deaths by finance workers around the world have raised concerns about mental health and stress levels in the industry.

The inquest into the death of William Broeksmit, 58, a retired Deutsche Bank AG risk executive found dead in his London home in January, will start tomorrow. The inquest for Gabriel Magee, a 39-year-old vice president in technology operations at JPMorgan Chase & Co., who died after falling from the firm’s 33-story London headquarters, is scheduled for late May.

The suicides were followed by others around the world, including at JPMorgan in Hong Kong, as well as Mike Dueker, the chief economist at Seattle-based Russell Investment Management Co. The financial world’s aggressive, hard-working culture may be hurting itself, professionals advising on mental health in the industry say.

At greatest risk are “those who have not cultivated friendships, networks, outside of their company,” said Stewart Black, professor of global leadership and strategy at IMD, a business school in Lausanne, Switzerland.

“A lot of executives keep their nose down, work hard, do great work and don’t really cultivate extra networks,” he said. “Those broader networks act as safety valves.”

Photographer: Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg

 

Banks are starting to realize the scale of the problem, said Peter Rodgers, chairman of the City Mental Health Alliance, which counts Morgan Stanley and Bank of America Corp. among its members.

Cultural Change

When the group was set up last year banks, law firms and accountants including Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Linklaters LLP and KPMG LLP, “no one in the City was really talking” about mental health, Rodgers said. Now they have 18 firms on their list, including the Bank of England, the central bank.

The banking sector has “seen a number of initiatives” to improve staff well-being but they “need to be accepted by a cultural change at the very top,” said Rodgers, who is also deputy general counsel at KPMG.

Magee’s family didn’t return a phone call seeking comment. Ed Adler, a spokesman for the New York-based Broeksmit Family Foundation, also didn’t return a call seeking comment. Kathryn Haynes, spokeswoman for Deutsche Bank in London, and Jennifer Zuccarelli, a spokeswoman for JPMorgan, declined to comment.

Finance “does tend to have a long-hours culture,” said Emma Mamo, who leads workplace initiatives at Mind, a U.K. mental health charity. “People can’t keep doing long hours; you need perspective and downtime.”

‘Finest Minds’

Broeksmit died on Jan. 26 at his home in Chelsea, west London, according to a memo to employees obtained by Bloomberg News. Police said he was found hanging and they aren’t treating the death as suspicious.

“He was considered by many of his peers to be among the finest minds in the fields of risk and capital management,” Deutsche Bank’s co-CEOs Anshu Jain and Juergen Fitschen wrote in the memo. They said Broeksmit was “instrumental as a founder of our investment bank.”

Dueker was found dead at the side of a highway that leads to the Tacoma Narrows Bridge in Washington state, according to the Pierce County Sheriff’s Department. He was 50.

The reviews into the deaths of Broeksmit and Magee will be overseen by a coroner, whose role is to question witnesses and police to determine where, when, how and why sudden or unexplained deaths occur, including suicides.

Magee’s inquest will be held by Mary Hassell, the coroner who said practices at Bank of America Merrill Lynch’s London office may have been a factor in the death of 21-year-old intern Moritz Erhardt from an epileptic seizure last year.

5 A.M. E-Mail

“It may be that Moritz had been working so hard that his fatigue was a trigger for the seizure that killed him,” Hassell said at the Nov. 23 inquest. “But that is only a possibility.”

Erhardt was found unconscious in a shower at Claredale House, a student residence in East London, on Aug. 15. His parents told the coroner that their son contacted them the day before his death in a 5 a.m. e-mail and that they were worried he was working too hard and sleeping too little.

Hassell questioned Juergen Schroeder, Erhardt’s development officer at Merrill Lynch, about whether working late was necessary in investment banking.

“There is a general expectation in our profession,” Schroeder said.

Weekends Off

Bank of America told staff on Jan. 10 its junior bankers should take some weekends off. Christian Meissner, head of global corporate and investment banking at the lender, said in a memo to employees that analysts and associates should “take a minimum of four weekend days off per month.”

JPMorgan, which has had at least two suicides so far this year, isn’t a member of the City Mental Health Alliance and hasn’t publicly announced measures to deal with the aftermath of the deaths.

“JPMorgan haven’t come forward to us and we haven’t approached them either,” Rodgers said. “There’s a period of mourning. The last thing they need is us sticking our heads in. I’m confident they will come forward.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Ben Moshinsky in London at bmoshinsky@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Anthony Aarons at aaarons@bloomberg.net Lindsay Fortado, Peter Chapman

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-24/banker-suicides-leave-industry-concerned-as-coroners-investigate.html

.

Spin meisters at work! Why are they pushing the mentally disabled label here and abroad? I would like to see the top guys undergo some testing. Sociopathy is a personality disorder characterized by a lack of social responsibility and failure to adapt to ethical and social standards of the community. Source

Did the “suicide” – “suicided”  mid-level bankers know where the “bodies are buried” since most of them were managers of the IT division.

.

Related:

Document: JPMorgan Chase Bets $10.4 Billion on the Early Death of Workers (banker deaths)

http://mediachecker.wordpress.com/?s=banker+suicide


Egypt: Minya Criminal Court Condemns 529 Muslim Brotherhood Defendants to Death

$
0
0
Egyptian relatives of supporters of ousted Islamist president Mohamed Morsi cry after the court ordered the execution of 529 Morsi supporters
Egyptian relatives of supporters of ousted Islamist president Mohamed Morsi cry after the court ordered the execution of 529 Morsi supporters after only two hearings. Photo: AFP/GETTY
March 24th, 2014
.
We’ve got the highest number of HCV patients in the world,
We’ve got the highest rate of sexual harassment in the world. and
Today we broke a record in a mass-death sentence by a court in one single case !!
By Ternz
I am speaking about the historical court rule of Minya criminal court against 529 defendants , yup the one which the whole world is speaking about right now.
.
I will speak about facts here :
.
  • 529 defendants were sentenced to death and 15 were acquitted in the Rabaa dispersal aftermath in Minya trial.
  • 139 were detained in the case while the rest were either released on bail or on the run.
  • Only 51 defendants attended the trial because the space could not hold more defendants.
  • The trial started on Saturday and ended on Monday.
  • The 529 defendants are accused of killing deputy Sheriff Mostafa El Attar of Matay Police Station !!
  • The lawyers of the defendants demanded to replace the Judges panel but their request was rejected.
  • Update: Now the head of Minya investigation is saying that all the defenders are in jail and not on the run. He also stated that the judge refused their attendance !!
  • The lawyers of the defendants “not in absentia” were not allowed to defend their defendants !!They were not allow to see or discuss the evidence in fact the judge did not discuss any evidence or anything !!
  • According to the Egyptian laws such big number of suspects you cannot prove that all of them are implicated in first degree murder and so it is impossible to sentence all that number legally to death.
  • One of the lawyers in the case revealed only 22 out of the 529 defendants are Muslim Brotherhood members. Of course there are no official ID membership for the brotherhood yet concerning this point , I believe he meant the famous leading members in the area as well the members of Freedom and Justice Party.
  • A father and a son “from Pro-MB supporters” are convicted in the case !! A person in a wheel chair was sentenced in the case to death while other two were proven to be outside Minya in the first place !!
  • Some say that there are four people killed in Rabaa Sit in are included too !!
  • This is the biggest mass death sentence in the history of Egyptian judiciary.
  • According to Amnesty International this is the biggest mass death sentence not only in the history of Egypt but in the world !!
  • The Egyptian embassy in London sent an email to journalists , the foreign journalists of course explaining the independence of judiciary as well emphasizing the fact that there will be appeal naturally in death sentences.
  • Back to Cairo the official spokesperson of ministry of foreign affairs Ambassador Badr Abdel Atti said the judiciary in Egypt was independent and that they could not comment on the court rulings…etc.
  • You must know also after the court ruling at least two Coptic schools in Minya were torched in retaliation.

I know very well the hell erupted in Minya following the the dispersal of Rabaa sit in , I know it very well . I know what happened to the Churches there. I know also there is something called justice I care for more than anything. What happened earlier today is not Justice.

I know very well that this sentence will be overturned but till it does , it will unleash real hell in Minya. We are speaking about tribal armed society in Upper Egypt.

The story is developing as usual.

http://egyptianchronicles.blogspot.com/2014/03/another-world-record-we-achieved.html#more

Related:

Coptics in Minya – source

Egypt: List of Churches destroyed by Muslim Extremists

 .

The trial began on Saturday and sentenced on Monday??? The result of this court will certainly create even more destabilization in Egypt. One has to wonder if that wasn’t the intent especially since everyone and their mother know it will be overturned.


Yulia Tymoshenko: 8 Million Ukrainian Russians Must Be Killed With Nukes

$
0
0

March 24, 2014 – telephone call has been verified.

.

This monster also stole tens of millions from the Ukrainian people!

.

Source: One of Soros’ Kiev Ukraine News Blog from the “Orange Revolution”

“A leaked report, seen by The Independent, claims that 85 bank accounts containing millions of pounds were linked to Ms Tymoshenko and relatives.”

“The Yanukovich regime previously hired Lawrence Graham to trace more than $200 million which the former Ukrainian government alleged was siphoned off by Tymoshenko and another former Ukrainian Prime Minister Pavlo Lazarenko, among others. The funds allegedly disappeared from the mid-1990s onwards at a time when Tymoshenko ran United Energy Systems”

“But her supporters hail Tymoshenko as a hero for her role in the Orange revolution of 2004 and regarded her as a political prisoner when she was jailed during Yanukovych’s rule over a gas deal with Russia which she arranged while she was prime minister.”

Read it all here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/exclusive-uk-banks-in-row-over-yulia-tymoshenko-millions-9177693.html

Anyone who supports this creature are either total morons or being paid to support her since no one in their right mind would want this women anywhere close to any government decisions.


The Man-Made Famine-Genocide in Soviet Ukraine, 1932-1933 (Holodomor)

$
0
0
holodo_dees
genocide_remembered
The death toll from the 1932-33 famine in Ukraine has been estimated between six million and seven million.
According to a Soviet author, “Before they died, people often lost their senses and ceased to be human beings.” Yet one of Stalin’s lieutenants in Ukraine stated in 1933 that the famine was a great success. It showed the peasants “who is the master here. It cost millions of lives, but the collective farm system is here to stay.”.. source
70th Anniversary Commemoration of the Ukrainian Famine/genocide 'Holodomor' in Kyiv, Ukraine
70th Anniversary Holodomor
Commemoration in Kyiv

In the spring of 1933, the rural population of Ukraine was dying at a rate of 25,000 a day, half of them children. The land that was known worldwide as the breadbasket of Europe was being ravaged by a man-made famine of unprecedented scale.

It was engineered by Stalin and his hangmen to teach Ukraine’s independent farmers “a lesson they would not forget” for resisting collectivization, which meant giving up their land and livestock to the state. (Ukraine was then under Soviet domination). Moreover, it was meant to deal “a crushing blow” to any national aspirations of the Ukrainian people, 80 percent of whom were peasant farmers.

While millions of men, women and children in Ukraine and in the mostly ethnically Ukrainian areas of the northern Caucasus were dying, the Soviet Union was denying the famine and exporting enough grain from Ukraine to have fed the entire population.

The purpose of this website is twofold:

• To serve as a portal to information about the Holodomor: it’s tragic history and it’s great relevance to today’s world.

• To describe the work of the Connecticut Holodomor Awareness Committee, and how we can help educators and civic organizations host an event as part of your human rights, current awareness, history, or other educational programming.

Only by understanding the genocides of the past, can we hope to prevent others from occurring in our lifetime.

Child victim of holodomor
Holodomor Memorial (Kyiv, Ukraine

BRIEF SUMMARY

The term Holodomor refers specifically to the brutal artificial famine imposed by Stalin’s regime on Soviet Ukraine and primarily ethnically Ukrainian areas in the Northern Caucasus in 1932-33.

In its broadest sense, it is also used to describe the Ukrainian genocide that began in 1929 with the massive waves of deadly deportations of Ukraine’s most successful farmers (kurkuls, or kulaks, in Russian) as well as the deportations and executions of Ukraine’s religious, intellectual and cultural leaders, culminating in the devastating forced famine that killed millions more innocent individuals. The genocide in fact continued for several more years with the further destruction of Ukraine’s political leadership, the resettlement of Ukraine’s depopulated areas with other ethnic groups, the prosecution of those who dared to speak of the famine publicly, and the consistent blatant denial of famine by the Soviet regime.

1917
The Bolsheviks, led by Vladimir Lenin take power in Russia.

1922
The Soviet Union is formed with Ukraine becoming one of the republics.

1924
After Lenin’s death, Joseph Stalin ascends to power.

1928
Stalin introduces a program of agricultural collectivization that forces farmers to give up their private land, equipment and livestock, and join state owned, factory-like collective farms. Stalin decides that collective farms would not only feed the industrial workers in the cities but could also provide a substantial amount of grain to be sold abroad, with the money used to finance his industrialization plans.

1929
Many Ukrainian farmers, known for their independence, still refuse to join the collective farms, which they regarded as similar to returning to the serfdom of earlier centuries. Stalin introduces a policy of “class warfare” in the countryside in order to break down resistance to collectivization. The successful farmers, or kurkuls, (kulaks, in Russian) are branded as the class enemy, and brutal enforcement by regular troops and secret police is used to “liquidate them as a class.” Eventually anyone who resists collectivization is considered a kurkul.

1930
1.5 million Ukrainians fall victim to Stalin’s “dekulakization” policies, Over the extended period of collectivization, armed dekulakization brigades forcibly confiscate land, livestock and other property, and evict entire families. Close to half a million individuals in Ukraine are dragged from their homes, packed into freight trains, and shipped to remote, uninhabited areas such as Siberia where they are left, often without food or shelter. A great many, especially children, die in transit or soon thereafter.

1932-1933
The Soviet government sharply increases Ukraine’s production quotas, ensuring that they could not be met. Starvation becomes widespread. In the summer of 1932, a decree is implemented that calls for the arrest or execution of any person – even a child — found taking as little as a few stalks of wheat or any possible food item from the fields where he worked. By decree, discriminatory voucher systems are implemented, and military blockades are erected around many Ukrainian villages preventing the transport of food into the villages and the hungry from leaving in search of food. Brigades of young activists from other Soviet regions are brought in to sweep through the villages and confiscate hidden grain, and eventually any and all food from the farmers’ homes. Stalin states of Ukraine that “the national question is in essence a rural question” and he and his commanders determine to “teach a lesson through famine” and ultimately, to deal a “crushing blow” to the backbone of Ukraine, its rural population.

1933
By June, at the height of the famine, people in Ukraine are dying at the rate of 30,000 a day, nearly a third of them are children under 10. Between 1932-34, approximately 4 million deaths are attributed to starvation within the borders of Soviet Ukraine. This does not include deportations, executions, or deaths from ordinary causes. Stalin denies to the world that there is any famine in Ukraine, and continues to export millions of tons of grain, more than enough to have saved every starving man, woman and child.

Famine Victims
A Corpse of a Famine Victim
on the streets of Kharkiv, 1933.

Uncovering the Truth:

“Any report of a famine in Russia is today an exaggeration or malignant propaganda. There is no actual starvation or deaths from starvation but there is widespread mortality from diseases due to malnutrition.”
(as reported by the New York Times correspondent and Pulitzer-prize winner Walter Duranty)

Source

Denial of the famine by Soviet authorities was echoed at the time of the famine by some prominent Western journalists, like Walter Duranty. The Soviet Union adamantly refused any outside assistance because the regime officially denied that there was any famine. Anyone claiming the contrary was accused of spreading anti-Soviet propaganda. Outside the Soviet Union, Western governments adopted a passive attitude toward the famine, although most of them had become aware of the true suffering in Ukraine through confidential diplomatic channels.

Picture

Source: http://lkjhlkjh.weebly.com/evidence.html

In fact, in November 1933, the United States, under newly elected president Franklin D. Roosevelt, chose to formally recognized Stalin’s Communist government and also negotiated a sweeping new trade agreement. The following year, the pattern of denial in the West culminated with the admission of the Soviet Union into the League of Nations. Stalin’s Five-Year Plans for the modernization of the Soviet Union depended largely on the purchase of massive amounts of manufactured goods and technology from Western nations. Those nations were unwilling to disrupt lucrative trade agreements with the Soviet Union in order to pursue the matter of the famine.

Source

In the ensuing decades, Ukrainian émigré groups sought acknowledgment of this tragic, massive genocide, but with little success. Not until the late 1980′s, with the publication of eminent scholar Robert Conquest’s “Harvest of Sorrow,” the report of the US Commission on the Ukraine Famine, and the findings of the International Commission of Inquiry into the 1932–33 Famine in Ukraine, and the release of the eye-opening documentary “Harvest of Despair,” did greater world attention come to bear on this event. In Soviet Ukraine, of course, the Holodomor was kept out of official discourse until the late 1980′s, shortly before Ukraine won its independence in 1991. With the fall of the Soviet Union, previously inaccessible archives, as well as the long suppressed oral testimony of Holodomor survivors living in Ukraine, have yielded massive evidence offering incontrovertible proof of Ukraine’s tragic famine genocide of the 1930′s.

Picture

Source: http://lkjhlkjh.weebly.com/evidence.html

On November 28th 2006, the Verkhovna Rada (Parliament of Ukraine) passed a decree defining the Holodomor as a deliberate Act of Genocide. Although the Russian government continues to call Ukraine’s depiction of the famine a “one-sided falsification of history,” it is recognized as genocide by approximately two dozen nations, and is now the focus of considerable international research and documentation.

Eyewitness accounts:

Ukrainian girl Emaciated by Hunger
Child victim of Famine/Genocide

Source - http://www.holodomorct.org/index.html

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

George Santayana

“Please return the grain that you have confiscated from me. If you don’t return it I’ll die. I’m 78 years old and I’m incapable of searching for food by myself.”

(From a petition to the authorities by I.A. Rylov)

“I saw the ravages of the famine of 1932-1933 in the Ukraine: hordes of families in rags begging at the railway stations, the women lifting up to the compartment window their starving brats, which, with drumstick limbs, big cadaverous heads and puffed bellies, looked like embryos out of alcohol bottles …”

(as remembered by Arthur Kaestler, a famous British novelist, journalist, and critic. Koestler spent about three months in the Ukrainian city of Kharkiv during the Famine. He wrote about his experiences in “The God That Failed”, a 1949 book which collects together six essays with the testimonies of a number of famous ex-Communists, who were writers and journalists.)

Our father used to read the Bible to us, but whenever he came to the passage mentioning ‘bloodless war’ he could not explain to us what that term meant. When in 1933 he was dying from hunger he called us to his deathbed and said “This, children, is what is called bloodless war…”

(as remembered by Hanna Doroshenko)

“What I saw that morning … was inexpressibly horrible. On a battlefield men die quickly, they fight back … Here I saw people dying in solitude by slow degrees, dying hideously, without the excuse of sacrifice for a cause. They had been trapped and left to starve, each in his own home, by a political decision made in a far-off capital around conference and banquet tables. There was not even the consolation of inevitability to relieve the horror.”

(as remembered by Victor Kravchenko, a Soviet defector who wrote up his experiences of life in the Soviet Union and as a Soviet official, especially in his 1946 book “I Chose Freedom”. “I Chose Freedom” containing extensive revelations on collectivization, Soviet prison camps and the use of slave labor came at a time of growing tension between the Warsaw Pact nations and the West. His death from bullet wounds in his apartment remains unclarified, though it was officially ruled a suicide. His son Andrew continues to believe he was the victim of a KGB execution.)

“From 1931 to 1934 we had great harvests. The weather conditions were great. However, all the grain was taken from us. People searched the fields for mice burrows hoping to find measly amounts of grain stored by mice…”

(as remembered by Mykola Karlosh)

“I still get nauseous when I remember the burial hole that all the dead livestock was thrown into. I still remember people screaming by that hole. Driven to madness by hunger people were ripping the meat of the dead animals. The stronger ones were getting bigger pieces. People ate dogs, cats, just about anything to survive.”

(as remembered by Vasil Boroznyak)

“People were dying all over our village. The dogs ate the ones that were not buried. If people could catch the dogs they were eaten. In the neighboring village people ate bodies that they dug up.”

(as remembered by Motrya Mostova)

“I’m asking for your permission to advance me any amount of grain. I’m completely sick. I don’t have any food. I’ve started to swell up and I can hardly move my feet. Please don’t refuse me or it will be too late.”

(From a petition to the authorities by P. Lube)

“In the spring when acacia trees started blooming everyone began eating their flowers. I remember that our neighbor who didn’t have her own acacia tree climbed on ours and I went to tell my mother that she was eating our flowers. My mother only smiled sadly.”

(as remembered by Vasil Demchenko)

“Of our neighbors I remember all the Solveiki family died, all of the Kapshuks, all the Rahachenkos too – and the Yeremo family – three of them, still alive, were thrown into the mass grave…”

(as remembered by Ekaterina Marchenko)

“Where did all bread disappear, I do not really know, maybe they have taken it all abroad. The authorities have confiscated it, removed from the villages, loaded grain into the railway coaches and took it away someplace. They have searched the houses, taken away everything to the smallest thing. All the vegetable gardens, all the cellars were raked out and everything was taken away.

Wealthy peasants were exiled into Siberia even before Holodomor during the “collectivization”. Communists came, collected everything. Children were crying beaten for that with the boots. It is terrifying to recall what happened. It was so dreadful that every day became engraved in my memory. People were lying everywhere as dead flies. The stench was awful. Many of our neighbors and acquaintances from our street died.

I have no idea how I managed to survive and stay alive. In 1933 we tried to survive the best we could. We collected grass, goose-foot, burdocks, rotten potatoes and made pancakes, soups from putrid beans or nettles.

Collected gley from the trees and ate it, ate sparrows, pigeons, cats, dead and live dogs. When there was still cattle, it was eaten first, then – the domestic animals. Some were eating their own children, I would have never been able to eat my child. One of our neighbours came home when her husband, suffering from severe starvation ate their own baby-daughter. This woman went crazy.

People were drinking a lot of water to fill stomachs, that is why the bellies and legs were swollen, the skin was swelling from the water as well. At that time the punishment for a stolen handful of grain was 5 years of prison. One was not allowed to go into the fields, the sparrows were pecking grain, though people were not allowed.”

(From the memories of Olexandra Rafalska, Zhytomir)

“A boy, 9 years old, said: “Mother said, ‘Save yourself, run to town.’ I turned back twice; I could not bear to leave my mother, but she begged and cried, and I finally went for good.”

(Recollected by an observer simply known as Dr. M.M.)

“At that time I lived in the village of Yaressky of the Poltava region. More than a half of the village population perished as a result of the famine. It was terrifying to walk through the village: swollen people moaning and dying. The bodies of the dead were buried together, because there was no one to dig the graves.

There were no dogs and no cats. People died at work; it was of no concern whether your body was swollen, whether you could work, whether you have eaten, whether you could – you had to go and work. Otherwise – you are the enemy of the people.

Many people never lived to see the crops of 1933 and those crops were considerable. A more severe famine, other sufferings were awaiting ahead. Rye was starting to become ripe. Those who were still able made their way to the fields. This road, however, was covered with dead bodies, some could not reach the fields, some ate grain and died right away. The patrol was hunting them down, collecting everything, trampled down the collected spikelets, beat the people, came into their homes, seized everything. What they could not take – they burned.”

(From the memories of Galina Gubenko, Poltava region)

“The famine began. People were eating cats, dogs in the Ros’ river all the frogs were caught out. Children were gathering insects in the fields and died swollen. Stronger peasants were forced to collect the dead to the cemeteries; they were stocked on the carts like firewood, than dropped off into one big pit. The dead were all around: on the roads, near the river, by the fences. I used to have 5 brothers. Altogether 792 souls have died in our village during the famine, in the war years – 135 souls”

(As remembered by Antonina Meleshchenko, village of Kosivka, region of Kyiv)

“I remember Holodomor very well, but have no wish to recall it. There were so many people dying then. They were lying out in the streets, in the fields, floating in the flux. My uncle lived in Derevka – he died of hunger and my aunt went crazy – she ate her own child. At the time one couldn’t hear the dogs barking – they were all eaten up.”

(From the memories of Galina Smyrna, village Uspenka of Dniepropetrovsk region)

Connecticut Commerates Ukrainian Famine and Genocide with Exhibit at the State Capitol (February 2010)

Information*:

*Please click the links below to access event information

New Unit of Study Presented at NERC 2012 Conference

The Holodomor Is Commemorated At The Armenian Library And Museum Of America (ALMA), In Watertown MA.

The latest documentary on the Holodomor: Genocide Revealed

Okradena Zemlia Screening at Litchfield Hills Film Festival (April 2011)

Screening of “Okradena Zemlia” In Hartford and New Haven (November 2010)

The Holodomor: Famine and Fiction Exhibit at the Jeremy Richard Library (Uconn, Stamford Campus) April 16 – May 20, 2010

Connecticut Commerates Ukrainian Famine and Genocide with Exhibit at the State Capitol (February 2010)

Holodomor Exhibit at the University of Connecticut (October-December 2009)

Annual Fundraising Art Show (May 31, 2009)

Information and photos from the Commemorative Event in the honor of the 75th Anniversary of the Holodomor of 1932-1933 (May 17, 2008)

Commemorative Art Show dedicated to the memory of the victims of the Ukrainian Famine/Gen

http://www.holodomorct.org/index.html

Recommended Resources for Further Information:

http://www.holodomorct.org/links.html

~~~~

Stalin's Forced Famine 1932-33 7,000,000 Deaths

Joseph Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union, set in motion events designed to cause a famine in the Ukraine to destroy the people there seeking independence from his rule. As a result, an estimated 7,000,000 persons perished in this farming area, known as the breadbasket of Europe, with the people deprived of the food they had grown with their own hands.

Source

The Ukrainian independence movement actually predated the Stalin era. Ukraine, which measures about the size of France, had been under the domination of the Imperial Czars of Russia for 200 years. With the collapse of the Czarist rule in March 1917, it seemed the long-awaited opportunity for independence had finally arrived. Optimistic Ukrainians declared their country to be an independent People’s Republic and re-established the ancient capital city of Kiev as the seat of government.

Source

However, their new-found freedom was short-lived. By the end of 1917, Vladimir Lenin, the first leader of the Soviet Union, sought to reclaim all of the areas formerly controlled by the Czars, especially the fertile Ukraine. As a result, four years of chaos and conflict followed in which Ukrainian national troops fought against Lenin’s Red Army, and also against Russia’s White Army (troops still loyal to the Czar) as well as other invading forces including the Germans and Poles.

Source

By 1921, the battles ended with a Soviet victory while the western part of the Ukraine was divided-up among Poland, Romania, and Czechoslovakia. The Soviets immediately began shipping out huge amounts of grain to feed the hungry people of Moscow and other big Russian cities. Coincidentally, a drought occurred in the Ukraine, resulting in widespread starvation and a surge of popular resentment against Lenin and the Soviets.

To lessen the deepening resentment, Lenin relaxed his grip on the country, stopped taking out so much grain, and even encouraged a free-market exchange of goods. This breath of fresh air renewed the people’s interest in independence and resulted in a national revival movement celebrating their unique folk customs, language, poetry, music, arts, and Ukrainian orthodox religion.

Source

But when Lenin died in 1924, he was succeeded by Joseph Stalin, one of the most ruthless humans ever to hold power. To Stalin, the burgeoning national revival movement and continuing loss of Soviet influence in the Ukraine was completely unacceptable. To crush the people’s free spirit, he began to employ the same methods he had successfully used within the Soviet Union. Thus, beginning in 1929, over 5,000 Ukrainian scholars, scientists, cultural and religious leaders were arrested after being falsely accused of plotting an armed revolt. Those arrested were either shot without a trial or deported to prison camps in remote areas of Russia.

Source

Stalin also imposed the Soviet system of land management known as collectivization. This resulted in the seizure of all privately owned farmlands and livestock, in a country where 80 percent of the people were traditional village farmers. Among those farmers, were a class of people called Kulaks by the Communists. They were formerly wealthy farmers that had owned 24 or more acres, or had employed farm workers. Stalin believed any future insurrection would be led by the Kulaks, thus he proclaimed a policy aimed at “liquidating the Kulaks as a class.”

Declared “enemies of the people,” the Kulaks were left homeless and without a single possession as everything was taken from them, even their pots and pans. It was also forbidden by law for anyone to aid dispossessed Kulak families. Some researchers estimate that ten million persons were thrown out of their homes, put on railroad box cars and deported to “special settlements” in the wilderness of Siberia during this era, with up to a third of them perishing amid the frigid living conditions. Men and older boys, along with childless women and unmarried girls, also became slave-workers in Soviet-run mines and big industrial projects.

Source

Back in the Ukraine, once-proud village farmers were by now reduced to the level of rural factory workers on large collective farms. Anyone refusing to participate in the compulsory collectivization system was simply denounced as a Kulak and deported.

A propaganda campaign was started utilizing eager young Communist activists who spread out among the country folk attempting to shore up the people’s support for the Soviet regime. However, their attempts failed. Despite the propaganda, ongoing coercion and threats, the people continued to resist through acts of rebellion and outright sabotage. They burned their own homes rather than surrender them. They took back their property, tools and farm animals from the collectives, harassed and even assassinated local Soviet authorities. This ultimately put them in direct conflict with the power and authority of Joseph Stalin.

Source

Soviet troops and secret police were rushed in to put down the rebellion. They confronted rowdy farmers by firing warning shots above their heads. In some cases, however, they fired directly at the people. Stalin’s secret police (GPU, predecessor of the KGB) also went to work waging a campaign of terror designed to break the people’s will. GPU squads systematically attacked and killed uncooperative farmers.

Maps & Photo
Present day map of Russia showing the location of the Ukraine (highlighted in green).
Present day map of Ukraine.
A World War II era photo of Soviet leader Joseph Stalin (on right) with top aide Viachislav Molotov who helped implement the 1932-33 famine policy in the Ukraine.

But the resistance continued. The people simply refused to become cogs in the Soviet farm machine and remained stubbornly determined to return to their pre-Soviet farming lifestyle. Some refused to work at all, leaving the wheat and oats to rot in unharvested fields. Once again, they were placing themselves in conflict with Stalin.

Source

In Moscow, Stalin responded to their unyielding defiance by dictating a policy that would deliberately cause mass starvation and result in the deaths of millions.

By mid 1932, nearly 75 percent of the farms in the Ukraine had been forcibly collectivized. On Stalin’s orders, mandatory quotas of foodstuffs to be shipped out to the Soviet Union were drastically increased in August, October and again in January 1933, until there was simply no food remaining to feed the people of the Ukraine.

Source

Much of the hugely abundant wheat crop harvested by the Ukrainians that year was dumped on the foreign market to generate cash to aid Stalin’s Five Year Plan for the modernization of the Soviet Union and also to help finance his massive military buildup. If the wheat had remained in the Ukraine, it was estimated to have been enough to feed all of the people there for up to two years.

Source

Ukrainian Communists urgently appealed to Moscow for a reduction in the grain quotas and also asked for emergency food aid. Stalin responded by denouncing them and rushed in over 100,000 fiercely loyal Russian soldiers to purge the Ukrainian Communist Party. The Soviets then sealed off the borders of the Ukraine, preventing any food from entering, in effect turning the country into a gigantic concentration camp. Soviet police troops inside the Ukraine also went house to house seizing any stored up food, leaving farm families without a morsel. All food was considered to be the “sacred” property of the State. Anyone caught stealing State property, even an ear of corn or stubble of wheat, could be shot or imprisoned for not less than ten years.

Source

Starvation quickly ensued throughout the Ukraine, with the most vulnerable, children and the elderly, first feeling the effects of malnutrition. The once-smiling young faces of children vanished forever amid the constant pain of hunger. It gnawed away at their bellies, which became grossly swollen, while their arms and legs became like sticks as they slowly starved to death.

Source

Mothers in the countryside sometimes tossed their emaciated children onto passing railroad cars traveling toward cities such as Kiev in the hope someone there would take pity. But in the cities, children and adults who had already flocked there from the countryside were dropping dead in the streets, with their bodies carted away in horse-drawn wagons to be dumped in mass graves. Occasionally, people lying on the sidewalk who were thought to be dead, but were actually still alive, were also carted away and buried.

Source

While police and Communist Party officials remained quite well fed, desperate Ukrainians ate leaves off bushes and trees, killed dogs, cats, frogs, mice and birds then cooked them. Others, gone mad with hunger, resorted to cannibalism, with parents sometimes even eating their own children.

Meanwhile, nearby Soviet-controlled granaries were said to be bursting at the seams from huge stocks of ‘reserve’ grain, which had not yet been shipped out of the Ukraine. In some locations, grain and potatoes were piled in the open, protected by barbed wire and armed GPU guards who shot down anyone attempting to take the food. Farm animals, considered necessary for production, were allowed to be fed, while the people living among them had absolutely nothing to eat.

Holodomor Museum. The Holodomor was a forced, man-made famine created by Bolshevik Russians to starve and eliminate middle-class Ukrainians in 1932-33. Something in the neighborhood of 8 million Ukrainians starved to death.

By the spring of 1933, the height of the famine, an estimated 25,000 persons died every day in the Ukraine. Entire villages were perishing. In Europe, America and Canada, persons of Ukrainian descent and others responded to news reports of the famine by sending in food supplies. But Soviet authorities halted all food shipments at the border. It was the official policy of the Soviet Union to deny the existence of a famine and thus to refuse any outside assistance. Anyone claiming that there was in fact a famine was accused of spreading anti-Soviet propaganda. Inside the Soviet Union, a person could be arrested for even using the word ‘famine’ or ‘hunger’ or ‘starvation’ in a sentence.

Source

The Soviets bolstered their famine denial by duping members of the foreign press and international celebrities through carefully staged photo opportunities in the Soviet Union and the Ukraine. The writer George Bernard Shaw, along with a group of British socialites, visited the Soviet Union and came away with a favorable impression which he disseminated to the world. Former French Premier Edouard Herriot was given a five-day stage-managed tour of the Ukraine, viewing spruced-up streets in Kiev and inspecting a ‘model’ collective farm. He also came away with a favorable impression and even declared there was indeed no famine.

Source

Back in Moscow, six British engineers working in the Soviet Union were arrested and charged with sabotage, espionage and bribery, and threatened with the death penalty. The sensational show trial that followed was actually a cynical ruse to deflect the attention of foreign journalists from the famine. Journalists were warned they would be shut out of the trial completely if they wrote news stories about the famine. Most of the foreign press corp yielded to the Soviet demand and either didn’t cover the famine or wrote stories sympathetic to the official Soviet propaganda line that it didn’t exist. Among those was Pulitzer Prize winning reporter Walter Duranty of the New York Times who sent one dispatch stating “…all talk of famine now is ridiculous.”

Picture

http://lkjhlkjh.weebly.com/evidence.html

An announcement published in the newspaper Moloda hvardiya about the village of Pisky being put on the “black list” for failing to provide the specified amount of grain. Source

Outside the Soviet Union, governments of the West adopted a passive attitude toward the famine, although most of them had become aware of the true suffering in the Ukraine through confidential diplomatic channels. In November 1933, the United States, under its new president, Franklin D. Roosevelt, even chose to formally recognized Stalin’s Communist government and also negotiated a sweeping new trade agreement. The following year, the pattern of denial in the West culminated with the admission of the Soviet Union into the League of Nations.

Source

Stalin’s Five Year Plan for the modernization of the Soviet Union depended largely on the purchase of massive amounts of manufactured goods and technology from Western nations. Those nations were unwilling to disrupt lucrative trade agreements with the Soviet Union in order to pursue the matter of the famine.

Enlarge picture

A child left to starve by Stalin’s man made famine 1932-1933. Poltava Oblast

By the end of 1933, nearly 25 percent of the population of the Ukraine, including three million children, had perished. The Kulaks as a class were destroyed and an entire nation of village farmers had been laid low. With his immediate objectives now achieved, Stalin allowed food distribution to resume inside the Ukraine and the famine subsided. However, political persecutions and further round-ups of ‘enemies’ continued unchecked in the years following the famine, interrupted only in June 1941 when Nazi troops stormed into the country. Hitler’s troops, like all previous invaders, arrived in the Ukraine to rob the breadbasket of Europe and simply replaced one reign of terror with another.

Copyright © 2000 The History Place™ All Rights Reserved

http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/genocide/stalin.htm

~~~

Exhibit G

Sir Winston Churchill to Joseph Stalin:
“…Have the stresses of war been as bad to you personally as carrying through the policy of Collective Farms?”
Stalin:
“ – Oh no, The Collective Farm policy was a terrible struggle… Ten million (he said holding up his hands). It was fearful. Four years it lasted. It was absolutely necessary.”
“Ukrainians are an ethos, with their profound religiosity, individualism, tradition of private property, and devotion to their plots of land, were not suited to the construction of communism, and this fact was noted by the high-ranking Soviet officials.”

Just prior to the Ukrainian genocide, Ukraine was seeking political independence from the Soviet Union. Because the Soviet Union was built on the principles of communism, part of their union seeking independence was very threatening. This is what Stalin was speaking of in this quote. Stalin despised the idea of Ukraine owning private property, and having personal devotion to their land. It was clear the Stalin believed the status of Ukraine was not suited for communism, leading him to make start a famine.

Exhibit H

Quotes by Stalin that exemplify his ruthless ideologies and principles:

Death solves all problems – No man, no problem
One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.

Exhibit I

Another quote from Stalin, however this one is much more specific:

“In order to oust the ‘kulaks’ as a class, the resistance of this class must be smashed in open battle and it must be deprived of the productive sources of its existence and development… That is a turn towards the policy of eliminating the kulaks as a class”

Exhibit J

“I walked along through villages and twelve collective farms. Everywhere was the cry, ‘There is no bread. We are dying.”

“In a train a Communist denied to me that there was a famine. I flung into the spittoon a crust of bread I had been eating from my own supply. The peasant, my fellow passenger fished it out and ravenously ate it. I threw orange peel into the peasant again grabbed and devoured it. The Communist subsided.”

- Gareth Jones, Welsh journalist and former Political Secretary of Prime Minister of the U.K., David Lloyd George.
These were the observations he reported in an interview with the New York Evening Post.

He was the first to publicize the famine

http://lkjhlkjh.weebly.com/evidence.html

~~~

Images and Evocations of the Famine-Genocide in Ukrainian Art OF THE FAMINE-GENOCIDE IN UKRAINIAN ART”

[...]As is known, for over fifty years the Communist Party of the USSR vehemently denied that the famine-genocide of 1932-1933 had taken place and attempted to erase it from public conscious­ness. Speaking out about the famine was ruthlessly punished as an offence against the State. Therefore, there can be no doubt that fear and the urge to survive played an important role in what the artists did or did not do.

I would like to begin by referring to images of the 1921-1922 famine in Ukraine, which were exhibited in the 1920s and later reproduced in books, in order to argue that artists did not avoid the first famine because they did not feel threatened.

One of the most prominent Soviet graphic artists, Vasyl Kasian (1896-1976), while still a student at the Prague Academy of Art, created two images of the 1921-1922 famine. The first is a sepia ink drawing titled “Pieta” (ill. 1). It depicts a grieving mother with the naked, famine ravished body of a child across her knees. The title and the composition echo Michelangelo’s sculpture of the same name where Mary holds the body of Christ in her lap. This relates the secular event to a religious experience.

 

1: Vasyl Kasian. “Pieta,” 1921-1922
ink, sepia, size unknown
Leonid Vladych. “Vasyl Kasian” [Kyiv: Mystetstvo, 1978], ill. 56
(Click on image to enlarge it)

In the poster “Help the Starving” (Pomozte Hladovejicim) (ill. 2) designed for the Prague Committee helping the famine victims in Ukraine, Kasian painted a peasant mother with emaciated children in an appeal for funds. Painted in oils on board this poster was displayed at the entrance to the Stromovka Park where donations were accepted.[2]

 

2: Vasyl Kasian. “Help the Starving,” 1921-1922
oil on board, size unknown
Leonid Vladych. “Vasyl Kasian” [Kyiv: Mystetstvo, 1978], ill. 57
(Click on image to enlarge it)

After graduation from the Prague Art Academy Kasian returned to Ukraine in 1927. Between 1931-1933 at the height of the forced collectivization and famine Kasian produced woodcuts, which exalted labor and industrialization and ignored what was happening in the countryside. In the woodcut “Bolshevik Harvest,” 1934 (ill. 3), he depicted three happy corpulent figures with lush, fertile fields of grain all around them. These images contradicted the tragic events. They were Kasian’s contribution to the glorification of collectivization and the demands of the Communist Party that “. . . the artistic depiction of reality must be combined with the task of ideological transformation and education of workers in the spirit of socialism.”[3]

 

3: Vasyl Kasian. “Bolshevik Harvest,” 1934
colored woodcut on paper, size unknown
(H. S. Portnov. “Vasyl Illich Kasian” [Kyiv: Derzhavne vydavnystvo obrazotvorchoho mystetstva I muzychnoii literatury UkSSR, 1962], p. 16)
(Click on image to enlarge it)

Art produced in Soviet Ukraine of the 1921-1922 famine is scarce. Sofia Nalepinska-Boichuk (1882-1937), the Polish wife of Mykhailo Boichuk and an accomplished artist and teacher, engraved a woodcut titled “Famine” (ill. 4).[4] It shows four emaciated children with swollen bellies being fed by a woman beside a railroad car. Published sources do not provide a provenance of the work, but it appears that the woodcut was first exhibited in 1927 at the Tenth Anniversary of the October Revolution Exhibition.[5] Although Nalepinska was sympathetic to the plight of starving children in 1922, there are no surviving depictions of the famine of 1932-1933 in her work, much of which was destroyed after her arrest and execution in 1937.

 

4: Sofia Nalepinska-Boichuk. “Famine,” 1927
woodcut on paper, 33 c 25 cm.
collection of the National Art Museum of Ukraine, Kyiv
(“The Phenomenon of the Ukrainian Avant-garde” [Winnipeg: Winnipeg Art Gallery, 2001], ill. 39)
(Click on image to enlarge it)

 

[For more information on artist Sofia Nalepinska-Boichuk click on:
http://www.artukraine.com/famineart/nalepynska.htm]

 

On the basis of these works one can assume that images of famine rendered in the 1920s were permitted and reproduced because they were considered to be the result of bourgeois capitalist oppression of the people.

In my quest for images of the famine-genocide I was able to find only a few works by Kazimir Malevych rendered in response to collectivization and indirectly to famine. These works survived outside of Soviet Ukraine.

Kazimir Malevych (1878-1935), one of the great innovators of the twentieth century and the leading figure of the Russian avant-garde art, was born in Kyiv and brought up in Ukraine. From 1904 to 1926 he worked mostly in Moscow and St. Petersburg/Petrograd/Leningrad where in 1915 he launched Suprematism, the first geometric abstraction movement. After the Bolshevik Revolution, which he supported, he held numerous important positions within the official Communist art establishment. However, in 1926 as a result of art policy changes he was relieved of the directorship of the Institute of Artistic Culture. When political pressures in Russia intensified, he was given refuge in Kyiv and taught at the Kyiv Art Institute from 1928-1930, as did Vladimir Tatlin, the father of Constructivism and a fellow Ukrainian.[6]

About the time of the First Five-Year Plan and the drive to collectivization, Malevych abandoned his Suprematist compositions and returned to painting peasants. However, they were no longer the sturdy peasants of iron and sheet metal of the Cubist period of the 1910s. Often they were faceless and inert puppet-like figures alienated from their surroundings. Those without arms and hands suggest mutilation and helplessness. It has been suggested that Malevych’s return to representational depictions and peasant subject matter was not only prompted by political pressure to return to figuration, but also by his sympathy for the peasants.[7] According to Dmytro Horbachov, a respected art scholar in Kyiv, Malevych visited his sister in Zhytomyr Region every summer and was very distressed by the sight of starvation.[8]

The colored pencil drawing titled “Standing Figure” (ill. 5) (or “Selianyn z khrestamy rozpiattia” [Villager with Crucifixion Crosses] according to D. Horbachov) has been dated as early as 1927 and as late as 1932-33.[9] Thematically and iconographically it is more in keeping with the later works where facial features have been omitted or are indicated by crosses.[10] Here the Orthodox cross if seen only on the face, could be read as a simplification of facial features. However, the repetition of the crosses on the hands and feet suggests a deeper message, perhaps martyrdom. The raised arms echo the Oranta images common in icons. Thus the suffering peasant with arms raised in supplication has spiritual connotations.

 

5: Kazimir Malevych, “Standing Figure,” 1927-1933
colored pencil on paper, 36.5 x 22.5 cm.
Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam
“Malevich: Artist and Theoretician” [Paris: Flammarion, 1991], ill. 158
(Click on image to enlarge it)

The pencil drawing “Three Figures” (also known as “Trois personnages marques au visage par: la faucell et le marteau, la croix orthodoxe, un cercueil noir”) has been called “De serp i molot, tam smert’ i holod” (Where There Is the Hammer and Sickle, There Is Death and Famine), 1932-1933 (ill. 6) by D. Horbachov.[11] The latter title corresponds to popular songs of the time, known as “chastushky.”[12] Facial features have been replaced by a hammer and sickle, a cross, and a coffin. This brave indictment of the regime and collectivization survived in the collection of Malevych’s student, Alexandra Leporskaia in Leningrad.

 

6: Kazimir Malevych. “Three Figures,” 1932-1933
pencil on paper, 36 x 22.5 cm.
private collection, Leningrad
Jean-Claude Marcade. “Malevitch” [Paris: Casterman, 1990], ill. 378

In the oil on canvas known as “Man Running,” beg. 1930s[13] (ill. 7), Malevych departs from the static frontal peasant figures by painting a figure in motion in a flat barren landscape. Between the symbolic red and white house Malevych has suspended a sword and in front of the running man – a cross. The sword appears dipped in blood and points to a single sack, surely a reference to the brutal confiscation of all grain. The horizontal band on which the figure is running is also red as is the cross. Horbachov has called the work “Selianyn pomizh khrestom i mechem” (Villager between the Cross and the Sword) and has dated the work to 1932-1933.

 

7: Kazimir Malevych. “Man Running,” beg. 1930s
oil on canvas, 78.5 x 65 cm.
Musee National d’Art moderne – Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris
Jean-Claude Marcade. “Malevitch” [Paris: Casterman, 1990], ill. 389
(Click on image to enlarge it)

 

[For more information on this painting by Malevych click on:
http://www.ArtUkraine.com/paintings/malevich3.htm
http://www.ArtUkraine.com/paintings/malevich4.htm]

 

Jean-Claude Marcade, a French art historian, writes that “Malevych without a doubt was the only painter who showed the dramatic situation of the Russian peasants at the time of the criminal forced collectivization.”[14] Indeed this appears to be the case. However, I would like to argue that this statement applies especially to Ukrainian peasants as their resistance was widespread and death toll mind-boggling.

Meanwhile in 1932 at the start of the famine the prominent artist, Mykhailo Boichuk (1882-1937), and his colleagues Vasyl Sedliar (1899-1937), Ivan Padalka (1894-1937), and Oksana Pavlenko (1896-1991) were commissioned to decorate the Chervonozavodsk Theatre in Kharkiv. The four huge murals depicted the progress and accomplishments of the First Five-Year Plan in Ukraine. Boichuk was responsible for “Harvest Festival in the Collective Farm” (ill. 8), a large fresco (5.5 x 6 m.) in the central foyer of the theatre. He was forced to make numerous revisions to his sketches to satisfy the authorities, and the work was not completed until 1935. What he painted was a departure from his previous work in terms of style and content.

 

8: Mykhailo Boichuk. “Detail of Harvest Festival on the Collective Farm,” 1935, fresco mural
Chervonozavodsk Theatre, Kharkiv, destroyed
“Ukrainian Art Digest” [Philadelphia: Ukrainian Artists Association USA, 1968], no. 7, p. 48

 

[For information on some of the early 1930's artwork by Vasyl Sedliar click on:
http://www.artukraine.com/famineart/sedlyar.htm]

 

The end product was typical of the demands made on artists by the Communist Party to portray idealized, smiling collective farm workers celebrating the achievements of collectivization and to do so in a realistic three-dimensional manner. It was art custom tailored to hide the gruesome truth and to serve the propaganda purposes of the Soviet state. How ironic that one of the leaders of the Ukrainian artistic renaissance, a dedicated advocate of a national monumental school and the founder of what became known as the Boichukist School was required to do the regime’s bidding to survive. However, even these efforts did not spare him from death.

After the arrest and execution of Padalka, Sedliar, and Boichuk on fabricated charges of membership in a counter-revolutionary terrorist organization, these frescoes, as well as all others done by the Boichukists were destroyed as the work of “enemies of the people.”

As a result, it is perhaps understandable that at the time, fear, trauma and silence overwhelmed all the artists as it did the writers. But eventually, the writers, particularly those who fled Soviet Ukraine for the West, found their voices and recorded their experiences in memoirs or fiction. Why not the artists?

Vasyl Krychevsky and Mykola Nedilko, for example, were professional artists at the time of the famine, yet, they did not commit to paper their eye-witness responses as realistic visual records or transformed metaphorical experiences when they emigrated to the West, as far as I was able to determine.

Mykhailo Dmytrenko, who had worked as an assistant to Fedir Krychevsky at the Kyiv Art Institute and later was active in Canada and the USA, in an interview in 1995 recalled vividly the victims of the famine. He described an emaciated woman with a child in her lap sitting against a wall in Kharkiv, her face covered with flies. The starving child was trying to nurse despite the apparent death of the mother. Visible above them was a poster proclaiming Stalin’s slogan, “Zhyt’ stalo lutshe; zhyt’ stalo vieselieie” (Life Became Better; Life Became Happier).[15]

Dmytrenko did not dare to record what he saw in any drawings or paintings at the time. When I interviewed him, the trauma of working under the Communist regime and his fear of retribution were still very much in evidence even though, at the time, he was 87 years old.

For the thirtieth anniversary of the Famine, in 1963, Dmytrenko painted “1933″ (ill. 9). This was not the horrific image, which was etched in his mind, but a composition where he juxtaposed symbolic images: a famine victim vs. the Communist regime.

 

9: Mykhailo Dmytrenko. “1933,” 1963
oil on canvas, size and location unknown
“Mychajlo Dmytrenko” [Detroit: Jubilee Committee, 1990], p. 92
(Click on image to enlarge it)

 

[Editors Note: ArtUkraine Information Service (ARTUIS) found the original of this painting in the museum at the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA located in South Bound Brook, NJ. ARTUIS was there on Wednesday, December 17, 2003. It was painted in 1963 and is approximately three feet by three feet.]

 

Another Ukrainian artist working in the USA, Bohdan Pevny, responded to the thirtieth anniversary of the famine with the painting “The Earth” (ill. 10). It shows a dying woman clutching the black earth which had nourished her, but which had been forcibly taken away, as had all grain. Pevny had not witnessed the famine. His depiction was based on a still from Oleksander Dovzhenko’s film Arsenal. Reproductions of The Earth were widely circulated as post cards.

 

10: Bohdan Pevny. “The Earth,” 1963
oil on canvas
Art Gallery of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A., South Bound Brook, NJ (postcard)
(Click on image to enlarge it)

 

[For more information on this painting by Bohdan Pevny click on:
http://www.ArtUkraine.com/famineart/famine09.htm]

 

There were responses from other artists who were not witnesses. In 1950 Yuri Kulchytsky in France created a woodcut called Famine “1933″ in an expressionist manner. Yuri Solovij working in New York painted “Pièta: Homage to 1933″ in the American abstract expressionist style in 1953.

Apparently in the diaspora the famine manifested itself in the work of individual artists sporadically usually with the approach of memorial anniversaries. At times it was encouraged by the Ukrainian community. As a direct result of the commemoration of the fiftieth Anniversary of the famine-genocide the Ukrainian Women’s Society in Paris commissioned three Ukrainian artists Omelian Mazuryk, Volodymyr Makarenko, and Anton Solomukha to paint works dedicated to the famine. The work by Makarenko now hangs in the City Hall of the 6th Arrondissement in Paris.[16]

Ukrainian communities in Canada commissioned memorials to be erected in Edmonton and Winnipeg. The memorial monument in Edmonton was designed by Montreal/Toronto artist Ludmyla Temertey. It was inspired by her mother, who was a famine survivor. The one in Winnipeg was the work of Roman Kowal, a local sculptor, who was born in Western Ukraine. As a young man he heard of the famine from one of the survivors. His secular depiction of a mother and child squeezed between two pillars of granite stands in a prestigious location in front of Winnipeg’s City Hall. [For more information on the memorial monument in Winnipeg click on: http://www.artukraine.com/famineart/winnipeg_mon.htm]

In Ukraine, most artists did not turn to the depictions of the famine until Ukraine’s independence. In 1992 to mark the sixtieth anniversary of the famine-genocide “The Ukrainian Great Famine Art Exhibition” was held in Kyiv at the Teachers’ Building (formerly the Central Rada Building at 57 Volodymyrska Street). Over one hundred artists participated.

Vasyl Perevalsky, a Kyiv artist designed the logo for the Great famine Memorial Events in 1993. This became the basis for the monument located in Mykhailivskyi Square near St. Michael of the Golden Domes Church. The design effectively combines the cross with the simplified silhouettes of the Mother of God the Protectress and Child. It was also used on a postage stamp in Ukraine and has become a popular symbol of the famine. [For more information about this artist and the monument in click on: http://www.artukraine.com/famineart/perevalsky.htm, http://www.artukraine.com/famineart/famine22.htm]

In December 2000 the “Great Tragedy and Hope of the Nation Exhibition: Through the Eyes of Ukrainian Artists” opened in Kyiv with about 500 participants. It appears that the new generations of artists with no direct ties to the famine have shown a heightened awareness and willingness to confront the catastrophic events. Amazingly the format of these large scale exhibits harks back to the big thematic shows that were obligatory during the Soviet period and in which artists participated in great numbers. The deification of the leader, the mythologizing of the revolution, and the glorification of labor have been replaced with representations of formerly forbidden historical events and condemnation of crimes of the Communist state. [For more information about the December 2000 exhibition click on: http://www.artukraine.com/exhibitions/tragedy.htm, http://www.artukraine.com/famineart/famine34]

Of the many artists in Ukraine and in the diaspora who paid homage to the famine-genocide, I would like to single out two: Roman Romanyshyn, a Lviv artist, and Lydia Bodnar-Balahutrak from Houston, Texas.

In 1990 Roman Romanyshyn (1957-) composed a triptych titled “Year 1933.” All three prints are based on the events of Holy Week (Strastnyi tyzhden). In “Thursday” (subtitled Square) (ill. 11) the central figure of Christ is framed within a square format against a black square in the background. The apostles are arranged in four groups of three to form a cross around Christ.

 

11: Roman Romanyshyn, “Year 1933: Thursday,” 1990
etching, aquatint, 35 x 34.5 cm.
private collection, Canada
(Click on image to enlarge it)

In the second and central frame “Friday” (subtitled Vertical) (ill. 12) there is a depiction of the Crucifixion with the same apostles arranged in an inverted pyramid. Judas is etched in black.

 

12: Roman Romanyshyn, “Year 1933: Friday,” 1990
etching, aquatint, 35 x 39 cm.
private collection, Canada
(Click on image to enlarge it)

The third print titled “Saturday” (subtitled Horizontal) (ill. 13) portrays the entombed Christ with the apostles arranged around him. Judas is not only black, but has been turned upside down. The title of the triptych Year 1933 is significant because it provides the key to understanding the artist’s intention of juxtaposing the suffering and death of the Son of God with the suffering and death of innocent Ukrainian victims of the famine. There is no “Sunday.” Romanyshyn does not portray the Resurrection.

 

13: Roman Romanyshyn. “Year 1933: Saturday,”
etching, aquatint, intaglio, 35.5 x 34.5 cm.
private collection Canada (source: Daria Darewych)
(Click on image to enlarge it)

Lydia Bodnar-Balahutrak (1953-), a second-generation American, had two extended working trips to Ukraine in 1991 and 1993. Upon her return she felt “a compelling need to document the horrors committed on Ukraine’s people and land.”[17] Two series of works, “Another Kind of Icon and Fragments,” resulted. Both were dominated by themes of humanity and inhumanity, death and rebirth as seen through the prism of tragic historical events in twentieth-century Ukraine.

Several of these works on paper are evocations of the famine incorporating text and photo reproductions, which memorialize the historic events and Bodnar-Balahutrak’s experiences as an artist in the post-modern tradition. According to the artist, “All the works are a personal, visceral piecing together and layering of the spiritual and human dimensions of my cultural identity.”[18]

The mixed media work “Satan All Around Us, Dancing,” 1991 (ill. 14) was an early attempt to come to terms with the overwhelming horrors of the famine and to represent them using painted images, text, political commentary, and symbolic color.

 

14: Lydia Bodnar-Balahutrak. “Satan All Around Us, Dancing,” 1991
oil, mm/paper, 30.5 x 41 cm
The Barrett Collection, Dallas, Texas (artist)
(Click on image to enlarge it)

By 1993 the initial raw emotions and didactic approach had given way to more universal images incorporating appropriated religious art and photocopied photographic material of the actual famine as in “Another Crucifixion” (ill. 15). Here the figure of Christ has been replaced with photocopied images of famine victims. The gold background characteristic of precious icons and sacred spaces stands in stark contrast to images of death.

 

15: Lydia Bodnar-Balahutrak. “Another Crucifixion,” 1993
gold leaf, photocopy, mm/paper, 30.5 x 41 cm.
collection of the artist (artist)
(Click on image to enlarge it)

In “Another Kind of Icon #18″ (ill. 16) Bodnar-Balahutrak has appropriated the icon format but has replaced the Mother of God and Christ Child with a photocopied version of an actual starving mother and child. The incorpo­­ra­tion of traditional Christian iconography, contemporary documentary evidence and art making, the layering of imagery and meaning have been successfully synthesized to create a powerful after-image of the famine-genocide.

 

16: Lydia Bodnar-Balahutrak. “Another Kind of Icon #18,” 1996
charms, rosaries, photocopy, gesso, mm, wood, 34.5 x 27 cm.
collection of O. Bashuk Hepburn, Aylmer, Canada (artist)
(Click on image to enlarge it)

It is interesting to note that both Roman Romanyshyn, as well as Vasyl Perevalsky, in Ukraine, and Lydia Bodnar-Balahutrak in America have transcended the apocalyptic subject matter by sublimating the horrors of suffering through the use of Christian symbolism. They have raised their evocations of the famine to the level of the spiritual, thus paying homage to the universal tragedies, which have ravaged our world.

The number of artists who have illuminated the traumatic events of the famine-genocide through their art continues to grow as does the awareness of the famine-genocide. Unfortunately space does not allow me to discuss their work.

In conclusion, I would like to stress that more research needs to be done. I would also like to reiterate that although there is no documentary art contemporary with the famine, compelling after-images of the famine continue to be created. It would appear that the evocations of the famine of 1932-1933 in art created recently serve as a kind of unifying historical reminder of Ukraine’s greatest catastrophe and one of the most brutal genocides in human memory.


FOOTNOTES:

[1]. In 1936 such key figures in Ukrainian art as Mykhailo Boichuk, Ivan Padalka, and Vasyl Sedliar were arrested and shot in 1937. Boichuk’s wife, Sofia Nalepinska-Boichuk, was arrested and executed on December 11, 1937. The wife of Ivan Padalka, Maria Pas’ko, was arrested and sentenced to eight years in the camps. Property of arrested individuals was usually confiscated leaving families destitute. At the beginning of the 1930s the following artists, Boichuk’s students, were arrested and disappeared into Stalin’s GULag: Okhrim Kravchenko, Onufrii Biziukov, Ivan Lypkivsky (executed), and Kyrylo Hvozdyk. Mykola Kasperovych and Yukhym Mykhailiv were also sent to concentration camps where they perished. Hvozdyk returned after Stalin’s death a broken man and refused to discuss his experiences.

[2]. L.Vladych, “Vasyl Kasian” (Kyiv: Mystetstvo, 1978), pp. 71-72.

[3]. For a complete definition of the Socialist Realist method, see “Pervyi Vsesoiuznyi s”ezd sovetskikh pisatelei” [The First All Union Congress of Soviet Writers] Stenographic transcript (Moscow, 1934), p. 716

[4]. This work has been published and exhibited in Canada under the name Hunger. See “The Phenomenon of the Ukrainian Avant-garde 1910-1935″ (Winnipeg: Winnipeg Art Gallery, 2001), p. 151.

[5]. Serhii Bilokin, “Holodomor i stanovlennia sotsrealismu yak tvorchoho metodu,” unpublished article, 2003, p. 6.

[6]. In 1930 there was a purge at the Art Institute in Kyiv in which the following artists-professors were ousted: Lev Kramarenko, M. Boichuk, F. Krychevsky, V. Kasian, K. Malevych, and V. Tatlin as “bourgeois specialists”

[7]. Jean-Claude Marcadé in “Malevitch” (Paris: Nouvelles Editions Francaises Casterman, 1990), p. 245.

[8]. In a telephone conversation, March 2003.

[9]. “Malevich Artist and Theoretician” (Paris: Flammarion, 1991), fig. 158 indicates 1927 or later. D. Horbachov in “Khronika 2000,” no. 3-4 (Kyiv 1993), p. 127 gives 1932-33 as the dates. The fact that the work is in the Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam and was acquired from Hugo Haring in 1958 makes the earlier date more likely. Jean-Claude Marcadé in “Malevitch,” fig. 379, titles the work “Orant aux stigmates cruciferes orthodoxes” and dates it at the end of 1920s.

[10]. In the painting known as “A Complex Presentiment or A Complex Premonition” dated 1928-32 the figure is shown without facial features, beardless, and without arms. On the reverse Malevych had written “The composition is made up of the elements of emptiness, loneliness and the hopelessness of life in 1913 in Kuntsevo.” The backdating to 1913 is generally interpreted as a safeguard. At the time Malevych painted the work he had lost his status, had been persecuted, and imprisoned briefly in 1930.

[11]. D. Horbachov and O. Naiden, “Malevych muzhyts’kyi,” in “Khronika” 2000, no. 3-4 (Kyiv 1993), p. 226.

[12]. I first learned about “chastushky” (also known as chastivky), popular songs, often couplets, dealing not just with the famine, from Dr. Dagmara Duvirak in Toronto. She heard them from Prof. Mykola Hordiichuk, including ones about the famine. Hordiichuk was a famine survivor and musicologist in Kyiv. D. Horbachov refers to songs about the famine in “The Exuberant World of Ukrainian Avant-garde,” in “The Phenomenon of the Ukrainian Avant-garde 1910-1935,” pp. 37-38. In “Ukrainian Avant-garde Art 1910s-1930s” (Kyiv: Mystetsvo, 1996), p. 5, Horbbachov quotes a specific chastivka, which relates to Malevych’s drawing: “Oi, na khati serp i molot, a u khati – smert’ i holod” [Oh, a sickle and hammer on the house, death and famine in the house].

[13] Marcadé, “Malevitch,” pp. 254 and 257 gives the date as the beginning of the 1930s, whereas D. Horbachov in “Khronika 2000,” dates the work as 1932-33.

[14]. Marcadé, “Malevitch,” p. 245.

[15]. Audio and video interviews were conducted by the author with M. Dmytrenko Nov. 29-30, Dec. 1, 1995 for the Ukrainian Canadian Research and Documentation Centre in Toronto.

[16]. Makarenko was awarded a silver medal by the City of Paris for this work on June 1, 1987.

[17]. From “Artist’s Statement,” 1996.

[18]. Ibid..

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bilokin, Serhii. “Holodomor i stanovlennia sotsrealismu yak tvorchoho metodu” (The Famine and the Establishment of Socialist Realism). Unpublished article, 2003.

Contanza, Mary S. “The Living Witness. Art in the Concentration Camps and Ghettos.” New York: Free Press, 1982.

Horbachov, Dmytro. Ukrainian Avant-garde Art 1910s-1930s. Kyiv: Mystetstvo, 1996.

Horbachov, D. and O. Naiden. “Malevych muzhyts’kyi”, Khronika 2000. (Kyiv, 1993, no. 3-4).

“Kazimir Malevich 1878-1935.” Los Angeles: The Armand Hammer Museum of Art and Cultural Center, 1990.

“Malevich. Artist and Theoretician,” Paris: Flammarion, 1991

Marcade, Jean-Claude. “Malevitch,” Nouvelles Editions Francaises Casterman, 1990.

“Pervyi Vsesoiuznyi sezd sovetskikh pisatelei.” Stenographic transcript. Moscow, 1934.

“The Phenomenon of the Ukrainian Avant-garde 1910-1935,” Winnipeg: Winnipeg Art Gallery, 2001

Ripko, Olena. “Boichuk i Boichukisty, Boichukizm.” Lviv: Lvivska Kartynna Halereia, 1991.

Ripko, Olena. “U poshukakh strachenoho mynuloho.” Lviv: Kameniar, 1996.


This article posted by the ArtUkraine.com Information Service (ARTUIS) with permission from author Daria Darewych and from publisher Charles Schlacks. Information cannot be reproduced without permission.

The material composed, edited and posted with identified inserts of additional information by the ArtUkraine.com Information Service (ARTUIS). Specific information from ARTUIS can only be used with permission.

FOR PERSONAL AND ACADEMIC USE ONLY.


Copies of “HOLODOMOR: THE UKRAINIAN GENOCIDE, 1932-1933″ Holodomor 70th Anniversary Commemorative Edition, Canadian-American Slavic Studies Journal, can be ordered from the publisher via the following contact information. The price of this special edition is: $5.00, plus $2.00 US postage, $3.00 in Canada, and $4.00 foreign. Mr. Charles Schlacks, Jr., Publisher, P. O.Box 1256, Idyllwild, CA 92549-1256 USA, schslavic@tazland.net


HOLODOMOR: THE UKRAINIAN GENOCIDE, 1932-1933

Canadian-American Slavic Studies Journal
Holodomor 70th Anniversary Commemorative Edition
Mr. Charles Schlacks, Jr, Publisher
Idyllwild, CA, Vol. 37, No. 3, Fall 2003

The Fall 2003 Canadian-American Slavic Studies journal features the following articles:

Foreword: “1933. Genocide. Ten Million. Holodomor,” by Peter Borisow, President of the Hollywood Trident Foundation and the Genocide Awareness Foundation. Mr. Borisow’s article focuses on the fact that it is necessary to correct the erroneous perception that Holodomor was a weather-generated event, as is the common public perception gained through the use of the term, “famine.”

Margaret Siriol Colley and Nigel Linsan Colley wrote, “Gareth Jones: A Voice Crying in the Wilderness,” an article based on the British reporter Gareth Jones’ articles (including those that first broke the news of the Holodomor to the west), diaries, and letters, as well as official British government documents, and letters from former Prime Minister, David Lloyd George.

Dr. Daria Darewych’s article, “Images and Evocations of the Famine-Genoide in Ukrainian Art,” is enhanced by 16 exemplary illustrations. Dr. Darewych is the President of the Shevchenko Society of Canada, and is a Professor of Art History at York University. Her article explains the reasons why, because of the political oppression pervasive in the USSR, there was, of political necessity, a dearth of artistic images dealing with the Holodomor until the recently achieved freedom of expression permitted the subject to be artistically addressed.

Dr. James E. Mace, Professor of Political Science at the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy National University contributed his article, “Is the Ukrainian Genocide a Myth?” Citing Stalin’s letter to Kaganovich of 11 September 1932, he points out the unquestionable fact that the genocidal aspects of the Holodomor were both known and condoned at the highest level of the Stalinist regime.

Johan Ohman, a Ph.D. candidate at Lund University in Sweden, addresses the ways in which Ukrainian subjugation by the USSR especially as demonstrated by the ravages inflicted upon the populace by the Holodomor influenced the formation of both national and personal identities. He also discusses how these subjects, as well as Ukrainian history in general, are presented in Ukrainian textbooks.

“The Holodomor of 1932-1933, as Presented in Drama and the Issue of Blame,” by Dr. Larissa M. L. Zaleska Onyshkevych, President of the Shevchenko Society of America, explores the Holodomor-related works of the playwrights, Yuriy Yanovskyi, Serhiy Kokot-Ledianskyi, and Bohdan Boychuk. As with visual arts, the problem of Soviet control of all aspects of life prohibited these writers, and others, to present the Holodomor in its horrible truth and vastness. While in the thrall of the Soviet Union, these writers could mention the ravages of the Holodomor only through the use of veiled allusions, or in publications written by the Diaspora and/or published in the west. Once the collapse of the Soviet Union removed the threat of fast and sure reprisals against the artist, his work, and his family members, artists and writers were freed to relate the once-captive history of their people.

Orysia Paszeczak Tracz translated primary source testimonies from the book edited by Lidia Borysivna Kovalenko and Volodymyr Antonovych, Holod 33: A National Memorial Book. Mrs. Tracz is an Ukrainian ethnographer, translator, and frequent contributor to The Ukrainian Weekly. The variety, and yet universality of experiences suffered by those providing testimonies for this book express the profound influence of the terrors these people witnessed and never forgot.

“The Holodomor: 1932-1933,” provides an overview of the Holodomor, and makes use of a variety of international and multi-ethnic sources to support its various points. The Introduction is, “A Selective Annotated Bibliography of Books in English Regarding the Holodomor and Stalinism,” and there is a review of the book of primary source famine-appeal letters, We’ll Meet Again in Heaven: German-Russians Write Their American Relatives, 1925-1937, by Ronald J. Vossler.

Copies of Holodomor: The Ukrainian Genocide, 1932-1933 can be ordered from the publisher via the following contact information. The price of this special edition is: $5.00, plus $2.00 US postage, $3.00 in Canada, and $4.00 foreign.

Mr. Charles Schlacks, Jr., Publisher, P. O. Box 1256,
Idyllwild, CA 92549-1256 USA, schslavic@tazland.net

~~~~~

“…Denial of the Holodomor (Ukrainian: Заперечення Голодомору, Russian: Отрицание Голодомора) is the assertion that the 1932-1933 Holodomor, a supposedly artificial famine in Soviet Ukraine,[1] recognized as a crime against humanity by the European Parliament,[2] did not occur.[3][4][5][6]

This denial and suppression was made in official Soviet propaganda from the very beginning and until the 1980s. It was supported by some Western journalists and intellectuals.[4][5][7][8][9] It was echoed at the time of the famine by some prominent Western journalists, including Walter Duranty and Louis Fischer. The denial of the famine was a highly successful and well orchestrated disinformation campaign by the Soviet government.[3][4][5] Stalin “had achieved the impossible: he had silenced all the talk of hunger… Millions were dying, but the nation hymned the praises of collectivization”, said historian and writer Edvard Radzinsky.[5]

According to Robert Conquest, that was the first major instance of Soviet authorities adopting Hitler’s Big Lie propaganda technique to sway world opinion, to be followed by similar campaigns over the Moscow Trials and denial of the Gulag labor camp system.[10]

The famine’s existence is still disputed by some, despite a general consensus. The causes, nature and extent of the Holodomor remain topics of controversy and active scholarship.

Soviet Union Cover-up of the famine

Soviet leadership undertook extensive efforts to prevent the spread of any information about the famine by keeping state communications top secret and taking other measures to prevent word of the famine from spreading. When Ukrainian peasants traveled north to Russia seeking bread, Joseph Stalin and Vyacheslav Molotov sent a secret telegram to the party and provincial police chiefs with instructions to turn them back,[11] alleging Polish agents were attempting to create a famine scare. OGPU chairman Genrikh Yagoda subsequently reported that over 200,000 peasants had been turned back.

Stalin’s wife, Nadezhda Allilueva, learned about the famine from Ukrainian students at the technical school she was attending. They described acts of cannibalism[12] and bands of orphaned children. Allilueva complained to Stalin, who then ordered the OGPU to purge all the college students who had taken part in collectivization.[13]

Soviet President Mikhail Kalinin responded to Western offers of food by telling of “political cheats who offer to help the starving Ukraine,” and commented that, “only the most decadent classes are capable of producing such cynical elements.”[6][14]

In an interview with Gareth Jones in March 1933, Soviet Foreign Minister Maxim Litvinov stated, “Well, there is no famine”, and went on to say, “You must take a longer view. The present hunger is temporary. In writing books you must have a longer view. It would be difficult to describe it as hunger.”[15]

On instructions from Litvinov, Boris Skvirsky, embassy counselor of the recently opened Soviet Embassy in the United States, published a letter on January 3, 1934, in response to a pamphlet about the famine.[16] In his letter, Skvirsky stated that the idea that the Soviet government was “deliberately killing the population of the Ukraine” “wholly grotesque.” He claimed that the Ukrainian population had been increasing at an annual rate of 2 percent during the preceding five years and asserted that the death rate in Ukraine “was the lowest of that of any of the constituent republics composing the Soviet Union”, concluding that it “was about 35 percent lower than the pre-war death rate of tsarist days.”[17]

Mention of the famine was criminalized, punishable with a five-year term in the Gulag labor camps. Blaming the authorities was punishable by death.

Falsification and suppression of evidence

The true number of dead was concealed. At the Kiev Medical Inspectorate, for example, the actual number of corpses, 9,472, was recorded as only 3,997. The GPU was directly involved in the deliberate destruction of actual birth and death records, as well as the fabrication of false information to cover up information regarding the causes and scale of death in Ukraine.[18] Similar falsifications of official records were widespread.[6]

The January 1937 census, the first in 11 years, was intended to reflect the achievements of Stalin’s rule. It became evident that population growth particularly in Ukraine failed to meet official targets—evidence of the mortality resulting from the famine and from associated indirect demographic losses. Those collecting the data, senior statisticians with decades of experience, were arrested and executed, including three successive heads of the Soviet Central Statistical Administration. The census data itself was locked away for half a century in the Russian State Archive of the Economy.[19][20]

The subsequent 1939 census was organized in a manner that certainly inflated data on population numbers. It showed a population figure of 170.6 million people, manipulated so as to match the numbers stated by Joseph Stalin in his report to the 18th Congress of the All-Union Communist Party that March. No other census in the Soviet Union was conducted until 1959.

Campaigns of disinformation

The Soviet Union denied all existence of the famine until its 50th anniversary, in 1983, when the world-wide Ukrainian community coordinated famine remembrance. The Ukrainian diaspora exerted significant pressure on the media and various governments, including the United States and Canada, to raise the issue of the famine with the government of the Soviet Union.

While the Soviet government admitted that some peasantry died, it also sought to launch a disinformation campaign, in February 1983, to blame drought. The head of the directorate for relations with foreign countries for the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), A. Merkulov, charged Leonid Kravchuk, the chief idealogue for the Communist Party in Ukraine, with finding rainfall evidence for the Great Famine. This new evidence was to be sent to the Novosti press centers in the U.S. and Canada, denouncing the “antidemocratic base of the Ukrainian bourgeois Nationalists, the collaboration of the Banderists and the Hitlerite Fascists during the Second World War.”[21] Kravchuk’s inquiry into the rainfalls for the 1932-1933 period found that they were within normal parameters.[22] Nevertheless, the official position regarding drought did not change.

The United States Congress created the Commission on the Ukraine Famine in 1986. Soviet authorities were correct in their expectation that the commission would lay responsibility for the famine on the Soviet state.[23]

Increased international awareness of the famine did not dissuade Soviet authorities from further disinformation in anticipation of the 55th anniversary of the famine. In Canada, the Association of United Ukrainian Canadians (a cultural and educational organization founded in 1918 and still preserving its original pro-Communist leanings) published numerous articles denying the famine in its publications, available to the public through its bookstore outlets. In 2007, newly released correspondence confirmed instructions for the content of these materials had come directly from Soviet authorities.

Ultimately, as President of Ukraine, Kravchuk exposed the official cover-up attempts and came out in support of recognizing the famine, named the “Holodomor,”[24] as genocide.

From glasnost to post-Soviet standoff

In an open letter to Mikhail Gorbachev in August 1987, veteran dissident Viacheslav Chornovil wrote about the denial of the famine:[25]

“The biggest and most infamous blank spot in the Soviet history of Ukraine is the hollow silence for over 50 years about the genocide of the Ukrainian nation organized by Stalin and his henchmen … The Great Famine of 1932-33, which took millions of human lives. In one year—1933—my people lost more than throughout all of World War II, which ravaged our land.”

It was during this period of glasnost that Soviet authorities admitted that agricultural policies played a direct role in the causing the famine.

In the post Soviet era, an independent Ukraine has officially condemned the Holodomor as an act of genocide against the Ukrainian people. The Russian Foreign Ministry counters that not only Ukrainians died in the Great Famine, that to single out Ukrainians as victims insults others who died, that the

“declaration of the tragic events of that time as act of genocide against the Ukrainian nation is a unilateral misinterpretation of history in favor of modern conformist political and ideological principles.”
 

WALTER DURANTY and THE NEW YORK TIMES

According to Patrick Wright,[27] Robert C. Tucker,[28] Eugene Lyons,[29] Mona Charen[30] and Thomas Woods [31] one of the first Western Holodomor deniers was Walter Duranty, the winner of the 1932 Pulitzer prize in journalism in the category of correspondence, for his dispatches on Soviet Union (called incorrectly Russia) and the working out of the Five Year Plan.[32] While the famine was raging, he wrote in the pages of The New York Times that “Any report of a famine in Russia is today an exaggeration or malignant propaganda”, and that “There is no actual starvation or deaths from starvation, but there is widespread mortality from diseases due to malnutrition.”[29]

In his reports, Duranty downplayed the impact of food shortages in Ukraine, although in private he told Eugene Lyons and reported to the British Embassy that the population of Ukraine and Lower Volga had “decreased” by six to seven million.[33] While other Western reporters reported the famine conditions as best they could due to Soviet censorship and restrictions on visiting areas affected by the famine, Duranty’s reports frequently echoed the official Soviet view. As Duranty wrote in a dispatch from Moscow in March 1933, “Conditions are bad, but there is no famine… But—to put it brutally—you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs.”[34]

Duranty wrote articles denying that the Holodomor was taking place in Ukraine. He also wrote denunciations of those who wrote about the famine, accusing them of being reactionaries and anti-Bolshevik propagandists. Duranty repeated Soviet propaganda without verifying its veracity. As the New York Times notes: “Taking Soviet propaganda at face value this way was completely misleading, as talking with ordinary Russians might have revealed even at the time.”[34]

In August 1933, Cardinal Theodor Innitzer of Vienna called for relief efforts, stating that the Ukrainian famine was claiming lives “likely… numbered… by the millions” and driving those still alive to infanticide and cannibalism. The New York Times, August 20, 1933, reported Innitzer’s charge and published an official Soviet denial: “in the Soviet Union we have neither cannibals nor cardinals”. The next day, the Times added Duranty’s own denial.

[German-language source, Hungersnot! (Famine Calamity) by Cardinal Theodor Innitzer, dated approximately 1934 and published in Vienna by Buchdruckerei Karolik consists of eyewitness accounts of German nationals - religious leaders as well as businessmen, who were in Ukraine at that time. It also includes a map (and pictures) of the famine-afflicted areas of Ukraine. Source

Genocide  Photo's  - from Theodor Cardinal Innitzer's Archive: Source

Some historians consider Duranty’s reports from Moscow to be crucial in the decision taken by President Franklin D. Roosevelt to grant the Soviet Union diplomatic recognition in 1933.[35] Bolshevik Karl Radek said that was indeed the case.[4]

Louis Fischer and The Nation

Next to Duranty, the American reporter most consistently willing to gloss Soviet reality was Louis Fischer, who had a deep ideological commitment to Soviet communism dating back to 1920. When Fischer traveled to Ukraine in October and November 1932, for The Nation, he was alarmed at what he saw. “In the Poltava, Vinnitsa, Podolsk and Kiev regions, conditions will be hard”, he wrote, “I think there is no starvation anywhere in Ukraine now — after all they have just gathered in the harvest, but it was a bad harvest.”

Initially critical of the Soviet grain procurement program because it created the food problem, Fischer by February 1933 adopted the official Soviet government view, which blamed the problem on Ukrainian counter-revolutionary nationalist “wreckers.” It seemed “whole villages” had been “contaminated” by such men, who had to be deported to “lumbering camps and mining areas in distant agricultural areas which are now just entering upon their pioneering stage.” These steps were forced upon the Kremlin, Fischer wrote, but the Soviets were, nevertheless, learning how to rule wisely.

Fischer was on a lecture tour in the United States when Gareth Jones’ famine story broke. Speaking to a college audience in Oakland, California, a week later, Fischer stated emphatically: “There is no starvation in Russia.” He spent the spring of 1933 campaigning for American diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union. As rumors of a famine in the USSR reached American shores, Fischer vociferously denied the reports.

Fischer’s article entitled “Russia’s Last Hard Year”, stated, “The first half of 1933 was very difficult indeed. Many people simply did not have sufficient nourishment.” Fischer blamed poor weather and the refusal of peasants to harvest the grain, which then rotted in the fields. Government requisitions drained the countryside of food, he admitted, but military needs (a potential conflict with Japan) explained the need for such deadly thoroughness in grain collections.[40]

Fischer maintained his general optimism about the Soviet Union through the publication of his Soviet Journey in 1935. The book devoted three pages to a discussion of the famine of 1932-1933, in which Fischer described his October travels through Ukraine. He told of food left rotting in the fields as the result of peasants’ “passive resistance.” Fischer blamed the peasants directly for having “brought the calamity upon themselves.” Fischer stressed the positive results ensuing from Bolshevik victory in the countryside, and connected the famine to peasant action (or inaction).[40]

Holodomor denial by prominent visitors to the USSR

Prominent British writers who visited the Soviet Union in 1934, such as George Bernard Shaw [MC-> GB Shaw and HG Wells were Fabian Socialists] and H. G. Wells, are also on record as denying the existence of the Famine in Ukraine.[5][41]

In 1934 the British Foreign Office in the House of Lords stated that there was no evidence to support the allegations against the Soviet government regarding the Famine in Ukraine, based on the testimony of Sir John Maynard, a renowned famine expert who visited Ukraine in the summer of 1933 and rejected “tales of famine-genocide propagated by the Ukrainian Nationalists”.[citation needed]

The height of manipulation was reached during a visit to Ukraine carried out between August 26 and September 9, 1933, by French Prime Minister Édouard Herriot, who denied accounts of the famine and said that Soviet Ukraine was “like a garden in full bloom”.[3] The day before his arrival, all beggars, homeless children and starving people were removed from the streets. Shop windows in local stores were filled with food, but purchases were forbidden, and anyone coming too close to the stores was arrested. The streets were washed. Just like all other Western visitors, Herriot met fake “peasants”, all selected Communists or Komsomol members, who showed him healthy cattle.[42] Herriot declared to the press that there was no famine in Ukraine, that he did not see any trace of it, and that this showed adversaries of the Soviet Union were spreading the rumour. “When one believes that the Ukraine is devastated by famine, allow me to shrug my shoulders”, he declared. The September 13, 1933 issue of Pravda was able to write that Herriot “categorically contradicted the lies of the bourgeoisie press in connection with a famine in the USSR.”[43]

The lack of knowledge of the famine was observed by English writer George Orwell, who commented that “huge events like the Ukraine famine of 1933, involving the deaths of millions of people, have actually escaped the attention of the majority of English Russophiles”.[44] In 1945, Orwell wrote,

[I]t was considered equally proper to publicise famines when they happened in India and to conceal them when they happened in the Ukraine. And if this was true before the war, the intellectual atmosphere is certainly no better now.[45]

Nigel Colley has written on the influence of the Ukrainian Famine, and the Holodomor denial of Duranty, on Orwell’s book Animal Farm.[46]

Read in full here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Holodomor

“The success of using food as a weapon to control/punish/eliminate a people was first used by the Soviet Communists. Since then this has become a standard tool in the arsenal of communist regimes to control/punish/eliminate people, and has been used by such regimes such as China, North Korea, Ethiopia, Cambodia, Zimbabwe amongst others.”

http://www.infoukes.com/history/famine/

 

More to add, especially on the last paragraph, time permitting.

Note: I tried to be careful with the horrific pictures of Ukrainian souls and not mix them with the Russian Famine in the early twenties. I’ve seen this being done on the Armenian Famine; Turkish denial talltale site, where they used famine pictures of Armenian souls claiming they were Turks, which is morally unethical.


China is furious with Malaysia over its bungled search for the missing plane

$
0
0

By Heather Timmons 11 hrs ago

A protest outside the Malaysian Embassy in Beijing. Reuters/Kim Kyung-Hoon

Less than six months ago, Chinese president Xi Jinping made his first-ever visit to Malaysia to usher in what China’s state media dubbed a “new era” in Sino-Malaysian relations, as the two-countries agreed to increase trade and cooperate on everything from agriculture to energy. “It’s a miracle that so many achievements have been made within such a short period of time,” Tan Khai Hee, secretary general of Malaysia-China Friendship Association, told Xinhua after the October visit. 

The short-lived new era between the long-time allies ended abruptly this month, with the disappearance of Malaysian Airlines flight 370. 

Chinese officials and citizens alike are furious with the Malaysian government over what they see as ineptness and incomplete disclosure over the fate of the Beijing-bound plane that had 154 Chinese citizens aboard. Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak finally confirmed late March on 24th that MH370 ”ended in the Indian Ocean.” 

On March 25, Chinese families of the passengers on the Malaysia Airlines flight that crashed in the Indian Ocean staged a rare protest march in Beijing that ended in front of the Malaysian Embassy, where they shouted “Liars, tell us the truth.” Protestors numbered in the hundreds, observers said, and were allowed to march and mass in front of the embassy, indicating that their protest was probably sanctioned by the Beijing government.

The families also issued a scathing statement accusing the Malaysian government of deception and—if delays in the search led to the death of those aboard—outright murder:

+

 18 days have passed during which the Malaysian government and military constantly tried to delay, deceive the passengers’ families and cheat the whole world.

This shameless behavior not only fooled and hurt the families of the 154 passengers but also misguided and delayed rescue actions, wasting a large quantity of human resources and materials and lost valuable time for the rescue effort. If our 154 relatives aboard lost their lives due to such reasons, then Malaysia Airlines, the Malaysian government and the Malaysian military are the real murderers that killed them.

+

 

Officials are forcefully speaking out. “We demand that Malaysia provide all available information and evidence on how it reached this conclusion,” said China foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei March 25, hours after another foreign ministry official made the same demand. China’s government only learned of the news that the plane had changed direction—and that China’s search efforts were in the wrong place—when the Malaysian government held a press conference about it, days after it was reported in the media, Hong said earlier.

China’s state-run media has also been hammering away at the Malaysians. “With all the satellite data available, why did it take so long to come to this conclusion?,” asked a television anchor in a CCTV broadcast, one of many op-eds and articles questioning Malaysia’s conduct.

A discussion (link in Chinese) about the Malaysian prime minister’s statement that the plane had crashed on Chinese blogging site Sina Weibo had over 13 million participants by mid-day March 25 and tens of thousands of comments, many of them aimed at the Malaysian government:

“The Malays must give an explanation. The Chinese people are not fools,” read one message. “Never go to Malaysia as a tourist,” read another. More than 75% of citizens who participated in an online poll on Sina said the Malaysian government’s handling of the situation would influence their decisions about whether to travel there.

.

The outcry is so vehement that one Malaysian politician suggested the government censor the internet to keep angry Chinese from rioting and torturing Malaysians.

Malaysia Airlines said it would give $5,000 in financial assistance to the family of each missing passenger, but had little additional information to offer in a press conference at noon on March 25. “We do not know why, and we do not know how this terrible tragedy happened,” said the airline’s CEO, Ahmad Jauhari Yahya.

Source

~~~

CNN March 13: What we know: There were 239 people on board: 227 passengers and 12 crew members (MC ->one of which was a trainer for the co-pilot). Five of the passengers were younger than 5 years old. Those on board included a number of painters and calligraphers, as well as employees of an American semiconductor company.

According to the airline, the passengers’ 14 nationalities spanned the Asia-Pacific region, Europe and North America. Passengers from China or Taiwan numbered 154, followed by Malaysians, at 38. There were three U.S. citizens on the plane. Four passengers had valid booking to travel but did not show up for the flight, according to the airline. “As such, the issue of off-loading unaccompanied baggage did not arise,” it added Tuesday in a prepared statement.

What we don’t know: Whether any of the passengers had anything to do with the plane’s disappearance. Source

.

Nagging question: I wondered here  the 4 people who checked in but didn’t board the flight. Who were they…?  What was in their luggage?


Obama: I’m Concerned About a Loose Nuke Being Detonated in Manhattan

$
0
0

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
March 25, 2014

During a press conference in the Netherlands today, Obama said he is more worried about Manhattan getting nuked than any supposed threat posed by Russia.

.

The president made the remark after a reporter asked him if former challenger Mitt Romney was correct in his assertion that Russia is once again the primary foe of the United States following Crimeans voting to rejoin Russia.

.

“Russia’s actions are a problem. They don’t pose the No. 1 national security threat to the United States. I continue to be much more concerned when it comes to our security with the prospect of a nuclear weapon going off in Manhattan,” Obama said.

.

Obama did not elaborate on the threat.

.

North Korea has threatened to nuke the United States on several occasions. Last April, the Defense Intelligence Agency concluded with “moderate confidence” North Korea has a nuclear weapon small enough to be loaded on a ballistic missile. However, according to the DIA, the reliability of the missile would be low.

.

The previous December South Korea, for obvious reasons, said North Korea had developed the technology capable of delivering a nuclear weapon to the West Coast of the United States. Experts, however, said at the time the hereditary communist state is years away from miniaturizing a nuclear weapon and mounting it on a ballistic missile.

.

California is approximately 3,000 miles from Manhattan. In order to nuke New York, the North Koreans would require a missile capable of traveling around 9,000 miles.

.

The next suspect on the Axis of Evil list the government has claimed for over a decade wants to do us harm is Iran. It currently does not have a nuclear bomb and, in fact, has not enriched uranium to the level required for a bomb, and also does not possess a missile capable of striking the United States. In January, Secretary of State John Kerry insisted Iran has pledged to stop stockpiling uranium.

.

After the September 11, 2001 attacks, the government and various commentators told us on numerous occasions al-Qaeda has planted nukes around the United States and will “kill millions, destroy the economy and fundamentally alter the course of history.”

.

In 2010, Obama said al-Qaeda is trying to get nukes and would have “no compunction in using them.” He added if “there was ever a detonation in New York City, or London, or Johannesburg, the ramifications economically, politically and from a security perspective would be devastating.”

.

U.S. intelligence officials, however, say the al-Qaeda nuclear threat is, at best, a remote possibility.

“At this point, they don’t appear to have made much progress, but we continue to review every bit of information that comes in to determine whether they’ve advanced their efforts in any way whatsoever,” an anonymous intelligence official told CNN in 2010. “Developing a nuclear device involves a highly sophisticated technical process, and al-Qaeda doesn’t seem to have mastered it based on what we know now.”

.

Obama apparently does not consider Russia a threat, although it currently has around 45,000 nuclear weapons and a sophisticated ballistic missile system.

Russia, according to Obama, is a “regional power that is threatening some of its immediate neighbors, not out of strength, but out of weakness.”

.

Obama made the remark while speaking with Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte after a nuclear security summit in The Hague. Russia attended the summit and endorsed the meeting’s final statement on enhancing nuclear security.

.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Dmitry Rogozin threatened to use nuclear weapons if Moscow was attacked. He made the remark following discussions about missile defense systems installed in Eastern Europe by the United States.

.

“One can experiment as long as one wishes by deploying non-nuclear warheads on strategic missile carriers,” Rogozin said. “But one should keep in mind that if there is an attack against us, we will certainly resort to using nuclear weapons in certain situations to defend our territory and state interests.”

http://www.infowars.com/obamas-worried-manhattan-will-get-nuked/

.

A signal of intent?

VIDEO: Missing Plane And Missing Nukes | mediachecker

.

Obama’s been funding the Muslim Brotherhood/al Qaeda in the ME and Nazi’ in the Ukraine so it appears they’re no longer our “enemy” so now we now have a new “cold war” with the possibility of a small nuke in NYC which they’ll blame on Iran, Russia, China or more than likely Domestic Terrorism which they’ve mentioned in the past and even placed on their watch list. And those who hate tyranny and won’t follow their ugly plan will become the enemy. This will eventually create a [global] police state, water and food shortages – famines, internet censorship, curtail air travel, gun raids - Martial Law. It’s the money lender/corporate pattern. I usually label this thinking as “crazy talk” but somehow can’t do it this time…let’s face it he was in the Hague – Netherlands when he said it. Yes, that’s a big historical factor…


Open the floodgates? Indiana becomes first state to scrap Common Core

$
0
0

Fox News
March 25, 2014

Indiana has become the first of 45 states to opt out of the national education standard known as Common Core, and critics of the controversial K-12 program say the move could “open the floodgates” for others to follow.

Credit: csessums / Flickr

Growing criticism over costs imposed by the program, as well as fears that by setting a national education standard, the program has already begun dictating curriculum, has made Common Core an increasingly polarizing issue. Although the program has both Republican and Democrat supporters, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence predicted his state will be the first of many to rethink participation.

“I believe when we reach the end of this process there are going to be many other states around the country that will take a hard look at the way Indiana has taken a step back, designed our own standards and done it in a way where we drew on educators, we drew on citizens, we drew on parents and developed standards that meet the needs of our people,” Pence said.

Read more

Bill Gates loves Common Core but not for his own kids. Let’s hope others follow Indiana though they’ll have to scrap all of it ‘cos if they don’t the kids will still have to take the test and will likely fail.

Bill Gates: Monsanto and Eugenics

.



Ukraine: The Corporate Annexation. “For Cargill, Chevron, Monsanto, It’s a Gold Mine of Profits”

$
0
0

As the US and EU apply sanctions on Russia over its annexation’ of Crimea, JP Sottile reveals the corporate annexation of Ukraine. For Cargill, Chevron, Monsanto, there’s a gold mine of profits to be made from agri-business and energy exploitation.

The potential here for agriculture / agribusiness is amazing … production here could double … Ukraine’s agriculture could be a real gold mine.

On 12th January 2014, a reported 50,000 “pro-Western” Ukrainians descended upon Kiev’s Independence Square to protest against the government of President Viktor Yanukovych.

Stoked in part by an attack on opposition leader Yuriy Lutsenko, the protest marked the beginning of the end of Yanukovych’s four year-long government.

That same day, the Financial Times reported a major deal for US agribusiness titan Cargill.

Business confidence never faltered

Despite the turmoil within Ukrainian politics after Yanukovych rejected a major trade deal with the European Union just seven weeks earlier, Cargill was confident enough about the future to fork over $200 million to buy a stake in Ukraine’s UkrLandFarming.

According to the Financial Times, UkrLandFarming is the world’s eighth-largest land cultivator and second biggest egg producer. And those aren’t the only eggs in Cargill’s increasingly ample basket.

On 13th December 2013, Cargill announced the purchase of a stake in a Black Sea grain terminal at Novorossiysk on Russia’s Black Sea coast.

The port – to the east of Russia’s strategically and historically important Crimean naval base – gives them a major entry-point to Russian markets and adds them to the list of Big Ag companies investing in ports around the Black Sea, both in Russia and Ukraine.

Cargill has been in Ukraine for over two decades, investing in grain elevators and acquiring a major Ukrainian animal feed company in 2011. And, based on its investment in UkrLandFarming, Cargill was decidedly confident amidst the post-EU deal chaos.

It’s a stark juxtaposition to the alarm bells ringing out from the US media, bellicose politicians on Capitol Hill and perplexed policymakers in the White House.

Instability – what instablility?

It’s even starker when compared to the anxiety expressed by Morgan Williams, President and CEO of the US-Ukraine Business Council – which, according to its website, has been “Promoting US-Ukraine business relations since 1995.”

Williams was interviewed by the International Business Times on March 13 and, despite Cargill’s demonstrated willingness to spend, he said, “The instability has forced businesses to just go about their daily business and not make future plans for investment, expansion and hiring more employees.”

In fact, Williams, who does double-duty as Director of Government Affairs at the private equity firm SigmaBleyzer, claimed, “Business plans have been at a standstill.”

Apparently, he wasn’t aware of Cargill’s investment, which is odd given the fact that he could’ve simply called Van A. Yeutter, Vice President for Corporate Affairs at Cargill, and asked him about his company’s quite active business plan.

There is little doubt Williams has the phone number because Mr. Yuetter serves on the Executive Committee of the selfsame US-Ukraine Business Council. It’s quite a cozy investment club, too.

According to his SigmaBleyzer profile, Williams “started his work regarding Ukraine in 1992″ and has since advised American agribusinesses “investing in the former Soviet Union.” As an experienced fixer for Big Ag, he must be fairly friendly with the folks on the Executive Committee.

Big Ag luminaries – Monsanto, Eli Lilly, Dupont, John Deere …

And what a committee it is – it’s a veritable who’s who of Big Ag. Among the luminaries working tirelessly and no doubt selflessly for a better, freer Ukraine are:

  • Melissa Agustin, Director, International Government Affairs & Trade for Monsanto
  • Brigitte Dias Ferreira, Counsel, International Affairs for John Deere
  • Steven Nadherny, Director, Institutional Relations for agriculture equipment-maker CNH Industrial
  • Jeff Rowe, Regional Director for DuPont Pioneer
  • John F. Steele, Director, International Affairs for Eli Lilly & Company

And, of course, Cargill’s Van A. Yeutter. But Cargill isn’t alone in their warm feelings toward Ukraine. As Reuters reported in May 2013, Monsanto – the largest seed company in the world – plans to build a $140 million “non-GM (genetically modified) corn seed plant in Ukraine.”

And right after the decision on the EU trade deal, Jesus Madrazo, Monsanto’s Vice President for Corporate Engagement, reaffirmed his company’s “commitment to Ukraine” and “the importance of creating a favorable environment that encourages innovation and fosters the continued development of agriculture.”

Monsanto’s strategy includes a little “hearts and minds” public relations, too. On the heels of Mr. Madrazo’s reaffirmation, Monsanto announced ”a social development program titled ‘Grain Basket of the Future’ to help rural villagers in the country improve their quality of life.”

The initiative will dole out grants of up to $25,000 to develop programs providing “educational opportunities, community empowerment, or small business development.”

Immense economic importance

The well-crafted moniker ‘Grain Basket of the Future’ is telling because, once upon a time, Ukraine was known as ‘the breadbasket’ of the Soviet Union. The CIA ranks Soviet-era Ukraine second only to Mother Russia as the “most economically important component of the former Soviet Union.”

In many ways, the farmland of Ukraine was the backbone of the USSR. Its fertile black soil generated over a quarter of the USSR’s agriculture. It exported substantial quantities of food to other republics and its farms generated four times the output of the next-ranking republic.

Although Ukraine’s agricultural output plummeted in the first decade after the break-up of the Soviet Union, the farming sector has been growing spectacularly in recent years.

While Europe struggled to shake-off the Great Recession, Ukraine’s agriculture sector grew 13.7% in 2013.

Ukraine’s agriculture economy is hot. Russia’s is not. Hampered by the effects of climate change and 25 million hectares of uncultivated agricultural land, Russia lags behind its former breadbasket.

According to the Centre for Eastern Studies, Ukraine’s agricultural exports rose from $4.3 billion in 2005 to $17.9 billion in 2012 and, harkening the heyday of the USSR, farming currently accounts for 25% of its total exports. Ukraine is also the world’s third-largest exporter of wheat and of corn. And corn is not just food. It is also ethanol.

Feeding Europe

But people gotta eat – particularly in Europe. As Frank Holmes of US Global Investors assessed in 2011, Ukraine is poised to become Europe’s butcher. Meat is difficult to ship, but Ukraine is perfectly located to satiate Europe’s hunger.

Just two days after Cargill bought into UkrLandFarming, Global Meat News reported a huge forecasted spike in “all kinds” of Ukrainian meat exports, with an increase of 8.1% overall and staggering 71.4% spike in pork exports.

No wonder Eli Lilly is represented on the US-Ukraine Business Council’s Executive Committee. Its Elanco Animal Health unit is a major manufacturer of feed supplements.

And it is also notable that Monsanto’s planned seed plant is non-GMO, perhaps anticipating an emerging GMO-unfriendly European market and Europe’s growing appetite for organic foods. When it comes to Big Ag’s profitable future in Europe, the stakes couldn’t be higher.

A long string of Russian losses

For Russia and its hampered farming economy, it’s another in a long string of losses to US encroachment – from NATO expansion into Eastern Europe to US military presence to its south and onto a major shale gas development deal recently signed by Chevron in Ukraine.

So, why was Big Ag so bullish on Ukraine, even in the face of so much uncertainty and the predictable reaction by Russia?

The answer is that the seeds of Ukraine’s turn from Russia have been sown for the last two decades by the persistent Cold War alliance between corporations and foreign policy. It’s a version of the ‘Deep State‘ that is usually associated with the oil and defense industries, but also exists in America’s other heavily subsidized industry – agriculture.

Morgan Williams is at the nexus of Big Ag’s alliance with US foreign policy. To wit, SigmaBleyzer touts Mr. Williams’ work with ”various agencies of the US government, members of Congress, congressional committees, the Embassy of Ukraine to the US, international financial institutions, think tanks and other organizations on US-Ukraine business, trade, investment and economic development issues.”

Freedom – for US business

As President of the US-Ukraine Business Council, Williams has access to Council cohort – David Kramer, President of Freedom House. Officially a non-governmental organization, it has been linked with overt and covert ‘democracy’ efforts in places where the door isn’t open to American interests – aka US corporations.

Freedom House, the National Endowment for Democracy and National Democratic Institute helped fund and support the Ukrainian ‘Orange Revolution’ in 2004. Freedom House is funded directly by the US Government, the National Endowment for Democracy and the US Department of State.

David Kramer is a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs and, according to his Freedom House bio page, formerly a Senior Fellow at the Project for the New American Century.

Nuland’s $5 billion for Ukrainian ‘democracy’

That puts Kramer and, by one degree of separation, Big Ag fixer Morgan Williams in the company of PNAC co-founder Robert Kagan who, as coincidence would have it, is married to Victoria “F*ck the EU” Nuland, the current Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs.

Interestingly enough, Ms. Nuland spoke to the US-Ukrainian Foundation last 13th December, extolling the virtues of the Euromaidan movement as the embodiment of “the principles and values that are the cornerstones for all free democracies.”

Nuland also told the group that the United States had invested more than $5 billion in support of Ukraine’s “European aspirations” – meaning pulling Ukraine away from Russia. She made her remarks on a dais featuring a backdrop emblazoned with a Chevron logo.

Also, her colleague and phone call buddy US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt helped Chevron cook up their 50-year shale gas deal right in Russia’s kitchen.

Coca-Cola, Exxon-Mobil, Raytheon

Although Chevron sponsored that event, it is not listed as a supporter of the Foundation. But the Foundation does list the Coca-Cola Company, ExxonMobil and Raytheon as major sponsors. And, to close the circle of influence, the US-Ukraine Business Council is also listed as a supporter.

Which brings the story back to Big Ag’s fixer – Morgan Williams.

Although he was glum about the current state of investment in Ukraine, he’s gotta wear shades when he looks into the future. He told the International Business Times:

“The potential here for agriculture / agribusiness is amazing … production here could double. The world needs the food Ukraine could produce in the future. Ukraine’s agriculture could be a real gold mine.”

Of course, his priority is to ensure that the bread of well-connected businesses gets lavishly buttered in Russia’s former breadbasket. And there is no better connected group of Ukraine-interested corporations than American agribusiness.

Given the extent of US official involvement in Ukrainian politics – including the interesting fact that Ambassador Pyatt pledged US assistance to the new government in investigating and rooting-out corruption – Cargill’s seemingly risky investment strategy probably wasn’t that risky, after all.

J P Sottile is a freelance journalist, radio co-host, documentary filmmaker and former broadcast news producer in Washington, D.C. His weekly show, Inside the Headlines w/ The Newsvandal, co-hosted by James Moore, airs every Friday on KRUU-FM in Fairfield, Iowa. He blogs at Newsvandal.com.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-the-corporate-annexation-for-cargill-chevron-monsanto-its-a-gold-mine-of-profits/5375170

Europe – WB/IMF/Austerity - turn over all your industries (OIL) leading to unemployment and everything else triples for the people.

Russia – 15 billion counter-offer - cheap heating gas – no strings – just join our trade pact – good pensions.

The democratically elected president chose the Russian offer. Weeks later he was ousted and the European sock-puppets were installed. The money lenders are always accompanied by the corporists.


NEO – Flight 370: Another US Conspiracy?

$
0
0

March 23rd, 2014 |

malaysia-flight.si

 Flight 370: Another US Conspiracy?

….by Gordon Duff, VT Sr. Editor, … with New Eastern Outlook, Moscow

 

Who would allow a bogus search to go on like this? Only the perpetrators

On March 13, 2014 Veterans Today said they could prove Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 was “on the ground.” The mainstream media had sighted wreckage but families were calling passengers on the “downed jet” and those phones were ringing, an impossibility.

We are now certain that we are dealing with a “black op” at the highest level. This fact alone surprises no one. The more important issue is the ramifications of accepting this inexorable fact.

Today, nobody doubts flight 370’s globetrotting ordeal. However, the real story is so big it can and will never be told though, as with similar mysteries such as 9/11, we can expect and implausible fairy tale to emerge and receive official recognition. Only the dead will know the truth.

The following excerpt is from a retired US Air Force Colonel who currently flies the Boeing 777/200 for a major airline:

“Just a quick update with what I know about the Malaysia 777 disappearance. The Boeing 777 is the airplane that I fly. It is a great, safe airplane to fly. It has, for the most part, triple redundancy in most of its systems, so if one complete system breaks (not just parts of a system), there are usually 2 more to carry the load. It’s also designed to be easy to employ so 3rd world pilots can successfully fly it. Sometimes, even that doesn’t work…

There’s many ways to fly the 777 and there are safety layers and redundancies built into the airplane now to Malaysia. There are so many communication systems on the airplane: 3 VHF radios, 2 SatCom systems, 2 HF radio systems, plus Transponders and active, ‘real time’ monitoring through CPDLC (Controller to Pilot Data Link Clearance) and ADS B (Air Data Service) through the SatCom systems and ACARS (Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System) thru the VHF, HF and SatCom systems.

The air traffic controllers can tell where we are, speed, altitude, etc. as well as what our computers and flight guidance system has set into our control panels. Big Brother for sure! However, most of these things can be turned off.”

______________________________

But, there are a few systems that can’t be turned off and one is the engine monitoring systems. The Malaysia airplane, like our 777-200’s, uses Rolls Royce Trent Engines (as a piece of trivia….Rolls Royce names their motors after rivers….because they always keep on running!) Rolls Royce leases these motors to us and they monitor them all the time they are running.

In fact, a few years back, one of our 777’s developed a slow oil leak due and partial equipment failure. It wasn’t bad enough to set off the airplane’s alerting system, but RR was looking at it on their computers. They are in England, they contact our dispatch in (REDACTED), Dispatch sends a message to the crew via SatCom in the North Pacific, telling them that RR wants them to closely monitor oil pressure and temp on the left engine.

The crew did all of that and landed uneventfully, but after landing and during the taxi in, the left engine shut itself down using it’s redundant, computerized operating system that has a logic tree that will not allow it to be shut down if the airplane is in the air…only on the ground. Pretty good tech. Anyway, the point was that RR monitors those engines 100% of the time they are operating. And don’t EVER get in an Airbus!!”

This system was monitored for at least 5 hours after the plane was initially reported as crashed, a reporting error that was not accidental. In order to look at this story, you have to answer the right questions. Sometimes the right questions aren’t the best questions; they are just the only ones you can answer.

The “mystery” of flight 370 subjected to the analytical tools of intelligence professionals proves the existence of a multi-national, super-governmental conspiracy. This is a broad statement, seemingly even a wild assumption. It is not.

The “370 incident” provides foundation for understanding not just 9/11 but the interlocking mosaic of staged revolutions, economic collapses, theatrical mass killings and the systematic brain-washing of generations.

You see, “disappearing” an airliner today is beyond impossible, beyond any magic trick. When the impossible is accomplished once, accepting it has been done before; that it is done continually is no longer conjecture.

Normally, crimes include three components, “means, motive and opportunity.” We will never know why 370 was taken, why the passengers and crew were killed. Anyone who knows and who would speak of it would be as dead as those on the plane. What we have to accept is that there are questions that the answers to are simply unimaginable.

We have to deal with what we know and what that means. We know that an airliner was taken, flown thousands of miles. We have surmised that the plane was landed on Diego Garcia, the bodies removed and disposed. As for what cargo was removed, asking is futile.

It certainly wasn’t “lithium ion” batteries as being reported today, not hardly.

We know these things for certain:

  • Those responsible are terrorists fully sanctioned by multiple governments with broad control over the international press
  • The willingness to do something this brazen is very real proof this isn’t the first time. It brings everything claimed to have occurred on 9/11/2001 not only in question but clearly establishes both capability and intent. If “they” did it now, they did it then and will do it again if “they” wish.
  • Recent plans for terrorist attacks against Ukrainian Air Force facilities, as outlined in emails intercepted and published by “Anonymous Ukraine” show identical intent and nearly identical capability.

Modern airliners cannot disappear. They can’t be hijacked or stolen, not without the full involvement of a SOCOM or Special Operations Command with the ability to control news reporting, suppress not just radar but sensor data, so much data that only a very few have a remote idea of how outlandish this story is.

We have already heard, first hand, how the plane tracks itself in ways that can’t be turned off. Thus, we know the team at Rolls Royce can tell us within 30 yards of where the engines were first turned off yet they have never said a word.

I accept this as proof that a British intelligence agency is very much a part of the fate of flight 370. This is now “a given.” Four nations have the capability of tracking Malayan Airlines Flight 370. In fact, disabling the planes communications is an impossibility.

___________________________________

TRACKING THE UNTRACKABLE

Everything on this planet is subject to what is called “Layered ISR.” ISR stands for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance. By “layered” we refer to satellites, starting with geosynchronous orbit down to LEO, or “Low Earth Orbit.”

These satellites monitor the entire electromagnetic spectrum and include SAR (Synthetic Aperture Capability). Everything that moves, on land or sea, under the sea, even underground, is watched and listened to.

Below this are nano-sensors that are sustained in the upper atmosphere. I won’t even begin to explain what these do but their function is “hyperspatial” rather than “hyperspectral.”When we talk “hyperspatial” we make physicists cringe.

Everything below this is watched, monitored or sensed. You have to realize that we don’t really need radar. Our entire atmosphere is an electromagnetic soup, a “sea” as it were of Wi-Fi signals, AM radio, particle emissions, a million sources, all reflected, slowed, absorbed or amplified, painting a very complete picture of anything that moves. All is sensed, recorded, examined by complex algorithms for anomalous behaviors that represent “threats.”

Planes don’t disappear; a gnat has trouble “disappearing.”

Immediately after the plane “disappeared,” a working team was put together headed by Lt. Colonel Stephen Avery, former USAF SOCOM pilot and retired security chief for a major airline. Aiding Steve heading up the inquiry is former Supervising Special Agent Frederick Coward (ret) who headed FBI operations for Asia.

Coordinating the team with active intelligence agencies, “official” and, by far the more effective private resources of Adamus Defense Group, was Operation Chief Colonel James Hanke, former G2 of Third Army, a retired Special Forces intelligence officer.

What we found was astounding. To put this in context, we looked back at 9/11 when CNN, at the scene of the Pentagon “whatever” was unable to find any proof an airplane had been there at all. See.

_________________________________

PRELIMINARY FINDINGS

Our preliminary findings:

  • An official cover-up began as soon as the plane went off course. All subsequent reporting was part of a conspiracy. The location of the plane for the 5 or more hours after it “crashed” was known, its speed, its altitude, and more.
  • If any of the multiple systems on the plane that could be turned off were turned off that, in itself, would have yielded data. Which system was turned off first? How long between turning off systems? Where was the plane when the systems were turned off?
  • Why didn’t ground controllers attempt to contact the plane when systems were turned off, particularly when we now know for certain that other systems were on and it was now known that the plane was in flight?
  • A real investigation would outline what was known, who knew it, when they knew it and why they failed to behave in a manner consistent with procedure, consistent with common sense and inconsistent with criminal complicity in a major act of terrorism.

This last list includes hundreds of people in dozens of nations. The crime they can now be investigated for involves the disappearance and assumed murder of hundreds of people.

Why does no one seem to care?

Gordon Duff is a Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War that has worked on veterans and POW issues for decades and consulted with governments challenged by security issues. He’s a senior editor and chairman of the board of Veterans Today, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/03/23/neo-flight-370-another-us-conspiracy/

Interesting. I still wonder about those 4 passengers who checked in but didn’t board.


How Egypt is Stopping the Next “Syrian War”

$
0
0
The West’s next proxy war is being stopped before it starts in Egypt.

 

Photograph: Cairo, Egypt. Tarek Wajeh/Almasry Alyoum/EPA

March 25, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci) – The unprecedented sentencing of over 500 Muslim Brotherhood members to death in Egypt for their role in the attack, torture, and murder of an Egyptian policeman, is the culmination of a lighting fast, all encompassing security crackdown across the pivotal North African Arab nation. The move has created a chilling effect that has left the otherwise violent mobs of the Muslim Brotherhood silent and the streets they generally sow their chaos in, peaceful and empty.

The New York Times reported in its article, “Hundreds of Egyptians Sentenced to Death in Killing of a Police Officer,” that:

A crowd gathered outside a courthouse in the town of Matay erupted in wailing and rage on Monday when a judge sentenced 529 defendants to death in just the second session of their trial, convicting them of murdering a police officer in anger at the ouster of the Islamist president. Here in the provincial capital just a few miles away, schools shut down early, and many stayed indoors fearing a riot, residents said.

But the crowds went home, and soon the streets were quiet.

The move by the Egyptian courts has attracted the predictable condemnation of the US State Department. The Washington Post’s article, “Egyptian court sentences 529 people to death,” stated:

The United States was “deeply concerned, and I would say actually pretty shocked,” about the mass death sentences, said Marie Harf, a State Department spokeswoman. “It defies logic” and “certainly does not seem possible that a fair review of evidence and testimony, consistent with international standards,” could have been conducted over a two-day period, she said.

While the US continues to feign support for the government in Cairo, it was fully behind the Muslim Brotherhood-led regime of Mohamed Morsi, its mobs in the streets, and the networks of NGOs inside Egypt supporting and defending their activities.

The most recent of these NGOs on display is the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR) cited by the above mentioned New York Times article which claimed:

“We have never heard of anything of this magnitude before — inside or outside of Egypt — that was within a judicial system as opposed to a mass execution,” said Karim Medhat Ennarah, a researcher at the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights who specializes in criminal justice.

 

“It is quite ridiculous,” he said, arguing that it would be impossible to prove that 500 people each played a meaningful role in the killing of a single police officer, especially after just one or two short sessions of the trial. “Clearly this is an attempt to intimidate and terrorize the opposition, and specifically the Islamist opposition, but why would the judge get so deeply involved in politics up to this point?”

EIPR is funded by among others, the Australian Embassy in Cairo, and carries out the same familiar role that other Western-funded NGOs did during the “Arab Spring” in 2011 – the covering up of the opposition’s violence and atrocities, and the leveraging of “human rights” to condemn the subsequent security crackdowns carried out in return by the state.

How Egypt Got Here

Egypt’s current turmoil is a direct result of the 2011 so-called “Arab Spring.” While nations like Libya lie in ruins with the “revolution” a “success” and the Libyan people now subjugated by pro-Western proxies, and Syria as continues to fight on in a costly 3 year conflict that has cost tens of thousands of lives, Egypt has taken a different path.


When violent mobs began inching Egypt toward violence of Libyan and Syrian proportions, the Egyptian military, who has been the primary brokers of power in Egypt for decades, bent with the winds of change. Hosni Mubarak was ousted from power and the military tolerated the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood itself into power. However, before they did so, they laid the groundwork for its eventual undoing.

The military leadership bid its time patiently, waiting for the right moment to unseat the Brotherhood and swiftly shatter its networks politically and militarily. It was a masterstroke that has so far saved Egypt from the same fate suffered by other nations still burning in the chaos unleashed by the “Arab Spring.”

Egypt’s Internal Crisis is Driven by External Meddling and Interests

Image: Protests in Egypt.

In January of 2011, we were told that “spontaneous,” “indigenous”uprising had begun sweeping North Africa and the Middle East in what was called the “Arab Spring.” It would be months before the West’s media would admit that the US had been behind the uprisings and that they were anything but “spontaneous,” or “indigenous.” In an April 2011 article published by the New York Times titled, “U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings,” it was stated:

“A number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region, including the April 6 Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and grass-roots activists like Entsar Qadhi, a youth leader in Yemen, received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington.”

The article would also add, regarding the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED):

“The Republican and Democratic institutes are loosely affiliated with the Republican and Democratic Parties. They were created by Congress and are financed through the National Endowment for Democracy, which was set up in 1983 to channel grants for promoting democracy in developing nations. The National Endowment receives about $100 million annually from Congress. Freedom House also gets the bulk of its money from the American government, mainly from the State Department. “

Far from simply capitalizing or “co-opting” genuine unrest, preparations for the “Arab Spring” began as early as 2008. Egyptian activists from the now infamous April 6 movement were in New York City for the inaugural Alliance of Youth Movements (AYM) summit, also known as Movements.org.

There, they received training, networking opportunities, and support from AYM’s various corporate and US governmental sponsors, including the US State Department itself. The AYM 2008 summit report (page 3 of .pdf) states that the Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, James Glassman attended, as did Jared Cohen who sits on the policy planning staff of the Office of the Secretary of State. Six other State Department staff members and advisers would also attend the summit along with an immense list of corporate, media, and institutional representatives.

Shortly afterward, April 6 would travel to Serbia to train under US-funded CANVAS, formally the US-funded NGO “Otpor” who helped overthrow the government of Serbia in 2000. Otpor, the New York Times would report, was a “well-oiled movement backed by several million dollars from the United States.” After its success it would change its name to CANVAS and begin training activists to be used in other US-backed regime change operations.

The April 6 Movement, after training with CANVAS, would return to Egypt in 2010, along with UN IAEA Chief Mohammed ElBaradei. April 6 members would even be arrested while awaiting for ElBaradei’s arrival at Cairo’s airport in mid-February. Already, ElBaradei, as early as 2010, announced his intentions of running for president in the 2011 elections. Together with April 6, Wael Ghonim of Google, and a coalition of other opposition parties, ElBaradei assembled his “National Front for Change” and began preparing for the coming “Arab Spring.”

Clearly then, the “Arab Spring” was long planned – and planned from abroad – with activists from Tunisia and Egypt on record receiving training and support from the West so that they could return home and sow unrest in a region-wide coordinated campaign.

An April 2011 AFP report would confirm this, when US State Department’s Michael Posner would admit that tens of millions of dollars had been allocated to equip and train activists 2 years ahead of the “Arab Spring.”

The Muslim Brotherhood’s role was hidden in plain site. While the Western media focused on the more presentable “pro-democracy” leaders it had trained and put at the head of the mobs in Tahrir Square, it was the Muslim Brotherhood’s large membership that filled the rest of the square. They were also responsible for launching armed attacks across Egypt leading to the “revolution’s” 800+ death toll.

Image: Mohamed Morsi – hardly a “hardline extremists” himself, he is the embodiment of the absolute fraud that is the Muslim Brotherhood – a leadership of Western-educated, Western-serving technocrats posing as “pious Muslims” attempting to cultivate a base of fanatical extremists prepared to intimidate through violence the Brotherhood’s opposition. Failing that, they are prepared to use (and have used) extreme violence to achieve their political agenda.

Egyptians quickly became distrustful of the protest’s leadership, particularly ElBaradei who’s ties to Western interests were uncovered and led to his swift fall from influence. The protest movement lacked the political machinery to actually fill the void their movement had created. Once again, the West turned to the Muslim Brotherhood – and the Western-educated Mohamed Morsi for results.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Resurrection

The Muslim Brotherhood is a faux-theocratic sectarian extremist movement – a regional movement that transcends national borders. It is guilty sowing decades of violent discord not only in Egypt, but across the Arab World and it has remained a serious threat to secular, nationalist states from Algeria to Syria and back again.

Image: Backlash against the Brotherhood. Despite the Muslim Brotherhood’s political success, it represents a violent, loud, minority that is quietly opposed by the vast majority of not only Egyptians, but Arabs across North Africa and the Middle East. Its high level of organization, immense funding provided by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and even the West, including Israel, allows it to perpetuate itself in spite of its unpopularity, while its violent tactics allow it to challenge dissent.

Today, the Western press decries Egyptian and Syrian efforts to curb these sectarian extremists, particularly in Syria where the government was accused of having “massacred” armed Brotherhood militants in Hama in 1982. The constitutions of secular Arab nations across Northern Africa and the Middle East, including the rewritten Syrian Constitution, have attempted to exclude sectarian political parties, especially those with “regional” affiliations to prevent the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda affiliated political movements from ever coming into power.

And while specter of sectarian extremists taking power in Egypt or Syria may seem like an imminent threat to Western (including Israeli) interests – it in reality is a tremendous boon.

Morsi himself is by no means an “extremist” or an “Islamist.” He is a US-educated technocrat who merely posed as “hardline” in order to cultivate the fanatical support of the Brotherhood’s rank and file. Several of Morsi’s children are even US citizens.

Despite a long campaign of feigned anti-American, anti-Israeli propaganda during the Egyptian presidential run-up, the Muslim Brotherhood had joined US, European, and Israeli calls for “international” intervention in Syria. Egypt had also broken off diplomatic relations with Syria which were only restored after Morsi was finally ousted from power.

The Syrian Connection

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Syrian affiliates have been funneling weapons, cash, and foreign fighters into Syria to fight Wall Street, London, Riyadh, Doha, and Tel Aviv’s proxy war.

In Reuters ‘May 6, 2012 article titled, “Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood rise from the ashes,” it stated:

“Working quietly, the Brotherhood has been financing Free Syrian Army defectors based in Turkey and channeling money and supplies to Syria, reviving their base among small Sunni farmers and middle class Syrians, opposition sources say.”

The Muslim Brotherhood was nearing extinction in Syria before the latest unrest, and while Reuters categorically fails in its report to explain the “how” behind the Brotherhood’s resurrection, it was revealed in a 2007 New Yorker article titled, “The Redirection” by Seymour Hersh.

The Brotherhood was being directly backed by the US and Israel who were funneling support through the Saudis so as to not compromise the “credibility” of the so-called “Islamic” movement. Hersh revealed that members of the Lebanese Saad Hariri clique, then led by Fouad Siniora, had been the go-between for US planners and the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.

Hersh reports the Lebanese Hariri faction had met Dick Cheney in Washington and relayed personally the importance of using the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria in any move against the ruling government:

“[Walid] Jumblatt then told me that he had met with Vice-President Cheney in Washington last fall to discuss, among other issues, the possibility of undermining Assad. He and his colleagues advised Cheney that, if the United States does try to move against Syria, members of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood would be “the ones to talk to,” Jumblatt said.”

The article would continue by explaining how already in 2007, US and Saudi backing had begun benefiting the Brotherhood:

“There is evidence that the Administration’s redirection strategy has already benefitted the Brotherhood. The Syrian National Salvation Front is a coalition of opposition groups whose principal members are a faction led by Abdul Halim Khaddam, a former Syrian Vice-President who defected in 2005, and the Brotherhood. A former high-ranking C.I.A. officer told me, “The Americans have provided both political and financial support. The Saudis are taking the lead with financial support, but there is American involvement.” He said that Khaddam, who now lives in Paris, was getting money from Saudi Arabia, with the knowledge of the White House. (In 2005, a delegation of the Front’s members met with officials from the National Security Council, according to press reports.) A former White House official told me that the Saudis had provided members of the Front with travel documents.
Jumblatt said he understood that the issue was a sensitive one for the White House. “I told Cheney that some people in the Arab world, mainly the Egyptians”—whose moderate Sunni leadership has been fighting the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood for decades—“won’t like it if the United States helps the Brotherhood. But if you don’t take on Syria we will be face to face in Lebanon with Hezbollah in a long fight, and one we might not win.””

It was warned that such backing would benefit the Brotherhood as a whole, not just in Syria, and could effect public opinion even as far as in Egypt where a long battle against the hardliners was fought in order to keep Egyptian governance secular. Clearly the Brotherhood did not spontaneously rise back to power in Syria, it was resurrected by US, Israeli, and Saudi cash, weapons and directives. It was similarly resurrected in Egypt as well.

Syria’s Chaos is a Warning of Egypt’s Possible Future

Even as the world begins to reap what was sown in Syria through the intentional resurrection of the Muslim Brotherhood by the West and the extremist factions that the Brotherhood has on record facilitated, it appears that there has been no collective lesson learned by the general public, including many claiming to be “geopolitical experts.”

The same destabilization, step-by-step, is being carried out in Egypt once again through the Muslim Brotherhood. Legions of terrorists are waiting in Egypt’s Sinai region for the Brotherhood to sufficiently lay the groundwork in Egypt’s population centers so that they can be destroyed, just as has been done in Syria. And behind it all is the West, desperately trying to dislodge the Egyptian military from power with a combination of unpalatable carrots and broken sticks.

US corporate-funded policy think tanks like the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, have expressed America’s desire to see the Egyptian military cut down to size, and removed entirely as a political power broker, just as has been done in Turkey. In fact, the West is so proud of what has been accomplished in Turkey, it refers to the removal of any independent military institution around the world and its replacement by an easily manipulated proxy regime, the “Turkish model.”

The Endowment’s post titled, “Egypt Can’t Replicate the Turkish Model: But It Can Learn From It,” best articulates this desire by stating:

In Egypt, a number of younger and more moderate Islamists have pointed to Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) as a source of inspiration, citing legal reform, successful economic management, and electoral victories as models to be emulated. In some policy quarters, Turkey has even been presented as an overall model for the Arab world—a characterization which derives largely from its seemingly unique ability to couple secular democracy with a predominantly Muslim society.

And that (emphasis added):

The party has not only increased its support in secular businesses and the middle classes, but also rendered the idea of a powerful state—which commands the economy as well as the lives of Muslims through Islamic principles—an obsolete one. For the most part, the AKP has maintained the basic constitutional and institutional structure of the Turkish state, but has enacted constitutional amendments for EU harmonization and curtailed the power of the military. In other words, Islam and democracy have become compatible in Turkey under neoliberalism.

Saudi Arabia’s Al Monitor, a clearinghouse for Western political spin, states clearly in its article, “Egypt’s Second Revolution a Blow to Turkey,” that (emphasis added):

The Egyptian army considers Turkey’s Justice and Development Party to be a political rival and an ally of the Muslim Brotherhood. Moreover, the Egyptian military establishment views the Turkish model of limiting the power of Turkey’s military establishment by means of an alliance with Washington as a model that threatens the presence and interests of the Egyptian army.

Another US corporate-funded think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), cites another, older “Turkish model,” the one where the Turkish military was wielding power before being reduced in size and influence – and blames it for the downfall of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. In his post, “In Egypt, the Military Adopts Turkish Model to Check Morsi,” Stephen Cook of the CFR wrote:

Shortly after the fall of Mubarak, Field Marshal Tantawi asked for a translation of Turkey’s 1982 constitution, which both endows Turkish officers with wide-ranging powers to police the political arena and curtails the power of civilian leaders. In the June 17 decree, the military hedged against a Morsi victory by approximating the tutelary role the Turkish military enjoyed until recently.

US foreign policy think tanks and editorial columns are awash with comparisons between Egypt and Turkey and how Egypt can be transformed through the elimination of its politically influential military into a proxy state more like Turkey – a NATO member permanently bent to the will of Wall Street, London, and the European Union.

How far the West is willing and able to go in Egypt to achieve this reordering and along what path they will do it is still difficult to tell. How far they are willing to go in general can be seen in the rubble strewn streets of Syria’s smoldering, decimated cities. With the addition of the Muslim Brotherhood to the formula, and considering their role in Syria’s continued destruction, Egypt’s military-led government may be accused of using excessive force – but with Egypt many times larger than Syria in terms of population and land area, and considering the devastation and loss of life that has occurred in Syria, the alternative – appeasement, temporary accommodation, denial, or inaction – is utterly unacceptable.

Image: While the Western media attempts to portray the military coup as an antiquated feature of failed states, it has been and always will be an essential “check and balance” of last resort.

In Egypt, the military initially bent with the force of foreign-funded political destabilization as part of the “Arab Spring,” bid its time, and when the moment was right, overthrew the West’s proxy-regime of Mohamed Morsi. It did so with decisive and unyielding security operations to permanently uproot the regime’s power, and stem any attempts of triggering armed conflict backed by the West to reclaim power. The “Egyptian Model” may prove instructive for Thailand’s current political crisis.
The swift decisiveness the Egyptian military has acted with against what is clearly a foreign-driven, armed, dangerous subversion of Egypt’s stability serves as a model for other nations to follow, including Thailand which is facing down the prospect of widespread terrorism carried out by extremists loyal to the US-backed, crumbling regime of Thaksin Shinawatra. It is a model that had Syria or Libya followed, tens of thousands of lives could have been spared, and the lives of millions more left unscathed by years of bloodshed and war.

.
A great review article with updates!
.
Related
.

“Deutsche Bank-er Explains Why He Committed Suicide”

$
0
0

The dismal list of financial executive deaths has recently increased to 11 in the last few months. Speculation has surrounded many of these deaths (and suicides) as to the reasoning; none more than the first – William Broeksmit, an executive who worked in Deutsche Bank’s risk function and advised senior leadership who hanged himself in his South Kensington home in late January. However, as the WSJ reports, we now know why this poor man felt compelled to take his own life: he was “anxious about various authorities investigating areas of the bank where he worked” (and yes, we are well aware of the grammatical and temporal impossibilities suggested by this article’s title).

Via WSJ,

While a Deutsche Bank spokeswoman said Tuesday that “Bill was not under suspicion of wrongdoing in any matter,” according to statements read at a coroner’s inquest in London, the former senior executive at Deutsche Bank, who committed suicide in late January, was concerned about investigations into the German bank.

 

William Broeksmit, an executive who worked in the bank’s risk function and advised the firm’s senior leadership, was “anxious about various authorities investigating areas of the bank where he worked,” according to written evidence from his psychologist, given Tuesday at an inquest at London’s Royal Courts of Justice.

Mr. Broeksmit, an American born in Chicago who retired from Deutsche Bank in February 2013, hanged himself at his London home on Jan. 26, according to a statement read at the coroner’s inquest.

A close colleague of Deutsche Bank co-Chief Executive Anshu Jain, Mr. Broeksmit was expected to be appointed the bank’s chief risk officer in 2012, but the move was vetoed by BaFin, the German financial regulator, because of a lack of suitable experience, people familiar with the matter said at the time.

Ms. Wilcox, citing written medical evidence from Mr. Broeksmit’s doctor and psychologist, said the executive was sleeping badly during the summer of 2013, and his “self-esteem had been greatly undermined.” He was also trying to stop smoking cigars and his alcohol intake was high, according to a medical report.

Here are all the recent untimely financial professional deaths we have witnessed in recent months:

1 – William Broeksmit, 58-year-old former senior executive at Deutsche Bank AG, was found dead in his home after an apparent suicide in South Kensington in central London, on January 26th.

 

2 – Karl Slym, 51 year old Tata Motors managing director Karl Slym, was found dead on the fourth floor of the Shangri-La hotel in Bangkok on January 27th.

 

3 – Gabriel Magee, a 39-year-old JP Morgan employee, died after falling from the roof of the JP Morgan European headquarters in London on January 27th.

 

4 – Mike Dueker, 50-year-old chief economist of a US investment bank was found dead close to the Tacoma Narrows Bridge in Washington State.

 

5 – Richard Talley, the 57 year old founder of American Title Services in Centennial, Colorado, was found dead earlier this month after apparently shooting himself with a nail gun.

 

6 – Tim Dickenson, a U.K.-based communications director at Swiss Re AG, also died last month, however the circumstances surrounding his death are still unknown.

 

7 – Ryan Henry Crane, a 37 year old executive at JP Morgan died in an alleged suicide just a few weeks ago. No details have been released about his death aside from this small obituary announcement at the Stamford Daily Voice.

 

8 – Li Junjie, 33-year-old banker in Hong Kong jumped from the JP Morgan HQ in Hong Kong this week.

 

9 – James Stuart Jr, Former National Bank of Commerce CEO, found dead in Scottsdale, Ariz., the morning of Feb. 19. A family spokesman did not say whatcaused the death

 

10 – Edmund (Eddie) Reilly, 47, a trader at Midtown’s Vertical Group, commited suicide by jumping in front of LIRR train

 

11 – Kenneth Bellando, 28, a trader at Levy Capital, formerly investment banking analyst at JPMorgan, jumped to his death from his 6th floor East Side apartment.

One can only wonder how many of these unfortunate deaths were due to the similar “investigation” concerns.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-25/deutsche-bank-er-explains-why-he-committed-suicide

Deutsche Bank will find out more but won’t tell anyone about it. Nothing to see here.


We Kill Children in Abortions, Why Are We Shocked When Hospitals Incinerate Them for Heat?

$
0
0

by John Smeaton | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 3/25/14

 

burningwaste2Last night a Channel 4 Dispatches programme highlighted the disposal of human remains from aborted and miscarried babies in NHS hospitals.

Paul Tully, General Secretary of Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), has commented to the media on the revelations in the programme. Here’s what he said:

“We welcome the efforts of those who have highlighted these appalling practices, but we insist that the answer is not as simple as having a new code of practice or better ways of treating babies’ remains. We must stop killing babies like these by abortion and then we will know how to respect the dead.

“The way we treat those who have died is important, yet parents who lose a baby by miscarriage or abortion are rarely consulted over the disposal of the baby’s remains.

“The reluctance to consult families in these situations is undoubtedly linked to our barbaric abortion policies, even if sometimes after late abortions everyone admits that the baby is a baby and tries at least to respect his or her remains.

There are two issues at stake here. One is the feelings of the parents, and the other is the respect due to the dead – in this case a dead unborn child, killed by abortion or who has died as a result of spontaneous miscarriage.

“Some argue that because very early spontaneous miscarriage is not marked by social ceremony, and may be unrecognised by the mother herself, this indicates that the human embryo is not a person. This approach is used to argue for an arbitrary time before which the unborn are treated as non-persons.

“In fact the unborn has all the essential attributes of a person from conception, even though some characteristics take months or years to develop fully. If we feel differently about the unborn, it is simply because he or she is a stranger – someone we have not yet met or developed affection for.

“Until we reject the abortion culture and learn to honour all mothers – including expectant mothers and bereaved mothers – the sickening consequences of aborting over 500 babies every day will continue to resurface and unsettle us.”

LifeNews.com Note: John Smeaton is the director of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), a leading pro-life group in the UK. Photo credit Oregon Right to Life.

http://www.lifenews.com/2014/03/25/we-kill-children-in-abortions-why-are-we-shocked-when-hospitals-incenerate-them-for-heat/

.

It’s ok to kill babies and consider them medical waste, but not ok to dispose of them as medical waste? You can’t have it both ways. Why would it be totally unacceptable, if it’s not a human being?  Nazi ovens and eugenics – makes me sick to my stomach.


Spain: Femen Disrupt Pro-Life Rally: Chant “Pro-Life is Genocide, Go to Hell”

$
0
0

by Carole Novielli | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 3/25/14

The English version of Spain’s The Local is reporting that five activists belonging to controversial feminist group Femen have staged a protest against an anti-abortion demonstration in Spain’s capital by baring their breasts and painting skulls on their faces.

The five Femen members shouted out “Pro-life is genocide” as they interrupted the anti-abortion march in Madrid’s emblematic Puerta del Sol square on Sunday morning.

topless3

 

As usual, the feminist activists appeared topless as part of their protest modus operandi, but this time they also painted their faces and upper bodies in black and white to replicate a skeleton.

Bystanders vented their anger towards the women as police officers arrested the repeating offenders for public indecency.

Organizers of the ‘Sí a la vida’ demo, “Yes to life” in English, claimed as many as 100,000 people took part in the march.

topless4

 

 

 

 

 

 

“We can’t allow 300 children to die on a daily basis,” Lorena Díaz, spokesperson for Spain’s Right to Live organization, told Spanish news agency Europa Press.

Read more at The Local

According to Femen: In Madrid on March 23, 2014 FEMEN sextremists confronted pro-lifers with white bengals warning that women will “not allow more deaths for illegal abortions.”

FEMEN writes,

“No more victims because anti-choice fascism!

Screaming “Pro-vida Genocida!” (Pro-life genocide) dead

Sextremists personifyed the revenge of all women raped by Gallardon’s law.

Fascists groups like HazteOir, or catholic groups from Europe and Spain, youth organizations neo-nazis.

Our bodies belong to us!

Pro-life is pro-death!

YOUR MORALS, MY DEATH. PRO-LIFE GO TO HELL!

LifeNews Note: Carole Novielli is the author of the blog Saynsumthn, where this article originally appeared.

http://www.lifenews.com/2014/03/25/topless-feminists-disrupt-pro-life-rally-chant-pro-life-is-genocide-go-to-hell/

.

Mediachecker-Femen

Abortion is Killing – Science says so

.

“I think it’s going to take peoples hearts changing and when that happens abortion will become unthinkable.”


Revealed: Visitor logs show full extent of Pierre and Pamela Omidyar’s cozy White House ties

$
0
0

By   On March 23, 2014

 

omidyar-white-house

 

[White House officials] know who to call at The Times, they know who to call at The Post. With us, who are they going to call? Pierre? — Jeremy Scahill, First Look Media

.

Last month, Pando’s Mark Ames reported that Omidyar Networks, the philanthropic organization operated by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar and his wife Pamela, had co-invested with the US government in opposition groups that played a key role in organizing Ukraine’s recent revolution.

Unsurprisingly, given Omidyar is now running First Look Media, a journalistic enterprise dedicated to exposing US government wrongdoing around the world, some FLM staffers and supporters rushed to cry foul over our report.

USA Today’s Rem Rieder argued that Omidyar Network’s investments were a non-issue as they had been disclosed years earlier. Other supporters pointed out that, just because the Omidyars co-invested with the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and appeared to share their policy on regime change in Ukraine, didn’t mean that they had actively collaborated with the government on investment strategy.

This narrative of Pierre Omidyar being politically and financially separate from the Obama White House is a vitally important one. In recent weeks, the site’s reporters have taken their fight right to the President’s doorstep with headlines like “The White House Has Been Covering Up the Presidency’s Role in Torture for Years,” claiming that the administration has deliberately withheld thousands of documents relating to the CIA’s role in detention and interrogation of prisoners. Any sniff that First Look’s owner, publisher and chief editorial recruiter has close ties to the White House could undermine the whole premise of the organization.

Speaking to the Daily Beast, documentary maker Jeremy Scahill mentioned his boss explicitly when comparing the cozy relationship between other news organizations and the White House. First Look, he insisted, would be different

I think that the White House, whether it is under Republican or Democrat, they pretty much now [sic] who they are dealing with. There are outlets like The Daily Beast, or The Huffington Post that have risen up in the past decade, but they are very quickly just becoming part of the broader mainstream media, and with people that have spent their careers working for magazines or newspapers or what have you, and the White House believes they all speak the language on these things. With us, because we want to be adversarial, they won’t know what bat phone to call. They know who to call at The Times, they know who to call at The Post. With us, who are they going to call? Pierre? Glenn?”

Scahill’s question is a good one — and it’s also very easy to answer: If the White House has a problem with First Look, it’s a pretty safe bet they’ll pick up the phone and call Pierre Omidyar.

After all, according to records made available under Obama’s 2009 transparency commitment, Omidyar has visited the Obama White House at least half a dozen times since 2009. During the same period, his wife, Pamela Omidyar, who heads Omidyar Network, has visited 1600 Pennsylvania Ave at least four times, while Omidyar Network’s managing partner, Matthew Bannick, has visited a further three. In all, senior Omidyar Network officials made at least 13 visits to the White House between 2009-2013. (In fact the logs indicate that, on several occasions, Omidyar visited the White House more than once in the same day. To avoid unfairly inflating the numbers, I’ve removed same-day duplicates from all the totals cited in this article.)

To put the numbers in perspective, Omidyar’s six visits compare to four visits during the same period by NBCUniversal chief Stephen Burke, two by Fox News boss Roger Ailes, two by MSNBC’s Phil Griffin, one by New York Times owner Arthur O Sulzberger, and one each by Dow Jones’ Robert Thompson, Gannett/USA Today’s Gracia Martore and Omidyar’s fellow tech billionaire turned media owner, Jeff Bezos.

omidvisit

 

In fact Pando could only find three media titans who had earned more White House visitor loyalty points than Omidyar: CNN’s Jeffrey Zucker (7), former Post owner Donald Graham (9) and queen of all media, Arianna Huffington (11). According to records, neither The Daily Beast’s Tina Brown or Barry Diller were invited at all — nor, by the way, was Rupert Murdoch.

Even compared to other major tech leaders, Omidyar is a special case. LinkedIn’s Reid Hoffman visited the White House twice during the same period, as did Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg. Omidyar also beat out Marissa Mayer (5), Eric Schmidt (5), John Doerr (4), Dick Costolo (3), Evan Williams (3), Jack Dorsey (2), Larry Ellison (1) and poor old Reed Hastings who wasn’t invited at all, until this week. According to records, other people not important enough to make it through the door include Pando investors Marc Andreessen and Peter Thiel.

(In fairness, it should be noted that Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg (7) clocked at least one more visit than Omidyar — and on one occasion, records show, even scored herself a ride home to San Francisco on Air Force One. Which, I suppose, is what happens when Larry Summers is your mentor.)

[MC Note:  According to the Air Force it costs $181,757 per hour to keep Air Force One in the air. ]

Hell, even compared to famous investors, Omidyar holds his own: positioned, as he is, squarely between Warren Buffett (5) and George Soros (7).

The raw numbers can only tell half the story, though. What’s much more interesting — and potentially far more troubling for the owner of a soi-disant “adversarial” publication trying to paint itself as a stranger to the White House — is who Omidyar and his wife/co-founder met during their visits to the White House.

Again, the public data is our friend: From it we learn that, yes, Pierre Omidyar had many of the kind of meetings you might expect from the founder of eBay: For example, in 2009, he met with Beth Noveck, then Obama’s deputy chief CTO, who now works in a similar role for the UK government. That same year, Omidyar further cemented his relationship with the Obama White House when the President personally appointed him to sit on the President’s Commission on White House Fellowships, helping to nominate young future leaders to gain “experience working at the highest levels of the federal government.” (Other appointments to the Commission that year included Tom Brokaw and General Wesley Clark.) [MC Note - > Wesley Clark headed the NATO onslaught in Serbia]

Dig deeper in the visitor logs, however, and we find several meetings involving both Pierre and Pamela Omidyar which apparently have less to do with the former’s tech credentials than with Omidyar Network’s desire to shape US foreign policy.

On 16th April 2010, Pamela Omidyar visited the White House for four hours to meet with Gayle Smith, Senior Director of the National Security Council in charge of “global development” and “democracy.”

The National Security Council, which the president heads, was created by Truman in 1947, under the National Security Act, to act as a liaison between government and the military/intelligence community. This included providing a bridge between the government and the CIA, which was created in the same year under the same act. More recently the NSC, which oversees the “kill lists,” has been implicated in the targeted assassinations of American citizens and was responsible for controlling the “high value detainee interrogation group,” which was criticized for its inhumane treatment of prisoners in 2013 by the Guardian’s… Glenn Greenwald. More recently, the NSC was involved in the decision not to declassify thousands of CIA documents, prompting outrage from reporters at Omidyar’s First Look Media.

While we can’t know what was discussed at the meeting – not least because a spokesperson for Pierre and Pamela Omidyar declined to comment for this story – it’s possible that Pamela Omidyar and Smith touched upon Omidyar Network’s future international investment plans. After all, before joining the NSC, Smith worked as chief of staff at USAID.

In any case, the following month, another senior official from Omidyar Network was invited to the White House. This time, it was Matthew Bannick, Omidyar Network’s managing partner who made the trip to DC. According to White House records, the meeting was between “BANNICK, MATTHEW J” and “POTUS” — that is, the President of the United States himself.

Records show that Bannick and the President met in the Roosevelt Room for about an hour. That was apparently not enough time to conclude whatever business Omidyar Networks wished to transact with the White House, as Bannick returned to Pennsylvania Ave the very next day to meet the First Lady. The following day, Bannick was back for a third meeting, this time with Peter Rundlet, then deputy assistant to the President. A little over two weeks later, Pamela Omidyar also swung by to meet Rundlet.

These meetings clearly were very fruitful — at least for Rundlet. Just three months after meeting Pamela Omidyar and Matthew Bannick, Rundlet decided to quit his job at the White House and go to work as “vice president for investments” for a humanitarian group called “Humanity United.” The founders of that group? Pierre and Pamela Omidyar.

After Rundlet’s departure, the Omidyars and Bannick stayed away from the White House for almost a year, until suddenly in 2011 they were back with a vengeance. In June and July of 2011, Pierre and Pamela Omidyar and Matthew Bannick have a total five entries on the White House visitor log, including another visit with the President, on 18th July, this time in his private residence. It was two months after that meeting that Omidyar Network announced its co-investment with USAID in Ukraine’s Center UA—which described itself as an “active participant” in the Ukraine revolution earlier this year—as well as in pro-democracy groups in Nigeria, Chile and India.

The last recorded visit by Omidyar to the White House was in December 2012, just ten months before it was revealed that he had hired Glenn Greenwald, keeper of Edward Snowden’s secrets, to launch a site exposing the misbehavior of the US government. Since then, according to all the records Pando has been able to find, no representative of Omidyar Networks has visited the White House, nor have any more co-investments between Omidyar and USAID been announced publicly.

But the key word there is publicly. Just because Omidyar is now painting himself as an outsider, doesn’t mean he’s any less close to his old friends in Washington.

In February of this year, the Intercept published one of its first reports, bylined to Greenwald and Scahill, exposing the involvement of the NSA in foreign drone attacks — a program overseen by the National Security Council. That same month USAID official Sarah Mendelsen testified before the House Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs about the importance of the US government’s ongoing partnerships with private donors and NGO including, specifically, Omidyar Network…

“In 2012, USAID launched “Making All Voices Count: A Grand Challenge for Development,” a $55 million public-private partnership with UKAID, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Omidyar Network and the (Soros) Open Society Foundations to support innovation and research that will enable citizens to engage with their governments and improve the ability of governments to listen and respond to their citizens. The first round of challenge grants received over 500 applications proposing innovative ways to use technology to enable citizens to better use public information. [MC Note->rather than information one could use the word "doctrine"] We are working closely with our colleagues at the State Department to support local civil society efforts to prevent new restrictions from being enacted. And we are leading a process, together with other governments, private donors, and non-governmental organizations to explore new innovative ways to support civil society around the world.

The political trajectory of a country is ultimately a U.S. national security issue, and as such, we are intimately involved in advancing U.S. national security interests. Several of the countries we will discuss today [including Ukraine] are of high national security interest to the United States, and they are also in the category of requiring very long-term democracy efforts.

Accordingly, the investments we make in these closed societies will pay dividends in the future. We know this to be true in many countries where we have worked, where institutions and processes we supported became leading elements ushering in more democratic and accountable governments. That is the story of millions of dollars of USAID investments in Serbia, Georgia, and now Burma.

Serbia, Georgia and Burma are, of course, all places where USAID-backed pro-US color revolutions were successful. And now we have Omidyar Network investing in USAID’s newest overseas programs, “advancing U.S. national security interests” in USAID’s words.

With Omidyar Networks refusing to comment, we can’t know the full details of what Pierre and Pamela Omidyar discussed with the President and other top White House officials before they co-invested with USAID to bring democracy (and revolution) to foreign shores. And we can’t know if, for all of Jeremy Scahill’s snark, those same White House officials have attempted to use their relationship with the Omidyars to influence First Look’s reporting.

(I emailed Scahill for comment on this article [48+ hrs ago] but he had not responded by press time. A request for comment from First Look Media [48+ hrs ago] received no response by press time. A request for comment from the White House [12+ hrs ago] received no response by press time.)

What we do know for sure is this: for all of First Look’s bluster about Omidyar’s outsider status, his relationship to the White House is at least as close as any other media tycoon. Moreover, his direct business relationship with the Obama administration, through Omidyar Network’s co-investments with USAID and his donation of hundreds of thousands of dollars to the World Bank to promote micro-lending in emerging markets, adds another layer of coziness which most of the biggest media barons don’t even enjoy.

* * * *

And yet…

If Pierre Omidyar’s willingness to whitewash his establishment background and recast himself as a fiercely independent thorn in Obama’s side comes as a shock to First Look readers (or staffers), it probably shouldn’t. After all, Omidyar is the undisputed king of the fake origin story.

In a now deleted article, Wired UK editor David Rowan busted eBay for completely fabricating its folksy beginnings in order to secure favorable press coverage. The main characters in the fairytale: Pierre and Pamela Omidyar…

It was the warm, smalltown story of a corporate giant’s humble beginnings that enticed Business Week, The Wall Street Journal, even the fact-obsessed New Yorker. When Pam Wesley wanted to boost her collection of Pez sweet dispensers, her fiance, Pierre Omidyar, built a website for her to trade them. That website grew to be the huge online auction house eBay, one of the internet gold rush’s few success stories – even though, in the words of the company’s PR chief, Mary Lou Song, it began simply “as kind of a love token”.

.
It was a touching tale, recounted in endless profiles on both sides of the Atlantic, with only one flaw: it was a lie. As Song admits in a new book by Adam Cohen, The Perfect Store: Inside eBay, she invented the story five years ago to generate publicity for an otherwise dull tech company. “No one wants to hear about a 30-year-old genius who wanted to create a perfect market,” Song confesses. So she constructed what corporate PRs call a “creation myth”, and hoodwinked some of the world’s most respected reporters.

According to Rowan, some of those hoodwinked reporters were “furious” when they discovered the truth about Pierre and Pamela Omidyar: that the couple had allowed staffers to spread a romantic, completely false creation myth about eBay in order to conceal their real, purely market-driven motives for going into the auctions business.

With the stakes so much higher this time around, we can only hope that American journalists don’t fall for the same stunt twice.

[Illustration by Brad Jonas for Pando]

* * * *

Editor’s note: All figures cited above are taken from the publicly available White House Visitor Access Records, as of November 2013. Pando has removed any duplicate same-day records from the totals. We have also taken steps to filter out erroneous records as well as attempting to verify possible misspellings and name variations (where doubt remains, we have removed records from the count). We’ll update this article to reflect any subsequent errors we discover. Note that the publicly available records do not include any visits which the administration considers sensitive on national security grounds, nor do they include all visits to the Vice President’s residence. More on the types of visits not included in the public data can be found here.

Update: An earlier version of this post spelled Beth Noveck’s name as Novech.

http://pando.com/2014/03/23/revealed-visitor-logs-show-full-extent-of-pierre-and-pamela-omidyars-cozy-white-house-ties/

.

Humanity United is an Omidyar Foundation/Investor in the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC). His wife Pam sits on the board of the CICC -

“The Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC) includes 2,500 civil society organizations in 150 different countries working in partnership to strengthen international cooperation with the ICC; ensure that the Court is fair, effective and independent; make justice both visible and universal; and advance stronger national laws that deliver justice to victims of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide”

http://mediachecker.wordpress.com/2013/10/18/the-international-criminal-court/

.

Almost half of the donations to the ICC are from western governments.

Related:

Pierre Omidyar co-funded Ukraine revolution groups with US government, documents show

Snowden, Greenwald, Omidyar – PayPal/e-Bay, and the NSA Documents (follow-up)

eBay founder to launch independent mass-market news venture

The International Criminal Court



Michelle Malkin’s response to Beyonce & Michelle Obama’s attempt to ban the word “bossy”

$
0
0

Posted by: David Rufful  March 15, 2014

 

Sasha, I feel your pain. If I had to travel across China with Michelle Obama my face would look like that too…

Michelle Obama

Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg, Beyonce, Victoria Beckham and first lady Michelle Obama want the word “bossy” banned because it’s a devastating act of gender discrimination to be called bossy. Here’s Michelle Malkin’s perfect response:

 

Michelle Malkan

“The key to female empowerment doesn’t lie with wheedling word police. It lies with girls and women finding the courage to speak and act on their beliefs and principles without regard to their detractors’ opinions.

My message to girls, including my own 13-year-old daughter, is not: “Ban Bossy.” My message is: Be Bossy. And that means first being the boss of you….

Sandberg and her friends think “bossy” (which she calls “the other b-word”) is worth ginning up an entire media campaign over — even enlisting White House officials and cabinet members. But women with unpopular ideas and opinions face a daily barrage of unprintable c-words, f-words, s-words and w-words that are far worse. If we launched media campaigns to ban every ugly word that comes our way, we wouldn’t have time to get anything else done.

It is a blessing to be able to make a living exercising the First Amendment. It would be an absolute waste of those precious free speech rights for any woman to pull her punches for fear of, gasp, an adjective.

Girls, here’s the truth about the Ban Bossy campaign: It’s being spearheaded by a privileged group of elite feminists who have a very vested interest in stoking victim politics and exacerbating the gender divide. They actually encourage dependency and groupthink while paying lip service to empowerment and self-determination. They traffic in bogus wage disparity statistics, whitewashing the fact that what’s actually left of that dwindling pay gap is due to the deliberate, voluntary choices women in the workforce make. This includes which industries women enter, how long they stay, what levels they attain, and when and how they decide to start a family.

The supposedly abhorrent unequal outcomes that “progressive” women want to eradicate don’t always come down to sexism. It’s not just a gender thing. It’s a freedom thing.

I want young girls and young ladies to know that whatever adversity you might face, there has never been a better time to be an American woman. You have more educational, economic and entrepreneurial opportunities than generations of women before you. You have more flexibility, more choices and more ways to spread your messages and make yourself heard than ever before.

Don’t just be bossy. Be your own boss. When I started two Internet companies, I didn’t ask for anyone’s permission. I didn’t let anyone stop me. I didn’t wallow in self-pity about the odds stacked against me or the derision that greeted me. And when times were tough, I didn’t blame The Man. I woman-ed up.

Gals, you don’t need the sensitivity brigade to protect you from criticism or attacks. You need to learn from them and rise above them, not censor them. And if anyone tells you to tone it down, do the opposite: Crank it up and don’t look back. That’s an order!”

http://youngcons.com/michelle-malkins-perfect-response-to-beyonce-and-michelle-obamas-failed-attempt-to-ban-the-word-bossy/

.

It appears to be all about control – who controls the verbage we speaketh – where’s the first amendment or freedom in that?  Or are they getting ready for Hillary Clinton running for president where no one will be permitted to speak out against her else they ‘re called sexist? After all racism worked well for Obama. One word against him and you were/are called a racist.

.

And a few weeks later Belgium banned sexism: .

March 26, 2014 Belgium just banned sexism from the internet -> “Belgium has thus made the expression of sexism anywhere on the Internet a crime.”

.

Coincidence?


Belgium just banned sexism from the internet

$
0
0

By
On March 26, 2014

internet-sexism-illegalBelgium’s just banned sexism from the Internet!

Hurrah! The vile social cancer is banned from our lives forever. Mind you, I’m not entirely sure how successful said banning is going to be.

I need to explain a little about how the law affects there here Internet. It’s not where something is said, composed, hosted, written or uploaded that provides us with the relevant legal jurisdiction. It’s where something is read that does. So if Belgium has made sexism illegal then all of us (not that any of us us would ever be sexist) can be guilty of said sexism if we are read in Belgium.

It’s Volokh over at the Washington Post that spots the original law:

Penalization of Sexism

For the purposes of this Act, the concept of sexism will be understood to mean any gesture or act that, in the circumstances of Article 444 of the Penal Code, is evidently intended to express contempt for a person because of his gender, or that regards them as inferior, or reduces them to their sexual dimension, and which has the effect of violating someone’s dignity.

Anyone found guilty of [such conduct] will be punished with a prison sentence of one month to one year, and a fine …, or one of these penalties alone….

Of course, as above, we can all celebrate this imposition of a sexism free society. And the original tipster makes the interesting observation that under Belgian law accusing someone in public of a crime, if they have not been convicted of that crime, is in itself a crime. So calling someone out as being sexist is now a crime if they’re not already been tried and found guilty.

But there’s another problem with this and it concerns the way that libel law works. And yes, it is clear that this sort of law will work along the same lines as those about libel and defamation with respect to legal jurisdictions. The problem being that what defines where someone is libelled (or here, where they have been sexist) is where is the reader? No, not where is the writer, the printer, the publisher, host or anything else. Dow Jones lost a case in Australia on this very point. They published in New York, it was read by someone in Australia who claimed it libelled him and the Oz courts agreed, this was something that should be heard in the Oz courts, not those of New York.

This also isn’t some strange new thing about the Internet. It’s been a long standing feature of English libel law that it matters not one whit where a magazine or book was published. If it arrives (even against the author’s or publisher’s wishes) in England then it is as potentially libellous as anything else published in England. This was the basis of the Rachel Ehrenfeld case. It might be true that one’s native courts will not enforce any judgement, it might well be that no one is ever going to be extradited to Belgium to face charges of sexism. But that is, formally, how the law actually works.

That someone in a jurisdiction reads or observes something that is libellous, sexist or whatever, means that the offence itself has been committed in that jurisdiction. Thus by making sexism a crime, or at least the expression of it a crime, in Belgium, Belgium has thus made the expression of sexism anywhere on the Internet a crime.

Excuse me but I’ve got to go clean up various comment sections….

[illustration by Brad Jonas for Pando]

http://pando.com/2014/03/26/belgiums-just-banned-sexism-from-the-internet/

.

“Belgium has thus made the expression of sexism anywhere on the Internet a crime.”

.

March 15, 2014 Michelle Malkin’s response to Beyonce & Michelle Obama’s attempt to ban the word “bossy” (sexism)

March 26, 2014 Belgium just banned sexism from the internet

.

Coincidence?


Google distances itself from the Pentagon, stays in bed with mercenaries and intelligence contractors

$
0
0

By
On March 26, 2014

google-in-bed-w-mercenaries-n-military

“The United States government spends about $80 billion a year on information technology, making it the largest consumer of technology projects in the world.” —New York Times

.

With all the hubbub about NSA spying, Google’s PR people really want you to know how separate the company is from America’s military-industrial complex.

Earlier this week, Google made a big show of refusing DARPA funding for two robotics manufacturers it purchased, even though the companies themselves were financed with plenty of DoD cash. It’s a nice gesture, and one that was welcomed by those who want Silicon Valley to be free of government interference.

Unfortunately, while a crowd-pleasing announcement is good for Google’s public image, it does nothing to change the company’s long and ongoing history of working closely with US military and surveillance agencies.

Last week, I detailed how Google does much more than simply provide us civvies with email and search apps. It sells its tech to enhance the surveillance operations of the biggest and most powerful intel agencies in the world: NSA, FBI, CIA, DEA and NGA — the whole murky alphabet soup.

In some cases — like the company’s dealings with the NSA and its sister agency, the NGA — Google deals with government agencies directly. But in recent years, Google has increasingly taken the role of subcontractor: selling its wares to military and intelligence agencies by partnering with established military contractors. It’s a very deliberate strategy on Google’s part, allowing it to more effectively sink its hooks into the nepotistic, old boy government networks of America’s military-intelligence-industrial complex.

Over the past decade, Google Federal (as the company’s D.C. operation is called) has partnered up with old school establishment military contractors like Lockheed Martin, as well as smaller boutique outfits — including one closely connected to the CIA and former mercenary firm, Blackwater.

This approach began around 2006.

Around that time, Google Federal began beefing up its lobbying muscle and hiring sales reps with military/intelligence/contractor work experience — including at least one person, enterprise manager Jim Young, who used to work for the CIA. The company then began making the rounds, seeking out partnerships with with established military contractors. The goal was to use their deep connections to the military-industrial complex to hard sell Google technology.

And it worked.

The Washington Post summed up the success of Google’s new approach in 2010:

When Director Michael Bradshaw came to Google Federal about four years ago, he visited all the big government contractors in the federal market, going door to door to promote partnerships.

“A lot of people didn’t even know Google Federal existed,” Bradshaw said. “I think we were more of a novelty in their mind.”

Fast forward four years, and many traditional government contractors are clamoring to work with the company. Both sides sees advantages in the collaborations. Despite Google’s widespread commercial success, the partnerships help the Internet giant establish a beachhead in another lucrative market.

Who are some of these “traditional government contractors?” The Washington Post article mentioned Lockheed Martin. But there are plenty of others.

Looking at the non-classified government contracting database, we can see Google partnering with Northrop Grumman Space and Mission Systems Corp and tag-teaming the DoD for a $1-million contract to install a “webs Google Earth plug-in.” Northrop Grumman is one the top three of biggest arms manufacturers in the world. It designed the B-2 Stealth bomber, builds and outfits nuclear-powered submarines and nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. It is also intimately involved with all sorts of NSA surveillance operations, and was part of a team that designed Trailblazer — a multibillion-dollar mass Internet, e-mail and telephone surveillance system that was such a massive failure that it eventually had to scrapped. [MC->the NSA's own people had designed one for a pittance which worked much better but Google's Trail Blazer was chosen by Alexander - this is our tax-money]

In 2008, Google paired up with Eyak, a boutique military contractor based in Alaska, for a $2.735m DoD contract to install Google Earth. Like all good military contractors, Eyak’s execs were recently involved in $28 million bribery and kickback scheme.

You can check out Google’s other subcontracting gigs over at the Federal Procurement Data System — which range from just a few thousand dollars to multiple millions.

But Google partners for classified military/intelligence contracts are, unsurprisingly, not so easy to pin down.

From Google’s previously classified 2003 work order for the NSA, we know that in some cases the company is forbidden to disclose information or even admit the existence of contracts without authorization from the US government.

Still, Google’s “Enterprise Government” page yields a few hints. On it, Google lists some of the companies it partners with to deliver products and services to the government.

Among them is California-based mega military contractor/quasi-government intel agency SAIC. According to Tim Shorrock’s book, Spies For Hire, half of SAIC 40,000+ employees hold security clearances — many of them having come straight from the NSA:

“Indeed, so many NSA officials have gone to work at SAIC that intelligence insiders call the company ‘NSA West.’ SAIC also does a significant amount of work for the Central Intelligence Agency, where it is among the top five contractors.”

Another, lesser-known contractor stands out as well: Blackbird Technologies, a secretive hi-tech military contractor with strong ties to the CIA and the infamous mercenary firm Blackwater.

Wired’s Noah Shachtman — one of the few journalists to write about the company — describes Blackbird as “Manhunt Inc” because the company’s flagship product is a sophisticated locator bug that’s used for the covert “tagging, tracking and locating” of suspected terrorists/persons of interest out in the field. These bugs don’t just track someone’s location, but surveil their cellular communication, their WiFi traffic and can apparently be used to extract intel wirelessly from devices.

Here’s Wired in 2011:

Virginia-based Blackbird Technologies, has become a leading supplier of equipment for the covert “tagging, tracking and locating” of suspected enemies. Every month, U.S. Special Operations Command spends millions of dollars on Blackbird gear. The U.S. Navy has a contract with Blackbird for $450 million worth of these so-called “TTL” devices. “Tens of thousands” of Blackbird’s devices have been sent to the field, according to a former employee. And TTL is just one part of the Herndon, Virginia firm’s multifaceted relationship with the special operations, intelligence and traditional military services.

“Blackbird has hit the trifecta: They’ve got people to sell, people to perform the job, and people to keep it all secret,” says one well-placed Defense Department contractor. “Everybody keeps their distance.”

Blackbird offers other spy gadgets, too — and not just for governments, but high net worth individuals as well. One of them is an encrypted locator/distress beacon for the 0.001%. It’s called the Panther™:

Panther permits isolated, missing, or threatened VIPs to send an encrypted distress signal and be tracked anywhere in the world. These handheld, battery-powered, personnel locating and emergency signaling units provide both cellular- and satellite-based communications paths and are designed for ease of use.

Pretty badass, right?

Much of Blackbird’s tech involves geo-tracking, which makes the company a natural partner for Google’s military-grade Google Earth software — developed as it was in close collaboration with the US military and intelligence community.

But Blackbird is very likely involved in more than just passive observation. Several former Blackbird employees told Wired’s Noah Shachtman that Blackbird routinely went “outside the wire.” Meaning the company put armed operatives into battle zones on special operations, including search and rescue missions to extract missing/captured soldiers.

A military-surveillance tech contractor putting armed operatives in the field? Hmm… that would would seem to put the company in a totally different class of contractor — somewhere closer to the likes of mercenary security firm Blackwater/Xe/Academi.

Indeed, Blackbird appears to be closely connected to Blackwater and its founder Eric Prince. In 2010, Jeremy Scahill reported in “the Nation” that Blackbird was essentially an outgrowth of Blackwater:

I have heard from sources that over the past two years, Prince has shifted some of Blackwater’s clandestine work to companies he does not own but which are run by former Blackwater executives or allies. Among these are Blackbird Technologies, which now employs former Blackwater executive J. Cofer Black…

Now serving as Blackbird’s vice president, Cofer Black is a high-level spook with a long and distinguished career.

He served six foreign tours in the CIA clandestine service, mostly in Africa and the Middle East. Cofer was CIA station chief in Sudan in the 1990s, while Osama bin Laden had his base of operations there. He was was also the head of the CIA’s Counterterrorist Center in the lead-up to Sept 11 attacks. After failing to stop the attackers, he was put in charge of hunting down Al-Qaida, and then became infamous as the architect of the CIA’s “extraordinary rendition” program, which abducted and tortured terrorist suspects at top secret CIA run black sites.

In 2005, Cofer parlayed his three decades of CIA work into a lucrative gig with Blackwater, overseeing intel gathering for governments and private sector clients. In 2007, a year before moving from Blackwater to Blackbird, Cofer got a cushy gig providing foreign intelligence assessments on the Middle East to Mitt Romney’s failed 2008 presidential campaign.

Blackbird is an insanely secretive company — and proud of it. What we do know is that the guys behind Blackbird don’t just work to neutralize the “enemy” abroad. They have no qualms about using their military spook technology against American civvies: neutralizing the “enemy” at home on behalf of powerful corporate interests. And by enemy, I mean journalists, labor unions, political activists and whistleblowers.

In 2011, Wired reported that key Blackbird executives planned on buying a 20% stake in HBGary, a notorious private spook outfit that worked on behalf of Bank of America and the US Chamber of Commerce to spy on and sabotage anti-corporate activists:

[In 2009], the founders of Blackbird set up a separate venture capital firm, Razor’s Edge Fund. By 2010, it had attracted 26 investors and $21 million dollars. One of the planned investments: a 20 percent stake in the security firm HBGary, before the company became infamous for its proposals to smear WikiLeaks and its supporters.

HBGary did more than spy on WikiLeaks and its supporters. It was part of a group of companies — which included (Pando investor, via Founders Fund) Peter Thiel’s military intel contractor Palantir — hired by the US Chamber of Commerce to run a surveillance, sabotage and smear campaign against reporters, labor unions, environmental activists and progressive political groups. Internal emails — obtained after Anonymous hacked the HBGary’s server and released the company’s internal correspondence — revealed that HBGary was compiling and circulating detailed dossiers on its “targets,” including their photos and identities of their children and spouses.

It’s not surprising that Blackbird wanted to buy a chunk of HBGary. Until it was hacked and humiliated by Anonymous, HBGary was a promising intel company, doing work not for both private sector and military/intelligence clients. Among other things, it pitched to help build a DARPA system to detect insider threats to classified military and intelligence computer networks, allowing would-be leakers like Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden to be identified and caught before they even made a move. As fate would have it, Blackbird was one of the contractors who submitted a bid on this contract as well.

What does this all mean?

Google’s leadership has publicly been very critical of government surveillance in the wake of Edward Snowden’s NSA leaks. Google chairman Eric Schmidt called it “outrageous” and registered a personal complaint with President Barack Obama. The company even helped launch a Silicon Valley organization ostensibly dedicated to promoting government surveillance reform.

Of course, Google execs can gesture for the cameras all they want, and they can pretend to distance the company from the military-industrial complex. But Google’s partnerships with military contractors like SAIC, Northrop Grumman and Blackbird is just more more evidence of how snugly the company is in bed with the US military-surveillance complex.

SAIC and Northrop Grumman in particular have a long history of working with the NSA — designing, building and running the very same domestic surveillance programs that Google is supposedly against. With questionable partners like these, it’s no surprise that Google had no qualms about peddling its services to a controversial police surveillance center in Oakland explicitly designed to spy on protesters and labor activists.

Most other big tech companies — including Microsoft, Oracle, IBM and Amazon — are also deeply in bed with our military-surveillance state. What makes Google stand out is the sheer amount of data and information that the company has on the American people.

It’s important that we — the millions of people who trust our data to Google every day — understand what Google is: It isn’t a traditional Internet service company. It’s not even, as mild cynics are fond of saying, an advertising company. Google is a whole new type of beast: a global for-profit surveillance company with a mission to funnel as much of our daily life in the real and online world through its servers. The purpose: to track, analyze and profile us as deeply as possible — who we are, what we do, where we go, who we talk to, what we think about — and then constantly figure out ways to monetize that intelligence.

Google is ubiquitous enough in civilian life, which makes it the last company you’d want getting in bed with corrupt private intelligence contractors and shady quasi-merc outfits like Blackbird.

We asked Google, SAIC and Blackbird for comment on this piece (~2+ hours ago) but none had replied by press time. We will update this piece if we hear back.

Want to know more? Check out Pando’s Surveillance Valley coverage

[illustration by Brad Jonas for Pando]

http://pando.com/2014/03/26/google-distances-itself-from-the-pentagon-stays-in-bed-with-mercenaries-and-intelligence-contractors/

.

Related:

Google Bankrolled By a Branch of the CIA (and MI6…)

Google reveals sharp rise in requests for removal of political content (Turkey leads the pack)

YouTube co-founder hurls abuse at Google over new YouTube comment enforcements

Google+ has a different agenda than facebook or twitter; it’s The Matrix

Alliance of Youth Movements: State Dept., CFR, Google, AT&T…

Google’s Illuminati Themed New Year’s Eve (also Sydney, Australia)

Bill Gates: Monsanto and Eugenics

Ukraine: The Corporate Annexation. “For Cargill, Chevron, Monsanto, It’s a Gold Mine of Profits”

Bill Gates, Monsanto, and Eugenics: A Corporate takeover of global agriculture It’s “Gods Work”

Pierre Omidyar co-funded Ukraine revolution groups with US government, documents show


Iran: Pentagon’s and New York Times’ “Scary Iranian PR Ship” Turns Out to Be Movie Prop

$
0
0

By Scott Lucas – March 25, 2014 09:24

Iran: Pentagon’s and New York Times’ “Scary Iranian PR Ship” Turns Out to Be Movie Prop

 

PHOTO: An actual US aircraft carrier

The headline in The New York Times last Thursday promised intrigue and a bit of threat: “Iranian Ship, in Plain View but Shrouded in Mystery, Looks Very Familiar to U.S.

So did the opening paragraphs of the story, fed to The Times’ Washington correspondent Eric Schmitt by US military and intelligence officials:

Iran is building a nonworking mock-up of an American nuclear-powered aircraft carrier that United States officials say may be intended to be blown up for propaganda value.

Intelligence analysts studying satellite photos of Iranian military installations first noticed the vessel rising from the Gachin shipyard, near Bandar Abbas on the Persian Gulf, last summer. The ship has the same distinctive shape and style of the Navy’s Nimitz-class carriers, as well as the Nimitz’s number 68 neatly painted in white near the bow. Mock aircraft can be seen on the flight deck.

Schmitt reassured readers that this was not a “real” Iranian ship ready to challenge the US Navy — “Intelligence officials do not believe that Iran is capable of building an actual aircraft carrier” — but his military sources played up the drama and Iran’s devious plans:

“Based on our observations, this is not a functioning aircraft carrier; it’s a large barge built to look like an aircraft carrier,” said Cmdr. Jason Salata, a spokesman for the Navy’s Fifth Fleet in Bahrain, across the Persian Gulf from Iran. “We’re not sure what Iran hopes to gain by building this. If it is a big propaganda piece, to what end?”

Whatever the purpose, American officials acknowledged on Thursday that they wanted to reveal the existence of the vessel to get out ahead of the Iranians.

Navy and other American intelligence analysts surmise that the vessel, which Fifth Fleet wags have nicknamed the Target Barge, is something that Iran could tow to sea, anchor and blow up — while filming the whole thing to make a propaganda point, if, say, the talks with the Western powers over Iran’s nuclear program go south.

Well, the Iranian model is part of a drama, albeit not one that is supposedly worrying the Pentagon — and the story isn’t that much of a mystery.

If The New York Times had come to EA, rather than the Pentagon, we could have eased their minds while deflating their headline: the “aircraft carrier” is a movie prop — one that we have known about for almost a year.

In April 2013, Iranian websites announced that a joint Iranian-Canadian production was going to tell the story of Iran Air 655, the civilian jet shot down in July 1988 by the USS Vincennes, killing all 290 passengers and crew.

Co-directed by Nader Talebzadeh and Paxton Winters, the film would include Iranian and American actors

Sean Ali Stone had met Talabzadeh when the actor travelled to Iran in September 2011:

US officials and analysts forgot or were unaware of all this — or were confident that Schmitt would not discover the truth as they put out their scarier tale:

“It is not surprising that Iranian military forces might use a variety of tactics — including military deception tactics — to strategically communicate and possibly demonstrate their resolve in the region,” said an American official who has closely followed the construction of the mock-up….

“The system is often too opaque to understand who hatched this idea, and whether it was endorsed at the highest levels,” said Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Schmitt wrote of his efforts to check the US claims, “Iranian Navy officials could not be immediately reached for comment as the country prepared to celebrate its New Year festivities.”

Schmitt did not say if he had tried to confirm the story with The Times’ Tehran correspondent, Thomas Erdbrink.

Other US media raced to get Washington’s officials and politicians for their own versions of the story. Representative Eliot Engel told USA Today, “We don’t really know what it means, but I for sure don’t trust the Iranians. It’s some kind of a ruse and whatever they are up to, it’s no good.”

CNN announced that it had “commercial satellite images” and brought out its unnamed US official to declare, “While the purpose of the fake carrier is unknown, Iran may be planning to destroy it in a propaganda move.”

Meanwhile, Iranian outlets — some of whom have long been noted for their propaganda and scare stories — reveled in The Times’ conversion of the movie ship into a menace. Mashregh News laughed at the “quandary of America’s security and intelligence officials”. Alef put on a more serious face:

The issue has turned into a good excuse for another wave of hype against Iran. Without any proof or real basis, the western media have jumped again to paint a negative picture of Iran.

The Times and Schmitt — and their Pentagon and intelligence sources — don’t seem bothered, however. They have not stepped back from their original story:

For now, Navy analysts and American intelligence officials say they are not unduly concerned about the mock ship. But the fact (is) that the Iranians are building it, presumably for some mysteriously bellicose purposes.

http://eaworldview.com/2014/03/iran-pentagons-new-york-times-scary-iranian-pr-ship-turns-movie-prop/

.

I get a kick out of seeing the NYSlimes with egg on their face. heh


Anti-NSA Reps. Are Being Intentionally Cut Out Of Debate On Surveillance Bill

$
0
0

NSA “cheerleaders” in Congress divert spying bill away from opponents in “highly unusual” legislative move

Steve Watson
March 27, 2014

Lawmakers who approve of the NSA’s bulk collection of Americans’ communications data have been accused of intentionally sidelining those in Congress who oppose the practice by re-routing the new surveillance bill through the Intelligence committee rather than the Judiciary Committee.

The legislation, which would see significant alterations to the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, will now be primarily overseen by the chamber’s Intelligence Committee, a move some say represents a deliberate circumventing of vocally critical representatives in the Judiciary Committee, which has long presided over the intelligence community’s broad legal authority.

“Many of our members are pretty outraged,” one staffer said. “They’re trying to undermine this committee’s clear jurisdiction, as the debate we’re having is on civil liberties and constitutional rights.”

The aide added that the move puts NSA reform in “the hands of its biggest cheerleaders.”

 

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, on the Judiciary Committee, issued a statement yesterday saying he was “deeply concerned that today, for what appears to be the first time ever, a FISA reform bill has been sent first to the House Intelligence Committee.”

“The House Judiciary Committee must assert its critically important role with regard to Fisa reform efforts so as to ensure that our constitutional liberties are properly protected as we seek to promote national security,” Nadler added.

“The House Judiciary Committee must be the primary Committee at the center of this reform.” Nadler argued.

Another Judiciary congressional aide said it was “new and different that a bill that amends Fisa wouldn’t come to us first.”

The aide also made it clear that the surveillance bill, authored by Republican Mike Rogers of Michigan and Democrat Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland, does not go far enough to restrict the NSA’s powers.

“The committee will take the bill introduced by Mike Rogers and Dutch Ruppersberger into consideration, but it’s clear that reforms to the bulk telephone data collection program need to go further than those made in their bill.” the aide said.

Several ciritics have suggested that the bill could, in fact, make it EASIER for the NSA to operate in the same way as it has been.

It is feasible now that the Rogers/Ruppersberger bill could go to the House floor without going before the Judiciary Committee at all.

The bill broadly aligns with President Obama’s recommendation to have telecommunications companies retain the data, rather than the NSA. Rogers and Ruppersberger are both staunch advocates of the NSA, and have declared support for the NSA’s bulk data collection.

A further reason for cutting out the Judiciary Committee is that it is a stronghold of support for the USA Freedom Act, a direct rival bill that goes further to reign in the NSA. The bill is supported by vocal NSA critics including Republican Rand Paul, and Democrats Ron Wyden and Mark Udall.

The USA Freedom Act would see the end of NSA bulk data collection, and put into place more protective provisions, including the need for prior approval from a judge, should the government try to force phone companies to turn over customer data. It would also see the implementation of a threshold requirement of relevance to an ongoing investigation to secure such approval, as well as limitations of some of the NSA’s other programs, including surveillance of overseas Internet traffic.

In short, the Judiciary Committee bill goes much further than the Intelligence Committee bill, leading many staffers to believe that this is the reason for the attempted re-routing of the issue away from the judiciary panel. Infowars.com

This isn’t over…


Viewing all 820 articles
Browse latest View live