OpEds

JOHN ROBLES, voiceofrussia.com

The government of the United States of America has crossed a red-line in the sentencing of US Army Private First Class Bradley Manning to 35 years in prison. The government has proven that it has ceased to be legitimate and does not uphold the rule of law. By failing to prosecute those guilty of the war crimes exposed by Mr. Manning the US Government continues to flaunt international laws and norms, as war crimes are a crime against humanity, and it continues to selectively and prejudicially prosecute those who expose egregious illegality while protecting criminals who have committed crimes against all of humanity.

The record has shown that the United States of America has become a rogue authoritarian police state. The global military expansion of NATO, massive economic and political manipulation, the control and manipulation of information (in particular through its operations on the World Wide Web), illegal wars of aggression, all of the illegal actions associated with its “War on Terror” and its wanton disregard for international law and democratically accepted norms point to a state corrupted by absolute power and attempting to annex the entire planet and force all countries to be pliant surrogates. This is also underlined by its war against whistleblowers and journalists.

Mr. Manning is just one individual, but his persecution and unjust torture and confinement, for revealing war crimes, is beyond the pale and must not be allowed to stand. His sentencing proves that the United States Government has become a government unto itself, which refuses to listen to the voice of its own people, and egregiously prosecutes the innocent while protecting the worst kind of criminal known to mankind, namely those who commit crimes during a time of war under the color of their respective flags.

This is a call to the international community, to legal scholars, policy makers, the heads of international bodies, the leaders of all countries the world over (even those who have forsaken their own sovereignty to sheepishly comply with all U.S. demands) and in particular to all countries which are members of the United Nations.
This global call is necessary because the U.S. Government refuses to abide by international laws, as well as its own constitution, and has failed to be an instrument of its own people. It has shown itself to be unable to monitor and control itself and is dangerously and alarmingly growing more and more out of control.

Declaration:
I would propose that the international community demand that the United States of America cease the following practices and form a truly independent body to ascertain that these practices are stopped or are in the process of being remedied and that those responsible are being brought to justice. Until such is thus I propose sanctions to be implemented which are listed later. The United States of America must immediately cease:

1. The illegal profiling, suppression, arrest, detention, repression and brutality against peaceful protestors and the stifling of dissent in all forms. This would include freeing all political prisoners and the payment of restitution.
2. All questionable police, military and security service actions under the color of the “War on Terror” against innocent civilians, journalists and anyone else the state deems to be a threat. As well, the payment of restitution to all parties who have been falsely imprisoned, detained or harassed under terrorism statutes. This would not apply to real terrorists of course.
3. The highly illegal practice of extra judicial execution by drone or in special operations or by any other means that they are being carried out regularly by order of the U.S. president and his agents.
4. The practice of using drones for illegal surveillance, military operations where there is not an equal theater of operations, and for carrying out extra-judicial executions. This would include paying reparations to all of those who have suffered or been adversely affected as a result of the wanton killing of innocents that the U.S. drone war has brought about.
5. The practice of aggressive war under any guise, be it preventive, humanitarian or otherwise. This would include an end to the ability to go to war unilaterally or with the agreement of “allies” and would only allow the United States to go to war in a situation where there is a full United Nations mandate. This includes “secretly” funding, supporting or training warring parties on either side of any international or internal conflict. These practices must be ceased immediately.
6. The internal and now international practice of racial or other profiling by police, military, special services and other government bodies and compensation to those who have been unjustly victimized by such.
7. The practices of racial and other discrimination in, housing, health care, education, politics, banking, freedom of movement and freedom of residence within the United States and its territories.
8. The abolition of corporate donations to political parties and widespread reforms to make elections transparent and democratic. This includes an abolition of the two-party system, fair and equal opportunities for third parties, an end to harassment and even illegal detention of third party candidates and equal access for third parties to election resources including media and government funds.
9. Collecting, storing and using information on the world’s citizens,
international bodies, sovereign countries and international organizations and entities through the internet and by other illegal and secret means.
10. The practice of state sponsored executions and the death penalty, in keeping in line with the highest international norms and standards.
11. Discrimination against and pay repatriations to native American Indians and the ancestors of slaves.
12. All operations at the illegal offshore extra-judicial Guantanamo Bay Cuba detention facility and the freeing and repatriation of all of those held there.
13. The practice of pre-arrest or preventive arrest and detention.
14. The practice of secret arrest and detention and the denial of Habeas Corpus rights to all persons regardless of who they may be.
15. State sponsored racism. This includes segregation, grants, education and all forms of exclusion where race plays a factor. These practices must no longer be decided or regulated by the white minority or the power elites.
16. All practices that unfairly limit or infringe on worker’s rights, pensions, health care, education, housing and all social spheres.
17. All wars and occupations on invaded lands. This includes paying reparations and rebuilding infrastructure in invaded countries. This would go back to the invasion of Yugoslavia.
18. Promoting and attempting to coerce states and peoples to accept and adopt what for them are foreign and unacceptable concepts, such as equating homosexual relations to marriage, and other religious, cultural or social concepts that are endemic to the United States.
19. All war profiteering in countries that have been invaded by the United States or its surrogates. This includes charging countries to rebuild infrastructure which has been destroyed by U.S. aggression. Thus the United States must rebuild what they have destroyed at their own cost. This would also prohibit private U.S. bodies from profiteering in such rebuilding.
20. All operations and actions to subvert and over-throw the government of Syria and to depose its elected head of state.
21. Funding and supporting terrorists and all such destabilizing operations including fomenting revolutions, funding insurgents and overthrowing governments.
22. All persecution of journalists, whistleblowers and truth seekers including Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, Jeremy Hammond, Edward Snowden hacktivists, and all individuals, organizations and countries that have in any way supported them. This includes their immediate release.
23. The practice of illegally kidnapping and renditioning to the United States the citizens of third countries. This would include the freeing of such victims as Victor Bout and Constantin Yaroshenko.
24. Meddling in the internal affairs of sovereign nations and attempting to pressure foreign governments and organizations through any and all means. This includes compensation to all who have suffered because of overzealous U.S. persecution of individuals such as Julian Assange and Edward Snowden.
25. Manipulating, stealing and otherwise unfairly obtaining the resources of sovereign nations, including “all” resources from human to energy.
26. Torture and illegal detention in any way shape or form and in any location in, or outside of U.S. territory, by the U.S. Government and/or its agents be they public, private or foreign.
27. Monopolizing and controlling all international and extra-U.S. segments of the World Wide Web and committing spying and espionage through public worldwide channels.
28. The global expansion of NATO and all unilateral military formations on a worldwide level.
29. Protecting those guilty of war crimes, crimes against humanity, torture, aggressive war, illegal detention and extra-judicial executions. This would include their immediate arrest.
30. All practices which lead to the continued imprisonment of native Americans and which contribute to genocide. This includes reparations to native Americans.
31. Obfuscating the events of 9-11. This includes a true and independent international investigation of the events of 9-11-2001.
32. Cease the detention of all persons being held under secret arrest and indefinitely since 9-11. Reports say almost 9,000 people are currently being held.
33. Using terrorism as a pretext to get away with everything under the sun.
34. An immediate closure of the U.S./NATO military base on the territory of Kosovo, Serbia.

I am not a legal scholar nor an official and the aforementioned and consequent suggestions are in no way connected to the Russian Government. They are my views and recommendations as a fair minded and concerned citizen of the world and a journalist who has been documenting and attempting to bring to light all of the aforementioned crimes for years now. You may take the above points as food for thought. They are chiefly directed at those able to affect policy or bring about change but if you agree with them I would ask you to spread this document around.

Sanctions:
Until the previous points are remedied or steps are taken by the U.S. to remedy them I propose the following sanctions:

The prohibition by all states to allow U.S. military bases to be based in, or military operations to be carried out of, their countries. This includes allied countries and surrogates including those who are NATO members or members of other military alliances.

A prohibition on all U.S. corporations, persons and entities both public and private from profiteering or taking advantage of resources, rebuilding operations or any other area in which they may obtain gains in any war zone, conflict zone or area that has been the subject to U.S. invasion or internal meddling. Including Iraq, Afghanistan, the former Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, Iran and all other countries in which the U.S. has had a hand in destabilizing or in destroying the country or its government.

Economic, travel, trade, political, communications and military sanctions as determined by international bodies to be applied justly and fairly against those guilt of the aforementioned affronts to humanity.

Given all of the previous points and the current climate in the United States I would also call on all independent and just countries of the world to change their stance and policies on allowing U.S. citizens to obtain asylum and protection in their countries. Asylum should be granted to all of those seeking rule of law and who are exposing the illegality of the U.S. Government. It should also be granted to any member of the U.S. Government, military, or even special services who refuses to participate in illegality or attempts to expose it or stop it. Journalists, citizens, activists and all others who have suffered at the hands of the U.S. Government or due to the actions of its agents or surrogates should also be protected, including victims of racial, religious and other discrimination. Those whose conscience also leads the to cease to be willing to support the U.S. Government in any way shape or form should also be eligible for asylum if they wish to leave the United States.

The sentencing of Bradley Manning is a sign to all who would dare to expose illegality, it is designed to terrorize anyone who would speak out. I propose we make it a Red Line they have crossed, one which will force us (the world community) to end their illegality.

The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached robles@ruvr.ru
—John Robles

Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_08_21/Manning-conviction-a-line-the-US-should-not-have-crossed-5820/

Greg Mankiw, Harvard economist but, in our view,  chiefly a corporate whore and propaganda asset for the status quo. Mankiw was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under George W. Bush. In 2006, he became an economic adviser to Mitt Romney and continued during Romney’s 2012 presidential bid.[1][2] He is a conservative[3][4][5][6] and he writes a popular blog, ranked the number one economics blog by US economics professors in a 2011 survey. That in itself says something about professional economists today.—Eds

STEPHEN GOWANS, What’s Left

The $1 trillion-plus Iraq and Afghanistan wars were the first US wars since the American Revolution to have been fought without a general tax increase to cover them. Without tax increases to pay for the Pentagon’s ballooning budget, the country’s debt as a percentage of GDP has grown. Since a rise in debt relative to income can’t continue indefinitely without undesirable consequences, politicians are looking for ways to arrest the trend. It’s very likely that the burden of covering the costs of ran-away US military spending will fall upon poor and middle-income Americans. High-profile economists like N. Gregory Mankiw are preparing public opinion for eventual rate hikes, concealing the role played by US war spending in driving up the percentage of debt to GDP, and blaming growing entitlement spending on the need to raise taxes.

Harvard economics professor N. Gregory Mankiw, economic policy adviser to George W. Bush and Mitt Romney, and author of a widely used introductory economics textbook, weighed in this Sunday in The New York Times on the growing ratio of US debt to gross domestic product and what to do about it. [1]

Forget about raising taxes on the wealthy, counselled Mankiw. Instead, stick it to everyone else. Here’s Mankiw’s reasoning:

•    Debt as a proportion of national income is growing “thanks largely to growth in entitlement spending.”
•    If debt to GDP continues to grow, investors will eventually refuse to lend at manageable rates, tipping the United States into a Greek-style financial crisis.
•    The crisis can’t be averted simply by raising taxes on the rich. There just aren’t enough wealthy taxpayers around to make much of a difference. Nor would tax increases on the wealthy be fair. “The current tax system looks plenty progressive,” says Mankiw. “The rich are not…shirking their responsibilities.”
•    Instead, entitlements need to be scaled back and taxes hiked on the vast majority of Americans.

Mankiw presents this as a corrective to too much wishful thinking on middle-class tax rates. But his argument is more snow job than corrective.

Wasteful Military Spending

The former chairman of the council of economic advisers misses the elephant in the room on federal spending: the military and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. According to World Bank figures, from 1999 US military expenditures have steadily increased as a share of national income, rising from 3.0 percent of GDP to 4.7 percent by 2011. [3] New York Times’ reporters Thom Shanker and Elisabeth Bumiller reported last year that the US military budget “has doubled to $700 billion a year since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.” [3] Yes, doubled. If anything is growing, the military is. The Pentagon’s budget is now “the highest in absolute and in inflation-adjusted, constant (for any year) dollars since 1946, the year after the Second World War ended. Adding non-Pentagon defense-related spending, the total may exceed $1 trillion.” [4]

Before anyone says, “Yes, but defense spending had to increase to deal with the threat of al-Qaeda,” doubling the military budget doesn’t stop someone from buying an airline ticket and concealing a bomb in his underwear. Police methods and foreign policy correctives, not stealth bombers and tanks, are needed to deal with terrorist attacks. Besides, whether the spending increase is justified or not, the fact of the matter is that outlays on the military have skyrocketed. That Mankiw fails to mention this is more than a little fishy.

The US defense budget exceeds the combined expenditures of the next 14 highest spenders—China, Russia, the UK, France, Japan, Saudi Arabia, India, Germany, Brazil, Italy, South Korea, Australia, Canada and Turkey. All but two of these countries are US allies. [5] China and Russia are not part of a US-led military alliance. But their combined military expenditures are less than one-third of the Pentagon’s budget. It’s difficult to imagine how hard headed deficit hawks aren’t scolding Washington for its wasteful overspending on defense, unless the professed deficit hawks are using debt as a pretext to argue for cut-backs in programs for poor and middle-income Americans.

The Pentagon’s obesity is largely due to the United States becoming entangled—no, starting—two completely unnecessary and extremely expensive wars: one on Iraq, based on the lie that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and one on Afghanistan, to topple the Taliban who will likely return to power in a negotiated settlement.

Bumiller reported in 2010 that both wars had “cost Americans a staggering $1 trillion to date, second only in inflation-adjusted dollars to the $4 trillion price tag for World War II, when the United States put 16 million men and women into uniform and fought on three continents.” [6] With the war in Afghanistan dragging on at a cost of “about $2 billion a week” [7] another $200 billion has come due since Bumiller tallied up the original $1 trillion price tag. Genuine concern about managing US finances would have long ago led to an end to both wars (not just one), if not complete avoidance of either to begin with.

Taxes were not raised to pay for either war. This is the first time since the American Revolution that Washington hasn’t called upon taxpayers to ante up. [8] The reason Americans haven’t been asked to shell out for these wars is clear. Neither was likely to galvanize Americans to accept sacrifices. So, the only way to get Americans behind them was to fight the wars in a way that allowed the country to avoid “breaking a sweat,” as historian David Kennedy put it. [9]

Many Americans are willing to acknowledge that the wars should never have been fought, but rationalize them by pointing to the supposed good they’ve done (the toppling of Saddam Hussein, improved conditions for women in Afghanistan.) But how accepting will they be when they’re presented with the bill, as they most assuredly will be? Someone will have to pay eventually. The trick for politicians will be to blame the bill on something else. Entitlements come to mind.

The Flat Tax System

If Mankiw ignores the obvious links among rising military expenditures, absent tax increases, and a climbing debt to GDP ratio, he also ignores property, state, excise, and sales taxes, to argue that the wealthy are already paying their fair share, and that “the current tax system looks pretty progressive.” Well, yes, the current federal income tax system does look progressive, and Mankiw would be on target if federal income tax were the only one Americans pay. But they also pay sales taxes, property taxes and more. Factor in all other taxes and the tax system isn’t quite as progressive as Mankiw would have us believe. As Washington Post reporter Ezra Klein noted in September, “Confining the discussion to the federal income tax…makes the tax code look much more progressive than it actually is.” [10]

So, just how unprogressive is the tax system? According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, total taxes in 2011 as a percentage of income were [11]:

•    Top 1% of income earners, 29.0%
•    Bottom 99%, 27.5%

In other words, taking into account all the taxes Americans pay and not just the one Mankiw wants to confine the discussion to, the real tax system is essentially flat. The super-wealthy are paying about the same rate as everyone else. And yes, while the poor pay little if anything in federal taxes, they make up for it in state, local and other levies. Which means that were federal income taxes hiked on the bottom 99 percent, as Mankiw urges, the real tax system would go from flat to regressive.

Who Benefits?

It’s widely believed that taxes on the wealthy are redistributed to the poor, and while some redistribution of tax revenue from wealthy to poor does occur, what’s less widely known, and rarely talked about, is the massive redistribution of tax revenue from the bottom 99 percent to the top one percent. This is clear if we recognize that:

•    The bulk of taxes are paid by the bottom 99 percent (which is why defenders of the current flat tax system, like Mankiw, keep reminding us that hiking taxes on the rich will make little difference to government finances. The heavy lifting is done by poor and middle-income Americans.)
•    A large fraction of tax revenue is used to fund activities the wealthy disproportionately benefit from.

What do federal income taxes pay for?

A large part goes to defense contractors, companies like Lockheed-Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and General Dynamics. The top executives and shareholders of these companies—in other words, the super-rich—make off like bandits in regular times, but have benefited even more handsomely ever since post 9/11 military expenditures doubled. Profits of the top five defense contractors “rose from $2.4 billion in 2002, adjusted for inflation, to $13.4 billion in 2011,” a 450 percent increase. [12]

Another part of US military funding is used to finance US wars. US military interventions almost invariably create profit-making opportunities for the top one percent. For example, then US ambassador to Libya Gene Cretz was positively rhapsodic about the business opportunities that were opened by the US-led (from behind) Nato assault that toppled Muammar Gadhafi, not just petroleum-related but infrastructure contracts too. [13] In the charmed circle of US capitalism, defense contractors reap a bonanza of profits by supplying the Pentagon with arms, which the Pentagon use to destroy infrastructure that US engineering giants like Bechtel rebuild. War can be profitable.

Military and non-military aid to other countries also eats up a sizeable chunk of the federal budget. The bottom 99 percent, who contribute the bulk of funds to these programs, benefit only indirectly, if at all. Instead, their tax dollars are converted into credits, which are doled out to other countries to purchase goods and service from US corporations, the direct beneficiaries. For example, the $3 billion in annual military aid Israel receives travels from taxpayers’ pockets to US defense contractors’ coffers. The arms industry sends military equipment to Israel, with payment for the purchase never leaving the United States. The same kind of arrangement is used to provide economic aid to poor countries. These countries don’t get cash to spend as they see fit. They get credits to spend on American goods and services. There may be benefits to poor and middle-income Americans in job opportunities, but the benefits are disproportionately enjoyed by the top executives and shareholders of the companies on which the credits are spent.

Another sizeable part of US tax revenue goes to purchasers of US debt—the debt that piled up to pay for the wars Washington didn’t want to raise taxes to pay for. Needless to say, poor and middle-income Americans are not major holders of US debt. The super-wealthy are. And super-wealthy bondholders are often the same people who own shares in companies that supply the Pentagon and benefit from new foreign business opportunities that US military interventions secure.

So, no, the tax system isn’t a one-way circuit where the super-wealthy pick up the tab for everyone else’s entitlements, as Mankiw and others would have us believe. Instead, a large part of the tax system’s function is to transfer tax revenues from the bottom 99 percent to activities—foreign aid, military appropriations, wars, and interest on debt—that the top one percent disproportionately benefit from.

Conclusion

The United States has doubled military spending since 9/11, outspending its peer competitors, China and Russia, by more than a factor of three. It has squandered more than $1 trillion on wars that never should have been fought, and continues to waste $2 billion a week on war in Afghanistan. This excess has been paid for by borrowing rather than taxes, presumably to avoid hurting Americans in their pocketbooks, a pain that would likely provoke anti-war opposition. But the bills are coming due. Mankiw, and other prizefighters for the super-wealthy, are drawing attention away from outsize military spending—a significant contributor to burgeoning debt—and directing it instead to entitlements. They’re also deceptively ignoring payroll, property, sales and other taxes, to argue that the US tax system is progressive and that the wealthy already pay their fair share. In other words, Mankiw is arguing for higher taxes on poor and middle-income Americans, misdirecting attention to entitlement spending to conceal what the bill is really for: military spending that the super-rich have used to fatten their bank accounts.

Lessons learned.

A. Nothing comes free. Military spending can’t be doubled—and $1 trillion-plus wars fought— without someone eventually being handed the bill. And in the United States, the bill is always paid by the bottom 99 percent. This bill will be paid in entitlement cutbacks and tax increases.

B. The job of establishment economists is to make robbing poor and middle-income Americans seem both necessary and desirable. Feudal lords relied on priests to justify the exploitation of serfs. Bankers, top executives and investors have economists.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Stephen Gowans is a leading Canadian activist and political commentator. He is the founding editor of What’s Left.

1. N. Gregory Mankiw, “Wishful thinking and middle-class taxes”, The New York Times, December 29, 2012.
2. The World Bank, http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS
3. Thom Shanker and Elisabeth Bumiller, “Weighing Pentagon cuts, Panetta faces deep pressures”, The New York Times, November 6, 2011.
4. Thom Shanker and Elisabeth Bumiller, “Weighing Pentagon cuts, Panetta faces deep pressures”, The New York Times, November 6, 2011.
5. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, 2012
6. Elisabeth Bumiller, “The war: A trillion can be cheap”, The New York Times, July 24, 2010.
7. David E. Sanger, Eric Schmitt and Thom Shanker, “Steeper pullout is raised as option for Afghanistan”, The New York Times, June 5, 2011.
8. Elisabeth Bumiller, “The war: A trillion can be cheap”, The New York Times, July 24, 2010.
9. Ibid.
10. Ezra Klein, “The one tax graph you really need to know”, The Washington Post, September 19, 2012.
11. http://ctj.org/images/taxday2012table.jpg
12. Study co-written by Lawrence J. Korb for the Center for American Progress, cited by Walter Pincus in “Excess-profits tax on defense contractors during wartime is long overdue”, The Washington Post, December 31, 2012.
13. David D. Kirkpatrick, “U.S. reopens its embassy in Libya”, The New York Times, September 22, 2011. Cretz said, “We know that oil is the jewel in the crown of Libyan natural resources, but even in Qaddafi’s time they were starting from A to Z in terms of building infrastructure and other things. If we can get American companies here on a fairly big scale, which we will try to do everything we can to do that, then this will redound to improve the situation in the United States with respect to our own jobs.”

US Ambassador Echoes Cecil Rhodes

¶

 ADVERT PRO NOBIS
________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

IF YOU THINK THE LAMESTREAM MEDIA ARE A DISGRACE AND A HUGE OBSTACLE
to real change in America why haven’t you sent at least a few dollars to The Greanville Post (or a similar anti-corporate citizen’s media?). Think about it.  Without educating and organizing our ranks our cause is DOA. That’s why our new citizens’ media need your support. Send your badly needed check to “TGP, P.O. Box 1028, Brewster, NY 10509-1028.” Make checks out to “P. Greanville/ TGP”.  (A contribution of any amount can also be made via Paypal and MC or VISA.)

THANK YOU.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Pentagon budgets half a billion dollars to market its wars. Call it public relations or call it propaganda, it’s meant to win the hearts and minds of Americans. Critics argue it comes at the price of the truth.

When it comes to Afghanistan and Iraq, the stories American’s hear from the US media often sound optimistic.

Officials argue that isn’t exactly the case.

   And as the story of famous US soldier Pat Tillman, who gave up a multi-million dollar contract in professional football, illustrates, misinformation is provided, too.

Swanson explained the current rhetoric surrounding Iran is strikingly familiar to what took place before the US invasion of Iraq.