I think that all of these corporations are international. Some are in the US
because they derive benefits from being here. But they have pieces of
themselves in other countries and they offshore much of their profits. The
corporations have their homes in whatever country seems most beneficial to
them, but none of them are loyal to those countries.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Frank Ventura
Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2016 11:14 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Israel Veers Even Further Right
OK there is some truth there but there are so many international
corporations, often based in Israel, that are doing the job to us as well.
Even corporations that we consider to be "American" have their financial
holdings in international venues.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2016 10:50 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Israel Veers Even Further Right
Certainly we can draw similarities between pre-WW II and our present mess,
but one difference is the economic pressure that was placed on the backs of
the German people, following WW I, was put there by those wishing to control
Germany and suck up her resources to enrich the emerging corporations in
England, Europe and, to some degree, the USA, while today's economic mess is
caused from within our own borders by Corporate Terrorists, sucking up all
our resources for their own enrichment.
Of course, in both cases, it is the working class that suffers and bears the
brunt of the financial burden as well as for the blame when the house of
cards collapses.
Carl Jarvis
On 5/28/16, joe harcz Comcast <joeharcz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The scary thing. And I mean the really scary thing is this is allsoldier.
like, or similar to Weimer Germany in 1933, or the early 1920's with
the bombast Mussulini.
And what makes it wors or, even more scary is we've got Hilliry
playing the
puppet.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Ventura" <frank.ventura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2016 11:04 AM
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Israel Veers Even Further Right
As well as the white, daytime TV watching soccer moms.
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe harcz ;
Comcast
Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2016 9:31 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Israel Veers Even Further Right
One correction: It isn't the entire working class that is behind
Trump. It is the white, male, older working class.
It is a reactionary element that got all it had by fights of
socialists in the past and now betrays the history of it all.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Miriam Vieni" <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 10:08 PM
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Israel Veers Even Further Right
Well, I don't want to be cynical or anything, and maybe it's because
I just finished that book on BARD about Trump, but let's remember
that it is the working class who are his zealous followers. It is
they who avidly watch reality TV and read all those gossip columns
and articles in People Magazine for all these years, all about
celebrities. It is the working class, who want to be rich like Trump
keeps bragging about and who want to keep outsiders, meaning anyone
who looks different from them, out of our country.
Yes, they're waking up and they're angry. But are they angry because
our country isn't caring for all of us or because they aren't
getting what they want?
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl ;
Jarvis
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 9:04 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Israel Veers Even Further Right
It might have been on the streets of New York or Chicago, but this
was not a police action, it was, "an Israeli soldier who was caught
on videotape shooting in the head, at close range, a Palestinian man
who was wounded and lying on the ground, already subdued and
obviously not a threat."
But whether it be soldiers in Palestine or Police in American Slums,
the message is the same. Obey or suffer.
But the tide is turning. The Working Class has begun to stir. Long
suffering men and women are beginning to understand that while the
Ruling Class has the guns, the Working Class has the power to bring
the Empire to its knees, simply by doing nothing. Just staying home,
or under the bridges and in the tent cities. Refusing to harvest the
Master's crops or haul them to market, or to build his mansions or
glass towers, or march in his armies, or patrol the streets and
keeping the Ruling Classes laws.
But it will take understanding by all of those people who are bound
to serve the Empire's Rulers through the purchase of their loyalty
and the promise of a better life than that of the masses. They must
understand that they cannot serve the Masters and be Freemen.
Submitting to the Ruling Class demands obedience. All who serve this
monster will never be free. And they will never be truly safe.
Carl Jarvis
On 5/27/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Pillar writes: "There already shouldn't have been any doubt about
the orientation of the current Israeli government and the associated
obduracy of that government in blocking any path toward resolution
of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The government led by Benjamin
Netanyahu is firmly rightist, dominated by those opposed to the
relinquishing of occupied territory or the creation of a Palestinian
state."
Israel's PM Benjamin Netanyahu with Israel's new defense minister
Avigdor Lieberman. (photo: Getty)
Israel Veers Even Further Right
By Paul R. Pillar, Consortium News
26 May 16
Hillary Clinton says she wants to take the U.S.-Israeli relationship
"to the next level" even as Prime Minister Netanyahu's right-wing
regime plumbs new depths of extremism, as ex-CIA analyst Paul R.
Pillar notes.
here already shouldn't have been any doubt about the orientation of
the current Israeli government and the associated obduracy of that
government in blocking any path toward resolution of the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The
government led by Benjamin Netanyahu is firmly rightist, dominated
by those opposed to the relinquishing of occupied territory or the
creation of a Palestinian state.
Netanyahu, who comes across as one of the more moderate members of
his own coalition, has paid more lip service than some other members
of that coalition to the idea of an eventual Palestinian state, but
he has made clear with other words and actions that he has no
intention of any such thing coming into being on his watch, or of
taking any meaningful steps toward such a state coming into being.
Now come reports that Netanyahu is offering the Defense Ministry to
former Moldovan nightclub bouncer (and resident of a West Bank
settlement) Avigdor Lieberman. This will bring into the ruling
coalition Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu party, which even within the
Israeli context is usually described as "hard right."
Bringing Lieberman into the government is indicative not only of the
overall orientation of that government but also of some larger
disturbing trends in Israeli attitudes that the government has
fomented more than it has discouraged.
If Lieberman is made defense minister he would replace Moshe
Ya'alon, who in recent days has backed the Israeli military in
prosecuting (though only for manslaughter, not the murder that
occurred) an Israeli soldier who was caught on videotape shooting in
the head, at close range, a Palestinian man who was wounded and
lying on the ground, already subdued and obviously not a threat.
Lieberman has joined other hardliners in expressing support for the
occupation.(Netanyahu has visited the soldier's family to express sympathy.)all-important.
Netanyahu had been trying to recruit another coalition partner to
increase his government's thin majority in the Knesset. Talks with
centrist leader Isaac Herzog fell through; the government evidently
had more in common with the crude hard right tendencies of Lieberman.
Perhaps the timing of this latest political move was a natural
outcome of this sequence of negotiations.
Or maybe it was at least as much another example of Netanyahu's
proclivity for poking a stick in the eye of foreign leaders who look
like they might be getting on his case about the Palestinian
conflict
- such as timing an announcement of more settlement expansion to
coincide with a visit of Vice President Biden. This time the stickee
is the French government, which is organizing an international
conference for later this year on Israeli-Palestinian peace.
All honest outside observers should use the report about Lieberman
coming into the Israeli government as an occasion to remind
themselves that this tragic and long-running conflict continues to
run because one side refuses to end it. The gross asymmetry between
the two sides is
One side, the occupying power - the side with the firepower - has
the ability to end the occupation and resolve the conflict if it
decided to do so. The other side has no such power. That other side,
the Palestinian side, has tried to use violent resistance but has
subsequently and correctly drawn the conclusion that such violence
is not the answer; the violence, unsurprisingly, only stokes
legitimate fears among Israelis about their security.
Violence has been continuing in the unplanned, spontaneous, and
frustration-driven form of young people grabbing knives and stabbing
the first Israelis they can find. The Palestinian leadership has
turned to multilateral diplomacy, which, besides popular boycotts,
is about the only tool it has left. And the Israeli government does
everything it can to impede and to foil such diplomacy, as it is
trying to do now with the French initiative.
A common urge to sound impartial leads to the common refrain that
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict persists because neither side has
the political will to settle it. Nonsense. The overwhelming majority
of Palestinians do not want to continue to live under Israeli
ground.They have the will but not the power to settle.
There certainly are divisions and political weakness on the
Palestinian side
- of which the Israeli government has striven to prevent any repair,
such as in "punishing" the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority
through withholding tax revenue whenever it has moved toward
reconciliation with Hamas - but there is no significant
pro-occupation party among Palestinians.
The hardliners who control Israel policy have the power but - as
ample evidence, even without Avigdor Lieberman, has shown - not the
will, as long as third parties do not make them suffer any
meaningful consequences. They do want the occupation to continue.
The Netanyahu government's repeated claim that it wants to negotiate
with the Palestinians should be described as the charade that it is.
It is understandable that Palestinian leaders have no desire to
engage in talks that have no prospect of leading to anything, when
such engagement would just mean participating in the charade while
the occupation continues and more facts are built on the occupied
things.The insincerity is all the more obvious when Netanyahu speaks ofmonths of the Obama administration.
talks with "no preconditions" while at the same time insisting that
the Palestinians pronounce Israel to be a "Jewish state" - a
precondition that implicitly limits how the issue of Palestinian
refugees and right of return can be resolved, and also would mean
the Palestinian leadership formally signing on to a declaration that
non-Jewish Israelis are second-class citizens. Those are the only
things such a pronouncement would mean.
The Palestinian leadership long ago recognized, formally and
unequivocally, the state of Israel. As Palestinian leaders have
noted, that state is free to describe itself any way it wants.
With the American political system still wearing its usual
straitjacket on this issue, the main hope right now for taking any
steps out of this tragic situation lies with the French initiative.
If the United States is to do anything helpful any time in the
foreseeable future, it probably will have to come in the remaining
eight
One of the two presumptive presidential nominees speaks of taking
U.S.-Israeli relations "to the next level" - and it is safe to
assume she doesn't mean that the next level will consist of imposing
consequences for the continued occupation.
The other presumptive presidential nominee caused nervous moments in
the Israel lobby when he talked about being impartial, but the
nerves were soothed with a speech to AIPAC that said all the "right"
site.And now he has Sheldon Adelson and Adelson's heavyweight bankroll on
his side, with everything that implies for this nominee's future
posture on Israel-related issues if he were to be elected.
________________________________________
Paul R. Pillar, in his 28 years at the Central Intelligence Agency,
rose to be one of the agency's top analysts. He is now a visiting
professor at Georgetown University for security studies. (This
article first appeared as a blog post at The National Interest's Web
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/05/21/israel-veers-even-further-right/https:Reprinted with author's
permission.)
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference
not valid.
Israel's PM Benjamin Netanyahu with Israel's new defense minister
Avigdor Lieberman. (photo: Getty)
soldier.//consortiumnews.com/2016/05/21/israel-veers-even-further-right/
Israel Veers Even Further Right
By Paul R. Pillar, Consortium News
26 May 16
Hillary Clinton says she wants to take the U.S.-Israeli relationship
"to the next level" even as Prime Minister Netanyahu's right-wing
regime plumbs new depths of extremism, as ex-CIA analyst Paul R.
Pillar notes.
here already shouldn't have been any doubt about the orientation of
the current Israeli government and the associated obduracy of that
government in blocking any path toward resolution of the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The
government led by Benjamin Netanyahu is firmly rightist, dominated
by those opposed to the relinquishing of occupied territory or the
creation of a Palestinian state.
Netanyahu, who comes across as one of the more moderate members of
his own coalition, has paid more lip service than some other members
of that coalition to the idea of an eventual Palestinian state, but
he has made clear with other words and actions that he has no
intention of any such thing coming into being on his watch, or of
taking any meaningful steps toward such a state coming into being.
Now come reports that Netanyahu is offering the Defense Ministry to
former Moldovan nightclub bouncer (and resident of a West Bank
settlement) Avigdor Lieberman. This will bring into the ruling
coalition Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu party, which even within the
Israeli context is usually described as "hard right."
Bringing Lieberman into the government is indicative not only of the
overall orientation of that government but also of some larger
disturbing trends in Israeli attitudes that the government has
fomented more than it has discouraged.
If Lieberman is made defense minister he would replace Moshe
Ya'alon, who in recent days has backed the Israeli military in
prosecuting (though only for manslaughter, not the murder that
occurred) an Israeli soldier who was caught on videotape shooting in
the head, at close range, a Palestinian man who was wounded and
lying on the ground, already subdued and obviously not a threat.
Lieberman has joined other hardliners in expressing support for the
occupation.(Netanyahu has visited the soldier's family to express sympathy.)all-important.
Netanyahu had been trying to recruit another coalition partner to
increase his government's thin majority in the Knesset. Talks with
centrist leader Isaac Herzog fell through; the government evidently
had more in common with the crude hard right tendencies of Lieberman.
Perhaps the timing of this latest political move was a natural
outcome of this sequence of negotiations.
Or maybe it was at least as much another example of Netanyahu's
proclivity for poking a stick in the eye of foreign leaders who look
like they might be getting on his case about the Palestinian
conflict
- such as timing an announcement of more settlement expansion to
coincide with a visit of Vice President Biden. This time the stickee
is the French government, which is organizing an international
conference for later this year on Israeli-Palestinian peace.
All honest outside observers should use the report about Lieberman
coming into the Israeli government as an occasion to remind
themselves that this tragic and long-running conflict continues to
run because one side refuses to end it. The gross asymmetry between
the two sides is
One side, the occupying power - the side with the firepower - has
the ability to end the occupation and resolve the conflict if it
decided to do so. The other side has no such power. That other side,
the Palestinian side, has tried to use violent resistance but has
subsequently and correctly drawn the conclusion that such violence
is not the answer; the violence, unsurprisingly, only stokes
legitimate fears among Israelis about their security.
Violence has been continuing in the unplanned, spontaneous, and
frustration-driven form of young people grabbing knives and stabbing
the first Israelis they can find. The Palestinian leadership has
turned to multilateral diplomacy, which, besides popular boycotts,
is about the only tool it has left. And the Israeli government does
everything it can to impede and to foil such diplomacy, as it is
trying to do now with the French initiative.
A common urge to sound impartial leads to the common refrain that
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict persists because neither side has
the political will to settle it. Nonsense. The overwhelming majority
of Palestinians do not want to continue to live under Israeli
ground.They have the will but not the power to settle.
There certainly are divisions and political weakness on the
Palestinian side
- of which the Israeli government has striven to prevent any repair,
such as in "punishing" the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority
through withholding tax revenue whenever it has moved toward
reconciliation with Hamas - but there is no significant
pro-occupation party among Palestinians.
The hardliners who control Israel policy have the power but - as
ample evidence, even without Avigdor Lieberman, has shown - not the
will, as long as third parties do not make them suffer any
meaningful consequences. They do want the occupation to continue.
The Netanyahu government's repeated claim that it wants to negotiate
with the Palestinians should be described as the charade that it is.
It is understandable that Palestinian leaders have no desire to
engage in talks that have no prospect of leading to anything, when
such engagement would just mean participating in the charade while
the occupation continues and more facts are built on the occupied
things.The insincerity is all the more obvious when Netanyahu speaks ofmonths of the Obama administration.
talks with "no preconditions" while at the same time insisting that
the Palestinians pronounce Israel to be a "Jewish state" - a
precondition that implicitly limits how the issue of Palestinian
refugees and right of return can be resolved, and also would mean
the Palestinian leadership formally signing on to a declaration that
non-Jewish Israelis are second-class citizens. Those are the only
things such a pronouncement would mean.
The Palestinian leadership long ago recognized, formally and
unequivocally, the state of Israel. As Palestinian leaders have
noted, that state is free to describe itself any way it wants.
With the American political system still wearing its usual
straitjacket on this issue, the main hope right now for taking any
steps out of this tragic situation lies with the French initiative.
If the United States is to do anything helpful any time in the
foreseeable future, it probably will have to come in the remaining
eight
One of the two presumptive presidential nominees speaks of taking
U.S.-Israeli relations "to the next level" - and it is safe to
assume she doesn't mean that the next level will consist of imposing
consequences for the continued occupation.
The other presumptive presidential nominee caused nervous moments in
the Israel lobby when he talked about being impartial, but the
nerves were soothed with a speech to AIPAC that said all the "right"
site.And now he has Sheldon Adelson and Adelson's heavyweight bankroll on
his side, with everything that implies for this nominee's future
posture on Israel-related issues if he were to be elected.
Paul R. Pillar, in his 28 years at the Central Intelligence Agency,
rose to be one of the agency's top analysts. He is now a visiting
professor at Georgetown University for security studies. (This
article first appeared as a blog post at The National Interest's Web
Reprinted with author's
permission.)
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
