theduran--2020-02-14--Murderers Old And New In The News

Murderers Old And New In The News

Two murderers from the 1980s have been back in the news recently , while a man who committed a murder in 2018 has just been convicted .
If you are neither domiciled in the UK nor a crime buff , the name Jeremy Bamber may not be familiar to you , but in August 1985 , Bamber slaughtered his entire family in a bid to get his hands on the family fortune , and he nearly got away with it .
His sister Sheila was a schizophrenic with a record of having suicidal thoughts if not of actual attempts .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s two sons – his nephews – and Sheila herself , staging the crime scene to look like a mass murder/suicide complete with a posed Bible .
Then he cycled back to his own home and phoned the police , informing them his father had phoned him telling him Sheila had gone berserk .
The police met Bamber at the farm house and waited for back up .
The officer in charge of the investigation considered it to be an open and shut case , probably because he was anxious to get back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and members of Bamber ’ s extended family were not so easily persuaded , and it was the investigations of the latter than led to the discovery of some quite damning evidence .
The White House Farm Murders were the subject of an excellent recent dramatisation by ITV , and are still currently on the ITV hub .
Bamber appealed his conviction in 1989 , and again in 2002 on a referral by the Criminal Cases Review Commission which saw this august organisation go to extraordinary lengths to give him a further day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one ground of appeal , relating to supposedly new forensic evidence , but by the time it reached the Court Of Appeal , it had been expanded to 16 grounds .
Lord Justice Kay and his two brother judges were not happy with this .
Their judgment runs to 522 paragraphs , and dismisses Bamber ’ s application as totally without merit .
The ITV dramatisation does not cover this , ending with Bamber ’ s conviction ; his post-conviction antics from behind the walls of a high security prison could easily fill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unfathomable reason , he has attracted a small army of not simply the usual demented women who are fascinated by monsters like him , but of a number of men who are clearly not attracted to him sexually .
Collectively they are known as bamberettes , and have not been shy about spreading the most absurd lies about the case .
Thankfully though , there are a lot more people who know the truth , and they are not shy about spreading it .
They can be found at the Miscarriage Of Justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Atlantic , a different kind of murderer was convicted Thursday in a capital case , and will , hopefully , be sentenced to death next week .
Anthony Pardon is clearly of low intelligence and just as clearly a lowlife .
As a juvenile , Pardon was convicted of raping a 9 month old child .
Even bearing in mind both his age and the very broad definition of rape used in some states ( penetration however slight ) , a conviction of that nature should have seen him put away for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ later he was convicted of the attempted murder and rape of an adult woman .
That saw him spend the next 25 years behind bars in Ohio ; on his release he moved to Georgia where he ended up behind bars for a further 9 years for forgery and failing to register as a sex offender .
On this release , he moved back to Ohio , and on January 28 , 2018 he somehow effected entry into the Columbus home of the beautiful Rachael Anderson , pictured here with her murderer .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on her twenty-fourth birthday after being hog-tied , gagged and raped .
Then Pardon stole her bank card and , to avoid or minimise surveillance , duped a homeless man into making withdrawals from her account .
It is likely Rachael was tortured until she revealed her card PIN .
Although Pardon ’ s obviously dull brain considered CCTV at cashpoint withdrawals , it appears not to have considered the evidence he left at the crime scene , including his DNA in the victim ’ s vagina .
At trial , his sister @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the card fraud but being unaware of how he obtained the card .
So did the homeless man , from beyond the grave .
Although the 61 year old Anthony Sleet died before the trial , his questioning by the police was played to the jury .
Defending an obviously hopeless case , Pardon ’ s court-appointed attorney did the best he could for his client as obliged by law , but declined not only to put him on the stand but to call even a single witness .
When the jury @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brought in in handcuffs , and after dealing in their absence with some questions asked by the jury , they were brought in .
The verdicts were delivered live on the Internet by the judge from 19.53 London time ; it took him a full 10 minutes .
Pardon was convicted on all 9 counts which included rape and robbery .
The jury was discharged until Tuesday when the sentencing phase will begin .
If Anthony Pardon is deserving of the death penalty , a reasonable person might ask how Colin Pitchfork is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not familiar to you , Pitchfork holds a very special place in the annals of crime because he was the first murderer to be brought to book by DNA profiling .
His story has been thoroughly documented in print and on film , including at least one dramatisation .
Pitchfork raped and murdered not one teenage girl but two , and attacked at least two more .
In November 1983 , Pitchfork raped and murdered 15 year old Lynda Mann .
Two and a half years later , he raped and murdered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ashworth .
Then he sat back and allowed a none-too-bright teenager to be charged with Dawn ’ s murder after the kid confessed to it with little prompting .
Since capital punishment was abolished in the UK as in most other jurisdictions , there are only really two options for dealing with murderers .
Either they have to be locked up for life , or parolled at some point .
Under UK law , they are released on life licence under strict conditions .
While the friends and family of victims are usually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right that some convicted murderers are given a second chance , but there are limits , and whether or not he is considered to still be a danger , it beggars belief Pitchfork could ever be released , yet he has already been allowed out of prison on day release .
Last month it was reported that he is to be assessed again by the Parole Board , whatever that means .
In 2017 , the sister of Lynda Mann started a petition – one of at least three – to keep Pitchfork @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thousand supporters .
Perhaps it ’ s time to start another one , and this time to get a million signatures on it .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Two murderers from the 1980s have been back in the news recently, while a man who committed a murder in 2018 has just been convicted.
If you are neither domiciled in the UK nor a crime buff, the name Jeremy Bamber may not be familiar to you, but in August 1985, Bamber slaughtered his entire family in a bid to get his hands on the family fortune, and he nearly got away with it.
His sister Sheila was a schizophrenic with a record of having suicidal thoughts if not of actual attempts. Bamber shot his parents, Sheila’s two sons – his nephews – and Sheila herself, staging the crime scene to look like a mass murder/suicide complete with a posed Bible. Then he cycled back to his own home and phoned the police, informing them his father had phoned him telling him Sheila had gone berserk.
The police met Bamber at the farm house and waited for back up. The officer in charge of the investigation considered it to be an open and shut case, probably because he was anxious to get back to the golf course. Junior officers and members of Bamber’s extended family were not so easily persuaded, and it was the investigations of the latter than led to the discovery of some quite damning evidence.
The White House Farm Murders were the subject of an excellent recent dramatisation by ITV, and are still currently on the ITV hub.
Bamber appealed his conviction in 1989, and again in 2002 on a referral by the Criminal Cases Review Commission which saw this august organisation go to extraordinary lengths to give him a further day in court. Originally, there was one ground of appeal, relating to supposedly new forensic evidence, but by the time it reached the Court Of Appeal, it had been expanded to 16 grounds. Lord Justice Kay and his two brother judges were not happy with this. Their judgment runs to 522 paragraphs, and dismisses Bamber’s application as totally without merit.
The ITV dramatisation does not cover this, ending with Bamber’s conviction; his post-conviction antics from behind the walls of a high security prison could easily fill another six episodes because, for some unfathomable reason, he has attracted a small army of not simply the usual demented women who are fascinated by monsters like him, but of a number of men who are clearly not attracted to him sexually. Collectively they are known as bamberettes, and have not been shy about spreading the most absurd lies about the case. Thankfully though, there are a lot more people who know the truth, and they are not shy about spreading it. They can be found at the Miscarriage Of Justice Forum.
On the other side of the Atlantic, a different kind of murderer was convicted Thursday in a capital case, and will, hopefully, be sentenced to death next week. Anthony Pardon is clearly of low intelligence and just as clearly a lowlife.
As a juvenile, Pardon was convicted of raping a 9 month old child. Even bearing in mind both his age and the very broad definition of rape used in some states (penetration however slight), a conviction of that nature should have seen him put away for a long time, but two years later he was convicted of the attempted murder and rape of an adult woman. That saw him spend the next 25 years behind bars in Ohio; on his release he moved to Georgia where he ended up behind bars for a further 9 years for forgery and failing to register as a sex offender. On this release, he moved back to Ohio, and on January 28, 2018 he somehow effected entry into the Columbus home of the beautiful Rachael Anderson, pictured here with her murderer.
Rachael was stabbed and strangled to death on her twenty-fourth birthday after being hog-tied, gagged and raped. Then Pardon stole her bank card and, to avoid or minimise surveillance, duped a homeless man into making withdrawals from her account. It is likely Rachael was tortured until she revealed her card PIN.
Although Pardon’s obviously dull brain considered CCTV at cashpoint withdrawals, it appears not to have considered the evidence he left at the crime scene, including his DNA in the victim’s vagina. At trial, his sister testified against him, having taken part in the card fraud but being unaware of how he obtained the card. So did the homeless man, from beyond the grave. Although the 61 year old Anthony Sleet died before the trial, his questioning by the police was played to the jury.
Defending an obviously hopeless case, Pardon’s court-appointed attorney did the best he could for his client as obliged by law, but declined not only to put him on the stand but to call even a single witness.
When the jury had reached its verdicts, Pardon was brought in in handcuffs, and after dealing in their absence with some questions asked by the jury, they were brought in.
The verdicts were delivered live on the Internet by the judge from 19.53 London time; it took him a full 10 minutes. Pardon was convicted on all 9 counts which included rape and robbery. The jury was discharged until Tuesday when the sentencing phase will begin.
If Anthony Pardon is deserving of the death penalty, a reasonable person might ask how Colin Pitchfork is deserving of parole. If the name is not familiar to you, Pitchfork holds a very special place in the annals of crime because he was the first murderer to be brought to book by DNA profiling. His story has been thoroughly documented in print and on film, including at least one dramatisation. Pitchfork raped and murdered not one teenage girl but two, and attacked at least two more.
In November 1983, Pitchfork raped and murdered 15 year old Lynda Mann. Two and a half years later, he raped and murdered another 15 year old girl, Dawn Ashworth. Then he sat back and allowed a none-too-bright teenager to be charged with Dawn’s murder after the kid confessed to it with little prompting.
Since capital punishment was abolished in the UK as in most other jurisdictions, there are only really two options for dealing with murderers. Either they have to be locked up for life, or parolled at some point. Under UK law, they are released on life licence under strict conditions. While the friends and family of victims are usually unhappy about it, it is only right that some convicted murderers are given a second chance, but there are limits, and whether or not he is considered to still be a danger, it beggars belief Pitchfork could ever be released, yet he has already been allowed out of prison on day release. Last month it was reported that he is to be assessed again by the Parole Board, whatever that means.
In 2017, the sister of Lynda Mann started a petition – one of at least three – to keep Pitchfork behind bars. It attracted nearly twelve thousand supporters. Perhaps it’s time to start another one, and this time to get a million signatures on it.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-14--Mexico’s Fight for National Banking Revives a Forgotten History

In Ellen Brown ’ s brilliant new article “ Mexico ’ s AMLO Shows How It ’ s Done ” , the researcher and national banking advocate made the powerful point that the only way to properly fight the neo-liberal order is for nations of the west to follow the lead of Mexico ’ s current President Lopez Obrador who recently announced the creation of a new network of national banks- of which over 3238 branches will be in operation by 2021 .
Obrador ’ s stated aim is to have 13 000 branches built across Mexico which would far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ banks and will also provide a vital tool for the economic liberation of Mexico .
This act is nothing short of heresy in the corridors of the neoliberal priesthood of our modern age .
The “ economic foundation ” upon which today ’ s globalized world are premised assert that nation states may not participate in the marketplace .
No price controls , no protective tariffs , no bank regulation and certainly no national banks .
Following this gospel , nations are permitted to do war and promote various forms of population control… @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the supposedly “ free market ” .
Of course , simply utilizing national banking practices by themselves is not a full solution .
A fascist regime can of course , use national banks for destructive ends just as a democratic republic can use them for positive ends , and as we have seen over the years , the financial oligarchy has no problem supporting fascist regimes such as Hitler ’ s Germany or Mussolini ’ s Italy nor do they have any problem supporting “ national Keynesian initiatives ” so long as they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Deal frame work .
So what makes President Obrador ’ s current efforts different ?
As Brown states in her paper : If you haven ’ t figured it out , the answer is MORALITY .
What gave the establishment of modern nation states their power and legitimacy in the wake of the Golden Renaissance , was the fact that they are premised upon the common good of the people against the interests of private oligarchs and elite families .
Those feudal orders dominated by hereditary institutions during most of human history placed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , with the welfare of the talking cows ( aka : peasants ) granted to them by the fancy of the master class of land lords .
Under a true sovereign nation state , elected leaders derive their legitimacy and support of the people through their mandate to defend the inalienable rights of people though internal improvements which increase the socio-physical-spiritual well being of the people .
This used to be recognised in past ages as an elementary idea of Natural Law ( which saw the laws of morality as intertwined into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of gravity , and electricity ) .
It is here no coincidence that the leading proponent of national banking and productive credit in America was also the leading scientist who trumped all elite scientific minds of Europe when he discovered the principle of electricity in 1752 .
Benjamin Franklin and his vast network of leading collaborators across Europe and America never saw a distinction between “ subjective moral sciences ” and “ objective a-moral physics ” .
The foundational documents and also the first national banking system of America ( upon which other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themselves in the coming years ) were based upon this idea of Natural Law .
This insight was the basis for Franklin ’ s 1727 opus on the Necessity for a Paper Currency where Franklin argued that value was not located in gold , or silver , or land or even demand per se , but rather in the creative powers of a people !
The consolidation of America ’ s revolutionary war debt incurred by each of the 13 colonies into a unified federal credit transformed the unpayable debt “ into a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s protégé Alexander Hamilton ( first Treasury Secretary ) laid out in his famous Reports on a National Bank and On Manufactures in 1791 .
In opposition to the early free traders and monetarists who wished America would end its protective tariff , stay agrarian and allow Britain to maintain its global monopoly on industry , Hamilton and Franklin understood this would undo the entire revolutionary cause resulting in America ’ s eventual re-absorption back into the empire .
Although slandered by generations of anti-American propaganda as a “ Rothschild tool ” , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who argued that once the new federal debt was consolidated , the BEHAVIOUR of the debt would be turned from a passive burden which held the nation under water into an ACTIVE fuel of investments into infrastructure and manufacturing .
By doing this , the nation was able to TRANSFORM from an agricultural slave society of cash cropping into a full spectrum society capable of producing for itself and trading surplus finished goods to other nations .
In its first 40 years , this program allowed America ’ s population to quadruple overcoming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Unfortunately , starting with the 1804 killing of Alexander Hamilton at the hands of Aaron Burr ( the father of today ’ s Wall Street banking syndicates ) , much of America ’ s history has been contaminated by either slave-loving traitors who attacked national banking ( such as Presidents van Buren , Andrew Jackson , and Polk ) , OR great statesmen who too often died in office before their efforts to revive the constitution could be consolidated .
In this list we find Presidents Harrison ( 1840 ) , Taylor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , Garfield ( 1880 ) , McKinley ( 1901 ) , Harding ( 1923 ) , FDR ( 1945 ) , JFK ( 1963 ) .
By 1865 , Lincoln ’ s use of national banking practices ( the Greenback ) was instrumental in saving the union from British-orchestrated Civil War- although his assassination hampered this momentum to full industrial reconstruction of the south .
During this time , Britain , French and Spanish Hapsburg empires had initiated parallel wars to destroy the newly emerging Mexican republic then led by Lincoln-admiring president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ War of Reform and then 1862-1867 French Invasion .
In spite of this existential challenge , Juarez succeeded in driving out the imperialists with political and military support from Lincoln patriots in America , while also imposing tariffs which encouraged the build-up of industry- liberating Mexico from its status as cash cropping exporter .
Social and educational reforms elevating the health and welfare of the people grew enormously under Juarez ’ s leadership .
Although Lincoln republicans supported Mexico ’ s sovereign in opposition to foreign empires using a healthy interpretation of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1902 saw a grievous abuse of the Monroe Doctrine which too often became an imperial hammer to subdue banana republics as seen under the brutal leadership of Teddy Roosevelt .
Franklin Roosevelt was the first president to push back against the pro-empire Wall Street crowd since McKinley ’ s murder which he brought in with the Good Neighbor Policy stating : FDR broke from his puppet predecessors by supporting Mexico ’ s rights to control its own oil and resources ( after President Cárdenas , expropriated foreign oil holdings ) and also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bank to fund massive Mexican infrastructure projects with a focus on water , energy and transport .
This served as one of the earliest international extensions of the New Deal which FDR intended would liberate all nations of the earth from colonialism .
Upon his election in 2018 , President Obrador announced the first phase of his New Deal with an “ Every Young Person to Work ” program inspired by FDR which he described saying : Under NAFTA , Mexico was kept down by acting as cheap labor market to do the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Canadians .
This policy ultimately hurt Mexico since free trade ’ s obsession with low costs resulted in keeping quality of life and production dismally low .
( The formula “ Low prices= low paid workers= better slaves= weakened nations ” is as true today as it was 250 years ago when the British Empire commissioned Adam Smith to write his 1776 Wealth of Nations ) .
Obrador ’ s efforts are moving in the right direction , however the 13 000 national bank branches which he intends to have built will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the poor as the plan is currently constituted and he knows it .
Responding to the monetarist priests howling at the sacrilege of national banking , Obrador stated : Thus , taking over responsibility from the usurious private banking network and Mexican Central Bank which have converted Mexico into an indebted colony of crime and despair since the overthrow of President Portillo in 1982 is a vital next step in the fight .
Luckily China has made great strides in this direction which will likely be of a great assist to Mexico @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her report with the following astute analysis : The irony here is that the American system of National banking , productive credit and protective tariffs which were innovated by Alexander Hamilton and applied by every great leader from Harrison to Lincoln to McKinley to FDR both internally and across to international allies in Mexico is now most clearly embodied by the country which few people associate with America… the Peoples Republic of China !
While China uses its debt as an active asset to invest into great long term infrastructure projects which thus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ productive powers of labor , America ’ s private central banking system under the Federal Reserve merely creates debt for speculation and turning poor Americans into slaves .
Just look at the $ 14 trillion the treasury printed to bail out failing speculators in 2008-2010 .
Or look at the $ 9 trillion printed by the Fed to do the same .
Nothing was invested in the real economy during this time .
The debt generated by a truly National Bank would issue productive credit tied to long term infrastructure and industrial growth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times over .
What a different world we could have created had this money been invested into a new ( non-Green ) New Deal of the 21st century such as China ’ s Belt and Road Initiative has ushered in ?
NAFTA ’ s long awaited death is a start , as are Obrador ’ s vital reforms… however a fight needs to still occur before a North American Belt and Road Initiative can finally break colonized nations ( including the USA ) out from the clutches of the financial oligarchy and their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , BRI expert correspondent on Tactical Talk and has authored 3 volumes of ‘ Untold History of Canada ’ book series .
His works appear regularly on The Duran , Strategic Culture , Sott , Fort Russ , Zero Hedge , L.A. Review of Books , LeSaker.fr , Vigile Quebec , and South Front .
In 2019 Matthew co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation .
He can be reached at [ email protected ]

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
From Strategic Culture
In Ellen Brown’s brilliant new article “Mexico’s AMLO Shows How It’s Done”, the researcher and national banking advocate made the powerful point that the only way to properly fight the neo-liberal order is for nations of the west to follow the lead of Mexico’s current President Lopez Obrador who recently announced the creation of a new network of national banks- of which over 3238 branches will be in operation by 2021. Obrador’s stated aim is to have 13 000 branches built across Mexico which would far outnumber the total number of all private banks and will also provide a vital tool for the economic liberation of Mexico.
This act is nothing short of heresy in the corridors of the neoliberal priesthood of our modern age. The “economic foundation” upon which today’s globalized world are premised assert that nation states may not participate in the marketplace. No price controls, no protective tariffs, no bank regulation and certainly no national banks. Following this gospel, nations are permitted to do war and promote various forms of population control… but nothing that pollutes the purity of the supposedly “free market”.
Of course, simply utilizing national banking practices by themselves is not a full solution. A fascist regime can of course, use national banks for destructive ends just as a democratic republic can use them for positive ends, and as we have seen over the years, the financial oligarchy has no problem supporting fascist regimes such as Hitler’s Germany or Mussolini’s Italy nor do they have any problem supporting “national Keynesian initiatives” so long as they are done under an anti-human Green New Deal frame work.
So what makes President Obrador’s current efforts different?
As Brown states in her paper:
“The new president has held to his campaign promises. In 2019, his first year in office, he did what Donald Trump pledged to do — “drain the swamp” — purging the government of technocrats and institutions he considered corrupt, profligate or impeding the transformation of Mexico after 36 years of failed market-focused neoliberal policies. Other accomplishments have included substantially increasing the minimum wage while cutting top government salaries and oversize pensions; making small loans and grants directly to farmers; guaranteeing crop prices for key agricultural crops; launching programs to benefit youth, the disabled and the elderly; and initiating a $44 billion infrastructure plan. López Obrador’s goal, he says, is to construct a “new paradigm” in economic policy that improves human welfare, not just increases gross domestic product.”
If you haven’t figured it out, the answer is MORALITY.
What gave the establishment of modern nation states their power and legitimacy in the wake of the Golden Renaissance, was the fact that they are premised upon the common good of the people against the interests of private oligarchs and elite families. Those feudal orders dominated by hereditary institutions during most of human history placed the “natural order” upside down, with the welfare of the talking cows (aka: peasants) granted to them by the fancy of the master class of land lords.
Under a true sovereign nation state, elected leaders derive their legitimacy and support of the people through their mandate to defend the inalienable rights of people though internal improvements which increase the socio-physical-spiritual well being of the people. This used to be recognised in past ages as an elementary idea of Natural Law (which saw the laws of morality as intertwined into the fabric of objective reality as the laws of gravity, and electricity).
Ben Franklin’s Electric Insight into Economics
It is here no coincidence that the leading proponent of national banking and productive credit in America was also the leading scientist who trumped all elite scientific minds of Europe when he discovered the principle of electricity in 1752. Benjamin Franklin and his vast network of leading collaborators across Europe and America never saw a distinction between “subjective moral sciences” and “objective a-moral physics”. The foundational documents and also the first national banking system of America (upon which other republics in South and Central America modelled themselves in the coming years) were based upon this idea of Natural Law. This insight was the basis for Franklin’s 1727 opus on the Necessity for a Paper Currency where Franklin argued that value was not located in gold, or silver, or land or even demand per se, but rather in the creative powers of a people!
The consolidation of America’s revolutionary war debt incurred by each of the 13 colonies into a unified federal credit transformed the unpayable debt “into a national blessing” as Ben Franklin’s protégé Alexander Hamilton (first Treasury Secretary) laid out in his famous Reports on a National Bank and On Manufactures in 1791. In opposition to the early free traders and monetarists who wished America would end its protective tariff, stay agrarian and allow Britain to maintain its global monopoly on industry, Hamilton and Franklin understood this would undo the entire revolutionary cause resulting in America’s eventual re-absorption back into the empire.
Although slandered by generations of anti-American propaganda as a “Rothschild tool”, Hamilton was in fact a great patriot who argued that once the new federal debt was consolidated, the BEHAVIOUR of the debt would be turned from a passive burden which held the nation under water into an ACTIVE fuel of investments into infrastructure and manufacturing. By doing this, the nation was able to TRANSFORM from an agricultural slave society of cash cropping into a full spectrum society capable of producing for itself and trading surplus finished goods to other nations. In its first 40 years, this program allowed America’s population to quadruple overcoming all Malthusian “limits to growth”.
Unfortunately, starting with the 1804 killing of Alexander Hamilton at the hands of Aaron Burr (the father of today’s Wall Street banking syndicates), much of America’s history has been contaminated by either slave-loving traitors who attacked national banking (such as Presidents van Buren, Andrew Jackson, and Polk), OR great statesmen who too often died in office before their efforts to revive the constitution could be consolidated. In this list we find Presidents Harrison (1840), Taylor (1851), Lincoln (1865), Garfield (1880), McKinley (1901), Harding (1923), FDR (1945), JFK (1963).
Mexico and America
By 1865, Lincoln’s use of national banking practices (the Greenback) was instrumental in saving the union from British-orchestrated Civil War- although his assassination hampered this momentum to full industrial reconstruction of the south. During this time, Britain, French and Spanish Hapsburg empires had initiated parallel wars to destroy the newly emerging Mexican republic then led by Lincoln-admiring president Benito Juarez, first with the 1858-1860 War of Reform and then 1862-1867 French Invasion. In spite of this existential challenge, Juarez succeeded in driving out the imperialists with political and military support from Lincoln patriots in America, while also imposing tariffs which encouraged the build-up of industry- liberating Mexico from its status as cash cropping exporter. Social and educational reforms elevating the health and welfare of the people grew enormously under Juarez’s leadership.
Although Lincoln republicans supported Mexico’s sovereign in opposition to foreign empires using a healthy interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine, the death of McKinley in 1902 saw a grievous abuse of the Monroe Doctrine which too often became an imperial hammer to subdue banana republics as seen under the brutal leadership of Teddy Roosevelt.
Franklin Roosevelt was the first president to push back against the pro-empire Wall Street crowd since McKinley’s murder which he brought in with the Good Neighbor Policy stating:
“In the field of world policy, I would dedicate this Nation to the policy of the good neighbor—the neighbor who resolutely respects himself and, because he does so, respects the rights of others—the neighbor who respects his obligations and respects the sanctity of his agreements in and with a world of neighbors.”
FDR broke from his puppet predecessors by supporting Mexico’s rights to control its own oil and resources (after President Cárdenas, expropriated foreign oil holdings) and also vastly expanded credit from the US Export-Import Bank to fund massive Mexican infrastructure projects with a focus on water, energy and transport. This served as one of the earliest international extensions of the New Deal which FDR intended would liberate all nations of the earth from colonialism.
Franklin Roosevelt Inspires Mexico’s AMLO
Upon his election in 2018, President Obrador announced the first phase of his New Deal with an “Every Young Person to Work” program inspired by FDR which he described saying:
“I have had this idea since I read how President Franklin Delano Roosevelt pulled the United States out of the 1930s’ crisis. What did he do, in a tremendous economic crisis? He decided to put the whole U.S. people to work. And he decided to put young people to work, and he paid them a dollar a day, for every young person. But his idea was full employment. That is, a job for everyone. That idea stuck in my head, because Roosevelt lifted the United States out of the crisis, and for me, he was therefore, if not the best President, one of the best that the United States has had—Franklin Delano Roosevelt, by that action, by that decision. Now we are going to do something similar: All young people to work.”
Under NAFTA, Mexico was kept down by acting as cheap labor market to do the work once done by high paid Americans and Canadians. This policy ultimately hurt Mexico since free trade’s obsession with low costs resulted in keeping quality of life and production dismally low. (The formula “Low prices= low paid workers= better slaves= weakened nations” is as true today as it was 250 years ago when the British Empire commissioned Adam Smith to write his 1776 Wealth of Nations).
Obrador’s efforts are moving in the right direction, however the 13 000 national bank branches which he intends to have built will have to go beyond merely sending money to the poor as the plan is currently constituted and he knows it. Responding to the monetarist priests howling at the sacrilege of national banking, Obrador stated:
“We’re going to speak with those from the Bank of México respecting the autonomy of the Bank of México. We have to educate them because for them this is an anachronism, even sacrilege, because they have other ideas. But we’ve arrived here [in government] after telling the people that the neoliberal economic policy was going to change.”
Thus, taking over responsibility from the usurious private banking network and Mexican Central Bank which have converted Mexico into an indebted colony of crime and despair since the overthrow of President Portillo in 1982 is a vital next step in the fight. Luckily China has made great strides in this direction which will likely be of a great assist to Mexico. To this point, Brown ended her report with the following astute analysis:
“Today, the best model for that approach is China, which funds infrastructure by borrowing from its own state-owned banks. Like all banks, they create loans as bank credit on their books, which is then repaid with the proceeds of the projects created with the loans. There is no need to tap up the central bank or rich investors or the tax base. Government banks can create money on their books just as central banks and private banks do. For Mexico, however, using its public banks as China does would be something for the future, if at all. Meanwhile, AMLO has been a trailblazer in showing how a national public banking system can be initiated quickly and efficiently. The key, it seems, is just to have the political will — along with massive support from the public, the legislature, local business leaders and the military.”
The irony here is that the American system of National banking, productive credit and protective tariffs which were innovated by Alexander Hamilton and applied by every great leader from Harrison to Lincoln to McKinley to FDR both internally and across to international allies in Mexico is now most clearly embodied by the country which few people associate with America… the Peoples Republic of China!
While China uses its debt as an active asset to invest into great long term infrastructure projects which thus extinguish the original debt while increasing the productive powers of labor, America’s private central banking system under the Federal Reserve merely creates debt for speculation and turning poor Americans into slaves. Just look at the $14 trillion the treasury printed to bail out failing speculators in 2008-2010. Or look at the $9 trillion printed by the Fed to do the same. Nothing was invested in the real economy during this time. The debt generated by a truly National Bank would issue productive credit tied to long term infrastructure and industrial growth policies that would pay itself back many times over.
What a different world we could have created had this money been invested into a new (non-Green) New Deal of the 21st century such as China’s Belt and Road Initiative has ushered in?
NAFTA’s long awaited death is a start, as are Obrador’s vital reforms… however a fight needs to still occur before a North American Belt and Road Initiative can finally break colonized nations (including the USA) out from the clutches of the financial oligarchy and their self-imploding deep state managers.
Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review, BRI expert correspondent on Tactical Talk and has authored 3 volumes of ‘Untold History of Canada’ book series. His works appear regularly on The Duran, Strategic Culture, Sott, Fort Russ, Zero Hedge, L.A. Review of Books, LeSaker.fr, Vigile Quebec, and South Front. In 2019 Matthew co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation. He can be reached at matt.ehret@tutamail.com
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-14--North Macedonia Is Being Used by NATO to Target Serbia and Russia

Submitted by InfoBrics , authored by Paul Antonopoulos , Research Fellow at the Center for Syncretic Studies… The North Macedonian House of Representatives unanimously approved on Monday for their country to accept the NATO Accession Protocol , taking the former Yugoslav Republic a step closer towards accession into NATO which is expected to be completed and finalized in the spring .
North Macedonia ’ s rapid accession into NATO is only possible because of the Prespa Agreement signed between Athens and Skopje in June 2018 , bringing an end to the name dispute between the two countries that emerged in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Prespa Agreement , named after a lake that traverses the borders of Greece , North Macedonia and Albania , defined exactly what was meant by “ Macedonia ” and “ Macedonian.
” For Greece , according to the agreement , these terms denote an area and people of Greece ’ s northern region , who continue the legacy of the Ancient Macedonian Hellenic civilization , history and culture , as well as the legacy of Alexander the Great .
In reference to North Macedonia , these terms denote the modern territory of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Slavic people with their own history and culture unrelated to the Ancient Macedonians .
The agreement also stipulates the removal of North Macedonian irredentist efforts against Greek territory and to align them with UNESCO and Council of Europe ’ s standards .
With Greece no longer blocking North Macedonia ’ s attempts to join NATO and the European Union , no time has been wasted to elevate the Balkan country into the Atlanticist organization .
There is no doubt that the Prespa Agreement , which caused political turmoil in Athens and Skopje , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s rapid entry into NATO .
The acceleration of North Macedonia into NATO is not only a key priority for the organization to reduce Russian influence in the Balkans , but to continue pressurizing Serbia that was bombed by NATO in 1999 in response to the Serbian military operation against the “ Kosovo Liberation Army ” terrorist organization .
North Macedonia , Serbia and Bosnia are the only non-NATO members remaining in the Balkans , however it is important to remember that Bosnia is effectively a U.S. protectorate , while North Macedonia has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when Yugoslavia was completely destroyed in all but name .
Serbia has no such ambition to join NATO and is considered a problematic country as it is the only remaining bastion of Russian influence left in the Balkans and is preventing full Atlanticist hegemony over the region .
Syriza , the ruling Party of Greece at the time of the signing of the Prespa Agreement , knew full well that the Prespa Agreement was largely despised by the Greeks , but none-the-less pushed for it and signed it .
It is very obvious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ North Macedonia primarily into NATO , especially as not only Syriza , but also the current ruling party of New Democracy is loyal to NATO , with North Macedonia ’ s entry into the EU being only a consolation prize for Western powers .
Less than a month after signing the Prespa Agreement , North Macedonia received an invitation to join NATO on 11 July 2018 with the accession protocol made in February 2019 .
North Macedonia ’ s accession into the EU on the other hand has made no progress since the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Atlanticists , a rapid accession into NATO to contain and weaken Russian influence in North Macedonia and to also further constrain and pressurize Serbia was a higher priority than formalizing the Balkan country into the European neoliberal order as an official member .
Although North Macedonia will undoubtedly join the EU eventually , it is not a matter of urgency as making the country into a NATO member .
The Prespa Agreement is highly unpopular in both countries as they both feel they have lost out and did not achieve their objectives of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
NATO was unwilling to risk the Prespa Agreement failing and the name issue re-emerging which would once again put on hold North Macedonia ’ s accession into the organization .
North Macedonia can not contribute to NATO in any meaningful way as it is a poor country of just over two million people and not close to the Russian border like the tiny Baltic states .
Its accession into NATO is only for the purpose of weakening or preventing any Russian influence in the country and to further isolate Serbia .
Despite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Slavic country that had the potential to become another pro-Russia state in the Balkans alongside neighboring Serbia , since its separation from Yugoslavia in 1991 , Skopje pursued a pro-Western policy and joined the NATO program Partnership for Peace as early as 1995 and became a European Union candidate a decade later .
Why North Macedonia has pursued such a Western-centric policy since its separation with Yugoslavia is not clearly understood , but it is certainly understood why NATO has accelerated North Macedonia ’ s membership into its organization .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by InfoBrics, authored by Paul Antonopoulos, Research Fellow at the Center for Syncretic Studies…
The North Macedonian House of Representatives unanimously approved on Monday for their country to accept the NATO Accession Protocol, taking the former Yugoslav Republic a step closer towards accession into NATO which is expected to be completed and finalized in the spring. North Macedonia’s rapid accession into NATO is only possible because of the Prespa Agreement signed between Athens and Skopje in June 2018, bringing an end to the name dispute between the two countries that emerged in 1991 with the breakup of Yugoslavia.
The Prespa Agreement, named after a lake that traverses the borders of Greece, North Macedonia and Albania, defined exactly what was meant by “Macedonia” and “Macedonian.” For Greece, according to the agreement, these terms denote an area and people of Greece’s northern region, who continue the legacy of the Ancient Macedonian Hellenic civilization, history and culture, as well as the legacy of Alexander the Great. In reference to North Macedonia, these terms denote the modern territory of North Macedonia, the Slavic language and Slavic people with their own history and culture unrelated to the Ancient Macedonians. The agreement also stipulates the removal of North Macedonian irredentist efforts against Greek territory and to align them with UNESCO and Council of Europe’s standards.
With Greece no longer blocking North Macedonia’s attempts to join NATO and the European Union, no time has been wasted to elevate the Balkan country into the Atlanticist organization. There is no doubt that the Prespa Agreement, which caused political turmoil in Athens and Skopje, was signed only for North Macedonia’s rapid entry into NATO.
The acceleration of North Macedonia into NATO is not only a key priority for the organization to reduce Russian influence in the Balkans, but to continue pressurizing Serbia that was bombed by NATO in 1999 in response to the Serbian military operation against the “Kosovo Liberation Army” terrorist organization. North Macedonia, Serbia and Bosnia are the only non-NATO members remaining in the Balkans, however it is important to remember that Bosnia is effectively a U.S. protectorate, while North Macedonia has been trying to join NATO since 1995 when Yugoslavia was completely destroyed in all but name. Serbia has no such ambition to join NATO and is considered a problematic country as it is the only remaining bastion of Russian influence left in the Balkans and is preventing full Atlanticist hegemony over the region.
Syriza, the ruling Party of Greece at the time of the signing of the Prespa Agreement, knew full well that the Prespa Agreement was largely despised by the Greeks, but none-the-less pushed for it and signed it. It is very obvious that the Prespa Agreement was to accelerate North Macedonia primarily into NATO, especially as not only Syriza, but also the current ruling party of New Democracy is loyal to NATO, with North Macedonia’s entry into the EU being only a consolation prize for Western powers. Less than a month after signing the Prespa Agreement, North Macedonia received an invitation to join NATO on 11 July 2018 with the accession protocol made in February 2019. North Macedonia’s accession into the EU on the other hand has made no progress since the Prespa Agreement was made.
For the Atlanticists, a rapid accession into NATO to contain and weaken Russian influence in North Macedonia and to also further constrain and pressurize Serbia was a higher priority than formalizing the Balkan country into the European neoliberal order as an official member. Although North Macedonia will undoubtedly join the EU eventually, it is not a matter of urgency as making the country into a NATO member. The Prespa Agreement is highly unpopular in both countries as they both feel they have lost out and did not achieve their objectives of promoting their interests with the name issue. NATO was unwilling to risk the Prespa Agreement failing and the name issue re-emerging which would once again put on hold North Macedonia’s accession into the organization.
North Macedonia cannot contribute to NATO in any meaningful way as it is a poor country of just over two million people and not close to the Russian border like the tiny Baltic states. Its accession into NATO is only for the purpose of weakening or preventing any Russian influence in the country and to further isolate Serbia. Despite North Macedonia being an overwhelmingly Orthodox and Slavic country that had the potential to become another pro-Russia state in the Balkans alongside neighboring Serbia, since its separation from Yugoslavia in 1991, Skopje pursued a pro-Western policy and joined the NATO program Partnership for Peace as early as 1995 and became a European Union candidate a decade later. Why North Macedonia has pursued such a Western-centric policy since its separation with Yugoslavia is not clearly understood, but it is certainly understood why NATO has accelerated North Macedonia’s membership into its organization.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-14--China Battles Coronavirus as the Global Economy holds its breath

Submitted by InfoBrics , authored by Johanna Ross , journalist based in Edinburgh , Scotland… The BBC did a study in 2018 called ‘ Pandemic ’ , a social experiment which simulated what would happen if a lethal virus arrived in the UK ; the results of which were shown in a documentary this week .
What was most interesting from the documentary , however , were the interviews gathered from passers by on the street .
They were asked what they thought had biggest single cause of human death to date .
The answers were as one might expect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , natural disasters ; not one individual guessed the correct answer : Spanish Influenza .
Spanish influenza killed around 100 million people worldwide in 1918 .
Today we have another pandemic on our hands – coronavirus – which as we speak is spreading from country to country across the globe .
As I write the death toll stands at 1370 , with over 60,000 confirmed cases .
Originating in Wuhan , China , in a wild animal market , the virus which made the leap from animal to human has now spread to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But with global travel being what it is today , it will be a hard act for other nations to avoid succumbing to it .
Aside from the human cost of the disease , there are , of course , the economic repercussions .
China is the world ’ s second largest economy ( according to GDP ) and the rest of the world has become increasingly dependent on its goods .
Beijing is the biggest global trader of merchandise and is catching up with the US in terms of commercial services @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2018 .
In recent years more and more businesses have learnt to source widgets and components from China and are increasingly opening up their own factories on the mainland .
It is also a country which has benefited from its access to raw materials , much of which travels to China before being used in manufacturing .
With tens of millions of people in lock down across China , deserted metropolises have taken on an almost apocalyptic character , with streets devoid of life , and businesses – from large car manufacturers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Factories which were shut down for the two weeks around Chinese New Year may still not open this weekend .
Take Wuhan itself , the centre of the outbreak .
It is a city of around 11 million people , and an important hub of industry in the region , attracting a great deal of foreign investment .
Two top-10 universities are based there , and it is the country ’ s third largest education and scientific centre .
With the city brought to a standstill , it would be naive to think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impact on productivity , and the economy as a whole .
One of the main industries to suffer globally as a result of the outbreak is of course , travel and tourism .
Cancelled flights and hotel bookings in and around China , and the decision of several airlines to cut back services has hit a sector which normally booms over Chinese New Year .
Chinese tourists , now stranded at home , usually account for a massive chunk of international tourism .
In fact , the Chinese are the greatest source of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over 200 countries and regions across the world .
It has been estimated that China contributed around 26.7 % to the increase in tourism spending worldwide from 2000 to 2017 , and 45.7 % from 2010 to 2017 in the aftermath of the global financial crisis .
These figures speak for themselves : China ’ s economy booms and so does everyone else ’ s .
When the opposite is the case , we should be worried .
Granted , the Chinese government is clearly doing its utmost to stem the spread of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ several provinces .
Residents are receiving letters through their door reminding them that if infected , a refusal to present themselves to the authorities could lead to a 3 to 12 year prison sentence .
Anyone with a temperature is immediately isolated .
As for the economic measures , Chinese President Xi Jingping has decided to slash tariffs on US imports and has made borrowing cheaper for businesses as well as consumers .
But such measures will not compensate for the damage done already by the virus .
A larger stimulus package based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unleashed if the government really wants to resuscitate the economy .
China ’ s economy was already struggling somewhat after Trump ’ s 2019 trade war .
Growth last year was only around 6 % , compared to a higher rate of 10.2 % in 2010 .
At the moment , predictions for future growth lie between 3.7 % and 5 % .
A lot will depend on what happens in the coming next few weeks , and subsequently , how quickly things can return to normal .
The world will be watching @ @ @

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by InfoBrics, authored by Johanna Ross, journalist based in Edinburgh, Scotland…
The BBC did a study in 2018 called ‘Pandemic’, a social experiment which simulated what would happen if a lethal virus arrived in the UK; the results of which were shown in a documentary this week. What was most interesting from the documentary, however, were the interviews gathered from passers by on the street. They were asked what they thought had biggest single cause of human death to date. The answers were as one might expect: war, poverty, climate change, natural disasters; not one individual guessed the correct answer: Spanish Influenza.
Spanish influenza killed around 100 million people worldwide in 1918. Today we have another pandemic on our hands – coronavirus – which as we speak is spreading from country to country across the globe. As I write the death toll stands at 1370, with over 60,000 confirmed cases. Originating in Wuhan, China, in a wild animal market, the virus which made the leap from animal to human has now spread to a total of 28 countries so far. But with global travel being what it is today, it will be a hard act for other nations to avoid succumbing to it.
Aside from the human cost of the disease, there are, of course, the economic repercussions. China is the world’s second largest economy (according to GDP) and the rest of the world has become increasingly dependent on its goods. Beijing is the biggest global trader of merchandise and is catching up with the US in terms of commercial services also, with a 18% surge in 2018. In recent years more and more businesses have learnt to source widgets and components from China and are increasingly opening up their own factories on the mainland. It is also a country which has benefited from its access to raw materials, much of which travels to China before being used in manufacturing.
With tens of millions of people in lock down across China, deserted metropolises have taken on an almost apocalyptic character, with streets devoid of life, and businesses – from large car manufacturers to independent coffee shops shut indefinitely. Factories which were shut down for the two weeks around Chinese New Year may still not open this weekend.
Take Wuhan itself, the centre of the outbreak. It is a city of around 11 million people, and an important hub of industry in the region, attracting a great deal of foreign investment. Two top-10 universities are based there, and it is the country’s third largest education and scientific centre. With the city brought to a standstill, it would be naive to think it wouldn’t have a serious impact on productivity, and the economy as a whole.
One of the main industries to suffer globally as a result of the outbreak is of course, travel and tourism. Cancelled flights and hotel bookings in and around China, and the decision of several airlines to cut back services has hit a sector which normally booms over Chinese New Year. Chinese tourists, now stranded at home, usually account for a massive chunk of international tourism. In fact, the Chinese are the greatest source of direct increase in global tourism income for over 200 countries and regions across the world. It has been estimated that China contributed around 26.7 % to the increase in tourism spending worldwide from 2000 to 2017, and 45.7% from 2010 to 2017 in the aftermath of the global financial crisis. These figures speak for themselves: China’s economy booms and so does everyone else’s. When the opposite is the case, we should be worried.
Granted, the Chinese government is clearly doing its utmost to stem the spread of coronavirus. Masks are now obligatory in several provinces. Residents are receiving letters through their door reminding them that if infected, a refusal to present themselves to the authorities could lead to a 3 to 12 year prison sentence. Anyone with a temperature is immediately isolated.
As for the economic measures, Chinese President Xi Jingping has decided to slash tariffs on US imports and has made borrowing cheaper for businesses as well as consumers. But such measures will not compensate for the damage done already by the virus. A larger stimulus package based on fiscal policy may have to be unleashed if the government really wants to resuscitate the economy.
China’s economy was already struggling somewhat after Trump’s 2019 trade war. Growth last year was only around 6%, compared to a higher rate of 10.2% in 2010. At the moment, predictions for future growth lie between 3.7% and 5%. A lot will depend on what happens in the coming next few weeks, and subsequently, how quickly things can return to normal. The world will be watching and waiting.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-14--With UK out, Macron unveils ‘nuclear weapons doctrine’ with France leading an EU army (Video)

The Duran ’ s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss Emmanuel Macron ’ s speech where the French President unveiled his nuclear doctrine advocating for a more coordinated European Union defence strategy in which France , the EU ’ s only post-Brexit nuclear power , and its arsenal holding a central role .
Macron warned all those in attendance that the European Union ‘ can not remain spectators ’ in the nuclear arms race .
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute .
The Duran Audio Podcast : Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military officers graduating in Paris , Macron called on EU member states to play a more direct role in halting a new nuclear arms race , saying they “ can not remain spectators ” against a threat to the continent ’ s collective security .
“ In the absence of a legal framework , they could rapidly face a new race for conventional weapons , even nuclear weapons , on their own soil , ” said Macron .
Setting out his country ’ s nuclear strategy in a bid to show leadership a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ EU , Macron highlighted how France sees its nuclear weapons as a deterrent against attacks from belligerent foes .
Macron ’ s speech comes at a time when long-standing accords on limiting the growth of nuclear arsenals appear increasingly at risk .
The US and Russia have abandoned the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces ( INF ) treaty , each blaming the other for breaching its limits , and Washington is threatening to quit the New START arms reduction treaty when it expires next year .
Add to that China ’ s bid for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need for Europe to ensure it does not find itself in the middle of a Cold War-style standoff “ which could jeopardise the peace obtained after so many tragedies on our continent ” , Macron said .
He warned of “ the possibility of a pure and unrestrained military and nuclear competition , the likes of which we haven ’ t seen since the end of the 1960s ” .
“ The vital interests of France now have a European dimension , ” said Macron , circling back to his central message of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defence policy .
European nations should also insist on being signatories of any new deal to limit the development of new intermediate-range weapons , he noted .
“ Let us be clear : if negotiations and a more comprehensive treaty are possible… Europeans must be stakeholders and signatories , because it ’ s our territory ” that is most at risk .
Friday ’ s speech was part of Macron ’ s long-running push for a stronger European defence , as US President Donald Trump has pulled away from European allies and admonished @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for their own protection .
Macron himself ruffled feathers last year when he noted that the lack of US leadership is causing the “ brain death ” of the military alliance .
France has already reduced the number of its warheads to under 300 , Macron said , giving it “ the legitimacy to demand concrete moves from other nuclear powers toward global disarmament that is gradual , credible and can be verified ” .
But he stopped short of offering to share France ’ s nuclear deterrence capabilities , a pillar of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ de Gaulle in the 1960s .
Germany in particular remains strongly opposed to atomic weapons , although a leader in Chancellor Angela Merkel ’ s party , Johann Wadephul , said this week that Paris should consider putting its arsenal under the auspices of the EU or NATO .
Macron invited European partners to engage in a “ strategic dialogue ” on the deterrent role of France ’ s nuclear capacity as the country embarks on a costly modernisation of its arsenal .
“ Our independence in terms of decision-making is fully compatible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ partners , ” Macron said .
Macron also warned of the need for “ a greater capacity for autonomous action by Europeans ” , who must step up their military spending .
“ Why are they not ready to make defence a budget priority and make the necessary sacrifices , even as the risks are growing ?
” Macron asked .
His speech came as a diplomatic freeze between the EU and Russia since Moscow ’ s annexation of Crimea from Ukraine has rekindled fears of fresh conflict along Europe ’ s eastern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ EU nations by recently reaching out to restore dialogue with President Vladimir Putin , who controls the world ’ s largest nuclear arsenal .
“ There can be no defence and security project for European citizens without a political vision that seeks to progressively restore trust with Russia , ” Macron said .
“ We can not accept the current situation , where the chasm deepens and talks diminish even as the security issues that need to be addressed with Moscow are multiplying.
” Macron did not specify whether Britain , Europe ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of the deeper EU cooperation now that is has quit the bloc .
But he noted that “ since 1995 , France and the United Kingdom have stated clearly there is no situation in which a threat to one ’ s vital interests would not also be a threat to the other ’ s .
”

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss Emmanuel Macron’s speech where the French President unveiled his nuclear doctrine advocating for a more coordinated European Union defence strategy in which France, the EU’s only post-Brexit nuclear power, and its arsenal holding a central role.
Macron warned all those in attendance that the European Union ‘cannot remain spectators’ in the nuclear arms race.
Support Free Speech:
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute.
The Duran Audio Podcast:
Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes.
Via France24…
In a much anticipated speech to military officers graduating in Paris, Macron called on EU member states to play a more direct role in halting a new nuclear arms race, saying they “cannot remain spectators” against a threat to the continent’s collective security.
“In the absence of a legal framework, they could rapidly face a new race for conventional weapons, even nuclear weapons, on their own soil,” said Macron.
Setting out his country’s nuclear strategy in a bid to show leadership a week after nuclear-armed Britain officially exited the EU, Macron highlighted how France sees its nuclear weapons as a deterrent against attacks from belligerent foes.
Macron’s speech comes at a time when long-standing accords on limiting the growth of nuclear arsenals appear increasingly at risk.
The US and Russia have abandoned the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, each blaming the other for breaching its limits, and Washington is threatening to quit the New START arms reduction treaty when it expires next year.
Add to that China’s bid for global sway, there is a strong need for Europe to ensure it does not find itself in the middle of a Cold War-style standoff “which could jeopardise the peace obtained after so many tragedies on our continent”, Macron said.
He warned of “the possibility of a pure and unrestrained military and nuclear competition, the likes of which we haven’t seen since the end of the 1960s”.
“The vital interests of France now have a European dimension,” said Macron, circling back to his central message of a need for a more coordinated European defence policy.
European nations should also insist on being signatories of any new deal to limit the development of new intermediate-range weapons, he noted. “Let us be clear: if negotiations and a more comprehensive treaty are possible… Europeans must be stakeholders and signatories, because it’s our territory” that is most at risk.
Waning US engagement and NATO ‘brain death’
Friday’s speech was part of Macron’s long-running push for a stronger European defence, as US President Donald Trump has pulled away from European allies and admonished other NATO members for not paying more for their own protection.
Macron himself ruffled feathers last year when he noted that the lack of US leadership is causing the “brain death” of the military alliance.
EN DIRECT | Discours du Président @EmmanuelMacron sur la stratégie de défense et de dissuasion depuis l’École militaire. https://t.co/PfYQShLHV2 — Élysée (@Elysee) February 7, 2020
Reduced number of warheads and disarmament
France has already reduced the number of its warheads to under 300, Macron said, giving it “the legitimacy to demand concrete moves from other nuclear powers toward global disarmament that is gradual, credible and can be verified”.
But he stopped short of offering to share France’s nuclear deterrence capabilities, a pillar of its security strategy since implemented by Charles de Gaulle in the 1960s.
Germany in particular remains strongly opposed to atomic weapons, although a leader in Chancellor Angela Merkel’s party, Johann Wadephul, said this week that Paris should consider putting its arsenal under the auspices of the EU or NATO.
Macron invited European partners to engage in a “strategic dialogue” on the deterrent role of France’s nuclear capacity as the country embarks on a costly modernisation of its arsenal.
“Our independence in terms of decision-making is fully compatible with an unshakeable solidarity with our European partners,” Macron said.
Macron also warned of the need for “a greater capacity for autonomous action by Europeans”, who must step up their military spending.
“Why are they not ready to make defence a budget priority and make the necessary sacrifices, even as the risks are growing?” Macron asked.
‘Restore trust with Russia’
His speech came as a diplomatic freeze between the EU and Russia since Moscow’s annexation of Crimea from Ukraine has rekindled fears of fresh conflict along Europe’s eastern flank.
France has broken with some EU nations by recently reaching out to restore dialogue with President Vladimir Putin, who controls the world’s largest nuclear arsenal.
“There can be no defence and security project for European citizens without a political vision that seeks to progressively restore trust with Russia,” Macron said.
“We cannot accept the current situation, where the chasm deepens and talks diminish even as the security issues that need to be addressed with Moscow are multiplying.”
Macron did not specify whether Britain, Europe’s other nuclear power, should be part of the deeper EU cooperation now that is has quit the bloc.
But he noted that “since 1995, France and the United Kingdom have stated clearly there is no situation in which a threat to one’s vital interests would not also be a threat to the other’s.”
“Brexit doesn’t change this at all.”
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-02-16--Censorship Is the Way that Any Dictatorship — and No Democracy — Functions

No democracy can survive censorship .
If there is censorship , then each individual can not make his/her own decisions ( voting decisions or otherwise ) on the basis of truth but only on the basis of whatever passes through the censor ’ s filter , which is always whatever supports the censoring regime and implants it evermore deeply into the public ’ s mind — regardless of its actual truthfulness .
The public does have a mind , as a collective constituting the majority of the residents in the given land , which majority rules any democratic government .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ represent the majority , it ’ s no democracy , at all , but instead represents other individuals , the real rulers , who might be hidden .
Consequently , if a democracy exists but a censor somehow becomes allowed , and emerges into existence in a given land , then democracy will inevitably be snuffed-out there , and dictatorship will inevitably be the result — merely because censorship has been applied there , which blocks some essential truths ( truths that the rulers don ’ t want the public to know ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as toxic to democracy as is censorship .
Censorship prevents democracy .
If a dictatorship already exists in a given land , then it does so by means of censorship , because only by that means will the public be willing to pay taxes to the regime and to go to war for it and to kill and die for it .
Without censorship , none of that could happen , except in an authentic democracy .
An authentic democracy has no censorship .
This is why democracy is so rare .
Almost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ .
But a government which calls itself “ democratic ” isn ’ t necessarily democratic , but more likely it has simply fooled its public to think that it is one ( such as the United States has by now been scientifically proven to be — an actual dictatorship ) .
Anyone who endorses censorship is a totalitarian , a supporter of totalitarianism , even without recognizing the fact .
If the person fails to recognize the fact that censorship is applied only in a totalitarian regime , then that person has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ totalitarianism : the idea that censorship can be justified in some circumstances .
Dictatorships always pump that lie , so as to be able to continue to exist as a dictatorship .
There is no circumstance which ever can justify censorship , unless one believes that dictatorship is , or can be , good instead of bad .
If you think that some censorship is good , then you have bought into the fundamental belief that is promulgated in any dictatorship .
It ’ s a lie , but it fools the majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ No writing , nor any other statement , should ever be censored , no matter how vile it is .
Indeed , if it is vile , then it needs to be exposed , not hidden ; because , if it is hidden , then it will fester until it grows in the dark and finally becomes sprung upon a public who have never been inoculated against it by truth , and therefore the false belief becomes actually seriously dangerous and likely to spread like wildfire , because it had been censored before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infections are those that grow in the dark and then become released upon a population who have no pre-existing protection against it .
Every religion , and every evil regime , seeks to censor-out whatever contradicts its propaganda , and is therefore intrinsically hostile toward democracy , but the danger is always being presented not by the writers and speakers of the propaganda , but by its publishers ( regardless of media : print , broadcast , or online ) — they are the source of all censorship .
They are the censors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ publish , and what not to publish , are the censors .
The regime ’ s media are what perpetrate censorship , routinely , because those media are actually essential arms of the dictatorship , even if they are not directly owned by the government but instead by the clique who actually possess control over the government because they possess control over the mainstream ( and much of the non-mainstream ) media and thus the public ’ s mind in a ‘ democracy ’ in order to make it the dictatorship that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about how this censorship has been perpetrated in the post-WW-II ( post-26-July-1945 ) U.S.A. , such as here , and here , and here , and here .
( All of that has been censored-out from the major media — they don ’ t report that they represent the regime instead of the public . )
As a consequence of that censorship against truth , history is being revised to be ‘ history ’ so as to portray a false ‘ reality ’ to people today .
And there are numerous other examples @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , each instance , of which lying , is affirmed as being truth by the regime ’ s agents , but is actually nothing more than vicious lies that are spread by the regime and its agents .
What goes on behind the scenes is hidden from the American public , not really in order to protect them , but purely in order to deceive them .
The deception of the American people , and of the residents in all of the U.S. Government ’ s foreign vassal-states ( or ‘ allies ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extreme , in all fields of international relations .
Whereas Julian Assange was the world ’ s strongest enemy against censorship , he has been almost ten years now under some form or another of imprisonment , including solitary confinement and torture , all without ever having been convicted of anything , and all because he is an enemy against censorship instead of a flak for censorship .
And Twitter and other ‘ social media ’ are hiding from the public — censoring — the sheer outrageousness of it all .
( The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of the 180 nations on the Press Freedom Index .
That ’ s worse than almost all industrialized nations .
However , I find the truthfulness of its mainstream-media international news reporting to be worse than that in some countries which rank near the very bottom of the list .
I consider the ranking-system to be slanted toward U.S. and allied countries .
If anything , U.S. receives far too favorable a “ Press Freedom ” ranking , and should be listed somewhere near the very bottom — at least as regards @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every other industrialized nation already places it far lower than the country ’ s myth about itself does , regarding “ Press Freedom.
” And heroic whistleblowers , such as Assange , experience the very worst of it . )
The solution to the problem of lies is not censorship , it is banning censorship .
On 7 June 2019 , the need for this seemed even clearer to me after Russia ’ s RT headlined on that date “ Glenn Greenwald rips liberals who ‘ beg for censorship ’ ” , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ powerfully the case against any censorship at all .
As one can see from the accompanying video interview there of him , Greenwald was like a force of nature , in that video , or ( to use a different metaphor ) a huge dose of mental draino for clogged minds .
This also means that issues of libel and slander are only to be addressed in the civil courts , and not , at all , in the government ’ s prosecutions , the criminal courts .
All censorship needs to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ How can this be done ?
That ’ s a question I have never seen discussed , perhaps because it is being censored .
It ’ s a very serious question .
Any ‘ political science ’ which exists that has no extensive literature about this question is fake .
Perhaps draino for clogged minds is needed especially for scholars .
Things are worse than we know , because censorship exists .
Maybe censorship is pervasive .
So : I shall venture a solution to this problem : By law , all media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fire all editors and producers of “ news , ” but not the employees who have only managerial , presentational , and/or stylistic assignments , and will replace these people ( all personnel who select what to present and what not to present ) by a randomized algorithm being applied to each topic , so that , if , for example , something is entered into a search-box , then the order or presentation of the findings will be listed either ( at the user ’ s selection ) from earliest-posted to latest-posted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not by anything that is chosen or determined by the search-engine itself .
( In other words : no search-engine will be allowed to censor . )
On print or broadcast media , every news-piece will be controlled in real time by its audience so as to determine what the questions are and then to bring into the presentation randomly selected scientifically qualified experts regarding each such question .
For example : on the question of climate-change , the experts would be individuals who have terminal graduate-level degrees in each of the related @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at Wikipedia , but also in essential related fields such as economics ( an important climatological sub-specialty that ’ s not listed there ) .
If , indeed , over 90 % of climatologists agree that man-made global warming is a reality , then the result of this method of selecting the “ experts ” who will be presented is that that viewpoint will be represented by over 90 % of the experts — and this outcome would not be controlled by the given ‘ news ’ -medium , nor affected by its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the subject-matter and academic qualifications — no governmental positions or background — would qualify individuals as being “ experts ” on the given topic .
If a terminal degree isn ’ t a qualification for expertise on a topic , then what is ?
Aren ’ t government officials supposed to be relying on them ?
And if , for example , the topic is Syria , then shouldn ’ t all individuals who have terminal degrees on Syria be the “ experts ” who are invited , on a randomized basis , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issues ?
If that were the case , then — for example — perhaps many Americans would know that the U.S. and NATO “ began operations in April- May 2011 to organize and expand the dissident base in Syria , ” “ organizing defectors in Syria , ” and “ smuggle US weapons into Syria , participate in US psychological and information warfare inside Syria ” to produce regime-change there , and that Syria had never posed any threat to U.S. national security , yet the U.S. has invaded it for over eight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for such opportunities to overthrow Syria ’ s Government even when he became President in 2009 .
If the American public didn ’ t know those things at the time , then perhaps America ’ s censorship was total — which would indicate how absolutely crucial a randomization of the public ’ s information-sources is , so as to replace the power that the existing mainstrean ‘ news ’ -media have over the public ’ s mind , in America , and in its vassal-nations ( which don ’ t yet include Syria @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have unprejudiced — which means entirely uncensored — information presented routinely to them , then democracy isn ’ t even possible .
With this method , there still would be a system of exposing lies .
But censorship would not be a part of that .
Anyway : that is one proposed way of replacing censorship , and overcoming dictatorship .
How many politicians are proposing such changes ?
Why aren ’ t any ?
Are all of them afraid of the dictators ?
Is there no basis for hope , at all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ author , most recently , of They ’ re Not Even Close : The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records , 1910-2010 , and of CHRIST ’ S VENTRILOQUISTS : The Event that Created Christianity .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Eric Zuesse, originally posted at Strategic Culture
No democracy can survive censorship. If there is censorship, then each individual cannot make his/her own decisions (voting decisions or otherwise) on the basis of truth but only on the basis of whatever passes through the censor’s filter, which is always whatever supports the censoring regime and implants it evermore deeply into the public’s mind — regardless of its actual truthfulness.
The public does have a mind, as a collective constituting the majority of the residents in the given land, which majority rules any democratic government. If the government doesn’t really represent the majority, it’s no democracy, at all, but instead represents other individuals, the real rulers, who might be hidden. Consequently, if a democracy exists but a censor somehow becomes allowed, and emerges into existence in a given land, then democracy will inevitably be snuffed-out there, and dictatorship will inevitably be the result — merely because censorship has been applied there, which blocks some essential truths (truths that the rulers don’t want the public to know) from reaching the public.
Nothing is as toxic to democracy as is censorship. Censorship prevents democracy.
If a dictatorship already exists in a given land, then it does so by means of censorship, because only by that means will the public be willing to pay taxes to the regime and to go to war for it and to kill and die for it. Without censorship, none of that could happen, except in an authentic democracy. An authentic democracy has no censorship.
This is why democracy is so rare. Almost every dictatorship calls itself a ‘democracy’. But a government which calls itself “democratic” isn’t necessarily democratic, but more likely it has simply fooled its public to think that it is one (such as the United States has by now been scientifically proven to be — an actual dictatorship).
Anyone who endorses censorship is a totalitarian, a supporter of totalitarianism, even without recognizing the fact. If the person fails to recognize the fact that censorship is applied only in a totalitarian regime, then that person has bought into the most basic belief of totalitarianism: the idea that censorship can be justified in some circumstances. Dictatorships always pump that lie, so as to be able to continue to exist as a dictatorship. There is no circumstance which ever can justify censorship, unless one believes that dictatorship is, or can be, good instead of bad.
If you think that some censorship is good, then you have bought into the fundamental belief that is promulgated in any dictatorship. It’s a lie, but it fools the majority of people, in a dictatorship.
No writing, nor any other statement, should ever be censored, no matter how vile it is. Indeed, if it is vile, then it needs to be exposed, not hidden; because, if it is hidden, then it will fester until it grows in the dark and finally becomes sprung upon a public who have never been inoculated against it by truth, and therefore the false belief becomes actually seriously dangerous and likely to spread like wildfire, because it had been censored before it became public. The most deadly infections are those that grow in the dark and then become released upon a population who have no pre-existing protection against it.
Every religion, and every evil regime, seeks to censor-out whatever contradicts its propaganda, and is therefore intrinsically hostile toward democracy, but the danger is always being presented not by the writers and speakers of the propaganda, but by its publishers (regardless of media: print, broadcast, or online) — they are the source of all censorship. They are the censors. The people who select what to publish, and what not to publish, are the censors. The regime’s media are what perpetrate censorship, routinely, because those media are actually essential arms of the dictatorship, even if they are not directly owned by the government but instead by the clique who actually possess control over the government because they possess control over the mainstream (and much of the non-mainstream) media and thus the public’s mind in a ‘democracy’ in order to make it the dictatorship that it actually is.
Much has been written about how this censorship has been perpetrated in the post-WW-II (post-26-July-1945) U.S.A., such as here, and here, and here, and here. (All of that has been censored-out from the major media — they don’t report that they represent the regime instead of the public.) As a consequence of that censorship against truth, history is being revised to be ‘history’ so as to portray a false ‘reality’ to people today. And there are numerous other examples of this, by the U.S. regime, each instance, of which lying, is affirmed as being truth by the regime’s agents, but is actually nothing more than vicious lies that are spread by the regime and its agents. What goes on behind the scenes is hidden from the American public, not really in order to protect them, but purely in order to deceive them. The deception of the American people, and of the residents in all of the U.S. Government’s foreign vassal-states (or ‘allies’) in Europe and elsewhere, is extreme, in all fields of international relations. Whereas Julian Assange was the world’s strongest enemy against censorship, he has been almost ten years now under some form or another of imprisonment, including solitary confinement and torture, all without ever having been convicted of anything, and all because he is an enemy against censorship instead of a flak for censorship. And Twitter and other ‘social media’ are hiding from the public — censoring — the sheer outrageousness of it all. (The United States in 2019 ranked #48 out of the 180 nations on the Press Freedom Index. That’s worse than almost all industrialized nations. However, I find the truthfulness of its mainstream-media international news reporting to be worse than that in some countries which rank near the very bottom of the list. I consider the ranking-system to be slanted toward U.S. and allied countries. If anything, U.S. receives far too favorable a “Press Freedom” ranking, and should be listed somewhere near the very bottom — at least as regards truthfulness. But its scoring below almost every other industrialized nation already places it far lower than the country’s myth about itself does, regarding “Press Freedom.” And heroic whistleblowers, such as Assange, experience the very worst of it.)
The solution to the problem of lies is not censorship, it is banning censorship. On 7 June 2019, the need for this seemed even clearer to me after Russia’s RT headlined on that date “Glenn Greenwald rips liberals who ‘beg for censorship’”, and that brilliant lawyer and investigative journalist presented powerfully the case against any censorship at all. As one can see from the accompanying video interview there of him, Greenwald was like a force of nature, in that video, or (to use a different metaphor) a huge dose of mental draino for clogged minds.
This also means that issues of libel and slander are only to be addressed in the civil courts, and not, at all, in the government’s prosecutions, the criminal courts.
All censorship needs to be banned. The question therefore becomes: How can this be done? That’s a question I have never seen discussed, perhaps because it is being censored. It’s a very serious question. Any ‘political science’ which exists that has no extensive literature about this question is fake. Perhaps draino for clogged minds is needed especially for scholars.
Things are worse than we know, because censorship exists. Maybe censorship is pervasive.
So: I shall venture a solution to this problem: By law, all media which discuss national and/or international affairs will fire all editors and producers of “news,” but not the employees who have only managerial, presentational, and/or stylistic assignments, and will replace these people (all personnel who select what to present and what not to present) by a randomized algorithm being applied to each topic, so that, if, for example, something is entered into a search-box, then the order or presentation of the findings will be listed either (at the user’s selection) from earliest-posted to latest-posted, or latest-posted to earliest-posted, but not by anything that is chosen or determined by the search-engine itself. (In other words: no search-engine will be allowed to censor.) On print or broadcast media, every news-piece will be controlled in real time by its audience so as to determine what the questions are and then to bring into the presentation randomly selected scientifically qualified experts regarding each such question. For example: on the question of climate-change, the experts would be individuals who have terminal graduate-level degrees in each of the related climatology sub-specialties, such as those listed at Wikipedia, but also in essential related fields such as economics (an important climatological sub-specialty that’s not listed there). If, indeed, over 90% of climatologists agree that man-made global warming is a reality, then the result of this method of selecting the “experts” who will be presented is that that viewpoint will be represented by over 90% of the experts — and this outcome would not be controlled by the given ‘news’-medium, nor affected by its advertisers. In other words: only the subject-matter and academic qualifications — no governmental positions or background — would qualify individuals as being “experts” on the given topic. If a terminal degree isn’t a qualification for expertise on a topic, then what is? Aren’t government officials supposed to be relying on them? And if, for example, the topic is Syria, then shouldn’t all individuals who have terminal degrees on Syria be the “experts” who are invited, on a randomized basis, to comment to the public about Syria-related issues? If that were the case, then — for example — perhaps many Americans would know that the U.S. and NATO “began operations in April- May 2011 to organize and expand the dissident base in Syria,” “organizing defectors in Syria,” and “smuggle US weapons into Syria, participate in US psychological and information warfare inside Syria” to produce regime-change there, and that Syria had never posed any threat to U.S. national security, yet the U.S. has invaded it for over eight years. And Barack Obama was hoping for such opportunities to overthrow Syria’s Government even when he became President in 2009. If the American public didn’t know those things at the time, then perhaps America’s censorship was total — which would indicate how absolutely crucial a randomization of the public’s information-sources is, so as to replace the power that the existing mainstrean ‘news’-media have over the public’s mind, in America, and in its vassal-nations (which don’t yet include Syria). If the public do not have unprejudiced — which means entirely uncensored — information presented routinely to them, then democracy isn’t even possible. With this method, there still would be a system of exposing lies. But censorship would not be a part of that.
Anyway: that is one proposed way of replacing censorship, and overcoming dictatorship. How many politicians are proposing such changes? Why aren’t any? Are all of them afraid of the dictators? Is there no basis for hope, at all?
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report