May 26, 2012
The realities of the good life in the USA

Well… After moving back to the USA on 15 May, 2011, I feel like I have a pretty sophisticated impression of the effects that living here has on me, even if they are not the same as for everyone else.  To be honest, I’ve been pretty lucky.  I’m on track to have my masters completed a week and a half from today (probably less, since I am talking about the day I started writing this), I have met a few incredible friends and a lot of exceptional passers-by in New York city, and I was one of the first in my masters program to receive a job offer in NYC.

Then again, I’ve gotten a ticket for an open container for drinking on my fire escape, been ticketed hundreds of dollars for speeding on my bicycle, and spent a night in jail for my involvement in the Occupy Wall Street protests (although I absolutely cannot consider OWS to be anything but a positive part of my life).

Due in part to the OWS arrest, Columbia has told me I was not eligible to graduate twice, though I still am.  I’ve been banned by the department of education from teaching in New York, though, due to a variety of loopholes and appeals, I still am.

The City has been good to me.  Or better to me than a lot of people.  Though anyone who has tried here knows that making it is a little bit bitter-sweet.  You give up a lot on your way.

I don’t think, though, that these are uniquely the effects of life in New York City.  Rather, it seems like they are pretty likely to be side effects of western society as a whole, and particularly, the manifestation of western society in the Untied States.  We might refer to this phenominon as representing life through capitalist ideals.

Competition.

Anyone who knows me well will tell you, I can be a bit of a harsh person.  When asked about old friends who haven’t seemed to be going anywhere or moving towards their goals/ideals over a significant period, I’ll say that I am worried that they are failing at life.  Having taken literally years of time to backpack in different parts of the world, this might sound a little bit ironic, but I see that education as very much connected to my goals of continuing to understand the world, connect with it, and develop as an educator and an activist.  I see this as a strength.

But, even for someone with standards as high as my own, there are people in my life whose passion, drive, and work I deeply respect.  Unfortunately, under the current framework of our society, it can very difficult to get close with other people who are very good at my craft.  After all, we have been trained to compete.  The road to success lies in most effectively balancing the highest quality output with the greatest speed, reliability, and efficiency.  

Beyond the short term effects of this competition, working towards employment or whatever else, there is one really broad phenomenon: the way our society is structured, that road, or battle, never ends.  We never arrive at security or stability or success, we just make it to the next phase of our struggle, and then keep fighting.  And this is how a system as exploitative as that of the United States perpetuates itself (as a side note, this is why neoliberal forces in many countries with more public institutions and social support are pushing to change that reality).

For example, the typical, self perpetuating life of a bourgeois in the US:

  • Complete primary and secondary school.  If these schools are going to prepare an individual to be a critical thinker with doors open to them for their future, this school will be expensive: it will either be private, with a substantial price tag attached, or in a “public community school district” in a community that is socioeconomically selective.
  • Snag a Bachelors Degree:  This one is a prerequisite.  There are a few detours from this path.  Military service might be mixed into, or come before, university membership (as an officer, of course, as the upper classes of our stratified society rarely enter the lower ranks of the military).  Whether public or private, the cheapest this degree is likely to be is about $50,000 US dollars (though $150,000 is much more typical).  Loans will play a part in attaining this degree. Loans that make it increasingly hard for young people with degrees from the US to be employed abroad or compete on a global scale, since we are essentially saddled with an extra rent check every month: a sort of mortgage on our intellectualism.
  • (Possibly) Snag a Masters:  Tack on another $60-80,000 in debt.  In a growing number of fields, particularly in major urban centers, people are virtually unemployable if they don’t have this all important graduate degree.  The more elite the institution, the higher the price-tag.  But, we are told, access to employment (and therefore the ever-elusive carrot of “security”) lies on having this piece of paper and bit of what is quite often guided reading of literature that could be attained for free.
  • Start working: At the end of our formal education, numerous responsibilities shift onto our shoulders, quickly destabilizing our vision of what security might look like.  For example, an income of $55,000 USD per year in New York City is about $36,000 after tax.  After typical loan repayment, at the very minimum payment level, this is 26,000.  Rent and living costs in New York City, at minimum, with a lot of roommates, no TV, and limited heat, is about 18,000 dollars.  Alright, you say, that’s a surplus of $8,000. But let’s reflect.  If you want to have a child, you need to be able to save up to help with its education, with its healthcare, etc.  At this rate, you will take about 25 years to pay off your student loans, so if you’re planning on having a family (as our society pressures us to do) you better put that extra 8 grand into investments, a savings account, or making extra payments on your loans.  More on this train of thought in the next section, The hoarding effect.)
  • Keep Working:  This is a big one.  In the United States, if you stop working, a lot of things happen.  Suddenly you don’t have access to healthcare.  Neither do your children.  So a year off to travel, six months to get your life together (unless it is for a “government approved” reason like substance abuse treatment, though you will probably loose your children for this, anyway), or anything other than full time employment are pretty much out of the question.  This continues until you are 65 or 70 and have enough money hoarded (again,see below) to retire and hope that your pile of money doesn’t run out before your time on this earth does.  Since there is pretty much no helping you (you little burden on society, you) if it does.
  • Retire and die:  See above.  You better be sure your investments hold out, and that enough is left over to pay for the funeral that will cost tens of thousands of dollars, lest you be a burden to your family.

The hoarding effect

But let’s get back to that $8000 dollar surplus from our “start working” section.  That’s a pretty good chunk of money.  It could build more than 10 houses for victims of violence in Central Africa.  It could provide capital or life saving medical treatment in areas of the world where lack of access to these resources routinely results in death for those people deemed “less important” in the grand capitalist scheme of things.

But at the end of the day, the vast majority of people with access to this chunk of money (and an even more vast majority of people with access to bigger chunks of money) decide to keep it.  And because of the way in which our economy is structured, inflation essentially forces us to give our money over to major banking institutions or risk it losing value (well, losing even more value than it will when given to the bank).  Often, this involves using it to the advantage of the upper class in this country.  So it ends up invested.  With the good investments of our society.  In case you are wondering, green energy isn’t a good investment.  Companies like Chevron, Monsanto, and WalMart are.  Because those are the companies that the US government, and the economic culture it fosters, will reliably continue to support.

It’s something of a tough conundrum.  In order to be even remotely free to use this cycle, one is seemingly forced to claw their way to a position of relative “security” within the petit bourgeoise.  Then they might be able to save enough money to go travelling or wandering about for a period of time.

But in the process, they are expected to become imperializers in their own right, invested in a system that is consuming not only the freedom of others, but also their own.

The American Dream.  This is what it’s come to.  Or, if we are being a bit more honest, we can point out that this is likely what it’s always been.

May 25, 2012
South Africa Re-labels all Imports from the West Bank as "Made in Occupied Palestine"

Fucking awesome…

brosephstalin:

The international effort to boycott products made in Israeli settlements got a boost recently from a formidable quarter. South Africa announced it would label imports from the West Bank not “Made in Israel” but perhaps “Made in Occupied Palestine.”  It seems a small thing. The new regulation stops well short of calling for a boycott on Ahava beauty products and other exports manufactured or grown by Israeli companies on Palestinian land occupied by the Israeli military since 1967.

But the labeling regulation makes such a boycott more feasible, which is one reason Israel is making a big deal of it.  Another reason, of course, is that on the question of moral heft, South Africa ranks as a heavyweight. From the 1960s to the end of the 80s, an international boycott and disinvestment campaign against the Pretoria regime was one of the factors that led to abandoning the apartheid system that long let the white minority rule the black majority.

“It hurts, yes,” says Itzhak Galnoor, a political scientist at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. “It does send a message to the Israeli people and the Israeli government that the stalemate between Israel and the Palestinians is not acceptable. And I think that countries have the right to send the message.”

Galnoor is among the minority of Israelis who have long boycotted settlement products – making a point at the supermarket of not purchasing goods produced by Israeli companies on the Palestinian territory.  Mostly that’s fruits and vegetables – Israeli plantation agriculture has turned the occupied Jordan River Valley into one big truck farm – but also fine wines and other temptations.  To avoid “normalizing” the occupation, some Israelis also refuse to drive on Hwy. 443, a freeway cut into the West Bank for the convenience of Israelis commuting to Jerusalem from the coastal plain. (This can be a real sacrifice: The 443 is the only alternative to the steeper, almost alpine and frequently backed up Hwy 1, which except for a short span on “no-man’s land” lies entirely within Israel’s 1948 sovereign borders). The settlement product boycott is also being debated among American Jews at the urging of author Peter Beinart whose book The Crisis of Zionism  argues that the occupation is endangering Israeli democracy.

(Read More)

(via arielnietzsche)

May 22, 2012

antisocial-socialist:

Not much has changed.

(via amodernmanifesto)

May 13, 2012
CIA seeks new authority to expand Yemen drone campaign

fuckyeahmarxismleninism:

The CIA is seeking authority to expand its covert drone campaign in Yemen by launching strikes against terrorism suspects even when it does not know the identities of those who could be killed, U.S. officials said.

Securing permission to use these “signature strikes” would allow the agency to hit targets based solely on intelligence indicating patterns of suspicious behavior, such as imagery showing militants gathering at known al-Qaeda compounds or unloading explosives.

If approved, the change would probably accelerate a campaign of U.S. airstrikes in Yemen that is already on a record pace, with at least eight attacks in the past four months.

May 5, 2012
Fresno police drowned a man by tasering and hogtying him, then sticking a garden hose onto (his) face and mouth when he pleaded for water. He was murdered in front of his children.

beatyourselfup:

FRESNO, Calif. (CN) - Fresno police drowned a man by Tasering and hogtying him, then sticking a garden hose “onto (his) face and mouth” when he pleaded for water, the man’s two children claim in Federal Court.

The two minor children, I.R. and H.R., claim that in the summer of 2011 Fresno police restrained their father, Raul Rosas, at a friend’s house while responding to a domestic disturbance call.

The children say their father was not armed and “had not committed a crime.”

After an altercation with a John Doe officer, police pepper-sprayed Rosas and then Tasered him a “countless number of times,” the complaint states.
The children claim their father was Tasered “for eight to ten more minutes,” then he was “hogtied with his ankles tied to his handcuffs behind his back.”
The complaint continues: “Decedent was then slammed onto a table in the residence’s backyard face down. An officer was observed with his knee on decedent’s back while decedent was hogtied, handcuffed, and face down.

“Decedent stated that he couldn’t breathe and that he needed water; an officer ran water from a hose onto decedent’s face and mouth to the point of making it more difficult for decedent to breathe. Decedent tried to move his mouth away from the water and gasp for air. A witness yelled ‘He can’t breathe, you’re drowning him,’ but the officer continued running water over decedent’s face.

“After turning the water off, the Doe Officer(s) continued to press his knee against decedent’s back and continued to put pressure on it. Witnesses repeatedly asked officers to let decedent get up because he couldn’t breathe, but their cries for help were ignored.
“By now there were in excess of 15 deputies and officers on the scene.

“After some time passed, decedent had clear spit bubbles coming out of his mouth.

“Witnesses yelled at officers that decedent was not breathing and pointed to the clear spit bubbles but again were ignored. Doe officer claimed decedent was ‘faking it.’”

“Officers, after much pleading from witnesses, checked decedent’s pulse and discovered he had stopped breathing after not feeling anything when they touched decedent’s neck.

“Decedent had his handcuffs taken off and was untied and placed on his back on the ground. After some time had passed, an officer started doing chest compressions but none of the officers administered mouth-to-mouth resuscitation to the decedent. Ultimately a witness at the scene administered CPR to decedent.

“Some time later, an ambulance arrived and took over trying to revive decedent.”

Rosas’ children are represented by Brian Claypool of Pasadena.

They seek punitive damages for wrongful death, unreasonable search and seizure, due process violations, supervisory liability, negligence, battery, and violation of the Bane Act.

(via amodernmanifesto)

May 3, 2012
A nice glance at the purpose of US “humanitarian aid”

The Brotherhood’s new position on economic policy has delighted the United States. US lawmakers have pushed hard since the beginning of the uprising to foster a form of political Islam compatible with US economic interests and the ideology of the Washington Consensus. When Senators John Kerry and John McCain opened the Egyptian Stock Exchange in a made-for-TV moment last June, it was clear to all that the US would seek - in a characteristically cynical move - to hijack the cries for freedom echoing from Tahrir Square in order to promote the “freedom” of deregulated market capitalism.

Some of the most extreme neoliberal measures have been directed at Egypt’s agriculture sector. As a condition for development aid, USAid has required Egypt to shift its formidable agricultural capacity away from staple foods and toward export crops such as cotton, grapes and strawberries in order to generate foreign currency to pay off its burgeoning debt to the US.

According to Columbia University professor, Timothy Mitchell, USAid first began to facilitate this process in the 1980s through its Agricultural Mechanisation Project, which was designed to develop the productive capacity of Egyptian export agriculture by financing the purchase of American machinery.

In the end - despite USAid’s projections to the contrary - the programme did very little to help common farmers. Instead, it disproportionately benefitted the few large landholders who could afford to take out the loans, while slashing the demand for agricultural labour and causing rural wages to plummet.

To propel the transformation to export-led agriculture, USAid forced the Egyptian government to heavily tax the production of staples by local farmers and to eliminate subsidies on essential consumer goods like sugar, cooking oil and dairy products in order to make room for competition from American and other foreign companies.

To ameliorate the resulting food gap, USAid’s so-called “Food for Peace” programme provided billions of dollars of loans for Egypt to import subsidised grain from the US, which only further undercut local farmers. The result of all of this “agricultural reform” was an unprecedented spike in food prices which made livelihoods increasingly precarious and forced much of the workforce to accept degrading and dehumanising labour conditions. The widespread social frustrations that resulted from these reforms helped spark the 2011 uprising.

Similar forms of neoliberal shock therapy been applied to the public services sector. USAid has aggressively pushed for so-called “cost-recovery” mechanisms, a euphemism for transforming public healthcare and education into private, fee-based institutions. Indeed, USAid typically spends nearly half of its health and education budgets - more than $100-million per year - on privatisation measures.

This has been fantastic for multinational medical companies, as it translates into greater dependence on imported drugs and equipment. For Egyptians, however, privatisation means having to pay large sums on healthcare and education. Mitchell shows that such expenditures - as a percentage of household income - now rank at the second and third highest in the world, respectively. 

To make matters worse, Mitchell also demonstrates that USAidís cuts to public service budgets have forced the wage rates of workers in hospitals and schools below the rate of inflation, causing deep income deficits among working-class households.

These destructive, pro-corporate policies get obscured by the rhetoric that USAid deploys. According to its website, USAid claims to have helped Egypt become a “success story in economic development”, citing “improvements” in the quality of education and - amazingly - “the administration of justice” (a shocking contradiction, given that the US actively funded Mubarak’s repressive military apparatus and its widespread human rights abuses).

Source: Jazeera 

May 1, 2012
NYPD Raids Activists’ Homes Before Tomorrow’s Occupy Wall Street Protests

Today “there was definitely an upswing in law enforcement activity that seemed to fit the pattern of targeting what police might view as political residences,” said Gideon Oliver, the president of the New York Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, which offers legal to support to Occupy Wall Street. “They were asking what are your May Day plans, do you know who the leaders are—these are classic political surveillance questions.”

Oliver said the National Lawyer’s Guild is aware of at least five instances of NYPD paying activists visits, including one where the FBI was involved in questioning. (He wouldn’t elaborate.) We spoke to three of these activists. (click for full story)

April 29, 2012
Today’s version of this would be the US trying to consume the whole thing….
toobaa:

“Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious” ― Oscar Wilde

Today’s version of this would be the US trying to consume the whole thing….

toobaa:

“Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious”

― Oscar Wilde

(via bhabhaismyhomi)

April 28, 2012
What follows is one of the most inspirational current writings I have seen…

DECLARATION OF THE CUBAN REVOLUTIONARY GOVERNMENT
For our second independence

THE Summit held in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, gave evidence of the ever-growing abyss that exists between “Our America”, as Martí called it, and the “turbulent and brutal North that despises us.” Cartagena witnessed a rebellion of Latin America and the Caribbean against the imposition made by “one and a half governments” which applied their imperial veto to paragraphs in the Draft Final Declaration of the so-called Summit of the Americas which demanded an end to the blockade and Cuba’s exclusion from hemispheric events.

Since the celebration of the former Summit in 2009, the illusions about the policy of President Obama vanished; a gap between his speeches and his actions widened. There were no major changes in the policy towards Latin America and the Caribbean. The blockade against Cuba continued and it was even tightened in the financial sector, despite the international condemnation and the overwhelming vote against it at the United Nations General Assembly. The purpose of the blockade is “to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government”, which is now known as “change of regime”.

The ALBA group met on February 4 last in Caracas on the occasion of the celebration of an anniversary of the historical Civic and Military Rebellion of 1992. It adopted one Declaration on the Sovereignty of Argentina over the Malvinas Islands, another on the blockade and described the imposition of Cuba’s exclusion from these events as unfair and unacceptable. President Correa resolutely stated that if this issue was not resolved, Ecuador would not attend the Cartagena Summit. This statement shook the entire region. That courageous stand was the prelude to what happened next.

President Raúl Castro expressed at the ALBA meeting: “I would like to thank President Correa, Evo and all of you for your statements…You are absolutely right; this is an issue of utmost importance. We have never asked for such a measure, but that does not mean we will not support this one, which we think is only fair.”

The president of Colombia, Juan Manuel Santos visited us, in a respectful fashion, and received a response from President Raúl Castro Ruz stating that Cuba, if invited, would attend the Summit, abiding by its principles and the truth, with absolute respect, as is customary. He deserves credit for explicitly introducing the issue of the blockade and the exclusion of Cuba.

President Evo Morales, who was the first to question the Summit at the February ALBA meeting in Caracas, waged a battle in Cartagena and stated as follows: “We are going through a phase of disintegration. It is not possible that one country could veto the presence of Cuba. Therefore, there is no integration; and with the absence of Ecuador, an absence that is only fair to protest the U.S. veto against Cuba, what kind of integration can we talk about?”

On April 13, President Chávez exclaimed: “Now, truth be told, if these two governments, the United States and Canada, refuse to discuss issues that are so profoundly identified with Latin America and the Caribbean such as the issue of Cuba, the sister nation of Cuba, the fraternal Cuba, or the issue of the Malvinas Islands, what’s the point of holding any more Summits of the Americas? We will have to do away with these Summits”. Before that, he had written: “We likewise call for an end to the shameful and criminal blockade of the sister Republic of Cuba, a blockade that has been cruelly and brutally imposed by the empire for more than 50 years against the heroic people of José Martí.”

At a massive rally in solidarity with Cuba, full of young people, held on April 14 in Managua, Daniel Ortega stated as follows: “I think it is high time for the government of the United States to listen to all Latin American nations, with the most diverse ideologies and political philosophies, ranging from the most conservative to the most revolutionary. But, despite that, they all agree that Cuba must be present in these meetings; otherwise there won’t be any other so-called, or misnamed, Summit of the Americas.”

The unitary and solid stand adopted by Our America on the blockade, the exclusion of Cuba and the Malvinas Islands was truly impressive. The resolve and dignity upheld by the President of Argentina in her strong defense of these causes were indicative.

We felt proud when the President of Brazil, Dilma Rousseff, expressed with serene dignity, in front of Obama, that the Greater Homeland can only be treated as an equal and reaffirmed the common position in support of Argentina and Cuba.

The Caribbean leaders gave evidence of the soundness of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and the fact that the Caribbean and Latin America are likewise indivisible. Their defense of Argentinean sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands and their traditional and categorical support to Cuba were transcendental.

The left, popular, trade union, youth and student organizations, as well as the NGO’s, gathered at the Congress of the Peoples in Cartagena expressed an emotional solidarity with Cuba. The Inter-Parliamentary Meeting of the Americas condemned the exclusion of and the blockade of our country.

The United States underestimated the fact that on December 2, 2011, in Caracas, on the occasion of the Bicentennial of the Independence of that country, under the leadership of Chávez, and on the occasion of the 55th anniversary of the Landing of the Granma, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) was founded, an event that had been anticipated by the leader of the Revolution, Fidel Castro Ruz, on February, 2010, when he wrote: “no other institutional event in our hemisphere in the course of the last century has been so transcendental.”

At that first Summit, when Cuba was elected as President of CELAC for the year 2013, Army General Raúl Castro Ruz stated: “With the decisions which we have adopted here and the joint work that we have carried out during the last three years, we have vindicated more than two centuries of struggles and hopes. Having come this far has required effort, blood and sacrifice. The colonial metropolis of the past and the imperial powers of the present have opposed this endeavor.”

Obama does not seem to understand either the significance of the Bolivarian victory of April 13, 2002, or the fact that it’s been ten years now since the coup d’etat, organized by his predecessor with the support of the OAS and the Spanish government headed by Aznar, against President Hugo Chávez, in an attempt to annihilate the Bolivarian Revolution and assassinate its leader. As the Venezuelan Foreign Minister, Nicolás Maduro, reminded him, looking him straight in the eye, in a memorable speech delivered at the Cartagena Summit, the U.S. government continues to intervene in the internal affairs of Venezuela and support the coup conspirators whose members have now become electoral candidates.

President Obama should have realized that the Cartagena Summit was not the best place to offer Cuba advice about democracy, much less when the person attempting to do so was absolutely isolated, forced to apply the empire’s veto, given its lack of ideas and political or moral authority. He engaged in demagogy prior to some troublesome elections. He should rather take care of his wars, crises and politicking. We, Cubans, will take care of Cuba.

The United States never wanted to discuss the terrible consequences of neoliberalism for Latin America and the Caribbean; or the situation of immigrants in the United States and Europe, who are separated from their families, cruelly deported or murdered at walls like the one that has been built along the Río Bravo. The U.S. government never agreed to talk about the poor either, who account for half of humanity.

The empire and the former colonial metropolis do not listen to the “indignados,” their citizens and minorities who live in poverty in those opulent societies, while investing huge amounts of money to bail out corrupt bankers and speculators. In the superpower, 10 per cent of families control 80 per cent of the wealth. Those resources are enough to solve the problems of the planet.

The novelty at the Cartagena meeting was that many of the governments, with natural differences and different approaches, demanded an alternative model that gives priority to solidarity and complementarity over competition based on selfishness; guarantees a harmonious relationship with nature rather than the plundering of natural resources or frenzied consumption. They called for the protection of cultural diversity as opposed to the imposition of values and lifestyles that are alien to our peoples. They asked for the consolidation of peace and rejected wars and militarization.

They launched an appeal to recover the human condition in our societies and build a world that promotes respect for the plurality of ideas and models; the democratic participation of society in government affairs, including consultation about economic and monetary policies; the battle against illiteracy, infant and maternal mortality and curable diseases. They called for greater access to both free and truthful information and potable water. They recognized the existence of social exclusion and the fact that human rights are to be exercised by all and should not be used as a political weapon by the powerful.

This time, the United States government was forced to listen, not to an almost unique voice as had been the case for decades or to a slender minority as occurred until very recently. Now it was the majority of peoples which expressed itself at the Summit to promote this indispensable debate either through their Presidents and Heads of Delegations or through the stand adopted by those who did not attend. The Summit was censored because the empire listens with deaf ears.

In Cartagena, the Monroe Doctrine –”America for the Americans”- was laid bare. As if no one could remember the deception of the Alliance for Progress in 1961 and the Americas Initiative or FTAA in 1994, they have tried to trick us into trusting the “Alliance of Equals.”

As Comandante en Jefe Fidel Castro Ruz predicted during an international event held in Cartagena on June 14, 1994, the so-called Summits of the Americas have only benefited the North.

When expressing his opinion about a similar meeting held in Washington 105 years ago, José Martí wrote: “After viewing with judicial eyes the antecedents, motives, and ingredients of the feast, it is essential to say, for it is true, that the time has come for Spanish America to declare its second independence.”

During the meeting itself, ALBA declared both officially and publicly that without a radical change in the nature of these Summits, it will never attend these meetings again. Other continental leaders have made similar statements.

As to the OAS - that unburied corpse - there is no need to say anything about it.

The Republic of Argentina has the inalienable right to exercise its sovereignty over the Malvinas, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands as well as over the surrounding maritime areas.

Cuba is mindful of the fact that the Greater Homeland will not be complete until the sister people of Puerto Rico is able to exercise its inalienable right to self-determination and until Puerto Rico, a Latin American and Caribbean nation, submitted to the colonial status imposed by the United States, achieves its full independence.

With a solid consensus on regional sovereignty and the defense of our culture within our rich diversity, with almost 600 million inhabitants and abundant natural resources, Our America has now the opportunity to solve the serious problems of extreme inequality in the distribution of wealth and could contribute, with its already obvious strength, to the “equilibrium of the world”, the defense of peace and the preservation of the human species.

To that end, and in the face of attempts to divide us and derail us, which will continue to appear over and over again, Our America must remain united.

No one in the North should ever forget that 51 years ago the Cuban people were already defending, at this very hour, a Socialist Revolution on the bloodstained sands of Playa Girón and that, ever since, “all the peoples of the Americas are a little bit freer.”

Havana, April 18, 2012

http://www.granma.cu/ingles/cuba-i/18abr-17gobierno.html 

April 27, 2012
Those of you who follow the news and international events will recognize the name.  It pops up at least every six months in relation to some massacre of civilians or another…
occupyallstreets:

The 15 Deadliest Corporations: #15 Dyncorp
This privatized military company is often hired by the U.S. government to protect American interests overseas — and so the government can claim no responsibility for Dyncorp’s actions.  
Dyncorp is best known for its brutality in impoverished countries, for trafficking in child sex slaves, for slaughtering civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for training rebels in Haiti. Among some stiff competition, mercenary Dyncorp may be the deadliest and most evil corporation in the United States.
Source

Those of you who follow the news and international events will recognize the name.  It pops up at least every six months in relation to some massacre of civilians or another…

occupyallstreets:

The 15 Deadliest Corporations: #15 Dyncorp

This privatized military company is often hired by the U.S. government to protect American interests overseas — and so the government can claim no responsibility for Dyncorp’s actions. 

Dyncorp is best known for its brutality in impoverished countries, for trafficking in child sex slaves, for slaughtering civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for training rebels in Haiti. Among some stiff competition, mercenary Dyncorp may be the deadliest and most evil corporation in the United States.

Source

Liked posts on Tumblr: More liked posts »