Tuesday, August 18, 2015

Legal Killer. Mr Obama and the case of Lo Porto and Weinstein


In his most famous book "The Age of Extremes", the historian Eric Hobsbawm offers an essential vision of 1900. Not the usual list of dates and names, often forgotten after a few pages, but a point of view that allows the reader to deepen and understand the causes and consequences of a past still voraciously present in the geopolitical world.Hobsbawm on his book points out an important issue : "One reason for the significant growth of barbarism was rather the unprecedented democratization of war ... It 'so that the world became used to the expulsion of entire population from their lands and killing on a large scale : the First World War cleared off an unknown number of Armenians, about 1 million and a half, by the Turks. It was estimated that in May 1940 there were about 40 million refugees uprooted from their homeland. ... One of the most tragic is that humanity has learned to live in a world where the extermination, torture and mass exile have become daily experiences that we do not notice anymore. "January 22, 2012 Giovanni Lo Porto,  Italian aid worker for a German ONG, the "Welt HungerHilfe" ("Help to world hunger") engaged in Pakistan in the reconstruction of the area destroied by the floods of 2011, is kidnapped by unknown militants and held hostage until January 2015, when Americans Drones  decide that the time had come to eliminate Ahmed Farouq, a US citizen, identify as one of the leaders of the Al Qaeda militants in South Asia. In the same mountainous area of ​​Pakistan, covered by unmanned American bombs, they were also two hostages: the American Warren Weinstein and the Italian Giovanni Lo Porto. According to numerous sources, including the "New York Times", the dynamics of this military operation is not entirely clear: The killing of Italian cooperating  took place in January 2015, but the news was released only in April, with a delay of 3 months. A few days earlier in April the Italian Prime Minister Renzi had a meeting with Obama, nothing was leaked, but rather was shown the usual standard pleasantries when the United States were praised for "the extraordinary leadership in foreign policy." After a few days the wet blanket and the case Lo Porto, the apology of President Obama and the death of two innocent archived as "an error in the fight against terrorism". Despite Obama himself had announced, in 2013, after numerous civilians killed accidentally, a "policy of Drones" more accurate and precise. An article last April, appeared on "The Guardian" reports the statement by Josh Earnest, White House spokesman, about the attacks that saw the killing of Lo Porto and Weinstein: "Our objectives in January (Adam Gadahn and Ahmed Farouq) were NOT considered "targets first-level", the protocol in the use of drones should be revised again. "The "COPASIR" (The COPASIR, organ of the Italian Secret Service  has confirmed that the relics of Lo Porto are still in Pakistan, and has not yet been possible a recognition via DNA. The italian Organization has also expressed the wish to fully understand the dynamics of what happened to the Italian cooperative, but it should be noted the lack of interest for the tragic fact: to listen to the urgent speech by Foreign Minister Italian Paolo Gentiloni about this issue, last April there were just, and shamefully I would say, 39 member of Parliament (16 of the Democratic Party, 3 Pi, 7 respectively Fi and M5S, others of Ncd and Sel),Friday is not a good day, the equally shameful excuse of Italian politics.According to Al-Qaeda, in its version of events, the US would refused any negotiation with the kidnappers, prolonging the imprisonment of the two hostages then turned into "fatal accident".Obama told, in his apology, once again the usual story that to combat the terrorist threat the possibility of mistakenly killing civilians is a rare but possible, but the American President forgets a certain Geneva Convention which states "In order to avoid casualties among civilians, the fighting forces must always distinguish between population and civilian on one hand, and military target on the other. Neither the civilian population or individual citizens or civilian objects must be the target of military attacks. " Already a report of the organization "Reprieve" (Authoritative Organization for Human Rights British) of December 2014 revealed that for each target killed by US drones there were 28 unidentified. Only in Yemen and Pakistan for 41 "terrorists" eliminated they remained on the field more than 1,000 civilians killed.For 2015 there are already more than 200 casualities according to the "Bureau of Investigative Journalism" which also is quoted in an article by the NYT, which is defined the "drones" as the favourite weapon of war by Obama, considering that in his administration there were at 330 bombing declared only in Pakistan,  unlike the infamous George W. Bush which in his term saw "only" 51 attacks unmanned.The Pakistani army seems on the verge of defeating the terrorist danger, in particoular in the area where Lo Porto and Weinstein were killed by drones. The "Washington Post" also commented on the difficulties of an independent analysis of news that leaked from the country, since the affected area of ​​Pakistan is forbidden to the reporters. The event almost unique in which Obama has pleaded guilty for the killing of the two aid workers help us to reflect on another point: the file from the US administration full of dead peoples categorized as "unidentified", tens, hundreds, which does not even have the right to  stick a label with a name or a  false, but still formal, presidential apology. This shows once again what kind of value the American war Machine got for human lives. Numbers, path errors, tiny spots on the paper where the word "victory" or "end" is never fully spelled out.The Italian rulers and those across the world continue to incense the US as an example of economic and democratic freedoms. The law will work only for small fishes: if you kill, no matter the extenuating circumstances, however, you have committed a crime, this is not true for the big fish who have power and money to bypass the laws and make them harmless. Returning to the considerations of Hobsbawm we are witnesses of an era where the rulers are omnipotent regarding the laws, the International Law and Human Rights, they can decide each individual life destiny, becoming a divine figures, a kind of  God, remains without blame for the masses who worship them and vote for them. People, in a real and conscious world would be take to the streets protesting furiously for Lo Porto, Weinstein and all those killed "by mistake" from a war without end, but the hedge of  everybody garden is still green and tidy, selfishness wins , ignorance wins, getting used to the bad and the worst. maremmacinghialaaaaaa

Tuesday, July 21, 2015

TTIP, TTP, TISA. Government says "YES", eminent economist says "NO"


The entire policy, with rare exceptions, has already provided its own answer: The TTIP, TTP and TISA will be a good business solutions in the United States and in the rest of the world to abolish exorbitant protective tariffs, increasing volumes of business, foster vertiginous growth  of GDP and employment as never before.
But let's explain first:
TTIP - The Transatlantic Partnership for Trade and Investment  is a trade agreement  between the European Union and the United States. If the final project will be approved will cover about half of global GDP, over 30% of global trade and more than 40% of global trade in services. The major agreements concern Textile, Chemical, Pharmaceutical, Cosmetic, Medical, Computer, Engineering and Products, Pesticides, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. We are talking about agreements with an immense proportions that will affect the lives of millions of Americans and Europeans.
TTP - The Trans-Pacific Partnership concerns the other part of the world that is going to trade and do business with the United States: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam. These agreements will affect the services market, Rules of origin, sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, Intellectual Property, Competition Policy. Here too, the figures involved are huge, about 40% of world GDP.
TISA - The Agreement on Trade and Services. In particular we talk about the liberalization of transport, banking and healthcare. The agreement involves 24 countries, including all the European Union, and even Australia, Canada, Chile, Taiwan, Colombia, Costa Rica, Hong Kong, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Liechtenstein, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Panama , Paraguay, Peru, South Korea, Switzerland, Turkey, United States, about 70% of the World Economic Services. This plan proposes that once abolished a customs barriers between two countries, this can not be reintroduced.
So with these agreements would eliminate those barriers, those State rules, those
legislation laces  that would prevent the fluidity and the economic growth between the US and Europe, including the US and Rest of World. Once again, those who control the financial institution, the economic and the political world tends to provide an extreme simplification of the benefits of these partnerships: more work, greater prosperity, greater well-being. Since we are not economic experts but curious and attentive people we going to read some authoritative commentary of those who do not regard these treaties as the panacea for all the world's problems.

- Prof. Jane Kelsey (Professor of Law at the University of Auckland, MPhil from the University of Cambridge author of numerous publications on economics and the free market). Here is one of his last articles dated June 5, 2015.
"Wikileaks has once again made public documents on TISA that should have remained secret for the next five years. We would like negotiations" clean "without all the secrecy to not jeopardize the rights and quality of public services offered to New Zealand people. This deregulation not only facilitate privatization but give green light to those financial institutions and multinational companies to enter a country by buying and changing public services as they wish, without  the government power to do something. "

- Prof. Ha Joon Chang (Korean Economist, Associate Professor at the University of Cambridge, Consultant at the World Bank, the European Investment Bank, various UN departments and Oxfam. Author of numerous academic works).
This a speech March 3, 2015 on "The Guardian"
"In fact, despite the promoters of the Free Market, are precisely industrial policies smart, also to protect the emerging industrial areas, that can support the growth of a country.Being pro-business does not mean being pro-rich. Under the rhetoric of the pro-business we forget that governments have more to think about. For example, for the desire to do business you will, at times, lower taxes and barriers for Corporations, but that means going to tax more heavily other sectors of society to try to get the same level of services. Neoliberalism is not the best route to economic development. Democracy follows the principle of "one man, one vote" as the free market is the formula "one dollar, one vote". They overtake the masses to promote the rich guy in charge. "

- Jeffrey Sachs (American Economist, Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, special advisor to the United Nations, in the 2004/5 biennium is included in the ranking of the Times "The 100 most influential people on the planet")

This brought his thoughts on a Huffington Post article of September 15, 2014
"These agreements (TTIP, TTP, TISA) ignore the real challenges of this millennium, which are environment and growing inequalities. The internal process is not transparent, a more than sufficient reason not to respect the treaty. I am not against Globalization, but I always dreamed of moving toward a comprehensive system that is decent and humane, which recognizes the winners but also the losers, which redistributes with equity, which fights poverty. This globalization favors only investors. The slice of this system get widens, but with enormous costs for poverty and inequality, with financial crises and environmental disasters more frequent. These treaties will speed up these processes. "

- Dani Rodrik (Turkish economist, professor of Social Sciences at the Institute in Princeton New Jersey. Collaborator of the most important associations of Economic Research)This a speech on TTIP dated May 6, 2015
"We are shooting  fabulous
numbers, incredible growth, but in fact who is going to explain to the people? GDP growth does not take into account the increase of welfare. They tell us" less barriers, more economic efficiency, increased exports and more work ", but in a correct mercantile vision  export is positive, import a little less. So if we export in some countries, in the hypothetical country that receives our products we will destroy the labor market. In addition, all drafts are on by secret vote. Too many uncertainties of these agreements, there should be more public debates and less secretiveness. "

- Barnie Sanders (American politician, senator for the Democrats.).That his thinking in a speech at the US Senate, reported on "Economy in Crisis" April 29, 2015.
"These agreements always say the same things, but in the end are a failure. The NAFTA (Economic Agreement signed by the US, Canada and Mexico in 1994) would have to open up markets for Mexican products Americans. Clinton in 1993 said that NAFTA would created 200,000 jobs in the first two years. The Economic Policy Institute shows instead how all these trade agreements with Mexico, but also with China and Korea have increased the deficit in trade and more than 5 million jobs lost in 2013 alone . This is also evidenced by an article in the "New York Times" of 2013 entitled "Suffered Under NAFTA Mexico and the US felt its pain."

- Joseph Stiglitz (US economist, Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 2001. Adviser in the Clinton administration, Vice President of the World Bank, hundreds of its publications)Here is a passage of his thinking on the site "Project Syndicate"

"These agreements are not a real partnership of equality because the US dictate the terms. It goes beyond the normal trade, imposing fundamental changes in legal structures, justice and laws of an individual countries without due consideration for Democratic Institutions. In
similar cases  governments of Uruguay and Australia have been sued by "Philip Morris" for put on cigarette package more shocking images on the consequences of smoking, to protect consumers. The rules determine the type of economy and society we live in. They influencing the negotiations with a drift towards inequality. What we want to achieve with this agreement is not an improvement a system of rules and exchange positive for US citizens and Europeans, but to ensure free field to companies in harmful economic activities  for the 'environment and for human health. The question is shall these multinationals decide the way of life of the society in the 21st century? I hope that Asia, USA and Europe will respond "NO". "

How can we forget the recent case reported by the organization "Corporate Europe" on the attempts of some Corporation in the chemical and pesticide (CEFIC - European Chemical Industry Council & amp; ECPA - European Crop Protection Association, Bayer) to stop the banning of 'EDC, a broad category of substances or mixtures of substances that alter the functions of the endocrine system, causing adverse effects on the health of an organism. Human exposure to these substances, present from cosmetics, to plastics, pesticides, can cause cancer of the prostate, breast, infertility, diabetes, obesity, malformations. Delaying these regulations on this dangerous substance is essential for these Lobby. Extreme effort to include EDC in the deregulation of TTIP will, if approved.
The complaints of secrecy of these treaties are somehow rejected the sender by the European Commission, which has started to publish the files on the benefits of TTIP, but going to browse the site, the informations are always very vague: increase employment, benefits for industry and agriculture, health and wealth. While Wikileaks continues to churn out confidential documents that reveal the real intentions of those who weaves the threads of these agreements.
History has shown the total unreliability of these treaties, see NAFTA, the brightest minds in the world economy warn about the dangers of these agreements and the potential increase of the gap between rich and poor, between multinational and national sovereignty, between rights and dollars. Politics is increasingly entangled in the net of these Lobby, for every movement the canvas wraps and imprisons more. The people are mobilizing against TTIP, TISA and TTP but not enough. Only a global awareness of what politics represents nowadays can really lead to a cultural revolution. Delegate our life, unique and unrepeatable, in the hands of these individuals, without questioning them constantly about what they are doing is equivalent to a crime, a crime against ourselves and our future. Governments are increasingly authoritarian where citizens have stopped asking and be  interested in the most precious gift: their lives. Maremma cinghialaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Sunday, July 19, 2015

L'Omicidio di Obama, il Silenzio del mondo. Il Caso di Giovanni Lo Porto


Nel suo libro più famoso "Il Secolo Breve", lo storico Eric Hobsbawm ci offre una visione essenziale del 1900. Non la solita lista di date e nomi, spesso dimenticati dopo poche pagine, ma un punto di vista che permette al lettore di approfondire e comprendere le cause e le conseguenze di un passato ancora voracemente presente nelle geopolitiche mondiali.
Nella sua analisi Hobsbawm ricorda come: " Una ragione rilevante della crescita delle barbarie fu piuttosto l'inedita democratizzazione della guerra...E' cosi che il mondo si abituò all'espulsione di interi popoli dai loro territori e all'uccisione su vasta scala: la Prima guerra Mondiale portò all'uccisione di un numero imprecisato di Armeni, circa 1 milione e mezzo, da parte dei Turchi. E' stato calcolato che nel maggio del 1940 c'erano circa 40 milioni di profughi sdradicati dalla propria terra natale....Uno degli aspetti più tragici è che l'umanità ha imparato a vivere in un mondo in cui lo sterminio, la tortura e l'esilio di massa sono diventati esperienze quotidiane di cui non ci accorgiamo più."
Il 22 gennaio 2012 Giovanni Lo Porto, cooperante italiano per una OGN tedesca, la "Welt HungerHilfe" ("Aiuto alla fame nel mondo") impegnata in Pakistan nella ricostruzione dell'area messa in ginocchio dalle inondazioni del 2011,  viene rapito da ignoti miliziani  e tenuto in ostaggio fino al Gennaio 2015, quando i Droni americani decidono che era venuto il momento di eliminare Ahmed Farouq, un cittadino americano, definito uno dei leader della cellula di Al Qaeda nel sud dell'Asia. Nella stessa zona montuosa del Pakistan, coperta dalle bombe senza pilota americane si trovavano anche due ostaggi: lo statunitense Warren Weistein e l'italiano Giovanni Lo Porto appunto. Secondo numerose fonti, tra cui il "New York Times", le dinamiche di questa operazione militare non sono del tutto chiare: la probabile uccisione del cooperante italiano è avvenuta a Gennaio del 2015, ma la notiza è stata diffusa soltanto ad Aprile, con un vuoto temporale di 3 mesi. Qualche giorno prima in Aprile il Primo Ministro Renzi aveva avuto un incontro proprio con Obama, niente era trapelato, ma anzi era stata inscenata la solita sequela di convenevoli in cui gli Stati Uniti venivano elogiati per "la straordinaria leadership in politica estera". Dopo pochi giorni la doccia gelata ed il caso Lo Porto, le scuse del Presidente Obama e la morte di due innocenti archiviata come "un errore nella lotta al terrorismo". Nonostante lo stesso Obama avesse annunciato, nel 2013, dopo numerosi civili uccisi accidentalmente, una "politica dei Droni" più accurata e precisa. Un articolo dello scorso Aprile, apparso sul "The Guardian" riporta le dichiarazioni di Josh Earnest, portavoce della Casa Bianca, circa gli Attacchi che hanno visto l'uccisione di Lo Porto e Weistein : " I nostri obiettivi di Gennaio (Adam Gadahn e Ahmed Farouq) NON erano considerati "obiettivi di Primo Livello", il protocollo nell'uso dei Droni andrebbe nuovamente rivisto."
Anche il "COPASIR" ( Il Comitato parlamentare per la sicurezza della Repubblica, organo dei Servizi Segreti" italiano ha confermato che i resti di Lo Porto sono ancora in Pakistan, e non è ancora stato possibile un suo riconoscimento via DNA. L'Ente ha anche dichiarato di volere  comprendere appieno le dinamiche di quanto accaduto al cooperante italiano, ma c'è da notare lo scarso interesse italiano per il tragico fatto: ad ascoltare l'informativa urgente del Ministro degli Esteri Italiano Paolo Gentiloni, lo scorso Aprile,  c'erano appena, e vergognosamente direi, 39 Parlamentari ( 16 del Pd, 3 di Pi, 7 rispettivamente di Fi e M5S, gli altri di Ncd e Sel), colpa del Venerdi, la scusa altrettanto vergognosa della politica italiana. 
Secondo Al Qaeda, in una sua versione dei fatti, gli USA avrebbero rifiutato ogni trattativa con i rapitori, prolungando la prigionia dei due ostaggi tramutata poi in "incidente fatale".
Obama nelle sue scuse ripropone la solita storiella che per combattere il pericolo terrorista l'eventualità di uccidere erroneamente civili è una ipotesi rara ma possibile, ma dimentica il Presidente Americano una certa Convenzione di Ginevra in cui si enuncia " Allo scopo di evitare vittime tra i civili, le forze combattenti devono sempre fare distinzione tra popolazione e oggetti civili da colpire da una parte, ed obiettivi militari dall’altra. Né la popolazione civile, né singoli cittadini od obiettivi civili devono costituire il bersaglio di attacchi militari." Già un report dell'organizzazione "Reprieve" (Autorevole Organizzazione per i Diritti Umani Britannica)  del dicembre 2014 rivelava come per ogni obiettivo ucciso dai droni americani ce ne erano 28 non identificati. Nel solo Yemen e Pakistan per 41 "terroristi" eliminati  rimanevano sul campo oltre 1000 civili uccisi. 
Per il 2015 siamo già ad oltre 200 secondo il "Bureau of Investigative of Journalism" che viene anche citato in un articolo del NYT, dove si definisce i "droni" come l'arma di guerra telecomandata preferita da Obama, visto che nella sua amministrazione siamo a 330 bombardamenti dichiarati nel solo Pakistan, a differenza del pur famigerato George W. Bush che nel suo mandato vide "appena"  51 attacchi senza pilota. 
L'esercito Pachistano sembra sul punto di sconfiggere il pericolo terrorista specie nella zona dove  Lo Porto e Weistein sono stati eliminati dai Droni. Il "Washington Post" commenta anche le difficoltà di un'analisi indipendente delle notize che trapelano dal Paese, visto che l'area del Pakistan interessata è vietata ai giornalisti.  
L'evento praticamente unico in cui Obama ha ammesso le responsabilità nell'uccisione dei due cooperanti spinge a  riflettere su di un altro punto: quella cartella piena zeppa di morti catalogati come "non identificati", decine, centinaia, che non hanno nemmeno il diritto ad un nome o a false ma pur sempre formali scuse Presidenziali. Questo dimostra ancora una volta che tipo di valore hanno le vite umane per la macchina militare americana. Numeri, errori di percorso, macchie minuscole sul foglio dove la parola "vittoria" o "fine"non viene mai scritta completamente. 
I governanti italiani e quelli di mezzo mondo continueranno ad incensare gli USA come esempio di economia e libertà democratiche. La legge funzionerà per i piccoli pesci: se uccidi, non importano le attenuanti, hai comunque commesso un crimine, tutto questo non vale per i pesci grossi che hanno potere e denaro per scavalcare le leggi e renderle innocue. 
Ritornando alle considerazioni di Hobsbawm siamo i testimoni di un'epoca dove i Governanti sono onnipotenti rispetto alle Convenzioni, alle Leggi Internazionali ed ai diritti umani, possono decidere il destino di ogni singola vita, divenendo delle figure divine, sostituendosi ad un Dio, rimanendo senza colpe per le masse che li venerano e li votano. In un mondo reale e consapevole la gente sarebbe scesa in strada protestando furiosamente per Lo Porto, Weistein e tutti coloro uccisi "per errore" da una guerra senza fine, ma l'aiuola del proprio giardino rimane ancora verde ed ordinata, vince l'egoismo, vince l'ignoranza, vince l'assuefazione del male.....maremmacinghialaaaaaa

Wednesday, July 1, 2015

TTIP, TTP, TISA. La Parola agli esperti Economici. Da Stiglitz al Senato USA.


 La politica tutta, tranne rare eccezioni, ha già fornito la propria risposta:  Il TTIP, TTP e TISA saranno ottime soluzioni commerciali tra gli Stati Uniti ed il resto del mondo per abolire le esose tariffe protezionistiche, aumentare i volumi di affari, favorire crescite vertiginose del PIL e dell'occupazione come mai viste prima.
Ma andiamo con ordine:
TTIP - Il Partenariato Transatlantico per il Commercio e gli Investimenti ( Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) è un accordo commerciale di Libero Scambio tra l'Unione Europea e gli Stati Uniti. Se il progetto finale verrà approvato comprenderà circa la metà del PIL mondiale, oltre il 30% del commercio globale e oltre il 40% del commercio planetario dei servizi. I principali accordi riguardano il settore Tessile, Chimico, Farmaceutico, Cosmetico, Attrezzature Mediche, Informatica, Ingegneria e derivati, Pesticidi, Misure Sanitarie e Fitosanitarie. Stiamo parlando di accordi dalle proporzioni immense che interesseranno la vita di milioni di cittadini Americani ed Europei.
TTP - Il Partenariato Trans-Pacifico (Trans-Pacific Partnership) riguarda invece l'altra fetta di mondo che andrà a commerciare e fare affari con gli Stati Uniti: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Cile, Giappone, Malesia, Nuova Zelanda, Perù, Singapore, Vietnam. Questi accordi interesseranno il Mercato dei servizi, dei Beni, Norme di origine dei prodotti, Misure sanitarie e Fitosanitarie, Proprietà Intellettuali, Politiche di Competizione. Anche in questo ambito i numeri in gioco sono enormi, circa il 40% del PIL mondiale.
TISA - L'Accordo di Commercio e dei Servizi (Trade in Service Agreement). In particolare parliamo della liberalizzazione dei trasporti, banche e sanità. L'Accordo coinvolge 24 Paesi, compresa tutta l'Unione Europea, e ancora Australia, Canada, Cile, Taiwan, Colombia, Costa Rica, Hong Kong, Islanda, Israele, Giappone, Liechtenstein, Messico, Nuova Zelanda, Norvegia, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Sud Korea, Svizzera, Turchia, Stati Uniti, circa il 70% dell'Economia Mondiale dei Servizi. Questo piano propone, tra l'altro, che una volta abolita una barriere doganale tra più Paesi, questa non possa essere reintrodotta.
Dunque con questi Accordi si eliminerebbero quelle barriere doganali, quelle norme Statali, quei lacci legislativi che impedirebbero la fluidità e la crescita economica tra Stati Uniti ed Europa, tra Stati Uniti e Resto del Mondo. Ancora una volta chi controlla le istituzione finanziarie, economiche e politiche mondiali tende a fornire una semplificazione estrema dei benefici di questi partenariati: maggiore lavoro, maggiore prosperità, maggiore benessere. Visto che noi non siamo esperti economisti ma cittadini curiosi ed attenti vediamo qualche commento autorevole di coloro che non considerano questi trattati come la panacea di tutti i problemi mondiali.

- Prof. Jane Kelsey ( Professoressa di Legge presso l'Università di Auckland, MPhil presso l'Università di Cambridge autrice di numerose pubblicazioni di economia e libero mercato). Ecco uno dei suoi ultimi articoli datato 5 Giugno 2015

" Wikileaks ha ancora una volta reso pubblici dei documenti sul TISA che sarebbero dovuti rimanere segreti per i prossimi 5 anni. Ci vorrebbero negoziazioni "pulite" senza tutta questa segretezza per non mettere a rischio i diritti e la qualità dei servizi pubblici offerti ai Neozelandesi. Questa deregolamentazione non solo faciliterà la privatizzazione ma darà carta bianca alle Istituzioni Finanziarie e Multinazionali per entrare in un Paese comprando e cambiando i servizi pubblici a loro piacimento, senza che il Governo possa fare qualcosa."

- Prof. Ha Joon Chang ( Economista Coreano, Professore Associato presso l'Università di Cambridge, Consulente presso la Banca Mondiale, la Banca di Investimenti Europea, diversi dipartimenti delle Nazioni Unite e dell'OXFAM. Autore di numerosi testi accademici).
Questo un suo intervento il 3 Marzo 2015 sul "The Guardian"

" In realtà, nonostante i promotori del Libero Mercato, sono proprio delle politiche industriali intelligenti, volte anche a proteggere quelle aree industriali emergenti che possono sostenere la crescità di un paese.
Essere pro-business non vuol dire essere pro-ricchi. Sotto la retorica del pro-business ci dimentichiamo che i Governi hanno altro a cui pensare. Per esempio per la brama di fare affari si vuole, a volte, diminuire le tasse e le barriere per le multinazionali, ma questo vuol dire andare a tassare più pesantemente altri settori della società per cercare di ottenere lo stesso livello di Servizi. Il Neoliberismo non è il percorso ottimale per uno sviluppo economico. La democrazia segue il principio "un uomo, un voto" mentre per il libero mercato la formula è più "un dollaro, un voto". Si scavalcano le masse per favorire il ricco di turno."

- Jeffrey Sachs ( Economista Americano, Direttore dell'Earth Institute presso la Columbia University, consigliere speciale delle Nazioni Unite, nel bienno 2004/5 viene incluso nella classifica del Times "Le 100 persone più influenti del pianeta" )

Questo il suo pensiero riportato su un articolo dell'Huffington Post del 15 Settembre 2014

"Questi accordi (TTIP, TTP, TISA) ignorano le vere sfide di questo millennio, che sono ambiente e diseguaglianze crescenti. L'interno processo non è trasparente, una ragione più che sufficiente per non rispettare il trattato. Non sono contro la Globalizzazione, ma ho sempre immaginato di muoverci verso un sistema globale che sia decente ed umano, che riconosce i vincitori ma anche gli sconfitti, che redistribuisce con equità, che combatta la povertà. Questa globalizzazione favorisce solo gli investitori. La fetta di questo sistema si allarga ma con costi enormi per la povertà e per le diseguaglianze in aumento, con crisi finanziarie e catastrofi ambientali più frequenti. Questi trattati accellereranno questi processi."

- Dani Rodrik ( Economista Turco, professore di Scienze Sociali presso l'Instituto Princeton in New Jersey. Collaboratore delle più importanti associazioni di ricerca economica )

Questo un suo intervento sul TTIP datato 6 maggio 2015

" Si stanno sparando numeri da favola, crescite incredibili, ma nei fatti chi lo va a spiegare alla gente? L'aumento del PIL non tiene conto dell'aumento del welfare. Ci dicono "meno barriere, più efficenza economica, aumento esportazioni e più lavoro", ma nella visione mercantile esportare è positivo, importare un po meno. Quindi se noi esportiamo in qualche Paese, in quella ipotetica Nazione che riceve i nostri prodotti si distrugge il mercato del lavoro. Inoltre tutte le bozze sono a scrutinio segreto. Troppe incertezze su questi accordi, ci vorrebbero più dibattiti pubblici e meno segretezze. "

- Barnie Sanders (Politico Americano, Senatore per i Democratici.).

Questo il suo pensiero in un intervento al Senato Americano, riportato su "Economy in Crisis" il 29 Aprile 2015

" Questi accordi dicono sempre le stesse cose, ma alla fine sono un fallimento. Il NAFTA (Accordo Economico firmato da USA, Canada e Messico nel 1994) avrebbe dovuto aprire i mercati messicani ad i prodotti Statunitensi. Clinton nel 1993 diceva che il NAFTA avrebbe creato 200.000 posti di lavoro nei primi due anni. L'Economic Policy Institute riporta invece come tutti questi accordi commerciali con Messico ma anche con Cina e Corea hanno aumentato il deficit negli scambi commerciali e oltre 5 milioni di posti di lavoro andati persi nel solo 2013. Questo è comprovato anche da un articolo del "New York Times" del 2013 dal titolo " Under NAFTA Mexico suffered and the US felt its pain".

- Joseph Stiglitz ( Economista Statunitense, Premio Nobel per l'economia nel 2001. Consigliere nell'amministrazione Clinton, Vice presidente della Banca Mondiale, centinaia le sue pubblicazioni )

Ecco un passaggio del suo pensiero sul sito "Project Syndacate"

"Questi accordi non rappresentano un reale partenariato di uguaglianze perchè gli Stati Uniti dettano i termini. Si va oltre il normale commercio, imponendo cambiamenti fondamentali nelle strutture legali, di giustizia e normative dei singoli paesi senza la dovuta considerazione per le Istituzioni Democratiche. In casi analoghi i Governi di Uruguay e Australia sono stati denunciati dalla "Philip Morris" per aver aver posto più immagini  shock sulle conseguenze del fumo sui pacchetti di sigarette per tutelare i consumatori. Le regole determinano il tipo di economia e di società in cui viviamo. Esse influenzano le negoziazioni con una deriva verso le diseguaglianze. Ciò che si vuole otte­nere con que­sto accordo non è un miglio­ra­mento del sistema di regole e di scambi posi­tivo per i cit­ta­dini ame­ri­cani ed euro­pei, ma garan­tire campo libero a imprese pro­ta­go­ni­ste di atti­vità eco­no­mi­che nocive per l’ambiente e per la salute umana. La domanda è volere che queste Multinazionali decidano il modo di vivere delle società nel 21esimo secolo? Spero che Asia, USA ed Europa rispondano "NO"."

Come dimenticare, del resto, il recente caso riportato dall'organizzazione "Corporate Europe" sul tentativo di alcune Multinazionali del settore chimico e dei pesticidi (  CEFIC - European Chemical Industry Council & ECPA - European Crop Protection Association, Bayer) di bloccare la messa al bando dell' EDC,  una vasta categoria di sostanze o miscele di sostanze, che alterano la funzionalità del sistema endocrino, causando effetti avversi sulla salute di un organismo. L'esposizione umana a queste sostanze, presenti dai cosmetici, alle plastiche, ai pesticidi, può causare cancro alla prostata, al seno, infertilità, diabete, obesità, malformazioni. Ritardare queste regolamentazioni su questa pericolosa sostanza è basilare per queste Lobby. Estremo tentativo di includere l'EDC nella deregolamentazione che il TTIP porterà, se approvato.
Le denuncie di segretezza di questi trattati sono in qualche modo state respinte al mittente dalla Commissione Europea, che ha iniziato a pubblicare dei fascicoli sui benefici del TTIP, ma andando a curiosare sul sito le informazioni rimangono sempre molto vaghe: aumenti occupazionali, benefici per industria ed agricoltura, benessere e ricchezza. Mentre Wikileaks continua a sfornare documentazioni riservate che svelano le reali intenzioni di chi tesse le fila di questi accordi.

Il passato dimostra la totale inattendibilità di questi trattati, vedi NAFTA, le menti più brillanti dell'economia mondiale avvertono sulla pericolosità di questi Accordi e sul potenziale incremento della forbice tra ricchi e poveri, tra Multinazionali e sovranità nazionali, tra diritti e dollari. La politica è sempre più invischiata nella ragnatela di queste Lobby, ad ogni movimento la tela avvolge e imprigiona sempre più. Il popolo si sta mobilitando contro TTIP, TISA e TTP ma non è abbastanza. Solo una consapevolezza globale su che cosa la politica rappresenti al giorno di oggi può davvero portare ad una rivoluzione culturale. Delegare la propria vita, unica ed irripetibile, nelle mani di questi individui, senza interpellarli costantemente su che cosa stanno facendo è equiparabile ad un crimine, un crimine contro noi stessi ed il nostro futuro. I governi sono sempre più autoritari laddove i cittadini hanno smesso di domandare ed interessarsi del dono più prezioso: la loro vita. Maremma cinghialaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Wednesday, June 3, 2015

Sunni vs Shiite, Dollars and Koran. The permanent war in the Middle East


 "Divide and Conquer" (Divide and Command) never before now this motto by the Roman Empire is appropriate for what is going on in the Middle East. A series of events that engulfed a "distracted" public opinion  who is  hurried to synthesize the following thought: Islam equals terrorism and fundamentalism. Going beyond this wall of stereotypes means unravel the thread of a tangled skein, it means beginning to understand who are the real protagonist of this "total war" where the role of the victims and the executioners change almost daily.The first step to understand the Middle Eastern situation is to start to outline this immense community of ethnic groups, factions and etnicity with the necessary distinctions.The currents in Islam are mainly two: Sunnis and Shiites, the first include about 90% of the entire Islamic world (Jordan, Saudi Arabia, across North Africa, the Iraq of Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi's Libya), while Shiites occupy a more modest 10%, in absolute majority in Iran, predominant in Iraq, Bahrain and Azerbaijan, there is also a large presence of Shiite in Lebanon (Hizb Allah, the Party of God) in Kuwait and Yemen (Zayditi). The division of these two factions takes place after the death of Muhammad in 632 AD. It poses the problem of succession at the head of the community: a part of believers recognize  in Ali (cousin and son in law of Muhammad) the designated successor, but the majority of the community believed that there had not been any designation by Muhammad and that it was up to the community to elect the "first caliph." The first were called "Shiite" who recognized the leadership of the Islamic community only in the descendants of Muhammad, providing total power both spiritual and temporal to the Imam, he is appointed by the same Prophet and Imam  that had preceded him. Differently for the "Sunnis"  any good morality Muslim  can access to lead the community, they consider the successor to the Prophet Caliph, regarded as the guardian of the Shariah, which has the temporal power but not the spiritual, if we want the Sunni faction it has roots more egalitarian and democratic, even if only in theory. 
The Saudis  bombings  (with the support of a coalition of Morocco, Sudan, Egypt and Turkey) in Yemen, however illegal, (since that they have not received any kind of approval from the UN Security Council) are an effort to protect the interests of the House of Saud in Yemen, one of the poorest states in the Middle East and the world and to protect the religious balance in the area. The Houti, the Yemeni rebels / Shiites, seeking to control the country, after the escape of its president Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi, recognized by the international community and from Saudi Arabia. The forces maneuvering the battles are Iran on the Shi'ite side and Saudi Arabia for Sunni of the President Hadi, now a refugee in Riyadh what a case. But there is of course the frontline of Al Qaeda, located in southern Yemen and pushing to take over some oil well strategically important. The southern part of the country overlooks the Strait of Bab al Mandab, between Somalia and Yemen, where  four million of barrels of oil pass everyday. Leave this area on jihadist control means jeopardizing the oil trade between Arabia and the rest of the world, whereas the other possible commercial passage is the Persian Gulf which is under direct control of Iran.The Saudi influence in the Middle East is huge, in terms of energy the country covers 14% of worldwide demand for black gold, the latest estimates recorded more than 10 million barrels a day. Geopolitics, religion and energy sources: the Saudi strategy of destabilizing the Shiite Middle East  is clear: To fund Jihadist groups like Al Qaeda or ISIS, with arms and men to support the anti-Assad rebels in Syria, which happens to see among them members of the Black Caliphate, while at home they try to fight Al Qaeda and brothers. A key point to understand is the creed that is practiced in Saudi Arabia: Wahhabism, "an extraordinarily serious ideological threat, a totalitarian movement masquerading as a religion," according to former CIA Director James Woolsey. Orthodox and ultra-conservative movement, who interpret in a very rigid the Koran, the Wahhabis believe that all those who do not practice Islam in the manner indicated by them are heathens and enemies to fight. Ideology that has spread many Wahhabi mosques and schools across many Arab countries, ideal breeding ground for fundamentalism and hooded extremist . The attempt is to establish a stronghold of Sunni resistance to the Iranian Shiite borders. Ryad combines support for jihadism beyond its borders to counter the Shia power  (Iran), and the fight against the internal jihadism  that threat  the kingdom of Saud. A schizophrenic position since the distance between the doctrinal official Saudi Wahhabism and Salafism claimed by jihadist ISIS is reduced almost zero.We are talking about a state that has iron ties with the United States, which is protected by International Community despite the total lack of freedom for women and the systematic repression of any civil law. How can we forget, for that matter, 15 out of  19 attackers of 9/11 were Saudis. A destabilizing and dangerous policy that has cost the lives of many civilians in the north of Iraq, when the black troops of the Islamic Caliphate conquered Mosul and Kirkuk. All thanks to a rain of dollars from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, also confirmed by the statement of Richard Dearlove, head of British Intelligence M16, from 1999 to 2004. A system that has fueled the movement anti-Assad in Syria and anti Maliki in Iraq, to ​​the delight of jihadists supplied with weapons and dollars, with the approval of the West deliberately distracted on the real instigators of this disaster that is tearing apart the Arab world. "Kuwait is the epicenter of the financing of terrorist groups in Syria, while Qatar is its hinterland through a habitat permissive allowing terrorists to feed", so reports David Cohen, an official of the American administration. US tries not to get too hooked into this mess, especially for the recent agreements, all to be confirmed, with Iran, enemy number one of the Saudi kingdom. Of course the US involvement is not just a rumors but a fact: military hardware, bombs, aerial refueling, logistics, a fundamental support especially in the recent bombing in Yemen. John Kerry makes a big voice with Iran declaring unacceptable the supplies that the country provides to the Houthi rebels in Yemen. But the British Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Philip Hammond, called "exaggerated allegations of Iranian aid to the Yemeni rebels." There is more an economic and oil support, the Houthis have enough weapons and do not need the Iranian market. Once again the considerations are based on real data: the US are from 24 years in the Middle East, to be precise with the Iraq's invasion on 1991, the war against Saddam, the revolts of the rebels, the birth of ISIS, the collapse of Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Syria, the Palestinian question still in chaos, attacks in Tunisia, and once again the only solution is a military one. Billions of dollars and thousands of lives summarize drastically the total failure of US foreign policy, sometimes exclusively to conserve energy, to fuel the war industry, to redraw the borders and demarcate sectarian divisions, countering new and "old" world adversaries such as China and Russia. Despite these efforts, the breakthrough to the east from the Arab countries seems very strong: China is the third largest importer of oil from Saudi Arabia, 10% of Dubai's population is Chinese, also Qatar is increasing its business with Beijing in the sales of Gas. In this immense chess game, in this complex political picture, every move involves many decisions that eventually affect all players. Israel also has its role of lender of the rebels (ISIS) in Syria, to have more than one point in common with Saudi Arabia in destabilizing the Shiite communities, to control the Strait of Mandeb already mentioned above. The strange Couple Israeli-Arabia has very precise plans to stop the enemy Shiite Iran, what, according to Netanyahu himself, would clear his country and that is extremely dangerous for its nuclear arsenal. There are already plans  for an Israeli attack, with support of Rihad, against Iran.Yet enough to read more than one authoritative source on nuclear power to conclude that  is more dangerous Israel and its number of warheads which is a international secret  (probably a hundred), Iran does not even have the machines suitable for enrich uranium for military purposes. Israel is busy in its campaign for the " Middle East victim" forgets to communicate to the public the movement of its 3 nuclear submarines (purchased from Germany) off the coast of Iranian as reported by the "Sunday Times", a way to sharpen tensions in the Gulf, continuing to play the part of the country with the dove on his shoulder and a gun in his pocket. It is evident the total disinformation of the Media for a war zone that is on the headnews only when some Western hostage or Christian is eliminated or if the American empire allow  their means of propaganda in an attempt to mask a situation out of control. There is no mention of the ongoing military exercises with the participation of several Arab countries under the auspices of the United States. Here catapult in the fifth edition of the "Eager Lion" war games, with the kind hospitality of Jordan and with partecipants like Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, Lebanon and Iraq supported by the US, Britain, France, Italy, Canada , Belgium, Poland, Australia and Pakistan. All committed from the 5th to 19th May in practices for combating terrorism, throwing bombs in the desert and so on, even Jordan itself has shown the will to protect themselves from militants ISIS pressing at its borders. A sort of "get ready for the worst," the war that spreads like a virus, to the neighboring country in the neighboring country is more than a feeling. The American steamroller increased the pace dragging in prehistory entire nations. Libya was one of highest for GDP per capita and life expectancy among all African countries, with free education and health care. Gaddafi was considered a reliable partner, before the US / NATO might be revealed once again their true plans: to cripple a country and then rebuild it in his own image and likeness, at least economic. The Libyan leader did not line up with the energy policies imposed by the US and allies, he supported the "NAM" movement of non-aligned countries to the third world. The Arab Spring so acclaimed by the press and television as the beginning of a new phase of freedom and rights for Islamic countries, it is, in fact, proved to be fertile ground for warmongers and petrodollars. Pipeline projects shape the Middle East policies, they elect or overthrow the puppet on duty, all in a galaxy of total lawlessness that view from the land of trivial information seems a bright star. Laws and rules sink into the Middle East quagmire. Just a few days ago, "Human Rights Watch" has accused Saudi Arabia of using the infamous "cluster bombs" during its bombing in Yemen. (Prohibited by the UN Convention and banned by 116 States). In just six months 1,200 civilians died and more than 300,000 do not have a home anymore. More than 30 schools have been torn down by the Saudi missiles. Riyadh a few days ago hosted the visit of US Secretary of State John Kerry, who also had the guts to recommend attention and precautions in the bombing in Yemen, no matter if the majority of those deadly weapons and prohibited in many countries are sold  by the United States. A total war that changes name just for a matter of geography: Libya, Somalia, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, the same script, they use the  local stage for global interests. The chaos is the key aspect to remain permanently in the Middle East by funding sectarian groups and jiihadisti, bombing hospitals, schools and aqueducts, making every country in ruins to be shared with other allies bent to the Washington will. Quran and oil, comfortable fundamentalism  and rivers of dollars, local puppet with long strands up to Washington or Tel Aviv, Moscow and Riyadh where the real instigators move the checkers. After 24 years the Middle East has become a gunpowder keg, a hooded extremists factory , an immense refugee camp, a place of death, hatred and despair. While newspapers produce stereotypes for the masses in need of easy answers and often racist ...... and rubble cover the truth. maremmacinghialaaaaaaaaaaaaaa