La "democrazia" a stelle e strisce nella lunga notte della Somalia.

La politica estera americana promuove da sempre un modello di "esportazione della Democrazia" nei Paesi che, a suo giudizio, sono bisognosi di un supporto sia economico, che sociale ma sopratutto militare. Le coincidenze storiche non esistono, esiste una memoria storica ed una serie di episodi accaduti nel passato che dovrebbero aiutare i popoli e chi li governa ad evitare facili propagande, inutili guerre ed ignobili abusi sociali. Il fatto inequivocabile e' che le politiche estere americane sono alimentate dalla necessita' di controllare, incanalare ed addomesticare tutti quei paesi posti in situazioni di rilevanza strategica per l'impero a stelle e strisce. Anche qui gli esempi ed i fatti storici parlano da soli, sono dei pilastri inamovibili che dovrebbero farci riflettere su che tipo di informazione parziale ed illusoria riceviamo. Le verita' (del terzo millenio) che i Media ci propinano non sono altro che pillole per anestetizzare le nostre curiosita', il nostro spirito critico, il diritto sacrosanto di indignarci contro delle ingiustizie che presto o tardi busseranno alle porte delle nostre democrazie occidentali, fondate sui suprusi e le ruberie verso chi non si allinea al modello, al disegno quasi messianico che gli Stati Uniti hanno su questo pianeta.

Un articolo tradotto, con fonti molto autorevoli, scritto da Daniel Kovalik: attivista di diritti umani, avvocato per i diritti dei lavoratori e giornalista, sul silenzioso e, per certi versi, inesplorato dominio americano in Somalia. Non esistono repubblicani o democratici quando bisogna sostenere e alimentare l'impero americano nel mondo, esiste un progetto da portare avanti.

Buona lettura.

America, it’s 10pm. Do you know where your country is bombing? 

 Un famoso annuncio di pubblico servizio americano chiede in modo sinistro ai genitori: "Sono le dieci di sera! Sai dove sono i tuoi figli?" Parafrasando potremmo chiedere se per la stessa ora sanno dove il loro paese stia bombardando.

Potreste essere sorpresi nel sapere che gli Stati Uniti hanno incessantemente bombardato la Somalia, un paese quasi sconosciuto da anni nella stampa mainstream. E questo bombardamento sta solo aumentando. La Somalia è un paese situato nel Corno d'Africa. Confina sia con l'Etiopia che con il Kenya e si trova proprio di fronte al Golfo di Aden dallo Yemen - un paese che è stato a sua volta bombardato e devastato dal suo vicino settentrionale, l'Arabia Saudita, con il sostegno degli Stati Uniti, dal 2015 fino ad oggi (anche se il presidente Biden ha appena annunciato che l'assistenza statunitense per questo assalto potrebbe finire).

Il confine della Somalia con il Golfo di Aden rende questo paese di importanza strategica per gli Stati Uniti, perché qualsiasi interruzione del viaggio in quelle acque richiederebbe alle navi e alle petroliere del Golfo Persico di fare un lungo tragitto intorno all'Africa per portare petrolio e altre merci negli Stati Uniti e in Europa. Anche questo rende quest'area "una preziosa zona di sosta per le marine militari per mostrare potere sulla penisola arabica".

Gli Stati Uniti sono intervenuti in Somalia in vari modi per decenni - prima in nome della lotta al comunismo e all'influenza sovietica, dopo che la Somalia si era dedicata al "socialismo scientifico" nel 1969, poi in nome dell'umanitarismo nei primi anni '90, e poi più tardi in nome della cosiddetta Guerra al Terrore degli Stati Uniti dai tempi di George W. Bush ad oggi. Qualunque sia la ragione del giorno, gli interventi degli Stati Uniti hanno solo ulteriormente destabilizzato e devastato la Somalia, nonostante le successive amministrazioni statunitensi affermino di voler portare stabilità.

Il primo intervento americano diretto in Somalia iniziò nel 1992 con la missione Operation Restore Hope del presidente George H.W. Bush - uno sforzo apparentemente umanitario - in base al quale gli Stati Uniti inviarono 28.000 truppe in quel paese. Il presidente Clinton continuò questo sforzo quando entrò in carica nel gennaio del 1993, e lo terminò poco dopo che 18 soldati statunitensi furono uccisi nell'ottobre di quell'anno, quando militanti somali abbatterono un elicottero statunitense nel famoso incidente "Black Hawk Down". Gli Stati Uniti lasciarono la Somalia nel 1994, non essendo riusciti a raggiungere la stabilità nel paese.

Nel 2001, l'interesse degli Stati Uniti in Somalia è risorto con la dichiarazione di Bush sulla Guerra al Terrore, seguito degli attacchi dell'11 settembre. Attraverso la CIA, Bush iniziò operazioni segrete in Somalia che includevano il finanziamento di brutali gruppi di signori della guerra, che gli Stati Uniti speravano avrebbero contrastato i militanti islamici. Tuttavia, c'è un ampio consenso sul fatto che questo sostegno ai signori della guerra ha solo destabilizzato ulteriormente la Somalia, contribuendo a galvanizzare il sostegno pubblico intorno agli islamisti che gli Stati Uniti stavano combattendo. Per esempio, "Matt Bryden, coordinatore del gruppo di monitoraggio delle Nazioni Unite sulla Somalia e l'Eritrea, ha detto al Chicago Tribune che, a suo parere, la cooperazione della CIA con i signori della guerra è stata "un'idea stupida... ha effettivamente rafforzato la mano degli islamisti innescando la crisi in cui ci troviamo oggi".

Poi, nel 2006, ci fu un raggio di speranza per la Somalia con l'emergere dell'Unione delle Corti Islamiche (ICU) come governo della Somalia, l'ICU aveva un ampio sostegno popolare, ed una grande capacita' e volonta'di portare pace e stabilità - qualcosa che gli Stati Uniti non avevano mai raggiunto durante i loro molti anni di intervento. Purtroppo, il regno dell'ICU sarebbe stato di breve durata, con il più importante intervento degli Stati Uniti, che ricordo abbastanza vividamente, che ebbe luogo solo sei mesi dopo l'ascesa dell'ICU. Questo è stato un intervento che ha certamente messo fine a qualsiasi possibilità di stabilità per la Somalia per molti anni a venire.

Scrivendo nel 2008, Chris Albin-Lackey, un ricercatore senior di Human Rights Watch, ha spiegato che "due anni fa la Somalia si trovava a un bivio. Dopo 16 anni anarchici, senza un governo, una coalizione di tribunali islamici aveva preso il controllo della capitale, Mogadiscio, portando piuttosto sinistramente sia durezza che una stabilità senza precedenti. Ma il potente Stato vicino della Somalia, l'Etiopia, vide l'ascesa delle bellicose corti come una minaccia alla sua sicurezza nazionale, e l'amministrazione Bush accusò la leadership delle corti islamiche di dare rifugio a  terroristi sospetti".

Nel suo articolo intitolato 'The US Role in Somalia's Calamity', Albin-Lackey ha scritto: "quando l'Etiopia è intervenuta militarmente per schiacciare le corti islamiche nel dicembre 2006, Washington ha sostenuto la sua operazione". Il risultato di questo intervento, come tutti gli interventi degli Stati Uniti nella sua cosiddetta Guerra al Terrore, è stato il caos e un'indicibile sofferenza umana per la popolazione civile. Gli ultimi due anni sono stati un disastro totale per il popolo somalo. Il conflitto contrappone da una parte le forze etiopi e un inefficace governo di transizione somalo, sostenuto a livello internazionale, dall'altra una potente ma frammentata insurrezione. Tutte le parti hanno abitualmente commesso crimini di guerra e gravi abusi dei diritti umani".

Albin-Lackey ha riassunto la carneficina causata dall'intervento sostenuto dagli Stati Uniti: "Migliaia di civili sono stati uccisi, più di un milione di persone sono fuggite dalle loro case, e milioni di persone sono sull'orlo della carestia. Gli operatori umanitari, che erano riusciti ad assistere le comunità somale anche durante i periodi di maggiore illegalità, prima del 2006, sono stati il bersaglio di decine di omicidi e rapimenti nel 2008, e ora guardano impotenti dal vicino Kenya, mentre la situazione va fuori controllo. La risposta più visibile dell'America alla crisi è stata una serie di attacchi aerei contro sospetti terroristi, che hanno ucciso per lo più civili". In breve, questo è stato un altro enorme disastro per il popolo della Somalia, causato dagli Stati Uniti in nome della lotta al terrorismo. E, come al solito, l'intervento americano ha effettivamente dato origine all'attuale gruppo terroristico - Al-Shabaab - che gli Stati Uniti citano come pretesto per continuare il loro coinvolgimento in Somalia fino ad oggi. Come ha spiegato il New York Times nel 2016, "nel 2006, gli Stati Uniti hanno dato sostegno clandestino alle truppe etiopi che invadevano il paese per rovesciare un movimento islamista che aveva preso il controllo di Mogadiscio. Ma le brutali tattiche di guerra urbana delle truppe etiopi crearono il sostegno di un movimento insurrezionale che si faceva chiamare Al Shabab, che significa 'La Gioventù'".

Come ha spiegato il Times, il presidente Obama ha ripreso da dove George W. Bush ha lasciato in Somalia, portando avanti quella, che il giornale ha definito una "guerra ombra" per mezzo di forze speciali statunitensi, appaltatori militari privati e un sacco di bombardamenti aerei. Come il Times ha riferito, gli attacchi aerei degli Stati Uniti "hanno avuto un record misto": a volte uccidendo civili innocenti e persino soldati somali alleati. Il Times ha notato che "i funzionari somali, indignati, hanno detto che gli americani sono stati ingannati da clan rivali e da cattive informazioni di intelligence, mettendo a nudo le complessità di condurre una guerra ombra in Somalia".

Sotto il presidente Trump, la campagna statunitense in Somalia si è solo intensificata, principalmente sotto forma di attacchi aerei contro Al-Shabaab. E anche se nel gennaio di quest'anno, Trump ha ritirato le truppe americane dalla Somalia, è probabile che Biden intensifichi la campagna nel 2021. Come ha spiegato il Military Times, il Comando Africano degli Stati Uniti (AFRICOM) "ha condotto 52 attacchi aerei nel 2020, 63 nel 2019, 47 nel 2018 e 35 nel 2017", e ha già condotto sei attacchi aerei in Somalia quest'anno. "Ai ritmi attuali, il 2021 è sulla buona strada per superare il numero di attacchi aerei condotti in Somalia negli anni precedenti", prevede l'articolo. 

E, mentre l'obiettivo di questi bombardamenti è il gruppo militante Al-Shabaab, che è nato dall'intervento degli Stati Uniti nel 2006, la campagna sta chiedendo un enorme tributo in termine di vittime civili. Come ha scritto recentemente la rivista Time, ignorando l'appello dell'ONU di porre fine a tutte le ostilità durante la pandemia, gli Stati Uniti hanno invece intensificato la loro campagna di bombardamenti, uccidendo decine di civili somali nel processo. E, per aggiungere l'insulto al danno, gli Stati Uniti non sono stati disposti a contare i morti, a intervistare anche un solo testimone dei suoi bombardamenti errati, o a risarcire le famiglie delle vittime.

Il Time cita un portavoce di Amnesty International che ha lamentato: "il fatto che i civili stiano ancora morendo, a volte illegalmente, e che non una sola famiglia delle vittime sia stata ancora risarcita, significa che, dopo 13 anni, il governo degli Stati Uniti non ha ancora capito come combattere una guerra che dia priorità ai bisogni delle persone, che dicono di difendere... Se il governo degli Stati Uniti non può adempiere ai suoi obblighi verso i civili mentre combatte una guerra a distanza di attacchi aerei, allora deve riconsiderare i suoi metodi". Tale palese disprezzo per le vittime civili non fa che rafforzare la determinazione dei militanti somali e la simpatia della popolazione per loro.

Quello che abbiamo visto più e più volte, non solo in Somalia, ma anche in Libia, Siria, Iraq e altri teatri, è che gli Stati Uniti non possono portare stabilità, democrazia o diritti umani in un paese bombardandolo. In verità, questo dovrebbe essere un fatto ovvio a priori. E, invece di sconfiggere il terrorismo, gli Stati Uniti sono riusciti solo a creare sempre più terroristi attraverso le loro prepotenti tattiche militari. Il popolo americano deve chiedere all'amministrazione Biden di porre fine a questa guerra per sempre e di concentrare i suoi sforzi sullo sviluppo economico e sugli aiuti umanitari per contribuire a creare una Somalia più stabile. Ma il primo passo in tutto questo è che il popolo americano sappia cosa gli Stati Uniti hanno fatto e continuano a fare in quel lontano paese.

Sustainable Palm Oil. Consciences safe and Rainforest under Fire

Everyday the world of information and consumers show us how words are increasingly turn in the unclear contours of propaganda. The consumer, the citizen does not have to be informed, but reassured, must have a peace of mind while phrases totally emptied of their semantic value turn into bullets to anesthetize the masses. They seek the consent of those who buy, often through the denial of noxious withholding  to health: "no preservatives", "no coloring", "no additives", there is the trend of the biological, here is the accurate labels with natural words, "organic," there was the period of  products from overseas, immediately the word "Italian" and if not just check the "made in Italy" from "Italian milk", the consumer starts to rumble for palm oil, no problem , here is the palm oil from "sustainable" farming. But they do not tell us what lies within the ingredients. And what it means? Few ask themselves, a few look beyond the label, the term "sustainability" plays ecologically acceptable, green light, it is the trend of the moment, zero km and sustainable, thumbs up to our environmental consciousness. The confectionery and food market , but also cosmetics has been quietly colonized by palm oil, it is virtually everywhere. The "RSPO" acronym corresponds to the "Roundtable on Sustanable Palm Oil", an agricultural organization, founded in 2004, which includes the vast majority of the sectors of 'palm oil producers, intermediaries, distributors, retailers, banks and industries. All together to promote and develop the sustainable use of this ingredient present in almost all the houses in the Western countries: Knorr, Kraft, Mulino Bianco, Mars, Buitoni, L'Oreal, Ferrero, Garnier, AXE, Oreo cookies, Biotherm and many many more. Often the term is misleading, is confused with "vegetable fats or oils", for example, is almost impossible to find a box of cookies without this ingredient. The citizen has the duty to keep alive their "critical thinking," without accepting the paradigms imposed by any government or group of power. Delegate their lives to third parties, it makes the individual more and more dependent on decision-makers, a liability that gradually but steadily will change the fight into something optional, whereas the latter should represent one of the cornerstones of human existence. The RSPO is therefore a guarantee for purchases that actually protect the forests of Southeast Asia? The answer seems rather controversial. There are many criticisms of this organization by the "Friends of Earth": "The RSPO certification is not enough, because it does not check whether toxic pesticides are used as Paraquat and is not yet able to ensure full traceability of the supply chain. The RSPO it is not a still credible certification ". But also from "Greenpeace" which recently published a report which highlights how the fires that recently have destroyed the peat forests of Borneo have been caused by companies producing so-called sustainable "palm oil." The Culprit plantations belongs to the Indonesian IOI Group companies, Bumitama Agri Ltd and Alas Kusuma group. Companies that are part of important institutions of sustainability certification, including the Round Table for Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) and the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). For the WWF instead the RSPO is an excellent tool to open a dialogue among industry, environmental groups and consumers. Although, as admits WWF there is still much to do to achieve optimum traceability. One study went even more depths by the "Environmental Investigation Agency" Group (a British NGO with over 30 years of experience) asked who should control the controllers, in other words the whole team of inspectors that issue certificates and authorizations for a sustainable use of rain forests affected from crops. The main purpose of the RSPO are to verify the standards for the transparency of legislative norms of each country involved, respect for workers, the prohibition of destroying any part of "primary forest" or high conservation value, as well as the protection of the values ​​and the rights of local communities. Infact the Palm Oil Companies can not buy parts of the forest for cultivation without the prior consent of indigenous communities. In the Standard, however, not prohibiting high peat content areas, a high pollution potential, if, as often happens these types of soils are on fire. According to the further report, these "controllers" are the protagonists of repeated defaults: they fail to protect the indigenous rights, do not report any abuse of workers, and show considerable deficiencies in the control of environmental standards themselves. There is a supervisory committee to evaluate all breaches about regulations, permits and certifications. Unfortunately, many palm oil Companies  subjected to these criticisms are the same who hold active roles in committee, a classic conflict of interests. Through interviews with some of the indigenous communities in Indonesia it was discovered the strong pressure exerted by the palm oil Corporations to get areas of forest to be wipe out. And what about the permission granted to the Companies Henrison PT Inti Persada and PT Pusaka Agro Lestari for an area of ​​about 70,000 hectares in almost the totality of the rainforest, in the provncia area in Papua New Guinea, which is considered very high environmental interest area for biodiversity. The two companies are subsidiary of the energy giant Noble Group, which saw its prices market  fall by 65% ​​only in 2015. A domino effect also caused by the largest Sovereign Retirement Fund of the world, the Norwegian, who has disinvested in recent years by almost all form of palm oil industry, judging potentially dangerous for the environment. Just a few months ago a further grant of rain forest has sparked protests from the EIA (Environmental Investigation Agency). The affected area which is the size of Manhattan island, is home to many orangutans and leopards, already threatened in other areas. The company which has received the green light for its palm oil crops as "sustainable" is called "PT Sawit Sumbermas Sarana" and features an "excellent" record of crimes against the environment, reaching, in 2000, to be named among the worst 18 companies for illegal logging in the country. There are no certificate and if there are some have not been verified by the authorities. In Borneo, to quote an area with very high environmental interest, with unique biodiversity the world, more than 10% of the land has already been converted for agricultural use for palm oil. Yet despite the criticism, the investigations of the various environmental organizations, these industries giants continue to ride the wave of the market: they are unstoppable super speedy trains, driven by a society that for years, unaware of everything, powered fuel profits and income at exponential zeros. L "IOI Group" is a multinational Company that groups together several subsidiaries, After an early career in the gas sector, in 2015 55% of revenues come from oil palm with 152,000 hectares of plantations in Malaysia and 83,000 in Indonesia. The fact dates back a few months ago when the criticized RSPO decides, surprisingly, to suspend the right "IOI Group" and prohibit the sale of its palm oil as "sustainable", too many violations of local laws, too many unauthorized permits . The Malaysian multinational has decided to sue the RSPO, for damages, since many buyers including Nestle, Mars and Ferrero have suspended the supply the purchasing of oil from the "IOI". 22 environmental non-profit associations are pushing more buyers to cancel their contracts. Moreover there are increasingly frequent, investigations into abuses to workers in IOI plantations. Unfortunately just few days ago RSPO reinstated the certificate for IOI, sends a message that it's fine to continue trashing forests in pursuit of profits. Yet even though IOI still cannot demonstrate it can produce palm oil in a responsible manner and has not shown how it will restore the forests and peat it has damaged, the RSPO last week announced it was lifting the suspension. After all, I am an eyewitness, here in Singapore, of a phenomenon highly polluting and damaging to human health: the Haze, this dense fog with smells of burnt wood, is nothing but the smoke from Indonesian forests torched for the various palm oil crops. We are talking about crimes against humanity, so at least is reported in an article of "The Guardian", which brings terrible numbers: at least 500,000 cases of lung infections in the only Indonesia. In Sumatra the index of pollutants (PSI) provides that each parameter above 300 is considered hazardous to your health, here are data around 2000 !!! The promises by the Indonesia policy will melt like snow in the sun, a sun made of corruption, poor controls and a high demand of world market that continues get palm oil for their food and cosmetics. A system as  sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), which takes on the contours of a stopgap measure, something to put consumers at peace with its green soul, while thousands of kilometers away is staged the same drama where human rights, child labor, pollution, corruption and the devastation of massive area of the planet are now commonplace. Once again, the citizen must take back their rights / duty decision on what  buy. To judge the severity of a problem based on its distance with our everyday life has shown how dangerous it can be. You have to get involved, questioning and admit that the particular product bought for years is harmful to the health of the planet and then to ours. We still have time to change, one, ten, hundred and thousands of people who pass this mental edge can become the legion of a global change. There will come a day when those problems that we consider far and inconsistent knocking at our door, or on the future generation doorstep, and maybe it will be too late to understand .... .... maremmacinghialaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

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

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

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