tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37687699620914741072023-11-16T03:43:34.031-08:00Uncorruptable SocialistUncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-51074022834144536462011-11-15T05:33:00.000-08:002011-11-15T05:33:42.653-08:00Move to make libyans life better real trigger for red, white & blue killing of gaddaffi<span style="color: white;">There appears to be very clear run up of events that caused the american, british & french to fire up the revolution in libya, one would have to delve a little deeper but with so many former regime figures having defected to the 'NTC' during the conflict it would appear that there was a corrupt element in the heirarchy of libya's regime & gaddaffi was going to weed them out, to what level the yanks, brits & french had their people in their we dont know but it seems very clear that the control of the oil was going to be overhauled & the wealth given to the libyan people, cant be having that now,<br />
<br />
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
On 4 March 2008, Gaddafi announced his proposal to dissolve the country's existing administrative structure and disburse oil revenue directly to the people. The plan included abolishing all ministries; except those of defence, internal security, and foreign affairs, and departments implementing strategic projects. His reason for this plan was because he believed that the ministries were failing to manage the country’s oil revenues. Gaddafi claimed he was planning to combat corruption in the state by proposing reforms where oil profits are handed out directly to the country's five million people rather than to government bodies, stating that "as long as money is administered by a government body, there would be theft and corruption." Gaddafi urged a sweeping reform of the government bureaucracy, suggesting that most of the cabinet system should be dismantled to "free Libyans from red tape" and "protect the state's budget from corruption." According to Western diplomats, this move appeared to be aimed at putting pressure on the government to speed up reforms. Gaddafi claimed that the ministries were failing to manage the country’s oil revenues, and that his "dream during all these years was to give power and wealth directly to the people."<br />
<br />
A national vote on Gaddafi's plan to disband the government and give oil money directly to the people was held in 2009, where Libya's people's congresses, the country's highest authority, voted to delay implementation. The General People's Congress announced that, out of 468 Basic People's Congresses, 64 chose immediate implementation while 251 endorsed implementation "but asked for (it) to be delayed until appropriate measures were put in place." This plan led to dissent from top government officials, who claimed it would "wreak havoc" in the economy by "fanning inflation and spurring capital flight." Gaddafi acknowledged that the scheme, which promised up to 30,000 Libyan dinars ($23,000) annually to about a million of Libya's poorest, may "cause chaos before it brought about prosperity," but claimed that "Do not be afraid to experiment with a new form of government" and that "This plan is to offer a better future for Libya's children."<br />
<br />
<i>Mahmoud Jibril, a former Jamahiriya member who later formed the National Transitional Council, was opposed to Gaddafi's Wealth Redistribution Project where oil revenues would be distributed directly to the Libyan people, an idea that Jibril described as “crazy” in 2010.</i><br />
<br />
In December 2009, Gaddafi personally told government officials that Libya would soon experience a "new political period" and would have elections for important positions such as minister-level roles and the National Security Advisor position (a Prime Minister equivalent). He also promised to include international monitors to ensure fair elections. His speech was said to have caused quite a stir. These elections were planned to coincide with the Jamahiriya's usual periodic elections for members of the Popular Committees, Basic People's Committees, Basic People's Congresses, and General People's Congress, in 2010.</span>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-68675598605375154422011-10-26T00:52:00.001-07:002011-11-07T06:08:26.160-08:00Libya and Nigeria after Gaddafi<span style="color: white;">The article below would in my opinion be free from the propaganda machines of the WEST (America, britain etc) & EAST (Saudi, Quatar etc), the response from many of the african nations, i would offer, is closer to a reality check from the region, <b>any </b>media report is subject to the author, editor, & media outlet's bias, some are more bias than others, but some hit some home truths that are devoid in the reporting of the clearly massive bias of the WEST & EAST, this article, while it does seem to regurgitate some soundbites has hit the very point that is the aim of NATO from the start, </span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">The fragmenting of the various factions in libya so the country becomes easy picking for them to take sides, the most accurate point aired in the article is this,</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><i>With only a provisional Executive Council led by Mustafa Abdul Jalil, it will be interesting to see how the country will be brought under control and the transition to democracy initiated. If it works, it will be a major and uncommon sociological miracle of our time.</i> </span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">By Ochereome Nnanna</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">LIBYA does not have a common boundary with Nigeria. But it has boundaries with countries like Niger Republic and Chad, which in turn, have boundaries with Mali , Burkina Faso , Northern Sudan and Nigeria, all of which are weak states that have little or no control of their international boundaries.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">According to the Director General of the Standards Organisation of Nigeria, SON, Dr.Joseph Odumodu, Nigeria has over 1,000 border entry points out of which only 25 are manned! So, when I talk about Libya and Nigeria after Muamar Gaddafi, you will see where I am coming from</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">The fall of Gaddafi on Thursday October 20, 2011 may be the beginning of brand new nightmares for people of both countries. Years down the line, we may all rue the day we rushed to the side of the West in our support for the forceful ouster of the tyrant by pro-democracy forces.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">We may regret not thinking through the problem in the overall interest of the Libyan and Nigerian people. I hope this will not happen, but the auguries do not seem to support the unbridled sense of euphoria sweeping Libya and even Nigeria at the fall of a man who dominated his country – and to some extent, the continent – for 42 years</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">Let’s start with Libya. We cannot deny that Gaddafi was a brutal dictator and megalomaniac. It is not easy to build a regime in modern times that lasts 40 years under one man. We cannot deny his frequent rants against the West and even his involvement in sponsorship of terrorism, even though he quickly back-tracked just when the US and allies contemplated an invasion in the manner that Saddam Hussein of Iraq was dealt with. Also undeniable was the fact that he looted his country’s treasury and was estimated to be worth about US$150 billion. These were on the reverse side of the regime</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">Post-colonial monarchy</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">The obverse side was that he overthrew a post-colonial monarchy of King Idris and established his Arab socialist Jamahiriya that gave the people economic and social fulfilment but denied them the right to democratic change of governance. Under Gaddafi, Libya was one of the most effectively governed countries in the world. It was a rare example of how the oil money was deployed for the benefit of the people. Libyans lived like princes and princesses. Menial workers from sub-Saharan Africa (including Nigeria ) braved the hellish conditions of the Sahara Desert to work there under situations of virtual voluntary (but lucrative) slavery</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">The social conditions that obtained in Gaddafi’s Libya were such that Libyan citizens who engaged in lives of crime deserved, under the Islamic Sharia Law, to be given the severe punishments attached. The educational level among Libyans (83 percent, spread evenly among the genders and social classes) was among the highest in Africa and the Arab world. Incidentally, it was this high literacy rate that aided the pro-democracy revolution that took off in Tunisia, spread to Egypt and was copied by Libyans now yearning for democracy</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">The sudden onset of the Arab Spring at the end of 2010 caught everyone unawares. Certainly, Gaddafi was psychologically unprepared and unwilling to adjust to the demand for democratic change. He was not like that great Ghanaian leader, Flt Lt Jerry Rawlings, who staged two revolutions, cleaned his country free of political and economic vermin, conducted a decade of dictatorship and personally ushered Ghana into a genuine democratic dispensation that has survived for two decades and growing stronger. Gaddafi only saw “dogs” that he benefitted with his rule. He refused to adjust or even run away to safety when he had the Republic of South Africa , Venezuela and other countries begging him to come for asylum. He held on till he was killed, his family ruined, his town and tribe dismantled and everything lost</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">Now that Gaddafi is gone the hard part of the challenge stares everybody in the face. The Libyan National Transitional Council, NTC, is a coalition of strange bedfellows united by the urge to oust Gaddafi. Now that the mission has been accomplished, we wait to see what other factors still unite them. This is the usual point where former comrade-at-arms begin bloody rivalries</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">In Libya’s case, there are ethnic, religious, ideological and oil-related reasons for factional fights for control. There are guns everywhere and in every hand. In terms of control, Libya today is comparable only to Somalia. It is usually in this state of flux that Al Qaeda and related Islamist organisations come fishing</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">The road ahead of Libya is, indeed, rough, long and winding. For a country and an Arab culture that is used to only dictatorship, the yearning for democracy may be a mere chimera, as feasible as the mirages that are usually commonplace in desert climes. Unlike in Egypt and Tunisia where the military establishments survived the fall of the regimes and have since taken charge of the transition to democracy, the Libyan military under Gaddafi was defeated by the citizen revolutionary fighters. This is the most complete revolution ever witnessed in the Arab Spring</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">With only a provisional Executive Council led by Mustafa Abdul Jalil, it will be interesting to see how the country will be brought under control and the transition to democracy initiated. If it works, it will be a major and uncommon sociological miracle of our time</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">But if it is mismanaged, the reverberations will transcend Libya. The country might disintegrate, as tribes and factions might engage in wars of supremacy and control over the nation’s oil resources. When such conflicts explode, the West will take sides, and so will Islamists and Libya might turn into another Iraq, Afghanistan or Somalia for years to come. If this happens, both Libyans and Nigerians and countries within reach might look back with nostalgia at the period that Gaddafi was able to run his country peacefully and prosperously. Today’s jubilant victors may never live to see the peaceful, prosperous and democratic Libya they fought for.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">For us in Nigeria , the North might become an even hotter bed than Boko Haram has turned it into. With a lot of displaced gunmen and former Gaddafi fighters, many of whom belong to nomadic cultures now roaming the open Sahel, the territorial integrity of our country may take a bad hit. We now have no choice but to press ahead with President Jonathan’s new idea for a national identity card system. We may also have no alternative than to be more serious with manning our borders, especially our Northern borders</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">When there was a serious drought in the Sahel and Sahara Desert countries in the 1970s, hundreds of thousands of strange-looking, like-skinned refugees thronged towns and cities of Nigeria, living exclusively as beggars and refusing to do any work. If the Libyan civil war and subsequent possible instability triggers another wave of migrations, it may bring a large number of armed and war-hardened refugees</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: white;">We can only guess at the consequences for our fragile polity</span>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-11342575496529938592011-10-26T00:50:00.000-07:002011-11-07T06:10:01.194-08:00The Red, White and Blue Imperialist War against Libya<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="color: white;">The Imperialist attack that murdered thousands of Libyan civilians and smashed swathes of state infrastructure has nothing to do with what happened in Egypt, Tunisia or anywhere else in the Arab world. If you really want to know what went on, begin with <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Venezuela</place></country-region> in April 2002. That failed coup started with a mass media campaign orchestrated by the privately owned Venevision TV and Radio company, which claimed that Chavez supporters had murdered up to 60 trade union demonstrators. It also claimed that Chavez had resigned and was on his way out of the country. This was reported throughout <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Venezuela</place></country-region> and the world. Next up we had the new president Pedro Carmosa sworn in, who promptly dissolved the democratically elected National Assembly and declared the 1999 constitution null and void. As demonstrations erupted organically the police were unleashed, this was not televised but reported as, ‘Chavez hardliners attempting to usurp the will of the people’. This attempted coup had been planned nine months in advance initiated by big business and their acolytes’, the national media, some trade unionists, police chiefs, generals and other henchmen, directed from the good old God fearing US of A.<br />
<br />
It is almost 2 years since <country-region w:st="on">Libya</country-region> began trading with <country-region w:st="on">Venezuela</country-region> as it had with <country-region w:st="on">Cuba</country-region> some years earlier, now we begin to see a different equation, one where an alternative social alliance was being assembled outside the <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">USA</place></country-region>'s sphere of influence. Factor in Gaddafi’s economic diplomacy throughout Africa and Arabia over the last 15 years where he was trying desperately to put in place a gold standard Dinar; which if established would have had serious ramifications for the Dollar and the <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">US</place></country-region> economy. Once you understand that oil is bought with dollars you begin to see what has happened to <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Libya</place></country-region>. The <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">US</place></country-region> have been preparing for a long time to eradicate the Gaddafi regime by imposing their carefully selected ‘National Transitional Council’ (NTC) by military aggression. This time they were not going to leave their well laid plans in the hands of locals least they too botched-it-up like Carmosa’s Contras. This time they disguised their support beneath NATO banners claiming they were coming to the aid of friendly rebels who have requested their assistance; overstepping seriously their NATO mandate. The old imperialist powers, the UK and France, seemingly playing an equal part with the US in effecting regime change through targeted bombing, supported by special ground forces who helped direct the ‘friendly rebel forces’ in the overthrow of the Gaddafi led Jamarhiriya.<br />
<br />
Let’s not forget that <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Libya</place></country-region> was, 6 months ago, the leading African country in terms of human development index (HDI), it also had the highest life expectancy on the continent. Furthermore, it had the highest per capita spend on education and health while also providing less well-off neighbours with funding and technical expertise as part of its outreach humanitarian programme. <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Libya</place></country-region> consists of over 2000 tribes; who send elected representatives to the Council of Tribes (Jamarhiriya) where they debate education, health, cultural and social programmes and also influence the direction of their government’s foreign policy. Unlike Egypt and Tunisia the people do not lack food or social provision, in fact Libyans have one of the best universal health care systems in the world and have a standard of education comparable with France. This is reflected in their HDI standing of 0.755 making them by far the most desirable country in Africa to live in, 50 places higher than <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Egypt</place></country-region>.<br />
<br />
<country-region w:st="on">Libya</country-region> holds gold reserves of 148 tonnes worth in excess of $1,000 per person as opposed to $50.00 per person in <country-region w:st="on">Ireland</country-region> and $160.00pp in the <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">UK</place></country-region>. <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Libya</place></country-region> also has Billions of dollars invested throughout the world in different countries which have been frozen for the last 6 months. $1.5 billion of this money was frozen in <country-region w:st="on">South Africa</country-region> which the <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">US</place></country-region> has decided to take. <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">France</place></country-region> has already helped itself to $125 million of Libyan money. Wars like this cost these predators nothing because they ‘sequestrate’ their adversary’s investments and when they’re finished bombing, blasting and leveling the nation’s infrastructure they can look forward to enormous rewards. Their lackeys (NTC) will award multi-billion dollar contracts to those who helped install them, this is how they plunder the wealth from their defeated host.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="color: white;">This is international terrorism of the highest caliber designed to smash sovereign nations that can see-through the immoral imperative of the Red, White and Blue Troika who go about the world bombing, bullying and browbeating those who are not prepared to crawl. Gaddafi we have been told is a mad dog who should have been put down years ago, maybe he was made mad after 8 well documented assassination attempts on his life with at least a similar number of unsubstantiated ones. This policy of targeted assassinations sidesteps any semblance of law, national or international. The <country-region w:st="on">US</country-region>, the <country-region w:st="on">UK</country-region>, <country-region w:st="on">France</country-region> and <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Israel</place></country-region> have become the greatest purveyors of this perversion. Who’s Next in their line of fire, Chavez or (Raul) Castro? Once they have these other little nations crushed beneath the weight of their smart ordinance either directly or indirectly; then they will start paying a lot more attention to the internal opposition in their countries. Their master plan is simple, once they own and control everything, their rule will be tyrannical, then they can do anything they please; there will be no opposition. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="color: white;">To paraphrase ‘the Great US Indian fighter’, General William T Sherman, ‘the only good opponent is a dead opponent’<br />
<br />
Martin Niemuller poignantly captured how he ended up in a concentration camp when released from Sachsenhausen in 1945 </span><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10.5pt;"><br />
</span><span style="color: white;"><b>First they came for the communists: I was not a communist, so I did not speak-out <br />
<br />
Then they came for the Trade Unionists: I was not a trade unionist, again I stayed quiet <br />
<br />
Next they came for the Jews: I was not a Jew, I looked the other way <br />
<br />
Today; today they came for me. </b></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="color: white;">Written by,<br />
<br />
Ray FitzPatrick </span></div>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-67940106133489395972011-08-30T02:58:00.000-07:002011-08-30T03:02:09.713-07:00<h1 align="center" style="line-height: 18pt; margin: auto 0cm; text-align: center;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 15pt; letter-spacing: 0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN;"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Fidel Castro’s speech at the <place w:st="on"><placetype w:st="on">University</placetype> of <placename w:st="on">Havana</placename></place></span></span></h1><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;"><span class="entry-date"><u><span lang="EN" style="color: white; font-family: Arial; font-size: 16pt; mso-ansi-language: EN;">September 3, 2010</span></u></span></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcrWx85nuMs9Ul845A6B50LSdNAJrNeaxv03jq3rkWfiVh3aFhTCcHUFiCEhFdF0bU8I7L3aiLipcZEvBTHUC8NVAYZ9p5Mc3eqlY3hoM3SLA56xKMJooU6UqOwBRNDWISBVizbPSIC18/s1600/fidel.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcrWx85nuMs9Ul845A6B50LSdNAJrNeaxv03jq3rkWfiVh3aFhTCcHUFiCEhFdF0bU8I7L3aiLipcZEvBTHUC8NVAYZ9p5Mc3eqlY3hoM3SLA56xKMJooU6UqOwBRNDWISBVizbPSIC18/s320/fidel.jpg" width="213" xaa="true" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">My dear comrades:</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">I asked that we meet early, before the heat of our sun becomes too intense.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">This stairway, to which I never imagined I would be returning, keeps some indelible memories of the years when I began to become aware of our era and our duty. One can acquire knowledge and awareness throughout one’s lifetime but never in any other stage of one’s existence will a person again have the purity and selflessness with which, being young, one faces up to life. At that age, I discovered my true destiny.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Thus it is inevitable that, at these moments, I am accompanied by the memory of so many comrades whom I knew exactly 65 years ago. It was during the first week of September that I entered this University, the only one in the country. It is best that I don’t even try to ask for each one of them, and I just hold on to the memory of when they were all young and full of enthusiasm and, as a rule, selfless and pure.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">I am extremely encouraged to have present those who today, as we were in yesteryear, even incomparably more well-educated, freer and more aware.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">In those days, the power of the brute force and the brutality of force fell upon this university hill, the lack of conscience and the corruption applied upon our people.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Thanks to the example of those preceding us, to the students massacred at the demand of the hordes called the Spanish volunteers, many of whom were born in this country who took up service for the Spanish tyranny, thanks to the Apostle of our Independence and to the blood spilt by dozens of thousands of patriots in three wars of Independence, we have really been preceded by a history which inspired our struggles. We didn’t deserve to be a colony of an empire that was even more powerful, that took over our Homeland and a good portion of our national conscience, sowing fatalism with the idea that it was impossible to shake off such a hefty yoke.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Worse still, a powerful exploiting sector had arisen which, at the service of the Empire’s interests, was plundering the wealth of our people, keeping them shackled and ignorant by force and, not on a few occasions, using others born in the country to act as the torturers and murderers of their own brothers and sisters.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">The Revolution put an end to those horrors and it is because of that that we are able to meet here on this September morning.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><a href="http://marxistleninist.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/fidel-castro-universidad-roberto-chile-14-580x334.jpg"><span style="text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;"><shapetype coordsize="21600,21600" filled="f" id="_x0000_t75" o:preferrelative="t" o:spt="75" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" stroked="f"><stroke joinstyle="miter"></stroke><formulas><f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"></f><f eqn="sum @0 1 0"></f><f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"></f><f eqn="prod @2 1 2"></f><f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"></f><f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"></f><f eqn="sum @0 0 1"></f><f eqn="prod @6 1 2"></f><f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"></f><f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"></f><f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"></f><f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"></f></formulas><path gradientshapeok="t" o:connecttype="rect" o:extrusionok="f"></path><lock aspectratio="t" v:ext="edit"></lock></shapetype></span></a><span style="color: white;">How far away we were after the triumph to think that, on an occasion like this, we would be returning to meet in efforts even greater and with higher aims than those which, at a certain time, seemed to us to be the highest goals of peoples, in the name of justice and happiness for human beings.</span></span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">It would not seem to be possible that a country as small as <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Cuba</place></country-region> would be seen forced to carry the weight of the struggle against those who have globalized and submitted the world to an inconceivable plunder, and have imposed a system which today is threatening the very survival of humankind.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">I am not speaking only in favour of the interests of our nation. One might say that such objectives have been left behind, in the measure that existence and the well-being of peoples stopped being our objectives, in the name of world interests, without which the life of nations is impossible. It is also certain that, in our struggles for national and social emancipation, our country, the bastion of Spanish colonialism in this hemisphere, was the first to be occupied and the last to rid itself of the yoke after more than 400 years of domination.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Our struggle for national liberation was mixed together with the tenacious efforts of the workers of our country for their social liberation. It was not an act of will; it was an act of fate. The merit of the Cuban people is that they knew how to understand and strengthen the indissoluble bonds between both. (Applause and cries of “¡Viva Fidel!”)</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">The time humankind has to fight this battle is incredibly limited. Throughout more than three months of unceasing struggle I modestly made the effort to reveal, to an inattentive world, the terrible dangers that threaten human life on our planet. It is well-known, and I have no other alternative than to remember the fact, that we are not living in an age of chivalry and the steel of the swords accompanied by crossbows that were preceded for centuries by battering rams that demolished walls or tried to do so, or war chariots drawn by horses with knives mounted on the wheels; weapons, in brief, always cruel, but with limited destructive power that humans used to wage war on each other since they invented the mace, up to World Wars I and II, when automatic weapons were used , tanks, combat planes and flying fortresses, submarines, torpedoes, armoured vehicles and aircraft carriers that raised the toll of lives lost to tens of millions of humans, and to hundreds of millions of victims of destruction, the wounded, the sick and the hungry, inevitable consequences of wars.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Two nuclear devices were used at the end of the last war. Mankind had never before conceived such terrible destruction and extermination. More than 60 years ago we speak of the bombing of <city w:st="on">Hiroshima</city> and <city w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Nagasaki</place></city>; with that we have indicated that the destructive power of accumulated weapons is equal to more than four hundred and forty times the power of one of those bombs. That’s how it is, that’s what mathematics tells us. I add no more because I would have to use rather tough words about the causes and the people responsible for that extremely sad reality.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">But that was not enough. The desire for economic and military domination by the first ones to use those terrifying instruments of destruction and death lead humankind to the real possibility of dying out, which we face today. I don’t need to give you arguments for something you already know very well. The problem of peoples today, shall we say, of more than seven billion human beings, is to prevent that such a tragedy should occur.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">I am not happy speaking about the painful truth that constitutes something of shame for everything that is identified as policy or government. This truth was deliberately hidden from the world and the difficult task of warning humankind of the real danger it is facing has fallen upon <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Cuba</place></country-region>. We must not falter in that activity. Faced with sceptics, our unmistakable duty is to continue fighting the battle. It is a fact that a growing number of persons in the world have become aware of the reality.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Commenting on the first part of the interview published on Monday, August 30 by the director of La Jornada in that prestigious Mexican newspaper, a citizen of Our America who read it on the CubaDebate website voiced his opinion with words that were so profound that I decided to include the crux of his thoughts in this message to the university students of Cuba:</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“I call out to all the countries that today are involved in military conflicts. Please, always think about achieving true peace, that is what we need most. Our children, our grandchildren and the human beings of this world, all of us will thank you. We need to live in peace and security on a planet that day by day becomes less liveable. It is very easy to understand. Nuclear weapons should disappear, no country should have them, atomic energy should only be used for good. THE ONLY REAL VICTORY IS IN ACHIEVING PEACE.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“Today we face two great challenges: the consolidation of world peace and saving the planet from climatic changes. The first is to achieve a lasting peace on solid bases, the second is to reverse climate change. We have to become aware of these problems that we ourselves have created and that we are the protagonists of the changes we must attain. The panorama of the last century was not the same as the one in this century. Weaponry, at this time, is much more sophisticated and deadly and the planet is weaker and more polluted.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“World Conference on Climate Change in <place w:st="on">Cancun</place> […] the only opportunity left to us. […] We are getting to a critical point where there is no turning back. At that moment, because we are afraid, we would like to do anything to save our lives, but by now everything is in vain and it is too late. The opportunities in our lives appear before us just once and we must know how to make use of them. Our Mother Nature is like a passive smoker who still has not become addicted, we are making her sick indiscriminately.”</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“Nobody has the right to use violence against any human being, country or nation. Nobody can cut down a tree if he hasn’t first planted three. […] We cannot turn our backs on nature. Quite the opposite, we must always embrace her tightly. Because we ourselves are nature, we are part of that fan of many colours, sounds, balance and harmony. Nature is perfect.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“<city w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Kyoto</place></city> signified hope for all human beings …”</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“If we do nothing. Nobody will be saved, there will be no safe place on earth, not in the air, not in the cosmos. The great energy that accumulates daily because of the greenhouse effect, since the solar rays are trapped and emit more energy every day onto the surface of the earth. It will cause natural disasters having unpredictable consequences. Would there be anyone on earth with a button that would be able to stop such a disaster?”</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“…we cannot lose any time on anachronistic wars that weaken us and use up our energies. Enemies make wars. Let us eliminate all the causes that make men see other men as their enemies. Not even those who face each other in a war are aware that this is the solution to their problems, they react to their emotions and ignore their consciences mistakenly thinking that the road to peace is war. I say, without the least margin for error, that peace is attained with peace and: IF YOU WANT PEACE, GET READY TO CHANGE YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS (Applause).”</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Here you have the essence of his words, quite simple and within the reach of any citizen on earth.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">On Wednesday, September 1st, as I was writing this message, information appearing on the CubaDebate website brought us the following news: “A new wave of leakage about an attack on Iran’s nuclear targets being prepared by Israel together with the United States might this time have a basis in reality, as expressed in an article printed this Tuesday by George Friedman, the executive director of the prestigious Stratfor Centre, which has some former CIA analysts among its collaborators..” He is a well educated person with prestige.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">The information goes on to say:</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“There have been numerous occasions on which different versions of the possible attack on the Islamic Republic presumably filtered from secret services have been spread. According to experts, it dealt with an attempt to exert psychological pressure on Teheran to make it seek consensus with the West.”</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“…this technique didn’t work and it is highly unlikely that it will be used again with the same objective, states Friedman…”</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“‘It is a paradox, but the new slew of rumours about war may this time be directed towards trying to convince Iran precisely that there will be no war, while in reality, war is now being prepared’ …”</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“The analyst completely discards the fact that Tel Aviv is daring to embark on a military operation without counting on the support of the Pentagon.”</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“At the same time, the expert warns that the most serious consequence of the possible attack against Iran would be that the Islamic Republic would block the Strait of Ormuz, between the Oman and Persian Gulfs, and that would collapse 45% of world oil supplies thus shooting prices sky high and making world economic recovery after the recession difficult.”</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Thus concludes the information.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">I find it incredible that the fear of an attack is due to consequences that the price of oil may suffer and to the struggle against the recession. I myself do not harbour the least doubt that the capacity for <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Iran</place></country-region>’s conventional answer would provoke a ferocious war, control of which would escape the hands of the warring parties and it would become an irremediable global nuclear conflict. That is what I maintain.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">An important AFP dispatch states that former British Prime Minister Tony Blair warned this Wednesday in a BBC interview when talking about his memoirs being released, that the international community might have no other alternative than the military option if Iran were to develop nuclear weapons.”</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">It continues:</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“Blair concluded that he thought that there was no alternative to this if they continue developing nuclear weapons. They should receive this message loud and clear, he added, echoing a threat that has already been made several times by the <country-region w:st="on">US</country-region> and <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Israel</place></country-region>.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Of course, if they are manufacturing nuclear weapons they have no proof nor can they have any proof because they are using some research centres, doing research; they don’t have, for up to two or three years as they themselves have admitted, any material to begin manufacturing a bomb. This without taking into account that manufacturers of nuclear weapons have 25,000 nuclear weapons, without counting the unimaginable conventional ones. They have no proof of this, it’s a research centre. Is that a reason to attack them? Having a plant producing electrical energy, coming from uranium, that’s nothing constituting a crime and for them it is proof they are manufacturing weapons. They have already done it, they did it in 1981 against an Iraqi research centre, and they did it in 2007 against a Syrian research centre; they didn’t talk about that, it’s somewhat of a mystery why they didn’t speak of it. Because there are terrible things happening that nobody talks about and nobody prints them.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Well, that is the proof, because they are talking about attacking those reactors and those research centres. That’s why one cannot become confused by the little words “if they try” to manufacture nuclear weapons.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">A new dispatch from the ITAR-TASS agency reports that sanctions against <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Iran</place></country-region> will not report any desired results, the Iranian problem must not be resolved by any method using force. Today, Sergei Lavrov, head of Russian diplomatic services, stated this in his speech before students –what a coincidence – of the MGIMO International Affairs Institute.”</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">And the cable goes on:</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“We come from the idea that no world problem should be resolved using force, he stated. Lavrov drew attention to the position of US President Barack Obama in regard to <country-region w:st="on">Iran</country-region>, especially involving <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Iran</place></country-region> in the negotiated process. We welcome a normalization in US-Iran relations, he added.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">I would think that <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Russia</place></country-region> is not just a member of the Security Council with the right to veto, but also a powerful country whose opinion cannot be ignored. Independently of the fact that in that Resolution of June 9th, all those with the right to veto supported the Resolution. <country-region w:st="on">Turkey</country-region> and <country-region w:st="on">Brazil</country-region> did not support it, and <country-region w:st="on"><place w:st="on">Lebanon</place></country-region> abstained. That was a very important moment because the Resolution was approved; it authorized inspection of Iranian merchant vessels and also established a term, they said it was 90 days, and some say it expires on the 9th, other say on the 7th. It also says that on that day they have to inform if they attacked or not.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Now we must sit back and wait to see what they will do in this situation, how they value world opinion, what effect it will have, if they will invent another term or not, if they declare they are not going to do it, or if they ratify that they are going to do it, it might take a bit longer, but it cannot be a lot of time.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">I recommend that we are watchful, that we ask our information media to communicate to us, so that we can closely follow the situation.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Thanks to the electronic media there are persons in the world, a growing number of persons who are being informed, because they cannot prevent that, besides even if the news agencies and the great information media in the hands of the powerful capitalist corporations keep silent, the world is finding out about it. I tell you this because of the number of messages that are arriving. I read you one opinion that I selected: it is at 4:52, at 4:54, another at 4:55, the comrades who collect these explain that they are coming from all parts of the world, not just from <place w:st="on">Latin America</place>. It is impossible to collect and comment on them all, we have an idea about the state of opinions, about their credibility or not, and I can tell you that they are being given great credibility just as you are doing. It is clear, and that is decisive. It is a new stage, never have we seen a situation like this.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Therefore, I suggest to you, and to all our compatriots that are trying to be aware, and to our press media that inform us, because at times the international press keeps strangely silent and then suddenly a series of news items appears. The ones that are going to come out next, each day they will be more interesting.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Nobody can say exactly what is going to happen, because these events are unravelling.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">What is going to happen on the 7th, the 9th, the 15th, the 20th? We have to make our plans, work plans, everyone makes their own. As for me, I will be concentrating; I am concentrating on this for a while now, collecting as much information as possible.</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">But in all this, we all play a part in the job, a part of the responsibility that doesn’t mean that we have to stop whatever we are doing.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Also, another very important country, it is the last one mentioned here, because it was the last cable, yesterday afternoon.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">A Reuters dispatch states that the European Union is pressuring <country-region w:st="on">China</country-region> to comply with sanctions against <place w:st="on"><country-region w:st="on">Iran</country-region></place>.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Because besides the famous June 9th agreement, number 1929, establishing the sanctions I mentioned, these European satellite powers and those from other parts, imposed additional sanctions to strangle the country and, in this case, they were complaining about China, also about Russia in terms of what they were going to do, but it stated thus:</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">“The official responsible for the European Union foreign policy, Catherine Ashton, said on Thursday that China had been pressured to ensure that Chinese companies would not fill the void left by other companies that had abandoned Iran because of the sanctions …” It doesn’t say what sanctions, whether the ones by the Council or theirs, they must be referring to all of them, of course. .</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Any honest person can understand the complexity of the very serious problem that today threatens the world.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Comrades, university students, as in other times which seem far away and which seem to me to have been just yesterday, I thank you for your presence and for the moral support you are providing for this struggle for peace (Applause). I urge you to not give up fighting for this. In this struggle, as in many others in years past, victory is possible (Applause).</span><br />
<span style="color: white;"><br />
</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">May human life be preserved! May children and youth enjoy life in a world of justice! May parents and grandparents share with them the privilege of living!</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">The fair distribution of material and spiritual wealth, which mankind is capable of creating through the fabulous development of productive forces, that is the only possible alternative.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Thank you very much.</span><br />
<span lang="EN" style="color: white; mso-ansi-language: EN;">September 3, 2010</span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: center;"><br />
</div>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-20415684982749201782011-08-11T23:56:00.000-07:002011-08-11T23:56:11.761-07:00The Globalizer Who Came In From the ColdWednesday, October 10, 2001 <br />
<br />
<div class="pgentry">JOE STIGLITZ: TODAY'S WINNER OF THE NOBEL PRIZE IN ECONOMICS<br />
<br />
by Greg Palast<br />
<br />
The World Bank's former Chief Economist's accusations are eye-popping - including how the IMF and US Treasury fixed the Russian elections<br />
"It has condemned people to death," the former apparatchik told me. This was like a scene out of Le Carre. The brilliant old agent comes in from the cold, crosses to our side, and in hours of debriefing, empties his memory of horrors committed in the name of a political ideology he now realizes has gone rotten.<span id="more-960"></span><br />
And here before me was a far bigger catch than some used Cold War spy. Joseph Stiglitz was Chief Economist of the World Bank. To a great extent, the new world economic order was his theory come to life.<br />
I "debriefed" Stigltiz over several days, at Cambridge University, in a London hotel and finally in Washington in April 2001 during the big confab of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. But instead of chairing the meetings of ministers and central bankers, Stiglitz was kept exiled safely behind the blue police cordons, the same as the nuns carrying a large wooden cross, the Bolivian union leaders, the parents of AIDS victims and the other 'anti-globalization' protesters. The ultimate insider was now on the outside.<br />
In 1999 the World Bank fired Stiglitz. He was not allowed quiet retirement; US Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, I'm told, demanded a public excommunication for Stiglitz' having expressed his first mild dissent from globalization World Bank style.<br />
Here in Washington we completed the last of several hours of exclusive interviews for The Observer and BBC TV's Newsnight about the real, often hidden, workings of the IMF, World Bank, and the bank's 51% owner, the US Treasury.<br />
And here, from sources unnamable (not Stiglitz), we obtained a cache of documents marked, "confidential," "restricted," and "not otherwise (to be) disclosed without World Bank authorization."<br />
Stiglitz helped translate one from bureaucratise, a "Country Assistance Strategy." There's an Assistance Strategy for every poorer nation, designed, says the World Bank, after careful in-country investigation. But according to insider Stiglitz, the Bank's staff 'investigation' consists of close inspection of a nation's 5-star hotels. It concludes with the Bank staff meeting some begging, busted finance minister who is handed a 'restructuring agreement' pre-drafted for his 'voluntary' signature (I have a selection of these).<br />
Each nation's economy is individually analyzed, then, says Stiglitz, the Bank hands every minister the same exact four-step program.<br />
Step One is Privatization - which Stiglitz said could more accurately be called, 'Briberization.' Rather than object to the sell-offs of state industries, he said national leaders - using the World Bank's demands to silence local critics - happily flogged their electricity and water companies. "You could see their eyes widen" at the prospect of 10% commissions paid to Swiss bank accounts for simply shaving a few billion off the sale price of national assets.<br />
And the US government knew it, charges Stiglitz, at least in the case of the biggest 'briberization' of all, the 1995 Russian sell-off. "The US Treasury view was this was great as we wanted Yeltsin re-elected. We don't care if it's a corrupt election. We want the money to go to Yeltzin" via kick-backs for his campaign.<br />
Stiglitz is no conspiracy nutter ranting about Black Helicopters. The man was inside the game, a member of Bill Clinton's cabinet as Chairman of the President's council of economic advisors.<br />
Most ill-making for Stiglitz is that the US-backed oligarchs stripped Russia's industrial assets, with the effect that the corruption scheme cut national output nearly in half causing depression and starvation.<br />
After briberization, Step Two of the IMF/World Bank one-size-fits-all rescue-your-economy plan is 'Capital Market Liberalization.' In theory, capital market deregulation allows investment capital to flow in and out. Unfortunately, as in Indonesia and Brazil, the money simply flowed out and out. Stiglitz calls this the "Hot Money" cycle. Cash comes in for speculation in real estate and currency, then flees at the first whiff of trouble. A nation's reserves can drain in days, hours. And when that happens, to seduce speculators into returning a nation's own capital funds, the IMF demands these nations raise interest rates to 30%, 50% and 80%.<br />
"The result was predictable," said Stiglitz of the Hot Money tidal waves in Asia and Latin America. Higher interest rates demolished property values, savaged industrial production and drained national treasuries.<br />
At this point, the IMF drags the gasping nation to Step Three: Market-Based Pricing, a fancy term for raising prices on food, water and cooking gas. This leads, predictably, to Step-Three-and-a-Half: what Stiglitz calls, "The IMF riot."<br />
The IMF riot is painfully predictable. When a nation is, "down and out, [the IMF] takes advantage and squeezes the last pound of blood out of them. They turn up the heat until, finally, the whole cauldron blows up," as when the IMF eliminated food and fuel subsidies for the poor in Indonesia in 1998. Indonesia exploded into riots, but there are other examples - the Bolivian riots over water prices last year and this February, the riots in Ecuador over the rise in cooking gas prices imposed by the World Bank. You'd almost get the impression that the riot is written into the plan.<br />
And it is. What Stiglitz did not know is that, while in the States, BBC and The Observer obtained several documents from inside the World Bank, stamped over with those pesky warnings, "confidential," "restricted," "not to be disclosed." Let's get back to one: the "Interim Country Assistance Strategy" for Ecuador, in it the Bank several times states - with cold accuracy - that they expected their plans to spark, "social unrest," to use their bureaucratic term for a nation in flames.<br />
That's not surprising. The secret report notes that the plan to make the US dollar Ecuador's currency has pushed 51% of the population below the poverty line. The World Bank "Assistance" plan simply calls for facing down civil strife and suffering with, "political resolve" - and still higher prices.<br />
The IMF riots (and by riots I mean peaceful demonstrations dispersed by bullets, tanks and teargas) cause new panicked flights of capital and government bankruptcies. This economic arson has it's bright side - for foreign corporations, who can then pick off remaining assets, such as the odd mining concession or port, at fire sale prices.<br />
Stiglitz notes that the IMF and World Bank are not heartless adherents to market economics. At the same time the IMF stopped Indonesia 'subsidizing' food purchases, "when the banks need a bail-out, intervention (in the market) is welcome." The IMF scrounged up tens of billions of dollars to save Indonesia's financiers and, by extension, the US and European banks from which they had borrowed.<br />
A pattern emerges. There are lots of losers in this system but one clear winner: the Western banks and US Treasury, making the big bucks off this crazy new international capital churn. Stiglitz told me about his unhappy meeting, early in his World Bank tenure, with Ethopia's new president in the nation's first democratic election. The World Bank and IMF had ordered Ethiopia to divert aid money to its reserve account at the US Treasury, which pays a pitiful 4% return, while the nation borrowed US dollars at 12% to feed its population. The new president begged Stiglitz to let him use the aid money to rebuild the nation. But no, the loot went straight off to the US Treasury's vault in Washington.<br />
Now we arrive at Step Four of what the IMF and World Bank call their "poverty reduction strategy": Free Trade. This is free trade by the rules of the World Trade Organization and World Bank, Stiglitz the insider likens free trade WTO-style to the Opium Wars. "That too was about opening markets," he said. As in the 19th century, Europeans and Americans today are kicking down the barriers to sales in Asia, Latin American and Africa, while barricading our own markets against Third World agriculture.<br />
In the Opium Wars, the West used military blockades to force open markets for their unbalanced trade. Today, the World Bank can order a financial blockade just as effective - and sometimes just as deadly.<br />
Stiglitz is particularly emotional over the WTO's intellectual property rights treaty (it goes by the acronym TRIPS, more on that in the next chapters). It is here, says the economist, that the new global order has "condemned people to death" by imposing impossible tariffs and tributes to pay to pharmaceutical companies for branded medicines. "They don't care," said the professor of the corporations and bank loans he worked with, "if people live or die."<br />
By the way, don't be confused by the mix in this discussion of the IMF, World Bank and WTO. They are interchangeable masks of a single governance system. They have locked themselves together by what are unpleasantly called, "triggers." Taking a World Bank loan for a school 'triggers' a requirement to accept every 'conditionality' - they average 111 per nation - laid down by both the World Bank and IMF. In fact, said Stiglitz the IMF requires nations to accept trade policies more punitive than the official WTO rules.<br />
Stiglitz greatest concern is that World Bank plans, devised in secrecy and driven by an absolutist ideology, are never open for discourse or dissent. Despite the West's push for elections throughout the developing world, the so-called Poverty Reduction Programs "undermine democracy."<br />
And they don't work. Black Africa's productivity under the guiding hand of IMF structural "assistance" has gone to hell in a handbag. Did any nation avoid this fate? Yes, said Stiglitz, identifying Botswana. Their trick? "They told the IMF to go packing."<br />
So then I turned on Stiglitz. OK, Mr Smart-Guy Professor, how would you help developing nations? Stiglitz proposed radical land reform, an attack at the heart of "landlordism," on the usurious rents charged by the propertied oligarchies worldwide, typically 50% of a tenant's crops. So I had to ask the professor: as you were top economist at the World Bank, why didn't the Bank follow your advice?<br />
"If you challenge [land ownership], that would be a change in the power of the elites. That's not high on their agenda." Apparently not.<br />
Ultimately, what drove him to put his job on the line was the failure of the banks and US Treasury to change course when confronted with the crises - failures and suffering perpetrated by their four-step monetarist mambo. Every time their free market solutions failed, the IMF simply demanded more free market policies.<br />
"It's a little like the Middle Ages," the insider told me, "When the patient died they would say, "well, he stopped the bloodletting too soon, he still had a little blood in him."<br />
I took away from my talks with the professor that the solution to world poverty and crisis is simple: remove the bloodsuckers.<br />
******<br />
A version of this was first published as "The IMF's Four Steps to Damnation" in The Observer (London) in April and another version in The Big Issue - that's the magazine that the homeless flog on platforms in the London Underground. Big Issue offered equal space to the IMF, whose "deputy chief media officer" wrote:<br />
"... I find it impossible to respond given the depth and breadth of hearsay and misinformation in [Palast's] report."<br />
Of course it was difficult for the Deputy Chief to respond. The information (and documents) came from the unhappy lot inside his agency and the World Bank.<br />
Award-winning reporter Palast writes Inside Corporate America for the London Observer. To read other Palast reports, to contact the author or to subscribe to his column, go to GregPalast.Com<br />
</div>Source,<br />
<a href="http://www.gregpalast.com/the-globalizer-who-came-in-from-the-cold/">http://www.gregpalast.com/the-globalizer-who-came-in-from-the-cold/</a>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-21837264916581257232011-07-11T23:46:00.000-07:002011-07-11T23:46:07.769-07:00Bankers live in fear for their mistakes, not the population!<h1 class="news-display-headline entry-title">Iceland, a country that wants to punish the bankers responsible for the crisis</h1><a href="http://www.pressenza.com/npermalink/icelandx-a-country-that-wants-to-punish-the-bankers-responsible-for-the-crisis">http://www.pressenza.com/npermalink/icelandx-a-country-that-wants-to-punish-the-bankers-responsible-for-the-crisis</a><br />
<blockquote class="article-summary entry-summary">Since 2008 the vast majority of the Western population dream about saying "no" to the banks, but no one has dared to do so. No one except the Icelanders, who have carried out a peaceful revolution that has managed not only to overthrow a government and draft a new constitution, but also seeks to jail those responsible for the country's economic debacle.</blockquote><div class="article-image-top"> <abbr class="published" title="2011-03-31T11:45:44-07:00">3/31/11</abbr> </div><div class="article-image-top"> </div><div class="news-display-body"><div class="entry-content"><span class="article-header-agency"><span class="source-org vcard"><span>Pressenza</span> <span class="invisible fn">Pressenza International Press Agency</span> </span><!-- source-org vcard fn--></span><span class="article-header-city">Reikjavik,</span> <span class="article-header-date published"><abbr class="published" title="2011-03-28T00:00:00-07:00">3/28/11</abbr> </span>Last week 9 people were arrested in London and Reykjavik for their possible responsibility for Iceland’s financial collapse in 2008, a deep crisis which developed into an unprecedented public reaction that is changing the country's direction.<br />
It has been a revolution without weapons in Iceland, the country that hosts the world's oldest democracy (since 930), and whose citizens have managed to effect change by going on demonstrations and banging pots and pans. Why have the rest of the Western countries not even heard about it?<br />
Pressure from Icelandic citizens’ has managed not only to bring down a government, but also begin the drafting of a new constitution (in process) and is seeking to put in jail those bankers responsible for the financial crisis in the country. As the saying goes, if you ask for things politely it is much easier to get them.<br />
This quiet revolutionary process has its origins in 2008 when the Icelandic government decided to nationalise the three largest banks, Landsbanki, Kaupthing and Glitnir, whose clients were mainly British, and North and South American.<br />
After the State took over, the official currency (krona) plummeted and the stock market suspended its activity after a 76% collapse. Iceland was becoming bankrupt and to save the situation, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) injected U.S. $ 2,100 million and the Nordic countries helped with another 2,500 million.<br />
<strong>Great little victories of ordinary people</strong><br />
While banks and local and foreign authorities were desperately seeking economic solutions, the Icelandic people took to the streets and their persistent daily demonstrations outside parliament in Reykjavik prompted the resignation of the conservative Prime Minister Geir H. Haarde and his entire government.<br />
Citizens demanded, in addition, to convene early elections, and they succeeded. In April a coalition government was elected, formed by the Social Democratic Alliance and the Left Green Movement, headed by a new Prime Minister, Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir.<br />
Throughout 2009 the Icelandic economy continued to be in a precarious situation (at the end of the year the GDP had dropped by 7%) but, despite this, the Parliament proposed to repay the debt to Britain and the Netherlands with a payment of 3,500 million Euros, a sum to be paid every month by Icelandic families for 15 years at 5.5% interest.<br />
The move sparked anger again in the Icelanders, who returned to the streets demanding that, at least, that decision was put to a referendum. Another big small victory for the street protests: in March 2010 that vote was held and an overwhelming 93% of the population refused to repay the debt, at least with those conditions.<br />
This forced the creditors to rethink the deal and improve it, offering 3% interest and payment over 37 years. Not even that was enough. The current president, on seeing that Parliament approved the agreement by a narrow margin, decided last month not to approve it and to call on the Icelandic people to vote in a referendum so that they would have the last word.<br />
<strong>The bankers are fleeing in fear</strong><br />
Returning to the tense situation in 2010, while the Icelanders were refusing to pay a debt incurred by financial sharks without consultation, the coalition government had launched an investigation to determine legal responsibilities for the fatal economic crisis and had already arrested several bankers and top executives closely linked to high risk operations.<br />
Interpol, meanwhile, had issued an international arrest warrant against Sigurdur Einarsson, former president of one of the banks. This situation led scared bankers and executives to leave the country en masse.<br />
In this context of crisis, an assembly was elected to draft a new constitution that would reflect the lessons learned and replace the current one, inspired by the Danish constitution.<br />
To do this, instead of calling experts and politicians, Iceland decided to appeal directly to the people, after all they have sovereign power over the law. More than 500 Icelanders presented themselves as candidates to participate in this exercise in direct democracy and write a new constitution. 25 of them, without party affiliations, including lawyers, students, journalists, farmers and trade union representatives were elected.<br />
Among other developments, this constitution will call for the protection, like no other, of freedom of information and expression in the so-called Icelandic Modern Media Initiative, in a bill that aims to make the country a safe haven for investigative journalism and freedom of information, where sources, journalists and Internet providers that host news reporting are protected.<br />
The people, for once, will decide the future of the country while bankers and politicians witness the transformation of a nation from the sidelines.</div></div>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-38204822919300209632011-06-28T03:19:00.001-07:002011-06-28T03:20:30.784-07:00Labour Party Councillors delusion on Labour web site launching attack on ULA taken from Paul Murphy MEP's BLOG,As you may already be aware, the flotilla has been delayed by a few more days largely due to the Herculean efforts that are being made by the Israeli establishment to prevent this humanitarian and political mission taking place. The Israel Law Centre has filed a complaint about the seaworthiness of the US ship. This is a transparent attempt to prevent such passengers as holocaust survivor Hedy Epstein and internationally renowned author Alice Walker from participating in the flotilla.<br />
<br />
Their latest desperate effort is an attempt to intimidate journalists from going on the boats. They have said that any journalists who goes will be faced with a ten year ban on traveling to Israel. This is an outrageous attempt to prevent journalists being present to witness possible Israeli aggression against peaceful flotilla participants. This blatant attempt to crush press freedom should be condemned by all who defend the right to free speech, regardless of their views on the Flotilla or the Israeli blockade.<br />
<br />
Israeli commandos storming the first Freedom Flotilla in May 2010<br />
And while the Israeli state is busy cooking up plans to delay the Flotilla, the establishment parties in Ireland are reduced to pretend bewilderment as in the case of the Minister for Justice, Alan Shatter and pathetic smears in the case of Richard Humphreys, a Labour Party councillor in Stillorgan. Cllr Humphrey appears to have taken a bitter disliking to the United Left Alliance, releasing a somewhat hysterical attack on the ULA prior to February’s General Election and his <a href="http://www.labour.ie/richardhumphreys/news/1309094172572251.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: red;"><u>latest diatribe</u></span></a> against myself and fellow United Left Alliance activist, Cllr. Hugh Lewis, does not bother me in the slightest. However, his attack on the nine activists who were killed by the Israel Defence Forces last year is outrageous. In contradiction to the facts, but in line with Israeli propaganda, he has stated that responsibility for the killing of these people lies with the “nine Turkish terrorists” and that they “attempted to kill and injure members of the Israeli Defence Forces.” This is a fabrication not backed up with any evidence. In fact, a UN report in September 2010 confirmed that at least six of them were “summarily executed” by the IDF. Out of respect to the family of those activists and concern for the message it sends to the IDF about how it should respond to this flotilla, I call on him to retract that statement immediately.<br />
<br />
Despite the combined efforts of the Israeli state and their friends in high and low places, they will not be able to stop this Freedom Flotilla. We will set sail within days for Gaza. The impact of our trip will be felt in Gaza and throughout the world as the horrific conditions that are imposed by the Israeli state on the people of Gaza are highlighted.<br />
<br />
<b><span style="color: white;">The irony of the Labour councillor saying that the aid could be brought in over land & in the same breath telling us the ships are there to bring in arms is incredible, it must not have dawned on the labour councillor that to follow his logic then arms could also be brought in overland. Oh how far Labour have moved from their founding principles in supporting the mighty & powerful over the weak.</span></b>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-47450922521245479192011-06-28T01:04:00.000-07:002011-06-28T01:04:23.539-07:00IDF gets green light from US<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.paulmurphymep.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/xin_562110601131132811091.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="209" i$="true" src="http://www.paulmurphymep.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/xin_562110601131132811091.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>That old refrain – “They were asking for it” – has been commonly used by imperialism and by dictatorships the world over to justify the brutal repression of any one who dares challenge their brutal oppression and occupations. And it appears that is still in the vocabulary of US imperialism according to a statement made yesterday by US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. <br />
<br />
Criticising the attempts by the Freedom Flotilla II to deliver much needed humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza, Ms Clinton said that, “It’s not helpful for there to be flotillas that try to provoke actions by entering into Israeli waters and creating a situation in which the Israelis have the right to defend themselves.”<br />
<br />
<br />
But it is not true that we will be entering Israeli waters. We will be sailing through Gazan waters. Not that it matters to the Israeli Navy which intercepted last year’s flotilla killing 9 innocent and unarmed activists while the Flotilla was still in International waters – a blatant act of international piracy. Ms Clinton is criminally silent on this and is turning a blind eye towards the use of violence by Israeli forces. Our intention is humanitarian – to break the illegal blockade and deliver vital humanitarian supplies to the people of Gaza. It is the comments and actions of the Israeli military which are provocative. <br />
<br />
And one must ask what type of situation are the fishermen of Gaza creating to warrant the regular assaults on their ships by the Israeli Navy? Might it be that they dare to travel outside of the narrow, overfished 5km stretch that they are confined to by the IDF so that they might feed themselves?<br />
<br />
Clinton’s comments are disgraceful. She has essentially given the green light to Israeli Defence Forces to use violence against participants in the flotilla. She has ignored the reasoning behind the need for such a mission, the criminal and illegal blockade of Gaza, which is resulting in enormous suffering for the Palestinian masses.<br />
<br />
It is now clear that this blockade, while policed and imposed by Israel, enjoys the support of the so-called international community. These hypocrites pretended to support the people of North Africa and the Middle East who rose up against dictatorial and repressive regimes, but now criticise those who seek to assist the Palestinian people. Instead of propping up Israeli military aggression, the International Community should move beyond words and exert pressure on Israel to end its blockade. Until the blockade ends, flotillas will continue. If Ms Clinton wants to see an end to flotillas, she should seek to end the blockade.Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-59001752867604120732011-06-28T01:03:00.001-07:002011-06-28T01:03:36.425-07:00Pauls thoughts upon setting outWaiting here in a port in the Mediterranean is one of the most surreal experiences I’ve ever had. We are simply hanging around in a beautiful location, with hot sun and a sea to swim in. In other circumstances, this would be paradise. As it is, it’s certainly not a bad way to spend a few days, but the anticipation of what is coming in looms over everything. The mood is generally good and people are getting on well, but it’s clear we are all eager to get going. <br />
<br />
As I mentioned yesterday, I want to deal with the question of the role of the EU in the Middle East with this blog post. It is one of the major fallacies that surrounds the Middle East that the EU plays the role of the honest broker. It works as part of “the Quartet” of the US, Russia, the EU and the UN supposedly to try to help find a solution to the problems in the Middle East. While US support for Israel, as illustrated by the $3 billion per year in direct aid it gives it (around 75% of this being military aid), is almost universally recognised, the EU is often wrongly regarded as a neutral party in the conflict. In particular, the the EU’s role as the biggest donor to the Palestinian Authorities is often cited to bolster the argument that the EU assists the Palestinians. This is added to by rhetoric like that of Javier Solano who was the High Representative of the EU (and incidentally the man behind much of the strategic drive for a more militarised Europe), who said: “The European Union has never and will never let the Palestinian people down.”<br />
<br />
<br />
The reality, unfortunately, is quite different. I had the good fortune of meeting with David Cronin, an activist journalist, in Brussels before leaving for Gaza. In the discussion with him and in his book that he kindly gave me on “Europe’s Alliance with Israel: Aiding the Occupation”, this reality is laid bare. It’s important for those of us involved in opposing the oppression of the Palestinians in Europe (particularly those of us who are MEPs!), that we publicise and protest the fact that the EU is complicit in Israeli oppression. <br />
<br />
This complicity and support comes in a variety of forms. There is direct complicity in providing the weapons that are used to kill Palestinian civilians through EU research funding for Israeli armaments companies and European Union country weapons deal with Israel. There is also the enabling factor of the EU’s political approach, which is to refuse to condemn brutal Israeli actions and the moves to further upgrade trade relations with Israel on behalf of the EU.<br />
<br />
Probably the most shocking aspect for me is the direct funding by European taxpayers of Israeli armaments companies. This takes place via the EU Framework Programme for research which funds research. There is a high degree of EU-Israel co-operation in this area, including in the areas of “space” and “security” (often code words for “military”). Of the 45 initial “security “ projects, ten of them involved co-operation with Israeli firms or institutions!<br />
<br />
Cronin particularly highlights the funding received by Motorola Israel in an EU project called “iDetect 4All”. Motorola is guilty of a high degree of complicity in the Israeli occupation and oppression of the Palestinians. The “Israeli Defense Sales Directory 2009-10” lists them as “the leading Israeli company in developing and manufacturing a wide range of electronic fuses for aircraft and bombs and guided munitions.” They have also provided a wide range of surveillance material used in the settlements in the occupied territories. The “iDetect 4All” project seems to be in this vein, with the project description drawn up by the European Commission saying that it is to detect people or objects that could threaten “critical infrastructure”.<br />
<br />
Other recipients of EU research funding include two major Israeli armaments companies, Israeli Aerospace Industries and Ebrit. IAI is taking part in the ‘Clean Sky’ initiatve, a research project with a budget of €1.6 billion (half provided by the European Commission and the other half by industry) to develop less ecologically destructive aircraft. Perhaps as a result of this funding, in future Palestinians will be able to rest more soundly in their beds knowing that the aircraft raining down bombs on them are less harmful to the environment. Ebrit is taking part in an EU project whose aim is to deliver a blueprint for flying drones in civilian airspace in 2015. It produces many of the drones that are responsible for killing Palestinians. Both of these companies are also involved in providing technology for Israel’s apartheid wall in the Occupied Territories. <br />
<br />
In addition to this funding of Israeli armaments companies comes weapons sales from European companies to the Israeli state. Eleven of the top 20 weapons dealers to Israel are EU member states. That includes France, Britain, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and Italy. Of course, even this is carried out with the customary EU hand-wringing, with France insists that they do not sell complete weapons to Israel – only the components of them! What good is that to those killed by French weapons components found by Amnesty International in Gaza after Operation Cast Lead? <br />
<br />
Even Ireland, which is chief among those states who pretend to be friends of the Palestinians, and often stresses its supposed “neutrality”, is guilty in this respect too. David Cronin quotes Jeff Halper, an Israeli human rights activist saying that the brain of the Apache helicopters used by the Israeli military is made in Ireland. This refers to the Data Device Corporation which used facilities provided by the IDA in Cork to make parts of Apaches that are then sold on to other US firms and end up in Israel. Shannon airport has also been used, not only for rendition flights carrying prisoners destined for Guantanamo bay and US troops going to Iraq, but also Apache helicopters in a US cargo plane on the way to Israel. <br />
<br />
In many ways more significant than the direct support for the Israeli Defence Forces is the political support that is given to the Israeli state’s oppression of the Palestinians. Numerous examples are cited in David Cronin’s book which contradict the very occasional mild statements of criticism made by EU leaders of Israeli policy. <br />
<br />
This was evident in the response to Israel’s brutal assault on Lebanon in 2006, which left 1,400 dead and over 1 million forced from their homes. At the G8, Tony Blair worked with Bush to ensure that the declaration issued by the G8 did not include any criticism of Israel. This attitude was also seen in action when the EU suspended aid to the Palestinian authority for 15 months from 2006, a punishment for Hamas not agreeing to comply with a series of conditions after it won the elections. <br />
<br />
This same attitude was seen again at the time of the Israeli onslaught against Gaza at the end of 2008 and the start of 2009, known as “Operation Cast Lead”. The European Union’s special representative to the Middle East placed all of the blame with Hamas and the Palestinians asking: “Do you think the Palestinians could continue to launch rockets on Israel without Isreal reacting?” German Chancellor Angela Merkel declared that Hamas “clearly and exclusively” bore responsibility for the attacks! When the IDF carried out a massacre in the Jenin refugee camp, the British government refused to call for an international investigation, trusting the IDF to investigate itself as Israel was “a country that has respect for the rule of law”! <br />
<br />
The other important issue is the upgrading of trade relations between Israel and the EU, with Israel pushing to be effectively treated as an EU state, with no tariff barriers for imports and exports. In June 2008, foreign ministers from the EU and Israel agreed to upgrade their relations, heading in this direction. With the unleashing of the Israeli assault on Gaza, this process was slowed, but was not formally frozen and in reality did continue. There is now new momentum for these discussions. The EU and Israel have agreed that that this agreement will not place any demands on Israel in relation to its treatment of Palestinians. Typically of the EU, it may separately issue a declaration on that issue, but they won’t allow the systematic oppression of the Palestinians to get in the way of doing a deal that will further benefit the Israeli establishment and provide handsome profits for EU armaments companies. <br />
<br />
I’ve only been able to touch on some of the many issues that David Cronin highlights. Hopefully they are enough to demonstrate that a mass movement needs to be built across Europe to oppose the EU’s complicity in the oppression of the Palestinians. I would recommend to everybody to buy the book which contains countless other illustrations to prove that point. <br />
<br />
I’m heading off now to a meeting on the boat to discuss our final preparations for departure. Hopefully, we will be setting sail shortly!Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-19218445686748470882011-06-27T03:35:00.000-07:002011-06-27T03:36:26.164-07:00Irish Socialist Party MEP travels with aid flotilla<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://socialistparty.net/images/stories/megaphone_pic.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" i$="true" src="http://socialistparty.net/images/stories/megaphone_pic.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>Irish Socialist Party MEP travels with aid flotilla to try & offer some level of protection to the flotilla & bring much needed aid to desperate people,<br />
<br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://socialistparty.net/component/content/article/3-newsflash/688-socialist-mep-joins-freedom-flotilla-ii">http://socialistparty.net/component/content/article/3-newsflash/688-socialist-mep-joins-freedom-flotilla-ii</a></span></u><br />
<br />
At the end of June, Paul Murphy MEP will attempt to sail to Gaza as part of the “Freedom Flotilla II” to bring humanitarian aid. socialistparty.net spoke to Paul about the trip.<br />
<br />
What is the purpose of the Freedom Flotilla?<br />
The purpose of the flotilla is to break the blockade of Gaza which is imposed by the Israeli state. The situation there is really desperate, akin to a densely packed open-air prison camp with over 40% unemployment and massive poverty. We aim to bring necessary humanitarian aid, such as medicine, to the people.<br />
<br />
Why did you decide to join the Flotilla?<br />
I think much of the world watched in horror last year when the Mavi Marmara boat was boarded and nine activists were killed and dozens were injured. When I heard that the Flotilla was sailing again and that they were looking for public representatives to travel, I felt it would be a very good opportunity to express my solidarity with the Palestinian people as well as hopefully give some level of protection to the other activists on the ship.<br />
<br />
What will happen when you get to Gaza?<br />
It’s not clear what will happen. Unfortunately, I think it’s most likely that the Israeli state will once again try to prevent the ships getting to Gaza with the same brutal tactics that they used last time. However, I hope that we will be able to land in Gaza, deliver the aid and meet with civil society representatives and activists.<br />
<br />
How do you think the Flotilla can contribute to building lasting peace in the Middle East?<br />
The Flotilla can bring the world’s attention to what is happening in Gaza and give confidence to the Palestinian people that they have friends and supporters around the world. The revolutions against corrupt dictatorships across the Arab world demonstrate the major movements that can develop and these movements have had a real impact in both the Occupied Territories and in Israel. What needs to be built in my opinion is a mass revolutionary movement encompassing the Palestinian masses, the Israeli working class together with the risen masses of the Arab world. Such a movement could complete the overthrow of the corrupt elites in the Arab world as well as kick out the right-wing Israeli establishment and fight to create a socialist Palestine alongside a socialist Israel as part of a socialist confederation of the Middle East.Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-142380101817256282011-06-20T04:17:00.000-07:002011-06-20T04:17:12.144-07:00United Left Alliance Laois/Offaly - June 2011 newsletter<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgE0Vu7J1BzH8DJUkLMdNJA2a2_dh3FxAI14-k17YkrnchBrQhFQ6WcO1dWrNEnmf6UpsWPsJZckR9PGtshR5CyWxoF2zKOM9bgoMl3JFmAHiSsPlla6yElFbSTSxrpw1DxuB3OukA87h4/s1600/june+2011+newsletter+-+120+billion+gas+-+side+1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" i$="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgE0Vu7J1BzH8DJUkLMdNJA2a2_dh3FxAI14-k17YkrnchBrQhFQ6WcO1dWrNEnmf6UpsWPsJZckR9PGtshR5CyWxoF2zKOM9bgoMl3JFmAHiSsPlla6yElFbSTSxrpw1DxuB3OukA87h4/s320/june+2011+newsletter+-+120+billion+gas+-+side+1.jpg" width="226" /></a></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcE6As7BhIAPdrsao3ZFbSULEzwOy-h67S4OMvXCnlvZZskLCWLU6XvrsWcneYyZwDg7yEbiyn4faj8yBcuMIgZjdV1BkCvvPB_EYt5Z6l6xEW_tz6VSaQ4LdXdJ9jXyy3x7DolqIgZL0/s1600/june+2011+newsletter+-+united+left+alliance+water+charges+-+side+2-0.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" i$="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcE6As7BhIAPdrsao3ZFbSULEzwOy-h67S4OMvXCnlvZZskLCWLU6XvrsWcneYyZwDg7yEbiyn4faj8yBcuMIgZjdV1BkCvvPB_EYt5Z6l6xEW_tz6VSaQ4LdXdJ9jXyy3x7DolqIgZL0/s320/june+2011+newsletter+-+united+left+alliance+water+charges+-+side+2-0.jpg" width="226" /></a></div>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-37599623558395996012011-06-15T03:14:00.000-07:002011-06-15T03:14:17.791-07:00Commerative banknote<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhg-B6DL8g7iSEdsCxFSC-QmMTPVxrflDt55QnkDFK5jK1Ae4aQaeTKC6GMVnucSSp5Jf53qMnamzQrETfoEAE-RaRPZNzp-KUu8Qe1TP3aL5aaclPh4f-xkZQ_hZc3EyOkT-738HuxGzc/s1600/Copy+of+Purple+billion+note.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="172" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhg-B6DL8g7iSEdsCxFSC-QmMTPVxrflDt55QnkDFK5jK1Ae4aQaeTKC6GMVnucSSp5Jf53qMnamzQrETfoEAE-RaRPZNzp-KUu8Qe1TP3aL5aaclPh4f-xkZQ_hZc3EyOkT-738HuxGzc/s320/Copy+of+Purple+billion+note.jpg" t8="true" width="320" /></a></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjafw3uavoLPJMcTaZKBgAxe7RBsFgId7oQaph5fuRL5LEyFW3kHCPtQ8QCkyVAc1It9S7GBU0YD5FJ2z9QPk0IejkHdFvEJg-g_HnePihlSgPRbhoFf37-dCzGx-Q6mx3lBMd0jRauzss/s1600/Copy+of+Back+of+note.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="177" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjafw3uavoLPJMcTaZKBgAxe7RBsFgId7oQaph5fuRL5LEyFW3kHCPtQ8QCkyVAc1It9S7GBU0YD5FJ2z9QPk0IejkHdFvEJg-g_HnePihlSgPRbhoFf37-dCzGx-Q6mx3lBMd0jRauzss/s320/Copy+of+Back+of+note.jpg" t8="true" width="320" /></a></div>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-89643109414211843562011-06-10T01:31:00.000-07:002011-06-10T01:31:04.711-07:00Bilderberg meeting in st moritz, switzerland June 2011Letter from prominent swiss politician 'Dominique Baettig', calling for the arrest of Kissinger amongst others at at this years bilderberg meeting in st moritz, switzerland,<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJyTatRv_d4EpeYqghn__Zc8MoNMYfE2I-h4UB17XtxCEeeQSzMz4cBbk1S1Yo-OuZsUjtuYiWYDJIa-tmKB0XUolVbu1HHZYDddHvS4XOaRRcKKZ3h0U4r1zmdnGZQE3FORJwut9OPi0/s1600/Letter+to+prosecuters.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="294" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJyTatRv_d4EpeYqghn__Zc8MoNMYfE2I-h4UB17XtxCEeeQSzMz4cBbk1S1Yo-OuZsUjtuYiWYDJIa-tmKB0XUolVbu1HHZYDddHvS4XOaRRcKKZ3h0U4r1zmdnGZQE3FORJwut9OPi0/s320/Letter+to+prosecuters.jpg" t8="true" width="320" /></a></div>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-46849631295881879892011-06-07T02:26:00.001-07:002011-06-07T02:26:31.397-07:00Capitalism--from leftistreview.com<h2 class="title icon">Capitalism--from leftistreview.com </h2><div class="content"><div id="post_message_8586"><blockquote class="postcontent restore ">Capitalism<br />
May 31, 2011 By David Glenn Cox<br />
<br />
<b>I was raised to believe, as I think most of us were in the United States, that Capitalism is the superior economic system. Like the Bible, it is considered heresy even to question the idea. Our schools teach this belief as undisputed fact, yet as we look around our beleaguered American landscape it would appear that something is very wrong in this country and all of the symptoms point to Capitalism as the culprit.</b><br />
<br />
Our American political system runs not on one man one vote, but on one man one million dollars. Candidates’ chances of success or failure are determined directly by their ability to raise funds. <b>Successful candidates then find themselves beholden to which ever special interests funded their campaign. Barack Obama is nothing less than a prime example of this principle. As a candidate, he supported card check legislation which would have enabled American workers to more easily form labor unions in the workplace. He spoke at length of helping America’s middle class and about all the advantages of single payer health care to the public.</b><br />
<br />
<b>His candidacy was the largest beneficiary of Wall Street largesse. His campaign raked in millions of dollars from drug companies and hospital associations. Once elected, all talk of single payer health care disappeared</b>, Wall Street financial reform involves nearly 2,000 studies, and Mr. Obama will be writing his memoirs in Hawaii before they will, if ever, go into effect and become law. <b><span style="color: red;">Rather than assisting America’s middle class, he has become its nemesis. You could argue that the wheels of democracy turn slowly, but in Barack Obama you have a candidate who is diametrically opposed to almost every campaign position that he once held.</span></b><br />
<br />
Remember Sarah Palin’s campaign’s droid chant of “drill baby drill”? Candidate Obama was for green energy while John McCain favored more nuclear energy. President Obama then lifted the forty-year-old Nixon imposed ban on deep water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Obama then set in place $12 billion in federal loan guarantees to build two nuclear plants in Georgia. Then after the largest oil spill in American history, the Obama administration allowed deep water drilling to begin again, only this time with stricter paper work requirements. The question that might be asked is: if Barack Obama is so bad would John McCain have been the better choice?<br />
<br />
<b>The question and the answer by itself point to the weakness of our political system, a system denominated by money.</b> Here in my undisclosed location, the state government has passed a budget which will leave local school boards $25 million in the red. <b>Cutbacks and layoffs will have to be made and the education of children and of the people will suffer. At the same time, while the politicians weep crocodile tears for the poor little school children, the state and local governments are planning to subsidize a one billion dollar NFL football stadium with a retractable roof.</b><br />
<br />
<b>Sixty years after the dawn of America’s nuclear energy program, there is still no national repository for its nuclear waste.</b> The creation of the interstate highway system prompted a growth in the trucking business and a decline in local rail delivery. Government-subsidized airports helped to create the airline industry.<br />
<br />
<b>Yet, because every issue is profit-driven, unprofitable aspects are shunted to the side. There is little profit in handling nuclear waste, so the problem becomes a public issue and a political liability.</b><br />
<br />
The interstate highway system encouraged the growth of less fuel efficient trucking lines over the more fuel efficient rail lines. The airline industry destroyed America’s passenger rail system. Imported oil is the largest single item in America’s trade debt, yet government calls for cutbacks in mass transit subsidies while supporting the construction of a football stadium where only ten home games are played each year.<br />
<br />
The current discussion about the nation’s debt ceiling brings these questions into sharp focus. <b>If we can’t collect enough revenue to pay our bills then why did Barack Obama renew the Bush tax cuts? Why is our government so anxious to cut tariffs with other nations where the US is already running a trade debt?</b><br />
<br />
The Capitalist answer to our problems is to cut expenditures for the needs of the people, cut taxes for the rich, more free trade for big business, Social Security cuts, Medicaid cuts, education cuts, mass transit cuts and a new billion dollar football stadium.<br />
<br />
<b>In Scandinavia, with its social democracies, we find that the Swedish nuclear power program is managed by the government and as the nuclear electricity is generated, fees are collected to pay for waste disposal.</b> When Sweden shuts off its last nuclear reactor the waste will be deposited deep inside of a granite mountain range where it will be sealed up forever and it will be paid for with revenues already collected.<br />
<br />
<b>In Norway, the government drills for oil under the principle of safety first. There is no profit driven rush which caused the catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico.</b> The government drills for oil and the world’s oil companies line up to purchase it at a price dictated by the government. The oil profits are then placed into a national sovereign wealth fund and the interest off of that fund is used for functions of government. They are in effect trading the oil in the ground for money in the bank and when the oil is gone, it will have been replaced by the sovereign wealth fund.<br />
<br />
<b>In this country, Barack Obama wants to encourage more domestic oil drilling by cutting the lease rates oil companies pay for drilling on our federal lands.</b> Collecting fewer tax dollars for the treasury to “encourage” oil companies to do what it is that they are in business to do. It’s like subsidizing the building of a billion dollar football stadium to encourage the playing of professional football; tax breaks that encourage you to be rich so that the more you earn, the less you pay.<br />
<br />
Both Republican and Democratic deficit reduction plans call for cutting the corporate tax rate – or — if at first you don’t succeed, fail, fail again. The cutting of American tax rates has created the largest monetary deficit ever accumulated on earth, yet the Capitalist answer to the deficit question is to cut more taxes.<br />
<br />
It defies logic and all common sense. Do they really believe that 3-1= 4 or that 3-2 = 5? Still peddling the same soap flakes — that to increase revenue you must cut taxes, while thirty years of actual empirical evidence shows us the contrary is fact. Illusion is key to the continuance of Capitalist Shangri-La. Capitalism offers us variety and diversity and innovation, Coke or Pepsi, Bud or Miller or a Hummer or a Corvette.<br />
<br />
The American automobile manufacturers used their financial clout in Congress to fight every environmental, fuel or safety standard ever proposed. Volvo introduced the three point seat belt three years before the seat belts were even required in the United States. Did some authoritarian Socialist pound his fist on a desk and demand it of Volvo? No, it was done voluntarily and offered at no extra cost to the public. For years Volvo photographed every Volvo involved in an accident in Sweden to establish a data base towards building safer cars. While for years Ford, GM and Chrysler told Congress that air bags were too expensive.<br />
<br />
In Europe, genetically modified crops are banned and products for sale must list any genetically modified ingredients. In this country, genetically modified crops are the norm and the agribusiness cartels convinced the Congress that listing genetically modified ingredients imposed a hardship on the cartels’ business model and intruded on their freedom. <b>Monsanto uses lawsuits to collect royalties from farmers when genetically modified pollen germinates in a farmer’s fields. In Socialist Scandinavia, farmers are venerated, while in this Capitalist wasteland family farmers are targeted.</b><br />
<br />
But then who is not targeted in America? Farmers, workers, civil servants, school teachers and the elderly are all targeted for potential cuts or increased taxes. Valued only for what they can purchase as a revenue source alone, when they’ve spent their last dime, grown their last crop or taught their last class, Capitalism’s answer is to dispense with them!<br />
<br />
When you scratch the veneer of every problem in these United States, you see that Capitalism is at its root cause. “Suffer the little children to come unto me…” Well, in America, the children better run to Jesus because he is their only hope. There is little in the way of educational opportunity, no healthcare, few economic opportunities, and for most, a life of wage slavery in the peonage class. In this warped and twisted system, money begets money and poverty begets poverty and a billionaire gets a new football stadium built for him at public expense for a football team that plays ten home games with a retractable roof.<br />
<br />
<b>In the end it comes down to a question not of which economic system is better, but which is more survivable. Which system addresses the needs of the society as a whole and not as special interest groups? Which provides education because its children need an education? Which provides jobs because people need jobs? Which provides health care for the children and the elderly because the children and elderly need healthcare? Which system is more economically and environmentally conscious? Which economic system looks at society as one organism to be cared for and which looks at society with a carnivore’s eyes?</b><br />
<br />
To me at least, it would seem that Socialism is an economic system run by the people for the best interests of society, while Capitalism is an economic system which answers only to money as it runs the people.<br />
<br />
David Glenn Cox is a staff writer for TLR and an award winning author and musician; he is the author of the novel, The Servants of Pilate. </blockquote></div></div>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-8224786310997050672011-05-24T02:18:00.000-07:002011-05-24T02:18:32.882-07:00Coruscating criticism of the free market ideology of the IMF10 Years on & the IMF are as prominent in the control of nations as ever,<br />
<br />
27/4/01<br />
<br />
GREG PALAST:<br />
It's quiet now, but all police leave in the capital has been cancelled. They're taking no chances after last week's anti-globalisation protests in Quebec and the street wars on this spot during the same meeting last year of the IMF and World Bank. So what's their complaint? The protesters say that what we have here is a conspiracy - the World Bank, IMF and World Trade Organisation don't help the poor of the world, they crush them. Well, the bosses are here today, let's ask them. Mr Wolfensohn, the protesters say you are the chief of a secretive, undemocratic world government which has made poverty worse worldwide. How do you respond?<br />
<br />
JAMES WOLFENSOHN:<br />
PRESIDENT, WORLD BANK<br />
Well, I think it's nonsense. I've been accused of many things but I didn't know that was one of the accusations. I'm not sure where this government exists, but if I can answer the question more seriously, what I think is behind it, is that I'm very proud of the record of the bank.<br />
<br />
PALAST:<br />
But that's not what the insider says.<br />
<br />
JOSEPH STIGLITZ:<br />
FORMER CHIEF ECONOMIST, WORLD BANK<br />
You shouldn't take advantage of someone who is down and out and squeeze the last blood out of them.<br />
<br />
PALAST:<br />
Joseph Stiglitz was chief economist of the World Bank - he should know. He was in the meetings when the World Bank and IMF met to decide the fate of nations.<br />
<br />
JOSEPH STIGLITZ:<br />
They were making the countries worse off.<br />
<br />
PALAST:<br />
And he charges the IMF actually encouraged corruption.<br />
<br />
STIGLITZ:<br />
They'll take a strong position on petty larceny and petty theft, but on grand larceny, they'll look the other way.<br />
<br />
PALAST:<br />
The insider says there's a "one-size-fits-all" plan. Every nation gets the same exact four-step programme to the free market paradise. <br />
<br />
Step one - freedom for hot money.<br />
Step two - freedom to increase prices. <br />
Step three - free trade for all. <br />
Step four, where it all begins, freedom to privatise everything. <br />
Insiders saw how it worked in Russia.<br />
<br />
JOSEPH STIGLITZ:<br />
That was the extreme case. You turned over these assets to these oligarchs at a time when the government didn't have enough money to pay pensions to old people. It turned over billions of dollars to a few oligarchs for a fraction of the value of those assets.<br />
<br />
PALAST:<br />
How could the IMF let this happen in their privatisation programme?<br />
<br />
STIGLITZ:<br />
When it comes to corruption in Russia, they were willing to turn the other way. The IMF and the US Treasury actually almost encouraged it. There was a real commitment to a particular set of leadership - to Yeltsin. There was a fear that if he didn't get re-elected, who knows what would happen. So, the belief was the means justified the ends.<br />
<br />
PALAST:<br />
<span style="color: red;">Stiglitz charges the US government used the IMF to fix the Russian elections. Stiglitz isn't guessing. At the time he was in Clinton's cabinet as the president's chief economist.</span><br />
<br />
STIGLITZ:<br />
<span style="color: red;">The US Treasury's view was that this was great because they wanted Yeltsin re-elected. "We don't care if it is a corrupt election, we want the money to go to Yeltsin to be re-elected because he's our friend."</span><br />
<br />
PALAST:<br />
<b>Step two is what the World Bank calls a poverty reduction strategy. In Tanzania, the bank's idea of a poverty reduction strategy was to require the government to raise the price of medicine during an AIDS epidemic. In Bolivia, the bank's poverty reduction strategy was to demand increases in the price of water. That strategy produced riots. In Ecuador, the poverty reduction strategy included increasing the price of cooking gas by 60%. The nation exploded. The riots in Ecuador came as no surprise to the World Bank. We've obtained some confidential documents from inside. This one's the master strategy for Ecuador. It says the bank knew that their plans pushed down real wages and shoved 51% of the population below the poverty line. They even scripted in riots. They said their plans would lead to social unrest. The insider heard the same story about Indonesia.</b><br />
STIGLITZ:<br />
They'd been warned if the policies of austerity were continued, the economy would go down. The probability of social and political turmoil was very high. They've been warned and the unfortunate thing is those predictions came out to be true. Finally, the whole cauldron blew up and did enormous damage, from which the country has still not recovered.<br />
<br />
PALAST:<br />
What got Indonesia was step three of the IMF assistance programme - ending all controls on capital. This left Indonesia's fate to the mood of speculators and what Stiglitz calls "hot money". In Asia, it was the nations that refused the IMF medicine that escaped the financial flames.<br />
<br />
STIGLITZ:<br />
Both of them weathered the global financial crisis very well. <b><span style="color: red;">India's been having growth rate over the past decade of over 5%. China's growth rate has been faster. Neither of them followed the dictum of having capital market liberalisation.</span></b><br />
<br />
PALAST:<br />
Step four - free trade. <b>According to the insider, the World Trade Organisation just makes the rich richer.</b><br />
<br />
STIGLITZ:<br />
So much so, that after the last round of trade negotiations - the Uruguay round in 1994 - calculations of the World Bank showed that sub-Saharan Africa - the poorest region of the world - was actually worse off by more than 2%. While the USA was bragging about how many billions and billions of dollars better off it was.<br />
<br />
STIGLITZ:<br />
<b><span style="color: red;">Stiglitz says the WTO operates like the British Empire in the Opium Wars, when Britain forced China at gunpoint to "open its markets" to British narcotics. The new drug wars are over the WTO's intellectual property treaty. Until this month, British and American drug companies used WTO rules to prevent AIDS victims in South Africa getting cheap medicine.</span></b><br />
<br />
STIGLITZ:<br />
South Africa said, "We want to produce that drug and sell it at a cost the people can afford." The drug companies said, "If you do that, you are violating intellectual property rights." We don't care if people die, intellectual property rights are really supreme." People heard about this and they were outraged. And the protesters put such pressure that today, the drug companies have backed down.<br />
<br />
PALAST:<br />
One lost skirmish for the drug companies, but the deadly WTO rule still survives. And back at the IMF and World Bank spring meeting today, World Bank chief, Jim Wolfensohn, is still musing about world domination.<br />
<br />
JAMES WOLFENSOHN:<br />
We've done a lot of things well. We've made a lot of mistakes, but no more or no less than any other well-meaning group of people in a most difficult area. In some cases, I wish I was president of a world government, because then I could make sure everything worked - knowing, as you all do, of my great skill as an administrator! <br />
<br />
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/events/newsnight/1312942.stm">Source</a>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-56954982305698014072011-05-23T00:29:00.000-07:002011-05-23T00:29:59.770-07:00Letter written to the Irish Times by my father - 26/12/2010<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 14pt; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">We have had about a month of extraordinary weather, the likes we have not seen before and many previous records have been smashed.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 14pt; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">While looking out my window on Christmas morning at the whitest Christmas i have ever seen, i noticed a jet with its white trail crossing the sky at about 11.30 am. i said to my self that will involve Christmas dinner in the skies. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 14pt; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">It made me think that praise must be heaped on everyone in the transport business for doing everything they could for unfortunate commuters. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 14pt; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Bus Eireann staff facilitated a Christmas day service to main destinations up until 9 p.m. to get stranded passengers home in atrocious conditions. The snow plough workers and de - icers at <place w:st="on"><placename w:st="on">Dublin</placename> <placetype w:st="on">Airport</placetype></place> as well as the indoor staff who worked around the clock and on one day alone, 140,000 tons of snow was shifted from the runways. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 14pt; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">The army that helped clear our footpaths and other works and I heard many a person saying that they were proud of their Army. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 14pt; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Local authority ordinary workers who have been out day and night gritting and salting roads up on the back of a lorry in arctic conditions, you could almost feel the numb fingers and toes that affected them all combined with being away from their loved ones for long periods of time.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 14pt; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">The waterworks personnel who worked long hours out doors ensuring we have what we take for granted. We saw ordinary citizens at dangerous point on roads helping motorists along their way. Taxi men and women doing a very difficult job and going out of their way to help get people home safe and sound with the odds stacked against them. The ambulance crews who risked their lives to help others and save lives. Hospital staff that ensured a full service was maintained and I am sure that lives were saved and they were assisted by the Army in getting to and from work. There was and still are many voluntary organisations through the country working quietly behind the scenes helping the least well off of our citizens and the homeless.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 14pt; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">I am sure there are many others also not mentioned. All these are our unsung heroes and what can we do to thank them?</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 14pt; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">We simply remember them when their jobs are got rid of, their pay slashed and unfounded criticism heaped against them while they and their family’s face into a New Year of uncertainty. What will we do without them when things get this bad again?</span><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 14pt; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Perhaps the I. M.F. and the Euro Bosses together with their friendly Bond Holders will get out with their Hi visibility vests and shovels etc .to help our citizens.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span style="font-size: 14pt; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">We will wait and see.</span></div>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-75691030212014047582011-05-23T00:26:00.000-07:002011-05-23T00:26:44.454-07:00Letter i wrote to the Irish times - 17/11/2010The ruling elite have ruined our country by feathering their own nests & their cronyism; this is not in dispute & was certainly not by accident. The blatant corruption for years fuelling an unsustainable property boom leaves country now awash with property & government toying with the notion now of a property tax!!!!! (How convenient). This example that has been highlighted again & again around the property boom that ran away with itself is perhaps the most poignant of all as it epitomizes the fundamentals of capitalism, The perceived price being driven upwards by a fictitious demand for said product resulting ultimately in an over abundance of said product worth no where near what it was being portrayed as all the while the elitist are sitting pretty having had their accounts balance awarded credits from the sale of the properties at inflated fictitious prices.<br />
It’s easy to write that but what does that translate into for the common man? A negative equity mortgage, mortgage coming from the Latin originally meaning ‘dead’ ‘Pledge’ & unfortunately the name is now very befitting for most, as the debt will most likely follow them to the grave.<br />
Bailing out the PRIVATE companies (banks) that lost their Shirt on the ‘free trade’ markets on the back of the tax payers & allowing the top brass at these banks to walk away scott free with huge bonus, severance & pension packages all the while your average man & woman are having their utilities cut off & creditors breathing down their necks is a crime against the ordinary people of this state, what really is happening there is that the capitalist’s are not allowing their failed system to run its course, instead the capitalist problem of an unsustainable upwards growth only of profitability is being solved with socialist ideas, by borrowing at extortionate rates of interest more ‘credit’ (credit not being actual) from the same elites that have creamed it during the upwards growth on the back of the common man & he now being nominated as the guarantor for this credit.<br />
Its win win for the elites in times of growth & recession for the masses.<br />
Allowing the PRIVATE companies that are the ECB & IMF in to run the show who's primary obligations are to its funders & shareholders seeing that they are PRIVATE companies is nothing short of a Bond of slavery that is being proposed as we as a nation are being sold to the highest private lender, the end game is & has always been the privatisation of the world & the ‘free market’ capitalists have almost succeeded. This may sound absurd but the fact is that the three most banded about names in the news today, ‘The federal reserve’, ‘The ECB’ & ‘The IMF’ are PRIVATE companies, funding from any of these leaves entire nations in debt to a privately owned company & as with any private company policies are driven & ultimately decided by its funders & shareholders in the interests of said funders & shareholders. This also is no accident but has been engineered masterfully to eventually bring us to this end game. <br />
We are in reality being forced into a modern third world style national debt situation so that it will be kept at the highest price for as many years feasible by the capitalist elite.<br />
One of the more recent suggestions of ‘Political consensus’ is nothing more than the desperate last throw of the dice by the capitalist’s to try & maintain the grip on power as they see the inevitable rise of the left across Europe & the world to take the rights of people back as, ‘human beings’, that are now suffering from the failed capitalist model & not the ‘Consumers’ that we are told we are & reminded of in business language every day.<br />
The greatest con ever is the falsehood that is pedaled that their is somehow at the heart of capitalism the principle that peoples liberty & dignity is paramount, the very name is self explanatory 'Capitalism' meaning its primary function & concern is the promotion of an environment that allows the accumulation of capital!!!!!<br />
People are no longer referred to as people first rather are 'Consumers' in the first instance, I am not a 'Consumer', I am a person (first) that consumes (second) certain items, this shows in its clearest form how the capitalist perceives us, nothing more than ‘Target markets’ to be monitored, graphed & exploited for profit/capital, now more than ever being made easier by the likes of facebook leaking info on its users to corporations & Google sucking your information out of your wifi as it passes.<br />
The left needs to keep the need for the torch to be shone on the wealthy in Ireland that have €160 billion guaranteed by the working man in the failed PRIVATE companies that are Irish banks. <br />
The cuts that are proposed in the coming budget could be halved with a 2% tax on the most wealthy that have their money guaranteed by us, that could have disappeared into the ether along with our pension's was it not for our generous government protecting it on our backs.<br />
The time of capitalism has come to its inevitable end & change is coming for the common man for the better, the more equal distribution of how wealth is taxed is where we need to go for a fairer more equitable society & challenge now is to never let sight of this be diminished once we have a left led government in power & the memory of how corrupt & criminal the forces that have brought this to bear on us all kept to the fore.Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-32921467041958778152011-04-30T07:42:00.000-07:002011-04-30T07:42:53.267-07:00Issue 1 - Laois/Offaly United Left Alliance Newsletter, April 2011<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj20_gFmFviz0lPYAB4VSiJB6DQFDlYzwosxxOSmmialb06wLWiPgcDxR1W0DWjh0Ztk8JumGIn_tzkszZQoOumUM4MtUQIz2lGmeB9GCbO_ObVKjgz9FZxsAXv5kb4TPIDTWVRyoenViU/s1600/April+2011+ULA+Laois-offaly+newsletter+side+1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320px" j8="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj20_gFmFviz0lPYAB4VSiJB6DQFDlYzwosxxOSmmialb06wLWiPgcDxR1W0DWjh0Ztk8JumGIn_tzkszZQoOumUM4MtUQIz2lGmeB9GCbO_ObVKjgz9FZxsAXv5kb4TPIDTWVRyoenViU/s320/April+2011+ULA+Laois-offaly+newsletter+side+1.jpg" width="247px" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwp3xlvjmATLf7zjE7ZOPoORPwyUiFazguEFtOOn74qdL-g2O4UE2sQXrcAVNtmZrj-inD4EQsAvnOm3NxKx4ZqN4d5hGz4wbQ3PY2awvlM0DGW_xY22kgqTzZDgQv7BbPyjNRpWlpak4/s1600/April+2011+ULA+Laois-offaly+newsletter+side+2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320px" j8="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwp3xlvjmATLf7zjE7ZOPoORPwyUiFazguEFtOOn74qdL-g2O4UE2sQXrcAVNtmZrj-inD4EQsAvnOm3NxKx4ZqN4d5hGz4wbQ3PY2awvlM0DGW_xY22kgqTzZDgQv7BbPyjNRpWlpak4/s320/April+2011+ULA+Laois-offaly+newsletter+side+2.jpg" width="247px" /></a></div>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-62670522016083242632011-04-24T08:16:00.000-07:002011-04-24T08:16:34.720-07:00Who are the bond holders we are bailing out?This post is courtesy of the following blog,<br />
<br />
<a href="http://golemxiv-credo.blogspot.com/">http://golemxiv-credo.blogspot.com/</a><br />
<br />
<span>Sunday, 17 October 2010</span><br />
<br />
<span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;">The citizens of Ireland have been forced over the last two years to give the bond holders of Anglo Irish bank 20 billion euros. WHY? The Irish government recently told its people the 20 billion was not enough and they MUST give the same bond holders another 10 to 20 billion euros. WHO are these special people called Bond Holders that must be so carefully protected even at the cost of despoiling a nation?</span><br />
<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;">I tried to find out. I failed. 15th October the British Blogger </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><a href="http://order-order.com/2010/10/15/anglo-irish-bondholders-should-take-the-lossesis-the-ecb-forcing-ireland-to-protect-german-investments/"><span style="color: #cc3300;">Guido Fawkes published</span></a></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;"> a list of the bond holders. I would like to thank Mr Fawkes, and thank Unclear for posting the link and bringing it to my attention.</span></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg79D7UDNLyvBrvijwLgHqTZ8WZDk2VFDWO58IY2H8nUnLOjaDI2bEFEav9cwRkCJw9vHjsoN7Do0p2jynmggTPDOU6vMS2fbcUn1bvuCUcFlzHIv1TO52KbeRXMoUzQpXWRrpLtZUtbg/s1600/ai-bondholders.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320px" i8="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg79D7UDNLyvBrvijwLgHqTZ8WZDk2VFDWO58IY2H8nUnLOjaDI2bEFEav9cwRkCJw9vHjsoN7Do0p2jynmggTPDOU6vMS2fbcUn1bvuCUcFlzHIv1TO52KbeRXMoUzQpXWRrpLtZUtbg/s320/ai-bondholders.gif" width="246px" /></a></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">So those are the names but WHO are they? I thought this was something I could help with, to add my contribution to Mr Fawkes' break-through.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">It is worth knowing who the bond holders really are because the Irish government has said more than once that one of the reasons the bond holders had to be protected and could not, must not, be made to suffer any losses, even though it would be PERFECTLY legal to do so, is because the bond holders are pension funds for poor Irish widows and cooperative savings funds for orphans and 'ordinary folk'. A little poetic exaggeration there, but only a little.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">This 'widows and orphans' reason why the Bond holders must not take any loss, was trotted out to bolster an earlier reason that started to wear thin, which was that if Ireland pissed off the bond holders then they would refuse to ever deal with Ireland ever again and Ireland would never be able to borrow ever again, ever, and everyone would die in penury, friendless and cold. That first reason started to look like it might not hold, when the Germans started to talk rather too openly about how it might be best for all, them especially, if Greece did 're-structure' its debts (default on its bond holders - a teeny bit). When no one said it would be the end for Greece if it defaulted on the mighty bond holders, Ireland's 'the sky will fall in' reason for not asking its bond holders to share the pain started to look like what it was, a politically motivated lie. Thus the grannies and orphans had to be hurriedly wheeled out.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">So, are the bond holders widow's pension funds and orphans' savings accounts? Well actually, NO. That too was just another lie from the morally degenerate and cringingly servile Irish government.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">But don't take my word for it. Lets look at exactly who the bond holders are. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">But first be clear about my method. Over all I have decided to compare Ireland's wealth with that of its bond holders. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I have looked at what the named companies do - according to their own literature. I have looked to see if they are owned by someone else and if so who and where the companies are registered and based. And I have looked at the sort of wealth we are talking about. On this last point, I have looked not at their market value - because that, as we all know, is a matter of creative accountancy and is also often not something the companies like to list, but at their 'assets under management'. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Assets under management gives us a view of the total amount of wealth these companies deal with so we can compare it to the total wealth of Ireland. Its GDP. Where a company is, in fact, owned by a larger one, I have used the parent company's assets on the grounds that on the other side, Anglo Irish has been treated as a subsidiary of Ireland and the entire wealth of the nation is being deployed and called upon.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">So, on one side we have Anglo Irish and its 'parent company'/owner, Ireland and its 'bond' holders the people of Ireland. On the other, we have the companies listed as bond holders and the larger companies who own them and who are thus the ultimate beneficiaries and interested parties in those bonds.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">On with the show!</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Of the 80 listed companies only 7 listed their business as dealing with pensions and being a cooperative savings institution. Of those, only 4 listed churches and unions as their clients, the others could well have been big pension funds. The churches and unions in question were in Germany not Ireland. Those seven companies are amongst the smallest of Anglo Irish's bond holders. I only have figures for four of the seven. The largest, Union Investments of Germany, has a mere €165 billion in assets under management. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The total assets under management which I was able to compile from publicly available figures is €20,871,150,000,000. That is an underestimate because the bond holders who turn out to be Private and Swiss banks don't publish any figures. So Anglo Irish's 'bond holders' hold and invest MORE than 20.8 trillion euros. Guido lists those bond holders as holding between them 4 Billion euros in Anglo Irish bonds.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Now, in my opinion both figures are likely to be wrong. Certainly my figure is a large underestimate. But taking them at face value Anglo Irish would account for an one 5000th of the total assets being managed by all the bond holders. So would even a total default by Anglo Irish cause that much, let alone systemic, pain and risk? Why are the 'Bond holders' and the Irish government so concerned that the Irish people be forced to take the loss and pay the debts for them?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Now lets look at the other side of the equation, at Ireland itself. Well Ireland's GDP before the crash, in 2008, was ... drum roll please... €207 billion. Or 0.207 trillion.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">SO.... on one side we have Ireland whose bond holders, its people, have between them a total GDP wealth of 0.207 trillion euros. Who are being FORCED, against their will, to pay Anglo Irish bank's debts to its bond holders, who between them hold 20.8 Trillion euros. The people of Ireland are paying to, and protecting the wealth and power of, people who have 100 times more wealth! </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">So where do these wealthy bond holders live and work?</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Germany has the most with 15 of the bond holders. Who between them hold 5.3 trillion euros.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">France is next with 10 bond holders. Who have about 4 trillion to keep them warm.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Britain is third with 9 who have around 3 trillion.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The Swiss have 6 but who have about 8.5 trillion.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">America has only three and hold only a trillion.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Other nations include, Spain, Belgium, Portugal, Holland Finland, Norway, Sweden, Poland, South Africa and Italy.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">All these figures are very rough. The figure for Switzerland is certainly under because Private Swiss Banks just don't publish figures. What we can say for sure, figures or no figures, is these are not banks investing widow's pensions or orphan's pennies.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">So who are they? Well many of the bond holders are privately held banks, which list their activities as asset management for off-shore, non-resident and high value individuals. To give you an example, one of the private banks is EFG Bank of Luxembourg. EFG stands for European Financial Group which is the third largest private bank group in Switzerland. It manages over €7.5 trillion in assets. It is 'mostly', 40%, owned by Mr Spiro Latsis, son of a Greek shipping magnate. He also owns 30% of Hellenic Petroleum. His personal fortune is estimated to be about $9 Billion. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Now there is absolutely no suggestion that Mr Latsis has ever done anything wrong or illegal. And his holdings are, I am quite sure, perfectly legal and above board. But when we talk of Anglo Irish's bond holders it is Mr Latsis and those with his sort of wealth who we are talking about NOT widows and orphans or you and me. It is therefore worth remembering, the next time an Irish politician, or any of our politicians for that matter, say that some welfare payment can no longer be afforded, it is because the money that could have paid for it has been given instaed to the bond holders, people not unlike Mr Latsis. The Irish people are paying and protecting the interests of people like Mr Latsis over the interests of their own children. And it is their own politicians who have arranged this.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Other bond holders call themselves 'asset management' firms. The fifth largest asset management firm in the world is one of the bond holders. Others are insurance companies. The 6th and 9th largest in the world, to be specific. Others are the largest banks, Deutsche, Soc Gen, Barclay's, PNB Paribas, UniCredit (who don't appear on the list but own Pioneer Investments) and Wells Fargo (also not on the list but who own European Credit Management). Then there is Goldman. No show without the squid.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Kleinwort Benson Investors is a bond holder. But Kleinwort is owned by a Belgian holding company, RHJ which is part owned by Mr Timothy Collins. Mr Collins also sits on the board of Citigroup. So he too is one of the bond holders the Irish people are 'helping'.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Finally, a very large number of the banks who are Anglo Irish's bond holders, are members of something called the Euro Banking Association. All the large European banks, most of the large US ones, Swiss, Japanese, Nordic and some Chinese, are members. The chairperson is Mr Hansjorg Nymphius of Deutsche Bank. Other board members are from JP Morgan Chase, RBS, Bank of Ireland, West LB(bankrupt), BNP Paribas, ABN Ambro, Dexia and Banco Santander. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Its a list which could double as the list of Anglo Irish's bond holders. The EBA was set up in Paris in 1985, since when it has been and is, central to promoting European Union financial integration and the area's banking interests. The EBA has close ties to the ECB.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">I will leave you to digest this disgusting bolus of self serving wealth protection. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The only thing left to say is this. The bond holders of Anglo Irish are a very good guide to the identity of the bond holders of ALL OUR BANKS. The bond holders being protected, in every nation, on the advice of the banks and financial class, are THE BANKS AND THE WEALTHIEST OF THE FINANCIAL CLASS.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">THEY are screwing YOU!</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">For anyone interested in a very different take on the financial crisis, the failure of the policy of bailing out the banks and what it means for us, the book, <a href="http://www.debtgeneration.org/index.php"><span style="color: #cc3300;">The DEBT GENERATION</span></a> is now finished and shipping. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
UPDATE -<br />
<br />
On the question of the veracity of the bond holders list. I have now had word from two people who both claim to have knowledge, one is an insider, and both say it looks correct to them. </div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><br />
Obviously the only way to be sure is to have each company on the list confirm. But short of that I think the confirmations I now have, suggest the list is true. Though one of them also said it looked like the list was partial with some names missing.</span></div><span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;"></span> </span><br />
<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;"></span></div>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-20792307592525009122011-04-24T08:09:00.001-07:002011-04-24T08:09:05.720-07:00The Great Libyan Distraction<span class="norm">The entire Libyan conflict of the last month -- the civil war in Libya, the U.S.-led military action against Gaddafi -- is neither about humanitarian intervention nor about the immediate supply of world oil. It is in fact one big distraction -- a deliberate distraction -- from the principal political struggle in the Arab world. There is one thing on which Gaddafi and Western leaders of all political views are in total accord. They all want to slow down, channel, co-opt, limit the second Arab revolt and prevent it from changing the basic political realities of the Arab world and its role in the geopolitics of the world-system.<br />
<br />
To appreciate this, one has to follow what has been happening in chronological sequence. Although political rumblings in the various Arab states and the attempts by various outside forces to support one or another element within various states have been a constant for a long time, the suicide of Mohamed Bouazizi on Dec. 17, 2010 launched a very different process. <br />
<br />
It was in my view the continuation of the spirit of the world revolution of 1968. In 1968, as in the last few months in the Arab world, the group that had the courage and the will to launch the protest against instituted authority were young people. They were motivated by many things: the arbitrariness and cruelty and corruption of those in authority, their own worsening economic situation, and above all the insistence on their moral and political right to be a major part of determining their own political and cultural destiny. They have also been protesting against the whole structure of the world-system and the ways in which their leaders have been subordinated to the pressures of outside forces.<br />
<br />
These young people were not organized, at least at first. And they were not always totally cognizant of the political scene. But they have been courageous. And, as in 1968, their actions were contagious. Very soon, in virtually every Arab state, without distinction as to foreign policy, they have threatened the established order. When they showed their strength in Egypt, still the key Arab state, everyone began to take them seriously. There are two ways of taking such a revolt seriously. One is to join it and try thereby to control it. And one is to take strong measures to quash it. Both have been tried.<br />
<br />
There were three groups who joined it, underlined by Samir Amin in his analysis of Egypt: the traditional and revivified left, the middle-class professionals, and the Islamists. The strength and character of these groups has varied in each of the Arab countries. Amin saw the left and the middle-class professionals (to the extent that they were nationalist and not transnational neoliberals) as positive elements and the Islamists, the last to get on the bandwagon, as negative elements. And then there is the army, always the bastion of order, which joined the Egyptian revolt late, precisely in order to limit its effect.<br />
<br />
So, when the uprising began in Libya, it was the direct result of the success of the revolts in the two neighboring countries, Tunisia and Egypt. Gaddafi is a particularly ruthless leader and has been making horrific statements about what he would do to traitors. If, very soon, there were strong voices in France, Great Britain, and the United States to intervene militarily, it was scarcely because Gaddafi was an anti-imperialist thorn in their side. He sold his oil willingly to the West and he boasted of the fact that he helped Italy stem the tide of illegal immigration. He offered lucrative arrangements for Western business.<br />
<br />
The intervention camp had two components: those for whom any and all military interventions by the West are irresistible, and those who argued the case for humanitarian intervention. They were opposed very strongly in the United States by the military, who saw a Libyan war as unwinnable and an enormous military strain on the United States. The latter group seemed to be winning out, when suddenly the resolution of the Arab League changed the balance of forces.<br />
<br />
How did this happen? The Saudi government worked very hard and effectively to get a resolution passed endorsing the institution of a no-fly zone. In order to get unanimity among the Arab states, the Saudis made two concessions. The demand was only for a no-fly zone and a second resolution was adopted opposing the intrusion of any Western land forces.<br />
<br />
What led the Saudis to push this through? Did someone from the United States telephone someone in Saudi Arabia and request this? I think it was quite the opposite. This was an instance of the Saudis trying to affect U.S. policy rather than the other way around. And it worked. It tipped the balance.<br />
<br />
What the Saudis wanted, and what they got, was a big distraction from what they thought most urgent, and what they were doing -- a crackdown on the Arab revolt, as it affected first of all Saudi Arabia itself, then the Gulf states, then elsewhere in the Arab world.<br />
<br />
As in 1968, this kind of anti-authority revolt creates strange splits in the countries affected, and creates unexpected alliances. The call for humanitarian intervention is particularly divisive. The problem I have with humanitarian intervention is that I'm never sure it is humanitarian. Advocates always point to the cases where such intervention didn't occur, such as Rwanda. But they never look at the cases where it did occur. Yes, in the relatively short run, it can prevent what would otherwise be a slaughter of people. But in the longer run, does it really do this? To prevent Saddam Hussein's short-run slaughters, the United States invaded Iraq. Have fewer people been slaughtered as a result over a ten-year period? It doesn't seem so. <br />
<br />
Advocates seem to have a quantitative criterion. If a government kills ten protestors, this is "normal" if perhaps worthy of verbal criticism. If it kills 10,000, this is criminal, and requires humanitarian intervention. How many people have to be killed before what is normal becomes criminal? 100, 1000?<br />
<br />
Today, the Western powers are launched on a Libyan war, with an uncertain outcome. It will probably be a morass. Has it succeeded in distracting the world from the ongoing Arab revolt? Perhaps. We don't know yet. Will it succeed in ousting Gaddafi? Perhaps. We don't know yet. If Gaddafi goes, what will succeed him? Even U.S. spokesmen are worrying about the possibility that he will be replaced either with his old cronies or with al-Qaeda, or with both.<br />
<br />
The U.S. military action in Libya is a mistake, even from the narrow point of view of the United States, and even from the point of view of being humanitarian. It won’t end soon. President Obama has explained his actions in a very complicated, subtle way. What he has said essentially is that if the president of the United States, in his careful judgment, deems an intervention in the interests of the United States and the world, he can and should do it. I do not doubt that he agonized over his decision. But that is not good enough. It's a terrible, ominous, and ultimately self-defeating proposition.<br />
<br />
In the meantime, the best hope of everyone is that the second Arab revolt renews steam -- perhaps a long shot now -- and shakes first of all the Saudis.<br />
<br />
<br />
<i>Immanuel Wallerstein, Senior Research Scholar at Yale University, is the author of </i>The Decline of American Power: The U.S. in a Chaotic World<i> (New Press).</i></span>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-17194361142253305272011-04-24T08:03:00.000-07:002011-04-24T08:03:02.834-07:00The real Capitalist end game?The French & Germans are constantly being sounded out as the orchestrators of the EU debt crisis, the fact is though their populations are already being screwed with unjust engineered national debt also, <br />
<br />
<a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/irelandinclnama.htm" target="_blank">Irelands national debt clock</a> - €28,888 per head (& climbing)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/germany.htm" target="_blank">Germany</a> - €22,470 per head (& climbing)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/france.htm" target="_blank">France</a> - €25,233 per head (& climbing)<br />
<br />
Remarkable how close the figure per head is across the many factors like population, import/export figures, unemployment figures, property booms etc etc etc.<br />
<br />
The reality is Sarkosy & Merkel are only French & German by geographic loaction of their birth, they respect nothing about nationality whether it is French, German or even the myth that they pedal of us all being european, their core principle is the accumulation of wealth from every nation on the planet.<br />
<br />
The illusion of the capitalist system that is portrayed to all is that the 'free', 'developed', 'first world' etc is the shining example of how you can do anything you want & achieve great wealth through hard work, this in itself is only the by product of the system that the real aim of is to indebt so called 'prosperous' countries with national debt like we have just seen above.<br />
<br />
This had gone on for decades in the 'third world' countries, but the fact that there is far far more money to be squeezed out of 'first world' countries that have had the systematic plundering of 'third world' countries resources already set up, in order to facilitate the production of goods in the 'first world' countries, left the real end game of the greedy money men on this planet only to be acheived, sucking as much money out of the rich countries on a sovereign platform for private interest for decades to come.<br />
<br />
Sound outlandish? Think this should be in a conspiracies forum? <br />
<br />
Well just answer this question, who are the beneficiaries of all of these countries national debts?<br />
<br />
<a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/unitedstates.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">United States</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/canada.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Canada</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/unitedkingdom.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">United Kingdom</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/france.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">France</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/germany.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Germany</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/netherlands.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Netherlands</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/ireland.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Ireland</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/greece.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Greece</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/italy.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Italy</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/spain.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Spain</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/portugal.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Portugal</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/japan.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Japan</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/australia.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Australia</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/newzealand.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">New Zealand</span></a> - <a href="http://nationaldebtclocks.com/sweden.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Sweden</span></a> <br />
<br />
Private interest lenders, the truth is National debt & nations across the world are seen as nothing more than 'markets' full of 'consumers' to earn profit from no matter what the Social consequence.Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-27834252480407806612011-04-24T07:50:00.000-07:002011-04-24T07:50:31.979-07:00The inequitable distribution of the worlds wealthThis diagram speaks volumes, the entire cost of the bailout internationally was aprox $12T,<br />
The estimated combined wealth of just Anglo Irish Banks bond holders is €20.5T,<br />
1 billion people could be lifted out of poverty for $0.3T.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://s3.amazonaws.com/infobeautiful2/billion_dollar_gram_2009.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320px" i8="true" src="http://s3.amazonaws.com/infobeautiful2/billion_dollar_gram_2009.png" width="205px" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">Source of image</div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://s3.amazonaws.com/infobeautiful2/billion_dollar_gram_2009.png">http://s3.amazonaws.com/infobeautiful2/billion_dollar_gram_2009.png</a></div>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-81933941561443951892011-04-11T01:28:00.000-07:002011-04-11T01:28:18.710-07:00ECB-IMF deal is a noose that will strangle economic recovery (Irish times - 09/04/2011)<strong>OPINION</strong> : What the ECB and IMF have forced on Ireland is fundamentally corrupt and doomed to failure, write <strong>MICHAEL CRAGG</strong> and <strong>JOSEPH STIGLITZ</strong><br />
<br />
<br />
WHAT HAPPENED to the Celtic Tiger? For many years, Ireland’s growth was based on fundamentals: investing in education and infrastructure to make the country an attractive place for investment and a gateway to Europe for companies from the US and Asia.<br />
But then, like so much of the rest of the world, Ireland was distracted by the lure of fast bucks and the wizardry of finance. As in much of the rest of the world, false economic doctrines advocating unfettered markets prevailed, claiming the seeming success of the economy as evidence of their verity. Not surprisingly, economic doctrines that helped create the crisis have not served the country well in dealing with its aftermath.<br />
With those still in office entering into international lending agreements that benefit the Irish banks and their debt holders but not necessarily the Irish citizens, fundamental questions arise about how to move forward.<br />
Today, those fundamentals that created the Celtic Tiger are still there, but the real resources, the most important of which are its people, are increasingly sitting idle. Unless the right policies are put into place, matters are likely to get worse.<br />
Unfortunately, the question of which policies are right is being distorted by an effort to “save” the banks. The new Irish Government, after the old was tossed out for its dismal failure at managing the crisis, had (and still has) the opportunity to put Ireland on a more sustainable path, but has failed thus far to address the underlying problems.<br />
There are two fundamental interrelated problems. What to do with the banks? And how to get the economy started again? We know policies of austerity will lead to lower output and lower tax revenues, and if there is any improvement in the deficit, it will be smaller than expected. What matters for debt sustainability is the ratio of debt to gross domestic product (GDP); the higher the ratio the more unsustainable the economic trajectory.<br />
Even in more optimistic scenarios, Ireland’s debt to GDP ratio is expected to soar to 125 per cent in 2013, up from 25 per cent in 2007. Low growth could make things worse, as stagnant GDP offsets the reduction in Ireland’s debt. If Europe continues to falter – 2011 growth is projected to be lower even than last year – this will make Ireland’s recovery all the more difficult.<br />
Even the EU is now anticipating that projections made just a short while ago were too rosy. But the EU recipe for recovery is more of the same: to meet the deficit reduction targets, more austerity – which in turn means still lower growth and still higher unemployment.<br />
In effect, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and European Central Bank (ECB) are asking ordinary Irish workers and citizens to bear the burden of mistakes that were made by international financial markets. But it is important to recognise that these mistakes are at least partly attributable to following deregulation and liberalisation policies that were advocated by the IMF and ECB and that these policies provided significant benefits to the financial sector.<br />
Irish citizens bear the costs of these mistakes not only through higher unemployment, but also through lower wages, higher taxes and cutbacks in public services. That there will have to be some cutbacks is inevitable, but it is not inevitable that they be of the current form or magnitude. The Government’s steadfast and continuing policy of bailing out the Irish banks and their bondholders is at great personal cost to Irish citizens. The fundamental economic policy question is who should bear the costs of the mistakes. And this is where the first question, what should be done with the banks, links with the second, how to reignite the economy.<br />
Under capitalism, those who provide capital, whether through bonds or equity, are supposed to oversee what is done with their funds; this accountability is what makes capitalism work. It is the system of incentives that underlies the success of a market economy. We tolerate a high degree of inequality in defence of these incentives – it is argued that high rewards are necessary to compensate for risk and to motivate responsible entrepreneurship.<br />
In Ireland, as in much of the rest of the world, though, those who seemed to believe in markets, started to rewrite the rules in the midst of the crisis. They argued for the socialising of losses, while the gains had been privatised. Such a system of ersatz capitalism is doomed to failure, and is fundamentally corrupt and inequitable. Some argued that globally it was necessary to support the too-big-to-fail financial firms but this logic certainly doesn’t apply to relatively small institutions in a relatively small country at the cost of its citizens. There are alternatives.<br />
Many Irish citizens now realise the cost of bailing out bondholders (whether in Germany, the US, the UK or even Ireland) is being borne by them. It is a massive, unjustified and unjustifiable redistribution of resources.<br />
The IMF and ECB are lending money to ensure Irish taxpayers bail out Irish bank bondholders, but with little concern for economic growth and welfare.<br />
The international lending terms imposed on the Government and its citizens are onerous in large part due to the Government’s continuing policy of bailing out the Irish banks. Raising interest rates to Ireland to tame European inflation is senseless. The budgetary “correction”, arising from higher taxes and lower services to pay for interest on the debt, will balloon to over 6 per cent of GDP and cumulatively amount to 9.6 per cent of GDP.<br />
But Ireland should realise this may be only the first step in the bloodletting. As we noted, already there is recognition the Government underestimated the adverse effects on the economy – and thus overestimated tax revenues and the budget. But even worse, there are grounds to believe the €85 billion may be inadequate because of the ongoing posture towards the banks.<br />
No one can be sure what will happen with the economy or the banking sector and therefore judgments about the adequacy of the international lending package are contentious. This is in part because the answers depend on the policies pursued. If the austerity programme continues, the economy will slow, defaults will increase and property values will decline even further.<br />
Sometimes countries are faced with unpleasant choices. And there is a tendency when facing those unpleasant choices to avoid making the hard decisions. But there are high costs to postponing facing reality.<br />
Under the current strategy, under “rosy” scenarios, Ireland’s debt to GDP ratio will quickly reach 125 per cent. Think what that implies. Assume that Ireland doesn’t try to repay the money, but just pays the interest, and assume that market interest rates return to something more “normal” – compared to the current very low rates resulting from the flood of liquidity from the ECB and the Fed. A country with a debt to GDP ratio of 125 per cent could easily have to pay 8 per cent interest rates. This would mean that 10 per cent of Ireland’s GDP would have to go forever to just service the debt.<br />
This is a noose around the country’s neck that will strangle it. It makes clear the IMF, ECB and Government must come to terms with imposing losses on the international lenders whose loose lending policies played a central role in the current crisis.<br />
Debt restructuring is neither easy nor costless; but the costs are far less than the alternative. Argentina, after its debt restructuring, grew at an average annual rate of more than 8 per cent for six consecutive years until the global economic crisis hit. Ireland, with its talented people, its location, and the advantages provided by being in the EU, would be in an even better position.<br />
After restructuring, Ireland would attract new banks and new firms that would see these fundamental strengths. In contrast, continued delay in dealing with the inevitable day of reckoning will cast uncertainty over the economy: so long as there is not debt restructuring, the country faces low growth, high taxes and/or low public services, a disgruntled labour force and citizenry that has been made, unfairly, pay for others’ mistakes.<br />
And so long as there is not debt restructuring, economic risks of a highly levered economy and associated uncertainties of a future debt restructuring and its consequences will discourage investment, both domestic and foreign.<br />
Those representing the interests of the lenders (bondholders) have, of course, a different view. They want to extract as much out of the Irish people as they can.<br />
The new Government faces hard choices. Any path presents risks. If there were reasonable prospects of avoiding the turmoil that might result from a debt restructuring, we could understand why one might gamble on the strategy of postponement. But as we look at the numbers, the hard facts suggest otherwise. It is time to get the Irish economy back to work. The current strategy will simply increase the gap between the economy’s potential and actual output, and lengthen the time before a return to full employment.<br />
And even were it to succeed, it will mean Ireland will be in partial indentured servitude for as far as the eye can see – devoting 10 per cent or more of what it earns to pay off what are largely the consequences of the financial sector’s misdeeds. There has to be a better answer – and there is: international loan loss recognition combined with pro-Irish growth policies will be better for all in the long run.<br />
<br />
<hr />Joseph Stiglitz is university professor at Columbia University. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics in 2001. He formerly served as chairman of President Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers and chief economist at the World Bank. Michael Cragg, an economist who formerly taught at Columbia University, is now a principal with the Brattle Group.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/0409/1224294304548.html">Source</a>Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-60377740441037292512011-03-30T01:35:00.000-07:002011-03-30T01:44:08.513-07:00Fidel Castro speech - United nations 26/09/1960<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.wehaitians.com/un_speech_1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" r6="true" src="http://www.wehaitians.com/un_speech_1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
Mister President, fellow delegates:<br />
<br />
Although it has been said of us that we speak at great length, you may rest assured that we shall endeavor to be brief and to put before you what we consider it our duty to say. We shall also speak slowly in order to cooperate with the interpreters.<br />
Some people may think that we are very annoyed and upset by the treatment the Cuban delegation has received. This is not the case. We understand full well the reasons behind it. That is why we are not irritated. Nor should anybody worry that Cuba will not continue to the effort of achieving a worldwide understanding. That being so, we shall speak openly.<br />
It is extremely expensive to send a delegation to the United Nations. We, the underdeveloped countries, do not have many resources to spend, unless it is to speak openly at this meeting of representatives of almost every country in the world.<br />
The speakers who have preceded me on this rostrum have expressed their concern about problems the whole world is concerned about. We too are concerned about those problems and yet, in the case of Cuba, there is a very special circumstance, and it is that, at this moment, Cuba itself must be a concern for the world, because, as several delegates have rightly said here, among the many current problems of the world, there is the problem of Cuba. In addition to the problems facing the world today, Cuba has problems of her own, problems which worry her people.<br />
<h3>Body of speech</h3>Much has been said of the universal desire for peace, which is the desire of all peoples and, therefore, the desire of our people too, but the peace which the world wishes to preserve is the peace that we Cuban have been missing for quite some time. The dangers that other peoples of the world can regard as more or less remote are dangers and preoccupations that for us are very close. It has not been easy to come to this Assembly to state the problems of Cuba. It has not been easy for us to come here.<br />
I do not know whether we are privileged in this respect. Are we, the Cuban delegates, the representatives of the worst type of Government in the world? Do we, the representatives of the Cuban delegation, deserve the maltreatment we have received? And why our delegation? Cuba has sent many delegations to the United Nations, and yet it was we who were singled out for such exceptional measures: confinement to the Island of Manhattan; notice to all hotels not to rent rooms to us, hostility and, under the pretense of security, isolation.<br />
Perhaps not one among you, fellow delegates, you, who are not the individual representatives of anybody, but the representatives of your respective countries and, for that reason, whatever happens to each of you must concern you because of what you represent, perhaps not one among you, upon your arrival in this city of New York, has had to under go such personally and physically humiliating treatment as that which the President of Cuban delegation has received.<br />
I am not trying to agitate in this Assembly. I am merely telling the truth. It is about time we had an opportunity to speak. Much has been said about us for many days now, the newspapers have referred to us, but we have remained silent. We cannot defend ourselves from such attacks in this country. Our day to state the truth has come, and we will not fail to state it.<br />
As I have said, we had to undergo degrading and humiliating treatment, including eviction from the hotel in which we were living and efforts at extortion. When we went to another hotel, we did all in our power to avoid difficulties. We refrained from leaving our hotel rooms and went nowhere except to this assembly hall of the United Nations, on the few occasions when we have come to General Assembly. We also accepted an invitation to a reception at the Soviet Embassy, yet this was not enough for them to leave us in peace.<br />
There has been considerable Cuban emigration to this country. There are more than one hundred thousand Cubans who have come to this country during the last twenty years. They have come to this country from their own land, where they would have liked to remain for ever, and where they wish to return, as is always the case with those who, for social or economic reasons, are forced to abandon their homeland. These Cubans were wholly devoted to their work; they respected and respect the laws of this country, but they naturally harbored a feeling of love for their native country and its Revolution. They never had any problems, but one day another type of visitor began to arrive in this country, individuals who in some cases had murdered hundreds of our compatriots. Soon they were encouraged by publicity here. The authorities received them warmly and soon encouraged them, and, naturally, that encouragement is reflected in their conduct. They provoke frequent incidents with the Cuban population which has worked honestly in this country for many years.<br />
One of such incidents, provoked by those who feel supported by the systematic campaigns against Cuba and by the authorities, caused the death of a child. That was a lamentable event, and we should all regret such an event. The guilty ones were not the Cubans who lived here. The guilty ones were, even less, we, the members of the Cuban delegation, and yet undoubtedly, you have all seen the headlines of the newspapers, which stated that "pro-Castro groups" had killed a ten-year old girl. With the characteristic hypocrisy of those who have a say in the relations between Cuba and this country, a spokesman for the White House immediately made declarations to the world pointing out the deed, in fact, almost fixing the guilt on the Cuban delegation. And of course, His Excellency, the United States Delegate to the Assembly, did not fail to join the farce, sending a telegram of condolence to the Venezuelan Government, addressed to the victim's relatives, as though he felt called upon to give some explanation for something Cuban delegation was, in effect, responsible for.<br />
But that was not all. When we were forced to leave one of the hotels in this city, and came to the United National Headquarters while efforts were being made to find accommodation for us, a hotel, a humble hotel of this city, a Negro hotel in Harlem, offered to rent us rooms. (There I met American Negro Malcolm X, who treated me kindly.) The reply came when we were speaking to the Secretary General. Nevertheless, an official of the State Department did all in his power to prevent our staying at that hotel. At that moment, as though by magic, hotels began appearing all over New York. Hotels which had previously refused lodgings to the Cuban delegation offered us rooms, even free of charge. Out of simple reciprocity we accepted the Harlem hotel. We felt then that we had earned the right to be left in peace. But peace was not accorded us.<br />
Once in Harlem, since it was impossible to prevent us from living there, the slander and defamation campaigns began. They began spreading the news all over the world that the Cuban delegation had lodged in a brothel. For some humble hotel in Harlem, a hotel inhabited by Negroes of the United States, must obviously be a brothel. Furthermore, they have tried to heap infamy upon the Cuban delegation, without even respecting the female members who work with us and are a part of the Cuban delegation.<br />
If we were the kind of men they try to depict at all costs, imperialism would not have lost all hope, as it did long ago, of somehow buying or seducing us. But, since they lost that hope a long time ago--though they never had reasons to sustain it--after having stated that the Cuban delegation lodged in a brothel, they should at least realize that imperialist financial capital is a prostitute that cannot seduce us--and not precisely the "respectful" type of prostitute described by Jean Paul Sarte.<br />
Now, to the problem of Cuba. Perhaps some of you are well aware of the facts, perhaps others are not. It all depends on the sources of information, but, undoubtedly, the problem of Cuba, born within the last two years, is a new problem for the world. The world had not had many reasons to know that Cuba existed. For many, Cuba was something of an appendix of the United States. Even for many citizens of this country, Cuba was a colony of the United States. As far as the map was concerned, this we not the case: our country had a different color from that of the United States. But in reality Cuba was a colony of the United States.<br />
How did our country became a colony of the United States? It was not because of its origins; the same men did not colonize the United States and Cuba. Cuba has a very different ethnical and cultural origin, and the difference was widened over the centuries. Cuba was the last country in America to free itself from Spanish colonial rule, to cast off, with due respect to the representative of Spain, the Spanish colonial yoke; and because it was the last, it also had to fight more fiercely.<br />
Spain had only one small possession left in America and it defended it with tooth and nail. Our people, small in numbers, scarcely a million inhabitants at that time, had to face alone, for almost thirty years, an army considered one of the strongest in Europe. Against our small national population the Spanish Government mobilized an army as big as the total forces that had fought against South American independence. Half a million Spanish soldiers fought against the historic and unbreakable will of our people to be free.<br />
For thirty years the Cubans fought alone for their independence; thirty years of struggle that strengthened our love for freedom and independence. But Cuba was a fruit, according to the opinion of a President of the United States at the beginning of the past century, John Adams. It was an apple hanging from the Spanish tree, destined to fall, as soon as it was ripe enough, into the hands of the United States. Spanish power had worn itself out in our country. Spain had neither the men nor the economic resources to continue the war in Cuba; Spain had been defeated. Apparently the apple was ripe, and the United States Government held out its open hands.<br />
Not one--but several--apples fell in to the hands of the United States. Puerto Rico fell. Heroic Puerto Rico, which had begun its struggle for independence at the same time as Cuba. The Philippine Islands fell, and several other possessions. However, the method of dominating our country could not be the same. Our country had struggled fiercely, and thus had gained the favor of world public opinion. Therefore the method of taking our country had to be different.<br />
The Cubans who fought for our independence and at that very moment were giving their blood and their lives believed in good faith in the joint resolution of the Congress of the United States of April 20, 1898, which declared that "Cuba is, and by right ought to be, free and independent."<br />
The people of the United States were sympathetic to the Cuban struggle for liberty. That joint declaration was a law adopted by the Congress of the United States through which war was declared on Spain. But that illusion was followed by a rude awakening. After two years of military occupation of our country, the unexpected happened: at the very moment that the people of Cuba, through their Constituent Assembly, were drafting the Constitution of the Republic, a new law was passed by the United States Congress, a law proposed by Senator Platt, bearing such unhappy memories for the Cubans. That law stated that the constitution of the Cuba must have an appendix under which the United States would be granted the right to intervene in Cuba's political affairs and, furthermore, to lease certain parts of Cuba for naval bases or coal supply station.<br />
In other words, under a law passed by the legislative body of a foreign country, Cuban's Constitution had to contain an appendix with those provisions. Our legislators were clearly told that if they did not accept the amendment, the occupation forces would not be withdrawn. In other words, an agreement to grant another country the right to intervene and to lease naval bases was imposed by force upon my country by the legislative body of a foreign country.<br />
It is well, I think, for countries just entering this Organization, countries just beginning their independent life, to bear in mind our history and to note any similar conditions which they may find waiting for them along their own road. And if it is not they, then those who came after them, or their children, or grandchildren, although it seems to us that we will not have to wait that long.<br />
Then began the new colonization of our country, the acquisition of the best agricultural lands by United States firms, concessions of Cuban natural resources and mines, concessions of public utilities for exploitation purposes, commercial concessions of all types. These concessions, when linked with the constitutional right--constitutional by force--of intervention in our country, turned it from a Spanish colony into an American colony.<br />
Colonies do not speak. Colonies are not known until they have the opportunity to express themselves. That is why our colony and its problems were unknown to the rest of the world. In geography books reference was made to a flag and a coat of arms. There was an island with another color on the maps, but it was not an independent republic. Let us not deceive ourselves, since by doing so we only make ourselves ridiculous. Let no one be mistaken. There was no independent republic; there was only a colony where orders were given by the Ambassador of the United States.<br />
We are not ashamed to have to declare this. On the contrary: we are proud to say that today no embassy rules our country; our country is ruled by its people!<br />
Once again the Cuban people had to resort to fighting in order to achieve independence, and that independence was finally attained after seven bloody years of tyranny, who forced this tyranny upon us? Those who in our country were nothing more than tools of the interests which dominated our country economically.<br />
How can an unpopular regime, inimical to the interests of the people, stay in power unless it is by force? Will we have to explain to the representatives of our sister republics of Latin America what military tyrannies are? Will we have to outline to them how these tyrannies have kept themselves in power? Will we have to explain the history of several of those tyrannies which are already classical? Will we have to say what forces, what national and international interests support them?<br />
The military group which tyrannized our country was supported by the most reactionary elements of the nation, and, above all, by the foreign interests that dominated the economy of our country. Everybody knows, and we understand that even the Government of the United States admits it, that that was the type of government favored by the monopolies. Why? Because by the use of force it was possible to check the demands of the people; by the use of force it was possible to suppress strikes for improvement of living standards; by the use of force it was possible to crush all movements on the part of the peasants to own the land they worked; by the use of force it was possible to curb the greatest and most deeply felt aspirations of the nation.<br />
That is why governments of force were favored by the ruling circles of the United States. That is why governments of force stayed in power for so long, and why there are governments of force still in power in America. Naturally, it all depends on whether it is possible to secure the support of the United States.<br />
For instance, now they say they oppose one of these governments of force; the Government of Trujillo. But they do not say they are against other governments of force--that of Nicaragua, or Paraguay, for example. The Nicaraguan one is no longer government of force; it is a monarchy that is almost as constitutional as that of the United Kingdom, where the reins of power are handed down from father to son. The same would have occurred in my own country. It was the type of government of force --that of Fulgencio Batista--which suited the American monopolies in Cuba, but it was not, of course, the type of government which suited the Cuban people, and the Cuban people, at a great cost in lives and sacrifices, over threw the government.<br />
What did the Revolution find when it came to power in Cuba? What marvels did the Revolution find when it came to power in Cuba? First of all the Revolution found that 600,000 able Cubans were unemployed--as many, proportionately, as were unemployed in the United States at the time of the great depression which shook this country and which almost created a catastrophe in the United States. That was our permanent unemployment. Three million out of a population of somewhat over 6,000,000 did not have electric lights and did not enjoy the advantages and comforts of electricity. Three and a half million out of a total of slightly more than 6,000,000 lived in huts, shacks and slums, without the slightest sanitary facilities. In the cities, rents took almost one third of family incomes. Electricity rates and rents were among the highest in the world. Thirty-seven and one half percent of our population were illiterate; 70 per cent of the rural children had no teachers; 2 per cent of population, that is, 100,000 persons out of a total of more than 6,000,000 suffered from tuberculosis. Ninety-five per cent of the children in rural areas were affected by parasites, and the infant mortality rate was therefore very high, just the opposite of the average life span.<br />
On the other hand, 85 per cent of the small farmers were paying rents for the use of land to the tune of almost 30 per cent of their income, while 1 1/2 percent of the landowners controlled 46 per cent of the total area of the nation. Of course, the proportion of hospital beds to the number of inhabitants of the country was ridiculous, when compared with countries that only have halfway decent medical services.<br />
Public utilities, electricity and telephone services all belonged to the United States monopolies. A major portion of the banking business, of the importing business and the oil refineries, the greater part of the sugar production, the best land in Cuba, and the most important industries in all fields belonged to American companies. The balance of payments in the last ten years, from 1950 to 1960, had been favorable to the United States with regard to Cuba to the extent of one thousand million dollars.<br />
This is without taking in to account the hundreds of millions of dollars that were extracted from the treasury of the country by the corrupt officials of the tyranny and were later deposited in United States or European Banks.<br />
One thousand million dollars in ten years. This poor and underdeveloped Caribbean country, with 600,000 unemployed, was contributing greatly to the economic development of the most highly industrialized country in the world.<br />
That was the situation we found, and it is probably not foreign to many of the countries represented in this Assembly, because, when all is said and done, what we have said about Cuba is like a diagnostic x-ray applicable to many of the countries represented here.<br />
What alternative was there for the Revolutionary Government? To betray the people? Of course, as far as the President of the United States is concerned, we have betrayed our people, but it would certainly not have been considered so, if, instead of the Revolutionary Government being true to its people, it had been loyal to the big American monopolies that exploited the economy of our country. At least, let note be taken here of the wonders the Revolution found when it came to power. They were no more and no less than the usual wonder of imperialism, which are in themselves the wonders of the free world as far as we, the colonies, are concerned!<br />
We surely cannot be blamed if there were 600,000 unemployed in Cuba and 37.5 per cent of the population were illiterate. We surely cannot be held responsible if 2 per cent of the population suffered from tuberculosis and 95 per cent were affected by parasites. Until that moment none of us had anything to do with the destiny of our country; until that moment, those who had something to do with the destiny of our country were the rulers who served the interests of the monopolies; until that moment, monopolies had been in control of our country. Did anyone hinder them? No one. Did anyone trouble them? No one. They were able to do their work, and there we found the result of their work.<br />
What was the state of our reserved when the tyrant Batista came to power. There was $500,000,000 in our national reserve, a goodly sum to have invested in the industrial development of the country. When the Revolution came to power there was only $70,000,000 in our reserves.<br />
Was there any concern for the industrial development of our country? No. That is why we are astonished and amazed when we hear of the extraordinary concern shown by the United States Government for the Fate of the countries of Latin America, Africa and Asia. We cannot overcome our amazement, because after fifty years we have the result of their concern before our eyes.<br />
What has the Revolutionary Government done? What crime has the Revolutionary Government committed to deserve the treatment we have received here, and the powerful enemies that events have shown us we have?<br />
Did problems with the United States Government arise from the first moments? No. It is perhaps that when we reached power we were imbued with the purpose of getting into international trouble? No. No Revolutionary government wants international trouble when it comes to power. What a revolutionary government wants to do is concentrate its efforts on solving its own problems; what it wants to do is carry out a program for the people, as is the desire of all governments that are interested in the progress of their country.<br />
The first unfriendly act perpetrated by the Government of the United States was to throw open its doors to a gang of murders who had left our country covered with blood. Men who had murdered hundreds of defenseless peasants, who for many years never tired of torturing prisoners, who killed right and left--were received in this country with open arms. To us, this was amazing. Why this unfriendly act on the part of the Government of the United States towards Cuba? Why this act of hostility? At that time we could not quite understand; now we see the reason clearly. Was that the proper policy as regards relations between the United States and Cuba? Certainly not, because we were the injured party, inasmuch as the Batista regime remained in power with the help of tanks, planes and arms furnished by the Government of the United States; the Batista regime remained in power thanks to the use of an army whose officers were trained by a military mission sent by the United States Government; and we trust that no official of the United States will dare to deny that truth.<br />
Even when the Rebel Army arrived in Havana, the American military mission was in the most important military camp of the city. That was a broken army, an army that had been defeated and had surrendered. We could very well have considered those foreign officers as prisoners of war, since they had been there helping and training the enemies of the people. However, we did not do so. We merely asked the members of that military mission to return to their country, because after all, we did not need their lessons; their pupils had been defeated.<br />
I have with me a document. Do not be surprised as its appearance, for it is a torn document. It is an old military pact, by virtue of which the Batista tyranny received generous assistance from the Government of the United States. And it is quite important to know the contents of Article 2 of this Agreement:<br />
(READS)<br />
"The Government of the Republic of Cuba commits itself to make efficient use of the assistance it receives from the United States, pursuant to the present agreement, in order to carry out the plans of defense accepted by both Governments, pursuant to which the two Governments will take part in missions which are important for the defense of the Western Hemisphere, and, unless permission is previously obtained from the Government of the United States of America ..."<br />
I repeat:<br />
"and unless permission is previously obtained from the Government of the United States, such assistance will not be dedicated to other ends than those for which such assistance has been granted."<br />
That assistance was used to combat the Cuban revolutionaries; it was therefore approved by the Government of the United States. And even when, some months before the war was over, an embargo on arms for Batista was put into effect, after more than six years of military help, once the arms embargo had been solemnly declared, the Rebel Army had proof, documentary proof, that the forces of the tyranny had been supplied with 300 rockets to be fired from planes.<br />
When our comrades living in this country laid these documents before the public opinion of the United States, the Government of the United States found no other explanation than to say that we were wrong, that they had not sent new supplies to the army of the tyranny, but had just changed some rockets that could not be used in their planes for another type of rocket that could--and, by the way, they were fired at us while we were in the mountains. I must say that this is a unique way of explaining a contradiction when it can be neither justified nor explained. According to the United States, then, this was not military assistance; it was probably some sort of '"technical assistance."<br />
Why, then, if all this existed and was a cause of resentment for our people ... because everybody knows, even the most innocent and guileless, that with the revolution that has taken place in military equipment, those weapons from the last war have became thoroughly obsolete for a modern war.<br />
Fifty tanks of armored cars and a few outmoded aircraft cannot defend a continent, much less a hemisphere. But on the other hand they are good enough to oppress unarmed peoples. They are good for what they are used for: to intimidate people and to defend monopolies. That is why these hemisphere defense pacts might better be described as "defense pacts for the protection of United States monopolies."<br />
And so the Revolutionary Government began to take the first steps. The first thing it did was to lower the rents paid by families by fifty per cent, a just measure, since, as I said earlier, there were families paying up to one third of their income. The people had been the victim of housing speculation, and city lots had also been the subject of speculation at the expense of the entire Cuban people. But when the Revolutionary Government reduced the rents by fifty per cent, there were, of course, a few individuals who became upset, the few who owned those apartment buildings, but the people rushed into the streets rejoicing, as they would in any country, even here in New York, if rents were reduced by fifty per cent. But this was no problem to the monopolies. Some American monopolies owned large buildings, but they were relatively few in number.<br />
<br />
Then another law was passed, a law canceling the concessions which had been granted by the tyranny of Batista to the Telephone Company, an American monopoly. Taking advantage of the fact our people were defenseless, they had obtained valuable concessions. The Revolutionary Government then cancelled these concessions and re-established normal prices for telephone services. Thus began the first conflict with the American monopolies.<br />
The third measure was the reduction of electricity rates, which were the highest in the world. Then followed the second conflict with the American monopolies. We were beginning to appear communist; they were beginning to daub us in red because we had clashed head on with the interests of the United States monopolies.<br />
Then followed the next law, an essential and inevitable law for our country, and a law which sooner or later will have to be adopted by all countries of the world, at least by those which have not yet adopted it: the Agrarian Reform Law. Of course, in theory everybody agrees with the Agrarian Reform Law. Nobody will deny the need for it unless he is a fool. No one can deny that agrarian reform is one of the essential conditions for the economic development of the country. In Cuba, even the big landowners agreed about the agrarian reform--only they wanted their own kind of reform, such as the one defended by many theoreticians; a reform which would not harm their interests, and above all, one which would not be put into effect as long as it could be avoided. This is something that is well known to the economic bodies of the United Nations, something nobody even cares to discuss any more. In my country it was absolutely necessary: more than 200,000 peasant families lived in the countryside without land on which to grow essential food crops.<br />
Without an agrarian reform, our country would have been unable to take that step; we made an agrarian reform. Was it a radical agrarian reform? We think not. It was a reform adjusted to the needs of our development, and in keeping with our own possibilities of agricultural development. In other words, was an agrarian reform which was to solve the problems of the landless peasants, the problem of supplying basic foodstuffs, the problem of rural unemployment, and which was to end, once and for all, the ghastly poverty which existed in the countryside of our native land.<br />
And that is where the first major difficulty arose. In the neighboring Republic of Guatemala a similar case had occurred. And I honestly warn my colleagues of Latin America, Africa and Asia; whenever you set out to make a just agrarian reform, you must be ready to face s similar situation, especially if the best and largest tracts of land are owned by American monopolies, as was the case in Cuba.<br />
(OVATION)<br />
It is quite possible that we may later be accused of giving bad advice in this Assembly. It is not our intention to disturb anybody's sleep. We are simply stating the facts, although the facts are sufficient to disturb everybody's sleep.<br />
Then the problem of payment arose. Notes from the State Department rained on our Government. They never asked about our problems, not even out of sheer pity, or because of the great responsibility they had in creating such problems. They never asked us how many died of starvation in our country, or how many were suffering from tuberculosis, or how many were unemployed. No, they never asked about that. A sympathetic attitude towards our needs? Certainly not. All talks by the representatives of the Government of the United States centered upon the Telephone Co., the Electric Co., and the land owned by American Companies.<br />
How could we solve the problem of payment? Of course, the first question that should have been asked was what we were going to pay with, rather than how. Can you gentlemen conceive of a poor underdeveloped country, with 600,000 unemployed and such a large number of illiterates and sick people, a country whose reserves have been exhausted, and which has contributed to the economy of a powerful country with one thousand million dollars in ten years? Can you conceive of this country having the means to pay for the land affected by the Agrarian Reform Law, or the means to pay for it in the terms demanded?<br />
What were the State Department aspirations regarding their affected interests? They wanted prompt, efficient and just payment. Do you understand that language? "Prompt, efficient, and just payment." That means, "pay now, in dollars, and whatever we ask for our land."<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
We were not 100 per cent Communist yet!<br />
(LAUGHTER)<br />
We were just becoming slightly pink. We did not confiscate land; we simply proposed to pay for it in twenty years, and in the only way in which we could pay for it: in bonds, which would mature in twenty years at 4 1/2 per cent, or amortized yearly.<br />
How could we pay for the land in dollars, and the amount they asked for it? It was absurd. Anyone can readily understand that, under those circumstances, we had to choose between making the agrarian reform, and not making it. If we choose not to make it, the dreadful economic situation of our country would last indefinitely. If we decided to make it, we exposed ourselves to the hatred of the Government of the powerful neighbor of the north.<br />
We decided to go on with the agrarian reform. Of course, the limits set to latifundia in Cuba would amaze a representative of the Netherlands, for example, or of any country of Europe, because of their extent. The maximum amount of land set forth in the Agrarian Reform Law is 400 hectares (988 acres). In Europe, 40 hectares is practically a latifundium; in Cuba, where there were American monopolies that had up to 200,000 hectares--I repeat--in case someone thinks he has heard wrong, 200,000 hectares—an agrarian reform law reducing the maximum limit to 400 hectares was inadmissible.<br />
But the truth is that in our country it was not only the land that was the property of the agrarian monopolies. The largest and most important mines were also owned by those monopolies. Cuba produces, for example, a great deal of nickel. All of the nickel was exploited by American interests, and under the tyranny of Batista, an American company, the Moa Bay, had obtained such a juicy concession that in a mere five years--mark my words, in a mere five years--it intended amortizing an investment of $120,000,000. A $120,000,000 investment amortized in five years!<br />
And who had given the Moa Bay company this concession through the intervention of the Government of the United States? Quite simply, the tyrannical government of Fulgencio Batista, which was there to defend the interests of the monopolies. And this is an absolutely true fact. Exempt from all taxes what were those companies going to leave for the Cubans? The empty, worked out mines, the impoverished land, and not the slightest contribution to the economic development of our country.<br />
And so the Revolutionary Government passed a mining law which forced those monopolies to pay a 25 per cent tax on the exportation of minerals. The attitude of the Revolutionary Government already had been too bold. It had clashed with the interests of the international electric trusts; it had clashed with the interests of the international telephone trusts; it had clashed with the interests of the mining trusts; it had clashed with the interests of the United Fruit Co; and it had in effect, clashed with the most powerful interests of the United States, which, as you know, are very closely linked with each other. And that was more than the Government of the United States--or rather, the representatives of the United States monopolies--could possibly tolerate.<br />
Then began a new period of harassment of the Revolution. Can anyone who objectively analyzes the facts? Who is willing to think honestly, not as the UP or the AP tell him, to think with his head and to draw conclusions from his own reasoning and the facts without prejudice, sincerely and honestly--would anyone who does this consider that things which the Revolutionary Government did were such as to demand the destruction of the Cuban Revolution? No. But the interests affected by the Cuban Revolution were not concerned about the Cuban case; they were not being ruined by the measures of the Cuban Revolutionary Government. That was not the problem. The problem lay in the fact that those very interests owned the wealth and the natural resources of the greater part of the peoples of the world.<br />
The attitude of the Cuban Revolution therefore had to be punished. Punitive actions of all sorts--even the destruction of those insolent people--had to follow the audacity of the Revolutionary Government.<br />
On our honor, we swear that up to that moment we had not had the opportunity even to exchange letters with the distinguished Prime Minister of the Soviet Union, Nikita Khrushchev. That is to say that when, for the North American press and the international news agencies that supply information to the world, Cuba was already a Communist Government, a red peril ninety miles from the United States with a Government dominated by Communists, the Revolutionary Government had not even had the opportunity of establishing diplomatic and commercial relations with the Soviet Union.<br />
But hysteria can go to any length; hysteria is capable of making the most unlikely and absurd claims. Of course, let no one think for a moment that we are going to intone a mea culpa here. There will be no mea culpa. We do not have to ask anyone's pardon. What we have done, we have done consciously, and above all, fully convinced of our right to do it.<br />
(PROLONGED APPLAUSE)<br />
Then came the threats against our sugar quota, imperialism's cheap philosophy of showing generosity, egoistical and exploiting generosity; and they began showing kindness towards Cuba, declaring that they were paying us a preferential price for sugar, which amounted to a subsidy to Cuban sugar--a sugar which was not so sweet for Cubans, since we were not the owners of the best sugar-producing land, nor the owners of the largest sugar mills. Furthermore, in that affirmation lay hidden the true history of Cuban sugar, of the sacrifices which had been imposed upon my country during the periods when it was economically attacked.<br />
However when quotas were established, our participation was reduced to 28 per cent, and the advantages which that law had granted us, the very few advantages which that law had granted us, were gradually taken away in successive laws, and, of course the colony depended on the colonial power. The economy of the colony had been organized by the colonial power.<br />
The colony had to be subjected to the colonial power, and if the colony took measures to free itself from the colonial powers that country would take measures to crush the colony. Conscious of the subordination of our economy to their market, the Government of the United States began to issue a series of warnings that our quota would be reduced further, and at the same time, other activities were taking place in the United States of America: the activities of counterrevolutionaries.<br />
One afternoon an airplane coming from the north flew over one of the sugar refineries and dropped a bomb. This was a strange and unheard-of event, but we knew full well where that plane came from. On another afternoon another plane flew over our sugar cane fields and dropped a few incendiary bombs. These events which began sporadically continued systematically.<br />
One afternoon, when a number of American tourist agents were visiting Cuba in response to an effort made by the Revolutionary Government to promote tourism as one of the sources of national income, a plane manufactured in the United States, of the type used in the Second World War, flew over our capital dropping pamphlets and grenades. Of course, some anti-aircraft guns went into action. The result was more than forty victims, between the grenades dropped by the plane and the anti-aircraft fire, because, as you know, some of the projectiles explode upon contacting any object. As I said, the result was more than forty victims. There were little girls on the street with their entrails torn out, old men and women wantonly killed. Was this the first time it had happened in our country? No. Children, old men and old women, young men and women, had often been killed in the villages of Cuba by American bombs supplied to the tyrant Batista. One one occasion, eighty workers died when a mysterious explosion--too mysterious--took place in the harbor of Havana, the explosion of a ship carrying Belgian weapons which had arrived in our country, after many efforts by the United States Government to prevent the Belgian Government from selling arms to us.<br />
Dozens of victims of war; eighty families orphaned by the explosions. Forty victims as a result of an airplane that brazenly flew over our territory. The authorities of the United States Government denied the fact that these planes came from American territory, but the plane was now safely in a hangar in this country. When one of our magazines published a photograph of it, the United States authorities seized the plane. A version of the affair was issued to the effect that this was not very important, and that these victims had not died because of the bombs, but because of the anti-aircraft fire. Those responsible for this crime, those who had caused these deaths were wandering about peacefully in the United States, where they were not even prevented from committing further acts of aggression.<br />
May I take this opportunity of telling His Excellency the Representative of the United States that there are many mothers in Cuba still awaiting his telegrams of condolence for their children murdered by the bombs of the United States.<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
Planes kept coming and going. But as far as they were concerned, there was no evidence. Frankly, we don't know how they define the word evidence. The plane was there, photographed and captured, and yet we were told the plane did not drop any bombs. It is not known how the United States authorities were so well informed.<br />
Planes continued to fly over our territory dropping incendiary bombs. Millions and millions of pesos were lost in the burning fields of sugar cane. Many humble people of Cuba, who saw property destroyed, property that was now truly their own, suffered burns in the struggle against those persistent and tenacious bombings by pirate planes.<br />
And then one day, while dropping a bomb on one of our sugar mills, a plane exploded in mid air and the Revolutionary Government was able to collect what was left of the pilot, who by the way, was an American. In his documents were found, proof as to the place where the plane had taken off from. On its way to Cuba, the plane had flown between two United States military bases. This was a matter that could not be denied any longer: the planes took off from the United States. Confronted with irrefutable evidence the United States Government gave an explanation to the Cuban Government. Its conduct in this case was not the same as in connection with the U-2. When it was proved that the planes were taking off from the United States, the Government of the United States did not proclaim its right to burn over sugar cane fields. The United States Government apologized and said it was sorry. We were lucky, after all, because after the U-2 incident the United States Government did not even apologize, it proclaimed its right to carry out flights over Soviet territory. Bad luck for the Soviets!<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
But we do not have too many anti-aircraft batteries, and the planes went on flying and bombing us until the harvest was over. When there was no more sugar cane, the bombing stopped. We were the only country in the world which had gone through a thing like this, although I do recall that at the time of his visit to Cuba, President Sukarno told us that this was not the case, for they, too, had had certain problems with American planes flying over their territory.<br />
But the truth is that in this peaceful hemisphere at least, we were a country that, without being at war with anyone, had to stand the constant attack of pirate planes. And could those planes come in and out of United States territory unmolested? It has been stated that the defenses of the world they call "free" are impregnable. If this is the case, how is it that planes, not supersonic planes, but light planes with a velocity of barely 150 miles per hour, how is it that these planes are able to fly in and out of United States territory undetected.<br />
The air raids ended, and then came economic aggression. What was one of the arguments wielded by the enemies of the agrarian reform? They said that the agrarian reform would bring chaos to agricultural production, that production would diminish considerably, and that the Government of the United States was concerned because Cuba might not be able to fulfill her commitments to the American market. The first argument--and it is appropriate that at least the new delegations in the General Assembly should become familiar with some of the arguments, because some day they may have to answer similar arguments--the first argument was that the agrarian reform meant the ruin of the country. This was not the case. If this had been so, and agricultural production had deceased, the American Government would not have felt the need to carry on its economic aggression.<br />
Did they sincerely believe in what they said when they stated that the agrarian reform would cause a drop in production? Perhaps they did. Surely it is logical for each one to believe what his mind has been conditioned to believe. It is quite possible they may have felt that without the all-powerful monopolist companies, we Cubans would be unable to produce sugar. perhaps they were even sure we would ruin the country. And of course, if the Revolution had ruined the country, then the United States would not have had to attack us; it would have left us alone, and the United States Government would have appeared as a good and honorable government, and we as people who ruined our own Nation, and as a great example that Revolutions should not be made because they ruin countries. Fortunately, that was not the case. There is proof that revolutions do not ruin countries, and that proof has just been furnished by the Government of the United States. Among other things, it has been proved that revolutions do not ruin countries, and that imperialist governments do try to ruin countries.<br />
Cuba had not been ruined; she therefore had to be ruined. Cuba needed new markets for its products, and we would honestly ask any delegation present if it does not want its country to sell what it produces and its export to increase. We wanted our exports to increase, and this is what all countries wish; this must be a universal law. Only egotistical interests can oppose the universal interest in trade and commercial exchange, which surely is one of the most ancient aspirations and needs of mankind.<br />
We wanted to sell our products and went in search of new markets. We signed a trade treaty with the Soviet Union, according to which we would sell one million tons of sugar and would purchase a certain amount of Soviet products or articles. Surely no one can say that this is an incorrect procedure. There may be some who would not do such a thing because it might displease certain interests. We really did not have to ask permission from the State Department in order to sign a trade treaty with the Soviet Union, because we considered ourselves, and we continue to consider ourselves and we will always consider ourselves, a truly independent and free country.<br />
When the amount of sugar in stock began to diminish stimulating our economy, we received the hard blow: at the request of the executive power of the United States, Congress passed a law empowering the President or Executive power to reduce the import quotas for Cuban sugar to whatever limits might deem appropriate. The economic weapon was wielded against our Revolution. The justification for that attitude had already been prepared by publicity experts; the campaign had been on for a long time. You know perfectly well that in this country monopolies and publicity are one and the same thing. The economic weapon was wielded, our sugar quota was suddenly cut by about one million tons--sugar that had already been produced and prepared for the American market--in order to deprive our country of resources for its development, and thus reduce it to a state of impotence, with the natural political consequences. Such measures were expressly banned by Regional International Law. Economic aggression, as all Latin American delegates here know, is expressly condemned by Regional International Law. However, the Government of the United States violated that law, wielded its economic weapon, and cut our sugar quota by about one million tons. They could do it.<br />
What was Cuba's defense when confronted by that reality? It could appeal to the United Nations. It could turn to the United Nations, in order to denounce political and economic aggressions, the air attacks of the pirate planes, besides the constant interference of the Government of the United States in the political affairs of our country and the subversive campaigns it carries out against the Revolutionary Government of Cuba.<br />
So we turned to the United Nations. The United Nations had power to deal with these matters. The United Nations is, within the hierarchy of international organizations, the highest authority. The United Nations' authority is even above that of the OAS. And besides, we were interested in bringing the problem to the United Nations, because we know quite well the situation the economy of Latin America finds itself in; because we understand the state of dependence of the economy of Latin America in relation to the United States. The United Nations knew of the affair, it requested the OAS to make an investigation, and the OAS met. Very well. And what was to be expected? That the OAS would protect the country; that the OAS would condemn the political aggression against Cuba, and above all that would condemn the economic aggression against our country. That should have been expected. But after all, we were a small people of the Latin American community of nations. We were just another victim. And we were neither the first or the last, because Mexico had already been attacked more than once militarily. In one way they tore away from Mexico a great part of its territory, and on that occasion the heroic sons of Mexico leaped to their death from the Castle of Chapultepec enwrapped in the Mexican flag rather than surrender. These were the heroic sons of Mexico.<br />
(APPLAUSE).<br />
<br />
And that was not the only aggression. That was not the only time that American infantry forces trod upon Mexican soil. Nicaragua was invaded and for seven long years was heroically defended by Caesar Augusto Sandino. Cuba suffered intervention more than once, and so did Haiti and Santo Domingo. Guatemala also suffered intervention. Who among you could honestly deny the intervention of the United Fruit Co. and the State Department of the United States when the legitimate government of Guatemala was overthrown? I understand fully well that there may be some who consider it their official duty to be discreet on this matter, and who may even be willing to come here and deny this, but in their consciences they know we are simply stating the truth.<br />
Cuba was not the first victim of aggression; Cuba was not the first country to be in danger of aggression. In this hemisphere everyone knows that the Government of the United States has always imposed its own law--the law of the strongest, in virtue of which they have destroyed Puerto Rican nationhood and have imposed their domination on that friendly country--law in accordance with which they seized and held the Panama Canal.<br />
This was nothing new, our country should have been defended, but it was never defended. Why? Let us get to the bottom of this matter, without merely studying the from. If we stick to the dead letter of the law, then we are protected; if we abide by reality, we have no protection whatsoever, because reality imposes itself on the law set forth in international codes, and that reality is, that a small nation attacked by a powerful country did not have any defense and was not defended.<br />
With all due respect to this organization, I must state here that, that is why the people, our people, the people of Cuba, who have learned much and are quite up to the role they are laying, to the heroic struggle they are conducting our people who have learned in the school of international events, know that in the last instance, when their rights have been denied and aggressive forces are marshaled against them, they still have the supreme and heroic resource of resisting when their rights are not protected by either the OAS or the UN.<br />
(OVATION)<br />
That is why we, the small countries, do not yet feel too sure that our rights will be preserved; that is why we, the small countries, whenever we decide to become free, know that we become free at our own risk. In truth, when people are united and are defending a just right, they can trust their own energies. We are not, as we have been pictured, a mere group of men governing the country. We are a whole people governing a country--a whole people firmly united, with a great revolutionary consciousness, defending its rights. And this should be known by the enemies of the revolution and of Cuba, because if they ignore this fact, they will be making a regrettable error.<br />
These are the circumstances in which the revolutionary process has taken place in our country; that is how we found the country, and why difficulties have arisen. And yet the Cuban Revolution is changing what was yesterday a land without hope, a land of poverty and illiteracy, into one of the most advanced and developed countries in this Continent.<br />
The Revolutionary Government, in but twenty months, has created 10,000 new schools. In this brief period it has doubled the number of rural schools that had been created in fifty years. Cuba is today, the first country of America that has met all its school needs, that has a teacher in the farthest corners of the mountains.<br />
In this brief period of time, the Revolutionary Government has built 5,000 houses in the rural and urban areas. Fifty new towns are being built at this moment. The most important military fortresses today house tens of thousands of students, and, in the coming year, our people intend to fight the great battle against illiteracy, with the ambitious goal of teaching every single inhabitant of the country to read and write in one year, and, with that end in mind, organizations of teachers, students and workers, that is, the entire people, are preparing themselves for an intensive campaign, and Cuba will be the first country of America which, after a few months, will be able to say it does not have one single illiterate.<br />
Our people are receiving today the assistance of hundreds of doctors who have been sent to the fields to fight against illnesses and parasitic ailments, and improve the sanitary conditions of the nation.<br />
In another aspect, in the preservation of our natural resources, we can also point with pride to the fact that in only one year, in the most ambitious plan for the conservation of natural resources being carried out on this continent, including the United States of America and Canada, we have planted nearly fifty million timber-yielding trees.<br />
Youths who were unemployed, who did not attend school, have been organized by the Revolutionary Government and are today being gainfully and usefully employed by the country, and at the same time being prepared for productive work.<br />
Agricultural production in our country has been able to perform an almost unique feat, an increase in production from the very beginning. From the very start we were able to increase agricultural production. Why? In the first place, because the Revolutionary Government turned more than 10,000 agricultural workers, who formerly paid rent, to owners of their land, at the same time maintaining large-scale production through co-operatives. In other words production was maintained through co-operatives, thanks to which we have been able to apply the most modern technical methods to our agricultural production, causing a marked increase in that production.<br />
And all this social welfare work--teachers, housing, and hospitals--has been carried out without sacrificing the resources that we have earmarked for development. At this very moment the Revolutionary Government is carrying out a program of industrialization of the country, and the first plants are already being built.<br />
We have utilized the resources of our country in a rational manner. Formerly, for instance, thirty-five million dollars worth of cars were imported into Cuba, and only five million dollars worth of tractors. A country which is mainly agricultural imported seven times more cars than tractors. We have changed this around, and we are now importing seven times more tractors than cars.<br />
Close to five hundred million dollars was recovered from the politicians who had enriched themselves during the tyranny of Batista--close to five hundred million dollars in cash and other assets was the total we were able to recover from the corrupt politicians who had been sucking the blood of our country for seven years. It is the correct investment of these assets which enables the Revolutionary Government, while at the same time developing plans for industrialization and for the development of agriculture, to build houses, schools, to send teachers to the farthest corners of the country, and to give medical assistance to everyone--in other words, to carry out a true program of social development.<br />
At the Bogota meeting, as you know, the Government of the United States proposed a plan. Was it a plan for economic development? No. It was a plan for social development. What is understood by this? Well, it was a plan for building houses, building schools, and building roads. But does this settle the problem at all? How can there be a solution to the social problems without a plan for economic development? Do they want to make fools of the Latin American countries? What are families going to live on when they inhabit those houses, if those houses are really built? What shoes, what clothes are they going to wear, and what food are children going toe at when they attend those school? Is it not known that, when a family does not have clothes or shoes for the children, the children are not sent to schools? With what means are they going to pay the teachers and the doctors? How are they going to pay for the medicine? Do you want a good way of saving medicine? Improve the nutrition of the people, and when they eat well you will not have to spend money on hospitals. Therefore, in view of the tremendous reality of undevelopment, the Government of the United States now comes out with a plan for social development. Of course, it is stimulating to observe the United States concerning itself with some of the problems of Latin America. Thus far they had not concerned themselves at all. What a coincidence that, they are not worried about those problems! And the fact that this concern emerged after the Cuban Revolution will probably be labeled by them as purely coincidental.<br />
Thus far, the monopolies have certainly not cared very much, except about exploiting the underdeveloped countries. But comes the Cuban Revolution and suddenly the monopolists are worrying, and while they attack us economically trying to crush us, they offer aims to the countries of Latin America. The countries of Latin America are offered, not the resources for development that Latin America needs, but resources for social development--houses for men who have no work, schools where children will not go, and hospitals that would not be necessary if there were enough food to eat.<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
After all, although some of my Latin American colleagues may feel it their duty to be discreet at the United Nations, they should all welcome a revolution such as the Cuban Revolution which at any rate has forced the monopolists to return at least a small part of what they have been extracting from the natural resources and the sweat of the Latin American peoples.<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
Although we are not included in that aid we are not worried about that; we do not get angry about things like that, because we have been settling those same problems of schools and housing and so on for quite some time. But perhaps there may be some of you who feel we are using this rostrum to make propaganda, because the President of the United Nations has said that some come here for propaganda purposes. And, of course, all of my colleagues in the United Nations have a standing invitation to visit Cuba. We do not close, our doors to any one, now do we confine anyone. Any of my colleagues in this assembly can visit Cuba whenever he wishes, in order to see with his own eyes what is going on. You know the chapter in the Bible that speaks of St. Thomas, who had to see in order to believe I think it was St. Thomas.<br />
And, after all, we can invite any newspapermen, and any member of any delegation, to visit Cuba and see what a nation is capable of doing with its own resources, when they are used with honesty and reason. But we are not only solving our housing and school problems, we are solving our development problems as well, because without the solution of the problems of development there can be no settlement of the social problems themselves.<br />
Why is the United States Government unwilling to talk of development? It is very simple: because the Government of the United States does not want to oppose the monopolies, and the monopolies require natural resources and markets for the investment of their capital. That is where the great contradiction lies. That is why the real solution to this problem is not sought. That is why planning for the development of underdeveloped countries with public funds is not done.<br />
It is good that this be stated frankly, because, after all, we the underdeveloped countries, are a majority in this Assembly--in case anyone is unaware of this fact--and we are witnesses to what is going on in the underdeveloped countries.<br />
Yet, the true solution of the problem is not sought, and much is said about the participation of private capital. Of course, this means markets for the investment of surplus capital, like the investment that was amortized in five years.<br />
The government of the United States cannot propose a plan for public investment, because this would divorce it from the very reason for being the Government of the United States, namely the American monopolies.<br />
Let us not beat about the bush, the reason no real economic plan is being promoted is simply this: to preserve our lands in Latin America, Africa, and Asia for the investment of surplus capital.<br />
Thus far we have referred to the problems of my own country and the reason why those problems have not been solved. Is it perhaps because we did not want to solve them? No. The Government of Cuba has always been ready to discuss its problems with the Government of the United States, but the Government of the United States has not been ready to discuss its problems with Cuba, and it must have its reasons for not doing so.<br />
The Government of the United States doe not deign to discuss its differences with the small country of Cuba.<br />
What hope can the people of Cuba maintain for the solution of these problems? the facts that we have been able to note here so far conspire against the solution of these problems, and the United Nations should seriously take this into account, because the people and the Government of Cuba are justifiably concerned at the aggressive turn in the policy of the United States with regard to Cuba, and it is proper that we should be well informed.<br />
In the first place, the Government of the United States considers it has the right to promote and encourage subversion in our country. The Government of the United States is promoting the organization of subversive movements against the Revolutionary Government of Cuba, and we wish to denounce this fact in this General Assembly; we also wish to denounce specifically the fact that, for instance, a territory which belongs to Honduras, known as Islas Cisnes, the Swan Islands, has been seized "manu militari" by the Government of the United States and that American marines are there, despite the fact that this territory belongs to Honduras. Thus, violating international law and despoiling a friendly people of a part of its territory, the United States has established a powerful radio station on one of those Islands, in violation of international radio agreements, and has placed it at the disposal of the war criminals and subversive groups supported in this country; furthermore, military training is being conducted on that island, in order to promote subversion and the landing of armed forces in our country.<br />
Does the Government of the United States feel it has the right to promote subversion on our country, violating all international treaties, including those relating to radio frequency? Does this mean, by chance, that the Cuban Government has the right to promote subversion in the United States? Does the Government of the United States believe it has the right to violate radio frequency agreements? Does this mean, by chance, that the Cuban Government has the right to violate radio frequency agreements also? What right can the Government of the United States have over us over our island that permits it to act towards other nations in such a manner? Let the United States return the Swan Islands to Honduras, since it never had any jurisdiction over those Islands.<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
But there are even more alarming circumstances for our people. It is well known that, in virtue of the Platt Amendment, imposed by force upon our people, the Government of the United States assumed the right to establish naval bases on our territory, a right forcefully imposed and maintained. A naval base in the territory of any country is surely a cause for concern. First of all, there is concern over the fact that a country which follows an aggressive and warlike international policy has a base in the heart of our country, which brings us the risk of being involved in any international conflict, in any atomic conflict, without our having anything to do with the problem, because we have absolutely nothing to do with the problems of the United States and the crises provoked by the Government of the United States. Yet, there is a base in the heart of our Island which entails danger for us in case of war.<br />
But is that only danger? No. There is another danger that concerns us even more, since it is closer to home. The Revolutionary Government of Cuba has repeatedly expressed its concern over the fact that the imperialist government of the United States may use that base, located in the heart of our national territory, as an excuse to promote a self - aggression, in order to justify an attack on our country. I repeat: the Revolutionary Government of Cuba is seriously concerned--and makes known this concern--over the fact that the imperialist government of the United States of America may use a self-aggression in order to justify an attack on our country. And this concern on our part is becoming increasingly greater because of the intensified aggressiveness that the United States is displaying. For instance, I have here a United Press cable which came to my country, and which reads as follows:<br />
"Admiral Arleigh Burke, United States Chief of Naval Operations says that if Cuba attempts to take the Guantanamo Naval base by force we will fight back" In an interview for the magazine U.S. News and World Report (please excuse my bad pronunciation), Admiral Burke was asked if the Navy was concerned about the situation in Cuba under Premier Fidel Castro.<br />
"Yes, our Navy is concerned--not about our base at Guantanamo, but about the whole Cuban situation," Admiral Burke said. The Admiral added that all the military services are concerned.<br />
"Is that because of Cuba's strategic position in the Caribbean?" he was asked.<br />
"No, not particularly,' Admiral Burke said. 'Here are a people normally very friendly to the United States, who like our people and were also like by us. In spite of this, an individual as appeared with a small group of fanatical communists, determined to change all that. Castro has taught his people to hate the United States, and has done much to ruin his country.'<br />
"Admiral Burke said 'we will react very fast if Castro makes any move against the Guantanamo base.'<br />
"If they try to take the base by force, we will fight back", he added.<br />
Asked whether Soviet Premier Krushchev's threat about retaliatory rockets gave Admiral Burke 'second thoughts about fighting in Cuba' the Admiral said:<br />
"No, because he is not going to send his rockets. He knows quite well he will be destroyed if he does."<br />
He means that Russia will be destroyed.<br />
In the first place, I must emphasize that for this gently man, to have increased industrial production in our country by 35 per cent, to have given employment to more than 200,000 more Cubans, to have solved many of the social problems of our country, constitutes the ruination of our country. And in accordance with this line of reasoning they assume the right to prepare the conditions for aggression.<br />
So you see how conjectures are made--very dangerous conjectures, because this gentleman, in effect, thinks that in case of an attack on us we are to stand alone. This is just a conjecture by Mister Burke, but let us imagine that Mister Burke is wrong, let us suppose for just a moment that Mister Burke, although an admiral, is mistaken.<br />
Than Admiral Burke is playing with the fate of the world in a most irresponsible manner. Admiral Burke and his aggressive militarist clique are playing with the fate of the world, and it would really not be worth our while to worry over the fate of each of us, but we feel that we, as representatives of the various peoples of the world, have the duty to concern ourselves with the fate of the world, and we also have the duty to condemn all those who play irresponsibly with the fate of the world. They are not only playing with the fate of our people; they are playing with the fate of their people and with the fate of all the people's of the world or does thus Admiral Burke think we are still living in the times of the blunderbusses? Does he not realize, this Admiral Burke, that we are living in the atomic age, in an age whose disastrous and cataclysmic destructive forces could not even he imagined by Dante or Leonardo Da Vinci, with all their imagination, because this goes beyond the imagination of man. Yet, he made his conjectures, United Press International spread the news all over the world, the magazine is about to come out, hysteria is being created, the campaign is being prepared, the imaginary danger of an attack on the base is beginning to be publicized.<br />
And this is not all. Yesterday a United States news bulletin appeared containing some declarations by the United States Senator Styles Bridges who, I believe is a member of the Armed forces Committee of the Senate of the United States. He said:<br />
"The United States should maintain its naval base of Guantanamo in Cuba at all costs"; and 'we must go as far as necessary to defend those gigantic installations of the United States. We have naval forces there, and we have the Marines, and if we were attacked I would defend it, of course, because I believe it is the most important base in the Caribbean area."<br />
This member of the Senate Armed Forces Committee did not entirely reject the use of the atomic weapons in the case of an attack against the base.<br />
What does this mean? This means that not only is hysteria being created, not only is the atmosphere being systematically prepared, but we are even threatened with the use of atomic weapons, and, of course, among the many things that we can think of, one is to ask this Mister Bridges whether he is not ashamed of himself to threaten a small country like Cuba with the use of atomic weapons<br />
(PROLONGED APPLAUSE).<br />
As far as we are concerned, and with all due respect, we must tell him that the problems of the world cannot be solved by the use of threats or by sowing fear, and that our humble people, our little country, is there. What can we do about? We are there, however much they dislike the idea, and our Revolution will go ahead, however much they dislike that. And our humble people must resign themselves to their fate. They are not afraid, nor are they shaken by this threat of the use of atomic weapons.<br />
What does all this mean? There are many countries that have American bases in their territory, but they are not directed against the governments that made these concessions--at least not as far as we know. Yet ours is the most tragic case. There is a base on our island territory directed against Cuba and the Revolutionary Government of Cuba, in the hands of those who declare themselves enemies of our country, enemies of our revolution, and enemies of our people. In the entire history of the world's present-day bases, the most tragic case is that of Cuba; a base imposed upon us by force, well within our territory, which is a good many miles away from the coast of the United States, an instrument used against Cuba and the Cuban people imposed by the use of force, and a constant threat and a cause for concern for our people.<br />
That is why we must state here that all these rumors of attacks are intended to create hysteria and prepare the conditions for an aggression against our country, that we have never spoken a single word implying the thought of any type of attack on the Guantanamo base, because we are the first in not wanting to give imperialism an excuse to attack us, and we state this categorically. But we also declare that from the very moment that base was turned into a threat to the security and peace of our country, a danger to our country, the Revolutionary Government of Cuba has been considering very seriously the requesting, within the framework of international law, of the withdrawal of the naval and military forces of the United States from that portion of our National territory.<br />
(THE SPEAKER IS INTERRUPTED BY PROLONGED APPLAUSE)<br />
But is is imperative that this Assembly be kept well informed regarding the problems of Cuba, because we have to be on the alert against deceit and confusion. We have to explain these problems very clearly because with them go the security and the fate of our country. And that is why we want exact note to be taken of the words I have spoken, particularly when one takes into consideration the fact that the opinions or erroneous ideas of the politicians of this country as regards Cuban problems do not show any signs of improving. I have here some declarations by Mister Kennedy that would surprise anybody. On Cuba he says. "We must use all the power of the Organization of American States to prevent Castro from interfering in other Latin American countries, and we must use all that power to return freedom to Cuba". They are going to give freedom back to Cuba!<br />
"We must state our intention," he says, "of not allowing the Soviet Union to turn Cuba into its Caribbean base, and of applying the Monroe Doctrine". Half-way or more into the twentieth century, this gentleman speaks of the Monroe doctrine!<br />
"We must make Prime Minister Castro understand that we intend to defend our right to the Naval Base of Guantanamo." He is the third who speaks of the problem. "And we must make the Cuban people know that we sympathize with their legitimate economic aspirations..." Why did they not feel sympathetic before? "...that we know their love of freedom, and that we shall never be happy until democracy is restored in Cuba..." What democracy? The democracy "made" by the imperialist monopolies of the Government of the United States?<br />
"The forces in exile that are struggling for freedom," he says--note this very carefully so that you will understand why there are planes flying from American territory over Cuba: pay close attention to what this gentleman has to say. "The forces that struggle for liberty in exile and in the mountains of Cuba should be supported and assisted, and in other countries of Latin America communism must be confined and not allowed to expand."<br />
If Kennedy were not an illiterate and ignorant millionaire...<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
...he would understand that is is not possible to carry out a revolution supported by landowners against the peasant in the mountains, and that every time imperialism has tried to encourage counterrevolutionary groups, the peasant militia has captured them in the course of a few days. But he seems to have read a novel, or seen a Hollywood film, about guerrillas, and he thinks it is possible to carry on guerrilla warfare in a country where the relations of the social forces are what they are in Cuba.<br />
In any case, this is discouraging. Let no one think, however, that these opinions as regards Kennedy's statements indicate that we feel any sympathy towards the other one, Mister Nixon...<br />
(LAUGHTER)<br />
who has made similar statements. As far as we are concerned, both lack political brains.<br />
Up to this point we have been dealing with the problem of our country, a fundamental duty of ours when coming before the United Nations, but we understand that it would be a little egoistical on our part if our concern were to be limited to our specific case alone. It is also true that we have used up the greater part of our time informing this Assembly about the Cuban case, and that there is not much time left for us to deal with the remaining questions, to which we wish to refer briefly.<br />
The case of Cuba is not isolated case. It would be an error to think of it only as the case of Cuba. The case of Cuba is the case of all underdeveloped countries. The case of Cuba is like that of the Congo, Egypt, Algeria, Iran...<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
like that of Panama, which wishes to have its canal; it is like that of Puerto Rico, whose national spirit they are destroying; like that of Honduras, a portion of whose territory has been alienated. In short, although we have not make specific reference to other countries, the case of Cuba is the case of all underdeveloped, colonialized countries.<br />
The problems which we have been describing in relation to Cuba can be applied just as well to all of Latin America. The control of Latin American economic resources by the monopolies, which, when they do not own the mines directly and are in charge of extraction, as the case with the copper of Chile, Peru, or Mexico, and with the oil of Venezuela--when this control is not exercised directly it is because they are the owners of the public utility companies, as is the case in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Peru, Ecuador and Colombia, or the owners of telephone services, which is the case in Chile, Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, Paraguay and Bolivia, or they commercialize our products, as is the case with coffee in Brazil, Colombia, El Salvador, Costa Rica, and Guatemala, or with the cultivation, marketing and transportation of bananas by the United Fruit Co. in Guatemala, Costa Rica, and Honduras, or with the Cotton in Mexico and Brazil. In other words, the monopolies control the most important industries. Woe to those countries, the day they try to make an agrarian reform! They will be asked for immediate, efficient, and just payment. And if, in spite of everything they make an agrarian reform, the representative of the friendly country who comes to the United Nations will be confined to Manhattan; they will not rent hotel space to him; insult will he heaped upon him, and it is even possible that he may be physically mistreated by the police.<br />
The problem of Cuba is just an example of the situation in Latin America. And how long will Latin America wait for its development? It will have to wait, according to the point of view of the monopolies, until there are two Fridays in a week.<br />
<br />
Who is going to industrialize Latin America? The monopolies? Certainly not. There is a report by the economic Commission of the United Nations which explains how private capital, instead of going to the countries that need it most for the establishment of basic industries to contribute to their development, is being channeled referentially to the more industrialized countries, because there, according to their beliefs, private capital finds greater security. And, of course, even the Economic Secretariat of the United Nations has had to admit there there is no possible chance for development through the investment of private capital--that is, through the monopolies.<br />
The development of Latin America will have to be achieved through public investment, planned and granted unconditionally without any political strings attached, because, naturally, we all like to be representatives of free countries. None of us like to represent a country that does not feel itself in full possession of its freedom.<br />
None of us wants the independence of this country to be subjected to any interest other than that of the country itself. That is why assistance must be given without any political conditions.<br />
That help has been denied to us does not matter. We have not asked for it. However, in the interest of and for the benefit of the Latin American peoples, we do feel duty bound out of solidarity, to stress the fact that the assistance must be given without any political conditions whatsoever. There should be more public investments for economic development, rather than for "social development," which is the latest thing invented to hide the true need for the economic development of countries.<br />
The problems of Latin America are similar to those of the rest of the world: to those of Africa and Asia. The world is divided up among the monopolies; the same monopolies that we find in Latin America are also found in the Middle East. There the oil is in the hands of monopolistic companies that are controlled by France, the United States, the United Kingdom the Netherlands....in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, in short, in all corners of the world. The same thing is true, for instance, in the Philippines, and in Africa. The world has been divided among the monopolistic interests. Who would dare deny this historic truth? The monopolistic interests do not want to see the development of countries and the people themselves. And the sooner they recover or amortize the capital invested, the better.<br />
The problems the Cuban people have had to face with the imperialistic government of the United States are the same which Saudi Arabia would face if it nationalized its oil, and this also applies to Iran or Iraq; the same problems that Egypt had when it quite justifiably nationalized the Suez Canal; the very same problems that Indonesia had when it wanted to become independent; the same surprise attacks as against Egypt and the Congo.<br />
Have colonialists or imperialists ever lacked a pretext when they wanted to invade a country? Never! Somehow they have always found a pretext. And which are the colonialist and imperialists countries? Four or five countries--no, four or five groups of monopolies are the owners of the wealth of the world.<br />
If a being from another planet were to come to this Assembly, one who had read neither the Communist Manifesto of Karl Marx nor the cables of the United Press or the Associated Press or other monopolist publications, if he were to ask how the world had been divided, and he saw on a map that the wealth of the world was divided among the monopolies of four or five countries, he would say, without further consideration; "The wealth of this world has been badly distributed, the world is being exploited."<br />
Here in this Assembly, where the majority of the underdeveloped countries are represented, he would say: "The majority of the peoples that you represent are being exploited; they have been exploited for a long time. The form of exploitation may have changed, but you are still being exploited." That would be the verdict.<br />
In the address made by Premier Khrushchev there is a statement that attracted our attention because of the value of its contents. It was when he said that "the Soviet Union has no colonies or investments in any country."<br />
How great our world would be today, our world which today is threatened with catastrophe, if all the representatives of all nations were able to say: "Our country has no colonies and no investments in any foreign country"!<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
There is no use in going all over the question again. This is substance of the matter, the substance of peace and war, the substance of the armaments race. Wars, since the beginning of mankind, have occurred for one, fundamental reason; the desire of some to despoil others of their wealth.<br />
Do away with the philosophy of plunder and you will have done away forever with the philosophy of war!<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
Do away with the colonies, wipe out the exploitation of countries by monopolies, and mankind will have reached a true era of progress!<br />
As long s that step is not taken, as long as that stage is not reached, the world will have to live constantly under the nightmare and fear of being involved in any crisis, in an atomic conflagration. Why? Because there are some who are interested in perpetuating this exploitation.<br />
We have spoken here of the Cuban case. Our case has taught us because of the problems we have had with our own imperialism, that is, the particular imperialism that is ranged against us. But, since all imperialism are alike, they are all allies. A country that exploits the people of Latin America, or any other parts of the world, is an ally of the exploiters of the rest of the world.<br />
There are a number of problems which have already been discussed by several delegations. For reasons of time, we should like merely to express our opinion on the Congo problem. Of course, since we hold an anti-colonialist position against the exploitation of underdeveloped countries, we condemn the way in which the intervention by the United Nations forces was carried out in the Congo. First of all, these forces did not go there to act against the intervening forces, for which purpose they were originally sent. All necessary time was given, so that the first dissension could occur. And as that was not enough, further time was given, and the way was opened for the second division. And finally, while broadcasting stations and airfields were seized, the opportunity was provided for the emergence of the third man, as they always call the saviors who emerge in these circumstances. We know them only too well, because in the year of 1943 one of these saviors appeared in our country, and his name was Fulgenico Batista. In the Congo his name is Mobutu. In Cuba, he paid a daily visit to the American Embassy, and it appears the same thing is going on in the Congo. Is it because I say so? No, because no less than a magazine which is one of the most fervent supporters of the monopolies and therefore cannot be against them, is the one that says so. It cannot favor Lumumba, because it favors Mobutu. But it explains who Mobutu, is, how he began to work, and finally Time magazine says in its latest issue: "Mobutu became a frequent visitor to the United States Embassy and held long talks with officials there. One afternoon last week Mobutu conferred with officers of Camp Leopold and got their enthusiastic support. That night he went to Radio Congo--which Lumumba had not been allowed to use--and abruptly announced that the army was assuming power."<br />
In other words, all this occurred after frequent visits and lengthy conversations with the officials of the United States Embassy. This Time Magazine speaking, the defender of the monopolies.<br />
In other words, the hand of the colonialist interest has been clear and visible in the Congo, and our opinion is consequently that colonialist interests have been favored and that every fact indicates that reason and the people of the Congo are on the side of the only leader who remained there to defend the interests of his country, and that leader is Lumumba.<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
As regard the problem of Algeria, we are, I need hardly say, 100 percent in support of the right of the people of Algeria to independence.<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
And it is, furthermore, ridiculous--like so many ridiculous things in the world which have been artificially created by vested interests--to claim that Algeria is part of France. In the past, similar claims have been made by other countries in an attempt to keep their colonies.<br />
However, these African people have been fighting a heroic battle against the colonial power for many years. Perhaps, even while we are calmly talking here, Algerian villages and hamlets are being bombed and machine-gunned by the French Army. Men may well be dying in a struggle in which there is not the slightest doubt where the right lies, a struggle that could be ended even without disregarding the interests of that minority which is being used for denying nine-tenths of the population of Algeria their right to independence. Yet we are doing nothing. So quick to go to the Congo, and such lack of enthusiasm about going to Algeria!<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
We are, therefore, on the side of the Algerian people, as we are on the remaining colonial peoples in Africa, and on the side of the Negroes who are discriminated against in the Union of South Africa. Similarly, we are on the side of those peoples that wish to be free, not only politically--for it is very easy to acquire a flag, a coat of arms, an anthem, and a color on the map--but also economically free, for there is one truth which we should all recognize as being of primary importance, namely, that there can be no political independence unless there is economic independence, that political independence without economic independence is a lie; we therefore support the aspirations of all countries to be free politically and economically. Freedom does not consist in the possession of a flag, a coat of arms, and representation in the United Nations.<br />
We should like to draw attention here to another right: a right which was proclaimed the Cuban people at a mass meeting quite recently, the right of the underdeveloped countries to nationalize their natural resources and the investments of the monopolies in their respective countries without compensation; in other words, we advocate the nationalization of natural resources and foreign investments in the underdeveloped countries.<br />
And if the highly industrialized countries wish to do the same thing, we shall not oppose them.<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
If countries are to be truly free, in political matters, they must be truly free in economic matters, and we must lend them assistance. We shall be asked about the value of the investments, as we in return will ask: what about the value of the profits from those investments, the profits which have been extracted from the colonized and underdeveloped peoples for decades, if not for centuries?<br />
We should like to support a proposal made by the President of the Republic of Ghana, the proposal that Africa should be cleared of military bases and thus of nuclear weapon bases, in other words, the proposal to free from the perils of atomic war. Something has already been done with regard to Antarctica. As we go forward on the path of disarmament, why should we not also go forward towards freeing certain parts of the world from the danger of nuclear war?<br />
Let the other people, let the West make up a little for what it has made Africa suffer, by preserving it from the danger of atomic war and declaring it a free zone as far as this peril is concerned. Let no atomic bases be established there! Even if we can do nothing else, let this continent at least remain a sanctuary where human life may be preserved!<br />
(PROLONGED APPLAUSE)<br />
We support this proposal warmly.<br />
On the question of disarmament, we wholeheartedly support the Soviet proposal, and we are not ashamed to do so. We regard as a correct, precise, well-defined and clear proposal.<br />
We have carefully studied the speech made here by President Eisenhower--he made no real reference to disarmament, to the development of the underdeveloped countries, or to the colonial problem. Really, it would be worthwhile for the citizens of this country, who are so influenced by false propaganda, to compare objectively the statements of the President of the United States with those of the Prime Minister of the Soviet Union, so that they could see which speech contains genuine concern over the world's problems, so that they could see who spoke clearly and sincerely, and so they could see who really wants disarmament, and who is against it and why. The Soviet proposal could not be clearer. Nothing could be added to the Soviet explanation. Why should there be any reservations when no one has every before spoken so clearly of so tremendous a problem?<br />
The history of the world has taught us the tragic lesson that arms races always lead to war; but never has the responsibility been greater, for never has war signified so was a holocaust for mankind. And the Soviet Union has made a proposal regarding that problem which so greatly concerns mankind--whose very existence is at stake--a proposal for total and complete disarmament. What more can be asked? If more can be asked, let us ask it; if we can ask for more safeguards, let us do so; but the proposal could not be clearer or better defined, and, at this stage of history, it cannot be rejected without assuming the responsibility involved in the danger of war and of war itself.<br />
The representative of the Soviet Union has spoken openly--I say this objectively--and I urge that these proposals be considered, and that everybody put their cards on the table. Above all, this is not merely a question of representatives, that is a matter of public opinion. The warmongers and militarists must be exposed and condemned by the public opinion of the world. This is not a problem for minorities only: it concerns the world. The warmongers and militarists must be unmasked, and this is the task of public opinion. This problem must be discussed not only in the General Assembly, but before the entire world, before the great assembly of the whole world, because in the event of a war not only the leaders, but hundreds of millions of completely innocent persons will be exterminated, and it is for this reason that we, who meet here as representatives of the world--or part of the world, since this Assembly is not yet complete, it will not be complete until the Peoples' Republic of China is represented here--should take appropriate measures.<br />
(APPLAUSE)<br />
One-quarter of the world's population is of course absent, but we who are here have the duty to speak openly and not to evade the issue. We must all discuss it; this problem is too serious to be overlooked. It is more important than economic aid and all other obligations, because this is the obligation to preserve the life of mankind. Let us all discuss and speak about this problem, and let us all fight to establish peace, or at least to unmask the militarists and warmongers.<br />
And, above all, if we, the underdeveloped countries, want to preserve the hope of achieving progress, if we want to have a chance of seeing our peoples enjoying a higher standard of living, let us struggle for peace, let us struggle for disarmament; with a fifth of what the world spends on armaments, we could promote the development of all the underdeveloped countries at a rate of growth of 10 percent per annum. With a fifth of the resources which countries spend on armaments, we could surely raise the people's standard of living.<br />
Now, what are the obstacles to disarmament? Who is interested in being armed? Those who are interested in being armed to the teeth are those who want to keep colonies, those who want to maintain their monopolies, those who want to retain control of the oil of the Middle East; the natural resources of Latin America, of Asia, of Africa, and who require military strength to defend their interests. And it is well known that these territories were occupied and colonized on the strength of the law of force; by virtue of the law of force million of men were enslaved, and it is force which sustains such exploitation in the world. Therefore, those who want no disarmament are those interested in maintaining their military strength in order to retain control of natural resources, the wealth of the people of the world, and cheap labor in underdeveloped countries. We promised to speak openly, and there is no other way of telling the truth.<br />
The colonialists, therefore, are against disarmament. Using the weapon of world public opinion, we must fight to force disarmament on them as we must force them to respect the right of peoples to economic and political liberation.<br />
The monopolies are against disarmament, because, besides being able to defend those interests with arms, the arms race has always been good business for them. For example, it is well known that the great monopolies in this country doubled their capital shortly after the Second World War. Like vultures, the monopolies feed on the corpses which are the harvest of war.<br />
And war is a business. Those who trade in war, those who enrich themselves war, by must be unmasked. We must open the eyes of the world and expose those who trade in the destiny of mankind, in the danger of war, particularly when the war may be so frightful that it leaves no hope of salvation.<br />
We, the small and underdeveloped countries, urge the whole Assembly and especially the other small and underdeveloped nations to devote themselves to this task and to have this problem discussed here, because afterwards we will never forgive ourselves if, through our neglect or lack of firmness and energy on this basic issue, the world becomes involved once again in the perils of war.<br />
We have just one more point to discuss, which, according to what we have read in some newspapers, was one of the points the Cuban delegation was going to raise. And this, of course, is the problem of the Peoples Republic of China.<br />
Other delegations have already spoken about this matter. We wish to say that the fact that this problem has never been discussed is in reality a denial of the "raison d'etre" and of the essential of nature of the United Nations. Why has it never been discussed? Because the United Nations Assembly going to renounce its right to discuss this problem?<br />
Many countries have joined the United Nations in recent years. To oppose discussion of the right to representation here of the People's Republic of China, that is, of 99 percent of the inhabitants of a country of more than 600,000,000 is to deny the reality of history, the facts of life itself.<br />
It is simply an absurdity; it is ridiculous that this problem is never even discussed. How long are we going to continue the sad business of never discussing this problem, when we have here representatives of Franco, for instance?<br />
At this point is its appropriate to ask by what right the navy of an extra-continental country--and it is worth repeating this here, when so much is being said about extra-continental interference--intervened in a domestic affair of China. It would be interesting to have an explanation. The sole purpose of this interference was to maintain a group of allies in that place and to prevent the total liberation of the territory. That is an absurd and unlawful state of affairs from any point of view, but it constitutes the reason why the United States Government does not want the question of the People's Republic of China to be discussed. And we want to put it on record here that this is our position and that we support discussion of this question, and that the United Nations General Assembly should seat the legitimate representatives of the Chinese people, namely, the representatives of the Government of the People's Republic of China.<br />
I understand perfectly that is somewhat difficult for anybody here to free himself of the stereotyped concepts by which the representatives of nations are usually judged. I must say that we have come here free from the prejudices, to analyze problems objectively, without fear of what people will think and without fear of the consequences of our position.<br />
We have been honest, we have been frank without being Fran coist (APPLAUSE), because we do not want to be a party to the injustice committed against a great number of Spaniards, still imprisoned in Spain after more than twenty years, men who fought together with the Americans of the Lincoln Brigade, as the comrades of those same Americans who were there to do honor to the name of that great American, Lincoln.<br />
In conclusion, we are going to place our trust in reason and in the decency of all. We wish to sum up our ideas regarding some aspects of these world problems about which there should be no doubt. The problem of Cuba, which we have set forth here, is a part of the problems of the world. Those who attack us today are those who are helping to attack others in other parts of the world.<br />
The United States Government cannot be on the side of the Algerian people, it cannot be on the side of the Algerian people because it is allied to metropolitan France. It cannot be on the side of the Congolese people, because it is allied to Belgium. It cannot be on the side of the Spanish people, because it is allied to Franco. It cannot be on the side of the Puerto Rican people, whose nationhood it has been destroying for fifty years. It cannot be on the side of the Panamanians, who claim the Canal. It cannot support the ascendancy of civil power in Latin America, Germany or Japan. It cannot be on the side of the peasants who want land, because it is allied to the big landowners. It cannot be on the side of the workers who are demanding better living conditions in all parts of the world, because it is allied to the monopolies. It cannot be on the side of the colonies which want their freedom, because it is allied to the colonizers.<br />
That is to say, it is for the Franco, for the colonization of Algeria for the colonization of the Congo; it is for the maintenance of its privileges and interests in the Panama Canal, for colonialism through the world. It is for the German militarism and for the resurgence of German militarism. It is for Japanese militarism and for the resurgence of Japanese militarism.<br />
The Government of the United States forgets the millions of Jews murdered in European concentration camps by the Nazis, who are today regaining their influence in the German army. It forgets the Frenchmen who were killed in their heroic struggle against the occupation; it forgets the American soldiers who died on the Seigfried Line, in the Ruhr, on the Rhine, and on the Asian fronts. The United States Government cannot be for the integrity and sovereignty of nations. Why? Because it must curtail the sovereignty of nations in order to keep its military bases, and each base is a dagger thrust into sovereignty; each base is a limitation on sovereignty.<br />
That is why it has to be against the sovereignty of nations, because it must constantly limit sovereignty in order to maintain its policy of encircling the Soviet Union with bases. We believe that these problems are not properly explained to the American people. But the American people need only imagine how uneasy they would feel if the Soviet Union began to establish a ring of atomic bases in Cuba, Mexico, or Canada. The population would not feel secure or calm. World opinion, including American opinion, must be taught to see the other person's point of view. The underdeveloped peoples should not always be represented as aggressors; revolutionaries should not be presented as aggressors, as enemies of the American people, because we have seen American like Carleton Beals, Waldo Frank, and others, famous and distinguished intellectuals, shed tears at the thought of the mistakes that are being made, at the breach of hospitality towards us; there are many Americans, the most humane, the most progressive, and the most esteemed writers, in whom I see the nobility of this country's early leaders, the Washingtons, the Jeffersons, and the Lincolns. I say this is no spirit of demagoguery, but with the sincere admiration that we feel for those who once succeeded in freeing their people from colonial status and who did not fight in order that their country might today be the ally of all the reactionaries, the gangsters, the big landowners, the monopolists, the exploiters, the militarists, the fascists in the world, that is to say, the ally of the most reactionary forces, but rather in order that their country might always be the champion of noble and just ideals.<br />
We know well what will be said about us, today, tomorrow, every day, to deceive the American people. But is does not matter. We are doing our duty by stating our views in, this historic Assembly.<br />
We proclaim the right of people to freedom, the right of people to nationhood; those who know that nationalism means the desire of the people to regain what is rightly theirs, their wealth, their natural resources, conspire against nationalism.<br />
We are, in short, for all the noble aspirations of all the peoples. That is our position. We are, and always shall be for everything that is just: against colonialism, exploitation, monopolies, militarism, the armaments race, and warmongering. We shall always be against such things. That will be our position.<br />
<h3>Conclusion</h3>And to conclude, fulfilling what we regard as our duty, I am going to quote to this Assembly the key part of the Declaration of Havana. As you all know, the Declaration of Havana was the Cuban people's answer to the Declaration of San Jose, Costa Rica. Nor 10, nor 100, nor 100,000, but more than one million Cubans gathered together.<br />
At that Assembly, which was convened as an answer to the Declaration of San Jose, the following principles were proclaimed, in consultation with the people and by acclamation of the people, as the principles of the Cuban Revolution.<br />
(READS)<br />
"The National General Assembly of the Cuban people condemns large-scale landowning as a source of poverty for the peasant and a backward and inhuman system of agricultural production; it condemns starvation wages and the iniquitous exploitation of human work by illegitimate and privileged interests; it condemns illiteracy, the lack of teachers, of schools, doctor and hospitals; the lack of old-age security in the countries of America; it condemns discrimination against the Negro and the Indian; it condemns the inequality and the exploitation of women; it condemns political and military oligarchies, which keep our peoples in poverty, prevent their democratic development and the full exercise of their sovereignty; it condemns concessions of the natural resources of our countries as a policy of surrender which betrays the interests of the peoples; it condemns the governments which ignore the demands of their people in order to obey orders from abroad; it condemns the systematic deception of the people by mass communications media which serve the interests of the oligarchies and the policy of imperialist oppression; it condemns the monopoly held by news agencies, which are instruments of monopolist trusts and agents of such interests; it condemns the repressive laws which prevent the workers, the peasants, the students and the intellectuals, the great majorities in each country, from organizing themselves to fight for their social and national rights; it condemns the imperialist monopolies and enterprises which continually plunder our wealth, exploit our workers and peasants, bleed our economies to keep them in a backward state, and subordinate Latin American politics to their designs and interests.<br />
"In short, The National General Assembly of the Cuban People condemns the exploitation of man by man, and the exploitations of underdeveloped countries by imperialists capital.<br />
"Therefore, the National General Assembly of the Cuban People proclaims before America, and proclaims here before the world, the right of the peasants to the land; the right of the workers to the fruits of their labor; the right of the children to education: the right of the sick to medical care and hospitalization; the right of young people to work; the right of students to free vocational training and scientific education; the right of Negroes, and Indians to full human dignity; the right of women to civil, social and political equality; the right of the elderly to security in their old age; the right of intellectuals, artists and scientists so fight through their works for a better world; the right of States to nationalize imperialist monopolies, thus rescuing their national wealth and resources; the right of nations to their full sovereignty; the right of peoples to convert their military fortresses into schools, and to arm their workers--because in this we too have to be arms-conscious, to arm our people in defense against imperialist attacks--their peasants, their students, their intellectuals, Negroes, Indians, women, young people, old people, all the oppressed and exploited, so that they themselves can defend their rights and their destinies."<br />
Some people wanted to know what the policy of the Revolutionary Government of Cuba was. Very well, them, this is our policy.<br />
(OVATION)<br />
(END OF SPEECH)Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3768769962091474107.post-73792549840004733852011-03-22T23:02:00.000-07:002011-03-22T23:02:23.342-07:00Tony Corrigan`s Lament for New Orleans<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/qt6yyKQdkcg?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div><br />
Here is a song dedicated to the victims of hurricane katrina, Tony Corrigan from Dublin, Ireland is a lifelong Socialist who along with most of us was appauled by the treatment, at the hands of their own government, the victims of Katrina were subjected to & was moved to write this song.<br />
Thank you Tony for your compassion & determined vision for the dignity of all mankind.Uncorruptablehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03898832033846131074noreply@blogger.com0