The Press: Rigging the Coverage
 - what you see is not what you get

Coverage about the breakdown of the partial ceasefire in Syria illustrated the main way corporate news media distort public understanding of a major foreign policy story. The problem is not that the key events in the story are entirely unreported, but that they were downplayed and quickly forgotten in the media’s embrace of themes with which they were more comfortable.

In this case, the one key event was the major offensive launched in early April by Al Nusra Front — the Al Qaeda franchise in Syria — alongside U.S.-backed armed opposition groups. This offensive was mentioned in at least two “quality” U.S. newspapers. Their readers, however, would not have read that it was that offensive that broke the back of the partial ceasefire.

On the contrary, they would have gotten the clear impression from following the major newspapers’ coverage that systematic violations by the Assad government doomed the ceasefire from the beginning.

Corporate media heralded the ceasefire agreement when it was negotiated by the United States and Russia in February, with the Los Angeles Times (2/3/16) calling it “the most determined diplomatic push to date aimed at ending the nation’s almost five-year conflict.” The “partial cessation of hostilities” was to apply between the Syrian regime and the non-jihadist forces, but not to the regime’s war with Nusra and with ISIS.

The clear implication was that the U.S.-supported non-jihadist opposition forces would have to separate themselves from Nusra, or else they would be legitimate targets for airstrikes.
But the relationship between the CIA-backed armed opposition to Assad and the jihadist Nusra Front was an issue that major U.S. newspapers had already found very difficult to cover (FAIR.org, 3/21/16).
U.S. Syria policy has been dependent on the military potential of the Nusra Front (and its close ally, Ahrar al Sham) for leverage on the Syrian regime, since the “moderate” opposition was unable to operate in northwest Syria without jihadist support.

This central element in U.S. Syria policy, which both the government and the media were unwilling to acknowledge, was a central obstacle to accurate coverage of what happened to the Syrian ceasefire.

This problem began shaping the story as soon as the ceasefire agreement was announced. On Feb. 23, New York Times correspondent Neil MacFarquhar wrote a news analysis on the wider tensions between the Obama administration and Russia that pointed to “a gaping loophole” in the Syria ceasefire agreement: the fact that “it permits attacks against the Islamic State and the Nusra Front, an Al Qaeda affiliate, to continue.”

MacFarquhar asserted that exempting Nusra from the ceasefire “could work in Moscow’s favor, since many of the anti-Assad groups aligned with the United States fight alongside the Nusra Front.” That meant that Russia could “continue to strike United States-backed rebel groups without fear … of Washington’s doing anything to stop them,” he wrote.

On the same day, Adam Entous of the Wall Street Journal reported that Obama’s “top military and intelligence advisers don’t believe Russia will abide by a just-announced ceasefire in Syria and want to ready plans to increase pressure on Moscow by expanding covert support to rebels fighting the Russia-backed Assad regime.”

For two of the country’s most prominent newspapers, it was thus clear that the primary context of the Syria ceasefire was not its impact on Syria’s population, but how it affected the rivalry between powerful national security officials and Russia.

Note Almere-Digest: not only the Syria news is rigged by the media, but also most of the news, depending on who pays the salaries of the journalists writing the story, and the policies of the corporate media conglomerate they work for . 

Read more: Rigging the Coverage of Syria – Consortium

Europe's Refugee And Political Crises: Will the US Own Up to Its Role In the Destabilization Of The World?

EU  relationship with USA

Until last summer, the refugee crisis in Europe was quietly and intentionally hidden from most Americans' view.

It took 3,771 deaths in the Mediterranean last year - and a photograph of a lifeless, drowned Kurdish child named Aylan Kurdi - for coverage to hit the American press.

By that time, 3,000 people were arriving every day to Lesbos, and many thousands more to the other Greek islands.

The irony of this ignorance should be obvious: the United States stands at the center of this disastrous situations given their military involvement in the Middle East and around the world, which has resulted in refugees being out of their homes, over mountains, around border crossings, through Turkish prison cells and onto crowded, dangerous boats.

From Libya to southern Afghanistan, US interventions and occupations have led to further destabilization, violence and, in almost all cases, civil wars.

A longer trail of complicity that stretches back to the four decades of economic and military support that the United States has given to the Arab dictatorships challenged in the 2011 Arab Spring, and to similar support given in that same time period to a number of insurgencies that dovetailed with US foreign policy objectives.

 One such group, the insurgency of the Afghan Mujahideen, fought a decade-long guerrilla war against Soviet occupation in the 1980s.

Those who came to fight in Afghanistan from abroad, many of whom received US military and economic support either from Congress or the CIA, hatched a postwar strategy of insurgency across the Arab and Muslim world, which resulted in a civil war in Algeria that took 120,000 lives. Meanwhile, other smaller rebellions caused significant fighting across the Maghreb, in northern Pakistan, Yemen, Chechnya, Albania and beyond.

The group now known to the world as ISIS was created in this period by a Jordanian Mujahideen veteran named Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Originally launched in Jordan, the all-but-failed organization was given a second lease on life in post-invasion Iraq, where a destabilized and fractured society made fertile soil for the hyper-sectarian ideology of Zarqawi, who helped turn anger at the US occupation into a civil war against Shiites.

The sectarian state originally put in power in Iraq by the United States escalated divisions in the country, helping fuel the other side of the 2005-2006 civil war while pushing a large, disenfranchised Sunni population further toward the open arms of groups like ISIS.

A focus of the US "surge" in 2007 was working with Sunni militias to turn against this tide, but that strategy only lasted until the Iraqi state took control of the Sahwa program (Awakening Councils, or Sons of Iraq) as US troops withdrew and quickly dismantled them.

Against a backdrop of electricity shortages, water contamination and continued political destabilization, ISIS, which had by then entered into the north of Syria to take advantage of the civil war there, re-entered the picture with its dramatic capturing of Fallujah, Ramadi and other key points in Iraq's Anbar Province.

ISIS may be the most menacing face of Syria's civil war, but the multifaceted war includes a range of other groups, most notable the Assad regime itself, but also groups like the al-Qaeda-linked Jabhat al-Nusra and the Free Syrian Army, a "moderate" group originally formed by deserters from the regime's military. And while a civil society-based revolutionary movement continues to defend the small spaces it has been able to hold, a pipeline of US, Gulf and European money providing various factions with weapons that have helped prolong the bloodshed has helped shatter the hopes and dreams of those who first took to the streets in 2011. Though the US Congress recently canceled the public program backing such rebels, the much larger CIA program remains in operation.

Alongside the US funding, US allies like Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have pumped weapons, logistical equipment and soldiers into Syria to support various factions fighting in the civil war, mainly those linked with the Supreme Military Council of Syria, which includes the Free Syrian Army and other anti-ISIS, anti-Assad groups. These groups, as well as the Kurdish peshmerga (from Iraq but often fighting in Syrian Kurdistan) and the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG), are often supported by bombings of the US, EU (NATO) countries, Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Canada and Turkey.

On the other side of that war, Russia and Iran have sustained financial and political support to the four-decade-old Assad regime, helping defend its authoritarian police state from an array of forces fighting against it. In October 2015, Russian air support joined in the fight to secure Russia a seat at the negotiation table and to bolster Assad's position in power. Though Russia announced in mid-March that it would begin withdrawing forces as a long-needed cease-fire takes effect, fighting targeting Islamist groups unaffected by the cease-fire continues in Aleppo, Syria's largest city and its financial center.

Popular protests have exploded in almost every corner of the world, drawing comparisons to the revolutionary period of 1968. It's hard to analyze this wave of uprisings and protest without crediting the revolutions in the Arab world as the first spark that caught.

Those who inspired the world now face a severe wave of repression, with Syria as one of the most shocking examples. Over 11 percent of the population has been killed or injured since the start of the revolt, and over 20 percent have fled the country. Syria has become the single largest source of refugees in the world. The second largest? Afghanistan.

The Arab allies of the United States, fully involved in the war, have taken in an astoundingly small number of refugees from Syria, with Kuwait and Saudi Arabia in last place, with zero. 

The United States, with its massive economy and "huddled masses yearning to breathe free" rhetoric, pledged last year to take in a mere 10,000 refugees for fiscal year 2016 - that's .015 percent. So far, that number has only reached a little over 1000.

Considering the extent to which US money has been spent killing people and destroying infrastructure in these countries -- for each of the 1,700 Syrian refugees accepted into the country last year, the United States spent an estimated $375,000 financing and arming various factions in the civil war -- it's far beyond an oversight that the United States' borders are almost impossible for refugees from the region to enter. Even those who worked as interpreters for US soldiers in Iraq regularly make the dangerous crossing to Greece, unsupported by the governments they risked their lives to assist.

The reality is that the United States is politically unwilling to help. Its wars of political and economic self-interest have always centered on a US perception of success and have always utilized a rhetoric of liberation to achieve long-sought foreign policy objectives. It has left those whose lives have been turned upside down across the Middle East -- the people it claimed to be liberating when it invaded their homes -- to fend for themselves in Europe or drown in the picturesque waters of the Mediterranean Sea.

The message of the US is now crystal clear: "Your liberation only matters when we need to justify our wars."

Unfortunately the EU will pay, as it already is experiencing, a heavy price for blindly following, agreeing and participating in these disastrous US adventures in the Middle East and other places around the world.

This is not anti-Americanism, it is a statement of fact, ehich most cowardly corrupt politicians  and the corporate controlled press don't dare to mention.

Where are the European politicians who dare to speak out? It is high time for a EUXIT out of this destructive US embrace,  before this fragile European Union completely falls apart.

EU-Digest

Turkey signals joint defense plan with Russia

Speaking at Anadolu Agency’s Editors’ Desk, Cavusoglu said the previous day’s meeting between Presidents Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Vladimir Putin had paved the way for closer ties following a nine-month freeze after the shooting down of a Russian warplane.

“The officials will go to St. Petersburg tonight,” Cavusoglu said. “Our delegation will consist of foreign ministry [personnel], the Turkish Armed Forces, along with our intelligence chief.”

Cavusoglu said meetings will be held at ministerial level.

Erdogan’s trip to Russia and the revival of ties between Russia and Turkey have sparked concern that the NATO member is turning increasingly to the East as it feels rebuffed by the West over a host of issues such as EU membership and the West’s tepid response to the defeated July 15 coup.

Questioned about increased cooperation between the Turkish and Russian defense industries in the context of Turkey’s NATO role, Cavusoglu said Ankara had already established defense sector cooperation with non-NATO countries, including missile development.

“Turkey wanted to cooperate with NATO members up to this point,” the minister said. “But the results we got did not satisfy us. Therefore, it is natural to look for other options. But we don’t see this as a move against NATO.”

Referring to the Nov. 24 downing of a Russian warplane over the Turkey-Syria border by the Turkish Air Force, Cavusoglu explained that the Turkish pilots involved in the incident had been arrested on suspicion of being involved in the coup bid.

“Some of the pilots, who were involved in the downed Russian jet incident, are remanded in custody right now,” he said. “This is because of the allegation of being a member of the Fetullah Terrorist Organization [FETO], not because they were involved in the incident. The judiciary will look into the case in every aspect and evaluate.”

Is History Repeating itself?: End of History 2.0, beginning of gloom ?

The collapse of the Soviet Union and its allied Communist regimes in Europe was hailed as the ultimate triumph of Western liberal democracy and capitalism. Francis Fukuyama, the American academic, called it the “end of history” arguing that the West had finally—and for good—won the battle of ideologies. Scenes of joy swept Western capitals; darkness at noon had lifted! Hallelujah. Anyone caught expressing scepticism or urging humility risked ridicule and humiliation.

Twenty-five years later, we seem to be looking at another “end of history” episode. Except that this time it is playing out not in Moscow, Budapest and Warsaw but in the heartland of Western democracy and  capitalism – London, Washington, Paris, Rome and Berlin. The same remorseless cycle of ideological boom and bust that brought about the demise of Communism is now paying a visit to the capitalist West. Liberal democracy and capitalism—the two great pillars of self-proclaimed Western supremacy—are in deep crisis, spawning in its wake a politics of rage and hate on either side of the Atlantic.

It’s by far the gravest crisis since the Second World War, and threatens the post-War political and economic stability the West has come to take for granted. Economy is already in a tailspin and political and social stability hangs in the balance. There’s a worrying erosion of public confidence in the political class and democratically elected representatives—in effect in parliamentary democracy itself. Demagogues are taking over, prompting fears that power might be shifting from Parliament on to the streets, reminiscent of the 1930s Germany. That may be an exaggeration, but it’s hard to escape a growing sense of public contempt for mainstream politics and a desperate search for alternatives even if it means plunging into unchartered waters.

It is a culmination of years of pent-up grievances exacerbated by the fall-out of the 2008 financial crash whose worst victims were the poor. But what happened next was like rubbing salt into the wound. While millions of middle and working class people lost their jobs and had their homes repossessed, pushing them further into poverty for no fault of theirs, those responsible for the crash—bankers and their cronies in government and elsewhere—got away with it. There was much hand-wringing, mea culpas, and talk of market reforms. A new 21stcentury brand of “capitalism with a human face” was promised, but nearly a decade later it is pretty much business as usual with obscene salaries and bonuses still very much the norm in the corporate sector.

Meanwhile, globalisation has failed to work for the vast majority of lower, middle and working classes. Its promised benefits have bypassed them while benefitting big corporations and a small urban elite. Globalisation was sold to the public as a bold mission to bring the world closer to the mutual benefit of everyone, by breaking down trade barriers and promoting the idea of effectively a single world market. But it was really always about developed nations gaining access to lucrative new emerging markets in Asia and elsewhere. And about Western companies being able to save labour costs by outsourcing jobs to low-wage countries—India, China, Bangladeshi, Sri Lanka, etc. Even Britain's Labour Party’s ultra-Left  leader Jeremy Corbyn’s campaign T-shirts, which sell for up to £17 a piece, were made by “slave labour” in Bangladesh who were paid just 30 pence an hour.

Globalisation has also led to increased economic disparities and a widening of the rich-poor divide as its benefits have not been equitably distributed; and blue-collar workers especially find its gains outweighed by losses. This has got conflated with anger over other issues like racial discrimination, immigration (the Brexit vote was driven solely by concerns over large-scale immigration from other EU states), and corruption in high places completing the image of a system that is not working for ordinary people.

“A big factor in the anger and frustration that people are feeling today… is the realisation that regardless of who is formally elected, an insular ruling elite is actually in power, pursuing a technocratic agenda that serves the interests of rich and well-connected insiders rather than the public,’’ wrote  Steve Hilton, a former adviser to David Cameron, in The Times.

So, when an insurgent pretender promises to bring “our jobs back home”, bring down immigrant numbers, and crack down on corporate greed, people cheer them seduced by the idea that someone is “listening” to them and speaking their language. (We had a glimpse of it in India in the 2014 elections.) In Europe, the anti-establishment mood has been fuelled by European leaders’ strutting and confused response to the Eurozone and refugee crises—the former resulting in massive job losses and welfare cuts; and the latter igniting xenophobia. Like globalisation, the EU is also deemed as a failed project. Both have had the opposite effect of their intended aim. As Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz has argued, the EU was intended to foster unity and a sense of shared interests but, instead, it has ended up causing distrust and grievances. Ironically, even its poorer constituents (the ex-Communist East European nations) which have benefited enormously from their EU membership by way of subsidies and the right their citizens enjoy to settle and work in other member states are not happy, accusing Brussels of bullying.

But to cut to the chase, trying to find specific causes for the crisis gripping the West is to miss the wood for the trees. The short point is that an exhausted West has run out of tricks in the face of a new emerging global order; and an increasingly assertive citizenry not willing to be taken for granted. There is a feel of decay that it cannot remain business as usual for too long. If someone, somewhere is contemplating an “End of History 2.0” thesis, time to rush it out.

Large swathes of middle-class Americans and Europeans are willing to take a punt on anyone who doesn’t sound like a conventional politician. The Trump-isation of American politics, the Brexit vote, and the increasing appeal of populist right-wing figures such as Marie Le Pen in France, Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, and groups like Alternative for Germany (APD) in Germany are a manifestation of this crisis. According to The Economist, “populist, authoritarian European parties of the right and left now enjoy nearly twice as much support as they did in 2000, and are in government or ruling coalition in nine countries”.  This is no mid-summer madness that has suddenly seized millions of people; nor is there a right or left-wing conspiracy to destabilise the West.

How did it happen?

It is a culmination of years of pent-up grievances exacerbated by the fall-out of the 2008 financial crash whose worst victims were the poor. But what happened next was like rubbing salt into the wound. While millions of middle and working class people lost their jobs and had their homes repossessed, pushing them further into poverty for no fault of theirs, those responsible for the crash—bankers and their cronies in government and elsewhere—got away with it. There was much hand-wringing, mea culpas, and talk of market reforms. A new 21stcentury brand of “capitalism with a human face” was promised, but nearly a decade later it is pretty much business as usual with obscene salaries and bonuses still very much the norm in the corporate sector.

Meanwhile, globalisation has failed to work for the vast majority of lower, middle and working classes. Its promised benefits have bypassed them while benefitting big corporations and a small urban elite. Globalisation was sold to the public as a bold mission to bring the world closer to the mutual benefit of everyone, by breaking down trade barriers and promoting the idea of effectively a single world market. But it was really always about developed nations gaining access to lucrative new emerging markets in Asia and elsewhere. And about Western companies being able to save labour costs by outsourcing jobs to low-wage countries—India, China, Bangladeshi, Sri Lanka, etc. Even Labour Party’s ultra-Left  leader Jeremy Corbyn’s campaign T-shirts, which sell for up to £17 a piece, were made by “slave labour” in Bangladesh who were paid just 30 pence an hour.

Globalisation has also led to increased economic disparities and a widening of the rich-poor divide as its benefits have not been equitably distributed; and blue-collar workers especially find its gains outweighed by losses. This has got conflated with anger over other issues like racial discrimination, immigration (the Brexit vote was driven solely by concerns over large-scale immigration from other EU states), and corruption in high places completing the image of a system that is not working for ordinary people.

“A big factor in the anger and frustration that people are feeling today… is the realisation that regardless of who is formally elected, an insular ruling elite is actually in power, pursuing a technocratic agenda that serves the interests of rich and well-connected insiders rather than the public,’’ wrote  Steve Hilton, a former adviser to David Cameron, in The Times.

So, when an insurgent pretender promises to bring “our jobs back home”, bring down immigrant numbers, and crack down on corporate greed, people cheer them seduced by the idea that someone is “listening” to them and speaking their language. (We had a glimpse of it in India in the 2014 elections.) In Europe, the anti-establishment mood has been fuelled by European leaders’ strutting and confused response to the Eurozone and refugee crises—the former resulting in massive job losses and welfare cuts; and the latter igniting xenophobia. Like globalisation, the EU is also deemed as a failed project. Both have had the opposite effect of their intended aim. As Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz has argued, the EU was intended to foster unity and a sense of shared interests but, instead, it has ended up causing distrust and grievances. Ironically, even its poorer constituents (the ex-Communist East European nations) which have benefited enormously from their EU membership by way of subsidies and the right their citizens enjoy to settle and work in other member states are not happy, accusing Brussels of bullying.

But to cut to the chase, trying to find specific causes for the crisis gripping the West is to miss the wood for the trees. The short point is that an exhausted West has run out of tricks in the face of a new emerging global order; and an increasingly assertive citizenry not willing to be taken for granted. There is a feel of decay that it cannot remain business as usual for too long. If someone, somewhere is contemplating an “End of History 2.0” thesis, time to rush it out.

Read more: End of History 2.0, beginning of gloom

The Netherlands - Alternative energy: Beautiful solar-powered car chargers keep the Netherlands moving

Ever since I started driving an electric car, I've been surprised by just how little I need or care about having a charging network available to me. But I have a driveway. And a second car. For the one-car families and/or those who live in apartments, a reliable charging network would go a long way toward making electric cars a more attractive and practical option.

In the Netherlands, just such a network is already emerging. Fastned has already built 50 beautiful solar-powered chargers and they are aiming for 200 in the very near future. Robert Llewellyn of Fully Charged paid one charging station a visit, and he chatted with company founder Bart Lubbers about their plans for the future.

A few points worthy of note:

    *The solar panels create enough charge for about three cars. The rest comes from a contract with wind power generators.
    *The charging stations are built with expansion in mind. The one in the video currently has two chargers, but there's room for six more.
    *Fastned offers several pricing options and plans, including monthly fees and lower Kwh rates for people charging regularly, and no monthly fee but higher Kwh rates for people needing to charge only occasionally.

Lubbers also shares that the company eventually plans to add shops/coffee shops/bathroom facilities etc. This really does look like a smart approach to electric vehicle charging infrastructure. Now I kind of wish we had something like this in my neighborhood, even though I don't really need it...

Read more: Beautiful solar-powered car chargers keep the Netherlands moving : TreeHugger

New World Order Equals "Global Disorder": as the frail structures of peace are collapsing around us - by RM

A Nuclear War Is looming

What was sold to the world as "the New World Order" by George Bush, the father of  George W.Bush can only be described today as a total failure and should really be known as the "World Corporate Takeover".

As a result things are escalating in the world today: tensions, wars, guns, refugee crises, poverty, economic crises, immigration, etc.

The world must solve these problems before they explode into  a Third World Nuclear War.

World leaders, politicians, people cannot continue keep silent on atrocities going on around the world, especially the Middle East and Africa, or even in our own Western cities and neighborhoods.

Only when enough voices are raised can something change.

Feel encouraged to use the social media, not only for pleasantries, culinary delights, travel, or navel staring, but also use it as a non-violent, but very effective weapon to criticize your elected leaders, corporations, the press, on issues that are important for your survival.

Those of you using Blogs or other communications tools, as an oversight to expose governments and corporate "hanky-panky" need to be cheered on and complimented.

The younger generation, reading this report, are also encouraged to use their energy and skills, not only to make money, but also to become an activists, by speaking their minds on issues they believe in.

After all as Alexis de Tocqueville once said said: "The health of a democratic society may be measured by the quality of functions performed by its private citizens" .

Take the time to look around you and you will soon realize that the so-called "status-quo " enjoyed by only a few, is not sufficient to guarantee a productive living environment for all.

It is no longer acceptable before God, and people with conscience. Nations who have no voice in the world are being purged, gutted out and destroyed.

Today there is conflict all over the world. You name it, the Middle East, Africa, Central America, Ukraine, etc. Thousands have perished in Syria, and millions fled from their homes; thousands are perishing in Yemen, mostly children; thousand in Iraq and the destruction of an ancient city; thousands fled in Libya where another war is raging; 60, 000 just fled their homes a few days ago in South Sudan; Mali, Central African Republic, Somali, Congo all in conflict and millions in refugee camps. Thousands have perished and millions fled to seek refugee status in Europe, Turkey, Lebanon and even the US.

Something must be done soon before the frail structures still holding the world from collapsing into a Third World Nuclear War” also collapse.

Many of the areas where you have conflicts these days are usually the so-called Third World Nations or as somecall them, Developing Nations. They do, however, contain most of the natural resources in the world, but still remain among the poorest nations of the world.

The obvious question is why?

Mainly because the global centers of power in the world, including the US, EU, China, Russia, Britain, either use these developing countries to expand their political sphere of influence, or to control their natural resources, under all kinds of pretenses; including the setting-up of puppet leaders who do their bidding.

Once a grip is established by "an outside power", it will put a "friendly" Puppet Government in place providing it with weapons to control the people they govern.

When those leaders, however,  for one reason or another, are not able to meet the goals set for them by their "foreign benefactor", they are either exciled or assassinated, under whatever pretense.

This is the way leaders in Egypt, Libya, Iraq, etc. were toppled.

Consequently many of the world's Third World leaders are ruthless, wicked, and not able to develop these natural resources for the benefit of their own people, specially in Africa, blessed with just about every natural resource the world needs.

Our own Western leaders are not much better in that respect, specially when it comes to Democracy or governance.

They seldom show any remorse for the atrocities they have created around the world; are godless and immoral; will promise anything to keep control over the people, only to deceive, will not do what they promise and usually create more problems than opportunities for the people they are supposed to serve.

Poverty has spread across the globe, not only in Africa, but now also to the rich and powerful nations of the world, including, the US, India, Russia, China, Britain, Greece, France, Braxil, Venezuela and many more.

When it comes to politics, people these days the world over have a lot in common. From Fukushima to Athens, and from Washington to Shanghai, China, the collective refrain is that government is not to be trusted, or working the way it should, and that corporations are calling the shots today.

People in the so-called "civilized" world now pay dearly for energy, medicine,insurance, healthcare, banking, and telecommunications services.  In the past it was called Voodoo Economics and today it has become Strangle-Hold Economics.

Research reveals that people are paying more -- much more -- in a variety of ways that our business-friendly mainstream media won't talk about.

Just look at America's Middle class. It  is almost wiped out; either you are rich, or poor now; poverty levels stand at 46 percent and is increasing; millions are in shelters, and millions without jobs. 

To add insult to injury - The wide-spread availability of guns in America has killed thousands of Americans, and everyday, many more die from gun violence; yet, Congress doesn't want to pass gun control law. Mainly again because of the powerful NRA lobby, which has its hands on the pocketbook of just about every legislator in both major parties.

In the meantime the corporate power structure has taken over most of the political decision making in Western Countries, and even more so in America. It now influences and controls just about anything  you can imagine. From the healthcare Industry to the food industry, even influencing what kind of hormones and pesticides are allowed in the food you eat, and all else in between. 

The Pharmaceutical industry uses sales agents, not only to peddle their drugs, but also to bribe Drs. with a variety of incentives, including money. 

Drs. are prescribing drugs and performing surgery on patients that don't really need those particular drugs or the surgery, while new effective and cheaper .drugs that can cure patient are delayed in being put on to the marketplace,t so that the Pharmaceutical Industry can continue selling expensive drugs which don't work. .  


A report by Battelle Memorial Institute determined that the $4 billion government-funded Human Genome Project (HGP) will generate economic activity of about $140 for every dollar spent. Although that estimate controversial, drug industry executives say it's just a matter of time before the profits roll in.

Big business has quickly made its move on this. 

One-fifth of the human genome is now privately owned through patents. Strains of influenza and hepatitis have been claimed by corporate and private university labs, preventing researchers from using the patented life forms to perform cancer research. This is not only bad it is plainly criminal.

As if to mock us, while taking over our public research, some of the largest drug companies haven't been paying much in taxes. Pfizer had 40% of its 2011-12 revenues in the U.S., but declared almost $7 billion in U.S. losses to go along with $31 billion in foreign profits. Abbott Labs had 42% of its sales in the U.S., but declared a loss in the U.S. along with $12 billion in foreign profits.

These alliances between the political establishment and the corporate world are now commonplace and even expanding further..

In the area of communications we see similar developments. 

In the US the CIA and NSA have been using public tax money to pay AT&T. Google, and other companies to access its data - basically your private data - for surveillance purposes. 

With almost no transparency or oversight, the CIA has been paying AT&T to monitor US citizens overseas phone calls. Hundreds of dollars per customer per month goes to Verizon for similar snooping. 

The NSA also compensated Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and Facebook for penalties accrued in the secretive Prism surveillance program.

Many US  corporations consequently feel very powerful as a result of the inequitable support they receive from their government when operating in other countries, and often act accordingly in an arrogant way, when dealing with foreign governments.

Recently Facebook rejected claims made by Germany's state authorities that it was reluctant to co-operate with them on criminal investigations, saying many of the requests it received for user data were incorrectly formulated.

Several regional interior ministers have complained that the social media group is hesitant to respond to requests for data and have called on the Federal Justice Ministry to introduce new laws.

German Police said the Ansbach bomber had six Facebook accounts including one held under a false identity. Traces of an online messaging conversation found on his phone also suggest he was influenced by an unknown person up until the time of the attack, said Bavaria's interior minister.

Germany's spy chief called on Monday for a more intensive exchange of information between social networks and security agencies in the fight against terrorism.

Bottom-line: The state of the world is not looking good, and maybe in this respect one should quote Scripture which says: “You will reap whatever you sow in life.” 

Mankind certainly can not be proud about what it sowed. 

The time of reckoning is fast approaching -and we must act before it is too late,

EU-Digest                                                                                               

The Netherlands and Canada: Why Do Canada And The Netherlands Love Each Other? - by Glenn McDonald

During World War II, Canada and the Netherlands formed a friendship that persists until today. So what's behind their strong alliance?

Odd news from the United Nations this week: A recently convened panel of international experts and career diplomats have issued a remarkable joint statement, concluding: "Canada and the Netherlands are so cute together!"

We're kidding about the joint statement, but the two countries actually do enjoy a uniquely close relationship. From the U.S. perspective, it's like having two good friends hit it off and get married. Everybody wins! Jules Suzdaltsev explains in today's Seeker Daily report.

Canada and the Netherlands have a similar international profile. Both are parliamentary democracies with a strong tradition of supporting progressive causes like universal health care, environmental conservation and same-sex marriage. The countries also share some intriguing history.

In 1940, Germany invaded and occupied the Netherlands as World War Two heated up. Fleeing the conflict, the Dutch royal family took refuge in Canada for five years. The Netherlands' Princess Margriet was born in an Ottawa hospital, which was temporarily declared Dutch territory so that she could obtain dual citizenship.

Canadian troops fought alongside the Dutch at the end of the war, and Canada's Air Force carried out crucial airlift missions and food drops to isolated Dutch cities. Many Canadians remained in the Netherlands after the war to help rebuild.

The Dutch, in turn, have a long history of migrating to Canada, dating back to the 19th century. Subsequent waves of migration followed after World War I and World War II. Dutch-Canadians remain one of Canada's largest immigrant groups.

Canada and the Netherlands also share strong business ties. Bilateral trade between the two nations exceeded $7 billion in 2014 and Dutch seaports play a key role in transporting Canadian goods throughout Europe. Both are founding members of a number of international organizations, including NATO and the Organization for Security and Cooperation.

Diplomatically, Canada and the Netherlands are about as close as two countries can be. How do they keep the magic alive after 70 years? Well, for one thing, the Netherlands even sends Canada flowers every year. No, seriously.

Read more: Why Do Canada And The Netherlands Love Each Other? - Video