Bob Ness
-
Posts
1,440 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Bob Ness
-
-
9 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:
Bob Ness- you making broad general statements about potential liability of news organizationsm and the viability of parties bringing lawsuits that resembles magical thinking which is ok- just recognize it .
This case will turn on specific allegations that the plaintiffs must prove along with their damages. I have already explained how Fox can try to defend this case. read the preceding discussions. This case is far from a slam dunk. All we have so far is the complaint and the selective leaks from deposition testimony. You havent even heard Fox's side of the story yet. They have very good lawyers. this will become very muddled after Fox tells its story.
I've read the briefs.
I don't have a lawyer's perspective of course but Helen Keller could parse through the facts of what they were doing and I'd think it will be very difficult to defend their actions.
-
3 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:
is there a way I can share the pdfs of the briefs supporting motions for summary judgement filed by Dominion, Fox News Corp and Fox Corp? They are interesting to me as a lawyer but I think you may find them interesting as well.
-
8 minutes ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:
if there was any verdict against Fox, i doubt it would be in the billion dollar range. Dominion is going to be hard pressed to show damages exceeding anything approaching the amount from what I have seen so far. And any damages approaching that amount would likely be overturned by the Supreme Court based on its recent jurisprudence.
Smartmatic is asking for $2.7 billion. Dominion is just first in line.
Let's face it the "news" companies nowadays are little more than content for advertisers and it's been that way for some time. Like Chomsky says, since profits depend on the advertising models rather than viewership or subscriptions (direct audience generated revenue) those organizations will have no interest in changing their editorial slant until such time as their advertisers demand it or leave. But much of what we're talking about isn't "editorial slant". It's outright fabricated information which "Fox NEWS" (NOT Fox opinion) put forth at the same time they apparently knew the information was fabricated. This absolutely impacts both Dominion and Smartmatic's ability to do business as they are multi-billion dollar businesses with employees and the whole lot who are now at least partially seen as not credible.
The news organizations receive protection specifically in the constitution but that also comes with a responsibility to investigate the veracity of their claims. Usually, cases don't make the docket unless a strong set of issues make it likely a plaintiff will prevail. People can't just sue every time they disagree with what a newspaper opines. It's a waste of money and court resources. What you seem to be saying is they get to play both sides: "Hey we weren't reporting news! We're an opinion organization!" But we get to claim the protection of a news organization!" Which is it?
An entity claiming to "give an opinion" is absolutely subject to all the legal remedies available to a plaintiff if they maliciously malign, slander or defame them. Courts have consistently held that news organizations can't recklessly disregard the truth when reporting on matters of public concern. In this case, they're not saying so and so is a bad candidate or it's a shame he won (an opinion many would agree with) they were saying the entire voting procedure, effecting all voters, was fraudulent and of great PUBLIC CONCERN. They're including ALL voters and not a subsection or segment, which has been shown to be false and known to Fox NEWS at that time. They knew there wasn't a fire and not only claimed otherwise, used the near full extent of their massive resources to perpetuate the lie.
Finally, courts have also held that news organizations are liable for damages if they publish or broadcast defamatory statements with a "reckless disregard" for the truth.
tl;dr
Taint that hard methinks. Would have been dismissed long ago but hey, IANAL.
-
6 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:
I am no lawyer, but Glenn Greenwald seems to think the Dominion case is iffy.
Don't worry about that. Greenwald isn't either.
-
6 hours ago, Mark Knight said:
There have been several ad hominem attacks posted in this thread.
Understand that when someone questions the honesty of your SOURCE, that is not an attack on YOUR honesty. Therefore, no ad hominem is "required" in retaliation.
I believe everyone here is aware of the forum rules. It would be GREAT if everyone here would abide by those rules. If you need a refresher, I'm sure there's a "sticky" post on the main page that will spell things out.
We these things get so far off the rails maybe they should be just closed to further comment? Thanks for the efforts Mark.
-
18 hours ago, John Cotter said:
If that's how you see yourself, maybe you should have a chat with the house shrink.
Cotter: "I know you are, but what am I?"
Good response. Fourth grade, John?
-
Gee. This thread is like the tr0ll hall of fame.
-
47 minutes ago, Charles Blackmon said:
sounds like a "must read"
We shall see. We shall see...
-
4 hours ago, David Von Pein said:
But, whether conspiracy believers like it or not, that's precisely where the evidence leads us, Bob---to that "crazy mixed-up kid" named Oswald.
Just follow Oswald's own movements and actions on both Nov. 21 and Nov. 22. If you do that, you can't help but lean toward the "Lone Assassin" conclusion. It's inevitable.
http://DVP's JFK Archives / Everything Oswald Did Indicates His Guilt
I'm certainly not in a position to argue the accumulated evidence with you the presumed facts you present about the case. You have many decades of gathering the information that I will never match. I am in a position to objectively weigh arguments and make my own judgements.
I am going to try to make a separate post that will attempt to show what your spectacular main flaw is and why your arguments tend to fall flat on many ears. Those arguments really aren't yours but they're positions that you reiterate rather well.
I'm very busy prostituting myself (I feel so cheap) right now but I think it will be interesting. I'll let you know when it's up if you're interested.
-
13 hours ago, Gerry Down said:
This means it would appear there was nothing out of the ordinary about the alleged plots in Tampa and Chicago just before the JFK assassination.
Lots of people wanted JFK dead and he was getting these threats all throughout his presidency.
Exactly the point. I would guess assassins we're tripping over each other in Dallas.
Chalking it up to a that 'crazy mixed up kid' in not much more the a few minutes is a bit pat, don't you think?
-
7 hours ago, Matthew Koch said:
Rather ironic given Matts interaction with Sherry where she threatened to sue him..
Ron, you used to call me Koach like a roach until I sent you a private's message and told you to stop, so I find it rather humorous that you would ignore Leslie trying to tie me and Chris to (N)azis and would act like that didn't happen.. maybe stick to drinking beer beer with your buddy Hank
Mods. Please take out the garbage.
Enough is enough.
-
3 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:
Everyone sat idly by and watched Germany invade Poland. Didn’t England have a defense treaty with Poland?
But Germany didn't invade Poland. Germany AND Russia invaded in September of 1939.
France and England had an agreement to defend them and prior to the Munich agreement the Soviets weren't necessarily going to take part in an invasion. The Munich agreement, which gave the Sudetenland to Germany provided immense logistical advantages to Germany and created a rift between the Russians and the Allies; France, Italy (who were with the Allies at the time) and England. Lord Chamberlain essentially drove a wedge between the Allies and Stalin who was their most important ally (if only to keep the USSR sidelined). Russia could have prevented the invasion either diplomatically or through logistical support as they had a mutual defense agreement with France. But the Munich agreement essentially abandoned Czechoslovakia to the Germans which gave them the military stockpiles of the Czechs and lead Russia to the Ribbentrop agreement.
Throughout this entire time and before, ALL of these countries were engaged in small military incursions with each other trying to claim this patch of land for these guys, that patch of sticks for those guys ad infinitum. It was viewed in the States as typical Euro "Lord this and such that" is offended by the gesture of the "Throne of what's his name" and must needs start a conflagration to defend the honor of such arachnids! And that's pretty close! They've been doing it for centuries and why stop now?
Remember? We left all that crap behind and kicked them out when they brought it here!
NATO is our response to that.
-
5 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:
Thanks Paul, you say it better than I, that's pretty much exactly what I meant. When the military took in Gehlen and his aides for a year, agreeing to his terms, it set the stage for where we are today. Having Dulles as the only one from OSS among those few to have contact with Gehlen or the aides is eye opening for me. Dulles ignored the Holocaust as it was happening from Switzerland for the OSS, while continuing to deal with the Nasis. He was dealing with Skorzeny at the time regarding the rat lines. Skorzeny rescued Mussolini.
Then Dulles becomes Director of the CIA. They both wanted the cold war to continue. As did the Rockefellers.
I'm not trying to make excuses for anyone but they were people who had to play the cards as dealt and not as they wanted them, plus had just traveled through the most violent time in human history. I for one often wonder how the Russians left even a blade of grass standing in Germany. Of course they sat idly by as the Germans annihilated Warsaw - to this day Russia would love nothing more than to incinerate Poland. In Warsaw the animals wouldn't give the Allies permission to even drop food during the German's attack.
The Russians were the worst of all save the Nasis, and were plenty happy to aid them early on. It's no wonder Hitler despised them. In point of fact the European continent is the place to go for bloodletting and a quick visit to the Ukraine will bear that out.
Picking friends there is a lot like going to a pig farm to find a bride. Particularly after World War Two.
-
33 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:
What exactly did Moore want GDM to find out about LHO?
A: To see if LHO was trying to make contact with any foreign networks inside the U.S.?
B: To gather foreign Intel on the workings inside the Soviet union, such as details on the Minsk radio factory?
Was it more B than A do you think?
I would just guess the CIA or ONI would have debriefed him already about his time in the USSR. Perhaps they may suspect he wasn't entirely forthcoming about that, but I find Marina as suspicious as Lee. If he was acting as some sort of dangle during that time, the Soviets wouldn't have been stupid enough to expose him to anything of import I imagine. My understanding of the theory is that Oswald's (and others) possible use as a dangle was really meant to create comm traffic between the various Soviet assets in the states and possibly expose a mole. An interesting theory with some grounds for discussion and even some indications that may have been the case.
On the other hand, at first blush and with no other information, the FBI may have been suspicious that he was sent back home with his new toy sparrow and handler, Marina, to create political hay, which they are very good at. You can see that today with news reports and social media that they are a very good humint type of operation and were reported to have 120,000 assets in the states at one point. The FBI could have very well suspected his return to be something along those lines and kept tabs for those reasons. That is well within their remit.
If Oswald was indeed a straw man communist, another possibility, I'm not convinced that information would have been shared between agencies. The CIA and/or ONI would likely wall that off unless absolutely necessary to protect him or a project. The intel agencies are loath to get cross threaded with the other agencies because their projects could often times be at odds with federal law and the less people know the better.
I guess the short answer, IMO, is that GDM was introduced to Oswald to verify his activities independent of whatever information he gave in interviews to whomever. I rather doubt radio factories in Minsk would have much value. The activities he may have been verifying is hard to say but I suspect actual networks wasn't one of them. The Russians wouldn't have trusted that information to Oswald.
-
13 hours ago, Gerry Down said:
From this it would appear the FBI wanted to know if any foreign networks inside the U.S. would try to make contact with LHO.
In a recent interview, Larry Hancock suggested it was somewhat more the CIAs role to see if LHO would make contact with any foreign network inside the U.S. See 37 to 40 minutes on the below video:
So was it both the FBI and CIA job to investigate to see if LHO was going to make contact with any foreign network inside the U.S.?
I mean if this was the FBIs job, then why would the CIA also be doing this? Surely the CIA should have left this job to the FBI and then the FBI liaison office would make contact with the CIA to inform them if LHO did make contact with any foreign network inside the U.S.
Why would the FBI and CIA independently of one another both be investigating to see if LHO would make contact with any foreign network inside the U.S. ?
@Ron EgeI don't think that would be unusual. In fact, I would expect them both to have concurrent investigations. They both have their own patch to tend and different resources as well as remits. Just as their names imply, the CIA collects intelligence and the FBI investigates federal crimes. The CIA doesn't and has no particular expertise in collecting evidence for a criminal prosecution. Foreign intelligence concerns would be of interest to the FBI but I'm sure they would pass that off.
I'm sure you know this but I don't find it remarkable that they would both have an interest and in fact the ONI was probably looking at him also, although their files seem to have found a burn barrel.
-
2 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:
Some of us, perhaps not you, and perhaps mistakenly, think that Allen Dulles and his ilk signed a deal with the devil, and that we are still paying for it, perhaps even losing a president at their hands.
Oh sure, quite possible. I also think that the two World Wars started basically as ridiculous border disputes and the assassination of Ferdinand. We can thank Russia for that little gem too after they decided to back Serbia sending that war into a large-scale conflict. It wasn't just their joining up with Hitler to start World War Two and trash Poland. I see they're beginning to hint around at another Polish invasion as well as Moldova.
Regardless, I am on record here placing much of the blame on those wars creating PTSD addled vets in the US who ginned up extreme political right wing idealogies that we can see still exist. There was a reason, not entirely unfounded, for the isolationist fervor in the run up to World War Two. It's also the reason (at least partially) for the existence of NATO. There has been no outbreak in violence in NATO countries (aside from internal disputes) since its formulation.
I'm sure many of the vets from those conflicts saw JFK's attempts at warming relations with the Eastern Bloc as near treasonous. Europe, Russia and the UK have been slaughtering each other (and others) for centuries. That's just a fact. NATO's aligning with many of the more unseemly portions of those countries I'm sure was viewed as being pragmatic. Sure, hold your nose while doing it, but it's the lesser of evils etc.
I don't necessarily hold that position but I'm glad it wasn't my choice. Post war Europe was an ugly mess most Americans couldn't imagine. An interesting book on that is Savage Continent: Europe in the Aftermath of World War II by Keith Lowe.
-
4 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:
Bob. - tell us more about your talks with John Loftus. What do you make of his info on the Bush - Dulles - Thyssen connections?
I didn't go down that road with him - it's been a few years. I find John very credible about a number of topics and the Nasi/OSS thing he's very knowledgeable about. That was a heavy part of a writing project I was working on. He investigated the topic for the DoJ and had access to information most wouldn't. Interesting guy.
-
2 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:
After re reading the essay from six years ago it seems the Gehlen deal was the introduction of fascism to the USA. Thanks for your part Allen, hope your still burning.
Oh, I don't think so. Fascists had been alive and well for some time before that. It may have looked different here but much of the thinking of the time was we were better off recruiting fascists to act as a bulwark against Stalin because moderate stripes of the political spectrum would look a lot like Vichy France in the event of aggression from the Soviets. I think Wisner even explicitly stated as such - it may have been someone else - when the stay behinds were developed post World War 2.
As it turns out - I spoke at some length with John Loftus about this - Gehlen was doing what a lot of people were doing. He was basically selling the Allies and the US in particular an intelligence or paper mill. The assets and information he had were either bogus or already compromised well over half the time and Gehlen probably caused more problems and wasted more money than anything else. Sort of like Curveball, Bush's buddy that created the fake intel for the Iraq invasion. Maybe not quite that bad. Agent Garbo is an excellent example Juan Pujol García - Wikipedia.
The intel agencies will often use bogus intelligence to publicly justify actions that have other motives and goals. I believe (but don't remember the details - I haven't reread the beginning thread posts) Gehlen or his "network" was the sparkling source about Soviet nuclear capabilities that were used to drum up massive hysteria about the "missle gap".
Those kinds of shenanigans are harder to do now in the west but still are part of the tool set, especially in Russia, China and a few others. They usually don't have to do that with their own populations but serve up garbage for foreign consumption. In the US, UK and other western democracies effective political and judicial restraint exists as well as vibrant journalistic push back against the story telling. As flawed as those institutions are they're often non-existent elsewhere.
-
Just now, Chris Barnard said:
Tip: maybe you should just try refuting things. At the moment, you’re not going to win any point by crying about originality or hypocrisy. Come on Bob, you can do better than this. 🙂
Win what? I wouldn't refute many of those statements. Some lack cotext. All lack balance.
-
2 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:
Bob, why don’t you try refuting what is being said? Of course you can’t manage that. That would require a modicum of intellect.
Oh yeah you sure showed me what an intellectual giant you are.
Yet another copy and paste that elevates you to the upper reaches challenging intellectual debate.
It literally reads like a cliche'd compendium of beefs that various scholars have had with the US since long before I was born. Like chatgpt. Maybe that's how I'll do the response. It's not that it's entirely or even partially wrong or lacking context it's that it's so unoriginal and hypocritical it's difficult to take seriously.
Fortunately that's not a criticism of you Chris because you couldn't make it even that far.
-
1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:
Geeez, Matt, I wonder why China could be getting closer to Russia?
⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️
———————————————-#RePost
A friend forwarded this article from Chinese media earlier today. It addresses the USA in a way not too dissimilar to the way that Russia does. Of course, in the trilateral world of super-powers, they all manufacture propaganda for the consumption of their own citizenry, as well as for those they wish to acquire the minds of in the international community.
Do you guys have any thoughts on the following?
—————————————————
U.S. Hegemony and Its Perils
Source: Xinhua
Editor: huaxia
2023-02-20 15:03:15
BEIJING, Feb. 20 (Xinhua) -- U.S. Hegemony and Its Perils
February 2023
Contents
Introduction
I. Political Hegemony -- Throwing Its Weight Around
II. Military Hegemony -- Wanton Use of Force
III. Economic Hegemony -- Looting and Exploitation
IV. Technological Hegemony -- Monopoly and Suppression
V. Cultural Hegemony -- Spreading False Narratives
Conclusion
Introduction
Since becoming the world's most powerful country after the two world wars and the Cold War, the United States has acted more boldly to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, pursue, maintain and abuse hegemony, advance subversion and infiltration, and willfully wage wars, bringing harm to the international community.
The United States has developed a hegemonic playbook to stage "color revolutions," instigate regional disputes, and even directly launch wars under the guise of promoting democracy, freedom and human rights. Clinging to the Cold War mentality, the United States has ramped up bloc politics and stoked conflict and confrontation. It has overstretched the concept of national security, abused export controls and forced unilateral sanctions upon others. It has taken a selective approach to international law and rules, utilizing or discarding them as it sees fit, and has sought to impose rules that serve its own interests in the name of upholding a "rules-based international order."
This report, by presenting the relevant facts, seeks to expose the U.S. abuse of hegemony in the political, military, economic, financial, technological and cultural fields, and to draw greater international attention to the perils of the U.S. practices to world peace and stability and the well-being of all peoples.
I. Political Hegemony -- Throwing Its Weight Around
The United States has long been attempting to mold other countries and the world order with its own values and political system in the name of promoting democracy and human rights.
◆ Instances of U.S. interference in other countries' internal affairs abound. In the name of "promoting democracy," the United States practiced a "Neo-Monroe Doctrine" in Latin America, instigated "color revolutions" in Eurasia, and orchestrated the "Arab Spring" in West Asia and North Africa, bringing chaos and disaster to many countries.
In 1823, the United States announced the Monroe Doctrine. While touting an "America for the Americans," what it truly wanted was an "America for the United States."
Since then, the policies of successive U.S. governments toward Latin America and the Caribbean Region have been riddled with political interference, military intervention and regime subversion. From its 61-year hostility toward and blockade of Cuba to its overthrow of the Allende government of Chile, U.S. policy on this region has been built on one maxim-those who submit will prosper; those who resist shall perish.
The year 2003 marked the beginning of a succession of "color revolutions" -- the "Rose Revolution" in Georgia, the "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine and the "Tulip Revolution" in Kyrgyzstan. The U.S. Department of State openly admitted playing a "central role" in these "regime changes." The United States also interfered in the internal affairs of the Philippines, ousting President Ferdinand Marcos Sr. in 1986 and President Joseph Estrada in 2001 through the so-called "People Power Revolutions."
In January 2023, former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo released his new book Never Give an Inch: Fighting for the America I Love. He revealed in it that the United States had plotted to intervene in Venezuela. The plan was to force the Maduro government to reach an agreement with the opposition, deprive Venezuela of its ability to sell oil and gold for foreign exchange, exert high pressure on its economy, and influence the 2018 presidential election.
◆ The U.S. exercises double standards on international rules. Placing its self-interest first, the United States has walked away from international treaties and organizations, and put its domestic law above international law. In April 2017, the Trump administration announced that it would cut off all U.S. funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) with the excuse that the organization "supports, or participates in the management of a programme of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization." The United States quit UNESCO twice in 1984 and 2017. In 2017, it announced leaving the Paris Agreement on climate change. In 2018, it announced its exit from the UN Human Rights Council, citing the organization's "bias" against Israel and failure to protect human rights effectively. In 2019, the United States announced its withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty to seek unfettered development of advanced weapons. In 2020, it announced pulling out of the Treaty on Open Skies.
The United States has also been a stumbling block to biological arms control by opposing negotiations on a verification protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) and impeding international verification of countries' activities relating to biological weapons. As the only country in possession of a chemical weapons stockpile, the United States has repeatedly delayed the destruction of chemical weapons and remained reluctant in fulfilling its obligations. It has become the biggest obstacle to realizing "a world free of chemical weapons."
◆ The United States is piecing together small blocs through its alliance system. It has been forcing an "Indo-Pacific Strategy" onto the Asia-Pacific region, assembling exclusive clubs like the Five Eyes, the Quad and AUKUS, and forcing regional countries to take sides. Such practices are essentially meant to create division in the region, stoke confrontation and undermine peace.
◆ The U.S. arbitrarily passes judgment on democracy in other countries, and fabricates a false narrative of "democracy versus authoritarianism" to incite estrangement, division, rivalry and confrontation. In December 2021, the United States hosted the first "Summit for Democracy," which drew criticism and opposition from many countries for making a mockery of the spirit of democracy and dividing the world. In March 2023, the United States will host another "Summit for Democracy," which remains unwelcome and will again find no support.
II. Military Hegemony -- Wanton Use of Force
The history of the United States is characterized by violence and expansion. Since it gained independence in 1776, the United States has constantly sought expansion by force: it slaughtered Indians, invaded Canada, waged a war against Mexico, instigated the American-Spanish War, and annexed Hawaii. After World War II, the wars either provoked or launched by the United States included the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Kosovo War, the War in Afghanistan, the Iraq War, the Libyan War and the Syrian War, abusing its military hegemony to pave the way for expansionist objectives. In recent years, the U.S. average annual military budget has exceeded 700 billion U.S. dollars, accounting for 40 percent of the world's total, more than the 15 countries behind it combined. The United States has about 800 overseas military bases, with 173,000 troops deployed in 159 countries.
According to the book America Invades: How We've Invaded or been Militarily Involved with almost Every Country on Earth, the United States has fought or been militarily involved with almost all the 190-odd countries recognized by the United Nations with only three exceptions. The three countries were "spared" because the United States did not find them on the map.
◆ As former U.S. President Jimmy Carter put it, the United States is undoubtedly the most warlike nation in the history of the world. According to a Tufts University report,"Introducing the Military Intervention Project: A new Dataset on U.S. Military Interventions, 1776-2019," the United States undertook nearly 400 military interventions globally between those years, 34 percent of which were in Latin America and the Caribbean, 23 percent in East Asia and the Pacific, 14 percent in the Middle East and North Africa, and 13 percent in Europe. Currently, its military intervention in the Middle East and North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa is on the rise.
Alex Lo, a South China Morning Post columnist, pointed out that the United States has rarely distinguished between diplomacy and war since its founding. It overthrew democratically elected governments in many developing countries in the 20th century and immediately replaced them with pro-American puppet regimes. Today, in Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Pakistan and Yemen, the United States is repeating its old tactics of waging proxy, low-intensity, and drone wars.
◆ U.S. military hegemony has caused humanitarian tragedies. Since 2001, the wars and military operations launched by the United States in the name of fighting terrorism have claimed over 900,000 lives with some 335,000 of them civilians, injured millions and displaced tens of millions. The 2003 Iraq War resulted in some 200,000 to 250,000 civilian deaths, including over 16,000 directly killed by the U.S. military, and left more than a million homeless.
The United States has created 37 million refugees around the world. Since 2012, the number of Syrian refugees alone has increased tenfold. Between 2016 and 2019, 33,584 civilian deaths were documented in the Syrian fightings, including 3,833 killed by U.S.-led coalition bombings, half of them women and children. The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) reported on 9 November 2018 that the air strikes launched by U.S. forces on Raqqa alone killed 1,600 Syrian civilians.
The two-decades-long war in Afghanistan devastated the country. A total of 47,000 Afghan civilians and 66,000 to 69,000 Afghan soldiers and police officers unrelated to the September 11 attacks were killed in U.S. military operations, and more than 10 million people were displaced. The war in Afghanistan destroyed the foundation of economic development there and plunged the Afghan people into destitution. After the "Kabul debacle" in 2021, the United States announced that it would freeze some 9.5 billion dollars in assets belonging to the Afghan central bank, a move considered as "pure looting."
In September 2022, Turkish Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu commented at a rally that the United States has waged a proxy war in Syria, turned Afghanistan into an opium field and heroin factory, thrown Pakistan into turmoil, and left Libya in incessant civil unrest. The United States does whatever it takes to rob and enslave the people of any country with underground resources.
The United States has also adopted appalling methods in war. During the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Kosovo War, the War in Afghanistan and the Iraq War, the United States used massive quantities of chemical and biological weapons as well as cluster bombs, fuel-air bombs, graphite bombs and depleted uranium bombs, causing enormous damage on civilian facilities, countless civilian casualties and lasting environmental pollution.
III. Economic Hegemony -- Looting and Exploitation
After World War II, the United States led efforts to set up the Bretton Woods System, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, which, together with the Marshall Plan, formed the international monetary system centered around the U.S. dollar. In addition, the United States has also established institutional hegemony in the international economic and financial sector by manipulating the weighted voting systems, rules and arrangements of international organizations including "approval by 85 percent majority," and its domestic trade laws and regulations. By taking advantage of the dollar's status as the major international reserve currency, the United States is basically collecting "seigniorage" from around the world; and using its control over international organizations, it coerces other countries into serving America's political and economic strategy.
◆ The United States exploits the world's wealth with the help of "seigniorage." It costs only about 17 cents to produce a 100 dollar bill, but other countries had to pony up 100 dollar of actual goods in order to obtain one. It was pointed out more than half a century ago, that the United States enjoyed exorbitant privilege and deficit without tears created by its dollar, and used the worthless paper note to plunder the resources and factories of other nations.
◆ The hegemony of U.S. dollar is the main source of instability and uncertainty in the world economy. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States abused its global financial hegemony and injected trillions of dollars into the global market, leaving other countries, especially emerging economies, to pay the price. In 2022, the Fed ended its ultra-easy monetary policy and turned to aggressive interest rate hike, causing turmoil in the international financial market and substantial depreciation of other currencies such as the Euro, many of which dropped to a 20-year low. As a result, a large number of developing countries were challenged by high inflation, currency depreciation and capital outflows. This was exactly what Nixon's secretary of the treasury John Connally once remarked, with self-satisfaction yet sharp precision, that "the dollar is our currency, but it is your problem."
◆ With its control over international economic and financial organizations, the United States imposes additional conditions to their assistance to other countries. In order to reduce obstacles to U.S. capital inflow and speculation, the recipient countries are required to advance financial liberalization and open up financial markets so that their economic policies would fall in line with America's strategy. According to the Review of International Political Economy, along with the 1,550 debt relief programs extended by the IMF to its 131 member countries from 1985 to 2014, as many as 55,465 additional political conditions had been attached.
◆ The United States willfully suppresses its opponents with economic coercion. In the 1980s, to eliminate the economic threat posed by Japan, and to control and use the latter in service of America's strategic goal of confronting the Soviet Union and dominating the world, the United States leveraged its hegemonic financial power against Japan, and concluded the Plaza Accord. As a result, Yen was pushed up, and Japan was pressed to open up its financial market and reform its financial system. The Plaza Accord dealt a heavy blow to the growth momentum of the Japanese economy, leaving Japan to what was later called "three lost decades."
◆ America's economic and financial hegemony has become a geopolitical weapon. Doubling down on unilateral sanctions and "long-arm jurisdiction," the United States has enacted such domestic laws as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, and the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, and introduced a series of executive orders to sanction specific countries, organizations or individuals. Statistics show that U.S. sanctions against foreign entities increased by 933 percent from 2000 to 2021. The Trump administration alone has imposed more than 3,900 sanctions, which means three sanctions per day. So far, the United States had or has imposed economic sanctions on nearly 40 countries across the world, including Cuba, China, Russia, the DPRK, Iran and Venezuela, affecting nearly half of the world's population. "The United States of America" has turned itself into "the United States of Sanctions." And "long-arm jurisdiction" has been reduced to nothing but a tool for the United States to use its means of state power to suppress economic competitors and interfere in normal international business. This is a serious departure from the principles of liberal market economy that the United States has long boasted.
IV. Technological Hegemony -- Monopoly and Suppression
The United States seeks to deter other countries' scientific, technological and economic development by wielding monopoly power, suppression measures and technology restrictions in high-tech fields.
◆ The United States monopolizes intellectual property in the name of protection. Taking advantage of the weak position of other countries, especially developing ones, on intellectual property rights and the institutional vacancy in relevant fields, the United States reaps excessive profits through monopoly. In 1994, the United States pushed forward the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), forcing the Americanized process and standards in intellectual property protection in an attempt to solidify its monopoly on technology.
In the 1980s, to contain the development of Japan's semiconductor industry, the United States launched the "301" investigation, built bargaining power in bilateral negotiations through multilateral agreements, threatened to label Japan as conducting unfair trade, and imposed retaliatory tariffs, forcing Japan to sign the U.S.-Japan Semiconductor Agreement. As a result, Japanese semiconductor enterprises were almost completely driven out of global competition, and their market share dropped from 50 percent to 10 percent. Meanwhile, with the support of the U.S. government, a large number of U.S. semiconductor enterprises took the opportunity and grabbed larger market share.
◆ The United States politicizes, weaponizes technological issues and uses them as ideological tools. Overstretching the concept of national security, the United States mobilized state power to suppress and sanction Chinese company Huawei, restricted the entry of Huawei products into the U.S. market, cut off its supply of chips and operating systems, and coerced other countries to ban Huawei from undertaking local 5G network construction. It even talked Canada into unwarrantedly detaining Huawei's CFO Meng Wanzhou for nearly three years.
The United States has fabricated a slew of excuses to clamp down on China's high-tech enterprises with global competitiveness, and has put more than 1,000 Chinese enterprises on sanction lists. In addition, the United States has also imposed controls on biotechnology, artificial intelligence and other high-end technologies, reinforced export restrictions, tightened investment screening, suppressed Chinese social media apps such as TikTok and WeChat, and lobbied the Netherlands and Japan to restrict exports of chips and related equipment or technology to China.
The United States has also practiced double standards in its policy on China-related technological professionals. To sideline and suppress Chinese researchers, since June 2018, visa validity has been shortened for Chinese students majoring in certain high-tech-related disciplines, repeated cases have occurred where Chinese scholars and students going to the United States for exchange programs and study were unjustifiably denied and harassed, and large-scale investigation on Chinese scholars working in the United States was carried out.
◆ The United States solidifies its technological monopoly in the name of protecting democracy. By building small blocs on technology such as the "chips alliance" and "clean network," the United States has put "democracy" and "human rights" labels on high-technology, and turned technological issues into political and ideological issues, so as to fabricate excuses for its technological blockade against other countries. In May 2019, the United States enlisted 32 countries to the Prague 5G Security Conference in the Czech Republic and issued the Prague Proposal in an attempt to exclude China's 5G products. In April 2020, then U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced the "5G clean path," a plan designed to build technological alliance in the 5G field with partners bonded by their shared ideology on democracy and the need to protect "cyber security." The measures, in essence, are the U.S. attempts to maintain its technological hegemony through technological alliances.
◆ The United States abuses its technological hegemony by carrying out cyber attacks and eavesdropping. The United States has long been notorious as an "empire of hackers," blamed for its rampant acts of cyber theft around the world. It has all kinds of means to enforce pervasive cyber attacks and surveillance, including using analog base station signals to access mobile phones for data theft, manipulating mobile apps, infiltrating cloud servers, and stealing through undersea cables. The list goes on.
U.S. surveillance is indiscriminate. All can be targets of its surveillance, be they rivals or allies, even leaders of allied countries such as former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and several French Presidents. Cyber surveillance and attacks launched by the United States such as "Prism," "Dirtbox," "Irritant Horn" and "Telescreen Operation" are all proof that the United States is closely monitoring its allies and partners. Such eavesdropping on allies and partners has already causedworldwide outrage. Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, a website that has exposed U.S. surveillance programs, said that "do not expect a global surveillance superpower to act with honor or respect. There is only one rule: there are no rules."
V. Cultural Hegemony -- Spreading False Narratives
The global expansion of American culture is an important part of its external strategy. The United States has often used cultural tools to strengthen and maintain its hegemony in the world.
◆ The United States embeds American values in its products such as movies. American values and lifestyle are a tied product to its movies and TV shows, publications, media content, and programs by the government-funded non-profitcultural institutions. It thus shapes a cultural and public opinion space in which American culture reigns and maintains cultural hegemony. In his article The Americanization of the World, John Yemma, an American scholar, exposed the real weapons in U.S. cultural expansion: theHollywood, the image design factories on Madison Avenue and the production lines of Mattel Company and Coca-Cola.
There are various vehicles the United States uses to keep its cultural hegemony. American movies are the most used; they now occupy more than 70 percent of the world's market share. The United States skilfully exploits its cultural diversity to appeal to various ethnicities. When Hollywood movies descend on the world, they scream the American values tied to them.
◆ American cultural hegemony not only shows itself in "direct intervention," but also in "media infiltration" and as "a trumpet for the world." U.S.-dominated Western media has a particularly important role in shaping global public opinion in favor of U.S. meddling in the internal affairs of other countries.
The U.S. government strictly censors all social media companies and demands their obedience. Twitter CEO Elon Musk admitted on 27 December 2022 that all social media platforms work with the U.S. government to censor content, reported Fox Business Network. Public opinion in the United States is subject to government intervention to restrict all unfavorable remarks. Google often makes pages disappear.
U.S. Department of Defense manipulates social media. In December 2022, The Intercept, an independent U.S. investigative website, revealed that in July 2017, U.S. Central Command official Nathaniel Kahler instructed Twitter's public policy team to augment the presence of 52 Arabic-language accounts on a list he sent, six of which were to be given priority. One of the six was dedicated to justifying U.S. drone attacks in Yemen, such as by claiming that the attacks were precise and killed only terrorists, not civilians. Following Kahler's directive, Twitter put those Arabic-language accounts on a "white list" to amplify certain messages.
◆The United States practices double standards on the freedom of the press. It brutally suppresses and silences media of other countries by various means. The United States and Europe bar mainstream Russian media such as Russia Today and the Sputnik from their countries. Platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and YouTube openly restrict official accounts of Russia. Netflix, Apple and Google have removed Russian channels and applications from their services and app stores. Unprecedented draconian censorship is imposed on Russia-related contents.
◆The United States abuses its cultural hegemony to instigate "peaceful evolution" in socialist countries. It sets up news media and cultural outfits targeting socialist countries. It pours staggering amounts of public funds into radio and TV networks to support their ideological infiltration, and these mouthpieces bombard socialist countries in dozens of languages with inflammatory propaganda day and night.
The United States uses misinformation as a spear to attack other countries, and has built an industrial chain around it: there are groups and individuals making up stories, and peddling them worldwide to mislead public opinion with the support of nearly limitless financial resources.
Conclusion
While a just cause wins its champion wide support, an unjust one condemns its pursuer to be an outcast. The hegemonic, domineering, and bullying practices of using strength to intimidate the weak, taking from others by force and subterfuge, and playing zero-sum games are exerting grave harm. The historical trends of peace, development, cooperation, and mutual benefit are unstoppable. The United States has been overriding truth with its power and trampling justice to serve self-interest. These unilateral, egoistic and regressive hegemonic practices have drawn growing, intense criticism and opposition from the international community.
Countries need to respect each other and treat each other as equals. Big countries should behave in a manner befitting their status and take the lead in pursuing a new model of state-to-state relations featuring dialogue and partnership, not confrontation or alliance. China opposes all forms of hegemonism and power politics, and rejects interference in other countries' internal affairs. The United States must conduct serious soul-searching. It must critically examine what it has done, let go of its arrogance and prejudice, and quit its hegemonic, domineering and bullying practices.
Link:
https://english.news.cn/20230220/d3a4291d44f2499ea20710ae272ece72/c.html
Written by chat gpt. Read it yourself.
Next
-
11 hours ago, Bob Ness said:
No, they didn't W. As you can see youtube is their education.
You and Matt are new here. We've been through this. I wake up next to a scientist AND CLINICIAN (board certified in three specialties) with thousands of patients who is far and away more knowledgeable and experienced than me, you, Matt or the YouTubers you're so proud of.
Thanks for your opinion. I'll take her experience, research and education.
-
2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:
Yeah, Chris, but fortunately, we have non-scientists like you and Mathew to explain the science to us, eh?
Did you and Mathew ever pass Immunology 101 or Virology 101 when you were in medical school?
Geez... 🤥
No, they didn't W. As you can see youtube is their education.
-
9 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:
I guess you don't know what the left box is. It's not "left" to understand history. In the not-so-distant past, many Republicans were for things like gun control, abortion rights, and protecting social security. Things flipped about 30 years ago, where a Repub had to be hard-line on these issues or risk losing his base, ginned-up by the NRA, the Christian Right, and Fox News.
It's been but 10 years since Romney was the Repub nominee, after all. And only 6 since Jeb Bush was considered the front-runner. Don't get suckered into thinking Trump represents the real Republican Party, or whatever. He will fade and moderates will rise to the top. That's how it's supposed to work in a Democracy. Trump's reign was an aberration.
Are you sourcing Fox's time traveler hahaha?
These people will believe anything.
Thankyou, Tucker Carlson!!
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
I have no doubt Larry that the kitchen sink won't be included in any potential judgements against Fox News, Fox Corp or anyone else the plaintiffs' attorneys have decided to fold into the suit which are numerable and largely have been left intact to go to trial. The reason for that, as you well know is that the judges in the numerous attempts at dismissing the case have disagreed with Fox's attorneys and determined these is a reasonable chance a jury would find in Smartmatic's favor.
The examples given by Fox's lawyers above are ridiculous attempts to somehow compare them with Fox's callous disregard for not only the financial damage to Dominion but also threats against Dominion employees, which are deplorable to me. I doubt you would approve of such consequences either. Fox continued to air demonstrably provable lies peddled by their on-air staff to millions of gullible marks they call an audience. Should they be able to short circuit some aspects of the suit (which I'm sure they will) they stand a fair likelyhood IMO of proving what is patently obvious to any objective observer of this entire grift.
I was saying it at the time on this board and will repeat it now (as you weren't around for that conversation) the "stolen election" grift was entirely engineered to capture money in the form of "defense funds" by people who can count clicks for their clients. At every moment of every news cycle (which essentially acts as a national advertisement) people like me are counting dollars, geographically segmented and donated to Trump, Guiliani, Lindell, Powell ad infinitum for what they themselves knew was a con job. After the wild success Trump had of sucking money out of the pockets of these people everyone was stepping up to the trough. It wasn't me they were conning; it was their own supporters. I can roughly tell you how they did it but don't have time for lengthy explanations.
IMO Fox, OANN and a few others were a major part of promoting that and in my view did it intentionally. To try to claim they were fulfilling their constitutionally protected rights is akin to saying Madoff was just trying to make a buck through hard work and perseverance.
I actually have to go prostitute myself and may not get back to you for a bit but I appreciate your perspective regardless. Of course, we don't have all the facts and this is largely conjecture in a legal sense but from my personal perspective and opinion, I think these people are a disgrace.