De voorpagina van de Volkskrant van maandag 19 mei 2014 opende met de kop:
Het is lang niet altijd de schuld van Brussel.
De nrc.next opende op maandag 19 mei 2014 over de gehele breedte van de voorpagina met de kop:
Hallo Brussel, hoor je mij?
Donderdag kunnen we stemmen voor het Europees Parlement. Is Brussel een onneembare bastion? Nee hoor, als burger kun je elke dag invloed hebben.
'Geen Jorwert zonder Brussel, geen Brussel zonder Jorwert'
Geert Mak. Abel Herzberg-lezing. 22 september 2013
De propaganda van de 'vrije pers' is al geruime tijd goed op stoom gekomen. De gevestigde orde moet worden verdedigd en de spreekbuizen van de neoliberale elite schuwen geen enkele leugen om de belangen van de economische en politieke macht te beschermen. Wat de propagandisten verzuimen te vermelden is dat de EU tevens de Europese Unie van de NAVO is, onder aanvoering van de macht in Washington en op Wall street. Vandaar dat Geert Mak op bevrijdingsdag, 5 mei 2014, op de Nederlandse televisie meedeelde dat 'Europa' wordt bedreigd door 'meneer Poetin' en dat die 'meneer' het Europa van de NAVO 'dwingt om meer aan defensie uit te geven,' waarmee 'De Chroniqueur van Europa' de onjuiste bewering van de interviewer bevestigde dat 'De meeste Europese landen véél te weinig [besteden] aan hun defensie-uitgaven.'
Aangezien ook dit een leugen is, in het leven geholpen door het westers militair-industrieel complex, wordt het interessant te weten waarover de Makkianen nog meer onjuistheden verspreiden, maar vooral ook wat ze allemaal verzwijgen. Onder andere het volgende feit:
Enhanced capabilities and bigger defence budget required
By Nigel Chamberlain, NATO Watch
Opening remarks by Secretary General Rasmussen at his monthly press conference on 19 May 2014
Over the past few weeks I have visited many of our Allies in Central and Eastern Europe which are marking significant anniversaries of their accession to NATO. Russia's aggression against Ukraine has posed a challenge to a fundamental principle: the right of sovereign states to choose their own path. On 25 May Ukraine will hold presidential elections, an important opportunity to find a peaceful way forward for a united Ukraine. The new security situation in Europe is less predictable and more dangerous and this has implications for NATO, so forward land, sea and air deployments have been reinforced.
Right now, around 6,000 troops from across NATO are taking part in exercise Steadfast Javelin in Estonia. This is a significant exercise, aiming to test our ability to repel an attack against an Ally. It includes infantry, fighter jets and also a cyber security team. In early June, NATO defence ministers will meet in Brussels to pave the way for our Wales Summit in September. We will discuss further steps to reinforce our collective defence.
And we are considering how we can build on our Connected Forces Initiative to make our exercises more frequent and more demanding. To maintain credible defence and deterrence, we need credible capabilities which will cost money. We are seeing encouraging efforts to start reversing the trend in declining defence budgets, and we see greater multinational cooperation.
There follows an edited version of the Q & A session:
Q1. Peter Spiegel, The Financial Times: We've heard President Putin again today declare that he wants forces that have been arrayed along the Ukrainian border to return to base. NATO and the US have previously provided satellite imagery and other intelligence to show this hasn't happened. Do you have any evidence today that this has happened yet? And should we still believe Vladimir Putin when he makes these declarations? The Ukrainians have repeatedly requested military assistance in the form of anti-tank and anti-aircraft weaponry. Do you have a view as to whether it's advisable for NATO members to provide that assistance?
A1. Secretary General: We haven't seen any evidence at all that the Russians have started withdrawal of troops from the Ukrainian borders. I strongly regret that because a withdrawal of Russian troops would be a first important contribution to de-escalating the crisis. It is for individual Allies to decide whether they will deliver military equipment to any country. I don't think nations need recommendations from my side in that respect.
Q2. Wall Street Journal: I was wondering if there's any sort of consideration being given to the shipping of ground (inaudible)… permanent basing for temporary deployment aside from exercises. Is there any movement or thought in that direction?
A2. Secretary General: These are indeed questions that are under consideration for the time being. I think the NATO summit in Wales should adopt a readiness action plan to take account of the dramatically changed security situation in Europe, including updating of existing defence plans, development of new defence plans, enhanced exercises and also appropriate deployment.
Q3. NPR/CBS: Have you reached out to the Russians at all? Have you tried to make any contact with Russian officials? And what do you think, at this point, the prospects are for any kind of resumption of cooperation within the NRC? There are some, including the Deputy Secretary General, who said maybe lessons should be drawn from having gone back to business as usual after Georgia a little bit too soon.
A3. Secretary General: We have taken a two-track decision. On the one hand, we have suspended all practical cooperation with Russia. On the other hand, we have also decided to keep open the channel for political and diplomatic dialogue within the NATO-Russia Council. We had a meeting in the NATO-Russia Council on the 5th of March, after the crisis started. And we have suggested another meeting next week. But so far we haven't heard from the Russians. So we are open to a political dialogue.
Q4. Georgian Public Broadcaster: Two days ago I read in the Romanian press your interview which states that you have no doubt that Russia will increase pressure on Moldova as well as possibly on Georgia. The signing of this association agreement is coming. This topic is crucial for us. Can you specify for us what do you mean? The Georgian Defence Minister has asked NATO to install air defences and other military systems in Georgia. You said in Bratislava that it would be a matter of negotiation with individual countries. But still, what is your position about it?
A4. Secretary General: We have seen Russia put a lot of pressure on countries in their near neighbourhood as they are approaching the EU for progress on the association agreement. I expect that we will see the same as Moldova and Georgia are going to finalize these agreements with the EU. NATO works with Georgia within the NATO-Georgia Commission on practical, military-to-military cooperation. When it comes to more concrete delivery or establishment of military capabilities, it is for individual Allies to make those decisions and engage with Georgia.
Q5. Nawab Khan (ph) from the Kuwait News Agency: The situation in Libya has been deteriorating in the last few days. So is NATO going to offer any kind of cooperation to the Libyan authorities to restore calm and security? There are going to be elections in Syria next month. So do you think these elections will contribute to solving the crisis or make it more complicated?
A5. Secretary General: Last year we received a request from the Libyan authorities for NATO assistance to help develop their security sector. We responded positively. Unfortunately, we have had some difficulties in engaging with the Libyan authorities, also because of instability and lack of security. But once the Libyan authorities are ready to engage with us in a way that also ensures a safe environment for our assistance, we are ready to assist Libya to develop their security sector. Provided that elections in Syria are free, fair, transparent, and produce an outcome that is considered a true reflection of the will of the Syrian people, I think they could contribute to a political solution.
Q6. Udor Rawicky (ph) from Real (ph) Northwest News Agency: Don't you think that the ongoing security operation in the eastern Ukraine can disturb the whole presidential elections? And don't you call the Ukraine government to show restraint?
A6. Secretary General: Of course the lack of stability in the east is a matter of concern. And obviously there is a clear relationship that instability in the eastern regions will make it difficult to conduct elections in that part of the country in an orderly manner. And that's exactly why we urge the armed pro-Russian separatist groups to stop their illegal activities and allow presidential elections to go forward in an orderly manner. I also think Russia could play a much more constructive role, living up to their Geneva commitments, and stop their support for these armed groups.
Q7. Anna Sweetska (ph), (inaudible): You have mentioned that you have visited some central and eastern European countries recently. We can see a divergence of views on the level of the Russian threat within NATO and the EU. How they see the threat? And do you think this makes united and decisive action by NATO more difficult?
A7. Secretary General: So far, you have seen a clear demonstration of unity within our Alliance when it comes to a number of immediate steps we have taken to reinforce collective defences. We move in a unified manner. Concerns expressed by eastern European Allies are definitely not exaggerated and must be taken seriously.
Q8. Nicolas Gros-Verhyde, Bruxelles2 and Ouest-France: Will you go to the Beach of Normandy on 6 June for the anniversary of the Second War? And do you have some intention of meeting Vladimir Putin? Do you think your future after the General Secretary for NATO is at European Union?
A8. Secretary General: No, it's not foreseen that I will go to participate in the Normandy commemoration which, in my opinion, is not NATO business. I haven't started reflections or planning my future for the very reason that I'm very much focused on my tasks at hand, the NATO Summit in September and of course the ongoing Ukraine crisis.
Q9. Adrian Croft, Reuters: NATO officials have been involved in a number of talks with the Ukrainians about energy safety and security. Could you tell us what role you envisage for NATO in helping Ukraine with energy security? Spiegel reported yesterday that you said that NATO military planners said it would be difficult to defend the Baltics by conventional means. Are you reconsidering your 1997 commitment not to place nuclear weapons on the territory of new member states?
A9. Secretary General: We have sent a small team of civilian experts to assist the Ukrainians in improving security of their civilian nuclear plants. On the Baltic states, rest assured that we have all plans in place to ensure effective defence and protection of all Allies against any threat, and we have all the means to do it. We have to adapt accordingly to review our defence plans, enhance our exercises, and also consider appropriate deployment. I do not foresee any NATO request to change the content of the NATO-Russia Founding Act.
Q10. Ito, Japanese Daily (inaudible): The German Chancellor Ms. Merkel said something negative to increase defence budget because this problem cannot be solved by military. It's a little bit contradictory to your appeal. What do you think about it?
A10. Secretary General: I don't think we have a disagreement because I agree that there is no military solution to the crisis in Ukraine. We are all for a political solution to the crisis in Ukraine. When I speak about the need for increased defence investments, I'm more speaking about the broader, long-term, strategic perspectives. My point is that the trend of reducing defence budgets must be reversed. European Allies must invest more in defence.
Q11. Juen Navata (ph), Global News Japanese News Agency: Recently there is a strong tension concerning the South China Sea among Vietnam, Philippines, China. What do you see in this situation?
A11. Secretary General: The situation in East Asia is a matter of concern. And we urge all nations in the region to seek peaceful solutions to disputes, and live up to their international commitments. I think China has a particular responsibility as a major power, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council.
Met andere woorden: onder leiding van Washington en Wall Street bereidt de NAVO van Geert Mak's 'Geen Jorwert zonder Brussel' zich ook voor op een mogelijke oorlog met China over de vitale grondstoffen in het gebied van de Zuid Chinese Zee. De NAVO-leden zijn daartoe verplicht, want ze dienen in actie te komen zodra één van de bondgenoten in een gewapend conflict met een niet NAVO-lid betrokken raakt. En aangezien de Amerikaanse hegemonie voorschrijft dat alleen de VS kan bepalen wat in de wereld gebeurt, hebben de eerste schermutselingen met China al plaats gevonden. Op de voorpagina van de International Herald Tribune van vrijdag 1 juni 2012 berichtte de krant onder de kop 'U.S.-China tensions grow at sea' dat 'Naval test of strength revolves around control of potential of energy source.' Na de context duidelijk te hebben gemaakt, namelijk energiebronnen, vervolgde de Herald Tribune:
Het mag duidelijk zijn dat de Europese burgers van 'Geen Jorwert zonder Brussel' hier niet of nauwelijks van op de hoogte zijn, laat staan dat ze een oordeel hierover kunnen uitspreken. Oorlog of vrede wordt bepaald door de machtige elite, ook in een neoliberale 'democratie.' De propaganda op de voorpagina van de westerse kranten mag dan wel claimen dat de EU-'burger elke dag invloed' kan uitoefenen, maar niet zodra het om de belangen van de elite gaat.
Superficially, a recent squabble in the South China Sea was over rare corals, clams and sharks that Philippine Navy seamen were trying to seize from a half-dozen Chinese fishing boats -- until two Chinese Marine craft intervened. After tense hours in the tropical waters of the Scarborough Shoal, the Philippine Navy Ship -- a refitted U.S. Coast Guard cutter -- withdrew. But the real stakes were far larger, as the insistent claims of sovereignity over the shoal by the Philippine and Chinese governments since the standoff in April have made clear. The clash intensified longstanding disputes over the strategic and potentially energy-rich area that have become more urgent as the United States and China expand their naval power in the region. 'We're just pawns,' said Roberto Romulo, a former Philippine foreign secretary who argues that China is flexing its muscles to gain unimpeded access to vast reserves of natural gas and oil believed to be buried under the South China Sea. 'China is testing the United States, that's all it is. And China is eating America's lunch in Southeast Asia.' A senior Chinese military officer dismissed any legitimate role for the United States in the South China Sea.
Zie: http://stanvanhoucke.blogspot.nl/2012/12/deskundigen-50.htmlHet mag duidelijk zijn dat de Europese burgers van 'Geen Jorwert zonder Brussel' hier niet of nauwelijks van op de hoogte zijn, laat staan dat ze een oordeel hierover kunnen uitspreken. Oorlog of vrede wordt bepaald door de machtige elite, ook in een neoliberale 'democratie.' De propaganda op de voorpagina van de westerse kranten mag dan wel claimen dat de EU-'burger elke dag invloed' kan uitoefenen, maar niet zodra het om de belangen van de elite gaat.
De commerciële massamedia zijn zo gecorrumpeerd geraakt dat ze voor een deel zelfs niet eens meer weten dat ze corrupt zijn. Ik bedoel dit: Geert Mak weet maar al te goed dat hij de kluit belazerd. En ik begrijp dat ook, als nakomertje heeft hij vanaf kindsbeen af zich moeten manifesteren om tegenover zijn veel oudere broers en zusters gehoord te worden. Hij bezit een overmatige geldingsdrift, en die pathologie is ongeneeslijk. Inmiddels weet hij dat zijn boeken over Europa en de VS nu al gedateerd zijn, en dus moet hij alles op alles te zetten om toch maar weer gehoord te worden. Hij kan niet anders dan roepen dat het dorp Jorwert, dat hem beroemd maakte, niet kan voortbestaan zonder het neoliberale Brussel. Naast zijn verslaving aan aandacht, speelt bij hem nog een element. Mak weet dat zijn roem na zijn dood als sneeuw voor de zon zal verdwijnen omdat dan duidelijk wordt hoe erg hij de plank heeft misgeslagen. En dus wil hij op dit moment gehoord worden, nu het nog kan. Het weerzinwekkende is alleen dat Geert Mak, die geen eigen kinderen heeft, de kinderen en kleinkinderen van anderen opzadelt met een desastreuze toekomst. Hoe dan ook, dit fenomeen is nog te begrijpen, moeilijker wordt het om te doorgronden waarom de eerste de beste letterknecht van de mainstream-pers zoveel leugens kan verspreiden. Het lijkt erop alsof ze, net als Geert Mak, geen waardigheid bezitten, en zelfs geen zelfrespect. Maar waarom niet? Aan welke psychische stoornis lijden zij? Hoe erg het allemaal is laten de makers van de Amerikaanse documentaire Shadows of Liberty (2012) zien. Als motto van hun film hebben ze de uitspraak van de Britse revolutionaire vrijdenker Thomas Paine genomen:
When men yield up the exclusive privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon.
Het is precies dat waar wij nu getuige van zijn: een meedogenloze economische macht gesteund door corrupte politici en een al even corrupte mainstream-pers. Shadows of Liberty belicht
stories you will not be told on radio, in newspapers or on television: a clash between two worlds. Big media corporations spinning public perception for profit versus the defenders of truth who stand for liberty and democracy.
De Amerikaanse journaliste Amy Goodman van Democracy Now! wijst op de paradox dat
in this country, the most powerful country on earth, it is actually so difficult to get information, especially outside our borders, not to mention what is going on inside this country.
Public information, the news we rely on to learn about what is happening in the world, to learn about one another is basically in the hands of commercial enterprises.
Giant media corporations, Time Warner, Disney and so forth, get to decide what is news, what is newsworthy and what is not newsworthy.
You have a commercial driven journalism that has no interest in poor people. They are basically written out of the picture altogether. And we have a system that tells us what people in power are interested in and what they want to talk about.
De journalist Julien Assange, oprichter van WikiLeaks, merkt terecht op: What the press is pushing is distortion, lies…
De Amerikaanse journalist en media-criticus Norman Solomon:
We are in a profound crisis of democracy. You can't choke off discourse and have a free society.
De informatie die u aantreft op mijn weblog aangaande de westerse journalistiek kan en mag niet in de mainstream-media gegeven worden. De Nederlandse massamedia volgen de Amerikaanse. Zij zijn de norm. Waarover zij niet berichten, bericht ook de polderpers niet. Zo wordt bewust vitale informatie geweerd. De censuur en zelfcensuur werkt in een neoliberale 'democratie' even doeltreffend als in een dictatuur, door het feit dat de media in bezit zijn van een handvol grote concerns, die het als handelswaar zien. Zo wordt de NRC nu opnieuw verkocht, omdat mede-eigenaar, SP-multimiljonair Derk Sauer, er winst mee hoopt te maken.
John Nichols, auteur en journalist van The Nation Magazine: This country was founded on the idea that when you gave citizens the information they needed, they could govern themselves.
Shadows of Liberty: The founders of the U.S. gave citizens the fundamental right to a free press.
De Amerikaanse hoogleraar en journalist Robert McChesney: One of the primary reasons for the freedom of press was that it was the only way that people outside of power could keep the government from becoming an empire. Stop militarization, stop the corruption, the secrecy, the cronyism. That was the function of the free press.
Amy Goodman: There is a reason why our profession, journalism, is the only profession explicitly protected by the Constitution, because we are supposed to be holding those in power accountable, asking the critical questions… It is simply information that is power. It's information that frees us, because when people get information they can then decide what to do.
Janine Jackson, 'Program Director of FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting), and the co-host and co-producer of FAIR's syndicated radio show CounterSpin --a weekly program of media criticism airing on more than 150 stations around the country':
Media is the conversation we have as a society. It is the way we learn about the world. It is the way we learn about one another. We see the range of public debate constrained because there may be many things that citizens of democratic societies need to know about that private corporations may not be interested in telling them.
Deepa Kumar, 'an associate professor of media studies and Middle Eastern studies at Rutgers University (New Jersey)':
A recent study found that anywhere between 40 and 70 percent of what is considered news is an idea that came out of a PR-department. The media should have a social responsibility. Unfortunately that does not happen in the current context.
President Ronald Reagan: Government is not the solution to our problem, government ís the problem.
John Nichols: Ronald Reagan believed the answer to any concern, any question as regards how to create a good media-system was to get government oud of the way.
Ronald Reagan op 29 maart 1985 tegenover de 'Ronny, Ronny' schreeuwende speculanten op de beurs van Wall Street: Driving the Bears back into permanent hibernation we are going to turn the Bull loose.
Deepa Kumar: Their whole model was the idea that if you remove all controls and regulations, and allow the free market rip, then everything would be fine, everything would be wonderful. In reality what it does is to allow a handful of giant corporations to come in and gobble up everything, and these conglomerates don't see journalism as actually vein central and essential to the functioning of democracy. Their mains interest is making profit.
David Simon. Auteur en journalist, Creator of 'The Wire': Capitalism is not the best judge of what is good for society.
Norman Solomon. Journalist en Founder of 'Institute for Public Accuracy' over de mainstream-journalistiek: The current mission is to sell things, to delude and to deceive, to do damage control when unpleasant stories come up.
Binnen deze context opereren de Makkianen. Zonder enige norm en waarde zijn ze bereid en in staat om de grofste leugens te verkopen om er zelf beter van te worden. Op het moment dat ze worden betrapt kunnen ze niets anders dan zwijgen. Vandaar dat geen één van de journalisten die ik sinds 2005 bekritiseer durft te reageren. Lafheid is misschien wel hun voornaamste karaktereigenschap. Volgende keer meer.
Well we know what they want. They want more for themselves, and less for everybody else, but I'll tell you what they don't want - they don't want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don't want well informed, well educated people capable of critical thinking. They're not interested in that - that doesn't help them. That's against their interests. That's right. They don't want people that are smart enough to sit around a kitchen table, and think about how badly they're getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years ago. They don't want they. You know what they want? Obedient workers - Obedient workers, people who are just smart enough to run the machines, and do that paper work. And just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of overtime, and vanishing pension that disappear the minute you go to collect it, and now they're coming for your social security money. They want your fucking retirement money. They want it back so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street, and you know something? They'll get it - they'll get it all from you sooner or later cause they own this fucking place. It's a big club, and you ain't in it. You, and I are not in The Big Club.
George Carlin.
2 opmerkingen:
Persbericht van de Rijksoverheid: Minister Hennis bezoekt Israël
Je weet natuurlijk dat het zo gaat, maar je verwacht niet dat het zo open en bloot gebeurt. En dat niemand hier op reageert vind ik onvoorstelbaar.
Hallo Sonja,
Naar aanleiding van je reactie kwam het volgende in me op. Mensen die weten hoe het zit kunnen alleen publiceren via vrije media op internet. En zij die de versie van de gevestigde media geloven hebben geen reden om te reageren. Ik denk dat dat voor een deel de relatieve stilte rond dit soort onderwerpen verklaart. En dan is er het gebrek aan interesse, de moeheid van 'altijd het zelfde liedje', het gevoel van machteloosheid en het 'te verwend zijn in het westen' om echt om je heen te kunnen en willen kijken. (Als je leven veel te moeilijk is kom je daar trouwens ook niet echt makkelijk aan toe). En natuurlijk het verstikkende geweld van de oppervlakkige consumptiesamenleving die wordt aangewakkerd door 'het dom houden' via reclame, voorgekookte culturele programma's, de gevestigde media, het gerieflijk denken in abstracties, etc. Nou ja, ik kan ook nog noemen het gezapige geloof in het makkelijke eigen onderbuikgelijk, het in slaap gesuste geweten, luiheid, het niet willen aangaan van pijnlijke confrontaties e.d. maar als ik hierover blijf nadenken wordt de lijst kwalen waar we aan leiden erg moedeloosmakend steeds maar langer en langer... Beter is het denk ik om de oorzaken te zoeken en niet de oneindige lijst van symptomen in zijn geheel te willen benoemen. Daarom hou ik het voorlopig op 'niet graag wakker willen worden' en op de mechanismen die dat van buitenaf voeden en in stand houden. Mechanismen die bewust door 'de gevestigde orde' op de massa worden losgelaten. Veel politici en vertegenwoordigers van andere elites zie ik trouwens meer als slachtoffers van die mechanismen dan als beheersers ervan. Ik geloof bijvoorbeeld dat mensen als Mark Rutte, Frans Timmermans en Geert Mak eerder meelopers zijn dan bewuste intriganten. Waarschijnlijk zullen het schokkende gebeurtenissen zijn die ons wakker schudden en ook helpt de informatie die ons via de vrije media bereikt. Verder geloof ik dat er tegenwoordig veel meer mensen zijn die echt iets van belangrijke wereldgebeurtenissen begrijpen dan bijvoorbeeld dertig jaar geleden en ik hoop dat die trend zich doorzet en dat we op den duur echt betere tijden tegemoet gaan. In ieder geval zijn er in mijn ogen veel bewonderenswaardige mensen die zich daar enorm voor inzetten. (Iets wat ik van mijzelf eerlijk gezegd niet direct durf te zeggen. Ik meen tamelijk veel te zien en te begrijpen maar dat omzetten in maatschappelijk geëngageerde daden ligt op een of andere manier niet echt op mijn weg).
Met vriendelijke groet en succes met alles,
Vincent Brunott
Een reactie posten