Zoeken in deze blog 🔎🔎

zaterdag 28 september 2019

Neoliberalism: The Ideology that Dares not Speak its Name



Neoliberalism: The Ideology that Dares not Speak its Name

 Facebook
Photograph Source: Coco Curranski – CC BY 2.0
The question, “What is neoliberalism?” invites a response similar to the old canard about art: “I don’t know what it is, but I know it when I see it”. Unlike art, which seldom rears its head outside a rarified, specially designated setting, neoliberalism is everywhere, which is why we seldom acknowledge its ubiquity, even as we endure its predations on every aspect of our lives.
If neoconservatism is late-stage capitalism on rage-inducing steroids, ranting about imaginary external threats, then neoliberalism is peak capitalism on hallucinogenic horse tranquilizers, dreaming about itself. Unlike its bug-eyed, more visibly bloodthirsty counterpart, neoliberalism doesn’t appear when the occasion demands it, but remains thoroughly entrenched in everything it touches, leaving nothing untouched or unscathed.
The word itself brings to mind a host of vague concepts that add up to little in terms of understanding just what it is exactly. Can it be described as “free market fundamentalism”, the pushing through of democratic sounding reforms to jump-start a global feeding frenzy on another country’s resources? “The stealth deliverance of violence (economic and military) under an internationally agreed upon humanitarian framework, as opposed to a boots-on-the-ground occupation” might be closer to the mark. Or maybe it’s just some guy on a mountain bike staring at sunrise in an online video ad touting “Global Solutions”.
Whatever it is, you suffer under it gratefully, perhaps dimly aware of a darker, less “tolerant” age when you could shut off communication with the outside world long enough to sleep. Or perhaps, you can’t imagine not being tethered to a radioactive surveillance device that is collating your genome sequence in order to sell you a healthcare plan, or better cater to your growing fascination with assault weapons after being told for the umpteenth time that your password is incorrect.
Neoliberalism, under the subterfuge guise of technology and “progress”, keeps you interminably on hold and demands that you not only agree to, but rather embrace its terms of service in order to proceed with a transaction it invented five minutes ago to extract more data from you. It calls this sadistic vampire process of life-depleting exsanguination, “a time-saving solution”. You seldom notice that there was never a problem to begin with, only a confounding technology to now overcome in order to do something that was once as simple as blowing your nose.
You tend to overlook its authoritarian aspects, since it always uses its ‘indoor voice’, and presents you with choices. By now you may have noticed that from this vast menu of options, there is only one outcome: Your abject capitulation to its demands to access your data, or forsake the ability to perform necessary tasks altogether, forcing you “off the grid” and into a world inaccessible by non-digital means. Good luck finding a dumpster, or even cat food cans and old newspapers that haven’t been transformed by IOT.
This phantom killer is embedded in every molecule that makes up your life. It’s everything you consume, watch, listen to, discuss, anticipate and fear. It does to you inversely what you do with its devices and apps. Soon it will be absorbed directly into your skin as 5G millimeter waves, the new generation of electromagnetic radiation that promises to accelerate internet speeds and cancer cells concomitantly. For now, neoliberalism is in the food you eat and the water you drink, or at least the lead and microplastics contained within. Contamination itself Is a “smart” solution to the loss of profits a behemoth corporation might risk through regulation. It provides opportunities for start ups to make the world a better place by addressing, or rather, profiting from health and environment hazards with more carcinogenic, poverty-inducing technology.
Even as you deny the existence of an all-encompassing, interconnected surveillance dragnet closing in and microwaving you for profit, you begin to curb your impulses around it, and refrain from expressing a desire to shit kick Siri in the vicinity of any of your devices. You never know who might be listening. But you don’t really have a problem with that. You aren’t, after all a . . . I’d better not say that, or even think it, regardless of the context, or the justified urge to do some real damage. Isn’t there software that alerts the NSA to act on hyperbolic expressions of frustration with a virtual assistant who keeps directing you to Uber Eats in California, instead of finding ‘California Uber Alles’ on Spotify? Still, you are willing to make the necessary adjustments to your lifestyle, giving up privacy, free speech and inner thoughts so that you can make use of an app that superimposes kitten whiskers on your selfie, or gain access to your own refrigerator.
The chances that you will ever holler ‘Allah Akbar’ in a crowded stadium are pretty slim, so you just accept the fact that some airport screener is laughing at what’s in your pants as you are boarding your flight to Cleveland. The NSA meanwhile, knows that you are going there to meet a hottie you met on a dating app, while her Fit Bit device knows that she’ll be dead in less than six months of Type Two Diabetes. Thanks to Google, her insurer will cite a “preexisting condition” to avoid covering the costs of treatment and burial.
YouTube, sensing that you are sad over the loss of your booty call, has already lined up a playlist of mournful power ballads, while Facebook targets you with ads for anti-depressants to help you get through your bereavement. In exchange for allowing yourself to be manipulated, monitored and humiliated in order to advance AI so that it can one day lure you and your self-driving car off a cliff, your new smartphone provides you with the perfect animated 3D poop emoji to express your present mood. Meanwhile, Tinder has already lined up a catfish in a Kentucky halfway house as your next “soulmate”.
You are not prepared just yet to hate this thing you can’t quite name (but suspect the guy on the mountain bike had something to do with) despite having noticeably aged in the time it took to download an app – just so you can flush a “smart”, crowd-funded toilet, and make the world a better place by sending its contents to Kenya. When Neoliberalism speaks, it asks (rhetorically, of course) “How can we force another country to cede its sovereignty and hand over its resources without getting the anti-war crowd all worked up”? The implied almost universally accepted answer is “Send them your sewage, along with a volunteer aid worker on a ‘gap year’ wearing a flower crown”.
If you attempt to put a face to it, you start to picture the guy on the mountain bike, now dressed in business casual giving an upbeat forecast for the launch date of a solar-powered shipping container that can transport a globally connected network of freshly harvested human waste to now “empowered” farmers in Kenya. You see him now in a sunlight drenched boardroom where a woman in a sari is deep in thought. Mathematical formulae is superimposed across her face, now in closeup, as if the magic of PowerPoint has lit her up from within.
Together they are projecting the wisdom of the ages across a curved horizon that ends in a Sierra Nevada mountain range at sunrise. In fact, they are a photo stock image, a ’simulacra rendering’ if you will, extracted from the neurons of white mice that have been subjected to near-lethal exposure to PowerPoint during clinical trials to determine their receptivity to phrases like ‘Global Solutions’ during REM cycles of web browsing.
Yes, neoliberalism is that guy, or sometimes even a woman with a name you struggle to pronounce. It is deceptively “diverse” in its packaging, despite exclusively prioritizing everything the man in business casual and his bro cohorts hold dear to the detriment of everything else on the planet. It’s green, to be sure, as in the color of money. Being a good sport, it will endure a sixteen-year-old girl with a very large megaphone scolding it for that very reason.
Just as likely, it wears yoga pants, and takes it talking points from an advanced Women’s Studies program. It might even write inspirational messages on a banana intended for a sex worker’s lunch. Unlike its neoconservative flip side, which comes more honestly represented in Dick Cheney and John Bolton, it’s hard to hate with the visceral revulsion brought on by imagining what a walrus mustache smells like.
Neoliberalism most often presents itself as your new team leader, a guy known for being charismatic and competent, upbeat and fair. Part of you knows that he’s a condescending autocrat, inventing pointless and mind-numbing tasks for you to carry out that a lab rodent would refuse on the ground of cruel and unusual punishment. As his “associate” or “valuable team member” you forgive these micro-assaults on your selfhood because it’s either that or face a dumpster that has caught fire after being “hacked by Russia”.
At least in theory, this mini-overlord, representative of the ideological framework that produced him is the opposite of Donald Trump. Glib and clever as opposed to bellicose and demented. He’s more likely to blow smoke up your ass than set off a firestorm of tweets. In practice, however, neoliberalism is more like Ivanka, unshakeable in the belief that unearned influence and privilege has the power to move mountains, or at least low-income people out of their homes, and “empower” them with the tools to oppress themselves.
Neoliberalism, like the ‘spectacle’ it evolved from, mediates all social relations. It reduces them to performative, choreographed transactions in the service of an ideology that dare not speak its name for fear of inviting unwanted scrutiny into the void at its center. It has the vampire ability to elude reflection. Put a mirror in front of it and you’ll end up with a selfie that bears an uncanny resemblance to ‘The Scream’.
More articles by:
Jennifer Matsui is a writer living in Tokyo and a columnist for the print edition of CounterPunch magazine.


End US Aid for the Israeli Occupation

Democratic Candidates Must Pledge to End US Aid for the Israeli Occupation

Something has happened in the Democratic primary campaigns that activists fighting the Israeli occupation might not have expected. In response to the Jewish anti-occupation movement IfNotNow’s bird-dogging efforts, many of the leading candidates have already named and shamed the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories.
On July 12, South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg said that Israel’s “occupation has to end.” It’s not just Buttigieg either. Asked by a pair of young Jewish women if she would fight the occupation like she has fought Wall Street corruption, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren responded, “Yes, yes. So I’m there.” Likewise, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont posed with a group of young Jews holding a sign that read, “Jews Against the Occupation.” Even former Vice President Joe Biden begrudgingly admitted that “the occupation is a real problem.” In just a matter of weeks, the majority of the front-runners have publicly stated that they oppose occupation, setting a baseline for the discussion moving forward.
However, no one should pretend that this emerging Democratic consensus is actually groundbreaking. As journalist Robert Mackey pointed out in his recent piece for The Intercept, Senator Warren’s apparent recognition of the occupation as a problem is not a particularly progressive position when placed in historical context. Even former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, one of the leading war criminals of the latter half of the 20th century, was willing to tell the Israeli public in 2003 that “to hold 3.5 million Palestinians under occupation is, in my opinion, a very bad thing for us and for them.”
As Mackey noted, the fact that some people consider naming and shaming the occupation today to be “progressive” reflects a victory of the expansionist branch of the Israel lobby. This faction believes that the Israeli military should remain in control of the West Bank and Gaza Strip forever, and therefore they reject even using the term “occupation.” Having regained ground previously lost to the pro-occupation camp, we in the anti-occupation must build upon this now-established common sense among the Democratic candidates.

Supporting a Two-State Solution Is Not Enough

Confronted with the crisis of occupation, Democrats generally redirect the discussion away from criticism of Israeli human rights abuses and war crimes by deploying banal talking points about a two-state solution. Indeed, a new “pro-Israel” lobbying group, Democratic Majority for Israel, has recently been coaching Democrats on this rhetorical move.
This tactic allows candidates to maintain their verbal opposition to the occupation, thereby superficially agreeing with anti-occupation activists without actually challenging Israel in any serious way. In this vein, we will often hear politicians affirm that any peace settlement must be achieved bilaterally between Israel and Palestine, and pledge not to impose a solution from the outside. The answer, we hear, is more negotiations that the United States will facilitate.
I do not wish to question the maxim that the ultimate settlement between Israelis and Palestinians must be negotiated bilaterally. However, any honest observer has to recognize that the U.S. diplomatic approach of pushing bilateral negotiations without pressuring Israel has not worked — or, more precisely, it did work by not working.
The truth is that the United States has never been an impartial broker of peace. During the Oslo Accords and in the decades afterward, the United States postured as the objective, third-party mediator bringing together two recalcitrant sides, when in fact the United States all along was materially enabling the system of military dictatorship that Israel imposes on the West Bank and Gaza. The warplanes, weapons and ammunition never stopped flowing from Washington D.C. to Jerusalem, while the United States went out of its way to protect Israel from any accountability in international fora. Without a doubt, the United States was applying strong pressure on one party to the negotiations, the stateless Palestinians, who have always been in a far weaker negotiating position vis-à-vis Israel.

The Necessity of Outside Pressure on Israel

There has never been an Israeli government willing to accept a Palestinian state. Even during the Oslo Accords, which many still see as the closest Israel ever came to accepting Palestinian statehood, then-Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin did not recognize the state of Palestine’s right to exist. Then-Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and the Palestine Liberation Organization recognized Israel’s statehood, but neither the Rabin government nor any government since has reciprocated.
Today, pro-occupation liberals, along with many anti-occupation activists, often act as if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his right-wing coalition government constitute the main obstacles to peace and reconciliation. Netanyahu is a problem, to be sure. He is now the longest-serving premier in the country’s history, and he is overseeing a steady annexation of the West Bank, eroding whatever basis there might have once been for the two-state solution.
Still, Netanyahu’s ideology and praxis is not actually a deviation in principle from the doctrine of the “Iron Wall” that has defined Israel’s entire existence as a state. The Iron Wall is a creed of violent territorial expansion and military chauvinism. Coined by Zionist leader Vladimir Jabotinsky and embraced by the country’s first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, this dogma, through its human actors, spawned the ethnic cleansing and herrenvolk ethnocracy that remain the core of the modern Jewish state. These central tenets of existing Zionism are unlikely to disappear if Israel were to elect a new prime minister.
In all likelihood, Netanyahu will head the next Israeli government after the elections in September. This near certainty should be sufficient cause for us to recognize that the next U.S. president will need to compel Israel to make concessions. However, even if Benny Gantz of Israel’s so-called center-left Blue and White coalition prevails, it is highly unlikely that the Israeli public will give him a mandate that includes ending the occupation.
In fact, peace with the Palestinians was not even discussed during the last election season in Israel. Quite the opposite: As researcher and activist Hanna Alshaikh has pointed out, the public debate was over who could dominate the Palestinians more harshly and efficiently, with the “center-left” candidate, Gantz, boasting about the number of Palestinians he killed in Gaza and of sending the coastal enclave back “to the Stone Age.”
The poverty of the mainstream political debate in Israel today supports the basic thesis of Israeli columnist Larry Derfner’s new book, No Country for Jewish Liberals. Israel simply is not a liberal country anymore, if it ever was. The right wing dominates, and the left is in shambles. Israelis who dare to stick their necks out for Palestinians — like the brave solidarity activists of Ta’ayush and the army veterans of Breaking the Silence and Combatants for Peace — are maligned as traitors and anarchists. Sometimes they are physically attacked on the street.
Obviously, there are still liberals and leftists in Israel today, but as we see in Gantz and what remains of the old Labor party, the “left” that remains in Israel today resembles the right-wing Likud of 40 years ago. Just as former Prime Minister Menachem Begin did not relent without considerable U.S. pressure during the Israeli occupation of Lebanon in the early 1980s, the next Israeli prime minister will not either.

No Aid for Occupation

Contrary to popular opinion, the United States has actually withheld, and threatened to withhold, military aid from Israel on several occasions. In 1953, Israeli commando forces led by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon committed a horrific massacre in the West Bank village of Qibya, razing buildings and murdering some 69 Palestinians before occupying the town. When President Dwight Eisenhower threatened to suspend aid, the Israeli military quickly withdrew from the village.
As it turns out, when you bankroll another country’s military, you can ask for things in return.
Anti-occupation activists are currently debating the method by which the United States should pressure Israel. In his piece arguing for conditional aid to Israel, Peter Beinart lays out several possible frameworks for strategically and selectively cutting off U.S. aid in a way that targets the military occupation as such. He preaches agnosticism about which is the best approach, but through his analysis of the structure of U.S. aid to Israel, Beinart appears to ultimately favor a policy which goes after something called “offshore procurement” — the unique arrangement by which Israel is allowed to use U.S. tax dollars to buy Israeli, not U.S., weapons.
While I do not disagree with the thrust of Beinart’s approach, I do see a few problems with how he formulates it. First, no one ever galvanized a political movement around such a technical demand. If Senator Sanders is elected president, Beinart and Sanders’s advisers can flesh out the minute details of the conditional aid plan, but I challenge any activist to start a “no off-shore procurements” chant at the next pro-Palestine rally. Second, this proposal on the surface lacks moral force. It sounds too technical and thereby loses a sense of urgency.
Indeed, “conditional aid” or “leveraging aid” is not even the proper framing. Sanders deserves credit for publicly stating that he would “absolutely” leverage aid to change the Israeli government’s behavior, but this policy and rhetoric is missing the moral clarity that his democratic socialism embodies so well. The incentive structures may appeal to the economists in the audience, but these formulations lack the fire that we need.
The best path forward is to simply demand no more aid for occupation. U.S. citizens must refuse to aid and abet these horrific human rights abuses and outright war crimes any longer. There is a moral imperative that we not let our government make us accomplices to Israel’s atrocities. For decades, Palestinians have been chanting that iconic phrase, “No taxation without representation.” Now we in the United States must all say together, “No taxation for occupation.”
This policy also has its technical side without even getting into off-shore procurements. Congress should immediately pass legislation that codifies the Israeli military units enforcing the occupation of the West Bank and the 12-year siege of Gaza as gross violators of human rights. The unit that razed those Palestinian buildings in East Jerusalem this summer will be on the list, as will air force units that bomb flour mills, water sanitation facilities and farmland in Gaza.
Officially labeling these units as gross violators of human rights would trigger the Leahy Law, a piece of legislation that prohibits U.S. funding from going to any armed force engaged in such flagrant and chronic abuses. This approach would not threaten the overall aid to Israel, thereby winning broader support in Congress. Indeed, Israel has real security concerns — even if they are often wildly overstated— and so this bill would specifically only target those military units that perpetuate the system of military dictatorship in the West Bank and the strangulation of the Gaza Strip. Call it the “No Aid For Occupation Act.”
This legislation will eventually complement a diplomatic initiative by the executive branch. As Congress works to pass this bill, a willing presidential administration would privately inform Israel that aid will be restricted if it does not dismantle the settlements, withdraw its military from the West Bank and end the blockade of Gaza. Because it depends so heavily on U.S. military and diplomatic backing, Israel would comply or make a significant compromise very quickly.
Israel could take some good-faith steps right away — e.g., freezing settlement expansion, offering to relocate its citizens living in the settlements to residences on the Israeli side of the Green Line, dismantling military bases and settler outposts — and thereby ensure continued U.S. support overall.

The Challenges and Opportunities Ahead

It goes without saying that none of these moves would be accomplished easily. For one, the U.S. public would have to force the political establishment to recognize that U.S. aid to Israel is not sacrosanct, but is in fact a tool with which we can advance democracy and self-determination for Israelis and Palestinians in an even-handed way.
Second, we would have to prevail over the so-called pro-Israel lobby. Groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the Democratic Majority for Israel refuse to recognize that the onus for making concessions is on the infinitely more powerful party to the conflict: Israel. It is on us to liberate members of Congress from this stupefying ignorance.
Thirdly, we would have to figure out how the No Aid For Occupation initiative relates to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. Whereas BDS has almost entirely focused on boycott and divestment campaigns, the No Aid For Occupation bill focuses more on sanctions (or what amounts to sanctions on specific army units), and so it is, in my view, complementary to BDS.
However, this legislation would not in itself advance all of the BDS campaign’s demands, which includes, in effect, the disintegration of the state of Israel in all parts of the territory. While I personally uphold the inalienable right of Palestinians to return to the places that they call home, including places located in the modern state of Israel, the members of Congress who support the Palestinian right of return can be counted on one hand.
Much more broad-based support could be galvanized in Congress for the short term around strong measures that end the military occupation and siege, which do in fact represent the most pressing humanitarian and human rights crises. No Aid For Occupation would explicitly target those unilateral Israeli land grabs that have caused so many people to reject the two-state solution as unworkable — that is, by freezing and then dismantling settlements, including those bifurcating the West Bank in the area east of Jerusalem.
To be clear, the No Aid For Occupation initiative cannot be an endorsement of any particular configuration of states or a referendum on Zionism per se. The ultimate solution has to be negotiated between the two sides, and Israelis and Palestinians will determine whether it will be a one-state, two-state or no-state solution.
Trump, incredibly, claimed that by officially recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, he would be taking Jerusalem “off the table” for negotiations and thereby advance a peaceful settlement more quickly. By first ending the occupation and taking the U.S./Israeli boot off the Palestinian neck, No Aid For Occupation can advance to a discussion of one- or two-state solutions more quickly.
The moment is ripe for this escalation. The occupation is now widely recognized as the central issue, even as Israeli leaders refuse to give up their maximalist territorial ambitions and double down on military chauvinism. The Democratic presidential candidates who speak most clearly for the real political movements in this country already have made taking on power and political revolution the heart of their campaigns.
Let us push them to go one step further on Israel/Palestine by getting them to commit to taking on the injustice of the occupation and the political power structures in this country which perpetuate it.

Paul Craig Roberts 360

America: A Land Without Truth

Paul Craig Roberts
It has been 17 days since a four-year study of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 by civil engineers was made available to the media.  The study concluded that fire was not the cause of the collapse of the 47-story building.  The study also concluded that “the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.”  https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/09/04/the-official-story-of-the-collapse-of-wtc-building-7-lies-in-ruins/ 
In other words, the study concludes that the building was intentionally destroyed by controlled demolition.  Controlled demolition means that there was a plan to destroy the building and that access to the building inhabited by a number of US security agencies was permitted in order to wire the building for demolition.  This finding is consistent with what the owner of the World Trade Center, Silverstein, said on television, that the decision was made “to pull” the building.  
To pull a building means to bring it down by controlled demolition.  Later, Silverstein tried to retract his admission and claimed that he meant the decision was made to pull the firemen out of the building, but according to reports no firemen were in the building as the fires were not regarded as of any consequence.
After 17 days, the report of the civil engineering team remains unmentioned in the American media except for a local Alaska TV station and a local Alaska newspaper.  The report went straight into the Memory Hole.  The vast majority of the American people will never know that the information has been kept from them.
The pile of lies that constitutes American awareness is very high. Indeed, it is as high as the hundred-story twin towers: the lies about Gaddafi and Libya, Saddam Hussein’s “weapons of mass destruction,” “Assad’s use of chemical weapons,” the Taliban, Osama bin Laden, Yemen, Pakistan, China, Russian invasions, World War II, World War I, Vietnam War, overthrows of Latin American governments, Ukraine, Spanish/American war, and on, and on.
All of these lies have been exposed, but the facts have been kept from the vast majority of Americans.  Historians such as Howard Zinn in his book, A People’s History of the United States, and Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick in their book, The Untold History of the United States, attempted to make Americans more aware of the false reality in which they live, but the small number of voices on the side of truth are simply overwhelmed by a massive propaganda machine.
The reason for the dim future that the United States faces is that explanations are controlled by elites in the interest of their agendas.  There is no independent media except on the Internet, and that media is being overwhelmed by the numerous elite-sponsored websites.
Many Americans are too mentally and emotionally weak to come to grips with the possibility that the events of September 11, 2001, were a false flag attack orchestrated in order to serve agendas hidden from the American people.  They are much more comfortable not to look at the evidence and simply dismiss it as a “conspiracy theory.”
The families of those killed in the twin towers made a stink about the unexplained total failure of US national security.  No one was held accountable for the amazing security breaches and dysfunction of the national security state.  Washington tried to buy off the families with money, but only partially succeeded. The “Jersey Girls” helped to rally impacted families.  After one year of stonewalling their demands for an investigation, the White House finally agreed to a political investigation and appointed the 9/11 Commission, which avoided a forensic investigation.  
In contrast to the families who lost members in the twin towers, I have never heard anything about a similar organization of families of those who died in the hijacked airliners.  Perhaps they are included in the 9/11 Family Steering Committee.  If so, they must have been silent members.  I have not come across any sign of them demanding explanations.  It is almost as if they don’t exist. 
Those who know that they have been lied to about Septermer 11, 2001, are still trying to get truthful answers.  A report on their latest efforts can be found here:  https://www.globalresearch.ca/911-truth-justice-18-years-after-the-attacks/5689203 

vrijdag 27 september 2019

US support for neo-Nazis

The other Ukraine scandal: US support for neo-Nazis fuels far-right terror at home


Libya

Libya Celebrates the 50th Anniversary of the Great Al Fateh Revolution


JoanneM's picture
Submitted by JoanneM on 
September 1, 2019 marks the 50th anniversary of the Great al-Fateh ("the Conqueror") Revolution in Libya, a bloodless coup that forced out the old despot "puppet" king of Libya. This so called King was appointed in Libya by the UK and was the puppet of the US and UK. He did nothing for the people of Libya; he knew of their suffering, he knew of the poverty, he knew of the slavery of the Libyan people by Italy and their oppression by the same. Yet, this so called king, was a puppet of the imperialists and took his money, pleasures and perversions without shame. NOTE: the average Libyan salary during this time was 60 dinars a year - Libya was one of the poorest, least developed country in Africa. 
When the biggest 11 tribes of Libya came together to overthrow the puppet king, the only despot just ran off and the coup was complete.
The Libyan tribal leaders picked Moammer al Ghadafi as the new leader of Libya. There were many reasons for this; Ghadafi was well educated (at home and abroad), he spoke more than one language, he was well trained in the military and other areas, he was very charismatic and very clever. It is important to understand that the Libyan country and people had been occupied and ruled by foreign countries for the majority of its entire history. Libya is an ancient and tribal culture and it was important that they picked someone to lead them that could communicate with other country leaders, understand how to develop their country bringing the Libyan people and infrastructure into the 20th century. 
Ghadafi understood the issues of his country very well. He understood the imperialist occupation of his country was not acceptable, he immediately pushed out all the British, Italian and US occupiers and he gifted the land that the Italians had occupied to the Libyans that had been working the land as slaves. He nationalized, banks and oil and began to share the countries wealth with its people. He began to build schools, hospitals, airports, roads, agriculture and helped the people in every manner possible. 
Of course the western imperialists were appalled that any Arab country would not follow their lead and would kick them out. They were shocked when Ghadafi stood up against them, standing with the oppressed Palestinians and creating the Arab league of nations. As a result of his refusal to be the imperialist puppet, there began a campaign of lies and propaganda against the great African / Arab leader. They made him responsible for terrorist acts that they (the CIA/MI5) committed such as the Lockerbie disaster and other acts of terrorism. The world bought into the lies and illegal embargoes were placed against Libya and her people. 
What the world did not understand was that the Libya people and Ghadafi are against radical Islam. (Ghadafi emancipated women in the 1970's, women were not required to dress in any special way and were doctors, lawyers, military, entrepreneurs, homemakers, etc.) Perhaps only 4% of the Libyan people are radical Islamic terrorists and thank you very much Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Cameron, Sarkozy, NATO and the UN, these terrorists have controlled Libya (with the help of foreign intervention by Turkey, Qatar, the UN and others) for the past 8 years under the umbrella of the Muslim Brotherhood. Now all the terrorist leaders are millionaires and billionaires made so by stolen Libya money. 
Left to live in a failed state controlled by terrorists the Libyan people have suffered for 8 years, deprived of security and many times of water and electricity. More than 2 million have lived in exile and close to a million are dead since the 2011 NATO invasion all based on the "need to save the innocents" LIE.
Finally, the Libyan peoples army came together last April, and joined by the military forces from many tribes began to cleanse their beloved Libya of the Muslim Brotherhood, GNA terrorists and other criminal gangs. Hope has finally arrived for the Libyan people and they rejoice this hope by openly celebrating across their country the 50th anniversary of the Great Al Fateh Revolution that brought to them their beloved great leader Moammer Al Ghadafi, their green Flag representing the great Jamahiriya that brought to them a wonderful life sharing in the wealth of their country. They celebrate the return of their security and their freedom from terrorists and puppet (unelected) illegitimate governments.
I am posting below, many videos and photos passed to me by the great tribes. These are videos from all over Libya of the Libyan people in the streets celebrating the anniversary of their great revolution. This is the first time since NATO invaded and destroyed their country in 2011 that they have had enough freedom to celebrate the proudest day in their history; the day they gained control of their own country for the first time in their thousands of years history. Below you will find a video of some of the accomplishments of the great Jamahiriya during its first 40 years. 
God bless all legitimate Libyans, God bless Moammer al Ghadafi, God bless the great al Fateh revolution, God bless the green flag, God bless the great Jamahiriya, all these representing the best of life for the Libyan people and their hope for a new, free and secure future.

Public video download links

libya_-_alfateh_revolution_through_40_years_download-lagu-mp3.com_.mp4 (18.12 MB)
sirte_9_1_2019.mp4 (2.14 MB)
southern_libya_9_1_2019.mp4 (10.50 MB)
sabah.mp4 (153.28 MB)

gift_from_bani_walid_to_libyan_peps_9_1_2019.mp4 (5.68 MB)



Thunberg Hypocrisy


Most Americans Are Completely Unprepared

A Shocking New Survey Finds That Most Americans Are Completely Unprepared For The Next Recession

Just like in 2008, most Americans are living right on the edge financially, and so any sort of an economic downturn is going to be extremely painful for tens of millions of American families.  When you have not built up a financial cushion, any sort of a setback can be absolutely disastrous.  During the last recession, millions of Americans suddenly lost their jobs, and because most of them were living paycheck to paycheck a lot of them suddenly couldn’t pay their mortgages.  In the end, millions of Americans lost their homes during the “subprime mortgage meltdown”, and today the housing bubble is even larger than it was back then.  Sadly, the reality of the matter is that many of us are just barely scraping by from month to month, and that is a very dangerous position to be in.
A new survey that was just released shows just how vulnerable American consumers have become at this point in time.  According to the survey, the top financial priority for 38 percent of all Americans is just trying to pay the bills, and for 19 percent of all Americans it is dealing with credit card debt.  The following comes from Fox Business
Among survey respondents in the nationally representative poll, 38 percent said their top financial priority is “just staying current on living expenses or getting caught up on all the bills.” Almost 3 in 10 respondents (29 percent) said their chief priority was “saving more money,” and 19 percent indicated they were mainly working on paying down debt from products like credit cards and student loans.
So that means that for nearly 60 percent of all Americans, the top financial priority each month is either finding a way to pay the bills or dealing with credit card debt.
And if you are struggling to pay the bills each month or you are drowning in credit card debt, the truth is that you are definitely not ready for the next recession.
The same survey also discovered that a very large percentage of Americans are not following any sort of a financial budget
More than a decade into the longest economic expansion on record, almost two-fifths of people said in a new Bankrate poll that their main financial priority was just keeping their heads above water on living expenses rather than saving money.
Nearly as many of those surveyed said that they’re not following financial budgets, according to Bankrate’s September Financial Security Poll.
So many people out there spend money whenever they feel like it and they don’t have any sort of a plan for their finances.
And then when they get deep into debt they wonder how that could have possibly happened.
It is so important to take charge of your money and to have a plan for where you want to go financially.  Because if you don’t have a plan for your money, I promise you that somebody else does.  As many of us have learned the hard way, it is all too easy to fall victim to all of the financial predators that are constantly circling these days.  The big financial institutions want to get Americans into as much debt as possible, because the deeper we are in debt the more money they make.
In our society, everything has become all about extracting as much money out of you as possible.  Even when we are at the checkout counter at the supermarket we are asked if we want to get some “cash back” so that they can charge us a “convenience fee” and make even more money.  And of course most of the money that is extracted out of us ultimately ends up at the very top of the financial pyramid, and as a result the gap between the “haves” and the “have nots” continues to grow.
In fact, the U.S. Census Bureau is telling us that the gap between the rich and the poor is now “greater than it has ever been”
In the midst of the longest economic expansion the United States has ever seen, with poverty and unemployment rates at historic lows, the separation between rich and poor from 2017 and 2018 was greater than it has ever been, federal data show.
To be fair, the U.S. Census Bureau has only been measuring this since 1967, and so it is entirely possible that things could have been even worse earlier in our history.
But the numbers do clearly show that the gap has been steadily widening for years, and at this point wealth inequality in the U.S. is far greater than it is in any country in Europe
The Gini index measures wealth distribution across a population, with zero representing total equality and 1 representing total inequality, where all wealth is concentrated in a single household. The indicator has been rising steadily during the past several decades. When the Census Bureau began studying income inequality more than 50 years ago, the Gini index was 0.397. In 2018, the Gini index rose to 0.485.
By comparison, no European country had a Gini index greater than 0.38 between 2017 and 2018.
So what this means is that we have a small group of people at the top of the pyramid doing really, really well, but meanwhile most of the rest of us are deeply struggling.
In fact, survey after survey has shown that the vast majority of Americans are currently living paycheck to paycheck.
The way that our entire system is structured greatly favors Wall Street, the big banks, the largest corporations and those with enormous amounts of money.  And they are able to maintain control of the system by literally buying elections and controlling public opinion through their control of the mainstream media.  Our founders were deeply suspicious of large concentrations of power, and we need to return to the values that our nation was founded upon if we ever hope to turn things around.
Unfortunately, more Americans that ever are convinced that socialism is the answer to the problems that I just discussed, and this is fueling the rise of politicians such as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.
But socialist experiments have failed all throughout human history, and socialism would fail here too.
Big government is never the answer.  Sadly, we already have the biggest government in the history of the world, and many Americans seem absolutely determined to make it even bigger.
About the author: Michael Snyder is a nationally-syndicated writer, media personality and political activist. He is the author of four books including Get Prepared NowThe Beginning Of The End and Living A Life That Really Matters. His articles are originally published on The Economic Collapse BlogEnd Of The American Dreamand The Most Important News. From there, his articles are republished on dozens of other prominent websites. If you would like to republish his articles, please feel free to do so. The more people that see this information the better, and we need to wake more people up while there is still time. Of course the most important thing that we can share with people is the gospel of Jesus Christ, and if you would like to learn more about how you can become a Christian I would encourage you to read this article.

Gaza: The Arsenal of the Irreparable

  Fair Use Disclaimer Privacy Policy Contact Subscription News Letter Submission Policy About Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Fol...