Pages: << 1 ... 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 ... 1261 >>
UN Treaty Bans Nuclear Weapons
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
On Thursday, 122 UN member states adopted the first ever treaty banning nuclear weapons. It’s legally-binding when taking effect - without an enforcement mechanism to assure compliance.
The treaty states “(e)ach State Party undertakes never under any circumstances to…develop, test, produce, manufacture, otherwise acquire, possess or stockpile nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.”
All nine nuclear powers, NATO members except the Netherlands opposing the treaty, boycotted the meeting, along with Japan and South Korea. Iran supported it, long ago urging a nuclear-free Middle East. Singapore abstained.
On September 20, the measure will be open for signing by all nations. It will become effective 90 days after ratification by 50 member states.
Costa Rican UN envoy/president of negotiations to ban nuclear weapons said “(w)e have managed to sow the first seeds of a world free of nuclear weapons.”
Xi Jinping’s Meeting with Trump
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
China and America are largely world’s apart on ways to resolve differences between them, including major geopolitical issues.
Beijing urges diplomatic outreach with Pyongyang and cessation of provocative US/South Korean military exercises the DPRK believes are preparations for war on its country.
Washington categorically refuses to end decades of unjustifiable hostility toward North Korea, choosing confrontation over responsible outreach, risking unthinkable war on the peninsula, possibly going nuclear by accident or design.
Beijing and Moscow want provocative US THAAD missile systems removed from South Korea, threatening their territory. The Trump administration is unbending, keeping them deployed, intending new installations - aimed mostly at China and Russia aggressively.
Putin’s Meeting with Trump
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Putin is a preeminent, respected world leader, overwhelmingly popular domestically.
Trump a caricature of one, a real estate tycoon out of his element on the world stage - controlled by dark forces in America, representing their diabolical imperial agenda for global dominance.
The bottom line about the first face-to-face meeting between both presidents is little or nothing was accomplished other than them having a chance to meet and exchange views on issues of mutual importance, besides publicly getting along well together.Russia supports world peace, stability, security, and multi-world polarity, including harmony and mutual cooperation among all nations.
America’s agenda is polar opposite, wanting dominance over all other nations, using sticks, not carrots to achieve its destructive aims, war its favored strategy.
Progressive Democrats: Resist and Submit, Retreat and Surrender
James Petras
Introduction
Over the past quarter century progressive writers, activists and academics have followed a trajectory from left to right – with each presidential campaign seeming to move them further to the right. Beginning in the 1990’s progressives mobilized millions in opposition to wars, voicing demands for the transformation of the US’s corporate for-profit medical system into a national ‘Medicare For All’ public program. They condemned the notorious Wall Street swindlers and denounced police state legislation and violence. But in the end, they always voted for Democratic Party Presidential candidates who pursued the exact opposite agenda.
Over time this political contrast between program and practice led to the transformation of the Progressives. And what we see today are US progressives embracing and promoting the politics of the far right.
To understand this transformation we will begin by identifying who and what the progressives are and describe their historical role. We will then proceed to identify their trajectory over the recent decades.
We will outline the contours of recent Presidential campaigns where Progressives were deeply involved.
We will focus on the dynamics of political regression: From resistance to submission, from retreat to surrender.
We will conclude by discussing the end result: The Progressives’ large-scale, long-term embrace of far-right ideology and practice.
Tillerson Suggests Unacceptable No-Fly Zones in Syria
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Ahead of Putin and Trump meeting face-to-face for the first time on Friday, on the sidelines of the G20 meeting in Hamburg, Germany, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson commented on the current situation in Syria.
Trump inherited Obama’s war, escalating, not responsibly ending it - on the phony pretext of combating ISIS Washington created and supports.
Tillerson’s comments were outrageously deceitful, calling for “stability on the ground” US aggression prevents.
Saying “military efforts to defeat ISIS on the ground” continue ignored US support for all anti-government terrorist groups - in Syria and elsewhere.
Anti-Populism: Ideology of the Ruling Class
James Petras
Introduction
Throughout the US and European corporate and state media, right and left, we are told that ‘populism’ has become the overarching threat to democracy, freedom and . . . free markets. The media’s ‘anti-populism’ campaign has been used and abused by ruling elites and their academic and intellectual camp followers as the principal weapon to distract, discredit and destroy the rising tide of mass discontent with ruling class-imposed austerity programs, the accelerating concentration of wealth and the deepening inequalities.
We will begin by examining the conceptual manipulation of ‘populism’ and its multiple usages. Then we will turn to the historic economic origins of populism and anti-populism. Finally, we will critically analyze the contemporary movements and parties dubbed ‘populist’ by the ideologues of ‘anti-populism’.
South Korean President Seeks Diplomatic Relations with DPRK
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
President Moon Jae-in urges improved ties with Pyongyang over confrontation.
Earlier he said “I’m pro-US, but now South Korea should adopt diplomacy in which it can discuss a US request and say no to the Americans."
He wants his government taking the lead on policies affecting the peninsula, mostly concerned about preventing war, devastating for Seoul and Pyongyang if launched. On Thursday, ahead of the G20 summit in Hamburg, Germany, he expressed willingness to meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un “any time, any place” - despite the DPRK’s nuclear program and July 4 ballistic missile test.
He proposed both North and South resumption of family reunions and mutual cooperation on the 2018 winter Olympic games - to be held in Pyeonchang, South Korea.
Ceasefire Declared in Southern Syria
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
It’s a major development if it sticks. Syria’s Defense Ministry said the following:
“The hostilities in the southern regions of Daraa, Quneitra, and Suwayda have been suspended from” midnight last night until 12:00AM July 6, longer if it’s working.
Syria’s aim is “supporting the peace process and national reconciliation.” ISIS, al-Nusra and other terrorist fighters remain in these areas, their ranks severely battered by Syrian and allied forces.
Ceasefire covers areas targeted six times in recent weeks by Israeli aggression. Damascus promised “an appropriate response” to elements breaching cessation of hostilities.
Implementing De-Escalation Zones in Syria
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Successfully implementing four designated de-escalation zones is a vital step toward restoring peace and stability to war-torn Syria.
Russia, Iran, and Assad’s government are committed to making the plan work. Washington wanting regime change and Syrian sovereignty destroyed is the obstacle to overcome - no easy task.
On July 4, Syria’s UN envoy/chief peace negotiator Bashar al-Jaafari explained mechanisms for implementing the de-escalation zones are still being discussed.
“We are still in the framework of diplomatic discussion on how to bring attitudes closer and find common denominators to focus on them for building a unified position,” he said.
“We are still in the beginning, and we have not yet finished discussing the mechanisms related to implementing the agreement.”
Why Don’t All Americans Have Healthcare Like Congressional Members Get?
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
It’s generous but not free. It’s not as good as Medicare for all - the only equitable system, especially for the world’s richest country, easily able to afford it.
Medicare coverage isn’t free as originally promised. Eligible recipients with incomes above a certain amount have to pay for Parts B and D. Supplemental insurance is needed for what Medicare doesn’t cover.
Seniors like myself pay plenty for Medicare, originally touted as free. It’s not an entitlement, as falsely claimed. It’s financed by individual and employer payroll tax deductions - insurance premiums by another name. Here’s what congressional members get. Prior to enactment of Obamacare, they got the same healthcare coverage as other federal employees through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP).
Obamacare requires lawmakers and designated staff members to get coverage through the Affordable Care Act DC Health Link exchange.
<< 1 ... 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 ... 1261 >>
