Author: Alicia

On the eve of his trip to Vietnam and Japan, Barack Obama told Japan’s largest TV channel NHK, yesterday that he will not apologize for the U.S. dropping an atomic bomb on Hiroshima in 1945. Why? Because he has learned as President that Presidents have to make difficult decisions during wars:

“I think that it’s important to recognize that in the midst of war, leaders make all kinds of decisions. It’s a job of historians to ask questions and examine them, but I know as somebody who has now sat in this position for the last seven and a half years, that every leader makes very difficult decisions, particularly during war time.”

Harry Truman was thus not just excused, but perhaps fatefully held up as a war-decision maker by Obama.

As is his wont, Obama lied that he is, and has been an activist for nuclear disarmament worldwide, and it is Russia which is not willing to reduce nuclear stockpiles.

Obama will be the first sitting U.S. President to visit Hiroshima. But on April 11, John Kerry became the first Secretary of State to visit Hiroshima. Kerry did not make any apology either, but his words and demeanor made a contrast to Obama’s “hard decisions have to be made” attitude. Kerry after what he called a “gut-wrenching” tour of the museum at the Hiroshima Memorial Park, said that the museum “is a harsh, compelling reminder not only of our obligation to end the threat of nuclear weapons, but to rededicate all of our effort to avoid war itself. War must be the last resort—never the first choice.”

Sen. Bob Graham has told the Florida Bulldog that the Obama Administration has structured a four-step process around the demands to declassify the 28 pages, that stinks of more cover-up. In a May 18 interview with Dan Christensen, former Senator Graham recounted the May 17 meeting he had, along with Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) and Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA), with Director of National Intelligence Gen. James Clapper. While Clapper came across as “sympathetic” to the demands to declassify the chapter from the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11, he explained that President Obama has organized a four-step process for deciding on whether or not to release the pages.

After Clapper submits his own recommendations to the President, the matter will be further referred to the Interagency Security Clearance Appeals Panel (ISCAP), which has representatives from the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, the State Department and other intelligence agencies, which will review and make their own recommendations. President Obama will then make a decision—and refer the issue back to the Congress for final decision.

If this sounds like a stall and cover-up, it is.  While Senator Graham was not about to denounce the process, he expressed alarm about the added steps:

Christensen reported:

Washington sources have added that, following President Obama’s meeting with Gulf Cooperation Council leaders in Saudi Arabia last month, the U.S. is moving ahead with joint military programs—and is relying on the Saudis to make huge new purchases of U.S. weapons. There is also growing pressure, both in the U.S. and in Britain, to cut off arms sales to the Saudis over their persistent war crimes and violations of the Geneva Conventions in their war in Yemen, which both the Obama and Cameron governments are aiding.

A phase-shift of enormous dimensions is underway in Asia. A marker is the May 19-20 Russia-ASEAN summit in Sochi, Russia, whose Leibnizian slogan is, “Towards Strategic Partnership for the Sake of the Common Good.”  President Putin has announced that this summit will be the biggest international event in Russia in 2016.  Most of the top leaders of the ten ASEAN countries are personally in attendance, and President Putin has held bilateral summits with each of them over the past week.  The warmth and intimacy of these talks is as important as their concrete results of investment agreements, closer trade ties, and in many cases defense cooperation.        

Jin Liqun, the Chinese President of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), was also present for the summit, and discussed financing 16 projects in Russia’s Far East, worth a total of $8 billion.  “That is BIG.  That is BIG,” said Lyndon LaRouche.        

More could be said, but when these are put together with other developments, what is in prospect is the closest, trusted cooperation between Russia, India, China and Japan in Asia, in the political, economic and security dimensions, which will revolutionize Asia and the world.        

On the critical Japan flank, Michael Billington will report in the forthcoming (May 27) EIR, that “Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on May 6 held an extremely successful summit with Putin in Sochi, despite Obama’s demand that he cancel the visit. Although it was not discussed publicly, sources close to the negotiations informed EIR that Abe and Putin agreed on a path towards solving the territorial dispute, which has prevented the signing of a peace treaty to end World War II between Russia and Japan.  Publicly, the two leaders discussed a wide range of potential Japanese investments, mostly in the Russian Far East, in energy production, oil and gas, medical facilities, transportation, ports, and more.  It should be noted that the launching of such extensive joint development would also have significant implications for the Korean Peninsula.        

“Putin invited Abe to attend the second Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok on Sept. 2-3.  Abe is expected to attend, and to hold a second summit with Putin.  The Forum will bring together international business and government representatives to discuss the economic potential of Russia’s Far East and the Asia-Pacific region, as well as investment opportunities.”        

“Is Japan Really Going to Do This?” Lyndon LaRouche asked today.  “If so, that’s a very positive development for the entirety of Asia.” LaRouche said that this is what he had gotten into in the 1980s, when he visited Japan with his wife Helga. “We actually had, among certain people in Japan,— we had a group of people who were really on the ball, and had the ability to produce results,— but that got lost.”

Otherwise, avoid facile comparisons: There’s no way this Asia phase-shift can be compared with Obama, or anything like Obama. Quite the contrary.  The United States economy is collapsed,— in the process of collapsing.  This whole business of trying to gauge things, comparing one thing to another thing, doesn’t work any more.  You can’t draw a comparison with Obama; this economy is kaput.  Certain weapons being produced, but there’s nothing impressive about this thing,— it seems to be, but it’s not.  He’s not credible at all; that’s quite negative.        

On Obama’s continued outrageous cover-up of the 9/11 mass murders after almost 15 years, LaRouche said, “They’re all cowardly: either more or less.  The whole thing, is that the British are the key thing.  The whole problem is the British issue, the British Royal Family.  Everything the Saudis were involved in, was based on the British Royal Family.  That’s what these politicians do not emphasize, and that’s why they do it the way they do.  They’re not going to attack the British interest. You have to think about what the financial interests are, from the British side, with respect to the United States. And that’s what they don’t talk about.”

I’m interested, tell me more

Former U.S. Senator Bob Graham (D-FL), co-chair of the Joint Inquiry of Congress into 9/11, said yesterday, “Support for 9/11 goes to the top of the Saudi government,” in response to Yahoo.news interviewer Stephanie Sy’s question about how high up the support for 9/11—Saudi terrorism—goes in Saudi Arabia.

Graham’s optimism came through in the video interview, conducted after the U.S. Senate’s unanimous passage of the JASTA (Justice Against State Sponsors of Terroriism Act) bill yesterday, which,  if it becomes law if it becomes law, will allow U.S. citizens to sue the Saudis for damages. “JASTA,” said Graham, “is part of an overall effort. It will not only open the courts to the victims of terrorism, but potentially expose information related to Saudi Arabia and 9/11.”

The release of the classified “28 pages” of the Joint Inquiry is “a roadway to more information,” Graham replied to the questions of what will release of the 28 pages do.

Graham reported that he met with Director of National Intelligence James Clapper last night, and Clapper indicated that he would finish his review of the pages, and then send his report to a panel of agencies, such as the State Department, and then the President, noting that it has been withheld for a long time, and that withholding of this information for so long has had consequences — for the families, and for the U.S., because “the Saudis know what they did, and they know we know,” and interpret [our non-action] as impunity to continue to fund terrorists.

Asked if he believed the Saudis were giving financial support to terrorists, Graham said yes. Asked which ones, Graham said, “You name them,” and agreed as they came up — Al Qaeda, ISIS, at least local affiliates, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Support runs from rogue elements to the highest levels. It includes public and private elements; government, foundations, individuals. And when accusations are made, said Graham, the Saudi government claims “sovereign immunity.” Our assumption is the support is on the part of the government.

Graham referred to the Saudi support network for the 19 hijackers, who had little education, little English, and required the support of others. Graham referred to 9/11 Commission member John Lehman’s statement that he knew of six high Saudi officials involved.

Graham said the information in the 28 pages would lead to many other documents, which would provide multiple confirmations of the evidence. Graham said, “It is not a coverup. It is, as I have said, aggressive deception.”

The Saudi threat to sell off its U.S. Treasury holdings is not credible, because it would hurt them, Graham said. If they were to do it, it would show how serious they think the threat is.

Finally, to the concern that other nations could sue the U.S. if injured by Americans, Graham replied that the JASTA bill was very carefully formulated, and no such suit could succeed.

After Brazil’s monetarist Finance Minister Henrique Meirelles announced new members of his economics team on Tuesday, Goldman Sachs waxed ecstatic, calling it a “dream team.” Goldman official Alberto Ramos told The Financial Times that the team of “respected, well-trained technocrats,” was an important signal that there will be a dramatic shift in policy, as Rousseff’s “heterodox” policies had turned Brazil into a “basket case.”

Meirelles, referred to as a “super minister” who will wield great power—it was he who announced the team, not interim President Temer—chose Ilan Goldfajn, currently chief economist at Brazil’s largest private bank, Itau Unibanco, as new head of the Central Bank. Most telling about Goldfajn is not that he worked for the IMF and World Bank, but that he previously worked at the Central Bank under Arminio Fraga, George Soros’s former employee at the Quantum Fund, who served as its governor from 1999 to 2003. He also worked for Fraga’s Brazilian investment firm, Gavea Investimentos Ltda.

“You could not ask for a better person” to take this post, Fraga told The Wall Street Journal.

“Orthodox” economist Goldfajn will be in charge of monetary and currency policies, and advocates slashing public spending, “tough inflation targeting” and pension reform to “rebalance” fiscal accounts. Meirelles, who has announced that pension reform is an urgent matter, has created a special task force, led by new Social Welfare Minister Marcelo Caetano, which must come up with a reform proposal within 30 days.

The other dream-team member is Cambridge-trained Mansueto Almeida, Secretary of Economic Monitoring, who previously served as advisor to Temer ally and hardcore monetarist Aecio Neves, who lost to Dilma Rousseff in the 2014 presidential elections.

Meirelles is expected to submit a bill to Congress to amend the Constitution to establish the independence of the Central Bank, arguing that Dilma’s “interference” in the economy helped cause Brazil’s economic downfall. Dilma “strayed from balanced budgets and inflation targeting, in favor of more lax policies aimed at spurring economic growth and expanding social programs that helped lift millions out of poverty,” The Wall Street Journal complained May 17. 

The establishment is quickly discovering that Vladimir Putin is in the process of outflanking Obama’s war plans in Asia, just as he has in the Mideast. The Council on Foreign Relations journal Foreign Affairs this week released a study warning that the visit by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to Russia last week, and their extensive agreements on joint development projects in Asia, as well as moves to settle the territorial issues which have prevented a formal peace since World War II, has thrown a huge monkey wrench into Obama’s building of an anti-China bloc to militarily challenge China.

Authors Joshua Walker of the German Marshall Fund (and a former State Department officer), and Hidetoshi Azuma of the American Security Project, describe “an emerging geopolitical reality: no Western leader knows quite what to do about Russia as it wields its strategic influence across Eurasia…. Russia, declining as it might be, is yet a serious Eurasian power to be reckoned with. It can still unilaterally shape geopolitical events across the region, including in eastern Ukraine, Syria, and even Northeast Asia, where it has been building almost 2,500 miles of gas pipelines to China. No other Eurasian powers, not even China, have as much sway there.”

They cry out that “the West has essentially treated Russia as a rival European power, largely failing to manage its Eurasian challenges since 2014…. From Serbia to Afghanistan, Russia is using a combination of energy deals, arms supplies, and covert actions to solidify its stakes in Eurasia’s arc of instability.”

Not only is Putin threatening to destroy Washington’s effort to get Japan’s military on the side of the war on China and Russia, but he even has the gall to speak out on Obama’s provocative operations in the South China Sea: “As Beijing’s latest solicitation for Moscow’s support for its South China Sea policies demonstrates, Russia is also emerging as a significant actor in Asian seas, the stability of which is crucial to European economies.”

Europe has been useless, they complain, since “Europe itself is in a severe crisis, and the West’s narrow focus on Ukraine has hindered its efforts to cope with Russia’s Eurasian challenges.”

The CFR duo rather pathetically portray their interest in getting Japan to bring the United States and Russia together — but give it away by claiming that the basis for cooperation is “the rise of China, where Russian and Western interests are aligned.”

As Obama heads to Japan next week, the British Empire is once again running into Putin’s brilliant strategic moves, countering development to Obama’s bloody geopolitics.

The 9/11 Families and the September 11 Advocates issued a joint statement Tuesday denouncing President Obama’s decision that he would “kill” or veto JASTA (Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act), which would allow the 9/11 families to sue foreign states which funded and sponsored the 9/11 terrorists.

JASTA passed the U.S. Senate by acclamation May 17. The White House then announced Obama’s intentions, and Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan stated that he had not made up his mind about the bill, preferring to send it to Committee, where most bills die. Rep. Peter King (R-NY) is leading the drive for it.

The 9/11 Families and the September 11 Advocates responded with their own statement:

“Regarding the passage of JASTA today in the U.S. Senate, we would like to sincerely thank Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) and Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) for their dedication and support. Their wisdom and leadership has demonstrated an understanding of the need to hold those responsible for funding terrorism accountable. Without accountability, there can be no justice. We look forward to members of the House joining with the Senate in demonstrating that same level of wisdom and leadership. In this time of angry partisan fighting, it is gratifying to see Senators from both parties joining together to fight terrorism in accordance with our legal principles. Ultimately, we hope to see this important legislation on the desk of President Obama for his swift signature.

“In light of that goal and in direct response to the Obama Administration’s statement today that they still, “strongly continue to oppose this legislation,” and that they may, `seek additional changes to the measure or try to get it killed in the House,’ we would like to respectfully request that the Administration refrain from using such violent language when opposing legislation specifically designed and intended to help victims of terrorism.

“For us, whose loved ones were killed, there is simply no room for the word `killed’ in this dialogue. Obama and his speechwriters and spokespeople ought to know that. Moreover, we would also like to encourage President Obama to recalibrate his priorities by placing American citizens and victims of terrorism ahead of nations like the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia who fund terrorists that want to kill Americans.  We are tired of witnessing President Obama block our path to justice. We do not appreciate such behavior being exhibited by a President who has the audacity to pride himself on holding such lofty principles of constitutionality, openness, transparency and accountability — not to mention being a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.

“Furthermore, over the weekend, at Rutgers University, President Obama stated the following: `In politics and in life, ignorance is not a virtue. It’s not cool to not know what you’re talking about. That’s not keeping it real or telling it like it is.’ In the spirit of keeping things real, we would like to draw Mr. Obama’s attention to his own deliberate decision not to read the 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry of Congress’ Final Report into the 9/11 attacks. Perhaps if Mr. Obama had bothered to read the 28 pages, he would more rightfully comprehend and appreciate the need for JASTA. Ignorance is NOT bliss….  “

Kristen Breitweiser
Patty Casazza
Monica Gabrielle
Mindy Kleinberg
Lorie Van Auken

The Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement Tuesday charging that comments made Monday by Czech Gen. Petr Pavel, chairman of the NATO Military Committee, “are fully detached from reality and are beyond ethics.” According to a paraphrase by TASS, Pavel said (speaking to a committee of the French Senate) that in its fight with the West Russia was using hybrid tactics, including torture and lies, and could deliver a strike on the territory of the Alliance in the Baltic states. According to the same report, Pavel speculated about the possibility of deploying seven divisions in Poland and Baltic states to avoid a defeat in that region.

Pavel, the Russian Foreign Ministry said, “seems to have fully lost the sense of reality and understanding of the cause-and-effect linkage of the processes underway in the sphere of European security.” The ministry pointed out that it is NATO that is engaged in an “unprecedented” build-up on Russia’s borders, and labelled any statements about the supposed threat from the East to be the “utmost cynicism” in light of that activity. “In conditions of NATO’s obvious inability to make substantial contributions to fight against such real challenges of the modern time as terrorism, only whipping up an anti-Russian campaign enables the Alliance to have bigger spending of its member countries and thus ‘stay afloat’,” the Foreign Ministry noted.

“This is very good,” Lyndon LaRouche said, upon being briefed on the Russian Foreign Ministry statement. “They’re basically saying, correctly, that the guy is nuts.”

Such nutty people can also be found in abundance in the right-wing government in Warsaw, particularly in the case of Polish Defense Minister Antoni Macierewicz, who told a lunch meeting with reporters last week, that the Polish government will insist on the necessity of “a permanent military presence on the eastern flank of NATO” during the Warsaw summit to be held in July, reports Defense News.

“Russia is an aggressive state, Russian troops are deploying more and more, and Russian ballistic missiles are near our borders. We want to be prepared to react. This is why we need a NATO military presence every day,” Macierewicz emphasized. Polish Prime Minister Beata Szydlo and Foreign Affairs Minister Witold Waszczykowski also underlined that the Warsaw summit July 8-9 must conclude with “concrete solutions” to face a threat that Russia could “destroy” Poland and the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. What motivation that Russia might have for wanting to destroy Poland and the three Baltic states is never explained.

Asked to describe the Russian threat to Poland, the defense minister said: “In the ’90s Russia held two wars in Chechnya; in 2008, Georgia; in 2014, Crimea, and its support to separatists in Donbass. … What more evidence do you need?”

“Do you think Western European countries’ troops would die for Estonia?” a Dutch journalist asked. “Nobody wants to die for [other countries], but I would do it for Amsterdam,” Macierewicz said melodramatically.

With the illegal ouster of Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, the era of fascist coups has returned to Ibero-America, and with it, a shift away from the BRICS-oriented policies of regional and international cooperation to promote economic development and continental integration.

The alternative, as Brazil’s interim President Michel Temer has already made clear, is to “reorient” Brazil’s foreign policy toward free trade, prioritizing its relationship with the U.S. —the disintegrating trans-Atlantic system—and with like-minded South American nations grouped in the pro-free-trade Pacific Alliance. The latter was created to counter the Mercosur customs union, of which Brazil and Argentina are founding members. Concluding a free trade agreement between the European Union and Mercosur, stalled for 12 years, will now be a priority.

It was these same policy prescriptions that, according to the Argentine daily Pagina 12 May 15, Barack Obama discussed with President Mauricio Macri when Obama visited him in March—in effect, the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) which George W. Bush tried, but failed to impose on Ibero-America at the November 2005 Summit of the Americas in Mar del Plata, Argentina. There, then-Argentine President Nestor Kirchner and his Brazilian counterpart Inacio Lula da Silva crushed the proposal and publicly humiliated Bush.

In a real “in your face” performance, on May 10, Argentine Finance Minister Alfonso Prat-Gay proclaimed that Rousseff’s removal represents a “great “opportunity to refound” Mercosur along free-trade lines. “Brazil will understand that its way of integrating itself into the world isn’t an individual issue. We have to take advantage of this opportunity” to finally sign the EU-Mercosur free trade agreement, he said, “and if we do that, it will make sense to discuss a [free-trade] agreement between Mercosur and the Pacific Alliance.”

Yesterday, in a conference call on “After Dilma, What Lies Ahead for Brazil?” sponsored by the Woodrow Wilson Center’s Brazil Institute, moderator Paulo Sotero, a longtime mouthpiece for London and Wall Street interests, gushed at how “impressed” he was that new Foreign Minister Jose Serra had moved aggressively on foreign policy, threatening to retaliate against nations charging that Rousseff’s removal was a coup. Implicitly referencing the BRICS, another participant in the call said that Serra will break with Rousseff’s international policy and the “way Brazil connects to the world,” specifically mentioning the importance of allying with Argentina’s Macri government.