Next month, hundreds across the country will participate in “Out of the Darkness” walks to raise awareness about suicide and to support the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP).
AFSP and similar groups like the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) and Active Minds claim there are “stigmas” and “barriers” to treatment for mental illness and there is not enough “awareness.” Two facts are missing in their messaging.
First, with as much as a fourth of some U.S. populations on antidepressants and ubiquitous quizzes and ads for them, there is neither a lack of “awareness” ––or are the drugs working. Why are suicides at an all time high at the same time psychoactive drug use is at an all time high?
Secondly, the groups are funded by Pharma to increase drug use and are widely considered unethical front groups, also called astroturf.
The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, founded in 1987, is steeped in Pharma money. In 2008, AFSP merged with the Suicide Prevention Action Network USA or SPAN which had announced in 2004 that “SPAN USA’s efforts to develop and expand its suicide survivor network received a major boost with a recent grant from Eli Lilly and Company Foundation,” and “The foundation generously provided funding to support training, education and collaborative opportunities for SPAN USA’s existing network and enable further expansion into all 50 states.” No lack of transparency there.
In AFSP’s 2009 report, its leading donors were Pharma companies and it attributes a new screening project to “funding from Eli Lilly and Co., Janssen, Solvay Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals.” It also credits Eli Lilly for printing its brochures. No lack of transparency there, either.
In 2011, AFSP appointed psychiatrist Charles Nemeroff president of the organization until his troubles began. Nemeroff became the subject of a congressional inquiry and was found to have so much unreported Pharma income, the $9.3 million National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant to study depression that he managed was suspended, which happens rarely. He left Emory University in disgrace.
A 1999 textbook written by Nemeroff and his colleague Alan Schatzberg was found, in 2010, to be written and funded by GlaxoSmithKline. Both Nemeroff and Schatzberg remain at AFSP and are termed “leaders.”
AFSP’s 2012 annual report reveals a $100,000 donation from Forest Laboratories, and donations from Eli Lilly, Pfizer and five other Pharma companies.
“AFSP also boasts the honor of having a former president – David Shaffer – who was responsible for leading the development of the now somewhat infamous TeenScreen,” writes Mad in America. “TeenScreen is a controversial tool that Marcia Angell (Harvard Professor and former editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine)…described as, “just a way to put more people on prescription drugs.”
The now defunct TeenScreen which screened young people for early signs of depression had “ties to the pharmaceutical industry,” reported the Scientific American.
Screening and intervention are widely accepted now to be nothing but sales tools—even to the mainstream medical establishment. In “How We Do Harm,” Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical and scientific officer of the American Cancer Society and an oncologist, devotes a chapter to how prostate screening is often done just for money sometimes with disastrous and deadly results.
AFSP’s annual report names Pharma companies Sunovion, Janssen, Forest, Pfizer and Otsuka America Pharmaceuticals as financial donors. AFSP also named Phil Satow, former Forest executive, to its Project 2025 Advisory Committee. Satow has worked for many Pharma companies and is co-founder and board chair of the very pro-drug JED Foundation.
Preventing Suicides or Causing Them?
While SSRIs can be useful in some depressions, they can also cause suicide–a fact written clearly on all their package inserts. In 2005, after meeting with parents whose children killed themselves on the drugs and public health officials, the FDA attached the following “Black Box” warning to SSRI antidepressants.
Antidepressants increased the risk compared to placebo of suicidal thinking and behavior (suicidality) in children, adolescents, and young adults in short-term studies of major depressive disorder (MDD) and other psychiatric disorders. Anyone considering the use of PAXIL [one SSRI] or any other antidepressant in a child, adolescent, or young adult must balance this risk with the clinical need. Patients of all ages who are started on antidepressant therapy should be monitored appropriately and observed closely for clinical worsening, suicidality, or unusual changes in behavior. Families and caregivers should be advised of the need for close observation and communication with the prescriber.
One chilling demonstration of the danger to young adults is seen in the military where SSRI use and suicides have reached astounding proportions. More than a third of the deaths were in soldiers who never deployed so combat stress was not a factor.
Both NAMI and Active Minds swoop down on campuses after suicides to suggest that not enough antidepressants are being prescribed–despite the clear dangers posed for that age group and sometimes without knowing if the victim was already on the pushed drugs. To remove the fabricated stigma to mental problems, Pharma funded groups visit public schools to suggest more young people should be on drugs. They even produce posters with the message that mental illness is “cool.” Their efforts may not help the young people but they sure help Pharma.
August 23, 2017
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Paxil, Pfizer, SSRIs |
Leave a comment
Head of the relief department of the Algerian Scholars Association, Yahya Sari, said on Tuesday that negotiations with Egyptian authorities to allow the Algerian humanitarian convoy to enter the Gaza Strip have reached a dead end.
Sari told Quds Press that the convoy is preparing to return to Algeria as soon as possible so that the medicines are not damaged due to heat.
He pointed out that Egyptian authorities have given their reasons for preventing the entry of the convoy into Gaza, but he did not disclose them.
The 14-truck convoy, carrying medical aid worth over $4 million, contained medicines, medical supplies, ambulances and electricity generators urgently needed for Gaza’s hospitals.
The convoy named (Algeria-Gaza 4) arrived on Wednesday at the Egyptian side of Rafah crossing in preparation for entering the Gaza Strip, but it was asked on Friday evening to return to the Egyptian city of Port Said despite having all the documents required to deliver aid to Gaza.
Ammar Talbi, the deputy head of the Algerian Scholars Association, appealed two days ago to Egyptian authorities to expedite the entry of the Algerian convoy into the coastal enclave fearing that some medicines may deteriorate due to the high temperature.
Talbi said in a statement that the convoy was purely humanitarian and that it left Algeria after obtaining the approvals of both Algerian and Egyptian authorities in early February.
August 23, 2017
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture | Egypt, Gaza, Zionism |
2 Comments
The Israeli intelligence service Mossad has been accused of assassinating a Palestinian man living in Sweden, according to Israeli daily Haaretz.
Mohammad Tahsin Al-Bazam, a former Gaza resident, was found shot in the head in the Swedish town of Limmared on Saturday. His family is believed to have ties to Hamas, prompting Palestinian sources to suspect Israeli involvement in his death.
A statement released on Sunday by the Swedish police confirmed that as yet they could not ascertain a motive for the intrusion.
“Reports said several people wearing masks entered the apartment through a balcony and shot the man inside. They disappeared after the shooting as quickly as they arrived.”
After the shooting Al-Bazam was taken to a local hospital, and then flown to a larger facility in Gothenburg, but died of his injuries.
Al-Bazam’s brother served in Hamas’ military wing and as a bodyguard to the group’s Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. His father is currently the spokesman for Hamas’ Homeland Security Office in Gaza, but stated in an interview that his son had been living in Sweden for over a decade and was not involved in political activity.
Hamas believes Mossad to be responsible for the deaths of numerous of its members over the years, including the assassination of a senior member, Mazen Fuqaha in March. Israel has never confirmed or denied reports but states that it reserves the right to fight alleged terrorists even beyond its borders.
August 23, 2017
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture, War Crimes | Hamas, Israel, Zionism |
1 Comment
Conservatives in America are leading a campaign to convince US President Donald Trump to fire his National Security Adviser, Israel Today reported on Tuesday. They accuse H R McMaster of being hostile to Israel and pro-Hamas, Hezbollah and the Iranian nuclear deal.
One of the leading figures of the campaign is Morton Klein, the head of the Zionist Organisation of America (ZOA), as well as the billionaire Zionist Sheldon Adelson. The ZOA and supporters of Israel in the White House are afraid that McMaster will use his position to disrupt Trump’s pro-Israel policies.
Adelson, the Israeli newspaper pointed out, was a major donor for Trump’s presidential campaign. While it said that he has denied that he was involved in a campaign criticising McMaster, it added that he had acknowledged in an email to Klein that he did not know much about the National Security Adviser but now supports efforts to remove him from the White House.
August 23, 2017
Posted by aletho |
Wars for Israel | Hamas, Hezbollah, Israel, Palestine, Sanctions against Iran, United States, Zionism |
3 Comments
For the first time ever, the US and South Korea will be conducting war games meant to prepare their militaries for the possibility of a nuclear war, according to a South Korean Defense Ministry official. North Korea has previously called the planned military exercises a provocation that could lead to nuclear war.
No other details were given by the Defense Ministry spokesperson, who was speaking to South Korean newspaper Chosun Ilbo. However, the war game does come in the wake of North Korea’s first-ever test of a long range intercontinental ballistic missile in July, as well as reports that the country might be capable of fitting a nuclear payload onto it.
Ulchi Freedom Guardian, a 10-day military exercise that this summer involves 17,500 American and 50,000 South Korean soldiers (as well as contingents from seven other US allies), has been an annual event for 41 straight years. The focus of the exercises is to defend South Korea from a mock invasion from the North.
Michelle Thomas, a US military spokeswoman, said of the exercises: “It’s to prepare if something big were to occur and we needed to protect [South Korea].”
North Korea traditionally condemns the drills as provocative, and this year is no different. State news agency KCNA called Ulchi Freedom Guardian an exercise “aimed to ignite a nuclear war on the Korean Peninsula at any cost.”
South Korean President Moon Jae-in said that the exercises were not meant “at all to heighten military tension on the Korean Peninsula as these drills are held annually and are of a defensive nature. North Korea should not exaggerate our efforts to keep peace nor should they engage in provocations that would worsen the situation, using [the exercise] as an excuse.”
China chimed in to the contrary, with Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying criticizing the drills during a regular press conference. Hua called them “not helpful to the de-escalation of the current tensions and the efforts made by all relevant parties to promote peace talks.” She added that the situation on the peninsula was “highly complex, sensitive and delicate” and that South Korea and the US shouldn’t “add fuel to the fire.”
Despite tensions with North Korea at their highest in decades, US Forces Korea has downsized American participation in the exercise from 2016: 17,500 American soldiers are participating in the 2017 exercises, down from 25,000 the previous year.
Hua urged both sides to focus on more “constructive actions” instead, such as accepting China’s proposal of “suspension for suspension.” The solution, proposed by Beijing in March, calls for North Korea to stop all missile tests in exchange for the US and South Korea stopping all military exercises.
Pyongyang welcomed the plan, while Washington and Seoul rejected it. American military experts called the deal overwhelmingly advantageous for North Korea, as they get to continue their own military exercises and thus better prepare for offensive or defensive warfare.
“It is hard to imagine why the United States would accept [suspension for suspension], because of the vulnerability it would create,” said Bruce Bennett, a senior defense researcher at Rand Corp., to the Charlotte Observer.
Hua also added that the “tense situation on the Korean Peninsula has shown a slight sign of abatement recently.” This may have been a reference to General Joe Dunford, the United States’ highest ranking military officer and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, visiting China earlier in August to meet with President Xi Jinping.
During his visit, the US and China agreed to strengthen military ties and the lines of communication to help find a resolution to the North Korean crisis.
August 23, 2017
Posted by aletho |
Militarism | North Korea, United States |
1 Comment
You may like Donald Trump or not but he will go down in history as the President who made decisions of fundamental importance for his country and the world. Nobody else but Donald Trump will determine the configuration of US future nuclear arsenal, which is to go through massive modernization. Modernizing the US’s entire nuclear arsenal would cost $400 billion by 2026, according to a figure released by the Congressional Budget Office. The United States will modernize nearly every part of its nuclear arsenal, including replacement warheads, upgraded command-and-control systems, and other improvements across the strategic triad. Kicked off in April to be finished by the end of the year, the Nuclear Posture Review is underway and the final decisions are to be taken during the Donald Trump’s tenure.
The issue is being debated, with new visions presented and new proposals put forward. Concerned over America «fallen behind on nuclear weapon capacity», the Supreme Commander-in-Chief wants the US to stay at the «top of the pack». The US Air Force is studying the options for «variable yield» bombs – nukes that can be dialed down to blow up an area as small as a neighborhood, or dialed up for a much larger punch.
Air Force Gen. Paul Selva, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, believes that the future of nuclear deterrence lies, at least in part, in smaller nuclear weapons that the United States might actually use. «Whether we do it with a ballistic missile or re-entry vehicle or other tool in the arsenal, it’s important to have variable-yield nukes,» he said. Speaking at the Air Force Association’s Mitchell Institute at the Capitol Hill Club on August 3, the US number two military leader confirmed that as part of the Pentagon’s ongoing nuclear posture review, it is looking at a new generation of low-yield «mini-nukes» in order to ensure that the threat from America’s nuclear arsenal remains credible.
He thinks a conventional response to a nuclear strike would not be sufficient to deter the attacker. It’s not tactical or battlefield weapons the general is talking about but rather munitions with explosive force increased or reduced electronically through a dial-a-yield (variable yield) system. This combination of accuracy and low-yield will make them the most usable nuclear weapons in America’s arsenal to ensure global domination.
The threat of mutually assured destruction doesn’t work against smaller nations, such as North Korea and Iran, in the way that it used to against Russia or China. The US needs to be able launch a nuclear attack on an adversary without global consequences.
In practical terms, accurate munitions with low yield can destroy any specific target without devastation indiscriminate killing of civilians through explosive force or radioactive fallout. According to some estimates, a US counterforce strike against China’s intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) silos using high-yield weapons detonated at ground blast would kill approximately 3-4 million people. Using low-yield weapons and airbursts, the figure drops to just 700 fatalities.
In December, the Defense Science Board urged the Pentagon to incorporate low-yield and variable-yield reentry vehicles into future ICBM designs. The Air Force had not yet made a final decision on that. Discriminate employment options could be provided by a suite of low-yield, special-effects warheads (enhanced radiation, earth penetration, electromagnetic pulse, and others), including a shorter-range cruise missile that could be delivered by F-35s.
Variable yield with in combination with great accuracy means less destruction. But there is the reverse side of the medal. The smaller yields and better targeting can make the arms more tempting to use — even to use first, rather than in retaliation. Gen. James E. Cartwright, former Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, believes that «what going smaller does,» he acknowledged, «is to make the weapon more thinkable». The Federation of American Scientists, has also argued that the high accuracy and low destructive settings meant military commanders might press to use the bomb in an attack, knowing the radioactive fallout and collateral damage would be limited.
So, the introduction of low yield accurate weapons (the nuclear utilization target selection – NUTS) asserts that such a thing as a limited nuclear war does exist and it is possible for a limited nuclear exchange to occur. So, the door is open for introducing nuclear warfare into local conflicts, such as Syria, Iraq, Yemen, you name it. But a tiny nuke still has a larger impact than any conventional massive ordnance air blast (MOAB). The temptation to use more here and there will be irresistible to gradually turn the planet into a wasteland. Mutual mass destruction would occur at a slower rate, but it would still happen as mini-nukes gradually create the same amassed yield as normal nukes.
Congressional critics say the proliferation of such weapons would bring less, not more security. «I have no doubt the proposal to research low-yield nuclear weapons is just the first step to actually building them», Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told Roll Call in February. «I’ve fought against such reckless efforts in the past and will do so again, with every tool at my disposal».
There is another aspect of the problem. The introduction of variable yield weapons will provoke Russia, China and other nuclear powers into taking similar measures. Uncontrolled arms race will start. The plans to equip the delivery means with variable yield munitions never mention the problem of arms control, probably because the process is uncontrollable. Small size, variable yield warheads could be installed on a wide range of delivery means to make verification impossible. It will put an end to all hopes for saving the arms control regime which is being eroded to put the world back to the brink of nuclear war where it had been before the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was signed in 1963. All the efforts applied to make the world safer will go down the drain. President Trump can prevent that from happening.
August 23, 2017
Posted by aletho |
Militarism, Timeless or most popular | United States |
Leave a comment
Newly released footage appears to prove Jeremy Corbyn did not lie about having to join seatless commuters on the floor during a three-hour train journey last year in a scandal known as ‘Traingate.’
The Labour leader was filmed by freelancer Yannis Mendez from the floor of a train, where he chose to sit instead of upgrading to first class, on his way to Newcastle from London last August.
Corbyn discussed the state of Britain’s privatized rail system, adding that the train was “ram-packed” and that “the reality is there are not enough trains.”
After CCTV footage was released by Virgin boss Richard Branson, appearing to show Corbyn and his team walking past empty seats on the train, he was accused of staging the scene to make a political point.
Plutocrat tycoon Branson tweeted: “What about all those empty seats he passed?”
Following the controversy, Mendez made a formal request for the complete CCTV footage.
It took Virgin seven months to comply. The firm claimed it did not release all the footage due to “technical difficulties.”
The report by Double Down News featuring the footage has gone viral. It shows the “empty” seats were actually occupied, with some passengers only visible when they move into frame, or taken up by small children not shown.
The newly released footage also shows many other passengers also sitting on the floor of the train.
Twitter users are now calling for Virgin and Branson to make an apology for accusing Corbyn of lying.
August 23, 2017
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Economics | Jeremy Corbyn, Richard Branson, UK |
Leave a comment
The battle between the established unipolar “international order” dominated by Wall Street, Washington, and London and an emerging multipolar order appears fixated on Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and across the entirety of Asia. However, it extends to virtually every corner of the globe, from competition in the Arctic to politically-motivated controversies in Earth orbit.
The South American nation of Venezuela also seems far-removed from this ongoing competition engulfing the world’s hot spots in the Middle East, Central and Asia, but the fate of this besieged nation is directly linked to the that of the rest of the world, either contributing to an emerging multipolar world order, or providing sanctuary and legitimacy to the established unipolar order currently dominated by Wall Street, Washington, and London.
The nation has been the target of US-backed subversion for decades. The latest iteration of American interference began with the rise of Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez and a failed US-backed coup in 2002 organized to oust him and place a US-controlled client regime in power.
Venezuela’s “Opposition” are US-Backed Agitators
Many of those involved in the failed 2002 coup are now leading US-backed protesters in the streets in a bid to overthrow the government of President Nicolás Maduro, who succeeded Chavez after his death in 2013.
The opposition includes former presidential contender, Henrique Capriles Radonski, who heads Primero Justicia (Justice First) which was co-founded by Leopoldo Lopez and Julio Borges, who like Radonski, have been backed for nearly a decade by the US State Department.
Primero Justicia and the network of foreign-funded NGOs that support it have been recipients of both direct and indirect foreign support for at least just as long.
All three co-founders are US educated – Radonski having attended New York’s Columbia University (Spanish), Julio Borges attending Boston College and Oxford, and Leopoldo Lopez who attended the Harvard Kennedy School of Government (KSG), of which he is considered an alumni of.
The Harvard Kennedy School, which hosts the notorious Belfer Center, includes the following faculty and alumni of Lopez, co-founder of the current US-backed opposition in Venezuela:
John P. Holdren, Samantha Power, Lawrence Summers, Robert Zoellick, (all as faculty), as well as Ban Ki-Moon (’84), Paul Volcker (’51), Robert Kagan (’91), Bill O’Reilly (’96), Klaus Schwab (’67), and literally hundreds of senators, ambassadors, and administrators of Wall Street and London’s current global spanning international order.
Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government (KSG) is one of several universities that form the foundation of both creating corporate-financier driven international policy, as well as cultivating legions of administrators to execute it. This includes creating cadres of individuals to constitute Wall Street and Washington’s client regimes around the world.
Venezuela’s Problem, Like Other Targeted States, is US Sedition, not “Socialism”
It is true that Venezuela is deemed a “socialist” nation, and its policy of heavily centralizing the economy has not only failed to alleviate the many longstanding socioeconomic conflicts inflicting Venezuelan society, but has also created an ample vector for Wall Street and Washington’s meddling.
By placing all of Venezuela’s proverbial “eggs” in one centralized “basket,” the United States – through the use of various well-honed geopolitical and socioeconomic tools – has managed to knock that “basket” from the government in Caracas’ hands and is now using its well-funded and organized opposition to crush whatever “eggs” survived the fall.
Unfortunately for Venezuela, the Western political landscape is so deeply rooted in blind, poorly developed political ideology, practical geopolitical and geostrategic analysis has been overlooked across both traditional and alternative media platforms, and instead, many – including opponents of US-backed regime change worldwide – have found themselves cheering on what they believe is the self-inflicted collapse of the socialist Venezuelan government at the hands of “free market” protesters.
In reality, they are cheering on yet another episode of US-backed regime change, wrapped in a protective layer of ideological, political, and economic rhetoric to justify otherwise unjustifiable, extraterritorial meddling, interference, chaos, division, and destruction.
Venezuela’s Place Within the Unipolar-Mulipolar World
Depending on the ultimate fate of the Venezuelan government, the success of US-backed proxies, and the ability of Venezuela to reconstruct itself after decades of foreign-backed subversion, Venezuela can either enhance or set back the emerging multipolar world order.
Regardless of Venezuela’s fate if and when the government in Caracas is toppled, the US-led unipolar international order will benefit. The elimination of competition, even at the cost of creating a center of regional destabilization is considered favorable versus allowing a bastion of alternative socioeconomic and geopolitical power to persist. And in many ways, the creation of a regional center of destabilization may help the US create “synergies” between the chaos it is fostering in Venezuela and in neighboring South and Central American nations the US has likewise targeted for geopolitical coercion and/or regime change.
For Russia, China, other nations of BRICS, and even emerging economies across Southeast Asia and Central Asia, the loss of Venezuela as a means of counterbalance to US hegemony both in the region of the Americas and globally will allow the US to concentrate more resources toward remaining alternative centers of geopolitical and economic power it seeks to target.
This – not the nature of Venezuela’s “socialist” government – is the focus of US efforts and is what defines the consequences of either US success or failure regarding regime change in Caracas.
Any government, socialist or otherwise, operating outside of Wall Street, Washington, and London’s sphere of influence is a target. Competition, not ideology defines and drives Western foreign policy – and for those who oppose this policy – it must be practical geopolitical and geostrategic analysis that defines conclusions and courses of action – not the ideological debates the US itself is using as a pretext and as rhetorical cover to justify its latest regime-change project.
Venezuela may be geographically far removed from the focal point of the great unipolar-multipolar struggle, but understanding how it fits into conflicts raging in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and across Asia illustrates just how encompassing the “international order’s” reach and ambitions really are – and how deadly dangerous they are to global peace, security, and stability.
August 23, 2017
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Economics, Timeless or most popular | Latin America, United States, Venezuela |
Leave a comment
The August 14 New York Times reported that the threat by Donald Trump to use the US military against the government of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has brought together Latin American leaders, divided on other things, in opposition to US intervention. Along the way, reporter Nicholas Casey cites a regional expert who says, “An often ugly history of US interventions is vividly remembered in Latin America — even as we in the US have forgotten.” Which the Times followed thus:
Under President Barack Obama, however, Washington aimed to get past the conflicts by building wider consensus over regional disputes. In 2009, after the Honduran military removed the leftist president Manuel Zelaya from power in a midnight coup, the United States joined other countries in trying to broker—albeit unsuccessfully—a deal for his return.
There’s a word for that kind of statement, and the word is “lie.”
Zelaya was indeed overthrown in a military coup, kidnapped and flown out of the country via the joint US/Honduran military base at Palmerola.
Now, the US is supposed to cut off aid to a country that has a military coup—and “there is no doubt” that Zelaya’s ouster “constituted an illegal and unconstitutional coup,” according to a secret report sent by the US ambassador to Honduras on July 24, 2009, and later exposed by WikiLeaks. But the US continued most aid to Honduras, carefully avoiding the magic words “military coup” that would have necessitated withdrawing support from the coup regime.
Internal emails reveal that the State Department pressured the OAS not to support the country’s constitutional government. In her memoir Hard Choices, Hillary Clinton recalled how as secretary of State she worked behind the scenes to legitimate the new regime. In the days following the coup, her book relates:
I spoke with my counterparts around the hemisphere, including Secretary Espinosa in Mexico. We strategized on a plan to restore order in Honduras, and ensure that free and fair elections could be held quickly and legitimately, which would render the question of Zelaya moot.
Let’s add, for the record, that with a corrupt, drug-linked regime in place—thanks in large part to US intervention—the murder rate in Honduras soared, rising to fully 50 percent above the pre-coup level. Many of the murders involved criminal gangs, but a great deal was political, with resuscitated death squads targeting journalists, opposition figures, labor activists and environmentalists—of whom indigenous leader Berta Cáceres was only the most famous.
So is it really that we in the US have forgotten what happened in Honduras? Or is that many of us believe falsehoods about that history brought to us by media like the New York Times? The paper may run a correction or a letter to the editor; we’re providing contact information below for readers to contact the Times to encourage them to set the record straight.
But really, how can you see such an outright inversion of reality as a slip-up? “Oops, did we say the US opposed the coup? What we meant to say is that the US, virtually alone in the world, supported it.” The real lesson is, when the US government declares a country an enemy, keep in mind that for corporate press, that basically means—anything goes.
ACTION: Please contact the New York Times and ask it to correct the false claim that the United States tried to restore the democratically elected president of Honduras.
CONTACT: nytnews@nytimes.com
August 23, 2017
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular | Honduras, Latin America, New York Times, United States |
1 Comment
The Kuwaiti Attorney General’s office filed criminal cases against several social media users who have been criticizing Arab states and their leadership for the decision to cut ties with Qatar and impose a blockade, Kuwaiti Information Minister Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah Al Sabah said Tuesday.
“We do not tolerate offensive remarks regarding any friendly Arab country, made by both licensed Kuwaiti media and social media users. The Attorney General’s office will deal with all those who offended Persian Gulf states,” Al Sabah said in an interview to Saudi Arabian Okaz newspaper.
He also noted that the names of those users had been already submitted to the Attorney General’s office.
In early June, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Egypt and a number of other countries broke off diplomatic relations with Qatar in early June, accusing it of supporting terrorism and interfering in their internal affairs. The move has been strongly condemned by a number of Kuwaiti journalists and analysts, who have a large number of followers on social media.
Kuwait, acting as a mediator in the crisis, handed over the four Arab states’ ultimatum containing several demands to Doha. The list included requests to sever relations with Iran, close Turkey’s military base on Qatar’s territory, shut down Al Jazeera TV channel and end support for the Muslim Brotherhood, a terrorist organization banned in Russia. Doha has refused to comply with the demands.
August 23, 2017
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | Human rights, Kuwait, Middle East |
Leave a comment
Aletho News
Aletho News 