La guerre est un grand racket qui ne sert qu' à enrichir la classe dominante, le complexe militaro-industriel, les banquiers -qui financent dans la plupart des cas les deux partis s`opposant- ainsi que de permettre de maintenir en place l`ordre social en contrôlant la population par la peur.
On a un grave problème quand on fonctionne dans un système économique qui profite de la mort et de la destruction. Un système qui ne fait pas la distinction entre faire du profit sur la vente de croissants ou sur la mort massive de gens innocents dans un pays lointains pour des raisons bidons. Seul le profit compte. Pour poursuivre leur but sacré de la rentabilité à n`importe quel prix, les corporations s`élèvent au-dessus de toute valeur humaine et produisent et vendent des produits qui vont décimer des populations, détruire l`environnement et mettre le futur même de la planète en danger. En fait, selon des analyses psychologiques du comportement des compagnies, si on s`imagine qu`elles sont des personnes, révèlent qu`elles tombent très rapidement dans la catégorie des psychopathes dangeureux.
Depuis le début de la guerre contre le "terrorisme", l`instabilité n`a fait que grandir de par le monde, les conflits se sont envenimé, la peur avec, causant des ventes records d`armements qui rapportent des milliards aux manufacturiers d`armes. Tout les industriels vous le diront: la guerre est toujours une occasion d`enrichissement énorme. C`est l`argent public qui à travers les budgets militaires augmentés, les achats militaires est transféré dans les poches privées des marchants de la mort. C`est exactement ce que c`est: un transfert de notre argent collectif vers une poignée de poches privées. Et quand les guerres deviennent très coûteuses, on emprunte necéssairement l`argent de banquiers privés qui vont en profiter pour s`arranger que des dettes faramineuses seront ainsi crées, permettant d`augmenter leur contrôle sur ces dits pays par leur économie.
C`est comme ça qu`éventuellement les banques centrales de nos pays en viennent à être contrôlé par ces banquiers privés. C`est la guerre perpétuelle qui profite sans fin aux barons de la destruction.
Il y a beaucoup plus d`intérêts et de motifs à continuer les guerres que de les arrêter ou les prévenir. C`est aussi simple que ça. C`est trop payant de faire la guerre. Jusqu`à ce qu`on change ce système sanguinaire basé que sur la valeur de l`argent au lieu de la valeur suprême de la vie il en sera ainsi. Notre Dieu est le cash, peut-être pas pour tous individuellement, mais certainement pour notre système économique mondial. C`est le coeur du problème. Et temps et aussi longtemps que les guerres seront aussi payantes et un outil pour conserver l`ordre établit et maintenir l`élite en place, on va souffrir de ces conflits inutiles.
On assiste alors à un nombre record de mercenaires privés n`étant régit par aucune loi en Iraq, à des entreprises privées en charge de développer des armes nucléaires, à des situations où les mêmes compagnies qui fournissent le matériel pour détruire, rafflent les contrats à coup de milliard$ pour reconstruire ce qu`il ont servit à détruire et qui contôlent l`information par les médias dont ils sont aussi les propriétaires. N`est-ce pas complètement débile???!!
N`est-ce pas un conflit d`intérêts des plus dangeureux qui soit? Les mêmes compagnies qui font du lobby sur nos gouvernements pour vendre leurs armes, qui feront plus d`argent plus il y aura de destruction et de tuerie, sont les mêmes qui feront plus d`argent le plus qu`il y aura à reconstruire, tout ça avec NOTRE argent, et la vie d`innombrable humains.
Pensez-y. C`est sérieux. Prenez le temps d`explorer les liens dans cet article. C`est une réalité qui n`est pas à notre avantage et nous avons du ménage à faire. C`est en fait très pathétique qu`on en soit encore là.
LA GUERRE EST OBSÉNITÉ GROSSIÈRE, UNE HONTE, UNE INDIGNATION SANS NOM. IL EST TEMPS QUE L`HUMANITÉ ÉVOLUE.
Fanning the Flames of Dissent +++++
Capital knows neither loyalty nor nationality. Its sole motivation is to maximize profits while minimizing costs by any means necessary. Thus capital seeks the cheapest labor with the least restrictions anywhere in the world. Capital has no qualms about outsourcing jobs and leaving economically devastated communities in its wake. It pits worker against worker to increase production while simultaneously driving down wages worldwide.
Although it was not widely reported in the American press, during World War Two General Motors and the Ford Motor Company simultaneously built armored vehicles for both the U.S. and the Nazis. Alcoa supplied aluminum to both sides, with plants operating in both countries.
Not only did these companies realize enormous profits on the spoils of war, they received huge windfall takings from the U.S. taxpayer for reparations to their bombed out production facilities in Germany at the close of the war.
In reality, there is no such entity as an ‘American’ company. Capital does not care where its wealth is produced or who produces it. The above example, by no means out of the ordinary, demonstrates how corporations reap the profits of war without incurring risk. War is good for business, a win-win for the profiteers of capitalism. It is hell for everyone else.
Virtually every military intervention undertaken by the U.S. throughout the world during the past sixty years was to protect corporate investments and to expand markets. None of these interventions were undertaken to spread democracy or to liberate oppressed people. They often did just the opposite.
The U.S. has a long and brutal history of oppressing Democratic Republics—a list too extensive to site here (see William Blum’s insightful book “Killing Hope”).
Democracy is the enemy of capital, as witnessed by our own bloody labor and civil rights history. Thus it should come as no surprise to anyone that a hundred and fifty U.S. based corporations are reaping obscene profits on the plunder and destruction of Iraq.
The U.S. military is the iron fist of capitalism that oppresses workers at home, and kills millions of innocent people in other parts of the world.
We have troops in 135 of the world’s 192 recognized nations. And we are not sowing democracy. We leave devastated landscapes, misery, and abject poverty in our wake. We set up puppet regimes willing to sell out their own people in exchange for making the world safe for corporate plunder; and we call it democracy.
The saber rattling over Iran is another case and point, another opportunity to prop up the anemic U.S. dollar, extend U.S. hegemony in the region and to secure more stolen oil for affluent multinational corporations with familiar names.
The specter of permanent war, as promised by the governing neocon cabal, guarantee obscene profits to the wealthiest corporations and the richest families on earth. Meanwhile, thousands more young women and men will needlessly die in the mistaken belief that they are defending America from foreign enemies. Millions of innocent Iranian citizens will also likely die as their peaceful nation is dismantled in a huge corporate fire sale like the one occurring in Iraq. It is easy money to be divided among the wealthiest one percent of the population.
Capital does not care how its bread is buttered, so long as it is buttered. A Plutocratic government that does not represent the interests of the people does not deserve the allegiance of the people. It is the moral duty of all citizens to resist unjust government, to overthrow it, and replace it with a form of government that serves them—a representative democracy in which all citizens are equal.
The Cash-cow called Israel ++
Many people go on autopilot when it comes to religion or politics. So here are some empirical facts. Israel is a country that has government-sponsored terrorism, and the US supports it.
They are a country with racially segregated settlements on land that is taken by force. Civilian Palestinians are shot and their homes are bulldozed. Israel is expanding its territory in the name of ‘defense’ though “Jew only” settlements, which the US helps to subsidize.
Why does the US support this? Because Israel is a cash-cow for the American military industrial-complex which earmarks ‘aid’ to be recycled on the defense industry which US politicians profit from though equity firms such as the Carlyle group for whom former president Bush is a spokesperson.
US would consider Israeli request for military aid
Great: US infrastructure crumbling and the people from New Orleans and the Mississippi Delta still without homes and basic services, and this administration is even considering sending MORE aid to Israel?
What about people here in this country: have they ceased to matter? -M. Rivero WRH
Arms sales record as firms duck controls with 'flat-pack' weapons ++
By the end of the year, military spending is estimated to reach $1,058bn (£561bn), about 15 times the amount spent on international aid, say Amnesty, Oxfam, and the International Action Network on Small Arms (Iansa).
The figure is higher than the cold war record reached in 1987-88 of $1,034bn in today's prices, they claim, adding that last year the US, Russia, Britain, France and Germany accounted for an estimated 82% of all arms transfers.
If you ever wondered about the US's 'wars on terror without end', just take a look at the numbers and how profitable war is for the defense contractors.And unfortunately, weaponry seems to be the only American-made (or licensed) item that people are interested in buying these days. -M. Rivero WRH
World military budget tops Cold War record: Oxfam
By Matthew Verrinder
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Global military spending is expected to hit $1.06 trillion this year, topping the record set during the Cold War era, an international aid agency reported on Friday.
"Arms sales do not start conflicts, but they certainly fuel and lengthen them," said Bernice Romero, international campaign director for Oxfam International, the group that released the study. "It is time the world stemmed the uncontrolled flood of weapons into the world's war zones."
The previous record for military spending was set in 1988, toward the end of the Cold War, when governments spent an estimated $1.03 trillion, Oxfam said. After falling off after the Cold War ended, military spending has been steadily climbing since 1999, the group said.
Sales of US arms hit record levels
AMERICAN defence contractors are enjoying a bumper year as arms contracts won from foreign governments surge to record levels. So far this year contracts worth $21.7 billion (£11.5 billion) have been passed to the US Congress for ratification, 76 per cent more than agreed during all of 2005, when America is believed to have lost market share in the global weapons trade to Europe.
US is top purveyor on weapons sales list
The United States last year provided nearly half of the weapons sold to militaries in the developing world, as major arms sales to the most unstable regions -- many already engaged in conflict -- grew to the highest level in eight years, new US government figures show. The United States supplied $8.1 billion worth of weapons to developing countries in 2005 -- 45.8 percent of the total.
The figures underscore how the largely unchecked arms trade to the developing world has become a major staple of the American weapons industry, even though introducing many of the weapons risks fueling conflicts rather than aiding long-term US interests. [The U.S.] also signed an estimated $6.2 billion worth of new deals last year to sell attack helicopters, missiles, and other armaments to developing nations such as the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, India, Israel, Egypt, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia.
There is growing evidence that the sales are increasingly more about dollars and cents for the US military-industrial complex. A UN panel [recently] voted to study whether a new treaty might be possible to regulate the sale of conventional arms. The United States was the only country out of 166 to vote no.
A study last year by the progressive World Policy Institute found that the United States transferred weaponry to 18 of the 25 countries involved in an ongoing war. More than half of the countries buying US arms...were defined as undemocratic by the State Department's annual Human Rights Report, including top recipients Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Uzbekistan.
U.S. top arms supplier to developing world
The United States supplied 46 percent of the arms sold to developing countries in 2005, a congressional report said.
Heady Days for Makers of Weapons
THESE are very good times for military contractors. Profits are up, their stocks are rising and Pentagon spending is reaching record levels.
Lockheed Stock and Two Smoking Barrels
Canada to send more high-tech guns to Afghanistan in new year
UN arms trade bill: US casts sole ‘no’ vote against
US casts sole ‘no’ vote against proposed treaty restricting arms tradeBy Kaleem OmarThe United States, which is the world’s biggest exporter of arms and accounts for more than 50 per cent of all arms exports, on Wednesday became the only country in the United Nations to vote against letting work begin on a new treaty to bolster arms embargoes and prevent human rights abuses by setting uniform worldwide standards for arms deals.
The vote in the 192-nation UN General Assembly was 153-1, with the United States casting the sole “no” vote. Twenty-four other nations abstained, including major arms sellers Russia and China and emerging exporters India and Pakistan.
Military may ask $127B for wars
Since 2001, Congress has approved $502 billion for the war on terror, roughly two-thirds for Iraq. The latest request, due to reach the incoming Democratic-controlled Congress next spring, would make the war on terror more expensive than the Vietnam War.
One hundred twenty-seven billion dollars to one hundred sixty billion dollars of YOUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS - for what?
For more American kids dying and getting maimed, more Iraqis dying and getting maimed?
It appears that the only folks "winning" in this war are the defense contractors, for whom members in congress are simply acquisition. -M. Rivero WRH
Behind the plan to bomb Iran
The fact that the military-industrial complex, or merchants of arms and wars, flourishes on war and militarism is largely self-evident. Arms industries and powerful beneficiaries of war dividends need an atmosphere of war and international convulsion to maintain continued increases in the Pentagon budget and justify their lion's share of the public money. Viewed in this light, unilateral or "preemptive" wars abroad can easily been seen as reflections of domestic fights over national resources and tax dollars.
Just as the powerful beneficiaries of war dividends view international peace and stability as inimical to their business interests, so too the hardline Zionist proponents of "Greater Israel" perceive peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors perilous to their goal of gaining control over the "Promised Land" of Israel. The reason for this fear of peace is that, according to a number of United Nations resolutions, peace would mean Israel's return to its pre-1967 borders; that is, withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
You have to wonder how much war there would be if wor wasn't enormously profitable for some people. -M. Rivero WRH
Corporate War Machine Gathers Speed
There is clear evidence that the leading neo-conservative figures have been longtime political activists who have worked through a network of warmongering think-tanks that are set up to serve either as the armaments lobby or the Israeli lobby, or both.These corporate-backed militaristic think-tanks include Project for the New American Century, the American Enterprise Institute, the Center for Security Policy, the Middle East Media Research Institute, the Middle East Forum, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, and the National Institute for Public Policy.
Major components of the Bush administration's foreign policy, including the war on Iraq, have been designed largely at the drawing boards of these think-thanks, often in collaboration, directly or indirectly, with the Pentagon and the arms lobby.
Even a cursory look at the records of these militaristic think-tanks - their membership, their financial sources, their institutional structures and the like - shows that they are set up in essence to serve as institutional fronts to camouflage the dubious relationship between the Pentagon, its major contractors and the Israeli lobby, on the one hand, and the warmongering neo-conservative politicians on the other.
More critically, this unsavory relationship also shows that powerful interests that benefit from war are also in essence the same powers that can - and indeed do - make war. Additionally, it explains why civilian militarists are so eager to foment war and international tensions.
Blix warns of WMD vicious circle
The US foreign policy of pre-emptive strikes against any perceived weapons of mass destruction (WMD) threat, its development of new types of nuclear weapons and the "Star Wars" missile defence shield risked fuelling a new global arms race, said Dr Blix.
... which may be the whole point; to justify taxing the people of all nations into poverty to make defense corporation cronies wealthier. -M. Rivero WRH
Blix warns against regime change
It also urged all nuclear states to reduce their arsenals and halt the production of plutonium and highly enriched uranium for nuclear weapons.
And it firmly rejected the idea that nuclear weapons were only dangerous in the hands of rogue governments.
"The commission does not accept that argument," Mr Blix said.
This is a polite way of saying that the nuclear crisis in the Mideast is the direct result of Israel's clandestine nuclear weapons program. -M. Rivero WRH
US rides weapons wave
War, instability and high oil prices have created a perfect storm of profit for the world's weapons manufacturers. This year, military analysts predict the biggest arms bonanza since 1993, which is saying something because in the aftermath of the first Gulf War the global industry reaped the benefits of a US$42 billion arms race.
Soldiers Die, CEOs Prosper
The top profiteers after 9/11 were the CEOs of United Technologies ($200 million), General Dynamics ($65 million), Lockheed Martin ($50 million), and Halliburton ($49 million).
Other firms where CEO pay the last four years added up to $25 million to $45 million were Textron, Engineered Support Systems, Computer Sciences, Alliant Techsystems, Armor Holding, Boeing, Health Net, ITT Industries, Northrop Grumman, Oshkosh Truck, URS, and Raytheon.
While Army privates died overseas earning $25,000 a year, David Brooks, the disgraced former CEO of body-armor maker DHB, made $192 million in stock sales in 2004. He staged a reported $10 million bat mitzvah for his daughter. The 2005 pay package for Halliburton CEO David Lesar, head of the firm that most symbolizes the occupation's waste, overcharges, and ghost charges on no-bid contracts, was $26 million, according to the report's analysis of federal Securities and Exchange Commission filings.
The Black House On Pennsylvania Avenue ++
By that time "corporate personhood" had already been established as a result of the Constitution being further subverted for corporate interests. With corporate personhood, Constitutional rights that were meant for human beings were given to corporations. There is something about corporations, though. Regardless of how many human rights they might claim for themselves, they remain in fact lifeless, devoid of all feelings, and they are mindless except in their desire for profit and gains. They never, ever develop a conscience, although those devoting themselves to corporation frequently lose theirs.
Two life altering events happened in 1913. Early in the year, the alleged ratification of Amendment XVI was announced in which Congress gave itself the power to tax citizens in a manner that directly violated the Constitution. In December of that year, Congress and President Woodrow Wilson, in further violation of the Constitution and without a required Constitutional Amendment, established The Federal Reserve. This turned important powers to coin and regulate money over to private bankers. The private bankers then referred to themselves by the misleading title of the "Federal" Reserve. On Christmas Eve, front page headlines screamed, "Wilson Sees Dawn of New Era in Business." Indeed. (5)
In 1916, Woodrow Wilson campaigned for reelection under the slogan "he kept us out of war," and he won reelection. Five months later, in April of 1917, Wilson asked Congress for a declaration of war against Germany. This was granted and the US entered the First World War. (6)
One of the most highly decorated Marines in US history, Major General Smedley Butler, wrote a book that was first published in 1935 called, War Is a Racket. The subject of his book was the First World War, and according to his book the war racket is one in which "profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War." The du Ponts alone, General Butler stated, had "an increase in profits of more than 950 percent" during the war years. Nickel manufacturers had increases of more than 1,700 percent; and coal companies had increases of 7,856 per cent. In fact, all of the industries General Butler looked into were ladling in for themselves the cream of substantial profits. The bankers who financed the war, however, had the largest ladles of all. "Being partnerships rather than incorporated organizations," Butler wrote, "they do not have to report to stockholders. And their profits were as secret as they were immense. How the bankers made their millions and their billions I do not know, because those little secrets never became public--even before a Senate investigatory body." (7)
With corporations having more importance than human life and health in the United States, and with the corporations engorged with profits earned at the cost of human life and health, the stage was set for something new to begin happening in the United States, and happen it did, just like night follows day--just like the expected cycles of summer, fall, winter and spring.
Since the First World War, a major war has been arranged for us to lose our lives in approximately every 20 years or so, always occurring after a major, staged event that results in the preliminary loss of innocent lives. This has historically proven to cause the masses to experience outrage, grief, fear and a sense of togetherness or patriotism--all of which have been traditionally necessary in order to turn us into willing military combatants.
The first catalyzing event was the Lusitania, then came Pearl Harbor, followed by the assassination of President Kennedy and the Gulf of Tonkin lies, and now it appears we have the "new Pearl Harbor," as predicted by the Project for a New American Century, PNAC. The "new Pearl Harbor" has so far led to a profitable "war on terror" that brought the US first to war in Afghanistan, and then on to Iraq, with no end currently in sight. Engorged again in another corporate feeding frenzy, the lifeless doll's eyes of this feeding machine are now possibly looking to engorge itself further with Iran.
The Bush regime's "war on terror" appears to be changing the modus operandi slightly. Apparently, those in charge of this profit-making war machine have now decided to do away with the 20-year pauses originally granted to those actually doing the fighting and doing the dying for corporate profit. Perhaps they have decided they are losing too much money with the old plan that skipped every other generation. The new and improved war plan appears to be intent on waging a permanent war against a select few whose names we might not even know, whose hiding places are not known, and whose actual threat to us is also not really known--or is even completely invented. This new plan will allow corporate and banking America to make long, drawn out, endless profits.
The plan is working well so far, at least for those carrying the cream ladles rather than the rifles. According to a 2004 report on Bloomberg, "U.S. corporate profits surged 87 percent from the third quarter of 2001 to the end of 2003." They based these figures upon Commerce Department records.(8)
But while the United States is now at war with "terrorists," and our task at hand is to apparently rid the world of terrorists, many U.S. Citizens are now falling under the category of being a "terrorist" themselves simply because we are sensing that something is suspiciously not right with the Bush administration and we are speaking out about it, as we are expected to do under the Constitution. The "patriot act," another illegal and unconstitutional law, demands that we obediently obey, and never question government. This violates the very soul of America.
What exactly does the Bush administration consider to be a terrorist? Are terrorists pacifists such as myself, who have never held or fired a gun in their lives, but who have a few select words to say about the mess the Bush family has orchestrated? Are terrorists newsmen such as Keith Olbermann who are daring to speak out against the policies of the Bush administration? Is this "war" Bush keeps reminding us of actually against terrorists, or is it a war against the civil liberties and human rights of people in this country and everywhere else?