No Pink Woolly Caps for Me


horiz grey line

tgplogo12313

 


As I looked at the photos of women’s marches in Washington DC, San Francisco and all over the world on January 21, I was struck by one thing. Whiteness. The marchers were predominantly white – even in places like Nairobi. Not only were they white, they looked like they were upper middle class – able to afford the finest warm clothes and designer outfits, down jackets, sporting iPhones to record themselves. 

When interviewed they appeared to be educated and articulate. All of this raised alarm bells in me. Even before the march I had reservations. Why, I wondered, did the organizers change the date from the day of the inauguration to the day after the inauguration? Why did they quickly back off from their acknowledged protest against Trump to a vague “support for rights”? Why was there suddenly no mention of Trump anywhere in their materials and postings – only a vague reference to “the new government? In fact, I read an interview with one of the organizers who specifically said, “This is not an anti-Trump march”. In reality, it seemed to be exactly that. So why did they not want to admit that?


What is their goal?

[dropcap]W[/dropcap]hat is their demand? Do they sincerely think Donald Trump and his followers are going to watch them and say – “wow – this is serious – I guess we had better change our ways”? That’s a little like a meme I saw recently on Facebook that said “Your political FB status updates totally changed my opinions. Said no one. Ever.” Their march was indecisive – all over the place. All of the issues they were raising are part of what is called “identity politics”.

Is it a feel-good day so they can go home and congratulate themselves on having “made history”? Then they can go back to their comfortable lives and do nothing more to organize or fight in any systematic way except to call their congresspersons – whose phone lines are down and can’t take more calls and who have systematically proven they pay no attention to these calls. Knitting pink caps, making signs and going out in the streets with others just like them gave them a feeling of catharsis.

Since the march I’ve watched many of the same people rush to the airports to defend immigrants being banned from the U.S. by Trump’s anti-Muslim edict. Does this mean that if immigrants are allowed in everything ok?


Whose march was this?

M. Moore: Democratic party booster, agitprop for the neoliberal status quo.

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]his was not a “women’s march”. This was an “upper middle-class women’s march”. This was a Democratic Party directed march. These were women – and men – who were upset that their candidate didn’t win. They wanted Hillary in the White House no matter what – partly because she is a woman. They paid no attention to her war mongering, Wall Street loving, elitist past, capitalist actions. And, rather than blaming her or the Democratic Party, they raged – and are still raging – at anyone who didn’t vote for her. They are all over Facebook pointing the finger at anyone who didn’t vote for Hillary and claiming they are the ones to blame for Trumps’ election. They are particularly raging against the 42% of the population who didn’t vote over – 90 million people – because they saw no point in it. Voter turnout was at the lowest point in two decades. Because they understand that, not matter who they vote for, their lives are not going to change for the better. The upper middle class has no investment or interest in actually talking to these folks to find out why they didn’t vote – and then working towards helping them.

Gloria Steinem’s brand of feminism has shown itself to be of real use only to her fellow upper middle class women. Not too mention the old collaboration of bourgeois feminism with the corporate status quo. Symbol over substance, again.

And where was the middle and upper middle class while all of this was happening? Nowhere to be found. The middle class was not even aware that it was shrinking to the lower middle and working classes, and all the while the upper middle class was growing. Now the upper middle class is a whopping 9% of the population. So it’s not accurate to talk about the 1%, because it’s really the top 10%. And none of the concerns that the working class and the poor have been fighting for are concerns of the 10%.

I have to ask – where were these women throughout the 8 years of war during the Obama administration. What exactly did Obama do for women? Where were they on all the marches so many of us were on against police violence against blacks, illegal wars for control of oil, outrageous student debt, low wages, poor working conditions, lack of benefits, Wall Street, Goldman Sachs? They were nowhere to be found. Or they might be found at Starbucks, the gym, having brunch. It doesn’t matter. Obama was charming, articulate, smooth and tall and now is being deified.

Not everyone participating in the march was a Clinton zombie. The Democratic Party has more or lesser control based on the city in which the march was held. But without making a clear distinction of their issues on the signs they were carrying, these marchers are being used by them.


Who supported the march?

Let’s look at a list of the people who spoke at or participated in the Women’s March:

  • Gloria Steinem
  • Michael Moore
  • John Kerry – and his dog
  • Van Jones – a total sell-out
  • Kamala Harris – Debbie Wasserman Schultz grinning next to her
  • Madonna
  • Cher
  • Billy Joel
  • Lady Gaga
  • Jennifer Lopez

All of these people are strong, vocal supporters of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party. Hillary, herself, tweeted her support. Michael Moore fought hard against the Greens to ensure we had no hope of having a third party in this country. He did the same thing to Ralph Nader when he ran as a Green 8 years ago. Gloria Steinem told women they must vote for Hillary because it’s time for a woman to be in the White House. Most are celebrities – whose single claim to fame is that they are famous. And they are rich – very, very rich. Where have they been on the ground fighting for the rights of the working class and poor? They may be very good at what they do – acting, singing – but what bestows on them the wisdom to lead us in our voting decisions? These people should not be our role models. They are the upper 9% supporting the ruling 1%.


Who funded the march?

These are some of the primary funders:

  • George Soros – a billionaire and long-standing supporter of the Democratic Party who was one of the initial donors to Moveon.org– formed in 1998 to oppose the impeachment of Bill Clinton and has spent millions supporting the Democratic Party
  • Planned Parenthood – supported by the Democratic Party
  • Sierra Club – supported by the Democratic Party and members of the 1%
  • Amnesty International – supported by the Democratic party and partially funded by George Soros

It’s important to understand that, while we may support the above organizations, we need to know where their funding comes from. Where there is funding, there is influence. This was clearly a march to support the Democratic Party and see them reinstalled.


The cops are NOT our friends

Seeing the photos posted of women shaking hands with the police, giving them pink pussy hats to wear – and seeing them plop them on their heads for photo-ops – made me sick. Yes, the cops are nice to them – they pose no threat. They are “good people”. Non-violent, not really rocking the boat. They also are from the upper middle class – the folks whose property is protected by the police – the very class the police are paid to protect. They are not paid to protect the middle, lower middle and working classes. The police state came about in the 19th century to protect the capitalists from the workers who were striking and demanding fair pay and treatment. And they are still protecting the capitalists. It was disgusting to see these upper middle class whites talking about how wonderful the police were, and posting thanks to them on FB. Other protestors who were not part of this group were attacked and arrested. Most of the protest marches I’ve been on we’ve watched the cops in their riot gear and helmets watching us.

A friend of mine who was going to the Women’s March told me she was worried there would be “some of those anarchists who want to cause trouble”. OK – I get it – it’s only a good march if everybody is orderly, peaceful and exactly like you. Sometimes the only way to get attention is to stop business as usual by breaking things. The police presence, in itself, IS violence. It’s a threat – but not to the upper middle class.


Qualification

[dropcap]B[/dropcap]efore I get accused of being a Trump supporter, I want to make clear that I think he is a megalomaniac, idiot of a bully but a very dangerous bully. And he is not alone. The real brains behind the throne is Steve Bannon, who is a much more dangerous threat because he actually reads books (mostly about war) and is capable of crafting a long-term plan to push through the strategies of the far right and neo-nationalism.


Why not name the system?


[dropcap]A[/dropcap]ll of these issues raised during the march and airport protests are important but, they didn’t start with Trump.  They all existed during previous administrations – Democratic or Republican. The difference now seems to be that there is no hiding those attacks – they are out in the open. The difference also is that the front man for them is a bellicose, obnoxious misogynist with a complete lack of charm or intellect.  These very same issues did not bring people out on the streets while they continued to go unaddressed by the Obama regime.

Where were all the identity politics people during the Obama administration’s failure to secure a minimum wage above poverty level, build low cost housing or deal with the worst police force in the entire industrial capitalist world? Under Obama’s reign the U.S. continued the illegal wars begun under Bush, pushed for the Dakota Access Pipeline, did close to nothing to punish the banks and Wall Street or demand a cap on emissions to slow global warming.

Whether its the neo-nationalist new-money faction of Trump-Bannon or it’s the old-money Clinton, Bush, Koch Brothers, Kissinger faction, we know that the capitalists give all of them their marching orders. The primary goal of both parties is to protect capitalism and undermine any attempts to regulate, let alone change, the economic system that is driving the majority of us into the ground.


Making demands is for those who accept their subservience

[dropcap]I[/dropcap]t would not be fair for me to only comment on the women’s part of the march because their were other groups there as well. The problem with all these “demands” is that they are demands. There is no promise to take power. The implication of demands is that there is someone in power that is in a position of granting or refusing the demands. It accepts the capitalist rulers and complains they are not fair and just rulers. Demands are the plea to make ones in power be better leaders.


I’ll march for a socialist transition program

[dropcap]B[/dropcap]ernie Sanders influenced 12 million people and used  the word “socialism” in his speeches. Most of his followers did not cringe under the bed and say “McCarthy will come after us.” Neither did they seem to worry that “the masses are not ready for socialism”.  The Green party had a golden opportunity to throw down the gauntlet to Sanders and say to his followers  “hey folks, he’s not a socialist, we’re the real thing.” Instead they offer him their nomination if he would join them.  Socialist Alternative seems to have stopped using the word socialism in its rallying cries and has dissolved their identity into an “Anti-Trump” movement. Many of the organizers of all these current marches are not liberals but socialists. They don’t have the nerve to tell ethnic and religious minorities that “we are socialists and we will help you as part of our socialist transition program”.  Neither do they have the nerve to reach out to the working class people who voted for Trump because he offered them jobs. Most of all, this cringing left does not use its collective imagination and provide a clear down-to-earth vision of socialism for all poor, working class and middle class people to see and craft a transition program. Whether you like Trotsky or not, he was on the right track. We need a socialist transition program publically presented at any future public encounters.

So, no, I won’t be marching with a pink, wooly cap. I’ve been through with New Left single-issue identity politics for many years. Why would I want to march with them? I will be marching with a broom, a shovel and a hammer when a socialist organization steps up with a socialist transition program.



NOTE: ALL IMAGE CAPTIONS, PULL QUOTES AND COMMENTARY BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS • PLEASE COMMENT AND DEBATE DIRECTLY ON OUR FACEBOOK GROUP CLICK HERE

Barbara MacLean has worked as an academic and career counselor at California State University, East Bay and as a career counselor and manager of the downtown Oakland One Stop Career Center, a public career and jobs center in partnership with EDD. She is a socialist feminist. She is a founder and organizer for Planning Beyond Capitalism. Follow them on Facebook and Twitter Email her at mailto:barbaramaclean8@gmail.com 

Note to Commenters
Due to severe hacking attacks in the recent past that brought our site down for up to 11 days with considerable loss of circulation, we exercise extreme caution in the comments we publish, as the comment box has been one of the main arteries to inject malicious code. Because of that comments may not appear immediately, but rest assured that if you are a legitimate commenter your opinion will be published within 24 hours. If your comment fails to appear, and you wish to reach us directly, send us a mail at: editor@greanvillepost.com

We apologize for this inconvenience. 

horiz-long grey

uza2-zombienationWhat will it take to bring America to live according to its own propaganda?


black-horizontal

black-horizontal

=SUBSCRIBE TODAY! NOTHING TO LOSE, EVERYTHING TO GAIN.=
free • safe • invaluable
Please see our red registration box at the bottom of this page

If you appreciate our articles, do the right thing and let us know by subscribing. It’s free and it implies no obligation to you—ever. We just want to have a way to reach our most loyal readers on important occasions when their input is necessary. In return you get our email newsletter compiling the best of The Greanville Post several times a week.

horiz-black-wide
REMEMBER: ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL-QUOTES BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS.




black-horizontal

THE GREANVILLE POST

For media inquiries contact us at greanville@gmail.com




Lithuania Demands More Foreign Troops on Russia’s Border to Counter Russian Troops Inside Russia


horiz grey line

tgplogo12313

Matthew Allen
RUSSIA INSIDER


WNot acceptable. 


Russian aggression has become so ubiquitous that even when Moscow holds defensive military drills inside Russia as a response to foreign soldiers massing on its borders, this is a form of aggression.

This is actually an example of aggression within aggression, because really the first act of Russian aggression was when it created a country called “Russia” in the first place.

We know this because Lithuanian president and NATO milk maid Dalia Grybauskaite says so.

Dalia Grybauskaite with John Kerry: Guess who put such stupid ideas in her head, besides being a natural Russophobe? And who’s egging her on?

Grybauskaite is fairly confident that Russian aggression inside Russia will destroy her country, which of course is next in line for Russian annexation. Because if there’s one thing Russia needs more than anything right now, its a pointless war for a useless blob of Baltic dirt inhabited by people like Dalia Grybauskaite.

Luckily Lithuania has a leader brave enough to speak truth to power:

Lithuania’s president Dalia Grybauskaite warned the Zapad 2017 joint military drills are a clear indication that Russia is preparing for war. And she appealed to NATO for more military aid in preparation for what could be ‘the biggest Russian war game in Europe’. 

She also sought more assurances European Union allies would come to the aid of the Baltic states, amid fears Vladimir Putin is attempting to annexe them

We see that risks are increasing, and we are worried about the upcoming ‘Zapad 2017’ exercise, which will deploy a very large and aggressive force on our borders that will very demonstrably be preparing for a war with the West.” This means that we will be talking with NATO about creating additional standing defence plans, about stationing additional military means and about creating a faster decision- making process.

What a staggering lack of self-awareness. You don’t like your neighbor conducting military exercises inside its own borders? How would you feel if a hostile army from the other side of the world was zooming around in tanks, just a few kilometers away from your territory?

We get it. Lithuania hates Russia.

But under what circumstances would it be prudent for Russia to launch an unprovoked invasion of Lithuania? And if the upcoming Zapad exercises are so distressing, maybe it would be wise to ask why Moscow believes it is necessary to conduct them?

Sorry, this is not a “what came first, the chicken or the egg?” scenario.

NATO expansion and saber-rattling came first. It would be nice if Washington and its client states could at least own up to this.



NOTE: ALL IMAGE CAPTIONS, PULL QUOTES AND COMMENTARY BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS • PLEASE COMMENT AND DEBATE DIRECTLY ON OUR FACEBOOK GROUP CLICK HERE

Note to Commenters
Due to severe hacking attacks in the recent past that brought our site down for up to 11 days with considerable loss of circulation, we exercise extreme caution in the comments we publish, as the comment box has been one of the main arteries to inject malicious code. Because of that comments may not appear immediately, but rest assured that if you are a legitimate commenter your opinion will be published within 24 hours. If your comment fails to appear, and you wish to reach us directly, send us a mail at: editor@greanvillepost.com

We apologize for this inconvenience. 

horiz-long grey

uza2-zombienationWhat will it take to bring America to live according to its own propaganda?


black-horizontal

black-horizontal

=SUBSCRIBE TODAY! NOTHING TO LOSE, EVERYTHING TO GAIN.=
free • safe • invaluable
Please see our red registration box at the bottom of this page

If you appreciate our articles, do the right thing and let us know by subscribing. It’s free and it implies no obligation to you—ever. We just want to have a way to reach our most loyal readers on important occasions when their input is necessary. In return you get our email newsletter compiling the best of The Greanville Post several times a week.

horiz-black-wide
REMEMBER: ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL-QUOTES BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS.




black-horizontal

THE GREANVILLE POST

For media inquiries contact us at greanville@gmail.com




Revealed: Trump Administration Aborted Operation That Would Have Provoked War With Iran

FRONTLINENEWSLOGO-2


Richard Brandt
RUSSIA INSIDER


The New York Times details an aborted operation that would have very likely started a shooting war with Iran


Too close for comfort.

Iranian patrol boat. Too close for comfort.

Buried in the middle of the New York Times’ story on the inner workings of Trump’s National Security Council is a revelation almost too terrifying to believe: Last week, the U.S. Navy came close to intercepting and boarding an Iranian ship — allegedly in an attempt to stop the flow of weapons to the Houthis in Yemen.

We don’t want to believe it, but frankly Trump’s team is so hawkish on Iran, it’s hard to completely dismiss:

Last week, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis was exploring whether the Navy could intercept and board an Iranian ship to look for contraband weapons possibly headed to Houthi fighters in Yemen. The potential interdiction seemed in keeping with recent instructions from Mr. Trump, reinforced in meetings with Mr. Mattis and Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson, to crack down on Iran’s support of terrorism.

But the ship was in international waters in the Arabian Sea, according to two officials. Mr. Mattis ultimately decided to set the operation aside, at least for now. White House officials said that was because news of the impending operation leaked, a threat to security that has helped fuel the move for the insider threat program. But others doubt whether there was enough basis in international law, and wondered what would happen if, in the early days of an administration that has already seen one botched military action in Yemen, American forces were suddenly in a firefight with the Iranian Navy.

Ah yes, that annoying little detail, “international law”. And are we supposed to be reassured that Mattis has set the operation aside “at least for now”?

It’s clear that the risks involved could never justify any potential “positive” outcome for Washington, like a few less guns for the Houthis.

Trump’s opposition to the wars in Iraq, Libya and Syria doesn’t count for much if he’s keen on provoking a shooting war with Iran.

Oh, and by the way — who benefits from a war between the United States and Iran?

You probably know the answer.


MAIN IMAGE: The USS carrier Iwo Jima, part of the Fifth Fleet on patrol in the Persian Gulf. What the devil is the American fleet doing thousands of miles from its home ports? If America respected other nations, would it need to have all these extravagant machines of war to intimidate them? 

black-horizontal

NOTE: ALL IMAGE CAPTIONS, PULL QUOTES AND COMMENTARY BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS • PLEASE COMMENT AND DEBATE DIRECTLY ON OUR FACEBOOK GROUP. JUST CLICK HERE.
           

Note to Commenters
Due to severe hacking attacks in the recent past that brought our site down for up to 11 days with considerable loss of circulation, we exercise extreme caution in the comments we publish, as the comment box has been one of the main arteries to inject malicious code. Because of that comments may not appear immediately, but rest assured that if you are a legitimate commenter your opinion will be published within 24 hours. If your comment fails to appear, and you wish to reach us directly, send us a mail at: editor@greanvillepost.com

We apologize for this inconvenience. 

horiz-long grey



black-horizontal

=SUBSCRIBE TODAY! NOTHING TO LOSE, EVERYTHING TO GAIN.=
free • safe • invaluable

If you appreciate our articles, do the right thing and let us know by subscribing. It’s free and it implies no obligation to you—ever. We just want to have a way to reach our most loyal readers on important occasions when their input is necessary.  In return you get our email newsletter compiling the best of The Greanville Post several times a week.  

horiz-black-wide
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL-QUOTES BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS.




black-horizontal




American Media Hacking “Fake News” About North Korea

pale blue horiz
WITNESSES TO HISTORY
CALEB T. MAUPIN


US media continues its campaign against “fake news,” urging people to only listen to mainstream, pro-western capitalist news sources, despite their documented record of factual inaccuracies.


US media coverage around anything related to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) is a great example of media bias and deception in practice. Sometimes US media is caught blatantly reporting false things about the DPRK, such as the outrageous claim that Kim Jong-Un executed someone by feeding them to a pack of wild dogs. This was proven to be fake, or untrue news.


However, most of the manner in which the US public is deceived about the DPRK is more subtle.

The Forgotten “Economic Miracles”

[dropcap]F[/dropcap]or example, most Americans believe that the economic system that is in place in the northern half of the Korean peninsula has been an absolute, total failure, and caused nothing but mass starvation. This is demonstrably false.

A new video from the Council on Foreign Relations, a top American foreign policy think tank features policy analyst Scott Snyder passingly mentioning:  “It is a socialist system, it was established on the  Soviet model. The economy is centrally controlled, it worked well in the early 60s, but it ran into roadblocks.”


border.”

The Country Study of the DPRK published by the US Library of Congress goes into detail describing the economic achievements of the country, including housing, literacy, self-sufficiency and access to medical care.

MASH: The Korean war as a non-stop big frat party. A pasteurized, trivialized picture of American power that Americans can live with. This dramedy is still regarded as exceptional television even though its central concept—the inherent goodness of Americans, their wars, and their right to set up shop anywhere they please across the globe—was a huge self-serving lie.

Mass starvation took place in the DPRK during the 1990s. In the aftermath of the Soviet Union’s collapse, the DPRK was unable to import oil, on which the country’s food system was very dependent. Within the DPRK, this period is known as the “arduous march.” The government blames sanctions from the United States for the food crisis.

However, when reporting on North Korea, American media emphasizes the “arduous march” period, and omits the “economic miracles” of the 1960s. Furthermore, the causes of the food crisis of the 1990s are never explained. A single episode of mass starvation during the 1990s does not accurately represent the entire experience of socialist construction in northern Korea.

Furthermore, the audience is led to believe that the only factor is the failure of socialist economics and mis-leadership by the Korean Workers Party. Usually no other factors, such as sanctions, lack of arable land, drought, flooding, etc. are discussed.



Nukes: The Whole Story


North Korean kids on the street. Guess what folks, North Koreans are human, too. (Andre Vltchek)

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he other example of lying through omission and emphasis relates to nuclear proliferation. North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty on January 10th, 2003. It is understood now that the country possesses nuclear weapons. But why?American media ignores, omits, or de-emphasizes the entire context of the DPRK developing nuclear weapons. The audience is led to believe that the DPRK randomly developed nukes out of a desire to attack the United States or threaten its neighbors.Let’s go over the omitted background of the story of nuclear proliferation on the Korean Peninsula. During the Korean War, millions of Koreans died. Some estimate that roughly 30% of the population of the DPRK was lost. Every building above one story high was destroyed. During the war, the United States was openly considering the use of Nuclear Weapons against both Korean and Chinese forces. Douglas MacArthur even made these threats publicly.North Korea first ratified the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1985. In 1993, they threatened to withdraw. At the time, the country was facing an episode of mass starvation, amid US threats, sanctions, and the loss of their Soviet allies. Negotiations between the US Government and the DPRK took place, and DPRK did not withdraw. In 1994 the “Agreed Framework” was established between the United States and North Korea. It was understood that North Korea would be given agricultural aid, heating oil, and the US would move toward having diplomatic relations with North Korea, all in exchange for nuclear non-proliferation.However, the United States never fulfilled its end of the bargain. US Congress blocked the implementation of the deal which the Clinton administration had negotiated.In this context, the DPRK dropped its obligations under the agreed framework as well, and ultimately developed nuclear weapons.US media, of course, leaves out this entire chain of events. Korea’s leadership agreed not to develop nuclear weapons in exchange for food for their starving population, as well as other humanitarian support, in a time of mass starvation. US leaders did not fulfill their promises. Very little food and heating gas was ever delivered. In this context, is it a surprise, or a moral outrage that North Korea would also drop its end of the bargain, and go ahead and pursue nukes? Does such an action really fit the narrative of a “rogue state” lead by “insane” leaders bent on destroying the planet?When a few basic facts are mentioned, the entire narrative and perception of North Korea falls apart. The DPRK hasn’t always had mass starvation, and according to even rather hostile sources like BBC and the Council on Foreign Relations, its economic system was quite successful at one time. Furthermore, the DPRK developed Nuclear Weapons only in response to the failure of US leaders to fulfill their obligations under a negotiated agreement. They were promised certain things in exchange for not developing nuclear weapons. They did not get those things, so they went ahead and did it.

These facts are conveniently forgotten in any discussion of the DPRK, but they are highly relevant to understanding the country and its relationship with the world. While ignoring important aspects of reality, these news sources talk of “fake news” and urge us to listen exclusively to them? That’s probably not a good idea, especially for those who want peace. To put it mildly.

http://journal-neo.org/2017/02/11/american-media-hacking-fake-news-about-north-korea/

black-horizontal



Caleb Maupin
Screen Shot 2016-02-04 at 9.46.00 AMIs an American journalist and political analyst. Tasnim News Agency described him as "a native of Ohio who has campaigned against war and the U.S. financial system." His political activism began while attending Baldwin-Wallace College in Ohio. In 2010, he video recorded a confrontation between Collinwood High School students who walked out to protest teacher layoffs and the police. His video footage resulted in one of the students being acquitted in juvenile court. He was a figure within the Occupy Wall Street protests in New York City. Maupin writes on American foreign policy and other social issues. Maupin is featured as a Distinguished Collaborator with The Greanville Post.  READ MORE ABOUT CALEB MAUPIN HERE.


Note to Commenters
Due to severe hacking attacks in the recent past that brought our site down for up to 11 days with considerable loss of circulation, we exercise extreme caution in the comments we publish, as the comment box has been one of the main arteries to inject malicious code. Because of that comments may not appear immediately, but rest assured that if you are a legitimate commenter your opinion will be published within 24 hours. If your comment fails to appear, and you wish to reach us directly, send us a mail at: editor@greanvillepost.com

We apologize for this inconvenience. 

horiz-long grey

Screen Shot 2015-12-08 at 2.57.29 PM

Nauseated by the
vile corporate media?
Had enough of their lies, escapism,
omissions and relentless manipulation?

GET EVEN.
Send a donation to 

The Greanville Post–or
SHARE OUR ARTICLES WIDELY!
But be sure to support YOUR media.
If you don’t, who will?

horiz-black-wide
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL-QUOTES BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS.




black-horizontal

=SUBSCRIBE TODAY! NOTHING TO LOSE, EVERYTHING TO GAIN.=
free • safe • invaluable

If you appreciate our articles, do the right thing and let us know by subscribing. It’s free and it implies no obligation to you—ever. We just want to have a way to reach our most loyal readers on important occasions when their input is necessary.  In return you get our email newsletter compiling the best of The Greanville Post several times a week.  

[email-subscribers namefield=”YES” desc=”” group=”Public”]




Trump’s Truth Bomb: “You Think We’re So Innocent?”


horiz grey line

tgplogo12313

 


“Putin’s a killer.” This was the claim made by Fox News ‘journalist’ Bill O’Reilly during his recent interview with Donald Trump. Trump’s reply came in the form of a simple question. “What, you think our country’s so innocent?” It was a reply that succeeded in puncturing the bubble of exceptionalism in which Mr O’Reilly and those like him have long chosen to cocoon themselves from reality. 

It was an extraordinary exchange, one that has gone viral on social media since. For liberals in the US and beyond it is being touted as yet more evidence of the fact that Donald Trump is completely unsuited to the rigors of the office of President. Meanwhile for dyed-in-the-wool neocons it suggests a leader of the so-called free world who is yet to realize the difference between ‘us’, the good guys, and ‘them’, the bad guys.


“Putin’s a killer.” Just ponder this statement for a moment, consider the ignorance, arrogance, and delusion it describes. Consider, too, the millions of human slaughtered by successive US presidents over the years, going back, say, to the Korean War and working your way forward. That they were killed in the name of democracy and human rights, at least according to Bill O’Reilly and the rest of the gang over at Fox News, is a boast as preposterous as it is grotesque. Firstly, justifying the wholesale slaughter of men, women, and children in the name of democracy renders the word completely meaningless. And secondly, what Mr O’Reilly describes as democracy others would describe as imperialism.But then, you see, this is the problem when you sit at the apex of the most destructive empire the world has ever known. It distorts your sense reality to the point where you become intoxicated with the associated myths used to justify this empire and the vast destruction it has wreaked and continues to wreak across the world.

Bill O’Reilly: Aggressive disinformer currently employed by Fox News. He’s interchangeable with many other presstitutes working for the Western media, but stands out (literally) for his sheer arrogance and obnoxiousness in disseminating the myths that keep the criminal empire in business.

We see this distortion in the way that Barack Obama has been allowed to walk off into the sunset with the highest approval ratings of any US president in living memory, lamented as one of the most progressive leaders ever to occupy the Oval Office. It is a rendering of the legacy country’s first black president that fails to pass even the most tepid scrutiny.

Obama’s administration was, to be frank, a veritable killing machine, one comprising almost daily drone strikes, kill lists, and the wholesale destruction of entire countries, as in the case of Libya. In his final year in office the US dropped 27,000 bombs, up from the number dropped in 2015. Yet we are meant to regard the 44th president and recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize as the modern incarnation of Dr Martin Luther King, a president who worked tirelessly for peace and justice.


“Putin’s a killer.” Just ponder this statement for a moment, consider the ignorance, arrogance, and delusion it describes. Consider, too, the millions of human slaughtered by successive US presidents over the years, going back, say, to the Korean War and working your way forward. That they were killed in the name of democracy and human rights, at least according to Bill O’Reilly and the rest of the gang over at Fox News, is a boast as preposterous as it is grotesque.


Reminding Mr O’Reilly and his ilk of a few basic facts when it comes to the difference between Moscow and Washington’s actions around the world in recent years, there is a significant difference between a foreign policy driven by restoring stability and security to entire regions, in the case of Russia vis-à-vis the Middle East, and a foreign policy that has only succeeded in sowing instability and terrorism across those regions, in the case of the United States.

Bill O’Reilly’s discomfort at being corrected by the country’s President on the egregious record of his own country when it comes to body count, was redolent to that of a vampire suddenly exposed to daylight. The Fox News anchor was left floundering around in his chair, rattled by Trump’s simple yet withering words of truth in response to the kind of statement that has no place being made by any self-respecting journalist.

But then the Bill O’Reilly’s of our world are not journalists they are propagandists, engaged in spreading disinformation in the cause of the previously mentioned myths that both sustain and nourish a perverse worldview. America, the ‘land of the free’, is a force for good in the world people such as him choose to believe. When we kill people we only do so reluctantly and in service to the greater good of freedom and liberty. Thus our bombs are good bombs, a fact that should be of comfort to the families and loved ones of those we obliterate.

What needs to be explored in light of Mr O’Reilly’s interview with President Trump is not so much his journalistic credentials but the education system of which he is a product. It reveals a man who when confronted with the choice between embracing truth or ideology has chosen ideology.

While nobody should be under any illusions when it comes to Donald Trump as the reincarnation of Hugo Chavez, he has revealed a propensity for dropping the odd ‘truth bomb’ here and there, much to chagrin of conservative and liberal commentators alike. And such truth bombs are the killers that Bill O’Reilly truly fears – killing the smug complacency and hypocrisy without which life loses all meaning.



NOTE: ALL IMAGE CAPTIONS, PULL QUOTES AND COMMENTARY BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS • PLEASE COMMENT AND DEBATE DIRECTLY ON OUR FACEBOOK GROUP CLICK HERE

John Wight is the author of a politically incorrect and irreverent Hollywood memoir – Dreams That Die – published by Zero Books. He’s also written five novels, which are available as Kindle eBooks. You can follow him on Twitter at @JohnWight1  

MAIN IMAGE: Trump with presstitute (and obnoxious bully by nature) Bill O’Reilly. This buffoon was not prepared to answer an admission so frank as to be simply unprecedented in the annals of US presidential bullshit. 

Note to Commenters
Due to severe hacking attacks in the recent past that brought our site down for up to 11 days with considerable loss of circulation, we exercise extreme caution in the comments we publish, as the comment box has been one of the main arteries to inject malicious code. Because of that comments may not appear immediately, but rest assured that if you are a legitimate commenter your opinion will be published within 24 hours. If your comment fails to appear, and you wish to reach us directly, send us a mail at: editor@greanvillepost.com

We apologize for this inconvenience. 

horiz-long grey

uza2-zombienationWhat will it take to bring America to live according to its own propaganda?


black-horizontal

black-horizontal

=SUBSCRIBE TODAY! NOTHING TO LOSE, EVERYTHING TO GAIN.=
free • safe • invaluable
Please see our red registration box at the bottom of this page

If you appreciate our articles, do the right thing and let us know by subscribing. It’s free and it implies no obligation to you—ever. We just want to have a way to reach our most loyal readers on important occasions when their input is necessary. In return you get our email newsletter compiling the best of The Greanville Post several times a week.

horiz-black-wide
REMEMBER: ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL-QUOTES BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS.




black-horizontal

THE GREANVILLE POST

For media inquiries contact us at greanville@gmail.com