9 BIG MYTHS BEING PEDDLED TO SCARE THE US ABOUT IRAN

9 BIG MYTHS WE'RE BEING PEDDLED TO SCARE US ABOUT IRAN

By  Juan Cole [2]

Friday, 21 September 2012 11:08

http://futurefastforward.com/feature-articles/7481-9-big-myths-were-being-peddled-to-scare-us-about-iran-by-juan-cole-2-21912 AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/world/9-big-myths-were-being-peddled-scare-us-about-iran 1. Iran’s civilian nuclear enrichment program is alleged by Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to be a stealth nuclear weapons program. But there is no evidence at all for this allegation, and it was contradicted by Netanyahu’s own Defense Minister, Ehud Barak, who admitted that Iran has not decided to initiate a nuclear weapons program. [3] Israel’s chief of staff, Benny Gantz, has also admitted that Iran has not decided to build a bomb [4]. 2. It is often argued that Iran does not need nuclear power. But it uses some petroleum for power generation, and Iranians are driving more and more. There is every prospect that what happened to Indonesia, which now uses all its own oil in addition to importing some, will happen to Iran. Iran’s energy exports provide a crucial financial cushion, allowing the country to remain independent. Other oil giants, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, are also building nuclear power plants. There is nothing illogical or unusual about Iran going in this direction. 3. It is alleged that Iran has threatened to annihilate Israel. It has done no such thing. [5] Iran has a ‘no first strike’ policy, repeatedly enunciated by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has expressed the hope that the ‘Zionist regime over Jerusalem” would ‘vanish from the page of time.’ But Iran didn’t threaten to roll tanks or missiles against Israel, and compared his hopes for the collapse of Zionism to the collapse of Communism in Russia. Iran has not launched a conventional war of aggression against another state in all of modern history. Israel aggressively invaded Egypt in 1956 and 1967 and Lebanon in 1982 and 2006. The list of aggressive wars fought by the US, including the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq, is too long to detail. So why is Iran being configured as the aggressor? 4. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has given a formal ruling [6] or fatwa against nuclear weapons, saying “The Iranian nation has never pursued and will never pursue nuclear weapons. There is no doubt that the decision makers in the countries opposing us know well that Iran is not after nuclear weapons because the Islamic Republic, logically, religiously and theoretically, considers the possession of nuclear weapons a grave sin and believes the proliferation of such weapons is senseless, destructive and dangerous.” 5. Some have alleged that Khamenei is lying in his fatwa, in accordance with a Shiite doctrine that allows pious dissimulation. The permission to lie about religion does not apply where there is a Shiite state able to protect Shiites [7]. 6. No, the International Atomic Energy Agency, on inspecting Iran, did not alleged evidence for bomb-making. [8] It certified that no uranium has been diverted to a weapons program. 7. It is often argued that Iran’s nuclear program might spur an arms race in the Middle East. But it is Israel’s arsenal of 400 nuclear warheads that has spurred the arms races. Iraq’s experiments with enrichment in the late 1980s until 1991 were a direct result of knowledge that Israel was given the bomb by France, Britain and the US. If a non-nuclear Iran is so important, why won’t Israel respond to repeated requests by Middle Eastern countries for a nuclear-free zone in that region? 8. Iran has actually reduced its stockpile of low-enriched uranium at 19.75% [9], turning it into plates to fuel its medical reactor (which is what Iran has all along said it was doing with that uranium). Iran lost its source of uranium fuel for the medical reactor when Argentina ceased producing and supplying it. (Note that no one put sanctions on Argentina or threatened to bomb it when *it* was enriching uranium to that level). 9. Netanyahu is implicitly arguing that Iran’s activities are the source of the region’s problems. But his insistence on keeping millions of Palestinians stateless and without basic human or property rights, and his creeping annexation of Arab Jerusalem, site of Islam’s third holiest site, are what inspires hatred in the Muslim world not only for Israel but for the United States. Hard line fundamentalists are so easy to convince of malevolent American intentions toward Islam because the United States has been so cooperative in screwing over the Palestinians and in the Israelization of all of Jerusalem. That the US press let Netanyahu get on American television and not answer questions about the illegal Israeli squatting on Palestinian land and continued depriving of the Palestinians of statehood is a testimony to how the American mass media has abdicated its responsibility to inform the American public. Source URL: http://www.alternet.org/world/9-big-myths-were-being-peddled-scare-us-about-iran Links: [1] http://www.juancole.com [2] http://www.alternet.org/authors/juan-cole [3] http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1207/30/sitroom.02.html [4] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/9226617/Iran-has-not-yet-decided-whether-to-build-nuclear-weapon.html [5] http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/23/politics/truth-squad-iran-israel/index.html [6] http://www.juancole.com/2012/03/khamenei-takes-control-forbids-nuclear-bomb.html [7] http://www.juancole.com/2012/04/irans-forbidden-nukes-and-the-taqiya-lie.html [8] http://www.wbeeman.com/ [9] http://www.fair.org/blog/2012/09/14/nyt-buries-the-lead-on-iran/ [10] http://www.alternet.org/tags/iran-0 [11] http://www.alternet.org/tags/nuclear-0 [12] http://www.alternet.org/tags/juan-cole [13] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B

NOT REAL CHOICE IN THE US DEMOCRACY

NOT REAL CHOICE IN US DEMOCRACY PEOPLE WILL VOTE EITHER THE BAD or THE WORSE

ELECTORAL TRAP: If the WORSE party threat to WIN you vote the BAD You vote the lesser evil in the past. Now not need to vote because Mitt Romney already conceded victory to Obama by endorsing the poor to them (he called parasites in the tape in which he divide the nation between those who pay most taxes and those who don't pay any, the unemployed and the elder),  besides being transferred the young woman vote to democrats before his selection in the GOP (the inside auction). WHAT A TRAP!!. Voters look like mice in a cage. They still have to go to the pools because the corporate media wanted so to give the international public opinion a sense of "democracy" in America. People have the right to occupy streets, but the rich laugh & police brutalize protesters.  Civil disobedience is changing almost nothing, if people continue going to the pools and vote the lesser evil candidate. The trap remains in place and the one who profit are big corporations, they are behind the super packs and they don’t lose, they win by financing both parties. WHAT HAS TO BE DONE? Ron Paul, Denis Kucinish and other bla-bla rebels betrayed American people when they renounced to unite themselves and create a United Front to re-build America.Their narcissist super-ego prevailed as usual. The Nation was not their real concern.   There are three options, all of them speak for the failure of real democracy . Failure because this is not election, this is an auction for selected rich financiers to play. In some countries of Europe & India buying elections is a political crime, no here. OPTIONS THAT SPEAK YOUR FED-UP WITH THE CURRENT ELECTORAL SYSTEM The 1st option is ABTENCION: don’t vote. It will express fed up to this system.   The 2nd: vote independent candidate al local level, if and only if, they can prove that they don’t belong to either member of the dirty couple, or, if they  publicly resign to either party. The 3rd option: tap you nose and vote the BAD if the WORSE is a threat, but if you really disgust this system better ABSTAIN and unite in a grass root organization. ------------------ THE BAD OPTION as described in the alternative media IS OBAMA THE TROJAN HORSE, A PSYCHOPATH, A BAD BOYFRIEND OR ALL THREE? - By Jill Dalton in The Nation of Change http://www.nationofchange.org/blogs/Jill%20Dalton Friday, 21 September 2012 11:11 Reproduced in: http://futurefastforward.com/feature-articles/7482-is-obama-the-trojan-horse-a-psychopath-a-bad-boyfriend-or-all-three-by-jill-dalton-21912 “Believe me the Obama brand is collapsing just as the Bush brand before him became so craven even the most deluded had to recognize the fraud that had been perpetrated upon the American people” I believe Barack Obama was put into office to do what no Republican could ever have gotten away with. Obama has extend the wars, created new wars, extended the Bush tax cuts for the rich, given additional bail out money to the banks, allowed the health insurance industry to write the healthcare bill, extended the Patriot Act and signed the NDAA. Under his watch not one member of the Bush Administration has been held accountable for leading us into wars built on false evidence and lies; not one banker has been held accountable for the fraud and corruption that brought down the global economy. And the final nail in the coffin, Mr. Slim Shady signed the NDAA bill on New Year’s Eve while most American’s sipped champagne and sang Auld Lang Syne. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) makes America the battlefield and allows indefinite detention of U.S. citizens suspected of ‘terrorist” leanings without due process. http://www.aclu.org/national-security/president-obama-signs-indefinite-detention-bill-law But why be so negative you might ask? Here are a few things Obama did manage to do. He extended unemployment benefits because they’re no jobs as his stimulus package was too small. He also managed to cut payroll taxes, which is a back door way to defund Social Security, He helped cover up the BP oil spill in the Gulf by allowing Corexit, a toxic disbursement not allowed in other countries, to break up the oil which then dropped to the bottom instead of just cleaning it up. In other words, allowing them to hide the body. Obama hates truth tellers such as Julian Assange of WikiLeaks and whistleblowers like Bradley Manning who’s been held in detention for almost two years for, according to Obama, exposing state secrets aka a horrendous war crime. That is if Manning is the alleged leaker who gave the “Collateral Murder” video to WikiLeaks showing 12 civilians murdered by American soldiers. What is the difference between the “Collateral Murder” war atrocity and the 1970 My Lai Massacre and the Court-Martial of Captain Ernest L. Medina? What is the difference between the Pentagon Papers and Daniel Ellsberg and Bradley Manning? I mean isn’t this evidence we’re now living in a corporate/fascist/ military/police state? Now look, I know they’re still plenty of Obama supporters among us but I find it very difficult to understand why so many people still love, honor and support this guy. I voted for this guy too. I fell for his smooth talk, cool demeanor and wide open smile. I’ve always been a sucker for tall dark and handsome but if he wasn’t lying then he’s lying now and I for one am mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore. I know it’s hard to admit you made a mistake. I get it. You really believed this guy was “the one” and he is the one for the 1%: Wall Street, the too big to fail banks, the military industrial complex, the prison industrial complex, big oil, big pharma, i.e. the corporate fascist state he’s so gingerly locking into place. We looked the other way when he said he’d put on comfy shoes and march with the unions and then when the unions had their bargaining rights withdrawn, Obama like the good corporate shill he is, remained silent. We made excuses for him when he remained silent as the police brutalized, beat, pepper sprayed and shot projectiles at peaceful demonstrators. Obama, unlike Robert Kennedy who had the balls to stand up to the racists down south and brought in the National Guard to protect those fighting for their civil rights, is a coward. It could be battered spouse syndrome. I know there are people hospitalized with a broken jaw or collarbone and they won’t press charges against their attackers. I can’t explain why victims protect their abusers but they do and not only do they protect them, they go back to them over and over only to be beaten again and again. Or maybe it’s the Stockholm syndrome whereby victims fall in love with their captors. It happens. No need to beat yourself up over it. To me Obama’s like the bad boyfriend. He lies to you, cheats on you, forgets to call, but you just keep taking him back and making excuses. “Well, he can’t help it. He has to stand up to those mean Republicans.” Right? And, therefore, I feel it’s my duty to do an intervention. For those of you still deluding yourselves, who still can’t face reality I suggest therapy or better yet maybe pick up a copy of “He’s just Not That Into You.” I know it’s hard. I told you I voted for him too. I sent him money. I believed him. But let’s be honest this guy is a lying, cheating, warmongering, opportunist who serves the 1% so he might get reelected. He’s in bed with Goldman Sachs, Exxon Mobile, GE and whoever else will pay him for his services. He does throw us the occasional bone like the recent appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. And studies show even rats will keep going back to find the food pellet over and over again even if it only shows up very rarely. But there comes a time when one must admit they were wrong, cut their losses and move on. Not to worry they’re other fish in the sea. Jill Stein of the Green Party has a very sane 5-point program. I know she may seem boring as we all love our bad boys but really a psychopath who murders innocent civilians and destroys countries using drone attacks will eventually turn on you. Didn’t you see “Sleeping With the Enemy?” Hello! And there’s also Anderson of the Justice Party. So don’t despair you’ll find somebody new. Maybe not right away but you won’t have to sleep alone forever. Believe me the Obama brand is collapsing just as the Bush brand before him became so craven even the most deluded had to recognize the fraud that had been perpetrated upon the American people. For those of you who still don’t see it you’re sort of like the Bushies who believed in the Iraq war and defended the honesty and integrity of their fearless leader no matter how many lies he told. I guess it may prove the old adage. Love really is blind. ============== THE WORSE,  to be avoided at any cost in the past Now rich already abandoned Romney and he conceded victory to Obama since he alienate the GOP from the poor & young woman vote MATT TAIBBI ON MITT ROMNEY'S CROOKED, DIRTY GAME - Ahmed Shihab-Eldin [2]  from  Huffington Post [1] Sunday, 16 September 2012 ORIGINAL  in http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ Reproduced in: http://futurefastforward.com/current-affairs/7450-matt-taibbi-on-mitt-romneys-crooked-dirty-game-by-ahmed-shihab-eldin-2-17912 The following is a transcript of HuffPost Live, in which host Ahmed Shihab-Eldin interviews Rolling Store editor Matt Taibbi about his latest piece exposing the ugly ways Mitt Romney built his massive fortune. The transcript has been edited for clarity. Ahmed Shihab-Eldin: In case you didn’t know this particular factoid, both governor Mitt Romney and President Obama have each raised well over half a billion dollars in this election. Even worse, the total amount spent on this election year will surpass $2.5 billion. To me, that’s a lot of money. But a question that comes up often is why aren’t more people — more Americans, more politicians — speaking up about this. Someone who’s speaking up is Rolling Stone’s contributing editor, Matt Taibbi, who’s joining us to talk about his latest article. Matt, this is your article, thank you for joining us. Matt Taibbi: This is how private equity deals work, and this is what most people don’t understand. When a company like Bain wants to take over a company, let’s say, like KB Toys, what they do is — it’s very similar to the process of getting one of those no-money-down mortgages — you put down a tiny amount of money, in the case of Bain, you put down about 5 percent of his own cash, $18 million. He financed the other $302 million that he got, and what he did was he went to a bank and you’re borrowing against the assets of a company you don’t own yet. So what you do is you say to the bank … Ahmed Shihab-Eldin: Which is legal. Matt Taibbi: Which is totally legal. But what you do is you say to the bank, ‘I’m going to take over this company,’ or ‘I’m going to take over some company, and when we do that company is going to be indebted to you.’ So they borrow $300 million. With that money, and his money, you buy a controlling stake in the company that you’re trying to take over, and once you do that, the debt that you yourself took out becomes the debt of the company that you have taken over. And this is very poorly understood by most people. Now there’s the other problem, now if you’re KB Toys, you’ve borrowed $300 million and you owe the bank. And you haven’t done it to buy new equipment or open new stores or do research and development, all you’ve bought with that $300 million is … Ahmed Shihab-Eldin: Debt. Matt Taibbi: Yes, and the privilege of being managed by Mitt Romney, that’s really all you’ve bought. Ahmed Shihab-Eldin: Privilege. Matt Taibbi: Exactly. And so now you have to cut costs, you have to tighten your belt a little bit. And the way that you deal with that is you have Mitt Romney tell you where the costs have to be cut, and whom to fire. For the privilege of doing that, they charge you another fee. So now, not only are you paying debt service, but you’re paying management fees to the PE company that could be as much as 7, 8, 9, 10 million dollars a year. Ahmed Shihab-Eldin: So you lay out a case and even now I think I’m having more understanding, but what I’m not understanding — I’m understanding what Mitt Romney’s done, and you’re right to point out that it’s several companies. But I have to ask you Matt, why is this happening? We said it was legal. Why do people do this? Why do we allow this to be legal? Is it just to maximize profit at all costs? Matt Taibbi: I think there’s a line of thinking, and look, not all private equity deals end in disaster. Sometimes they’re actually a good thing. One of the things that private equity companies do extremely well, is they’ll look at a landscape and say, ‘Here are three companies that do essentially the same thing, they’re occupying too much market space between them, let’s buy all three of them, roll them all up, eliminate the duplicate of overhead, create a new company and eliminate all that waste,’ — which is harsh because it ends up in a lot of jobs being lost. But sometimes you end up with a leaner, meaner company as the result of that. And there are plenty of success stories in private equity. But what people have to understand is that private equity companies do not exist to turn around companies. That is not their function. Their function is to make a profit for their investors and for the private equity firm, and these things are at cross-purposes. Ahmed Shihab-Eldin: I feel as though Romney himself has actually been forced to outline that very thing. It is ultimately about making a profit for investors, or someone in his campaign kind of admitting that that is the intent. Matt Taibbi: Well, yes and no. He wrote a book called Turn Around, and he's pitched himself as a guy who is going to turn around America because that's what he does, is turn around companies. But that's not really true. When you take over these companies, you have all these tools at your disposal that allow you to extract value from the company without the company succeeding. You can force them to take out a bank loan and pay you a dividend. There's all these different things you can do. Ahmed Shihab-Eldin: So there’s multiple alternatives… Matt Taibbi: Right. And so you can succeed in a private equity deal without turning a company around. And that’s a critical distinction that people don’t get. Source URL: http://www.alternet.org/matt-taibbi-mitt-romneys-crooked-dirty-game Links: [1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ [2] http://www.alternet.org/authors/ahmed-shihab-eldin [3] http://www.alternet.org/tags/taibbi [4] http://www.alternet.org/tags/romney-0 [5] http://www.alternet.org/tags/private-equity-0 [6] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B MORE IN GOOGLE: •  Matt Taibbi Mitt Romney - Huffington Post www.huffingtonpost.com/news/matt-taibbi-mitt-romney Rolling Stone contributing editor Matt Taibbi sounded off on Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney on HuffPost Live Thursday. Taibbi took on . •  Matt Taibbi Mitt Romney Debt - Huffington Post www.huffingtonpost.com/news/matt-taibbi-mitt-romney-debt Aug 29, 2012 – According to Rolling Stone contributing editor Matt Taibbi, Mitt Romney made his fortune exploiting two strategies that the Republican

HACIA DÓNDE APUNTA EL RESULTADO ELECTORAL EN QUÉBEC?

HACIA DÓNDE APUNTA EL RESULTADO ELECTORAL EN QUÉBEC?

He aquí una versión anti-Pauline Marois dis que solidario por no decir socialismo vergonzante, al parecer sección del NPD nuevo Pdo democrata

Por Alberto Rabilotta
Lea el artículo completo en: http://www.alainet.org/active/57733


ALAI AMLATINA, 5/09/2012.- Este martes los quebequenses fueron a las
urnas y además de la derrota del gobernante Partido Liberal de Québec
(PLQ) dirigido por Jean Charest, el resultado fue un ajustadísimo
triunfo del Partido Quebequense (PQ) dirigido por Pauline Marois.

Las elecciones en la “Belle Province”, como se define a sí misma la
provincia de Québec, siempre son algo más que comicios provinciales. En
varios momentos los resultados de las elecciones en Québec tuvieron
impacto histórico en Canadá, en América del Norte, y hasta mundial en lo
tocante a la implantación del libre comercio y el neoliberalismo.

Pero comencemos por el comienzo, un vistazo a los resultados a los
partidos políticos quebequenses.

LOS RESULTADOS ELECTORALES

La victoria del PQ es tan corta (54 de los 125 diputados de la Asamblea
Nacional de Québec), que el futuro del gobierno de Pauline Marois estará
en manos de la oposición desde el primer día de la apertura de los
trabajos de la nueva sesión parlamentaria, cuando los nuevos diputados
sean llamados a efectuar el tradicional voto de confianza en el nuevo
gobierno. Este ha sido el peor resultado posible para el PQ, según
algunos observadores.

El independentista y socialdemócrata PQ recibió el 31.9 por ciento de
los votos, apenas más que el 31.2 por ciento de los votos que tuvo el
federalista y conservador PLQ de Jean Charest, que iba a la búsqueda de
un cuarto mandato consecutivo, y que ganó en 50 de los 125 distritos
electorales.

La tercera fuerza, con 19 diputados y el 27.1 por ciento del voto
popular, es el nuevo partido Coalición Avenir Québec (CAQ) dirigido por
François Legault, ex ministro del PQ que por sus recetas simplistas y
cortantes puede ser enmarcado dentro del “populismo conservador”
típicamente norteamericano, reaccionario tanto en lo social como en lo
económico.

SURGIMIENTO DE UNA IZQUIERDA QUEBEQUENSE?

En las elecciones federales del 2011 resurgió a nivel canadiense, y por
el masivo voto de los quebequenses que lo convirtieron en la segunda
fuerza política en el Parlamento de Ottawa, el Nuevo Partido Demócrata
(NPD).

De manera mucho más discreta en las elecciones del pasado martes en
Québec se cristaliza como una fuerza política reconocida el partido
Québec Solidario (QS).

Con el 6.0 por ciento de los votos a escala provincial, pero mayormente
concentrados en Montreal, donde ganó dos distritos electorales (Amir
Khadir en Mercier y Françoise David en Gouin), el partido QS tiene una
experiencia acumulada, un importante núcleo de militantes y una
coyuntura favorable para constituirse en una opción política perdurable
y de peso.

QUE NOS DICE EL RESULTADO DE LA ELECCIÓN EN QUÉBEC?

El resultado de la elección de este martes en Québec nos muestra el
estado de la situación y un electorado que, como se ha visto en el
pasado, parece presto a dar un viraje “a la primera de cambio”, sin
preaviso.

El estado de la situación es un gobierno del PQ minoritario, sin poder
ni capacidad de alianzas que le permitan gobernar con un programa propio
y respetar sus promesas, un gobierno que tampoco caerá fácilmente porque
su principal adversario, el PLQ, por el momento tratará de evitar otra
elección y una peor derrota.

En otras palabras, estamos en un momento de gran fluidez política, con
fuerzas políticas desgastadas y sin opciones que presentar en una
provincia muy sensible al contexto político nacional, regional e
internacional, y por otra parte un electorado impaciente, y una juventud
que se radicaliza como en los momentos que precedieron los virajes
políticos en los años 70.

Antes y después de 1976 el fundador del PQ, René Lévesque, me dijo en
varias entrevistas que tuvimos que él concebía la independencia de
Québec en el contexto de la descolonización, de la recuperación de la
soberanía política que permitiera establecer la justicia social y la
independencia económica, razón por la cual cada vez que podía me
interrogaba sobre todo lo que este periodista podía saber sobre la
situación del movimiento de los países no-alineados (NOAL).

Pero el PQ, donde convergían diversas tendencias nacionalistas y algunas
de ellas conservadoras y pro-estadounidenses, rápidamente abandonó el
ideal de Lévesque.

Lo que me lleva a pensar que ahora, con un QS que rescata los elementos
socioeconómicos de ese ideal y que atrae el interés de los jóvenes, como
el PQ a mediados de los 70, sería imprudente descartar un viraje “en la
primera de cambio”.

Montreal, Canadá.

(Lea el artículo completo en: http://www.alainet.org/active/57733)

- Alberto Rabilotta es periodista argentino - canadiense.

LA POLITICA y la VIOLENCIA. caso QUEBEC

LA POLITICA y la VIOLENCIA
Comentario a un Articulo de Serge Charboneau reproducido en Mondialisation.ca. Sep 8-12.

INTRODUCTION
por Hugo Adan, septiembre 11, 2012

Hoy pueden eliminar a políticos de oposición con la violencia
Lo que jamás podrán eliminar es el poder de la razón y la causa justa
Lo 1ro solo requiere de mercenarios y de malos militares
Lo 2do requiere armar conciencia, unidad y voluntad de lucha popular
La victoria del 1ros solo es pasajera
La de los 2dos duradera y definitiva.


A BALAZOS RECIBEN A LA 1er MINISTRO DE QUEBEC, CANADA

El martes 4 cerca de la medianoche el pueblo de Quebec celebraba la victoria de la independentista Paulina Marois cuando se escucharon los balazos del asalto al edificio por un desquiciado mental. Pauline interrumpió su discurso inaugural, para luego regresar a él, lamentar lo ocurrido e indicar que todo está bajo control, que se trató de un hecho aislado que no compromete la vocación pacifista del pueblo de Quebec. Le pidió al público del auditorio que abandone el edificio calmadamente, y así lo hicieron.

En efecto, la victoria que ella obtuvo se dio en medio de masiva resistencia pacífica de estudiantes universitarios contra el Gbno Federal. Un líder de este Mov estudiantil entrevistado por el Guardian de Londres indicaba que ellos están celebrando 3 mayores victorias hasta el momento: la cancelación del aumento a los Tuition fees con la victoria de Pauline, lo que lucharán hasta el final; su rechazo a la Ley Federal #78 que impone restricciones al derecho a la protesta pacífica que ella promete dejar sin efecto en Quebec y la renuncia del 1er Ministro Charest del Pdo de Gobierno en Canada, hoy derrotado por Pauline Marois en Quebec .

Sin duda el triunfo de Pauline es el del pueblo de Quebec que la eligió y también el triunfo del Movimiento estudiantil universitario y esto indica que hay contexto político para un nuevo Referendum separatista. A la tercera va la vencida, dice el proverbio popular y los separatistas Quebequianos se preparan para aseguraran que eso sea así. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/06/quebec-elections-minority-government-shootings?intcmp=239.

Abajo voy comentar el análisis de Serge Charboneau al respecto y luego traducir algunos de extractos del artículo en francés.

1. Serge Charboneau (reproducido en Mondialisation.ca. Sep 8-12) sugiere que Quebec ha sido víctima de la violencia que patrocina el Gbno central de Canadá como aliado de NATO. La complicidad de la prensa corporativa creo una atmósfera de violencia que se filtró por todos los poros al público televidente. Ayer esta nación celebró la masacre de Gaddafi, su hijo y sus adeptos cuando aún sus cadáveres estaban frescos, hoy celebran con silencio cómplice la balacera contra el Pdo Quebequiano de la 1er Ministro Pauline Marois. Es la violencia inducida por el odio al “enemigo político” lo que crea los desquiciados mentales y/o los “snipers” ocultos que dispararon, asesinaron e incendiaron un edificio cercano a la Convencion donde ella daba su 1er discurso. No hay aun investigación seria sobre el caso, el Gobierno Federal lo impide al ocultar la lista de quienes tienen licencia para adquirir ak47, el arma asesina. El Gbno Federal quizá busca ocultar su complicidad en el caso, sugiere Serge.

2. Canada -y Quebec en particular- son víctimas del guerrerismo y del modelo liberal que patrocina el Gbno Central, ese de los mercenarios enviados a Libya y Syria y del que se enceban los cerdos de empresas mafiosoas que lucran con ello. Sin querras y sin Free Trade pacts, no seria posible la bonanza de los ricos en Canada y el norte.

Se trata de un modelo de capitalismo en descomposición, basado en el del saqueo, la especulación financiera y la inversión no-productiva, eso es lo que induce la violencia abierta y clandestina (incluida la de cientos de peruanos asesinados por una empresa canadiense-peruana que explota el oro en Cajamarca). No es casual que el boomerang violencia que los del norte lanzan fuera del país regrese hoy sobre sus cabezas. Ocurre en los EU a menudo y hoy en su patio trasero predilecto, en Canada, como ocurre también en el no-predilecto, Mexico, en gran escala. La violencia mafiosa (y jihadista) genera más violencia mafiosa, y como dice un refrán popular “un clavo saca otro clavo”. Esto es, solo una verdadera revolución independentista (sin mercenarios) puede poner fin al capitalismo en descomposición.

3. La respuesta de una verdadera revolución independentista tiene cuatro niveles:

a. el económico (un nuevo modelo basado en el Estado, capital productivo y labor como gestores económicos y a partir del control de la paridad del dólar o la adopción de monedas múltiples para la reserva nacional, o una moneda única que sugirioo el IMF con Dominique Straus Kan o lo que sugiera la nueva ONU para el intercambio mundial.
b. Al nivel politico se requiere un buen plan de transferencia de funciones desde el Gbno Federal al gobierno autónomo y los gobiernos locales.
c. Al nivel de las comunicaciones urge el control de la TV y la prensa escrita.
d. Al nivel de inteligencia creativa e institucional se requiere un think-tank que oriente las decisiones del gobierno autónomo y el shared-decision-making-process de Estado-capital y labor.

4. El drone violencia anti-Marois fue calculado y/o manipulado contra un movimiento político independentista. Que buscan? Por que quieren dividir la nación?. Preguntaron los del Gbno Federal, amenazante? Les devolvemos la pregunta: por qué es buena la independencia de Kosovo y no la de Quebec? “Ethnic cleansing” dirán.. Si la limpieza étnica es argumento válido, con mayor razón lo es el odio étnico-político. Uno asesina el cuerpo a balazos, el otro asesina la razón y el alma a pedazos.

Quieren intimidarnos, indica Serge, y hacernos creer que nuestra causa está condenada al fracaso. No van a lograr su objetivo, sugiere él, ellos enseñaron a odiar a quien consideran sus enemigos políticos y nosotros les enseñaremos a respetarlos y a respetar las leyes internacionales que Canadá firmó: el derecho a la auto-determinación de los pueblos. Nuestra democracia no tiene que ver nada con el odio, simplemente no somos harina del mismo costal y nos corresponde la autonomía política y económica, sugirió el. Quebec esta lista para mostrarle al mundo que puede contener su indignación y dar a su revolución la conciencia y la metodología que la paz y la tolerancia internacional requieren.

Si los dueños del poder en EU quieren ver en Quebec un mal ejemplo que podría ser seguido en su país, eso solo indicaría que le temen a su nación. Ningún modelo es bueno ni malo per se. Lo malo es que existan Gbnos Federales que asfixian la autonomía de sus Estados y los Gbnos locales. Lo bueno y saludable es –todo el mundo lo reconoce- la inteligencia creativa de los pueblos y este caso el del pueblo americano. Este pueblo será quien decida cuándo y cómo acabar con el modelo criminal que patrocinan sus elites de ricos mal habidos. Del pueblo americano y del mundo entero Quebec reclama solidaridad.

QUE VIVA LA REVOLUCION AUTONOMISTA DE QUEBEC!!!

===================

A los que leen Francés les recomiendo abrir el Art de Serge en:
La politique et la violence
De Serge Charbonneau
Mondialisation.ca, septembre 08, 2012

BALACERA CUANDO LA 1er MINISTRO ELECTA DABA SU DISCURSO INAUGURAL.
FUSILLADE LORS DU PREMIER DISCOURS DE NOTRE PREMIÈRE MINISTRE.
Mundialisation.ca/ Septembre 4, presque minuit. Septiembre 4, casi a la medianoche.

AQUÍ VAN ALGUNOS EXTRACTOS NO LITERALES EN ESPAÑOL:

“El primer discurso de la reciente electa Primer Ministro Pauline Marois fue interrumpida a balazos.

“Ella no sospechaba que la bala de un demente disparaba en la entrada del edificio. Una persona murió y un 3ro resultó gravemente herido.

Era ella a quien intentaban asesinar.

“Sin dramatizar este trágico evento preguntémonos por que era necesario que perdamos a nuestra 1er Ministro a los pocos minutos de ser elegida, se pregunta Serge.

“La balacera cayó como chaparrón frío y repentino justo en la línea de fondo de la columna vertebral. Tal evento dejo sin palabras a la nación entera. Fue un evento que invirtió lo que se predica como democracia y libertad, evento que capturó al mundo por el trasero.

“Fue esto gesto político de un loco o acto de un demente insano?.
“O es el contexto político el que empuja a la violencia y la locura?

“Por supuesto compartimos las demandas del Frente de Liberacion de Quebec, cuyos objetivos han sido estructurados contra gestos terroristas. Sus principios indican claramente que sus objetivos no tienen que ver nada ni con la locura política ni con la demencia insana.

REFIRIENDOSE AL PDO DE GBNO EN EL FEDERAL DE CANADÁ SERGE INDICA:

“Sus acciones fueron planeadas, sus comunicados de prensa fueron claros. Nuestro correo recibió amenazas terroristas. Nos recomendaron evitar las victimas” las victimas que ellos mismos crearon luego.

CONTINUA SERGE:

“Se trata de una política de seguridad de estado basado en el odio
“Que quieren? Nos decían diariamente con odio. Como si fueramos nosotros los que odiamos.

“Este condicionamineto viene de fuera, es el mismo que se crea contra Putin, contra Chavez, contra Iran y ayer contra Irak y Libya.
“La violencia a devenido una forma natural de eliminar a sus enemigos.
“Es violencia y odio que diariamente inyectan sobre nuestro cerebro los periodistas propagandistas de la seudo democracia y seudo libertad.. creiamos acaso que no iba a afectarnos?
“Por un año y medio mientieron sobre Syria. Nuestros gobiernos nos hicieron admirar el terrorismo ilegal, demente e insano!.

“Si la poblacion de Quebec piensa seriamente crear un pais independiente, el gobierno Federal va a reclutar los locos mercenarios de ayer para aterrorizar la población de Quebec y aplastar nuestras aspiraciones nacionalistas.
“Que hacer? Como lo evitamos? Ciertamente si podemos evitarlo.
“Pero no si vemos nuestra causa como causa perdida,
que es lo que ellos intentan hacernos creer con estos actos violentos.

“Que sobre el registro sobre armas de fuego? De donde salio la AK47?
“Por qué el Federal quiere destruir ese registro? Es question de economía como indican? Si Harper quiere destruir los registros aduciendo que es caro mantenerlos, por que no ordena poner esta bases de datos en Quebec? Sin duda buscan proteger a los locos de ayer y hoy.

“Mi mente se pregunta, estoy en un escenario político totalmente polarizado?
“Algunas veces la realidad y la ficción van de la mano y otras veces la realidad supera la ficción de forma sorprendente.

“La realidad es que la Prensa como 4to poder ya no existe más a nivel internacional.
“Los periodistas de la gran media devinieron propagandistas asociados. A nivel nacional y local hay un poquito de resistencia, pero solo un poquito.

“La realidad es que ellos agitan y manipulan nuestros sentimientos, nuestra razón y nuestro intelecto.
“Es entonces cuando nos encontramos con gente loca que está dispuesta a matarnos por “convicciones políticas” o religiosas.

“Cuando dormimos o estamos en casa atizan el odio.
“Es por eso que la democracia global languidece.
“Nuestra democracia nacional y local también sufren
“Debemos luchar para mantener la salud del pueblo Quebequiano independiente
“Debemos contener nuestra indignación.
“Seamos conscientes de que nuestra indignación debe ser consiente y metodológica.
Serge Charbonneau, Québec, Sep 4, 2012