Melania the nude model who married Donald Trump, threatens to sue anyone calling her a hooker. I don’t care if she was a hooker or not, it is beside the point. Hookers are also people. What matters is how a person behaves. What matters is her standing up for her dignity – and she is not doing it by suing media, she would be doing it by telling her lying, cheating, sexually assaulting husband to behave like a man.
Melania: It is your husband who is disrespecting you. If you want to be taken seriously, stand up and be a WOMAN in the relationship! Stop acting like a paid escort!
When a democracy turns into a dictatorship the rules change. If the democrats realize in time what is going on, they will act decisively and stop it. “Predict the end, prevent the beginning.” But if they refuse to take in what is happening, if they bury their heads in the sand, then the dictatorship will take root. Let me give you an example. Bill Palmer runs an anti-Trump group of 150k people on Facebook which used to be pro-Hillary (and he also writes the Palmer Report). As a democracy activist I have not just one but several Facebook accounts, everybody has that in dictatorships, so I joined that group with different accounts, and one after the other was blocked. At the same time I had Bill as a friend on Facebook, so I asked him why I was blocked. When time passed without a reply I started suspecting that someone was blocking people without his knowledge, and published the warning mentioned below. After about seven weeks he replied and the exchange below took place.
My advice to all Americans who are fighting against the authoritarian regime under Trump (it is already here) is to stay united, and to engage each other in open discussions. Name calling is what the Trumpistas are doing. Blocking someone who is trying to debate is the stuff of dictatorship, and is only helping Trump. The only legitimate reason to block someone is when that person is trying to destroy the debate. What we want is the debate! Not a monopoly of ideas, but a meeting of opinions.
Unfortunately I don’t see the leadership abilities in the Democratic Party that it needs. There is a lack of spine, a lack of “full speed ahead damn the torpedoes” mentality. And that is the only thing that can save America now: Courage. Lots of civil courage.
Social media are the new public space of the world. We cannot allow private corporations to be the masters of what we can or cannot say online, since that is tantamount to FASCISM. Take this example: This image was deleted by Facebook without any motivation or due process, just referring to what they euphemistically call “Community Standards.” For 7 days they blocked me, removing everything I had published on Facebook, much of it warning of the risk of fascism under Trump. Did Facebook silence me to cover their behinds from retaliation from the president elect? How can we ever know that Facebook is NOT playing nice to Trump, helping him to silence free speech? How can we know that we are not in fascism already? Simple answer: We can’t.
My conclusion is that every democracy needs a social media ombudsman to prevent fascism, but in the United States it may be too late already. When public space moved from the street to social media, the free speech protections did not keep up. Whoever controls the online space controls what the People knows, believes, and thinks.
Authoritarians like Putin, Maduro, and Trump don’t write laws to control the Internet corporations; they just let them know what they expect and that if they don’t preemptively do what the Leader wants, there will be “consequences.” It’s a brave new world.
The head of a country, the person who represents the country, is called the Head of State. To replace the head of state by illegal means is called a coup d’état. The head of state in the United State is the President. The election of a president is not allowed to involve foreign influence, yet Russia clearly decided the outcome by waging a full scale dirty election campaign, in which the hacking of the Democratic e-mails was just the tip of the iceberg. The Russian involvement was therefore an act of war, since it illegally changed the head of state in another country.
The realization that it was an act of war is crucial, since in war it is unconstitutional to give aid and comfort to the enemy. That is defined as treason. Treason trumps the First Amendment but it only applies in war. Those in the Trump campaign and in media who have spread the Russian propaganda lies, and who have disputed U.S. intelligence in order to get Trump elected, have committed treason, a crime punishable by death.
While the President weighs the options for how to deal with Russia, he should start by declaring it an act of war so that justice can be made at home. Those who put a kleptocratic fascist in the presidency have to pay a heavy price for their crime. It is not the voters’ fault because they based their decision on what they heard, read, and saw, and that was largely foreign propaganda, as a result of media outlets like FOX News. More than one in that outfit should therefore be charged with treason.
A non-partisan group has filed a suit to force a recount in Florida. The brief outlines serious concerns that a nation-state adversary (read: Russia) may have hacked the election. It was filed just before the deadline that expired Friday night. If you are interested, here are some potentially suspect vote-by-mail and early voting data from Florida that you can analyze statistically, and here you can download the election results.
There are also recounts ongoing in Wisconsin (in one of the first counties they found that 5 out of 8 electronic voting machines had their seals broken, which is a no-no), in Michigan, in Pennsylvania, and lesser known, in Nevada where Clinton actually won, that recount was filed to see how reliable the vote count is and it’s a good thing because it will help us see if there is a statistical difference in pattern between where she won and where she surprisingly lost.
UPDATE: The Excel file with preliminary results provided by the Florida department of elections fails to indicate total number of votes cast or number of invalid votes in the race. There is thus no way of checking (yet; this will become available after Dec. 17) if there was a systematic elimination of votes in order to affect the outcome of the election. This is a crucial figure in any election result, and it is beyond disbelief that Florida does not publish it. It places Florida on par with or worse than your typical Banana Republic in terms of election transparency.
Many things can be said about Juan Manuel Santos, president of Colombia and former minister of defense who was rewarded with (not awarded, rewarded) the Nobel Peace Prize yesterday. But I’ll stick to what I personally know. In 2014, Santos’s military invited two acquaintances of mine, members of the Venezuelan non-violent resistance Operación Libertad, to visit a military base where the below photo was taken. Later Santos extradited these two to the dictatorship in Venezuela where they were thrown in the most infamous torture site, known as “The Tomb”. They are still there.
The last time I spoke to Lorent Saleh he told me about being invited to a Colombian military base. Apparently this invitation was the cause for their extradition. But who is the commander in chief of the military? President Santos, of course. So he was ultimately responsible for their visit, and then he extradited them supposedly because of that visit(!).
Now as regards “peace”, for peace to be made there has to be war first. But Colombia is not in a civil war. Colombia is plagued by a terrorist group that is armed and supported by Castro on Cuba. Castro also supports and controls Maduro’s regime in Venezuela, and Venezuela cooperates intimately with FARC. So when Santos engaged in “peace negotiations” with FARC, with facilitation by Cuba, Venezuela, and Norway, it was really a negotiation to rewards a foreign-backed terrorist group. Santos is a quisling!
Norway was used as a pawn to give legitimacy to this charade. There is no reason to suspect that the Norwegians acted with malicious intent, because they are acting against their own national interest. You see, the bad guys in this deal are intimately allied with Putin’s Russia, so what Norway did—in the negotiations and in rewarding the quisling with a Nobel Peace Prize—indirectly helps Russia, Norway’s enemy.
Norges deltagande i de så kallade fredsförhandlingarna mellan Colombias regeringsparti och terroristerna i FARC (utan deltagande av oppositionen, vilka fördömt hela företaget) är en skamfläck för broderlandet. Projektet har utmålats som ett fredsprojekt, men det är allt annat än ett fredsprojekt. Tack och lov att folket röstade ner det i folkomröstningen den 2 oktober.
Detta så kallade fredsavtal skulle ha gett terroristgerillan FARC en position som de aldrig skulle ha kunnat uppnå i val. Det skulle ha kullkastat hela rättsstaten. Det skulle ha grundlagsskyddat politisk förföljelse av de som motsatte sig traktatet inklusive militärer och oppositionspolitiker.
Det bakomliggande syftet med avtalet var att förvandla Colombia till en kubansk vasallstat, likt Venezuela under Chávez och Maduro. De främmande makter som deltog i förhandlingarna var Kuba, Venezuela och Norge. FARC är en irreguljär styrka kontrollerad av Kuba. FARCs ledare har bostäder i Venezuelas centrala militärbas Fuerte Tiuna. Det enda land i förhandlingarna som representerade det internationella samfundet var Norge.
En skamfläck på Norges flagga
Hur kunde Norge sitta vid samma bord som dessa blodsugare och förhandla bort grundläggande fri- och rättigheter för 50 miljoner colombianer utan att slå larm? Att Norge nu dessutom gett Nobels fredspris till Colombias president Juan Manuel Santos sätter en skamfläck på broderlandets flagga som kommer att ta lång tid att tvätta bort.
Nordmän, ni verkar ha glömt att “Frihet är det största ting, som sökas kan all världen kring.” Mänskliga rättigheter kan inte förhandlas bort. Att lagstifta om en “fred” som slår undan benen för rättsstaten leder inte till fred – det leder till krig! Det som Santos nu får fredspriset för var ett förräderi mot allt vad fredspriset står för: en draksådd. En draksådd som Norge deltog i och lånade sitt goda rykte för, säkert av ren och skär blåögdhet; Castro lurade byxorna av Ola Nordman.
Russia wants a navy base. Period. It’s not a mystery. If you understand that Putin is supporting Assad for the purpose of having a navy base with a harbor that doesn’t freeze in the winter, and that is not cut off from the rest of the world by straights guarded by NATO, then Russia’s behavior becomes totally predictable and understandable.
How do I know this? Easy. Putin said as much. In 2008 if my memory does not fail me, he announced plans for a new oceanic fleet by 2020, with navy bases in Libya, Syria, Yemen, and Venezuela. Then came the Arab Spring and wiped away Kadaffi in Libya, and created civil wars in Syria and Yemen.
Russia already had a small base in Syria that seemed about to be lost, just like Sevastopol in Crimea would be lost when the treaty with Ukraine expired. Which is why Putin installed his man as president, but he was ousted in an uprising in 2014. So Putin invaded Crimea in order to hold on to Sevastopol. After that victory he turned to Syria and decided to hold on to that base as well, which is why he has backed Assad for a year now. Another stop gap measure has been a cooperation with Iran, using one of their bases in the Indian Ocean.
Libya and Yemen are out of reach now, but Venezuela is un unknown case. The area where the base presumably would be built has been closed off for civilians, and there are a lot of work going on under foreign direction. Not Russian though, but Asian. Tensions have gone high recently when foreign work leaders have pushed local crews beyond what they deem acceptable.
Russia is bombarding Aleppo because Putin wants a navy base in the Mediterranean, and his ticket to that is to keep Assad in power in Damascus no matter the cost. There are moderate rebels striving for a modern state, there are islamic extremist rebels, and there are some ethnic Turks and Kurds. This comes on top of the previous conflict in Iraq with Sunnis, Shias, and Kurds fighting each other, each with their links to kinfolks in other countries in the region.
The most problematic of these circumstances is the Kurdish case. It is the largest ethnic group in the world that does not have a country, a nation state. Their land is split between four countries, Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria. Turkey is helping the moderate rebels in Syria against Assad but their main foe is the Kurds. Apparently the situation is as follows:
There is one factor and one factor only that prevents the West from showing a united front, and it is the Kurdish problem. The fact that Turkey is insisting on subjugating a large tract of Kurdish land.
Turkey would have a lot to win on reconsidering its stance on Kurdistan. They would get more stability, and stability leads to economical development. It could also open the doors for EU membership. Furthermore, it would give them a friendly eastern neighbor that can act as a buffer to Iran, a very useful buffer since there are Kurds on the other side of the border as well, inside Iran. A Kurdistan created with pieces from present Iraq and Turkey would put Teheran on the defensive. By removing this problem from the table, all efforts could be focused on defeating the bad guys in the Levant (a people wanting sovereignty is not a bad guy!). It seems that it’s in Ankara’s interest to reconsider the Kurdish question.
El 1 de septiembre la oposición en Venezuela, respaldado por la resistencia, ha llamado a tomar la capital Caracas. Dado que el país se ha convertido en una dictadura bajo un régimen genocida, no hay problema ninguna si el pueblo decida derrocar al gobierno en una revolución popular para establecer un gobierno nuevo. La Ley Internacional les otorga ese derecho, siempre y cuando cualquier uso de fuerza solo sea dirigido hacía el régimen y sus fuerzas de seguridad (regulares como irregulares). El llamado es a una marcha pacífica, lo cual indica una lucha no-violenta. Eso está bien, porque tiene más probabilidad de tener éxito.
La resistencia en Venezuela por años ha estado claro que es una dictadura y que la salida pasa por el uso de fuerza popular, o sea, un pueblo unido en la calle para presionar y exigir la salida del régimen. Mucho de esta acción indica que por ahí van, pero no todo. La oposición política en la MUD (mesa de unidad democrática) parece incapaz de mantener un mensaje creíble. Ellos llaman a esa marcha para supuestamente exigir un referendo revocatorio este año, lo cual es un derecho constitucional.
El problema con esta exigencia es que el régimen ya lo ha dejado absolutamente claro que no lo van a permitir, y todos los demás observadores han captado esta respuesta del régimen (la OEA, la UE, la ONU, la resistencia venezolana). Por alguna razón la MUD sigue clamando por un referendo revocatorio que todos saben no se va a dar, punto. Eso hace mucho daño a la credibilidad política de la MUD. Un elemento de la resistencia sospecha que la MUD en realidad está trabajando para el régimen. Los chavistas piensan que los de la MUD son mentirosos. La comunidad internacional se pregunta si la MUD sabe lo que está haciendo. El pueblo en general se encuentra entre mensajes cruzados y eso contribuye a la confusión dentro del país — y la confusión solo beneficia a la dictadura. Realmente no entiendo por qué la MUD mantiene esa linea y ese discurso que hace tanto daño.
¿Por qué la MUD no habla claro y dice que “esto es una dictadura y tenemos el derecho bajo la ley internacional y el deber constitucional de restablecer la vigencia de la constitución”? Si dirían eso, a lo mejor todos los “duros”, los determinados, les respaldarían de inmediato en vez de posiblemente mantenerse en casa dudando sus intenciones. Es hora de hablar claro.