Archive | November 19, 2014

Unpaid Debts: Reparation For Colonialism*

Unpaid Debts: Reparation For Colonialism*

Bankruptcy is what drives Europe, U.S. and allies to launch a pathetic attack on Russia in recent times. With all the natural resources they have taken from Asia, Africa and other so-called third-world/developing nations what happened to all that wealth that they lied, cheated and murdered for? If it was any ordinary citizen in the same state of affairs that citizen would end up in the debtors prison, and whatever assets they had left would be confiscated.Instead they embark on a rabid dogs campaign to clear the path so they can rape and plunder the land free of the people (eugenics).

Chirac’s predecessor François Mitterand already prophesied in 1957 that:

 ”Without Africa, France will have no history in the 21st century”

Former French President Jacques Chirac recently spoke about the African nations money in France banks. Here is a video of  him speaking about the french exploitation scheme. He is speaking in French, but here is a short excerpt transcript:

“We have to be honest, and acknowledge that a big part of the money in our banks come precisely from the exploitation of the African continent.”

By Valentin Katasonov

In the 20th century contributions, or levies, paid by the defeated enemy to victors were substituted by reparations, or compensations, for the inflicted damage. In recent years some governments of the post-Soviet space have started to ask the Russian Federation to pay «compensations» as their territories were made parts of the USSR against their will. They say it was the period of «Soviet occupation». For instance, in September 2014 Lithuania formally claimed 300 billion euros to be paid by Russia. Naturally, such «reparation claims» are nothing else but a political demarche without any economic or legal substantiation. On the other hand, the issue of new reparations, such as the compensations for the damage inflicted on colonies, should be pushed more resolutely into international agenda.

The Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order adopted by the UN General Assembly on May 1, 1974 was an important step on the way to recognition of colonial reparation claims.

The document was pushed under the pressure exerted by the Soviet Union and the Group of 77 (the Non-Aligned Movement), no matter the West opposed it. The Declaration says,

«The right of all States, territories and peoples under foreign occupation, alien and colonial domination or apartheid to restitution and full compensation for the exploitation arid depletion of, and damages to, the natural resources and all other resources of those States, territories and peoples».

The new world order ensued after the Cold War and it happened to be quite different from what the UN Declaration of May 1, 1974 proclaimed.

The existing economic order (which is sometimes called «globalization») has actually revived many forms of neocolonialism and colonialism. 

Today the issue of colonial reparations is back to the fore again.

The First Pan-African Conference on Reparation, held in Abuja, Nigeria, April 27-29, 1993, kicked off a new round of fight for reparations in relation to the damage done to developing countries by colonialists. At the conference Jamaican lawyer Anthony Gifford argued that African slavery was a crime against humanity and international law recognizes that those who committed this crime and encroached on victims’ lives and freedom should compensate victims.

As far back as 1991, the Organization of African Unity took a decision to create the African World Reparations and Repatriation Truth Commission. In 1999 the commission estimated that the United States and Europe had to pay Africa $777 thousand billion for slave trade only. Historians believe that about 11-12 million Africans were transported across the Atlantic Ocean in the XV-XIX centuries.

The damage was not limited by slave trade; there were other losses – from compulsory labor to the profits lost because there was no development of national economy. It was not included in the $777 trillion damage estimate. Of course, it’s unreal to pay the sum (it exceeded the world GDP in early 1990s by 20 times). But the international commission wanted to attract the public attention to the issue of colonial reparations. If needed, it was prepared to launch legal suits on the part of former colonies and semi-colonies and go to the International Court in The Hague and the courts of other countries.

Private reparations for apartheid in South Africa

Some lawsuits have already been launched. The reparations received in accordance with the court decision could be called private reparations. They differ from state reparations. South Africa is the first among those who claim private reparations for colonialism. Its government encourages the activities of human rights organizations dealing with such matters. Khulumani is best known among them.

Banks and companies, not states, are defendants in such lawsuits. In the summer of 2002 Ed Fagan, a US-based renowned expert in the field of reparations lawsuits, launched $50 – billion dollar legal proceedings in Manhattan federal court, New York, against Switzerland’s two largest banks – UBS and Credit Suisse. He acted to defend the rights of a group of South African apartheid victims. Ed Fagan had previously won a many-billion compensation for the victims of WWII.

In 2002 South African human rights organizations launched lawsuits against the banks of Germany, France and Great Britain. The claims advanced in 2002 against a large number of companies were refused at first. In 2007 the US Court of Appeals examined the case again. In April 2009 the New York district court gave the permission to launch procedures on a number of complaints. South African President Jacob Zuma supported the apartheid victims. His predecessor Thabo Mbeki had been more restrained and kept at the distance from the plaintiffs. He believed that the problem could negatively affect the South African international image.

On April 9, 2009 the New York federal court handed down a ruling which said, «US court allows apartheid claims to go forward». It said Khulumani could go to US courts to claim compensations from the international companies that helped the South African government at the time it repressed the black majority, or, in other words, was involved in human rights violations on the black continent. As a result, the lawsuits were launched against General Motors, IBM, Ford, Barclays, British Petroleum and Shell. According to plaintiffs’ lawyer Michael Hausfeld, the claims were also lodged against arms producers – German Rheinmetall, Swiss Oerlikon and Fujitsu, a Japanese computer company. Millions of South African blacks want multi-billion reparations to be paid by Western companies. Five years have passed since the US federal court’s ruling but none of South African claimants have received any indemnity so far. 

First success in the struggle for colonial reparations

Members of the Herero tribe in Namibia sued the German Government in 2001 seeking $4 billion reparations for genocide. At the times of colonial expansion in Х1Х-ХХ German troops almost exterminated the tribe to seize its lands. Chief Kuaima Riruako said his people wanted reparations for the bloodshed and cattle taken away. He called on German people to press its government and make it pay it the reparations. 13 have passed since then. The Namibian plaintiffs got nothing from Germany. 

For many years Germany has been paying compensations to the victims of Holocaust on a regular basis voluntarily – no court rulings. A number of German organizations deal with the issues related to the compensations to holocaust victims, including the Conference on Jewish Material Claims against Germany, or Claims Conference. In 1951 the Association got $70 billion from the German government. According to the group’s information, it is to pay $185 billion in 2014, $266 billion in 2015, $273 in 2016 and $280 in 2018.

The lawsuit launched by the veterans of Mau Mau uprising in Kenya in the 1950-60s deserves special attention. Acting upon the orders from London the British military and special services killed, maimed, jailed and tortured over 200 thousand people.

In 2007 the litigation suit was launched at the high court in central London. The Kenyans wanted the UK government to pay them £59, 75 for the atrocities committed by British troops sent to quell the uprising. The veterans of liberation movement were resolute. They said in case of refusal they would go to the International Court in The Hague. Leigh Day issued a claim on behalf of the plaintiffs. In June 2013 the case ended up in an out-of-court settlement of about £19, 9 million pounds (23, 04 million euros). The ruling can be considered as a success though the money is only a third of the sum wanted by claimants.

This is a precedent that made the West panic and inspired the developing countries to continue their fight for colonial reparations.

Source*

Related Topics:

41,000 Kenyans to Sue Britain for Maltreatment*

Eugenics: Kenya’s Catholic Bishops Charge U.N. for Sterilizing the Population*

UK to Pay £20m compensation to Mau Mau Victims*

Fourteen Caribbean Nations Demand Reparation from Colonial Britain*

Did You Know: US Gov’t Paid Reparations…To Slave Owners

Eugenics: Compensation for the Homeless*

Controlling Haiti

From Liberation to Re-enslavement

Controling Haiti’s Gold

Colonial France out for Niger’s Uranium*

French Grab for Mali’s Gold*

The Rise of the French Right and the CFA Franc

Debt-ocracy: Enslaving Entire Nations and Peoples*

Censorship of History Curriculum: Students Employ Civil Disobedience*

Christopher Columbus’s Reign of Terror in the Caribbean

The Treasure at the Heart of Iraq

Europe’s Population ‘Management’ Agenda in Yemen.

EU Countries Should Pay Back all the Countries they have Plundered Before Demanding from Turkey for Cyprus*

U.K. Students March for Free Education*

U.K. Students March for Free Education*

By Jon Queally

‘We are determined,’ said students organizers in a joint letter, ‘to build a movement too big to ignore that puts free, accessible and public education back on the political agenda.’

“No tuition fees! No education cuts! No debt!”

Those are the calls being voiced in the streets of London on Wednesday as thousands of students marched for publicly-funded (“free”) education nationwide. The protest was also billed as a direct challenge to austerity cuts to higher education imposed by the conservative government led by David Cameron.

Organizers said the march is just the beginning of “a major wave of action” ahead of the nation’s next general election. “We are determined,” the students said in a joint letter, “to build a movement too big to ignore that puts free, accessible and public education back on the political agenda.”

In a tweet, the anti-austerity group UK Uncut declared, “No cuts! No fees! No debt! Education is a right not a privilege. The students are back on the streets demanding #Free Education.”

Led by a coalition of several student-led groups—including the Student Assembly Against Austerity, the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts and the Young Greens —organizers and participants wrote an open letter explaining their demands in a letter published in the Guardian on Wednesday morning:

Today we are stepping up our campaign against tuition fees and education cuts with the biggest student national demonstration for years. As student debt soars and staff working conditions deteriorate, it is clear that the marketisation of education is failing students and workers alike.

Last month Germany scrapped tuition fees – proving once again that free education is possible. If the government increased tax on the rich, scrapped Trident or reduced military spending, billions of pounds would be made available to fund education and other vital public services.

Free education is not just about the money. It’s about the working conditions of those who make our education possible, and about democratising and liberating our institutions and the curriculum; funding vocational and further education, living grants and childcare that allows women to freely access learning.

According to a statement put out by the Young Greens, the Cameron government and the ruling elites have their priorities on education all wrong. “[They] sees public services as a means to make a profit for the rich and powerful rather than a means to serve the common good,” the party said in a statement. Putting forward their proposed solutions, the group listed the following set of policy changes to counter the current assault on education and students:

  • Abolish all tuition fees.
  • Increase student grants to cover costs of living.
  • Cut accommodation costs by investing in decent, affordable social housing and regulating landlords.
  • Ensure that universities are sufficiently funded and accessible to all, including providing for disabled students and those with children.

Earlier this the year, the Student Assembly Against Austerity released a digital pamphlet, titled The Student Manifesto, which explained why free education was necessary and laid out 15 demands to create a revitalized public education in the country.

Source*

Related Topics:

British Education System Designed to Polarise People*

A U.K. Revolt against ‘exam factory’ Schooling*

‘You Are Not a Loan’*

Civil Unrest Returns to Europe*

Education: China’s Poorest Beat U.Ks Best*

Education Beyond Brainwashing*

The Fight against Corporate Education Reform is Just Beginning*

Occupy World: Mother Who Refused to Pay Home Schooling Fine is Released*

Occupy World: Mass Student Protest Turns into a Nation’s Struggle for Identity

U.K. Students Have Won the Battle But Not the War

A Silent Education Revolution in Brazil*

Kassig Died in a Bombing Raid before the Theatrical ISIS-U.S Beheading*

Kassig Died in a Bombing Raid before the Theatrical ISIS-U.S Beheading*

As with many of the earlier “beheading” videos questions are now being raised about the authenticity of Peter Kassig’s video beheading.

I have not seen the video yet but two clear points emerge in the following report, both of which indicate that the “beheading” may have been staged.

First and foremost, Peter Kassig’s body DOES NOT appear on video after his alleged murder.

Secondly, and perhaps more significantly, as with many of the previous “beheading” videos the actual moment of decapitation IS NOT SHOWN.

Unlike the earlier beheading videos, which displayed little blood and consequently raised serious questions about the authenticity of the actual decapitations, this latest video is bloodier. Although that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s authentic of course, just that the video makers are learning from previous oversights.

In other words this could be just as easily be a staged psyop.

However, it’s not the video that raises questions. It’s Peter Kassig’s background and history; both of which appear to have been scripted to elicit maximum sympathy from the public. Followed by indignation in the event and outrage over the manner of his death.

For Peter Kassig was a former Special Forces soldier who had served with the U.S. Rangers in Iraq during the allied occupation, converted to Islam and then devoted himself to charity work!!!

It’s almost too good to be true and begs the question: was Kassig still serving as a member of Special Forces, albeit in a covert capacity, when he was taken hostage?

We live in a phase of history where deception is king. “Islamic militants” commit atrocities in the name of Mohammad that the Prophet himself would condemn outright.

Covertly funded and supplied by Western interest groups, Islamic militants wage war against the “infidel” even as they further the interests of their financial backers.

Now a former Special Forces soldier who fought in Iraq is killed while doing charity work by Islamic militants. As a former Special Forces soldier — albeit fighting long ago in a country now long forgotten, Rhodesia — I just don’t buy this.

Of course this doesn’t necessarily mean that Peter Kassig wasn’t murdered. It does mean however, that we shouldn’t take claims that he was beheaded at face value.

Politicians may make a lot of noise about the horror of the “beheading” but they may simply be trying to milk the event for political profit. Knowing full well that Kassig wasn’t killed in the manner claimed and maybe wasn’t killed at all. Ed.

Syrian activists claim Peter Kassig died in bombing raid days before Jihadi John paraded his severed head

Sharon Churcher in New, John Hall in London — Mail Online Nov 17, 2014

Peter Kassig’s execution may have been faked by Jihadi John after the US hostage was killed in an US-led airstrike, according to extraordinary claims from the leader of a Syrian underground group.

Speaking over Skype from a hiding place near the Turkish border, the head of the anti-ISIS resistance group Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently claimed there are reports that Mr Kassig died on November 5, when coalition fighter planes and drones pounded Tel-Abyad in northern Syria.

The extraordinary allegation could not be independently verified.

The claims come among increased speculation over why Mr Kassig’s full body was not shown in the video. Unlike ISIS’ previous sickening filmed murders, he did not speak directly to camera before being killed and his body was not shown after the murder.

U.S. sources have suggested that Mr Kassig could have been killed before the video was shot because he did not cooperate with the jihadists, either refusing to give a final speech on camera or possibly even fighting back while the murder was taking place.

American forces have previously attempted a daring rescue of U.S. hostages and President Obama has said that he would make all efforts to rescue U.S. citizens if their location could be identified.

Western planes have carried out a series of raids on the Isis weapons stockpile and refinery where Peter Kassig is claimed to have been hit but if there had been any intelligence suggesting where he was being held such strikes would have been highly unlikely to be authorized.

The campaign group Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently also claimed to have pinpointed the exact location used by ISIS in their latest sickening video – which also showed a group of Syrian soldiers being brutally murdered by a large number of unmasked militants.

The resistance group produced a map to show the location in the northern suburbs of the small but highly symbolic Syrian town of Dabiq, north of Aleppo. The terror group’s de facto capital is Raqqa, where previous filmed murders featuring the militant known as ‘Jihadi John’ are understood to have been filmed.

But their most controversial allegation was that Mr Kassig could have been killed by accident in an American airstrike in Tel-Abyad. US Central Defence Command have previously announced that an onslaught destroyed an ISIS weapons stockpile in the town.

The resistance leader, a 22 year old medical student who uses the nom de guerre Abu Ibrahim Raqqawi, said in an interview: ‘I think ISIS didn’t execute Peter. An ISIS soldier told me this morning that Peter died in an airstrike on 5th November in Tel-Abyad and that is why they didn’t show a video of the execution.

‘The soldier was one of the first who arrived on the scene to secure it after an airstrike hit the Islamic State court building in Tel-Abyad. He said there was immediate high security and nobody was permitted entry to the building, not even ISIS fighters. Then two bodies were taken out of the building and put into a speeding car.’

Mr Raqqawi claims that the soldier said one of the bodies was that of Mr Kassig.

The British thug known as Jihadi John allegedly then used the remains to stage the barbaric video: ‘I think that is why there is a lot of blood on the face and no body — just a head,’ said Mr Raqqawi.

He did not suggest that the US knew Peter Kassig was being held at the Isis target – instead hinting that if true it would simply be a terrible accident.

U.S. Central Command was not immediately available for comments, but a message on its website reads: ‘U.S. and partner nation military forces continued to attack ISIL terrorists in Syria November 5-7 using fighter, bomber and remotely piloted aircraft to conduct eight airstrikes….. One airstrike near Tall Abyad destroyed an ISIL weapons stockpile.’ MailOnline has requested a comment from the Pentagon.

ISIL is an alternative acronym for ISIS commonly used by the United States military.

Previous claims by the Raqqa group have been supported by British intelligence sources.

Source*

Related Topics:

Occupy World: Australian Pilots Withdraw from Airstrikes on ISIS*

Steven Sotloff Another ISIS-U.S. False Flag to Whip Up the Blood-Feast*

David Haines Another ISIS Propaganda Beheading!?

Senior Commander of ISIS is a ‘retired’ US General Paul Vallely*

CIA Fabricates ISIL Intelligence*

US Planes Supplying ISIL with Weapons and Food*

Chechen President Calls the Kettle Black: Baghdadi is a CIA Agent*

Undercover Iraqi Journalist on ISIS and Why the U.S. Will Fail*

Plunging Oil Prices, ISIS and the Secret U.S – Saudi Deal*

ISIS: A CIA Trojan Horse to Justify War Abroad and Repression at Home*

Canada: ISIS False Flag Served to Bring in Draconian Laws*

The U.S. – ISIS Can’t Get the Story Right!*

Hoaxville from Ottawa to Fake US Airdrop For ISIS

ISIS exposed at House of Lords and the Covenant of Prophet Muhammad (SAW)*

Now we Know Why ISIS/L is Destroying Iraq and not Defending Palestine*

Former Israeli Soldier Echoes the ISIS-Zionist Threat*

Russia’s GMO Import Ban Boosts Local Organic Farmers*

Russia’s GMO Import Ban Boosts Local Organic Farmers*

Since the sanctions, “people have started to think more about where their food comes from” says organic food connoisseur, Boris Akimov.

Russia’s ban on western imports of food products may be helping the local, organic producers in the country, according to a report by the New York Times on Tuesday.

Speaking to the NYT, Boris Akimov, co-founded of LavkaLavka, a farm cooperative that sells local produce, said he has recently started receiving large orders from new customers. He has even had to turn some people away because his 100 farmers cannot produce enough to fill demand.

“The main thing which the sanctions have already changed is in people’s minds — in government, in business and on the streets, they have started to think more about where their food comes from,” Akimov told the NYT.  “If the sanctions give a chance to develop local farmers, to develop sustainable agriculture, it is very good. But I am not sure it will happen.”

In August, Russia placed an import ban on all beef, pork, fish, fruit, vegetables and dairy products coming from the European Union, the United States, Canada, Australia and Norway for one year. The ban was a response to the Western economic sanctions imposed on Moscow for their assumed involvement in the conflict in Eastern Ukraine.

Since the ban, Russia has looked towards other areas namely Asia and Latin American, to fill the gaps. However, the Kremlin has also been encouraging Russians to see the sanctions as an opportunity to support and develop their local economy.

Since then, food producers across the country have been making their own Parmesan, Mozzarella cheese, and Serrano ham – things they once depended on Europe for.

Last month, Prime Minister Dmitri A. Medvedev released a “road map” for agriculture in the country, to encourage people to think about local farming.

“The aim of our efforts is to increase our own agricultural produce and to reduce Russia’s dependence on food imports,” he said. However, the map was mostly filled with upcoming spaces to watch out for, as the Kremlin unveils new agriculture policies by the end of 2015, reported the NYT.

According to a poll taken at the end of September, 59 percent of Russians believed the sanctions would work to Russia’s economic advantage.

However, according to worried consumers, Russia’s agricultural sector is not developed enough to produce the amount of food necessary for the country.

Since the sanctions were imposed, the price of meat and poultry in the country has increased by 18 percent, and dairy products went up by over 15 percent, according to Rosstat, the federal statistics agency.

“Russia cannot provide itself with dairy products, fish, vegetables and other types of food,” said Mikhail Anshakov, the head of the Society for the Protection of Consumer Rights, which calls for food sanctions to be rescinded. “Self-imposed sanctions under these circumstances were madness.”

Since fighting in eastern Ukraine and renewed, and relations remain tense between Russia and western nations, there is little indication that sanctions will ease any time soon.

Source*

Related Topics:

Russia Bans Import of GMO Products*

Russia Sanctions Food from the West*

Monsanto Reports $156 Million Loss in Q4 as Farmers Abandon GM Crops*

Russian Food Embargo Incurs Losses for E.U.*

Farmers Abandoned by EU from Russian Food Ban*

Playing with Iran to Alienate Russia and Destabilize Iran*

Boycott America, Not Russia*

City of London’s Imperialist Designs on Russia