9/11: How our wars today began
(Herman Tiu Laurel / DieHard III / The Daily Tribune / 09-10-2014 WED)
The end of the Cold War and the 1990s brought the notion that the
horrors of war and nuclear Armageddon ended prospects of future wars.
America's taste and budgets for war also dove (or so it seemed). A
1992 book, The End of History by Francis Fukuyama, laid the myth that
capitalist liberal-democracy's victory as the perfect and "final form
of human government" had obviated conflict. Samuel Huntington, of the
neoconservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI), saw a new age of
conflict along cultural-religious lines. In a lecture series, he
posited "The Clash of Civilizations" (a phrase from Bernard Lewis'
"The Roots of Muslim Rage"), which laid the basis for "jihadism" in
subverting the world.
Fukuyama and Huntington come from the same community of conservatives
and neoconservatives (with some dressed as liberal and progressive
intellectuals), comprising the vast majority of 1,800 US "think tanks"
incubating and propagating justifications for US world dominance. AEI
is among many, such as the Council of Foreign Relations, Rand Corp.,
Heritage Foundation, Freedom House, National Endowment for Democracy,
US Institute for Peace, ad nausea, supported by either or both US
government and private funding. Many of them, in turn, promote and
fund projects and NGOs in targeted countries, including the
Philippines.
Drawing from the many neoconservative think tanks, a new strategic
plan and brain trust to establish US dominance in the 21st Century was
formed (which included Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, et
al., all part of George W. Bush's core). Called "The Project for a
New American Century (PNAC)," the strategy set out for "American
global leadership" on the pretext that "American leadership is both
good for America and... the world."
Interestingly, PNAC's Section V, Rebuilding America's Defenses, states
that "the process of transformation (of the military) ... is likely to
be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event--like a
new Pearl Harbor."
The 1941 Pearl Harbor attack, with 2,403 Americans killed, is the
moment that tipped an insular, pacifist US population in the mainland,
which up until then refused to join the raging war in Europe and Asia,
into committing itself body and soul to the war.
A "new Pearl Harbor" in September 2001 did transpire as if, and many
like this writer believe to be, by design--starting with the attack on
New York's World Trade Center (WTC) 1 and 2, and then the collapse of
WTC 7--which killed over 3,000 and left the US population in "shock
and awe," overwhelming the people with emotional vulnerability to
suggestive propaganda that "Muslim rage (and) Bin Laden did it."
"Shock and awe" is still employed with regularity today. As recently
as two weeks ago, US journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff were
supposedly beheaded by a British-accented Islamic State of Iraq and
Syria (ISIS) terrorist. But even outlets such as Al Jazeera now
question the authenticity of the beheadings, as there was no blood
shown besides the inexplicably stoic expressions of the men about to
have their heads cut off.
Still, the Foley and Sotloff events overwhelmed the US population's
aversion to restarting US bombings and eventual troop redeployment in
the Middle East after forcing Obama to hold off from bombing Syria,
turning the US public into "sheeple" once again.
People normally can think for themselves, but the art of turning the
most rational of them to "sheeple" has been a well-developed one and
all rulers require it, from Joseph Goebbels to PR-marketing master
Edward Bernays for capitalist-consumer society, to benignly named
London-based Travistock Institute of Human Relations and the MKUltra
program of the CIA.
"Shock and awe," as a basic tool to overwhelm people's rational
senses, was used in recent times also in the East Ukraine MH17 plane
destruction, which Western powers used to ramp up anti-Russian
feelings and are now covering up.
Goebbels said, "Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the
government can play." Today, the press is "the Media," including the
omnipresent "social media" down to individual cellphones. All of them
have played up the WTC 1 and 2 collapse, but few in world know about
Building 7 not being hit by any plane yet still imploding in gravity
speed.
To understand the "inside job" that was 9/11, the "sheeple" must
become "people" again, by shaking off impressions from controlled
mainstream media and by studying for themselves "AE 9/11 Truth" of
2,200 architects and engineers calling for a new investigation of the
event.
(Watch GNN Talk News TV with HTL on Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable
Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8:00 p.m. and replay
Sunday, 8 a.m.; tune in to 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.;
search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; and visit
http://newsulongpilipino.blogspot.com)
Wednesday, September 10, 2014
Monday, September 8, 2014
Government as private business
Government as private business
(Herman Tiu Laurel / DieHard III / The Daily Tribune / 09-08-2014 MON)
When politicians and businessmen make the same call to "run government
like a business," we are reminded of this one caveat from one of the
greatest reformers in history: Former US President Franklin Delano
Roosevelt, who saved the United States of America from the Great
Depression, said of those who bankrupted his country, "They had begun
to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to
their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is
just as dangerous as Government by organized mob."
Thus, when a major Philippine political leader calls the top corporate
money bag of foreign and local finance capital as his "bossing,"
Filipinos really have to worry.
The "bossing" quote accompanied an assertion by the politician that he
runs his constituency "like a business enterprise (similar to his
bossing's) whose successes in administration and public service he
wanted to replicate in the national government," according to one
report.
Clearly, the politician also wants to replicate the record of a
previous Malacañang tenant, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, whose then
economic adviser (now Albay governor) Joey Salceda boasted as having
the "most pro-business" government, with the top 1000 corporations
earning almost P4 trillion" (excluding unreported incomes) from 2001
to 2010. Of course, what Salceda left out was that the official
hunger rate upped from 11.4 percent in 2000 to 20.3 percent in 2010.
Even as current Palace occupant BS Aquino likes to repeat that his
"bossings" are the people, few believe that claim--especially so when
it comes to the vast sea and growing tsunami of the poor in this
country.
Despite the much ballyhooed GDP growth, the country remains faced with
growing joblessness in the jobless economic growth model (despite
Manila Times' Ben Kritz finally swallowing the skewed definition of
"employed" that includes garland vendors and the like); and the
reality of Gross Domestic Pain increasing as profits of
foreign-controlled and domestic Big Business expand through the
highest rates in Asia in corporate-controlled public utilities, such
as power, water, telecoms, fossil energy, transportation, ad nausea.
We debated this issue at our small Sunday market coffee clique, whose
other members include two World Bank consultants, one former Ayala
executive, and one engineer of a multinational oil company. They were
ranged against my Franklin Delano Roosevelt quip and my view that
government should not be run like a business and that it should
restrain the avarice, especially of Big Business. I have to qualify
that because, as I told the group, the business model is appropriate
for small, medium, and even large-scale businesses only when these do
not deal with inelastic demand commodities, services, and sectors
imbued with basic public interests.
They argued that the private business model is more efficient. But
where's the proof when it comes to governance? Which society is
better run for its people today--China, Vietnam, and Singapore (all
late economic tigers compared to 1950s Philippines) or the
Philippines? Or compare the US today with China.
I asked the World Bank consultant about Indonesia. Is it dominated by
private business or the state? He had to admit that Indonesia is a
state-run society and is better than the Philippines. We cited
examples in the Philippines, like the MRT, which is privately owned
with all sorts of problems, in contrast to the LRT run by government
since Marcos' time, which had been comparatively trouble free.
The Philippines today is actually being run exactly like a
business--entirely for profit. The general rule is that politicians
run it for profit too--for themselves, their business "bossings," and
foreign capitalists controlling the major Filipino companies through
the backdoor.
I highlighted the deterioration with policy retrogressions, such as
the removal of the "political ads ban" by Sen. Edgardo Angara in the
early 2000s after Edsa II, which restored the primacy of political
funding from the oligarchs, the profits of their media corporate
giants, and the money power of the two. There is also the complete
non-compliance by the tri-media owned by the oligarchs to any media
control limitations.
The struggle for democracy of the people against these money powers
stretches back centuries. I'll go as far back only to the 18th
Century when the US Constitution was drafted by Thomas Jefferson, who
said, "I hope we shall take warning from the example of England and
crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which
dare already to challenge our Government to trial, and bid defiance to
the laws of our country."
The US today has forgotten Jefferson's warning; and the Ferguson,
Missouri riots are a reminder.
In the Philippines, top business auditor (and US army sergeant)
Washington Sycip already has his sights set on Little Miss Poe-ppet
(see the September 3 Inquirer headline).
We need leadership that is sworn to defend and protect the State and the People.
(Watch GNN Talk News TV with HTL on Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable
Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8:00 p.m. and replay
Sunday, 8 a.m.; tune in to 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.;
search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; and visit
http://newsulongpilipino.blogspot.com)
(Herman Tiu Laurel / DieHard III / The Daily Tribune / 09-08-2014 MON)
When politicians and businessmen make the same call to "run government
like a business," we are reminded of this one caveat from one of the
greatest reformers in history: Former US President Franklin Delano
Roosevelt, who saved the United States of America from the Great
Depression, said of those who bankrupted his country, "They had begun
to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to
their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is
just as dangerous as Government by organized mob."
Thus, when a major Philippine political leader calls the top corporate
money bag of foreign and local finance capital as his "bossing,"
Filipinos really have to worry.
The "bossing" quote accompanied an assertion by the politician that he
runs his constituency "like a business enterprise (similar to his
bossing's) whose successes in administration and public service he
wanted to replicate in the national government," according to one
report.
Clearly, the politician also wants to replicate the record of a
previous Malacañang tenant, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, whose then
economic adviser (now Albay governor) Joey Salceda boasted as having
the "most pro-business" government, with the top 1000 corporations
earning almost P4 trillion" (excluding unreported incomes) from 2001
to 2010. Of course, what Salceda left out was that the official
hunger rate upped from 11.4 percent in 2000 to 20.3 percent in 2010.
Even as current Palace occupant BS Aquino likes to repeat that his
"bossings" are the people, few believe that claim--especially so when
it comes to the vast sea and growing tsunami of the poor in this
country.
Despite the much ballyhooed GDP growth, the country remains faced with
growing joblessness in the jobless economic growth model (despite
Manila Times' Ben Kritz finally swallowing the skewed definition of
"employed" that includes garland vendors and the like); and the
reality of Gross Domestic Pain increasing as profits of
foreign-controlled and domestic Big Business expand through the
highest rates in Asia in corporate-controlled public utilities, such
as power, water, telecoms, fossil energy, transportation, ad nausea.
We debated this issue at our small Sunday market coffee clique, whose
other members include two World Bank consultants, one former Ayala
executive, and one engineer of a multinational oil company. They were
ranged against my Franklin Delano Roosevelt quip and my view that
government should not be run like a business and that it should
restrain the avarice, especially of Big Business. I have to qualify
that because, as I told the group, the business model is appropriate
for small, medium, and even large-scale businesses only when these do
not deal with inelastic demand commodities, services, and sectors
imbued with basic public interests.
They argued that the private business model is more efficient. But
where's the proof when it comes to governance? Which society is
better run for its people today--China, Vietnam, and Singapore (all
late economic tigers compared to 1950s Philippines) or the
Philippines? Or compare the US today with China.
I asked the World Bank consultant about Indonesia. Is it dominated by
private business or the state? He had to admit that Indonesia is a
state-run society and is better than the Philippines. We cited
examples in the Philippines, like the MRT, which is privately owned
with all sorts of problems, in contrast to the LRT run by government
since Marcos' time, which had been comparatively trouble free.
The Philippines today is actually being run exactly like a
business--entirely for profit. The general rule is that politicians
run it for profit too--for themselves, their business "bossings," and
foreign capitalists controlling the major Filipino companies through
the backdoor.
I highlighted the deterioration with policy retrogressions, such as
the removal of the "political ads ban" by Sen. Edgardo Angara in the
early 2000s after Edsa II, which restored the primacy of political
funding from the oligarchs, the profits of their media corporate
giants, and the money power of the two. There is also the complete
non-compliance by the tri-media owned by the oligarchs to any media
control limitations.
The struggle for democracy of the people against these money powers
stretches back centuries. I'll go as far back only to the 18th
Century when the US Constitution was drafted by Thomas Jefferson, who
said, "I hope we shall take warning from the example of England and
crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which
dare already to challenge our Government to trial, and bid defiance to
the laws of our country."
The US today has forgotten Jefferson's warning; and the Ferguson,
Missouri riots are a reminder.
In the Philippines, top business auditor (and US army sergeant)
Washington Sycip already has his sights set on Little Miss Poe-ppet
(see the September 3 Inquirer headline).
We need leadership that is sworn to defend and protect the State and the People.
(Watch GNN Talk News TV with HTL on Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable
Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8:00 p.m. and replay
Sunday, 8 a.m.; tune in to 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.;
search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; and visit
http://newsulongpilipino.blogspot.com)
Wednesday, August 20, 2014
Fwd: HTL DieHard III Column for 08-20-2014 WED
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mentong Tiu <mentong2011@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 2:25 PM
Subject: Fwd: HTL DieHard III Column for 08-20-2014 WED
To: annalizagaspar <annalizagaspar@gmail.com>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Laurence Siao <lcsiao@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 12:46 AM
Subject: HTL DieHard III Column for 08-20-2014 WED
To: Tribune <mlatdt@gmail.com>, Tribune <mlatdt@yahoo.com>, Tribune-
Ninez <ninezolivares@yahoo.com>
Cc: Herman Tiu Laurel <mentong2011@gmail.com>, herman laurel
<htlnow@fastmail.fm>
People Power-less Revolution
(Herman Tiu Laurel / DieHard III / The Daily Tribune / 08-20-2014 WED)
Today, 14 years after the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA)
was signed into law a few months after the Edsa II coup of 2001, the
Philippines is faced with another power supply crisis. The EPIRA was
supposed to have solved the shortage of power that began when Cory
Aquino and Joker Arroyo cancelled the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant and
appointed a power oligarch to head the National Power Corp. (Napocor)
after the Edsa I "People Power Revolution" of 1986.
The crisis worsened under the term of Fidel V. Ramos, who then signed
a host of horrendously overpriced supply contracts from independent
power producers, whose so-called power purchase agreements required
government (and, of course, consumers) to pay even for power that had
never been used, which resulted in a humongous debt for Napocor.
When the EPIRA was still being sold to the public in the euphoric wake
of Edsa II, its proponent packaged the power industry privatization
plan as the guarantee for the Napocor debt of $15 billion to be paid
off through sale of the state agency's assets, besides fostering
competition among private power companies that would ensure lower
power rates and foreign investments in the industry that would lead to
ample supply for always.
The reality 14 years after those promises were made, however, has
become absolutely disheartening, if not depressing, for the country's
power consumers and economy. The Napocor debt was never reduced and
the company that stands today under the name of PSALM (Power Sector
Assets and Liabilities Management Corp.) has its interest costs at a
whopping $16 billion or P650 billion, despite 90 percent of its assets
having been privatized!
Today the Philippines proudly touts the highest power cost in Asia, if
not the world (since 2001), and continues to have annual power crises
and shortages plaguing Mindanao, as well as Luzon and the rest of the
country.
No new capacity has really been installed despite a decade and a half
of profits going to the major power companies. In fact, just this
year, an industry giant, in partnership with its mother company, even
opened a new power plant in Singapore worth P800 billion.
Two years after the EPIRA became law, Filipino power consumers began
to understand that none of its promises were being fulfilled. As
such, one of the anti-Arroyo campaign issues in 2004 was the high
power cost.
From 2008 to this day, Mindanao suffers 12-hour daily brownouts
despite its rich hydroelectric capacities. Every year the Department
of Energy warns of supply shortfalls and asks for emergency
presidential powers to rent expensive diesel power barges, which
government had privatized before.
Twenty-six years after the Edsa I and Edsa II "People Power"
uprisings, the Filipino people find themselves without sufficient
electric power despite the highest price for it they are paying; and
they find themselves powerless to do anything about it. The same is
true for their supposed representatives in the Senate, Congress,
Malacañang, the courts, or even activists and consumer protection
groups, having been ironically blocked in all their efforts by those
institutions of government and the media that the private power
oligarchs control.
Today not only the people and power consumers find themselves
powerless in both the electrical and political senses of the word,
even real industry and labor organization leaders find themselves in
the same boat.
Since 2013, the different chambers of commerce and labor groups such
as the Trade Union Congress of the Philippines have demanded action on
the power crisis (such as the repeal of the EPIRA) but to no avail.
It seems that after the Edsa I and II "People Power" revolutions, the
real power in Philippine society turned out to be the "power
oligarchs" who became the plutocrats with the privatization of state
assets.
What we have witnessed the past 20 or so years is in reality a people
made "power-less" through economic and political policies that have
transferred the economic power of government and the state to the
rich.
It is time to realize this and reverse it through the genuine populist
revolution. Who's to lead this? They are already there; the people
need only to recognize them.
(Watch GNN Talk News TV with HTL on Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable
Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8:00 p.m. and replay
Sunday, 8 a.m.; tune in to 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.;
search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; and visit
http://newsulongpilipino.blogspot.com)
From: Mentong Tiu <mentong2011@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 2:25 PM
Subject: Fwd: HTL DieHard III Column for 08-20-2014 WED
To: annalizagaspar <annalizagaspar@gmail.com>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Laurence Siao <lcsiao@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 12:46 AM
Subject: HTL DieHard III Column for 08-20-2014 WED
To: Tribune <mlatdt@gmail.com>, Tribune <mlatdt@yahoo.com>, Tribune-
Ninez <ninezolivares@yahoo.com>
Cc: Herman Tiu Laurel <mentong2011@gmail.com>, herman laurel
<htlnow@fastmail.fm>
People Power-less Revolution
(Herman Tiu Laurel / DieHard III / The Daily Tribune / 08-20-2014 WED)
Today, 14 years after the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA)
was signed into law a few months after the Edsa II coup of 2001, the
Philippines is faced with another power supply crisis. The EPIRA was
supposed to have solved the shortage of power that began when Cory
Aquino and Joker Arroyo cancelled the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant and
appointed a power oligarch to head the National Power Corp. (Napocor)
after the Edsa I "People Power Revolution" of 1986.
The crisis worsened under the term of Fidel V. Ramos, who then signed
a host of horrendously overpriced supply contracts from independent
power producers, whose so-called power purchase agreements required
government (and, of course, consumers) to pay even for power that had
never been used, which resulted in a humongous debt for Napocor.
When the EPIRA was still being sold to the public in the euphoric wake
of Edsa II, its proponent packaged the power industry privatization
plan as the guarantee for the Napocor debt of $15 billion to be paid
off through sale of the state agency's assets, besides fostering
competition among private power companies that would ensure lower
power rates and foreign investments in the industry that would lead to
ample supply for always.
The reality 14 years after those promises were made, however, has
become absolutely disheartening, if not depressing, for the country's
power consumers and economy. The Napocor debt was never reduced and
the company that stands today under the name of PSALM (Power Sector
Assets and Liabilities Management Corp.) has its interest costs at a
whopping $16 billion or P650 billion, despite 90 percent of its assets
having been privatized!
Today the Philippines proudly touts the highest power cost in Asia, if
not the world (since 2001), and continues to have annual power crises
and shortages plaguing Mindanao, as well as Luzon and the rest of the
country.
No new capacity has really been installed despite a decade and a half
of profits going to the major power companies. In fact, just this
year, an industry giant, in partnership with its mother company, even
opened a new power plant in Singapore worth P800 billion.
Two years after the EPIRA became law, Filipino power consumers began
to understand that none of its promises were being fulfilled. As
such, one of the anti-Arroyo campaign issues in 2004 was the high
power cost.
From 2008 to this day, Mindanao suffers 12-hour daily brownouts
despite its rich hydroelectric capacities. Every year the Department
of Energy warns of supply shortfalls and asks for emergency
presidential powers to rent expensive diesel power barges, which
government had privatized before.
Twenty-six years after the Edsa I and Edsa II "People Power"
uprisings, the Filipino people find themselves without sufficient
electric power despite the highest price for it they are paying; and
they find themselves powerless to do anything about it. The same is
true for their supposed representatives in the Senate, Congress,
Malacañang, the courts, or even activists and consumer protection
groups, having been ironically blocked in all their efforts by those
institutions of government and the media that the private power
oligarchs control.
Today not only the people and power consumers find themselves
powerless in both the electrical and political senses of the word,
even real industry and labor organization leaders find themselves in
the same boat.
Since 2013, the different chambers of commerce and labor groups such
as the Trade Union Congress of the Philippines have demanded action on
the power crisis (such as the repeal of the EPIRA) but to no avail.
It seems that after the Edsa I and II "People Power" revolutions, the
real power in Philippine society turned out to be the "power
oligarchs" who became the plutocrats with the privatization of state
assets.
What we have witnessed the past 20 or so years is in reality a people
made "power-less" through economic and political policies that have
transferred the economic power of government and the state to the
rich.
It is time to realize this and reverse it through the genuine populist
revolution. Who's to lead this? They are already there; the people
need only to recognize them.
(Watch GNN Talk News TV with HTL on Destiny Cable Channel 8, SkyCable
Channel 213, and www.gnntv-asia.com, Saturday, 8:00 p.m. and replay
Sunday, 8 a.m.; tune in to 1098 AM, dwAD, Tuesday to Friday, 5 p.m.;
search Talk News TV and date of showing on YouTube; and visit
http://newsulongpilipino.blogspot.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
