Organizing Notes

Bruce Gagnon is coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. He offers his own reflections on organizing and the state of America's declining empire....

My Photo
Name:
Location: Bath, Maine, United States

With a new administration in Washington it will be a challenge to get the 'liberals' to hold Biden-Harris to the few 'progressive promises' they made during their campaign. Biden is bringing back many of Bush & Obama's neo-cons to head his foreign policy. I'll be on this case without hesitation.

Saturday, January 02, 2021

Be a smart shopper in 2021


 

New year resolution....

 

Clips of Erich Fromm discussing the mask of happiness and repression in a 1977 interview.

Be more human....

Friday, January 01, 2021

Counter-productive talk....

 

Russian President Vladimir Putin thinks that the statement of German Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer on dealing with Russia from a position of strength is a way to "show how tough she is."

It appears that some German 'leaders' have learned very little since Hitler's ill-fated 'tough guy' move to occupy the former Soviet Union during WW II.  At that time 27 million Soviet citizens lost their lives but still provided the knock-out punch to German imperial ambitions.

Thursday, December 31, 2020

Rocket launch impacts: Ozone depletion & crowded orbits

 

As the number of space launches increase, rocket engine emissions grow in proportion. Rocket engine exhaust contains gases and particles that can affect Earth’s climate and ozone layer. These emissions historically have been assumed to be not much of a threat to the global environment because the space industry was considered small. Dilution was the solution to space travel pollution.  Now the dog is coming home to bite the master.

International regulations are needed to guide the program of commercial and military rocket launches in the future.

Every type of rocket engine causes some ozone loss, and toxic rocket exhausts are the only human sources of ozone-destroying compounds injected directly into the middle and upper stratosphere where the ozone layer resides.

Future ozone losses from unregulated rocket launches will eventually exceed ozone losses due to chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs, which stimulated the 1987 Montreal Protocol banning ozone-depleting chemicals.

"As the rocket launch market grows, so will ozone-destroying rocket emissions," said Professor Darin Toohey of Colorado University-Boulder's atmospheric and oceanic sciences department. "If left unregulated, rocket launches by the year 2050 could result in more ozone destruction than was ever realized by CFCs."

Crowded orbits

In 1978, NASA scientist Donald Kessler warned of a potential catastrophic, cascading chain reaction in outer space. Known as "Kessler Syndrome," the theory posited that orbits above Earth could one day become so crowded, so polluted with both active satellites and the junk from of past space missions, that it could render future space travel problematic and even impossible.

Rocket Lab CEO Peter Beck reports the company is already beginning to experience the effect of growing congestion in outer space. The sheer number of objects in space right now (a number that is quickly growing due to SpaceX's satellite internet constellation, Starlink) is making it more difficult to find a clear path for rockets to launch new satellites.

 



Multiple aerospace companies, including SpaceX and OneWeb, have vowed to launch tens of thousands of satellites into low Earth orbit, but these mega-constellations could make space a more congested and dangerous place. That’s why NASA is recommending in a new report that these companies make sure their future satellites are taken out of orbit as soon as they complete their missions.

The plunge into Earth's atmosphere of worn-out satellites, rocket parts and other space junk is a common occurrence. For spacecraft re-entries, that process means basically 'burning computers'.

During re-entry, big chunks of aluminum and other materials are subjected to intense heating. Some particles are very reactive, so even small amounts of them could have a significant effect on atmospheric chemistry.

'Vaporize' may mean 'disappear' in most people's minds, but that's assuredly not the case with re-entering space junk. Such debris generates 're-entry smoke particles' (RSPs) of unknown composition and reactivity. Scientific models suggest that at least 50 percent of a given debris object will end up as RSPs during re-entry.  

We must take capitalism and militarism out of the space biz. Space is part of our environment.


~ Much of the info above was obtained from multiple space-related Internet sites 

Wednesday, December 30, 2020

'You are now working for yourselves....'

 

One cannot change reality by changing the words you use to describe reality. Look beneath the rhetoric, and glimpse the truth.

Tuesday, December 29, 2020

Why is NATO going global?

 

One of the pre-conditions for Soviet support for the reunification of East & West Germany was the promise from the US that NATO would not expand 'one centimeter' toward the Russian borders.  The Soviet Union's Warsaw Pact alliance folded after its collapse thus making no need for NATO. Instead since those days NATO has been on steroids and is now working to become a global alliance.

The US rejects that any promise was made not to expand NATO - hardly a surprise.  Just ask Native Americans about promises from The Great White Father in Washington.

In 2017 The National Interest reported:

Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev was given a host of assurances that the NATO alliance would not expand past what was then the East German border in 1990 according to new declassified documents.

Russian leaders often complain that the NATO extended an invitation to Hungary, Poland and what was then Czechoslovakia to join the alliance in 1997 at the Madrid Summit in contravention of assurances offered to the Soviet Union before its 1991 collapse. The alliance has dismissed the notion that such assurances were offered, however, scholars have continued to debate the issue for years. Now, however, newly declassified documents show that Gorbachev did in fact receive assurances that NATO would not expand past East Germany.

“The documents show that multiple national leaders were considering and rejecting Central and Eastern European membership in NATO as of early 1990 and through 1991,” George Washington University National Security Archives researchers Svetlana Savranskaya and Tom Blanton wrote. “That discussions of NATO in the context of German unification negotiations in 1990 were not at all narrowly limited to the status of East German territory, and that subsequent Soviet and Russian complaints about being misled about NATO expansion were founded in written contemporaneous memcons and telcons at the highest levels.” 

But why would the US & NATO continue to deny that promises had been made about NATO expansion? What is the purpose today of NATO moving into the Asia-Pacific as it signs up nations like Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Mongolia and more as 'NATO Partners'.  

 

 

The United Nations monopoly of the use of force, especially as specified in Article 51 of the Charter, is no longer accepted under NATO's new aggressive doctrine. That new NATO doctrine calls for NATO's territorial scope, originally limited to the Euro-Atlantic region, to be expanded to encompass the whole world. 

NATO wishes to cut out Russia and China (both serve on the UN's Security Council and have the power to veto UN military operations) in order to give Washington and Brussels (where NATO is headquartered) the power to intervene in any part of the world without restriction - mostly for 'regime change' operations.  Thus NATO's real goal is to replace the United Nations with a non-democratic tool under full corporate control. 

In essence NATO becomes Mr. Big's Army which could run the world on behalf of corporate interests.

Long-time NATO analyst Rick Rozoff writes:

The first indication that the United Nations was marked for marginalization, selective application (and exploitation) or even de facto dissolution, however, occurred .... in 1996 when the United States single-handedly browbeat the other fourteen then members of the Security Council to depose Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali and replace him with Kofi Annan, who the preceding year had been appointed UN special envoy to NATO and authorized the NATO bombing in Bosnia behind the back of Boutros-Ghali.

Boutros-Ghali was deprived of the traditional second term for not authorizing NATO’s bombing of Bosnian Serb targets in 1995 and for speaking the truth about the deadly Israeli bombing of a refugee camp in Qana, Lebanon in the following year when 106 civilians were killed and 116 injured.

As former Clinton and Bush administrations’ National Security Council counter-terrorism adviser Richard Clarke acknowledged:

“[Madeleine] Albright and I and a handful of others (Michael Sheehan, Jamie Rubin) had entered into a pact together in 1996 to oust Boutros-Ghali as Secretary General of the United Nations, a secret plan we had called Operation Orient Express, reflecting our hope that many nations would join us in doing in the UN head.

“In the end, the US had to do it alone (with its UN veto) and Sheehan and I had to prevent the President from giving in to pressure from world leaders and extending Boutros-Ghali’s tenure, often by our racing to the Oval Office when we were alerted that a head of state was telephoning the President. In the end Clinton was impressed that we had managed not only to oust Boutros-Ghali but to have Kofi Annan selected to replace him.”


Russian response

The Russians and Chinese (among others) are not at all willing to allow this power grab by NATO. Unfortunately most Americans know little to nothing about this plan for global domination by the 'Atlantic alliance'.  The corporate dominated media in the US hides the real agenda from the public.

RT reported in 2011:

Despite attempts by individual politicians to assign international functions to NATO, the Western military bloc will never replace the UN, says Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who [was] in New York for the 66th UN General Assembly Session. 

"NATO – or to be more exact, some of its representatives – has been attempting to assume the role the UN plays since the 1990s,” Lavrov said in an interview.... The Russian Foreign Minister said this behavior continued “until the 2003 invasion of Iraq, when Germany and France did not support their NATO allies.” At this point in history, Lavrov said, NATO was forced to acknowledge that “the international community does not recognize its operations as legitimate if they are not approved by the UN Security Council.”

But Washington and Brussels don't intend to fold their militaristic tent so easily.  Thus we saw their illegal regime change operation in Libya and today their war in Syria. We see the attempts to pull NATO members and partners into the encirclement of China. And we witness the pressure (from Republican and Democrat administrations in Washington) to force NATO members to pay larger annual appropriations for alliance operations.

The United Nations and NATO are two distinctly different organizations.  The UN tries to keep the peace and to attempts to fund human development.  NATO is simply a war machine.  

It is time for NATO (which has no true reason to exist) to close up shop. It is time for the peace movements across the west to demand that NATO pass on like the Soviet-era Warsaw Pact did.

Bruce

Monday, December 28, 2020

Are you watching NATO yet?

 


NATO 2030: 

How to Make a Bad Idea Worse

Expanding the “Atlantic Alliance” into the Pacific….

By Matthew Ehret-Kump


Just when you thought the leaders of NATO could not push the limits of insanity any further, something like NATO 2030 is announced.

After helping blow up the Middle East and North Africa, dividing the Balkans into zones of war and tension, turning Ukraine upside down using armadas of neo Nazis, and encircling Russia with a ballistic missile shield, the leaders of this Cold War relic have decided that the best way to deal with instability of the world is… more NATO.

In a June 8th online event co-sponsored by the Atlantic Council, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg announced the launch of a planning project to reform NATO called NATO 2030. Stoltenberg told his audience that in order to deal with Russia and China’s strategic partnership which is transforming the global balance of power, “we must resist the temptation of national solutions and we must live up to our values: freedom, democracy and the rule of law. To do this, we must stay strong militarily, be more united politically and take a broader approach globally.”

In the mind of Stoltenberg, this means expanding NATO’s membership into the Pacific with a high priority on the absorption of Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea into NATO’s dysfunctional family. It also means extending NATO’s jurisdiction beyond a military alliance to include a wider political and environmental dimension (the war on climate change is apparently just as serious as the war on terrorism and should thus be incorporated into NATO’s operating system).

Read the rest of this article here 

~ Matthew J.L. Ehret is a journalist, lecturer and founder of the Canadian Patriot Review. He can be reached at matt.ehret@tutamail.com

Sunday, December 27, 2020

Sunday song

 

Arirang is a Korean folk song that is often considered to be the anthem of Korea. There are about 3,600 variations of 60 different versions of the song, all of which include a refrain similar to, "Arirang, arirang, arariyo". It is estimated the song is more than 600 years old.

During the Japanese occupation of Korea from 1910 to 1945, when singing was proscribed and it became a criminal offense for anyone to be singing any patriotic song including the national anthem of Korea, Arirang became an unofficial anthem. Arirang became a resistance anthem against Imperial Japanese rule. Korean protesters sang Arirang during the March 1 Movement, a Korean demonstration against the Japanese Empire in 1919. Many of the variations of Arirang that were written during the occupation contain themes of injustice, the plight of labourers, and guerrilla warfare. It was also sung by the mountain guerrillas who were fighting against the fascists.