ENLACES

[QckC] [MSI] [Lo Nuevo] [Madres Solas] [SUTESUAEM - Noticias] [Previsión Social] [Ciencias Económico Administrativas]
[
Educación a Distancia] [
Ciencias Sociales] [Ciencias de la Informaci
ón] [México Historia y Cultura]
[Materias de Estudio] [SPCU] [Diplomado SPC] [Documentos SPC] [Foro Permanente SPC] [Enlaces SPC] [Enlaces] 

[
Joseacontrera's Blog] [Propósito] [Viajeros] [Mis Viajes] [Fotos] [Música] [Deportes] [Correo] [Curriculum] [Godaddy]


NOTICIAS
 [México] [Emprendedores] [SUTESUAEM] [Edomex] [Estados] [Prensa Educativa] [Universities] [Empleo]
 [
Trabajo y Sindicatos] [Latinoam
érica] [Estados Unidos] [Unión Europea] [Asia] [África]
 [
Joseacontreras Diario] [Derechos Humanos Diario]



Día Internacional de la Mujer 2011.

Asociación de Madres Solteras y Grupos Vulnerables para el Desarrollo Social \\\\\\\"Por un Trato más digno Yo Madre Soltera Aquí Estoy A.C.\\\\\\\" Visita la página de Madres Solas Aquí. Más »

Entrega de Silla de Ruedas.

Asociación de Madres Solteras y Grupos Vulnerables para el Desarrollo Social \\\\\\\"Por un Trato más digno Yo Madre Soltera Aquí Estoy A.C.\\\\\\\" Visita la página de Madres Solas Aquí. Más »

Compartiendo con nuestras socias y socios de la tercera edad de Molino Abajo, Temoaya, Estado de México.

Asociación de Madres Solteras y Grupos Vulnerables para el Desarrollo Social \\\\\\\"Por un Trato más digno Yo Madre Soltera Aquí Estoy A.C.\\\\\\\" Visita la página de Madres Solas Aquí. Más »

Visita la página de “Código Ayuda A.C.” Aquí

Entrega de Reconocimiento por la AMS a la labor de Gabriela Goldsmith Presidenta de \\\\\\\"Código Ayuda A.C.” Más »

Día de la Niñez 2011 con nuestras socias y socios de San Lorenzo Tepaltitlán, Toluca, Estado de México.

Asociación de Madres Solteras y Grupos Vulnerables para el Desarrollo Social \\\"Por un Trato más digno Yo Madre Soltera Aquí Estoy A.C.\\\\\\\" Visita la página de Madres Solas Aquí. Más »

Entrega de Silla de Ruedas.

Asociación de Madres Solteras y Grupos Vulnerables para el Desarrollo Social \\\"Por un Trato más digno Yo Madre Soltera Aquí Estoy A.C.\\\\\\\" Visita la página de Madres Solas Aquí. Más »

“Yo Me Declaro Defensor” de los Defensores de Derechos Humanos

Participación en la campaña “Yo Me Declaro Defensor” de los Defensores de Derechos Humanos por la Alta Comisionada de los Derechos Humanos de la ONU Navy Pillay. Más »

Entrega de Reconocimiento al Lic. Enrique Peña Nieto por su apoyo como gobernador a los grupos vulnerables de nuestra Asociación.

Asociación de Madres Solteras y Grupos Vulnerables para el Desarrollo Social \\\\\\\"Por un Trato más digno Yo Madre Soltera Aquí Estoy A.C.\\\\\\\" Visita la página de Madres Solas Aquí. Más »

Compartiendo con nuestras socias y socios de la tercera edad en Molino Abajo, Temoaya, Estado de México.

Asociación de Madres Solteras y Grupos Vulnerables para el Desarrollo Social \\\\\\\"Por un Trato más digno Yo Madre Soltera Aquí Estoy A.C.\\\\\\\" ¡Visita la página de Madres Solas Aquí! Más »

Compartiendo con nuestras socias y socios de la tercera edad en Molino Abajo, Temoaya, Estado de México.

Asociación de Madres Solteras y Grupos Vulnerables para el Desarrollo Social \\\\\\\"Por un Trato más digno Yo Madre Soltera Aquí Estoy A.C.\\\\\\\" ¡Visita la página de Madres Solas Aquí! Más »

Compartiendo con nuestras socias y socios de la tercera edad en Molino Abajo, Temoaya, Estado de México.

Asociación de Madres Solteras y Grupos Vulnerables para el Desarrollo Social \\\\\\\"Por un Trato más digno Yo Madre Soltera Aquí Estoy A.C.\\\\\\\" ¡Visita la página de Madres Solas Aquí! Más »

Asociación de Madres Solteras y Grupos Vulnerables para el Desarrollo Social \\\\\\\"Por un Trato más digno Yo Madre Soltera Aquí Estoy A.C.\\\\\\\" ¡Visita la página de Madres Solas Aquí! Más »

Thelma Dorantes Autora y Actriz principal de la obra de Teatro \\\\

Visita de Thelma Dorantes a las oficina de la Asociación de Madres Solteras y Grupos Vulnerables para el Desarrollo Social \\\\\\\"Por un Trato más digno Yo Madre Soltera Aquí Estoy A.C.\\\\\\\" en Toluca, Estado de México. Más »

Thelma Dorantes Autora y Actriz principal de la obra de Teatro \\\\

Visita de Thelma Dorantes a las oficina de la Asociación de Madres Solteras y Grupos Vulnerables para el Desarrollo Social \\\\\\\"Por un Trato más digno Yo Madre Soltera Aquí Estoy A.C.\\\\\\\" en Toluca, Estado de México. Más »

Thelma Dorantes Autora y Actriz principal de la obra de Teatro \\\\

Visita de Thelma Dorantes a las oficina de la Asociación de Madres Solteras y Grupos Vulnerables para el Desarrollo Social \\\\\\\"Por un Trato más digno Yo Madre Soltera Aquí Estoy A.C.\\\\\\\" en Toluca, Estado de México. Más »

Premio Nacional del Trabajo 2012.

Entrega a los trabajadores de la Dirección de Organización y Desarrollo Administrativo de la Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México del Premio Nacional del Trabajo 2012 por la Secretaría de Trabajo y Previsión Social del Gobierno de México. Más »

 

Custom robots in a matter of minutes

This NEWS was origynally shared on Sutesuaem Universities News

Fuente: MIT News

http://news.mit.edu/sites/mit.edu.newsoffice/files/styles/article_cover_image_original/public/images/2017/interactive-robogami-printed-robots-mit-csail-00.jpeg
Even as robots become increasingly common, they remain incredibly difficult to make. From designing and modeling to fabricating and testing, the process is slow and costly: Even one small change can mean days or weeks of rethinking and revising important hardware.

But what if there were a way to let non-experts craft different robotic designs — in one sitting?

Researchers from MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) are getting closer to doing exactly that. In a new paper, they present a system called “Interactive Robogami” that lets you design a robot in minutes, and then 3-D print and assemble it in as little as four hours.
 

One of the key features of the system is that it allows designers to determine both the robot’s movement (“gait”) and shape (“geometry”), a capability that’s often separated in design systems.

“Designing robots usually requires expertise that only mechanical engineers and roboticists have,” says PhD student and co-lead author Adriana Schulz. “What’s exciting here is that we’ve created a tool that allows a casual user to design their own robot by giving them this expert knowledge.”

The paper, which is being published in the new issue of the International Journal of Robotics Research, was co-led by PhD graduate Cynthia Sung alongside MIT professors Wojciech Matusik and Daniela Rus.

The other co-authors include PhD student Andrew Spielberg, former master’s student Wei Zhao, former undergraduate Robin Cheng, and Columbia University professor Eitan Grinspun. (Sung is now an assistant professor at the University of Pennsylvania.)

How it works

3-D printing has transformed the way that people can turn ideas into real objects, allowing users to move away from more traditional manufacturing. Despite these developments, current design tools still have space and motion limitations, and there’s a steep learning curve to understanding the various nuances.

Interactive Robogami aims to be much more intuitive. It uses simulations and interactive feedback with algorithms for design composition, allowing users to focus on high-level conceptual design. Users can choose from a library of over 50 different bodies, wheels, legs, and “peripherals,” as well as a selection of different steps (“gaits”).

Importantly, the system is able to guarantee that a design is actually possible, analyzing factors such as speed and stability to make suggestions and ensure that, for example, the user doesn’t create a robot so top-heavy that it can’t move without tipping over.

Once designed, the robot is then fabricated. The team’s origami-inspired “3-D print and fold” technique involves printing the design as flat faces connected at joints, and then folding the design into the final shape, combining the most effective parts of 2-D and 3-D printing.  

“3-D printing lets you print complex, rigid structures, while 2-D fabrication gives you lightweight but strong structures that can be produced quickly,” Sung says. “By 3-D printing 2-D patterns, we can leverage these advantages to develop strong, complex designs with lightweight materials.”

Results

To test the system, the team used eight subjects who were given 20 minutes of training and asked to perform two tasks.

One task involved creating a mobile, stable car design in just 10 minutes. In a second task, users were given a robot design and asked to create a trajectory to navigate the robot through an obstacle course in the least amount of travel time.

The team fabricated a total of six robots, each of which took 10 to 15 minutes to design, three to seven hours to print and 30 to 90 minutes to assemble. The team found that their 3-D print-and-fold method reduced printing time by 73 percent and the amount of material used by 70 percent. The robots also demonstrated a wide range of movement, like using single legs to walk, using different step sequences, and using legs and wheels simultaneously.

“You can quickly design a robot that you can print out, and that will help you do these tasks very quickly, easily, and cheaply,” says Sung. “It’s lowering the barrier to have everyone design and create their own robots.”

Rus hopes people will be able to incorporate robots to help with everyday tasks, and that similar systems with rapid printing technologies will enable large-scale customization and production of robots.

“These tools enable new approaches to teaching computational thinking and creating,” says Rus. “Students can not only learn by coding and making their own robots, but by bringing to life conceptual ideas about what their robots can actually do.”

While the current version focuses on designs that can walk, the team hopes that in the future, the robots can take flight. Another goal is to have the user be able to go into the system and define the behavior of the robot in terms of tasks it can perform.

“This tool enables rapid exploration of dynamic robots at an early stage in the design process,” says Moritz Bächer, a research scientist and head of the computational design and manufacturing group at Disney Research. “The expert defines the building blocks, with constraints and composition rules, and paves the way for non-experts to make complex robotic systems. This system will likely inspire follow-up work targeting the computational design of even more intricate robots.”

This research was supported by the National Science Foundation’s Expeditions in Computing program.


For pregnancy or profit: Motive for undergoing IVF may alter the experience

This NEWS was origynally shared on Sutesuaem Universities News

Fuente: Yale University Science & Health News

An individual’s reason for undergoing a medical intervention — be it for preventing or treating disease, earning money, or to have a child — may result in variations in the bodily experience of the patient, Yale researchers have found.

A new study published in the journal Social Science and Medicine compares the physical, emotional, and cognitive experiences of women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) either to become pregnant or to donate their eggs for money. The researchers found that there is a direct correlation between the intensity of a woman’s bodily experience and her reason for harvesting eggs.

Rene Almeling, associate professor of sociology and lead author on the study, explains that one goal of the study was to assess whether different motivations for undergoing the same medical intervention affects bodily experiences. “We were trying to determine if why they want to do it and what they hope to get out of it produces variation in how it feels,” says Almeling.

The researchers surveyed 50 IVF patients and 62 egg donors from the United States. They found that IVF patients described the experience to be all-consuming and painful, while egg donors who underwent the exact same regimen described it as less intense.

To our knowledge, this is the first explicit comparison of bodily experiences based on individuals’ reasons for undergoing an elective medical intervention,” says Almeling. “We suggest that the intensity of one’s bodily experience is associated with one’s reason for producing eggs — either to become pregnant or to donate them for money.”

Scientific researchers and medical professionals should take into consideration an individual’s end goals as a potential factor in how they will experience medical interventions, notes Almeling. Another example of the same medical procedure being done for different reasons is mastectomy (breast removal surgery) to prevent cancer, treat cancer, or transition genders.

The Yale study also reveals that just looking at physical pain scores would be misleading. The researchers applied a statistical method called cluster analysis, which demonstrated that bodily experience is the result of physical, emotional, and cognitive processes.

Decades of mind/body research suggest that bodily experience really is a combination of physical pain, stress, and how much cognitive effort people are putting in. And that looks very different for IVF patients who are spending tens of thousands of dollars trying to have a child versus egg donors who are not trying to get pregnant and are being compensated for their efforts,” notes Almeling.

The research also shows that people who were undergoing IVF for the first time versus subsequent cycles had differing experiences with the procedure. IVF patients and egg donors experiencing IVF for the first time both had heightened levels of stress and concern about the procedure. “Going through a second or third or fourth cycle means different things to IVF patients and egg donors,” Almeling notes. “IVF patients have now had a failed cycle. Egg donors know what they are doing and have been chosen again. We show that that experience of producing eggs for the first time versus subsequent times feels very different for IVF patients and egg donors.”

Comparative analyses of bodily experiences are not only of theoretical interest to social scientists, there are also practical implications for clinicians, Almeling says. “In the case of IVF, patient fact sheets can be tailored to indicate that a woman producing eggs for different reasons may have more or less intense bodily experiences, particularly if it is their first cycle.”

Guam Não Vive Segura com Exército dos Estados Unidos

This NEWS was origynally shared on Sutesuaem Universities News

Fuente: Global Research

Guam tem estado no centro do noticiário internacional nos últimos dias devido à troca de fortes agressões verbais entre Washington e Pyongyang, e as ameaças de que a Coreia do Norte poderia atacar a pequena ilha da Micronésia com bombas nucleares. “É a presença dos Estados Unidos aqui que nos torna alvo preferencial para a Coreia do Norte em seu conflito com os Estados Unidos”, afirma na seguinte entrevista a acadêmica e ativista anti-colonização guamesa, Lisa Natividad.

“Guam não se sente segura com o Exército dos Estados Unidos”, conta Lisa enquanto o mandatário norte-coreano Kim Jong-um afirmou, na primeira semana deste mês, que estava examinando cuidadosamente a ilha guamesa, e que enviaria um míssil balístico intercontinental para o oceano, a 40 quilômetros de Guam.

Ao apontar que a ilha vizinha serve como armazenamento de bombas dos Estados Unidos, um porta-voz do Exército norte-coreano afirmou em 9 de agosto à agência de notícias KCNA, controlada pelo regime de Pyongyang: “Esta grave situação exige que o KPA [Forças Armadas] observe de perto Guam, o posto avançado e a cabeça de praia por invadir a Coreia do Norte, e necessariamente tomar ações práticas significativas, para neutralizar isso”.

Desde então, a sempre tendenciosa mídia ocidental, pró-Washington, passou a alardear que Pyongyang estava na iminência de atacar Guam com armas nucleares, fato negado por Kim nesta semana.

Sobre Guam, cuja capital é Hagåtña, vivem 162.742 pessoas cuja principal etnia é a dos chamorros. A líder social afirma também que seu povo conhece bem o “terrível poder de uma bomba nuclear”, ao lembrar que a ilha asiática a oeste do Oceano Pacífico foi invadida durante a Segunda Guerra Mundial pelos japoneses, fazendo do território guamês uma zona de guerra ativa de 1941 a 1944.

Território estadunidense desde 1950, após o final da Segunda Guerra Mundial, Guam abriga três bases militares dos Estados Unidos que ameaçam os rivais norte-americanos na região – China e a própria Coreia do Norte -, e sofre com o imperialismo dos Estados Unidos nos mais diversos aspectos da vida cotidiana (imagem abaixo, aviões da Força Aérea dos EUA sobrevoam a ilha de Guam).

“Pobreza, moradia precária, abuso de substâncias tóxicas, encarceramento, evasão escolar, gravidez na adolescência, suicídio, câncer e problemas de saúde mental – apenas para citar alguns casos”, são parte dos problemas, de acordo com Lisa, enfrentados especialmente pelos chamorros, na ilha.

A cultura local foi um dos primeiros valores atacados pelo imperialismo em Guam, como sempre na história em todo o mundo. “Estou fazendo aulas para aprender minha própria língua… Outro subproduto da colonização!”, afirma Lisa, habitante da pequenina cidade de Inarajan, onde habitam cerca de 2.200 pessoas.

“Estamos felizes em alcançar a mídia global, disposta a ajudar-nos a espalhar a mensagem da colonização e a expansão da militarização dos Estados Unidos, a fim de ajudar a impulsionar o diálogo e construir a solidariedade global em prol de um mundo livre e pacífico”, declara Lisa, professora adjunta da faculdade de Serviço Social na Universidade de Guam, e fundadora e presidenta de Guahan Coalition for Peace and Justice (Coalizão de Guam pela Paz e Justiça), e membro de Guam Decolonization Commission (Comissão pela Descolonização de Guam).

Confira a seguir, a íntegra da entrevista com Lisa Natividad.

Aviões da Força Aérea dos Estados Unidos sobrevoam a ilha de Guam

XIV. PINGO NO i - Edu Entrevista

Edu Montesanti: Lisa Natividad, muito obrigado por conceder esta entrevista tão importante. Qual a missão de Guahan Coalition for Peace and Justice, presidida por você, por que e quando foi fundada, e como atua?

Lisa Natividad: A Guahan Coalition for Peace and Justice é uma organização sediada em Guahan [Guam] fundada por um grupo de mulheres em 2006, após o anúncio da assinatura de um acordo entre os Estados Unidos e o Japão para transferir oito mil fuzileiros navais estadunidenses de Okinawa e da Coréia do Sul, para Guahan.

Nós, mulheres, reunimo-nos horrorizadas por como nossas vidas seriam impactadas se o Departamento de Defesa dos Estados Unidos aumentasse a ocupação em nossa ilha. Decidimos que era hora de assumir uma posição, e reivindicar nosso poder lutando pelos direitos da nossa pátria.

Nossa coalizão concentrou-se nas questões de descolonização política e desmilitarização da nossa ilha. Fizemos isso, principalmente, através da organização de palestras, fóruns públicos, divulgação pela mídia e apresentação dos nossos problemas diante de entidades internacionais como as Nações Unidas, e pronunciando-nos através de campanhas em outros países.

Qual o estado de espírito do povo guamês hoje, na mira da guerra de palavras entre Washington e Pyongyang, sob risco de ataques nucleares?

Coletivamente, eu diria que o povo de Guahan apresenta reações mistas às ameaças nucleares da Coréia do Norte. Por um lado, desejamos poder acreditar em nosso governador e no presidente dos Estados Unidos, que estamos seguros e que a tecnologia militar dos Estados Unidos pode combater os ataques da Coreia do Norte.

Contudo, conhecemos muito bem as realidades da guerra. Por causa da presença dos Estados Unidos em nossa ilha, fomos invadidos durante a Segunda Guerra Mundial pelo exército imperial japonês, e zona de guerra ativa de 1941 a 1944.

Consciente de um ataque iminente, os Estados Unidos retiraram todo seu pessoal militar e seus dependentes, deixando nosso povo indígena chamorro para trás sofrendo em uma guerra – em nome deles.

Durante esse período, nosso povo sofreu grandes atrocidades de guerra que incluem estupros, famílias tendo que morar em barracas, fome e desidratação, e finalmente a morte.

Nós, chamorros, continuamos sofrendo do trauma histórico desta experiência que afetou o que somos hoje. Então, enquanto queremos acreditar que os EUA nos manterão seguros durante esses dias de ameaças nucleares, nossa experiência passada tem sido exatamente o oposto.

Na Micronésia, conhecemos o terrível poder das armas nucleares. Nosso país vizinho, Ilhas Marshall foi local da detonação de 67 bombas nucleares pelos Estados Unidos. As pessoas de Marshall foram evacuadas das ilhas residenciais de Bikini, Rongelap e Enewetak, convidadas para assistência pelo serviço da humanidade para a promoção da paz mundial.

Hoje, sabemos que as bombas nucleares não promovem a paz mundial, mas sim uma grande ameaça para alcançá-la. Os marshaleses continuam sofrendo problemas de saúde que ameaçam a vida incluindo câncer, defeitos congênitos, parto de bebês, apenas para citar alguns. A nação está tão contaminada com a radiação que ainda não consegue retornar às suas ilhas residenciais, e se fizerem isso, o farão com alto risco.

O professor Michel Chossudovski me disse, recentemente: “A República Popular Democrática da Coreia [do Norte] não ameaçou bombardear Guam: o que eles disseram é que enviariam um ICBM [míssil balístico intercontinental] para o oceano a 40 quilômetros de Guam, houve declaração oficial e a mídia ocidental imediatamente distorceu o pronunciamento”. Sua visão disso, Lisa.

Isso provavelmente é verdade. Além disso, a Coreia do Norte nunca disse que enviaria um ataque preventiva … sempre manteve a posição de que só atacaria depois de ter sido atacada.

Quais as conseqüências da colonização norte-americana de Guam sobre a economia, a política, a educação e a cultura em geral, sobre o sistema de saúde, a mídia, o Exército e sociedade em geral, Lisa?

A colonização norte-americana de Guahan criou grandes problemas à nossa ilha e ao nosso povo. Guahan está na lista das Nações Unidas de Territórios Não Autônomos desde o início da lista em 1945.

Enquanto outras colônias do mundo tiveram a oportunidade de se descolonizar e afirmar a independência, Guahan teve negado este direito humano mais sagrado, pelos Estados Unidos. Em 1985, a ilha introduziu o Guam Commonwealth Act no Congresso dos Estados Unidos e, depois de algumas negociações, ele foi finalmente negado em 1997.

A ilha continua hoje educando a comunidade no processo de descolonização, através do trabalho da Guam Commission on Decolonization(Comissão de Guam sobre a Descolonização), com a esperança de resolver seu status político nos próximos anos.

Como sujeitos territoriais, não temos o direito de votar para o presidente dos Estados Unidos. Além disso, recebemos um assento para delegado no Congresso no Congresso dos Estados Unidos, no entanto essa pessoa não possui direitos de voto completos.

O delegado pode votar no mesmo nível do Congresso – mas apenas se o voto não for um desempate.No caso de a votação romper um empate, será considerado nulo e sem efeito. O delegado não consegue votar no plenário no comitê integral.

Essa realidade é um grande escárnio contra nossa ilha, e simplesmente cria uma ilusão de inclusão no sistema democrático norte-americano. Além disso, nos é oferecido apenas um sétimo do financiamento federal disponível para os Estados.

Os Estados Unidos também aplicaram unilateralmente uma série de políticas restritivas federais-territoriais que inibem a criação de uma economia local viável. Um exemplo disto é o Jones Act, que exige especificamente que todos os bens transportados por água entre os portos dos Estados Unidos sejam transportados em navios com a bandeira dos Estados Unidos, construídos nos Estados Unidos, de propriedade de cidadãos estadunidenses, e os cidadãos e residentes permanentes dos Estados Unidos são os únicos que podem servir em suas respectivas tripulações.

Jones Act é altamente prejudicial para a economia de Guahan, pois não permite que as importações de linhas de transporte com base na Ásia sejam enviadas diretamente à ilha. Isso resulta em um custo muito maior de bens.

Mas, em última instância, o maior prejuízo da nossa colonização é a ausência de qualquer poder político. Não temos voz em nossa própria pátria para tomar as decisões federais estabelecidas, impactando nossas vidas.

Lisa Natividad

XIV. PINGO NO i - Edu EntrevistaGuahan e os povos indígenas sofrem uma condição colonial clássica, com as maiores taxas de problemas sociais na ilha em comparação com os não chamorros.

Por exemplo, os chamorros têm as taxas mais elevadas nos seguintes quesitos: pobreza, moradia precária, abuso de substâncias tóxicas, encarceramento, evasão escolar, gravidez na adolescência, suicídio, câncer e problemas de saúde mental – apenas para citar alguns casos.

Essa realidade serve como motivação para a descolonização política, a fim de que Guahan e a autodeterminação de seu povo possa orientar seu futuro.

Você falou do Guam Commonwealth Act: por favor, explique o que foi isso, Lisa.

Guam Commonwealth Act foi um projeto de lei enviado para o Congresso dos Estados Unidos, que continha uma forma de autogoverno para Guahan, alterando nosso status político para o de uma comunidade de Estados Unidos.

Não foi uma escolha perfeita, mas era mais vantajosa em comparação com um território não incorporado, como somos hoje.

E como seu povo se sente sendo uma colônia dos Estados Unidos? O que os guamenses pensam e dizem sobre isso?

As pessoas em Guahan estão cada vez mais conscientes dos impactos da nossa atual realidade política de colonização.

Na década passada houve uma avalanche de ativismo da juventude da ilha, intolerantes diante do nosso status atual, comprometidos em resolver essa questão e exercer seu sagrado direito à autodeterminação.

Os protestos públicos, os ensinamentos sobre a independência, as manifestações pacíficas e até mesmo um processo contra o Departamento de Defesa dos Estados Unidos, foram todos empregados como estratégias de mudança social.

Essas atividades foram particularmente inflamadas quando os Estados Unidos anunciaram os planos de transferir oito mil de seus fuzileiros navais de Okinawa, no Japão, para Guahan. Como comunidade, as pessoas tinham preocupações quanto ao impacto daquilo na segurança das nossas mulheres e crianças, da nossa saúde, do nosso meio ambiente e na nossa vida cotidiana.

Todos falam chamorro em Guam, Lisa?

Não, infelizmente nossa língua não é falada por todos, de maneira que agora estou fazendo aulas para aprender minha própria língua… Outro subproduto da colonização!

E o que você pode dizer das posições do governador de Guam, Eddie Baza Calvo, em favor do povo guamense e do progresso local, contra esse neocolonialismo?

O governador convocou a Comissão de Guam sobre a Descolonização, de modo que nos dá esperança em sua liderança.

No entanto, ele tem grande confiança nas capacidades de defesa militar dos Estados Unidos, e assegurou à comunidade que “estamos seguros” diante das ameaças nucleares.

Os guameses se sentem seguros com o Exército dos Estados Unidos?

Algumas pessoas compram a retórica norte-americana de que suas forças armadas estão presentes na ilha, “proteja-nos”. No entanto, com o crescente estabelecimento do ativismo e do conhecimento comunitário mais profundo das realidades da colonização e da militarização, as pessoas estão começando a questionar exatamente o quanto é segura a presença dos militares dos Estados Unidos em Guahan.

Pois, na verdade, é a presença dos Estados Unidos aqui que nos torna um alvo primordial para a Coreia do Norte em seu conflito com os Estados Unidos. A Coreia do Norte é famosa por dizer que atacará a Base da Força Aérea de Andersen no norte da nossa ilha, por causa da presença de bombardeiros B1 e B2 Stealth estacionados ali.

Isto é muito claro: se não tivéssemos esses aviões, então não seríamos alvo. Nossas ilhas vizinhas na Micronésia não são alvos; mas somos por causa dessas bases.

Então não, não nos sentimos seguros e seguros com os militares estadunidenses aqui.

Além disso, existem quase 800 bases militares dos Estados Unidos fora do território norte-americano, o que é inaceitável. Os militares devem ser convocados apenas para a defesa, e contidos dentro das fronteiras de um país.

E a imprensa em Guam, Lisa? Qual influencia da mídia sobre seu povo? Por favor, fale um pouco mais sobre isso. Levanto novamente esta questão porque, fora nossa mídia realmente alternativa, na América Latina temos uma grande mídia totalmente subjugada em favor dos interesses do Pentágono mediático, isto é, do regime de Washington colonizador de mentes, que aprisiona almas em nossa região.

Também somos atormentados pela mesma experiência em que nossa mídia local, ligada aos Estados Unidos, relata principalmente a partir da perspectiva de doutrinar as pessoas a acreditar que os Estados Unidos são a maior potência mundial, e que a ocidentalização e a norte-americanização são o caminho para o sucesso.

A mídia também é usada para promover a agenda global dos Estados Unidos, apenas contando um lado de situações geopolíticas e justificando o complexo industrial militar dos Estados Unidos.

Esta postura mediática, quando não é confrontada, resulta em um aumento do patriotismo dos Estados Unidos e da contínua colonização de Guahan.

Muitas vezes, os meios de comunicação locais deturpam histórias sobre os esforços para descolonizar e desmilitarizar Guahan. Por isso, estamos felizes em alcançar a mídia global, disposta a ajudar-nos a espalhar a mensagem da nossa colonização e a expansão da militarização dos Estados Unidos, para ajudar a elevar a conversa e a construir a solidariedade global para um mundo livre e pacífico.

O que os Estados Unidos devem fazer para respeitar os interesses guamenses, tanto a economia como a auto-determinação do povo e a paz em sua nação?

A fim de respeitar os interesses dos chamorros em Guahan, os Estados Unidos devem apoiar e participar do processo de descolonização da ilha.

Nosso plebiscito terá três opções de status na votação: Estado (ou assimilação no poder de administração), associação livre, ou independência. A vontade das pessoas precisa ser suportada.

Esperamos ter um plebiscito em 2018 que resolva nossos problemas de status político. Quando isso aconteces, poderemos decidir o grau de militarismo que queremos estabelecer em nossa ilha.

A escolha deve ser nossa e de nenhuma outra pessoa. Para alcançar a paz, devemos sempre implementar diplomacia e respeito mútuo aos outros. Isso implica respeitar todos os níveis dos direitos das pessoas.

Entrevista por Edu Montesanti

Science hasn’t seen 99% of the microbes in your body

This NEWS was origynally shared on Sutesuaem Universities News

Fuente: Stanford University – Futurity

A new survey of DNA fragments circulating in human blood suggests our bodies contain vastly more diverse microbes than anyone previously understood.

In fact, 99 percent of that DNA is new to science.

“We found the gamut,” says Stephen Quake, a professor of bioengineering and applied physics at Stanford University, a member of Stanford Bio-X, and the paper’s senior author. “We found things that are related to things people have seen before, we found things that are divergent, and we found things that are completely novel.”

The research “arms infectious disease doctors with a whole set of new bugs to track and see if they’re associated with disease.”

The survey was inspired by a curious observation Quake’s lab made while searching for non-invasive ways to predict whether an organ transplant patient’s immune system would recognize the new organ as foreign and attack it, an event known as rejection. Ordinarily, it takes a tissue biopsy—meaning a large needle jabbed into one’s side and at least an afternoon in a hospital bed for observation—to detect rejection.

The lab members figured there was a better way. In theory, they might be able to detect rejection by taking blood samples and looking at the cell-free DNA—bits and pieces of DNA circulating freely in blood plasma—contained therein. Apart from fragments of a patient’s DNA, those samples would contain fragments of the organ donor’s DNA as well as a comprehensive view of the collection of bacteria, viruses, and other microbes that make up a person’s microbiome.

Over the course of several studies, the first of which was published in 2013, Quake, postdoctoral fellow Iwijn De Vlaminck, and others collected samples from 156 heart, lung, and bone marrow transplant recipients, along with 32 pregnant women. (Pregnancy, like immunosuppressant drugs taken by transplant patients, also changes the immune system, albeit in ways both more complicated and less well understood.)

The results of those earlier studies suggested there were identifiable changes to the microbiomes of people with compromised immune systems and that positive tests for the organ donor’s DNA were a good sign of rejection.

Mystery DNA

But there was something else, too—something weirder. Of all the non-human DNA fragments the team gathered, 99 percent of them failed to match anything in existing genetic databases the researchers examined.

With that in mind, Mark Kowarsky, a graduate student in Quake’s lab and the paper’s first author, set about characterizing all of that mystery DNA.

The “vast majority” of it belonged to a phylum called proteobacteria, which includes, among many other species, pathogens such as E. coli and Salmonella. Previously unidentified viruses in the torque teno family, generally not associated with disease but often found in immunocompromised patients, made up the largest group of viruses.

Viruses from newborn gut are new to science

“We’ve doubled the number of known viruses in that family through this work,” Quake says. Perhaps more important, they’ve found an entirely new group of torque teno viruses. Among the known torque teno viruses, one group infects humans and another infects animals, but many of the ones the researchers found didn’t fit in either group.

“We’ve now found a whole new class of human-infecting ones that are closer to the animal class than to the previously known human ones, so quite divergent on the evolutionary scale,” he says.

Is this surprising?

“I’d say it’s not that baffling in some respects because the lens that people examined the microbial universe was one that was very biased,” Quake says, in the sense that narrow studies often miss the bigger picture. For one thing, researchers tend to go deep in the microbiome in only one part of the body, such as the gut or skin, at a time. Blood samples, in contrast, “go deeply everywhere at the same time.”

For another, researchers often focus their attention on just a few interesting microbes, “and people just don’t look at what the remaining things are,” Kowarsky says. “There probably are some interesting, novel things there, but it’s not relevant to the experiment people want to do at that time.”

It was by looking at blood samples in an unbiased way, Quake says, that led to the new results and a new appreciation of just how diverse the human microbiome is. The findings appear in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Going forward, Quake says, the lab hopes to study the microbiomes of other organisms to see what’s there. “There’s all kinds of viruses that jump from other species into humans, a sort of spillover effect, and one of the dreams here is to discover new viruses that might ultimately become human pandemics.” Understanding what those viruses are could help doctors manage and track outbreaks, he says.

Do microbes cause babies to arrive too soon?

“What this does is it arms infectious disease doctors with a whole set of new bugs to track and see if they’re associated with disease,” Quake says. “That’s going to be a whole other chapter of work for people to do.”

Support for the work came from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the March of Dimes Prematurity Research Center at Stanford, the Stanford Child Health Research Institute, the John Templeton Foundation’s Boundaries of Life Initiative, and the United States Aid for International Development’s Emerging Pandemic Threats PREDICT program.

Source: Stanford University

Video: ISIS Defense Rapidly Collapses in Central Syria

This NEWS was origynally shared on Sutesuaem Universities News

Fuente: Global Research

The ISIS defense in central Syria is rapidly collapsing under the pressure of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and other pro-government formations supported by the Russian Aerospace Forces.

Government forces, led by the SAA Tiger Forces, have liberated the villages of Wadi Latum, Dagher, Latum, Quwayr, and Dahr Matla south of the recently liberated village of Taybah at the Sukhna-Resafa road.  Army troops and pro-government militiamen are now within only 10 km from creating the second ISIS pocket in the province.

Some sources even speculate that government forces have already done this.  However, no photos or videos have been provided.

In the Uqayrabat area, government troops, led by the 5th Assault Corps ISIS Hunters, have liberated the Huwaisis, Wadi Huwaysis, Taraq Sawwanat Hasw, Wadi Awabid, Jub Shuyukh, Sharqa Reservoir, Aydiyah, and the nearby points.  Huwaysis had been an important ISIS strongpoint used by terrorists as a foothold for counter-attacks against the SAA and its allies advancing in the area.

Warplanes of the Russian Aerospace Forces deployed in Syria have made 316 combat sorties over the past five days and carried out 819 airstrikes on ISIS terrorists, the chief of the main operations department of the Russian General Staff, General Sergey Rudskoy, announced on Monday.

Since the start of August, Russian warplanes have carried out 990 sorties and conducted 2,518 airstrikes on terrorist targets.  The airstrikes destroyed 40 units of military equipment, 106 trucks carrying heavy machineguns, and up to 800 terrorists.

Rudskoy added that the operation to liberate “central Syria from terrorists is nearing completion.” This is why ISIS terrorists are pulling their strongest units to the province of Deir Ezzor, preparing for the last stand against the SAA and its allies.  Many militants from Mosul and the most battle-ready units from Raqqa reportedly moved there.

As soon as the ISIS defense fully collapses in central Syria, the SAA and its allies will focus on lifting the ISIS siege from Deir Ezzor.

Voiceover by Harold Hoover

If you’re able, and if you like our content and approach, please support the project. Our work wouldn’t be possible without your help: PayPal: [email protected] or via: http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront

Featured image is from Land Destroyer Report.

The Long, Long Story: “Principled Realism”, Trump and Afghanistan

This NEWS was origynally shared on Sutesuaem Universities News

Fuente: Global Research

The story continues with dispiriting relentlessness. The remark by Samuel Beckett in The Unnamable comes to mind: “I can’t go on. I’ll go on.” With the sense of incapacity about going on, yet doing so with a drone’s dedicated commitment, President Donald Trump did what US Presidents have done since George W. Bush: commit. Commit, that is, to the mission; commit more promises; and commit more thoughts to blotted paper about the war that never ends in the graveyard of empires.

Addressing the nation from Fort Myer military base in Arlington, Virginia, Trump conceded to weariness – weary, that is, of not achieving victory in Afghanistan. “I share that American people’s frustration.”[1]

Another frustration were those failed efforts at nation building: “too much time, energy, money – and most importantly lives – trying to rebuild countries in our own image instead of pursuing our security interests about all other considerations.”

Trump’s none-too-intense scouring of the Afghan problem suggested three conclusions. The first was seeking to honour the US fallen. “The men and women who serve nation in combat deserve a plan for victory.”

The second effectively hooked an indefinite US commitment to the region: “the consequences of a rapid exit are both predictable and unacceptable.” More terrorist havens, he feared, would mushroom; more vacuums for instability, he warned, could result.

The third far from earth shattering conclusion: “the security threats we face in Afghanistan, and the broader region, are immense.” The region had been positively fecund in producing and harbouring some 20 US-deemed terrorist groups. “The highest concentration in any region, anywhere in the world.” (A big tut tut to Pakistan was uttered.)

These conclusions would entail a shift. Time as a measure of achievement would be ditched. Conditions would form the necessary criteria. Dates for commencing or ending “military options” would be abandoned. No timetables, no schedules, just ground conditions that “will guide our strategy from now on.” Rather neatly, Trump was suggesting a timeless deployment of US forces – for where time has ceased as a measure, there can only be conditions to assess.

The president also gave us a sprinkling of hoary old chestnuts. The government in Kabul would continue to receive support to combat the Taliban, but the issue of Afghan governance remained one for Afghans. “We are a partner and a friend, but we will not dictate to the Afghan people how to live or how to govern their own complex society.”

US nation building enterprises have generally floundered, and here was a president admitting to it. But that element of candour was followed by another ghoulish admission. Not only should the US shed such efforts at failed reconstruction, it should just admit to doing one thing: “We are killing terrorists.”

To do so, Trump promised to untether the US war machine, lifting those encumbering restrictions placed upon the use of fighter aircraft in targeting various networks. “Micromanagement from Washington, D.C., does not win battles.” Into the bin you go, international humanitarian law!

Other more idiosyncratic pointers were made, linked to a broadening of the South Asia strategy: India needed to muck in more to stabilise the situation, given its “billions of dollars in trade with the United States”. Pakistan, historically closer to US interests, was irritatingly problematic, receiving “billions and billions of dollars” while “housing the very terrorists that we are fighting.” That schizophrenic state of affairs would have to “change immediately.”

A vital problem here is one of aims, as muddled as they seem to be. What, for instance, would ever elusive victory look like? Taken from its elementary point in 2001-2, US strategists were hoping to eliminate a base for al-Qaeda (a “haven” for terrorists) while ensconcing a half-representative government in Kabul. It has succeeded in neither, botching the latter while failing to eliminate the Taliban.

Kabul remains in control of only some of the country, and it is a hold that is tenuous at best. The Taliban continue being enthusiastically aggressive, keeping the countryside dangerous for government soldiers. It now controls 15 percent more territory than it did in 2015, despite those “surging” efforts pursued by General David Petraeus in 2010-2011.[2]

Such a state of affairs, rather than dampening enthusiasm among the military classes, enthuses them to commit more troops. Never mind that such a deployment would be to thicken and deepen a stalemate, a near mediaeval, unchanging status quo.

The current US commanding general in Afghanistan, John “Mick” Nicholson Jr., suggested to the Senate Armed Services Committee an increased fare of several thousand US troops.[3] Their role would be primarily to engage in “hold-fight-disrupt” operations.

But Trump has his vision, and it is free of complicating numbers, law of war constraints and reconstruction agendas. Go in, maraud and exterminate, and be frank about such aims too. Give the necessary succour to the Afghan authorities, but only in so far as there are results. Such is the way of what he terms “principled realism”.

Finally victory could be given form, its elusive quality overcome. “From now on victory will have a clear definition: Attacking our enemies, obliterating ISIS, crushing al-Qaeda, preventing the Taliban from taking over Afghanistan, and stopping mass terrorist attacks against America before they emerge.” A truly violent, bull in the china shop definition, and an old, if slightly scoured one that will keep US boots in Afghanistan for a generation.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: [email protected]; Twitter: @bkampmark

Notes

Trump Continues Failed Military Policy in South Central Asia

This NEWS was origynally shared on Sutesuaem Universities News

Fuente: Global Research

Badly damaged from the political fallout surrounding President Donald Trump’s posture towards white nationalists and neo-fascists, the forty-fifth head-of-state has now shifted his focus toward war policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

With the 16th anniversary of the United States and NATO occupation of Afghanistan coming up in October, Trump has sought to justify the escalation of the war in the aftermath of decades of Washington’s failure dating back to the destabilization of the Socialist government of the 1970s and 1980s. It was during this period that the U.S.-backed Islamist groups opposed the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) which oversaw social advances inside Afghanistan involving land reform, the rights of women and the maintenance of a secular state.

During Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign he suggested that the war in Afghanistan had been a total failure and would not be a priority of his administration if elected. However, on August 21, the president said that the U.S. troops stationed there would not be withdrawn. Moreover, Trump announced the deployment of 4,000 more soldiers and an escalation in the bombing which has been carried out since 2001.

Trump said that the focus of his policy on Afghanistan would not be nation building. He went on to say that all he wanted to do was kill “terrorists.” Despite the speech delivered before a military audience, this is not a departure from what has already been done over the last 16 years.

Former President Barack Obama often boasted about how many Muslim “terrorists” he had killed in targeted assassinations. Drone attacks escalated under the Obama administration while tens of thousands of additional troops were sent to Afghanistan during his two terms of office.

Consequently, the Trump administration is not making any fundamental changes in Pentagon policy towards Afghanistan and Pakistan. Trump is attempting to scapegoat the Pakistan government saying they have received billions in U.S. dollars and have not been considerate of Washington’s wishes for the region. Under Obama the airstrikes inside Pakistan accelerated. The speech on August 21 signals the potential for ongoing bombing operations inside of Pakistan.

The Consolidation of Power Among the Generals

What is never said by the Trump administration and the corporate media which criticizes the presidency around the clock is that thousands of Pentagon and NATO troops have been killed and wounded in Afghanistan since 2001. There have been untold numbers of Afghans and Pakistanis who have lost their lives. Estimates are that several million people have been displaced both within and outside of the borders of the two nations.

In light of the rapid turnover of White House functionaries close to the president, the rise of even more high-ranking military personnel has caught the attention of even the Washington Post. General John F. Kelley was recently shuffled from the director for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to White House Chief of Staff. The departure of chief strategist Steve Bannon on August 18 connotes the further elevation of Pentagon interests in managing the day-to-day affairs of the oval office.

The Washington Post noted in an article written by Robert Costa and Philip Rucker that:

“Inside the White House, meanwhile, generals manage Trump’s hour-by-hour interactions and whisper in his ear — and those whispers, as with the decision this week to expand U.S. military operations in Afghanistan, often become policy. At the core of Trump’s circle is a seasoned trio of generals with experience as battlefield commanders: White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and national security adviser H.R. McMaster. The three men have carefully cultivated personal relationships with the president and gained his trust.” (Aug. 22)

Claiming the military influence on Trump serves as a “moderating” factor illustrates the blurring of lines between the apparent Democratic Party allied corporate media and the hawkish elements among the Republicans. Interestingly enough it has not been the questions of foreign policy and the waging of wars which never seem to end that have divided the two wings of the U.S. ruling class. Antagonizing relations with the Russian Federation, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Cuba and the People’s Republic of China seem to have bipartisan support. The disagreements derive from tactical and procedural issues on how to best implement the imperialist project of Washington and Wall Street.

This same Washington Post article goes on to say:

“Kelly, Mattis and McMaster are not the only military figures serving at high levels in the Trump administration. CIA Director Mike Pompeo, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Energy Secretary Rick Perry and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke each served in various branches of the military, and Trump recently tapped former Army general Mark S. Inch to lead the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Together with other allies in the administration, Kelly, Mattis and McMaster see their roles not merely as executing Trump’s directives but also as guiding him away from moves that they fear could have catastrophic consequences, according to officials familiar with the dynamic.”

White Nationalism, Neo-Fascism and Militarism

A campaign speech delivered by Trump in Phoenix, Arizona on August 22 reinforced the ultra-right wing character of the administration. The president praised the role of the police, military forces and the DHS.

Although Trump read a previous press statement ostensibly condemning the racists and neo-fascists, these sentiments were very much in evidence in Phoenix. His labeling of immigrants as criminals and terrorists provides a rationale for the further implementation of repressive measures impacting the majority of people in the U.S. and internationally.

The rally was yet another attempt to mobilize a mass base for his neo-fascist agenda. Belittling his critics within the corporate media as well as the thousands of people who had gathered outside to protest his policies, Trump emboldened his followers who applauded and screamed at every outrageous assertion uttered by the commander-in-chief.

So much so that in the aftermath of the Trump speech police fired teargas canisters, pepper spray and concussion grenades to disperse peaceful demonstrators surrounding the venue to protest the rally. During his gathering Trump praised Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio who was convicted of contempt of federal court and is waiting to be sentenced. The president hinted that Arpaio will be pardoned. Trump said that the pardon would not be announced in Phoenix since it would cause too much controversy. Arpaio enacted law-enforcement measures which many people felt racially profiled and humiliated immigrants.

Capitalism Cannot End Poverty and Low-wage Labor

Despite Trump’s bragging about the 4.3 percent unemployment rate in the U.S., the growth in the second quarter of 2.3, the additional points added to the stock market and the purported creation of over a million new jobs, contrastingly the labor participation rate of approximately 62 percent and the decline in real wages paints a more accurate portrait of the actual social situation prevailing in the country. The promises of massive mining, manufacturing and infrastructural projects remain an illusion waved before the susceptible largely white political base to maintain their allegiance.

Under modern-day capitalism the desire for maximum profitability guides economic policy. The profitability is closely intertwined with the export of capital seeking low wages and minimal resistance from the workers. Therefore the disbanding of the administration’s manufacturing and business councils represents the evisceration of the illusionary promises of better conditions for the distressed population inside the U.S.

Reverting back to the methodology of warmongering and race-baiting as a diversionary tactic is nothing out of the ordinary. Successive administrations have used these ploys in an attempt to confuse the masses. The dissolution of the war machine and the ascendancy of a planned economy operating in the interests of working people and the nationally oppressed are required at this conjuncture.

Republicans and the Democrats have proved incapable of satisfying the needs of the people. It will obviously take a new political dispensation to correct the contradictions that are rising rapidly within the U.S. during this time period.

Featured image is from the author.

Blackwater Founder Seeks Privatization of Afghan War

This NEWS was origynally shared on Sutesuaem Universities News

Fuente: Global Research

Featured image: Drug production rates in Afghanistan have been skyrocketing every since Washington invaded that country.

In an interview titled, “Blackwater Founder Backs Outsourcing Afghan War-Fighting to Contractors,” Prince would defend his proposal for the creation of an “American viceroy” in Afghanistan, consolidating and overseeing all US operations in the country.

He would also suggest replacing US troops with private mercenaries who he claimed would operate inside Afghan units, noting that some 25,000 contractors are already present in Afghanistan. When asked if his current private military contracting company, Frontier Service Group (FSG), would be interested in bidding on contracts that might materialize out of his proposal, he responded by saying, “absolutely.”

Steve Inskeep, who conducted the interview, noted that Prince’s proposal for an “American viceroy” overseeing what is essentially a private army inside of Afghanistan resembled very closely Imperial Britain’s colonial administration of India, an administration that carved out personal fiefdoms for influential British businessmen and lords, and emptied out India’s wealth into British coffers.

Inskeep also noted that such a proposal, even before being implemented, most likely would create further resentment among Afghans.

Prince, for his part, attempted to defend the proposal, claiming that current efforts in Afghanistan have cost American taxpayers several trillions and the cost would only continue to rise. He noted that such efforts have resulted in little progress. The “progress” Prince was referring to was defeating “terrorism” and preventing the country from becoming a safe haven for organizations like Al Qaeda and the Islamic State.

Prince would claim:

There’s really three ways we can go in Afghanistan. We can pull out completely, in which case, the Afghan government would likely collapse in a matter of weeks and the terrorists would run the country. And for as hard as, you know, we may be pushing in Iraq or Syria and elsewhere to destroy the Islamic State, this would give them a victory. 

Back in Reality…

Unfortunately for Prince and others attempting to propose the privatization of the Afghan war, Afghanistan already is a safe haven for terrorists. Al Qaeda had only a nascent presence there before the US invasion in 2001. The Islamic State, in its current form, did not even exist.

Both organizations flourish not because of a lack of US troops in Afghanistan, Syria or Iraq, but precisely because US foreign policy has turned its attention toward each nation and has intentionally used both terrorist organizations as proxies.

In Afghanistan, while Al Qaeda and the Islamic State are used as a pretext for both the continued presence of US troops there and now the proposed deployment of a private army headed by an “American viceroy,” the real battle has always been against the Taliban and in favor of an obedient client state headquartered in Kabul.

In pursuit of defeating the Taliban and the creation of a sustainable client state, the extensive use of private contractors in Afghanistan has not been part of any sort of coherent solution. Instead, private contractors are one of the most central reasons attempts at rebuilding Afghanistan have failed.

Private contractors seek to maximize profits and return home, and ultimately do not care what happens in Afghanistan. In many ways, shoddy work and continued chaos ensures continued contracts and immense profits. The estimated 2.4 trillion dollars spent on Afghanistan so far have not simply “disappeared.” This immense amount of wealth has been transferred from US taxpayers to, in part, private contractors and the defense industry.

The notion of creating an “American viceroy” leading a private army in Afghanistan would give people like Erik Prince and other ambitious heads of contracting firms an entire nation to preside over and a government-subsidized budget to do it with. With the nation’s immense narcotics industry and that industry’s apparent ability to export worldwide under the nose of the US military with impunity, contractors notorious for systemic impropriety would have additional sources of revenue to tap and develop.

Toward Narco-Terror Fiefdoms 

Rather than stabilizing and rebuilding Afghanistan, contractors would ensure its perpetual slide into darkness. Instead of dealing with the Taliban, Afghans would face foreign contractors competing to carve out their own personal narco-terrorist fiefdoms. The US client regime in Kabul would have even less control over its military, with entire Afghan battalions dependent not on Kabul for support and leadership, but private contractors.

Prince and Blackwater have become synonymous with murder and mayhem for money and present yet another case study as to why dependence on mercenaries is always a dangerous liability. His proposal offers neither the American nor the Afghan people any benefits and is entertained only for the benefits it potentially offers military contractors and the immense armament industry that would provide them a steady stream of weaponry.

A look at the Late Roman Empire, and the manner in which mercenaries transformed into independent entities of their own, complete with their own territory and armies that answered only to themselves, serves as a cautionary reminder as to where Prince’s proposal ultimately leads. What this latest debate illustrates is the evolution of modern organized crime, a culmination of blood, money, guns and turf on a global scale, carried out not by states, but by corporations and private armies.

But if one is to dismiss Prince’s criminal conspiracy and take his proposal at face value, it should be remembered that if the US military with 2.4 trillion dollars and 16 years could not transform Afghanistan into an obedient client state, mercenaries certainly can’t and won’t.

Fighting Terror Starts in Ankara, Riyadh and Doha, Not Afghan Mountains 

Prince’s claims that contractors, or even the US military itself have any role to play in combating “terrorism” by remaining in Afghanistan deserves further scrutiny.

Terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda and the Islamic State depend heavily on state sponsorship, particularly from nations like Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. In turn, each of these regimes depends heavily on US support to remain in power and to exercise that power beyond their respective borders.

The United States itself, ironically, played a central role in Afghanistan, creating, honing and expanding Al Qaeda’s fighting capacity there, before it spread worldwide.

Defeating organizations like Al Qaeda and the Islamic State must then, by necessity, revolve around exposing and dismantling centers of power in nations like Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar who are sponsoring both organizations as well as exposing and dismantling interests in the US propping up each of these sponsors in turn.

Al Qaeda and the Islamic State’s presence in Afghanistan is a symptom of this global web of terror sponsorship, not its source. The war in Afghanistan has dragged on for what seems an eternity, because attempting to defeat a problem by fighting its symptoms can only take an eternity.

For Prince, the US media who entertained him and the US government who will attempt to facilitate his and the defense industry’s ambitions, were they interested in truly combating terrorism, they would be raising armies outside of Riyadh, Ankara, Doha and perhaps even DC. That they seek to raise them in Afghanistan indicates that they seek not to fight terror, but to perpetually profit from it.

Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

All images in this article are from the author.

ISIS – Always-Always Claims Responsibility

This NEWS was origynally shared on Sutesuaem Universities News

Fuente: Global Research

Whenever a terrorist attack hits somewhere in Europe or the world, wait a few hours and the police or media report ISIS / ISIL / Daesh claims responsibility. To enhance credibility, they usually say it was confirmed by ISIS news agency Amaq. As soon as this little piece of info is out, the upset populace takes a deep breath and falls at ease. It’s the usual culprits. It’s them, not us. We are fine. We can go back to business as usual.

This in Europe alone has happened more than 40 times since May 2014 – that’s as many ‘Muslim-induced terror attacks’ Western Europe has endured; from Paris to Nice, Brussels, London, Berlin, Munich, Würzburg, Copenhagen, Zvornik (Bosnia & Herzegovina), Moscow, Istanbul, and many more. And almost without fail, the alleged perpetrator(s) were killed, though most of them were not armed and could have been apprehended by police, questioned and brought to justice. Dead men don’t talk. That’s more convenient.

The latest Barcelona terror Amuck-run on the Rambla is not different. It is a case in point and a typical case for confusion. There were several chief-perpetrators suspected and killed. Many names circulated – and, of course, a passport, leading to a Spanish enclave in Morocco was found. The owner of the passport, immediately reported it to the police as stolen, with a solid alibi. But then, suitably his 17-year-old brother stole the passport and left it in the white van, when he fled on foot, injured from an explosion the night before, in a residency some 230 km south of Barcelona – or was that really him? – and several hours after the Rambla assault, he was caught by police in Cambrils, 120 km south of Barcelona in another attempted pedestrian run – and killed among one of five terrorists who happened to be squeezed into the same Audi. Ever wondered, why so many terrorists in one car? – Or was he really one of those killed?

By now, the people are really-really confused. Nobody knows up from down in this chaos. Better leave it to the authorities. They know best to handle the situation. Let us go back to normal – until the next terror attack hits – Allahu Akbar – very likely next in a theatre near you, somewhere in this old, purposefully and increasingly militarized police state, called Europe.

What happened to the real and innocent owner of the passport? – Does anybody know? Or can we ask ten ‘official’ sources and get ten different answers?

How come special police throughout Europe apply the same philosophy – kill to shut them up? Isn’t there a police ethics code – shoot only in self-defense? Most cases were no self-defense, as the ‘terrorists’ were visibly not armed. Have European secret and special police forces been receiving collective, well-focused training: no Muslim-Terrorist Survivors!

Why not? – That would also explain why never anybody questions the ISIS claim to murder and mayhem. Why would ISIS / ISIL / Daesh want to hurt those who fund them, train them, arm them, feed them? – It’s not even secret any more. Hillary said so already years ago, We created them, now we have to deal with them. Former CIA officials admitted that they recruited, funded, trained and armed them – later the ISIL / Daesh reign was expanded with additional financial backing by the Saudis, other Gulf States and Turkey – and, of course, all the holy western allies. – So, why would ISIS want to hurt the cow whose milk they drink? Strange – isn’t it?

Maybe what meets the eye is not reality. Could it be that ISIS / ISIL / Daesh, out of sheer gratitude to its benevolent sponsors have agreed to take the blame whenever a western orchestrated terror attack strikes somewhere in Europe or the world? Can’t be excluded, can it? It’s not even blackmail. After all, lending a helping hand to the Big Brothers, NATO, France, Germany, UK, US of A and many more lesser contributors, but contributors all the same – who keep you alive, would not be out of the world. – Right? – This is all done in connivance with massive support of European secret services, led by the usual villains, CIA, MI6, Mossad. 

Is it therefore far-fetched to conclude that European governments are utterly complicit in instigating and executing these ‘false flag’ terror attacks, sacrificing the lives of hundreds of their citizens, just so they can pursue their goal of totally militarizing the Continent?  – That they are as faithful vassals following the pattern of their trans-Atlantic partners – aiming at Full Spectrum Dominance – World Hegemony, a New World Order under a One World Order governed by Washington and its Deep Dark handlers? – Barcelona, Paris, Berlin are mere little pebbles in the Big Picture mosaic of world dominion. And the people, the mothers, fathers, wives, husbands, children who are killed – they are just menial collateral damage. After all, slaves – what is their value?

Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a former World Bank staff and worked extensively around the world in the fields of environment and water resources. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for Global Research, ICH, RT, Sputnik, PressTV, The 4th Media (China), TeleSUR, The Vineyard of The Saker Blog, and other internet sites. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. He is also a co-author of The World Order and Revolution! – Essays from the Resistance.

Black Alliance for Peace Calls on the U.S. to End Its War in Afghanistan

This NEWS was origynally shared on Sutesuaem Universities News

Fuente: Global Research

With the announcement that the Trump administration concluded its analysis of the war in Afghanistan, the administration had an opportunity to announce a sensible solution to the longest war in U.S. history by calling on all parties to the conflict to enter into serious discussions to create a process for national reconciliation and peace. Instead, the administration committed the U.S. to an endless war in Afghanistan with no clear criterion for what the administration would define as a “win.” Moreover, by suggesting that the administration intends to play up to India, Pakistan’s bitter rival, so India can play a larger role in solving the conflict in Afghanistan amounts to a dangerous and cynical ploy that could inflame the already tense relations between the two nuclear-armed nations. Trump’s call for support for an increase to military spending was a crude and opportunistic rationalization for endless war and the squandering of the nation’s precious resources, including the lives of its young.

The policies of this administration reflect a continued commitment on the part of the U.S. oligarchy to utilize military force to advance its interests throughout the world. Members of the Black Alliance for Peace (BAP) understand that U.S. policy-makers see the continued presence of the U.S. in Afghanistan as a strategy to counter the growing cooperation between China and the Russian Federation and the Chinese “silk road” project. We also know that U.S. capitalists have their eyes on newly discovered and untapped mineral reserves of iron, cobalt, copper, gold, and lithium estimated at a value of over one trillion dollars. This increases Afghanistan’s value for the U.S. corporate and financial sector, which has no problem sending young people off to die for its narrow interests.

With the bipartisan vote in the U.S. House of Representatives to increase the military budget by $75 billion – a figure that represents more than the entire military budget of the Russian Federation – it is no longer accurate to characterize this grotesque proposal as a Trump proposal.  The commitment to Full Spectrum Dominance has always had bipartisan support, but Democrats and their liberal allies have been able to present its militarism as somehow more benevolent than the Republicans. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of the U.S. as the world’s predominant global power, the commitment to maintain U.S. hegemony and its predatory form of capitalism known as neoliberalism has always been a bipartisan objective.

Candidate Trump questioned the wisdom of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan seeing it as a lost cause that wasted resources and lives. Now President Trump has a different take. Joining the last two presidents before him, he adopted the agenda of military-industrial elites who see the necessity for a permanent U.S. presence in the country resulting in the U.S. and its NATO partners establishing nine permanent military bases in the country.  

The U.S. as part of the U.S./EU/NATO axis domination has been responsible for unspeakable acts of violence in every part of the world with most of the victims of U.S. state violence being the non-European peoples of the world.

In an obscene testament to U.S. vanity and the psychopathological commitment to global white supremacy, billions have already been wasted, almost three thousand U.S. lives lost and over 100,000 dead. It is time to admit defeat in Afghanistan and bring the war to an end. Justice and common sense demand that the bloodletting stop.

Featured image is from Fabius Maximus Website.