Author: R J Adams

Has there ever been a greater gathering of gangsters, corrupt business tycoons, and rich failed politicians gathered together in one place since the Apalachin meeting at the home of Joseph “Joe the Barber” Barbara in November 1957?^[1]

While the number of guests at Trump Towers in New York recently may have lacked the numbers present at Joe Barbara’s place, as gangsters go those parading for plum jobs in the next Trump administration lack for nothing in comparable quality.

^{Joseph “Joe the Barber” Barbara}

Steven Mnuchin, about to take control of the money as Treasury Secretary, is just one member of the ‘team’ with a somewhat chequered past. Sued by the trustee after the Bernie Madoff scandal he escaped due to a limitation of time. He, and a few of his rich pals, bought out IndyMac in 2009 for $1.6 billion, renamed it OneWest, then proceeded to rapidly repossess homes and throw people onto the street. “Harsh, repugnant, shocking and repulsive behaviour,” was how one New York judge described OneWest’s actions.

Mnuchin’s daddy made a fortune via Goldman Sachs, and sonny-boy Mnuchin followed in daddy’s footsteps. Pres-elect Trump, it seems, is still happy to keep that old revolving door turning, despite strident campaign promises to the contrary.

Then there’s the Vice-Pres elect, Michael Richard Pence, known for his conservative evangelical viewpoint. A supporter of the ‘Tea Party’, he says he’s, “Christian, conservative, and a Republican, in that order.” He may be conservative; he’s entitled to call himself Republican, but he’s certainly no Christian. His attitude towards women’s rights and “healthcare for all” would have Jesus of Nazareth coming back for a second crucifixion. But then we all know that white American evangelical Christianity stops at the end of the Old Testament – at least for all practical purposes. Pence is really a man after his time. He would have been more at home in the 1630’s working alongside John Winthrop in the Puritan theocracy known as the Massachusetts Bay Colony. There’s nothing Pence would like more than to take America back to that time, with its restrictive, forbidding, lifestyle.

Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III is favourite to become America’s next Attorney General. He was voted the 5th most conservative Republican in 2007 and has done nothing since to alter that rating. He’s anti-gay, anti-women’s rights, anti-immigration, anti- “healthcare for all” and anti-climate change – in fact he’s anti just about everything that might benefit anyone with an income below $100,000 a year. He calls himself a Christian of course, and teaches kids in a Methodist Sunday School attached to his own church – thus helping to create the next generation of bigoted, blinkered, pious, arrogant folk just like himself.

Michael Richard Pompeo is a lovely man. He encapsulates just about everything that normal, well-balanced, people despise and reject about ultra-right conservatism. He’s a member of the Tea Party. He opposes abortion, even after rape or incest; he opposes “healthcare for all” (he called ‘Obamacare’ a “train wreck”); he believes Edward Snowden should be put to death, is a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association (which endorsed him for Congress); he opposes the closing of the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center (after visiting during a hunger strike by detainees he stated, “It looked to me like a lot of them had put on weight.”); he was opposed to the Obama Administration’s closing of CIA ‘black sites’ and favours the continuation of ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’, known to the rest of the world under the name, ‘torture’. Of course, he rejects any idea of global climate change, but then he would, because he’s an oilman. Prior to joining Congress in 2011 he was president of Sentry International, an oilfield equipment company. Koch Industries has invested heavily in Pompeo’s political career, to the tune of $380,000 -and that’s just what we know about. Michael Pompeo is poised to become the next Director of the CIA. Who the Hell would want him living next door!

The icing on the cake – from a purely Mafia-style perspective – has to be Rex Tillerson, CEO of ExxonMobil, and nominated as the future U.S. Secretary for State by gangster boss, Donald Trump. Tillerson believes in climate change. He even admits it could be affected by human actions “to some extent”, but according to a report this year in Newsweek, he has stated that:

The world is going to have to continue using fossil fuels, whether they like it or not,” said the energy giant’s [ExxonMobil] CEO.^[2]

Trump’s administration will be composed of high-powered business executives, like Tillerson.

The above is just a sample of the many high-flying corporate executives about to find themselves running the United States of America from January 2017. It’s probably the biggest corporate takeover of a government in world history.

‘Corpocracy’ is about to become reality. Trump is certainly ‘draining the swamp’ of political alligators, only to replace them with some of the most poisonous snakes from the corporate jungle. Donald Trump has handed the United States – and by consequence, the world – over to the new Mafia: Big Business. Trump’s promise to kill NAFTA and the TPTP won’t be kept. These trade deals may be ‘re-arranged’ to suit, but Tillerson is a supporter of the trade agreements and one can be assured they are alive and well, merely being held in abeyance until required.

Yesterday, Trump tweeted that:

Those few words encapsulate the future Trump presidency. How can ‘strengthening and expanding’ nuclear capability assist in ‘bringing the world to its senses regarding nukes’? It obviously can’t, but it would make the U.S. appear even more powerful in the eyes of the rest of the world. Trump’s policy as a businessman has always been to appear supremely powerful in business transactions, a ‘mess with me at your peril’ syndrome. He intends to apply that maxim to his presidency, and to assist him has secured the services of those who share his viewpoint.^[3]

There will be some in America who will applaud such a doctrine and condone it. Perhaps sufficient even to award Trump and his corporate gangsters a second term. They may, after all, make America great again, but not in the way the rest of the planet requires.

America is as close as it has ever been to the period in 1930’s Germany when Fascism gained in power and popularity. Wealth resides only in the top echelons of society, leaving many impoverished and frustrated, a situation where blame tends to be focused on minorities. In Germany, the Jews became the whipping-boys of the Fascist government; in America it is fast becoming Muslims and the ‘so-called’ illegal immigrants from Mexico, who inherit the title.

Nazi rallies, and the mass hysteria accompanying them, are echoed today in those who flock to hear Trump speak: inciting violence against minorities; demanding prison terms for his opponents; promises to make the country “great” again.

By moving corporate heads into positions of political power Trump has metaphorically manacled the politicians of Congress, or at least, sufficient for his purpose. Control of Congress has passed from politicians to corporations. Lobbyists will rapidly find themselves redundant, as Congress is bent to the bidding of the corporations even more than it was before.

The stage is set for fascist, gangster-style, control of the United States, the only priorities wealth and power. The aim is to create a nation so powerful it can rule the world via control of trade and, where necessary, force of arms. That process has been underway for a long time. It hasn’t happened overnight. The raising of Donald Trump to president was surely meticulously planned and financed. It’s unlikely any other top business executive could have pulled it off, but Trump was the celebrity, the right man to appeal to the sections of American society he needed to win the presidency – against all the odds.

The gangsters are about to take control of America. This latest breed don’t need machine guns, they’ll have control of the law enforcement and security apparatus. The outcome may well prove to be Nazi Germany on steroids.

Joseph ‘Joe the Barber’ Barbara and his associates would be well pleased.

^{[1] “Joseph Barbara &The Apalachin Conference” Wikipedia.}

^{[2] “IS EXXON WAITING FOR THE PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT TO FAIL?” Newsweek, May 26th 2016.}

^{[3] “Donald Trump: US must greatly expand nuclear capabilities” BBC, December 22nd 2016}

There were many in Britain who breathed a huge sigh of relief back when, on 28th November 1990, Margaret Thatcher was finally ousted from her position as Prime Minister after more than a decade in power. Following her death in April 2013 it seemed both she, and the “Thatcher Years”, had been laid to rest forever.

Now, suddenly, Margaret Thatcher is alive and well, resurrected, reincarnated even, in the body of one Theresa Mary May (nee Brasier) of Eastbourne, West Sussex, who, via a succession of unfortunate events that may be encompassed under the infamous portmanteau, “Brexit,” has risen yet again to that pinnacle of British power once occupied by the aforesaid Thatcher personage.

Theresa May’s persona is so “a la Thatcher” as to be virtually indistinguishable from the original. Her speech to the Arab Gulf Cooperation Council this week was scarcely conveyed by the British rags, but the BBC’s report gives a hint of the “Thatcher” rhetoric:

Theresa May has said she is “clear-eyed” about the threat posed by Iran to the security of the Gulf and wider Middle East, in a speech in Bahrain…But she added that the UK would work with Arab Gulf states to counteract Iran’s “aggressive regional actions”.
Speaking at summit of the Gulf Co-operation Council – comprising Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Qatar and Bahrain – Mrs May also said the UK wanted to “make a more permanent and more enduring commitment to the long-term security of the Gulf” and would invest more than £3bn in defence spending in the region over the next 10 years.
“Gulf security is our security,” she said.
“Extremists plotting terror attacks here, in this region, are not only targeting the Gulf but, as we have seen, targeting the streets of Europe, too.
“Whether we’re confronting the terrorism of al-Qaeda, or the murderous barbarity of [so-called Islamic State], no country is a more committed partner for you in this fight than the UK.” ^[1]

It’s good to know that May is ‘clear-eyed’ about the threat from Iran. It’s just a shame she can’t explain it to the rest of us. Iran is a nation comprised of 95% Shiite Muslims. Between them, Saudi Arabia and Qatar (mainly Salafi Sunni), Kuwait (60-65% Sunni), UAE (85% Sunni), make up Arab nations with a dominant Sunni populace. Bahrain is 70% Shia, but with a Sunni ruling family, and Oman is mainly Ibadi Muslim, difficult to categorise as either Sunni or Shia, but certainly a more liberal form of Islam that is highly tolerant of other religions.

So, where does this Iranian threat manifest itself? It’s really hard to pin down, but basically there’s a power struggle between Sunni Saudi Arabia with its allies, and Shia Iran. The West, because of its oil requirements, backs the Sunni side of the equation, despite all terrorist attacks on Western nations having emanated from Sunni strongholds. Let’s not forget that all, bar two, of the 9/11 attackers were Saudi citizens.

Iran could be considered the most dominant nation. It’s slightly smaller than Saudi Arabia (636,400 square miles, compared to 830,000 square miles) but with nearly three times the population (Iran – 78,000,000 compared to Saudi, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain and Oman together only managing 47,000,000), but the Saudis are awash with Western military equipment, including the latest aircraft and weaponry. The U.S. showered Iran with its latest military gear back in the seventies when the Shah was still in power, including nuclear power stations (the start of Iran’s nuclear programme) but the U.S. technicians required to service this highly-technical equipment left after the revolution. Since then Iran has had to rely on Russia, North Korea and China for most of its military hardware, though it’s now in a position technologically to manufacture much of its own.

But Iran has never shown outright aggression towards its Sunni neighbours. In fact, the proverbial boot has tended to be firmly planted on the other foot, with Saudi Arabia quick to foment unrest against Iran at every opportunity. In January this year they executed a prominent Shia cleric, ostensibly on terrorism charges, which resulted in a war of words between the two nations and some protesting in the streets. But both governments tend to fight their battles via other’s conflicts, with Syria being the obvious one – Iran supporting Shia president Assad, and the Saudi royals aiding the Sunni rebels.

And then, of course, there’s Yemen. One hears a lot on news broadcasts about Yemen’s Houthi rebels and how they’re supported by Iran. Iran has supplied some arms to the Houthis, but they’re certainly not fighting a proxy war on Iran’s behalf.

As Prof. Thomas Juneau (University of Ottawa) wrote in the Washington Post this year:

The Houthi’s takeover of Sanaa, Yemen’s capital, in September 2014 prompted Iran to increase its support. It now appears that small numbers — perhaps dozens — of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) officers, with assistance from Lebanese Hezbollah, have set up a train and equip program for the Houthis. There have also been reports of intensifying shipping activity between Iran and Yemen.

This assistance, however, remains limited and far from sufficient to make more than a marginal difference to the balance of forces in Yemen, a country awash with weapons. There is therefore no supporting evidence to the claim that Iran has bought itself any significant measure of influence over Houthi decision-making.^[2]

The Houthis support the ex-President, Ali Abdullah Saleh. Why they should choose to ally with this guy is unclear. During his presidency he amassed a fortune – around $30 billion in total – while most of his countrymen, women and children, lived on the verge of starvation.

The Houthis subscribe to a branch of Shia Islam called Zaidism, and Saleh is Zaidi, which may be one reason. The present president, Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi, is a Sunni and thus favoured by Saudi Arabia where it’s believed he is now hiding, pending a final outcome to the conflict which may allow his return.

The arrival of al Qaeda(AQAP) in Yemen forced the Houthis into action. AQAP (extremist Sunni) started persecuting the Shia Houthis who felt President Hadi wasn’t doing enough to protect them, so they ousted him and are fighting to reinstate Saleh as president. This puts them on the wrong side of al Qaeda, ISIS – who are also present in Yemen – and Saudi Arabia, backed by their Arab allies and the West.

The religious aspect of Yemen’s conflict is only part of the problem. It’s one of the poorest nations on earth, despite oil making up 90% of the economy (which explains where ex-President Saleh’s huge fortune originated). Water shortages are serious. Major cities are expected to run out of water within a few years. It’s a grim place for the 54% of the populace living on less than $2 a day.

But Theresa May is quite happy to support the Saudi war against the Houthis, the war crimes being committed, the hospitals bombed, civilians slaughtered by the thousand. She’s happy to provide military hardware, and money – three billion pounds Sterling over the next ten years, though given the opulence of Saudi Arabia and most of its Arab friends, one might suggest they could pay for their own security.

Mrs May said she was determined to build further on the trade and investment relationship between the Gulf and the UK.
“Just as Gulf security is our security, so your prosperity is also our prosperity. Already the Gulf is a special market for the UK.”
She said that last year trade between the UK and the Gulf was worth more than £30bn and, at the same time, Gulf investment in the UK was helping to regenerate cities from Aberdeen to Teeside and Manchester to London.
Speaking on the final day of her trip to Bahrain, she recommended ongoing vigilance towards Iran.
“As we address new threats to our security, so we must also continue to confront state actors whose influence fuels instability in the region,” she said.
“So I want to assure you that I am clear-eyed about the threat that Iran poses to the Gulf and the wider Middle East; and the UK is fully committed to our strategic partnership with the Gulf and working with you to counter that threat.”
She alleged that Iran’s activities include:
Sending fighters including the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps ‘Qods Force to Syria to shore up President Bashar al-Assad
Providing support to the Houthi rebel movement in Yemen, and so working against the interests of the international community in bringing about peace and stability in the country
Undermining stability in Lebanon and Iraq
Mrs May added: “We secured a deal which has neutralised the possibility of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons for over a decade. It has already seen Iran remove 13,000 centrifuges together with associated infrastructure and eliminate its stock of 20%-enriched uranium.
“That was vitally important for regional security. But we must also work together to push back against Iran’s aggressive regional actions, whether in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Syria or in the Gulf itself.” ^[1]

May presents three examples of Iran’s ‘threats to the Gulf’: Syria, where Iran is supporting the Shiite government of Assad that is, in turn, supported by a majority of Syrian citizens**; the Houthis in Yemen, as already discussed, and the ‘undermining’ of Lebanon and Iraq.

It could be argued that the British and Americans between them have done more to undermine both nations (particularly Iraq!) than Iran could ever achieve. The truth is, of course, that Iran stepped into the breach to help Iraq deal with the threat from ISIS. The U.S. turned a blind eye to the atrocities perpetrated by this Sunni band of thugs until Iran got involved. Then, suddenly, Barack Obama saw fit to dispatch U.S. ‘military advisers’ in large numbers and ordered ISIS strongholds to be bombed by U.S. aircraft. The purpose: to warn Iran from gaining any further foothold in Iraq, despite there being no shred of evidence to suggest they might do so.

Theresa May is faithfully quoting U.S. foreign policy for the benefit of the West’s Arab ‘allies’. Iran is the Middle Eastern fall-guy for American pain because Iranians dared to depose the U.S. puppet Shah, and make Jimmy Carter look foolish by taking control of the Tehran embassy back in 1980.

One cannot help but hear the strident tones of Margaret Thatcher resounding through this speech. Like Thatcher, May is an advocate of U.S. foreign policy. Wherever the superpower leads she will follow. Her speech is straight out of the Pentagon Handbook for Foreign Allies.

The U.S. set its military sights on Iran back in 2002. The invasion of Iraq was a planned prelude to invading Iran, unless it was prepared to capitulate to U.S. pressure. The whole venture proved a military disaster from start to finish, serving only to fuel the venom and hatred towards the West that has created the present situation in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya, and other Middle Eastern nations today. Saudi Arabia and its Arab allies are using the West to further their powerbase in the area; their aim, Sunni domination of their Shiite rivals.

America and its Western allies are hellbent on helping them do so. Theresa May, just like Margaret Thatcher before her, is determined to be top of the pile when fealty to the United States is demanded. Ronald Reagan was Margaret Thatcher’s American beau. Can we expect to see a similar meeting of minds between Donald Trump and Theresa May?

Or, was one nightmare enough?

^{** Syria-Poll-Table}

^{[1] “Theresa May ‘clear-eyed’ over Iran threat” BBC, December 7th 2016}

^{[2] “No, Yemen’s Houthis actually aren’t Iranian puppets” Washington Post, May 2016}

Today I received an email from Debbie Stabenow, the Democratic senator for Michigan. I’ve reproduced it below, together with my response:

Dear Robert,

Because you have written me in the past to express your concerns about the threat of a nuclear Iran, I wanted to let you know about an important action that the Senate has taken.

Today I voted for, and the Senate passed, legislation that renews our ability to invoke sanctions on Iran. Without this action, that authority would have expired at the end of this year.

I cosponsored renewal of the sanctions on Iran because I am committed to keeping pressure on Iranian leaders to honor their agreement to end that country’s pursuit of a nuclear weapon. This 10-year extension sends a strong message to Iran: that we stand ready to reimpose strict sanctions if they fail to comply with the terms of the agreement.

I have said that the only thing worse than Iran being the largest state sponsor of terrorism would be Iran as the largest state sponsor of terrorism with a nuclear weapon. The Iran Sanctions Extension Act maintains critical leverage for the U.S. as we continue to closely monitor Iran’s activities to ensure the security of America, Israel, and the entire Middle East.

As always, please continue to share your views on issues of concern to you and your family.

Sincerely,

Debbie Stabenow
United States Senator

Dear Debbie

I had no idea you’d joined the Republican Party. Perhaps you could enlighten me as to the evidence dictating your view that Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism?

Iran is a nation of Shia Muslims; every terrorist act against the West, including 9/11, has been committed by Sunni Muslim extremists. Iran aids the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad because it is composed of mainly Alawis (with Shia affiliations) and the rebels are Sunni extremists. Hezbollah (again, Shia) is supported by Iran, but only in their fight against the brutality of the Israeli government towards the Palestinians they subjugate. If the U.S. government were to really pressurize the Israelis to repair the dreadful damage done to the lives of Palestinians, by Israeli actions since 1948, Hezbollah would likely cease to be a problem to them.

My last contact with you was concerning the Iranian situation, but I was much less concerned about their nuclear ambitions than the hideous sanctions imposed on them by the West (led, of course, by the U.S., via the U.N.) with the resultant effect on innocent civilians, and in particular, children.

It’s common knowledge that sanctions don’t work. They didn’t work against the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein, and they won’t work against Ali Khamenei, who’s a relatively moderate leader. American-led sanctions against Iraq in the 1990’s caused the most diabolical suffering to the populace. UNICEF calculated that as many as half a million children died as a direct result of American/Western sanctions.

The only sane choice when dealing with Iran has already been made by the present U.S. President. No doubt progress on this issue will be completely thrown away by the incoming administration of Trump & Co., who appear hellbent on stirring up another Middle Eastern brew of poison and hatred against the West.

I note this bill was passed unanimously (with the exception of Sanders, who opted out) and that President Obama will sign it into law, even though he’s intimated it’s unnecessary. Khamenei has previously stated that any extension of the legislation would be taken as a violation of the JCPA and could jeopardize further negotiations.

It would appear that the U.S. people’s representatives are determined to push the Iranian regime into a corner yet again, using more of the same bully-boy tactics that have proved such a disaster in the Middle East over the last forty years, since the Carter Doctrine.

Isn’t it time you, who are charged with the responsibility of bringing peace to the world, stopped behaving like schoolyard bullies run amok and became educated in the more mature skill of political diplomacy, an adeptness I feel is sadly lacking in U.S. politics today.

After all, the nation’s militant tactics in the Middle East over the last forty years have brought forth nothing but millions of dead bodies (including thousands of American soldiers), rampant terrorism against both the U.S. and its allies, the rise of al Qaeda and now, ISIS, the devastation of Iraq and Syria and their many historic sites and artifacts, and utter turmoil and suffering over five percent of the world’s landmass.

Is this a record of which one nation can feel proud?

Sincerely

Robert.