Fund Your Utopia Without Me.™

01 September 2011

Jimmy Carter & Transfers of Technology to the Chinese


Some liberals claim that Nobel Peace Prize winner, Jimmy Carter, has always put human rights above engagement with Communist countries and never engaged in transfers of technology.

Don't believe them!

As a candidate in 1976, Jimmy Carter criticized Gerald Ford for continuing Nixon's policy of Realpolitik with China at the expense of human rights. But once ensconced in the White House, Carter downgraded our relations with Taiwan and restored formal diplomatic ties with the People's Republic of China in 1978.

It was also Carter who granted MFN trade status to China for the first time and invited Deng Xiaoping to visit the United States.  Trade above human rights.

In 1979, President Carter and Premier Deng Xiaoping signed the U.S.-China Agreement on Cooperation in Science and Technology (S&T Agreement).  Since this agreement was executed, researchers in both countries have officially collaborated in work involving fisheries, earth and atmospheric sciences, physics, satellites, communications, chemistry, energy technologies, agriculture, geology, health and disaster mitigation.

The willingness of the United States to develop a military relationship with the PRC is founded on the
assessment that the United States and the PRC share important parallel interests, both globally and regionally. Foremost among these is a common security concern--the growing threat posed by the Soviet Union. Thus, an objective of U.S. policy is to build an enduring military relationship with the PRC which would support China's national development and maintain China as a force for peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific Region and the World. ( http://www.ewross.com/US-China_Military_Relations.pdf)

"The development of U.S.-PRC military relations began soon after the normalization of diplomatic relations between the United States and the People's Republic of China on January 1, 1979. Secretary of Defense Harold Brown's visit to Beijing in January 1980 opened a dialogue between the military establishments of the two countries. The evolution of U.S. policy with regard to a military relationship with the PRC was reflected in the announcement in 1981 that the United States would consider the sale, on a case-by-case basis, of defensive weapons and equipment to the PRC."

President Carter's National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski and Defence Secretary Harold Brown (especially Brzezinski) did not share the concerns of Secretary of State, Cyrus Vance, who was concerned that the US "steer a balanced course" and show no favouritism to either the Soviet Union or PRC.  According to Vance, prior to normalisation, both Brzezinski and Brown saw various "security enhancements" (the exchange of military attachés, TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER to the PRC, third-country sales of military equipment to China, and other forms of cooperation) as likely to caution rather than provoke Moscow.  As Soviet advances in the Third World continued, Brzezinski argued to President Carter that "the Chinese relationship is useful in showing the Soviets that their assertiveness is counterproductive and not cost-free."  - Citations from Brzezinski's memo of 5 October 1979 to President Carter, as cited by Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski, "Power and Principle", p. 566.

As John K. Cooley reminds us on page 51 in his book "Unholy wars: Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism" published in 2000, transfer of missile and satellite technology was on the Sino-American agenda even before Reagan was elected:

"Carter's taciturn Secretary of Defense, Harold Brown, was a sober, scholarly physicist by profession. He continued the tradition of near silence about political and military cooperation with China during his trip to Beijing to enlist the Asian giant in the Afghan jihad on January 4 to 13, 1980.

As Brown discovered in Beijing, both the Chinese and American sides had done their preliminary homework well.  This pleased Harold Brown, whose unflamboyant, but incisive manner combined the zeal of Zbigniew Brzezinski with outward mildness of Jimmy Carter.  Brown was much less of a Lone Ranger than Brzezinski.  Brown liked to rely on other people's expertise and homework, and to avoid the limelight.  On his January 1980 voyage to the Middle Kingdom, Brown took with him a high-powered team of administration experts.  These included a leading Cold War expert of the Vietnam era, Robert Komer.  There were also Asia veterans and arms controls experts such as George Seignious, who held the first-ever formal American discussion on arms matters with China's vice foreign minister, Zhang Wengin.

At the time, Deng Xiaoping, very much a man of power and vision and an architect of China's hesitant, but inexorable entry into the capitalist world, was vice premier to Premier Hua Guofeng.  After four days of talks with Deng, Foreign Minister Huang Hua and intelligence officials, Harold Brown emerged at a news conference.   He confined himself to banal generalities, giving nothing away about China's decision to join the jihad.   He had, he said, "found a growing convergence of views between our two governments on the outrageous and brutal invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union."  Each side "would take appropriate steps on its own" to counter the invasion.  Brown refused to spell out what those "steps" were.  He did acknowledge that while US arms sales to China were not discussed, "TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER" DEFINITELY WAS."

As Jacob Weinsberg has observed when it comes to Democrats and Republicans and their relationships with China, "In politics, the yang predominates. In power, the yin reasserts itself."


Related Reading:





Brzezinski: Carter Began the Secret Aid of the Afghan Rebels That Became Al Qaeda

 

Jimmy Carter: The Greatest Union Buster & Deregulator of the 20th Century!

 

1980: Which Presidential Hopeful Opened His General Election In the Hometown of the Ku Klux Klan?

 

Jimmy Carter & Transfers of Technology to the Chinese

 

 

1980: Which Presidential Hopeful Opened His General Election In the Hometown of the Ku Klux Klan?

In 1980, one of the major party presidential nominees opened his general election by delivering a speech in a small town in the Deep South that just by coincidence happened to be the national headquarters of the Ku Klux Klan. That same candidate had previously complained about federal housing policies which attempted “to inject black families into a white neighborhood just to create some sort of integration.” He argued that there was “nothing wrong with ethnic purity being maintained.” That candidate was President Jimmy Carter, the Democratic nominee.

Carter kicked off his general election campaign with a speech in Tuscumbia, Alabama. Although the Klan’s headquarters were located in that small town, Carter was not appealing to the Klan vote, but was instead hoping to win the votes of the more than 40,000 people who saw him speak at the town’s annual Labor Day fair. Perhaps Carter chose to start his general election campaign in rural Alabama because he recognized that Reagan might take away some of the southern states that had been crucial to Carter’s win in 1976. As things turned out, Carter was right to be concerned; he ended up losing Alabama by 1%.



Related Reading:





Brzezinski: Carter Began the Secret Aid of the Afghan Rebels That Became Al Qaeda

 

Jimmy Carter: The Greatest Union Buster & Deregulator of the 20th Century!

 

1980: Which Presidential Hopeful Opened His General Election In the Hometown of the Ku Klux Klan?

 

Jimmy Carter & Transfers of Technology to the Chinese

Jimmy Carter: The Greatest Union Buster & Deregulator of the 20th Century!

Unions have never represented a majority of the American workforce. However, to listen to today’s union bosses, one might be led to believe that they did. Ever since their peak, in 1945, when unions represented a total of 35.5% of the workforce unions in the private-sector have been on an almost steady decline. The common fallacy is that the union decline is due to the Reagan Era. That, however, is a false narrative.

In fact, it is the work of Democrat Jimmy Carter and his deregulators that has had a far more detrimental impact on unions than Reagan ever did.   The fact of the matter is, by the time Ronald Reagan was sworn into office the die had already been cast: Private-sector union membership in the United States had already begun its free fall, aided by market forces and the deregulatory push that the Carter administration put in place.

According to the Left’s narrative, it was the PATCO strike, the replacing of strikers in the private-sector during the 1980s, combined with the Reagan-appointed National Labor Relations Board that has caused the decline of unions.  However, this view is as misleading as it is simplistic. 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) under Carter conducted a management campaign of harassment against union controllers. And 12 months before the government’s contract with PATCO was set to expire, Carter formed a “Management Strike Contingency Force” to prepare for a walkout–including the use of scabs.

In addition to deregulating the airline industry earlier in his Presidency, in 1980, two laws were signed by Carter that greatly transformed the rail and trucking industries. The first was the Staggers Rail Act and the other was the Motor Carrier Act. By largely deregulating both the rail and trucking industries, these two laws have significantly altered the landscape for transportation unions.

When President Carter signed the Staggers Rail Act into law, he proclaimed:

“By stripping away needless and costly regulation in favor of marketplace forces wherever possible, this act will help assure a strong and healthy future for our nation’s railroads,” the president’s signing statement promised. “Consumers can be assured of improved railroads delivering their goods with dispatch.”

For the most part, Carter’s prediction has come to pass, as railroads were able to finally able to set their own prices and dump unprofitable lines. However, with deregulation has come a loss of union membership as the industry changed over the last 30 years.

The International Brotherhood of Teamsters, one of three unions who endorsed Reagan, pretty much controlled the interstate trucking industry in the U.S. prior to 1980. Before Carter signed the Motor Carrier Act of 1980 into law, price-fixing and regulated routes was as much as 75% higher than unregulated freight.

Both the Teamsters Union and the American Trucking Associations strongly opposed deregulation and successfully headed off efforts to eliminate all economic controls. Supporting deregulation was a coalition of shippers, consumer advocates including Ralph Nader, and liberals such as Senator Edward Kennedy.

Unable to stop Carter’s deregulatory move, the Teamsters saw their near-monopoly in the industry end.

Deregulation has also made it easier for nonunion workers to get jobs in the trucking industry. This new competition has sharply eroded the strength of the drivers’ union, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. Before deregulation ICC-regulated truckers paid unionized workers about 50% more than comparable workers in other industries. Although unionized drivers still are paid a premium, by 1985 unionized workers were only 28% of the trucking work force, down from around 60% in the late seventies.

Prior to deregulation, the Teamsters had 2.2 million members. However, as unionised trucking companies closed due to competition, the Teamsters’ union continued to lose members. Today, the union represents a mere 1.4 million and, were it not for union mergers and branching out into other industries, it would be considerably less than that.

In 1982, after President Carter had left office, an eight-year old anti-trust case against AT&T resulted in a settlement. The settlement called for the monolithic telephone company to divest itself of its local exchange companies. On January 1, 1984, AT&T’s seven Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs) were severed from Ma Bell.

The Ma Bell breakup led to the downsizing of hundreds of thousands of union members, primarily members of the Communications Workers of America (CWA) and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) that continues to this day. In one year alone (from 1985 to 1986), CWA lost 53,000 members, as competitors like MCI and Sprint gained greater market share.

The judge who presided over the break up of Ma Bell was Judge Harold Greene. He was a Jimmy Carter appointee.

Lastly, in 1978, Carter signed the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, which stripped Federal employees of their collective bargaining rights for everything save workplace environment issues.

Jimmy Carter began the deregulation of the banks.

See: Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980

Read more at the American Presidency Project: Jimmy Carter: Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980

Jimmy Carter deregulated the airline industry.

See: Airline Deregulation Act of 1978

Jimmy Carter deregulated the rail industry.

See: Staggers Rail Act of 1980

Jimmy Carter deregulated the trucking industry.

See; Motor Carrier Act of 1980

Jimmy Carter stripped Federal workers of collective bargaining rights on wages and benefits.

See: Civil Service Reform Act of 1978

According to Alfred Kahn, the ‘chief architect’ of airline deregulations stated years later:

“I have to concede that the competition that deregulation brought certainly was terribly, terribly hard on the airlines and their unions, who had heretofore enjoyed the benefits of protection from competition under regulation.”

It is time to set the record straight and give Carter credit where credit is due: Jimmy Carter was the nation’s biggest union-busting president in the 20th century.




Related Reading:





Brzezinski: Carter Began the Secret Aid of the Afghan Rebels That Became Al Qaeda

 

Jimmy Carter: The Greatest Union Buster & Deregulator of the 20th Century!

 

1980: Which Presidential Hopeful Opened His General Election In the Hometown of the Ku Klux Klan?

 

Jimmy Carter & Transfers of Technology to the Chinese



Brzezinski: Carter Began the Secret Aid of the Afghan Rebels That Became Al Qaeda


The CIA’s role in laying the foundations of Al Qaeda is confirmed in an 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, who at the time was National Security Adviser to President Jimmy Carter:

Brzezinski: According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, [on] 24 December 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979, that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the President in which I explained to him that in my opinion, this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

Question: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

Brzezinski: It isn’t quite that. We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Question: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn’t believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don’t regret anything today?

Brzezinski: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Question: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War?

( "The CIA’s Intervention in Afghanistan, Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser", Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998, published in English, Centre for Research on Globalisation, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html, 5 October 2001, italics added.)


Related Reading:



Brzezinski: Carter Began the Secret Aid of the Afghan Rebels That Became Al Qaeda

 

Jimmy Carter: The Greatest Union Buster & Deregulator of the 20th Century!

 

1980: Which Presidential Hopeful Opened His General Election In the Hometown of the Ku Klux Klan?

 

Jimmy Carter & Transfers of Technology to the Chinese

 

Norway: A Tolerant, Inclusive, Diverse, Multicultural Society For Everyone...Except Jews...Part I








People told me when I came to Norway that the country has a long tradition of anti-Semitism. They were wrong. It is not history. It is happening here and now.”  

- Alan Dershowitz, 2011




According to the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, Norway is one of the most anti-Semitic countries outside of the Muslim world.  While the world is shocked that a madman would slaughter innocent men, women and children because, in part, of his Islamophobia, nothing is being said about the fact that the same society suffering this horror today is not as inclusive, diverse, tolerant and multicultural as it and many would like you to believe.  Does this justify what Anders Behring-Breivik did?  Absolutely not.  Is it acceptable to discriminate against Muslims because a society is anti-Semitic?  Of course not, but it would suggest that a society that tolerates anti-Semitism while preaching tolerance and diversity should do some deep soul-searching.



Oslo, Norway, 2011



Oslo, Norway, 1940
‘Jøde-parasitten skaffet oss 9. april’ = “The Jew parasite got us April 9"
(Beginning of Nazi Germany's occupation of Norway)


While it is true that Norway has a long history of anti-Semitism, (Quisling, anyone?), it is also true that something very different is happening now.  In the 1920s and 1930s, economic conditions provided the kindle for the fire that became Naziism, which consumed more than just 6 million Jews.  Whereas, it was the "Native" Europeans discriminating against Jews and seeking their destruction, today, they are not alone.  What isn't clear is whether the "Natives" simply acquired partners in anti-Semitism with the influx of Islamists* or if the "Natives" are kowtowing to Islamists out of fear or if it is the former in some countries and the latter in others.



 Adolf Hitler and Vidkun Quisling


To this day, Germans still live with the shame of what their ancestors did. Norway, however, took the approach "One executed Quisling and done."  It has been criticised by the Simon Wiesenthal Centre as one of the countries that did little to investigate, let alone prosecute, the Nazi war criminals. The Norwegian Defence Ministry authorised in 1988 the obliteration of an archive containing information on the Norwegian people and organisations sympathising with communists or Nazis. The archive was erased in 1994 when the World Jewish Congress and Bjørn Westlie, a journalist for the Norwegian business daily Dagens Næringsliv, were gathering information on Naziism and the Jewish property plundered in Norway.  Of course, while the Norwegian media neglected to report on any of this, it did, as it continues to do today, criticise the very existence of the State of Israel.



 A caricature in Norway's largest daily Verdens Gang shows Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, while shaving, looking in the mirror and seeing Hezbollah leader, Hasan Nasrallah.  Olmert's feet are those of an animal.



In 1875, only 25 Jews had permanent residence in the country. In June 1892, the first Jewish community was established Oslo. The community was first given the name 'Det Jødiske Samfund i Christiania' ('The Jewish Community in Christiania'), but a year later this was changed to 'Det Mosaiske Trossamfund' ('The Mosaic Community').  By 1910, there were about 1,000 Jews in Norway. Though the minority was small and widely-dispersed, several stereotypes of Jews gained currency in the Norwegian press and popular literature in the early 20th century.





Opposition to antisemitic prejudice ran across party lines.  CJ Hambro, Sverre Støstad, and Fridtjof Nansen held a principled line against it. Primarily, the newspapers Aftenposten and Nationen, as well as Tidens Tegn served as platforms for anti-Jewish sentiments, also on the editorial pages.  Sadly, these journals continue their anti-Semitism and should be shamed by the global journalism community. Of course, that would require said community to have principles and honour.  If only Rupert Murdoch would purchase Aftenposten and Nationen, then the MSM would sharpen its fangs.


* I do not use the words 'Islamist" or "Islamism" interchangeably with Islam or Muslims.







28 August 2011

Islamic Naziism





"Arabs! Rise as one and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history and religion. This saves your honour." 

- Amin al-Husseini, Berlin, 1 March 1944

Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini

During World War II, Arab Nazi parties were founded throughout the Middle East. The most influential one was "Young Egypt" which was established in 1933. Young Egypt imitated the Nazi party in their ideology, slogans, processionals, and anti-Semitic actions. 


Amin al-Husseini at the creation of the Arab League in 1944


Amin al-Husseini is guest of honor as President of World Islamic Congress, Karachi, Pakistan, 1951

When the war was over, a member of Young Egypt named Gamal Abdul Nasser led the coup in 1952 that overthrew the Egyptian government. He made Egypt a safe haven for Nazi war criminals and, in 1964, he established the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO).