Turkish newspaper identifies US general behind failed military coup

Johannes Stern

Two weeks after the abortive military coup to overthrow and kill elected Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan more information is coming to light about the heavy US involvement in the bloody events that led to the bombardment of the Turkish parliament and the deaths of 246 Turkish citizens.

In an article titled “US commander Campbell: The man behind the failed coup in Turkey,” the conservative Turkish newspaper Yeni Safak claims that General John F. Campbell “was one of the top figures who organized and managed the soldiers behind the failed coup attempt in Turkey.” According to the paper, the information has been revealed by sources close to the ongoing legal processing of pro-coup detainees.

Campbell is a retired US general and has some experience with bloody military interventions and overseeing war crimes. He was the commander of the Resolute Support Mission and United States Forces in Afghanistan between August 2014 and May 2016. One of the major US crimes perpetrated in this period was the horrific attack on a hospital in Kunduz last October that slaughtered dozens of innocent patients and medical staff.

According to Yeni Safak “ongoing investigation unveiled” that Campbell, prior to the putsch attempt, had secretly traveled at least twice to Turkey since May. Military sources also reported that the US general held a series of top secret meetings at the Erzurum military base and at Incirlik Air Base. Campbell was the man, “who directed the process of trending/blacklisting the military officers in the base.”

The Turkish newspaper describes a huge Pentagon/CIA-sponsored operation spanning several months and involving billions of dollars to prepare the coup against Erdogan. According to the newspaper, Campbell managed more than $2 billion in transactions via the UBA Bank in Nigeria and used CIA links to distribute money among the pro-coup military personnel in Turkey.

Based on its sources, it reports that “an 80-person special team of the CIA” was working with pro-coup elements within the Turkish military close to US-based preacher Fethullah Gülen. The cleric is widely believed to be a CIA asset and Erdogan himself has accused his former ally and now archenemy Gülen of having masterminded the coup.

According to Yeni Safak, pro-Gülen officers at Incirlik Air Base established an investigation desk as early as 2015. They began to categorize all soldiers under their command in three groups: opponents, neutrals and supporters. Soldiers who were considered to be opposed to the establishment of a military junta were barred from “financial support.” Members of the army categorized as “those who will move with us,” were provided with the biggest amount of money.

The newspaper claims that money transactions began in March 2015 through a commissioned “courier.”

A bag with a large amount of money was found in the room of Brigadier General Mehmet Dişli, one of the top military officials arrested for their involvement in the coup attempt.

General Campbell angrily dismissed the allegations made by the Turkish paper. He told the Wall Street Journal that the story “doesn’t even warrant a response” and was “absolutely ridiculous.” President Barack Obama had already declared last week: “Any reports that we had any previous knowledge of a coup attempt, that there was any US involvement in it, that we were anything other than entirely supportive of Turkish democracy are completely false, unequivocally false.”

It is not possible to judge whether all the details in Yeni Safak’s report are true or not. But far from being “ridiculous” or “completely false,” the Pentagon and the CIA unquestionably had a major hand in the coup attempt.

It has already been fairly well established that Incirlik Air Base—which hosts about 5,000 US airmen, stores the largest stockpile of US nuclear weapons in Europe and serves as the base for the US-led bombing campaign against Syria and Iraq—was at the center of the putsch.

During the coup attempt Turkish fighter jets operated by plotters flew in and out of Incirlik under the eyes of the US military. After it became clear that the putsch would fail, the base commander General Bekir Ercan Van asked the US for asylum. Obviously abandoned by his backers in Washington, he and other pro-coup soldiers at the base have been arrested.

Shortly after the aborted coup, Turkish Labor Minister Suleyman Soylu, speaking on the broadcaster Haberturk, directly charged that “the United States is behind the coup.”

As matter of fact, Washington has a long and bloody history of supporting military coups in Turkey in order to preserve American geostrategic interests. In 1960 the US supported the coup against then Prime Minister Adnan Menderes after he turned to Moscow for economic aid. The putsch in 1980 was launched just hours after Turkey’s air force chief came back from an official trip to Washington. The US State Department publicly announced the coup before anyone in the Turkish government.

The initial response of the US government to the latest coup attempt was highly suspicious. When the coup was still unfolding US Secretary of State John Kerry called in very general terms for “stability and continuity within Turkey.” As in Egypt, where the US backed the 2013 military coup against Islamist president Mohamed Mursi, Washington made no call to defend the democratically elected president and issued no expression of concern for his personal safety or even survival.

The fact that the Obama administration actually wanted the coup to succeed and Erdogan dead rather than alive is most clearly expressed in the response of the American media. Immediately after it became obvious that the putsch had failed, leading newspapers began a concerted propaganda campaign denouncing Erdogan and his government. To cite only a few examples: The Economist accused the Turkish president of “staging his own coup against Turkish pluralism”; The Hill complained that the “failed Turkish coup helps Putin”; and the New York Times opened its editorial pages for Gülen.

As more evidence of US involvement in the coup emerges, the relationship between Ankara and Washington is becoming increasingly fraught. On Tuesday, the Turkish government issued another public call for the United States to immediately extradite Gülen. Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu declared in an article published by Al-Jazeera that “Turkish people are appalled at the US’ insistence in harboring him” and warned that the extradition ruling “may shape the future relations” of the US and Turkey. A survey conducted by pollster Andy-Ar showed on Tuesday that nearly two-thirds of the country believes that the US-protected cleric orchestrated the coup.

University of Newcastle Postgraduate Research Scholarships

University of Newcastle
Masters/PhD Degree

Deadline: 15 Sep 2016 (annual)
Study in: Australia
Course starts 2016/2017

Brief description:

Prospective and current research students are eligible to apply for University and Commonwealth Government scholarships, which are awarded during two rounds to domestic and international applicants.

Host Institution(s):

University of Newcastle, Australia

Level/Field(s) of study:

Eligible Masters by Research or PhD programme offered at University of Newcastle.

Number of  Scholarships:

Not specified.

Target group:

Domestic and international students

Scholarship value/inclusions/duration:

A scholarship funded by the University of Newcastle or the Commonwealth Government provides an annual living allowance $26, 288 per annum (2016 rate – indexed annually). The scholarship may also include:

• • a relocation allowance (up to $2,020)
• • a thesis allowance (up to $500)
• • a full tuition fee scholarship (international students)
• • overseas student health cover (OSHC) (international students)

PhD scholarships are for three years and Masters scholarships are for two years, less any tenure already completed towards a research degree.

Eligibility:

Eligibility criteria based on Commonwealth Government Scholarship Guidelines and candidates must:

• • satisfy the English proficiency requirement (IELTS of at least 6.5)
• • have a current offer of admission into a research higher degree.
• • have completed at least four years of undergraduate study and have attained Honours Class 1 or equivalent and a high grade point average (GPA)
• • be no more than two full-time equivalent years into their PhD (or one year for Masters) at the latest outcome date for the round in which they are applying.

Successful international scholarship candidates usually also have:

• • A master degree with strong research component
• • International peer reviewed research publication or research experience

Application instructions:

New applicants can apply for a scholarship at the same time as applying for admission. The next deadline for scholarship applications is 15 September 2016.

It is important to visit the official website (link found below) for detailed information on how to apply for this scholarship.

Website:

Official Scholarship Website: http://www.newcastle.edu.au/research-and-innovation/graduate-research/phd-and-research-degrees/scholarships#UON

NITDA 2016/2017 Scholarship Scheme

The National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA), with its mandate of transforming Nigeria into an IT driven economy for global competitiveness and the dire need to bridge the digital divide, has since 2010 established a Scholarship Scheme for Masters (MSc) and Doctorate (PhD) Degrees in relevant areas of Information Technology (IT) obtainable in Nigerian (Government and Private) Universities.

NOTE: This scholarship scheme only applies to candidates who are willing to study in any of the higher institutions either federal, state or private universities in Nigeria i.e. this scholarship scheme does not apply to foreign universities.

Criteria:

The scholarship award is strictly based on merit and is evenly distributed between the six geo-political zones for PhD and the 36 States and FCT for MSc.

Duration:

The Masters programme will run for one year and the Doctorate programme is expected to run for three years.

Eligibility (Nigerians):

PhD: Only University Lecturers with MSc in any Information Technology related field are eligible to apply for sponsorship.

MSc: Holders of First Class or Second Class (Upper) Honours Bachelor's degree, (BSc) in Information Technology related field.

The registration period is six (6) weeks from the date of the Newspaper publication.

A comprehensive Aptitude Test will be conducted to determine successful candidates for the Award. Only candidates who are found eligible will be Shortlisted.

Apply

For more information:

NITDA

Interns Are Exploited and Discriminated Against

David Macaray

Imagine if you ran a company or business, and had the choice of utilizing one of two scenarios in hiring employees. In Scenario A, you take the traditional route. You sift through a pile of worthy job applications, pick the most impressive candidate, hire that candidate, pay him or her an appropriate “entry level” wage, train them, mentor them and, hopefully, come to view them as a valuable addition to the team. That’s Scenario A.

Scenario B is non-traditional. Instead of “hiring” a new employee, you “hire” an intern, someone who so desperately wants to work for your company that they are willing to waive an actual starting salary, forego a clearly defined position on the progression ladder, and relinquish access to many of the rights and privileges afforded an authentic “employee” under state and federal labor law—all in the name of being given the opportunity to “learn the business from the bottom up.” Think Hollywood here.

Internships, which used to be fairly rare, are now commonplace, especially in fields considered so glamorous and/or highly lucrative that recent college graduates will do practically anything to land a job in one. Among those fields are: women’s fashion, big-time book and magazine publishing, high finance, and entertainment (music, television, movies). Think Hollywood.

In Scenario B, even though these interns are paid a pittance (sometimes not even that….sometimes not even so much as a nickel), they will pretty much do anything asked of them. This includes tasks that are more or less germane to their eventual hoped-for career (and are clearly delineated in Scenario A’s job description), but also lots of extraneous stuff, mindless stuff—like fetching coffee, replenishing the stock room, and running personal errands for the bosses.

Because an intern, unlike a traditional “new hire,” has no defined probationary period and no traditional schedule of regular performance reviews that result in traditional pay raises and increased seniority, he or she remains in the decidedly non-traditional state of “grateful servitude.”

Basically, an intern will agree to almost any form of economic subjugation in order to get their foot in the door, and alas, opportunistic employers (think Hollywood) will do almost anything to exploit and perpetuate that arrangement.

But there’s another negative aspect to this. We need to consider the profile of the “typical” intern. Would he or she be a recent Latino or African-American college graduate who had to work a series of part-time jobs and take on a burdensome student loan in order to pay for college—perhaps as the first person in their family’s history to ever receive a bachelor’s degree—or would it be a young Anglo-Saxon whose parents are affluent enough to underwrite his education?

In other words, who would be more apt to jump at the chance of working as an unpaid intern after finally earning a college degree? The relatively poor minority graduate who is already deep in a financial hole—who needs to find a paying job, and needs to find one quick?

Or the “rich” white kid who is in no particular hurry to go out in the world and start earning money—not when he can land a job in a glamour industry simply by agreeing to work there for free, for as long as it takes? Once can argue that this whole “internship” arrangement is rigged to help the privileged.

Make America Great Again?

Guy Nave

At the 2016 Republican National Convention, Donald Trump and the Republican National delegates engaged in an uncritical romanticizing of America’s past. Every evening there was a theme that pined for the “good ole days.” The convention started with “Make America Safe Again,” followed by “Make America Work Again,” “Make America First Again,” and “Make America One Again.” Each theme served the campaign’s larger theme of “Make America Great Again.”

While virtually every speaker declared that Trump would unify America by returning America to a prior golden age of greatness, no one identified when this golden age existed. When exactly in American history was America “safe” or “one”? When exactly was America “great”?

While there is nothing wrong with the desire to make America great, such a state of being lies in America’s future, not America’s past. Since the first day Europeans landed on the shores of this country, America has never been “one,” “safe,” or “great.”

The decimation, colonization, genocide, and forced relocation to reservations of millions of this country’s indigenous people attests to the fact that America has never been “safe” for Native Americans.

Since the first enslaved Africans were brought to this country, America has never been “one.” America has always been a divided nation, and that division has never been merely a division among Americans with differing views. Instead, the division has always been a division between the nation itself and segments of the American population.

The 1857 Dred Scott v. Sanford Supreme Court case clearly articulated the nation’s position regarding black people. The court declared that the framers of the Constitution believed blacks “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect…”

It is this belief that blacks (and “non-Americans”) have no rights that white Americans are bound to respect that has divided this nation since its inception.

While reactions to the Dred Scott decision may have helped precipitate the Civil War, the war ended slavery in name only. Black servitude continued in the form of sharecropping and peonage and as a result of vagrancy laws. The Civil War did not unite a divided America; instead it divided the nation even further and ushered in a new era of emancipation without equality.

The so-called “Reconstruction” period that followed marked the beginning of white resistance to government efforts to “make America one.”

In 1896, the Supreme Court again articulated the nation’s view regarding black people. In Plessy v. Ferguson, the Court put its stamp of approval not only on legalized discrimination and inequality, but also on the notion of white superiority and black inferiority.

In order to enforce and maintain systems of institutional discrimination and inequality—as well as notions of white superiority and black inferiority—violence against black people became a way of life.

Nothing exemplified this violence more graphically than what W. E. B. Du Bois identified as “the lynching industry,” which in addition to hangings included beatings, shootings, dragging, torture, burning, mutilation, and the destruction of entire communities.

Despite the horrific violence against blacks associated with the lynching industry and the tireless work of anti-lynching advocates—which included nearly 200 attempts from the 1920s to the 1950s to pass anti-lynching legislation as well as petitions to Congress by seven U.S. presidents to pass such legislation—Congress never passed an anti-lynching bill.

The Civil Rights period represented a period of fervent opposition to the Jim Crow system of legalized local, state, and national discrimination against blacks that contributed to a starkly unequal world of discrimination, disenfranchisement, segregation, and racialized violence.

One of the most significant acts of violence, which in many ways served as an impetus for the Civil Rights Movement itself (similar to how the Trayvon Martin murder served as an impetus for the Black Lives Matter movement), was the brutal 1955 torture and murder of 14-year-old Emmet Till.

Much of the violence during the Civil Rights period was initiated, perpetuated, and sustained by politicians and law enforcement. In his 1963 inaugural speech as governor of Alabama, George Wallace declared, “In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.” Wallace’s assertion once again illustrated the ideology of white (American) superiority and the idea that no black person (or non-American) has any rights that white Americans are bound to respect.

History clearly demonstrates that there was no period within the first 200 years of America’s existence when America was “one,” “safe,” or “great.” Does this mean the “golden age” of American greatness occurred sometime during the past fifty years?

The post-Civil Rights era marks a period of covert rather than overt racism that has sought to systematically dismantle and circumvent many of the legislative achievements of the Civil Rights era. Just as the post-Civil War period technically ended slavery without ensuring equality, the post-Civil Rights period technically ended government-mandated segregation and many forms of racial discrimination without ensuring equality.

What both of these periods illustrate is that it is impossible to ensure equality when notions of white (American) superiority still persist. While legislation can effectively reduce some forms of racism associated with blatant and overt acts of discrimination, legislation cannot eliminate notions of white superiority that have buttressed hundreds of years of racialized violence and division in America.

Over the course of the past fifty years, significant racial disparities have been identified in virtually every area of American life. How does one explain these disparities? Is it possible that notions of white superiority and black inferiority are part of the cause?

One of the greatest areas of racial disparity in America exits in the American criminal justice system. Nationally, blacks are imprisoned at more than five times the rate of whites. Blacks serve longer prison sentences and have higher arrest and conviction rates than whites, and—as American history has demonstrated (especially recent history)—as a percentage of the American population blacks are more often the victims of excessive police force. Black interaction with law enforcement has always carried with it risks of excessive police force against blacks.

During Donald Trump’s acceptance speech, he talked about making America great “again” by restoring “law and order” and eliminating violence in the streets of America—especially violence against police officers. Trump’s fear mongering rhetoric about immigrants and Black Lives Matter (BLM) supporters sought to link violence and chaos in America to non-white perpetrators.

Trump made no reference or allusion to the facts that in America, police officers are most often killed by white men or that women are more often raped by white men than by Mexican immigrants or that white men are responsible for a vast majority of violent crimes in America, especially homicide against white Americans and mass shootings (which are on the rise in America).

Furthermore, while mentioning police repeatedly in his speech, Trump said nothing about all of the police murders of unarmed black men, women, and children in the past few years or about the long and ugly history of racist policing in America—all factors that contribute to America not being safe.

While Trump’s RNC acceptance speech has been compared to Richard Nixon’s 1968 RNC acceptance speech, the speech also resonated with a 2005 statement by former secretary of education, William Bennet, who stated, “If you wanted to reduce crime, you could—if that were your sole purpose—you could abort every black baby in this country and your crime rate would go down.”

While Trump said nothing about aborting black babies, a belief that lies at the heart of Bennet’s assertion, at the heart of the racial disparities within the criminal justice system in America, and at the heart of Donald Trump’s promise to “Make America Great Again” through the restoration of “law and order” is belief in the notion of white superiority and black inferiority that associates criminality with black (and brown) people.

The myth of white superiority and black inferiority has pervaded the American justice system through discretionary acts, decisions, and comments by legislators, law enforcement officials, prosecutors, witnesses, jurors, and judges ever since America’s legalization of slavery.

During the Republican Convention itself, U.S. Representative Steve King articulated white supremacy on national television. Responding to Charlie Pierce on an MSNBC panel conversation, King said, “This whole ‘white people’ business though does get a little tired, Charlie. I mean, I’d ask you to go back through history and figure out where are these contributions that have been made by these other categories of people that you’re talking about. Where did any other subgroup of people contribute more to civilization?” [N.b.: The “other categories people” the panelists had just been talking about were black Americans and Mexicans.]

It is this notion of white superiority, shared by many Americans, that maintains and perpetuates significant racial disparities in virtually every area of American life. It is also this belief in white superiority and black inferiority that keeps America from being “one” and from being “great.”

While ethnic and racialized violence has divided America since its founding, many Americans (especially black Americans) have been working relentlessly to make America “one” and to make America “great.”

As a result of nearly 250 years of tireless work by countless Americans to defeat slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, and racialized violence, America is greater today than it has ever been, and the key to making it a great nation is to push forward to make it even greater.

The only way America will ever be “one” and will ever be “great” is to acknowledge that it has never been one and has never been “great.” There have been great moments in American history, but great moments do not make a great nation. To suggest that there is some “great” golden age in America’s past to which we need to return and emulate is an egregious disrespect to all those who have lived and who continue to live under the daily violence of American oppression.

The solution for “fixing” all that divides America is not to return to some golden age in America’s past but to work today to finally “Make America Great” (not merely greater) for all people.

The Present Dire State Of Bangladesh

Habibul Islam

It was a classic instance of bolting the barn door after the horse had made its getaway… But wait, let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Let’s begin at the beginning.

Without any sliver of doubt it can be unequivocally declared that almost the entire fault for the enhanced mayhem—with its concomitant loss of precious lives—in Bangladesh should justifiably be laid at the door of the Awami League administration, regardless of whatever fiction government honchos might regurgitate.

After the clockwork-like murders began in that country a couple of years back administration leaders, with the prime minister specifically fulfilling the role of drum majorette, determined to cover their heads in the sand, as the whole world knows by now. In simple terms, they refused to see the elephant in the room. But they didn’t restrict themselves only to extreme myopia. They behaved like obsessed fiends at a frenetic pace.

The government leadership’s over-the-top-obsession with decimating the political opposition in spite of no shred of evidence pointing to its culpability resulted, partly, from the Awami League’s reported desire to celebrate the one hundredth birthday of the present prime minister’s father while being in office. Obviously, marking that event when in office would provide the celebrations with the extra pizzazz of officialdom and the necessary state imprimatur.

Hence till only the other day the top leaders persevered in insisting, in the face of contrary facts, that the BNP with the support of Jamaat was responsible for all the deaths that were occurring in the previous years. Unfortunately and tragically, they persisted with this expedient confection essentially till the multiple deaths in the café in Gulshan—and in their confused state have now reverted to the same declarations while also stating that there indeed are terrorists in Bangladesh.

That horrendous event at the café opened an entire other can of whoopass and clearly exposed the dangerous inadequacies and sloppiness that the administration was hiding all this time—aside from the penchant of detecting their political adversaries in every moving shadow. All along suggestions, support and assistance offered by other entities and nations (with the exception of India; and significantly right now the Dhaka government is apprehensively awaiting instructions from New Delhi) were viewed with extraordinary suspicion and, naturally, ignored.

However, finally when even neighbor and mentor, worried at the spillover effects, appeared to side with the appeals to take the incidents for what they were did the Bangladesh government reluctantly agree to move to deter these murderous actions of the deviants. But because of the earlier continual failure of the entire security apparatus, when the administration did decide to act against the extremists, they did so in the only way they know how: by going overboard especially due lack of training, knowledge and most importantly an aversion to think rationally.

Modus vivendi: Aside from the militants the Awami League government has more than one factor to fret over even though, evidently, administration leaders aren’t still aware of the serious defects in the system which ultimately can result in expensive errors. For one thing, members of the so-called Cabinet and other ruling party potentates have more than adequately shown themselves to be ill-informed people  whose primary purpose is to ensure keeping the prime minister in good humor so that they may hold on to their coveted positions at the pleasure of their leader. Hence they aren’t the kind of persons who can be of any positive assistance to any leadership and particularly not in a crisis.

Bottom line: They don’t know whether they’re coming or going. And they prove it every day.

Modus operandi: Secondly, let’s take a closer look at the so-called law enforcement machinery. Even a perfunctory scrutiny immediately displays the obvious lack of training, inefficiency, incompetence and an absence of honest intention. A mélange like this, anywhere in the world, would definitely lead to a most poisonous brew. Then add to this venomous blend the only on-the-job training they ever are likely to receive, that of extorting money from the people on a plethora of excuses. One recent example of their sheer lack of ability: They killed one of hostages when they raided the Dhaka restaurant but initially tried to pass it off as the death of one more terrorist.

Bottom line: It makes little sense to believe anything they claim. And they prove it every day.

[Bangladesh’s history—taking the liberty of an obiter dictum—despite an abundance of misfortunes, is rich in irony. Hence, in the present context it needs to be underlined that the out-of-control Rapid (or should it be Rabid?) Action Battalion, now the exasperation-inducing force especially for the BNP, was in fact organized and sanctified by the self-same Bangladesh Nationalist Party when they had the levers of state power in their grasp.]

The consequence of all these elements coming together, i.e. the administration’s self-deceiving nonchalance in the first couple years of machete killings, the conflicting public statements by government leaders often even contradicting their own previous pronouncements, and finally the failure of the law enforcement entities mainly due their utter incompetence, finally brought about the massacre at the café in the Bangladesh capital. One may ask what about intelligence reports since that area of the city was supposed to be more secure than others being in the purported diplomatic zone? Apparently, but not surprisingly, intelligence (as information) and an absence of intelligence (as intellect) canceled each other out.

Despite the obvious inability of the administration and its entire machinery to comprehend, firstly, and secondly to have any clear notions of how to move forward to prepare for bloody horrible terror acts, ruling party leaders as well as law enforcement officials—who have consistently exhibited a predilection toward covering up their ineffectiveness while battening themselves on the perks of their offices—have yet to demonstrate any signs that they’re willing to amend their cavalier ways even if prized human lives are at risk. Ham-handed methods are all they’re aware of; and those are the ones they’ve begun to utilize.

Against this terrifying backdrop—which also includes the robust and comprehensive neutering of the media with yet more strictures in the works—the government in Dhaka is unable to curb its wanton urge to politicize everything in sight—including similar efforts for the armed forces—for the sake of its perpetuation in power simultaneously viewing with suspicion all those who offer to assist them (partially also because that would expose the incapability of the state institutions) while being unable to contemplate that the result of this selfish and self-centered policy can very well beget yet more tragedies.

As a footnote it may be added that the pronounced alignment of New Delhi with an incompetent proto-fascist kleptocracy cannot be in the medium- or long-term interest of India. Propping up an unpopular government at any cost, as was done in the inaugural years of Bangladesh’s independence too, cannot by any measure prove helpful to the neighbor’s objectives except to cast it as equally unpopular and brutish in the eyes of the people. The Indian ruling elite, in its wisdom, has seemingly concluded that short-term gains based on snug relations only with one political party while totally ignoring the larger interests of the Bangladeshi nation is the way to go.

Why “Bad Cops” Are Not The Real Issue

Rebecca Centeno

I’m hoping these comments will bring some analysis to 5 seemingly innocuous but misguided words: “Not all cops are bad” and “good cops versus bad cops”. If you’re in the company of someone who says this or posts this on social media, and if you have seen and heard this as much as I have lately, then perhaps it’s time to deconstruct these phrases and start calling them out.

I was in Texas during the murders of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile. And I watched the live news right after the Dallas shootings. I’ve talked with family and friends here, where I grew up, a Xicana outside of San Antonio in a small country town called Bulverde. The responses have shocked me. And it makes me wonder why so many, even people who are outraged at police brutality and police killings, are saying “Not all cops are bad”, and how the “bad cops are making a bad name for the good cops”, these are the “bad apples”, etc. This is only meant to provide some context as to why this phrase and phrases like “bad cops” are not helpful but incredibly detrimental to the conversation.

First, just on a psychological level, it feels dismissive. Black and Brown people are watching their loved ones get killed on camera, on social media, without justice by police almost daily. These comments are simply not constructive or helpful to the deeper questions that we need to be asking now. Who hires the police? Who absolves them? For what reason?

Saying “not all cops are bad” is like saying “not all soldiers are bad”. It’s not that the statement is or isn’t true, it simply does not matter. It doesn’t matter if your brother, your father, your cousin, best friend, aunt or uncle is a cop, and you grew up with them and know them, and maybe they’re even a Person of Color.IT DOESN’T MATTER. And the reason it doesn’t matter is because it doesn’t contextualize the situation and actually undermines any effort to have a deeper understanding of the issues being faced by People of Color, poor people and marginalized people on a day-to-day basis.

In 2010, Wikileaks released the Collateral Murder video, which showed footage from a US Apache helicopter in 2007 killing civilians, a war crime, in a public square in Baghdad. People were outraged. In 2004, images of torture and the raping of young boys in front of their mothers was released from Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and photos showed soldiers posing next to bodies being tortured, and other times deceased, giving a “thumbs up”. Did anyone respond, “Not all soldiers are bad”? No! Because it didn’t matter.

The cops of the world, our military, police other nations in the name of “Freedom”. But “freedom” is actually just a nice word to disguise words like “capitalism” and “imperialism”. The U.S. invades countries and engages in wars, killing civilians, dismissed as collateral damage, for political and monetary vested interests.

But the situation within the U.S. is not much different. We understand that “War is BAD” and “Imperialism is BAD”. The police, as well as the soldiers, are enforcers of a bigger and much more insidious beast.

Our nation was founded on the murder of millions of Indigenous people, and wealth was created by African slave labor for a white, patriarchal ruling class. Understanding the origins of the police is a start. Modern-day police departments stemmed from slave patrols. And the whole purpose of “policing” was, and is still, meant to protect some people, but not all people. In the 1800s slave owners, businessmen, bankers and emerging industrialists and their growing wealth needed to be protected. The police were created to serve and protect them, the propertied elites and their wealth, not POC, not poor people, not marginalized people.

The conditions have changed, but have they changed so much? We still enslave people, through prison labor and through our borders, which mean that we can pay people pennies on the dollar for what they would normally get paid.

The definition of “police” is literally to “control” a population and enforce government rule and order. The police “serve and protect” the government. They are government forces, and they serve and protect those forces whose interests governments primarily serve, not you.

It’s not about the individual cop (or soldier). Yes, some people are brutal and cruel. It’s about the mission police forces and the military are given. It’s about the absolution they are given for actions carried out to accomplish the mission. The phrases “good cop vs bad cop” or “not all cops are bad” hides this fundamental reality. History provides some understanding. But People of Color in the U.S. have an intense, personal experience of this reality every day of their lives. So, in response to amply documented incidences of violent police behavior, to say “not all cops are bad”, is greatly upsetting to POC and is counter-productive to the deeper conversations that are necessary now.

The fact is, for reasons that need to be explored more deeply, white people don’t have the same experience with the police forces as Black and Brown people in the U.S. Every time a Black or Brown person is killed by the police and these videos circulate on social media, Black and Brown people think of their family members, their loved ones. It can be traumatizing and seriously emotional. Every 28 hours, a Black person is killed by police, security guard or a vigilante.

Understand that Black and Brown people are policed and treated differently than most white people. Understand what “white privilege” means, and don’t be ashamed if you are white, but be aware. Understand that comments like “All Lives Matter”, “Blue Lives Matter”, and “Not all cops are bad”, are actually reinforcing racial divides and can be interpreted as racist rhetoric, even if they aren’t intended to be. Understand that for every “pro-police” post that us made, it undermines the Black and Brown community and fuels the War on Black people.

So the next time someone says, “my friend/family member is a cop, and not all cops are bad”, I think it is appropriate to say, “Great, do they and you speak out against the extrajudicial killings by police of Black and Brown folks?” Because if there’s any hesitation, or defensiveness, then there needs to be some personal, internal investigation as to why that is.

Black and Brown people, poor people, the LGBTQ community, marginalized people, need love and support now. But not in the form of BBQs and “Free Hugs” with cops, who will likely continue to surveil and brutalize communities after these photo ops. What people are asking for is real systemic change. What people want immediately is justice and for the police to be held accountable for their actions.

Abolition of the police, which deserves much deeper analysis than given here, will not and cannot happen in the current capitalist state. If we want to imagine a world without a police state, a world where police do not play the role of the oppressor, we need to organize and build a different system of production and social relationships that do not require it. That is a huge challenge but one that is worth the efforts of organizing and advocacy.

The Psychology Of Ideology And Religion

Robert J. Burrowes

Two of the drivers of world affairs that manifest in the daily decisions that affect our lives are ideology and religion.

Ideology is the term widely used to describe the underlying set of values, myths, ideas, attitudes, beliefs and doctrine that shape the behavioral approach to political, economic, social, cultural and/or ecological activities of an individual or organization. This organization might be a political party, government, multinational corporation, terrorist group, non-government organization, community or activist group.

Religion usually describes the belief in a superhuman controlling power involving a God or gods; it entails a system of faith and worship as well as, like ideology, an underlying set of values, myths, ideas, attitudes, beliefs and doctrine that shape the behavioral approach to political, economic, social, cultural and/or ecological activities of an individual or organization.

At the macro level, there are worldwide or regional ideologies such as capitalism, fascism, conservatism, communism, socialism, feminism, pacifism and environmentalism as well as religions including Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam and Judaism. There are also variations of these major ideologies and religions. But even at the micro level, the local service club, neighborhood charity and sporting club operates in accordance with an ideology or religion that is shared by its members too.

Frequently, a shared ideology or religion is a functional way for like-minded people to find each other and to work together to achieve a shared aim. When this helps to achieve a desirable social outcome, the shared ideology or religion has a valuable purpose.

Unfortunately, however, often enough the shared ideology or religion has a dysfunctional basis and the outcome is detrimental both individually and socially with the (violent) consequences sometimes reverberating throughout a national or even global society. This is why it is useful to understand the psychology of ideology and religion.

When a child is very young, they start to learn from the people around them. Predominantly, they learn by being participants, one way or another, in the events in which they are involved. That is, when their parents, other significant adults (such as relatives, school teachers and religious figures) or an older sibling involve the child in an activity, the child is taught and copies the mental responses and behaviours of those around them. This is what is called ‘socialization’.

However, it is important to identify the ideological/religious elements in this process too. First, there are ideological and religious imperatives around raising children. These imperatives are sometimes deliberately shaped by an ideology or a religion but, often enough, they are simply copied on the advice of, or by observing the behavior of, other nearby adults.

Second, and more importantly however, the child unconsciously acquires a set of values, myths, ideas, attitudes, beliefs and doctrine (in relation to social, cultural, political, economic, religious, sporting and ecological issues) that are approved by the adults in the child’s life.

There is much that is functional about this process and, historically, it can explain a great deal about human behavior, including in particular cultural contexts.

But I would like to discuss the dysfunctional aspects of this process which arise from the way in which the child’s fear is deliberately played upon so that, consciously or unconsciously, they copy the ideology or religion of the adults around them. And the reason that the child does this is so that the ideology or religion that they acquire, together with the behavioral outcomes that arise from this, does not scare these same adults.

In an ideal world, a child would be socialized in an environment devoid of fear and in which they are loved, there is no ‘visible’, ‘invisible’ or ‘utterly invisible’ violence – see ‘Why Violence?’http://tinyurl.com/whyviolence – damaging them in any way, they have their needs met and they are utterly free to choose (and later change if they wish) the values, myths, ideas, attitudes, beliefs and doctrine by which they will live their life, preferably with the benefit of substantial aware listening from adults while they work this out for themselves. Needless to say, this never happens.

In fact, the typical child is endlessly terrorized into adopting some version of the individual ideologies and religions, which are sometimes bizarrely conflicting, of the people around them.

This means that a fixed set of values, myths, ideas, attitudes, beliefs and doctrine – including those in relation to violence – become fearfully and unconsciously embedded in the child’s mind and they cease to be values, myths, ideas, attitudes, beliefs and doctrine that are easily and consciously accessible for review and reconsideration in light of new information or evidence. Let me briefly illustrate this point.

For some people, it is easy to laugh at or be outraged by the absurd statements they hear uttered by a very conservative politician, especially if they display a pronounced bias against a particular racial or religious group or a class of people. But to a conservative, their ideology is imperative and it reflects a childhood of being terrorized into believing certain things. There is no conscious awareness of this unconscious terror and even if asked, they would readily proclaim that they are not terrified (because they have been terrorized into suppressing their awareness of this terror, which is why it is now unconscious to them).

Similarly, most socialists are very attached to the ideology that puts class (based on the production relations of capitalism) predominantly at the centre of their analysis, feminists usually believe that gender relations under patriarchy are the primary problem in society, many people who combat racism view white domination as the core issue in social oppression, and religious fundamentalists believe that they know the one truth to the exclusion of people of other faiths. Irrespective of the proclaimed original basis of the ideology or religion, often enough, at least some of its adherents also learn to believe that violence is the appropriate behavior for achieving some or all of their aims.

The issue in this context, however, is not whether any of these people is right or wrong but why they hold so tenaciously to a worldview that they do not willingly and fearlessly subject to ongoing scrutiny. And that is why the psychology of ideology and religion is so important.

If any person is willing to fearlessly and open-mindedly consider other worldviews and analyses of society’s social relationships and problems, as well as how to tackle these problems, then it is likely that their ideology or religion is one that has been genuinely and intelligently acquired of their own free will and their mind will be capable of analysis and reconsideration if compelling evidence of the merits of an alternative worldview or explanation is made available. They are also likely to be highly tolerant of other worldviews as some religions, for example, specifically teach.

But if someone, whatever their ideology or religion, is dogmatically insistent on their own worldview, then their fear of further analysis and reconsideration will be readily apparent and it is a straightforward conclusion that they were terrorized out of the capacity to think fearlessly for themselves when they were a child. They are also more likely to behave violently.

If you would like to read a detailed explanation of how a child is terrorized, to a greater or lesser extent, into unconsciously absorbing a version of the ideologies and/or religions of the adults around them, you can do so in ‘Why Violence?’ http://tinyurl.com/whyviolence and ‘Fearless Psychology and Fearful Psychology: Principles and Practice.’http://anitamckone.wordpress.com/articles-2/fearless-and-fearful-psychology/ These documents explain the visible, invisible and utterly invisible violence to which children are subjected throughout childhood and which few survive. Moreover, it is this adult violence against children that leads to all other manifestations of violence.

Now, you might well ask: Is this simply my ideology? Well perhaps it is. But five decades of research, which included substantial reading and thoughtful consideration of many ideologies and religions, led me to this conclusion. Nevertheless, I remain happy to review my beliefs in this matter if someone offers me compelling evidence in support of another explanation.

Even better, when I witness Christian parents raising children who have chosen to be Muslims and conservative parents raising children who have chosen to be anarchists and… I will have all of the evidence I need to know that I am wrong.

If you would like to work towards creating a world in which fear does not shape every single outcome of human endeavor, you might like to sign the online pledge of ‘The People’s Charter to Create a Nonviolent World’. http://thepeoplesnonviolencecharter.wordpress.com

In essence, most children are terrorized into believing what the adults around them want them to think. This is because most adults are far too (unconsciously) frightened to let children think for themselves and to then let them believe and behave as they choose.

Consequently, therefore, it is fear, often mediated through ideology and religion, that drives most human behavior.

Kuwait Experiences The Highest Temperature With World Under Heat Waves

Vivek Kumar Srivastava

The World Meteorological  Organization(WMO), a specialized UN agency  has decided to constitute a committee to know whether  Kuwait’s Mitrabah had experienced the hottest day with the temperature 54.0°C; the temperature is the highest for the eastern hemisphere. The WMD is itself worried and to know whether the data was accurate, a high level scientific committee with Kuwait and  WMO official investigations, is appointed which  ‘will consist of meteorologists and climatologists. They will examine the instrumentation used, the quality of observations, the microclimate of the location, the representativeness of the station to its surroundings and to its own record. The station is in a remote, sparsely populated area in the north-west of Kuwait.’

According  to the report ‘ Mitrabah reportedly saw a temperature of 54.0°C on 21 July and the city of Basra in Iraq recorded a temperature of 53.9°C (128°C) on Friday 22 July. Southern Morocco also saw temperatures of between 43°C and 47°C. The highest temperature for the Eastern hemisphere was reportedly set in July 1931 in Kebili, Tunisia, at 55.0°C.’

The highest temperature as per the organization was experienced in Death Valley almost one century ago ‘when the hottest temperature ever recorded was in Furnace Creek, Death Valley, California at 56.7°C on 10 July 1913.’

This is alarming that small state like Kuwait and adjoining countries have experienced so much of the devastating temperature. In fact the whole of the MENA (Middle East and North Africa) have experienced the heat waves in the recent time.

The spread of heat waves is not limited to the water deficient desert countries but is widely spreading in the world. Heat waves are being experienced as well in the North American countries including the USA. The report shows that ‘a widespread heat wave has affected the central and eastern United States of America, with temperatures of 95-100 °Fahrenheit (35-38°C), and heat index values to reach 110°F F (43°C), with some areas reaching 115 °F (46°C), according to the US National Weather Service. At the peak on Friday, July 22, almost 124 million people were under an Excessive Heat Warning, Excessive Heat Watch or Heat Advisory. Above average temperatures are forecast to continue along much of the eastern U.S. through mid-week. A unique feature of these heat waves is its very high overnight low temperatures, which offer little relief from the oppressive heat.’

India is not an exception where the high temperature is on increase. The climate change in the country is on rise. The high heating of the country is one major cause of the floods and the change in the behavior of the rivers. Several countries are in the process of setting the new high temperatures, a phenomenon which was not experienced previously. ‘A number of countries have seen new national temperature records – for instance India saw a new national temperature record of 51°C in Rajasthan in May.’

The  warnings are here, the report has warned that ‘the global land and ocean average temperature for January–June at 1.05°C (1.89°F) above the 20th century average, besting the previous record set in 2015 by 0.20°C (0.36°F), according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’ moreover ‘from January to June, January–June 2016 was characterized by warmer to much-warmer-than-average conditions engulfing most of the world’s land and ocean surfaces. Record warmth was widespread across Alaska, western Canada, southern Mexico, northern South America, central Africa, Indonesia, northern and eastern Australia, North Indian Ocean, and across parts of north-central Russia, western Asia, central and eastern tropical Pacific Ocean, the southwestern Pacific Ocean, and the northwestern Atlantic Ocean.’

The common inferences are that the world is under the coverage of the heat waves, no area of the world is beyond the adverse impact of the heat waves which now encompass the Arctic region to the tropical regions, seas are under the impact of the heat waves which means the climate pattern are going to be affected soon enough as the IOD (Indian Ocean Dipole) may be altered or El Nino like effects may be on increase leading to deficient monsoon.

The primitive environment was reducing with high temperature. As the evolutionary biologists suggest that the primitive environment was with very high temperature and there was no possibility of the water in any reservoir due to the continuous evaporation due to high temperature; when the temperature reduced then sea water started to appear and primordial life originated. Self replicating small particle like virus appeared followed by the prokaryotic life and finally the eukaryotic Oxygen evolving life forms appeared, the environment turned to oxidizing with sea water and continuous rainfall but all this happened when temperature was lowered.

What is happening now: the eastern hemisphere is recording the highest temperature, the whole world is under intense heat waves and even the permafrost of the Arctic Ocean is now melting with a possibility that in next fifteen years it may turn into a  visible sea. The increase high temperature are result of the human follies and the main responsibility lies with the leaders of the world who are yet to take very strong decision on the issue of the global warming of which the heat waves are  considered as an important component. The Paris agreement is just a weak effort because still they are trapped in their national interests, for them the global environmental interests are still not their priority. The recording of the high temperatures in Kuwait should not be taken just an event but it should be taken as a warning to that entire world is under the process of reverting to the primitive age when high temperature evaporated every drop of the water. The global heat waves are a threat to global water. There is need to take strong actions on the world organization’s report by the global leaders but they are not so serious, it is open secret. The responsibility therefore lies on the citizens of the globe to press for their interests which are only one –the survival.