Pavlo Lysianskyi ist stellvertretender Vorsitzender der Unabhängigen Gewerkschaft der Bergarbeiter
der Ukraine (NPGU)
geopolitischen Frontstellung geführt: Wie sehr darf man Russland kritisieren, ohne auf die falsche Seite zu geraten – also ohne den westlichen Expansionsgelüsten in die Hände zu spielen? Dabei urteilen wir häufig hauptsächlich aus der Perspektive unserer eigenen Probleme. Die reale Situation der arbeitenden Menschen vor Ort und wie sie die Auseinandersetzungen mit der Regierung in Kiew und mit den verschiedenen politischen Kräften vor dem Hintergrund ihrer soziale Lage erleben, gerät dabei in den Hintergrund. Darüber erfahren wir fast nichts.
Diesem Umstand wollten wir abhelfen, indem wir die Unabhängige Bergarbeiter-Gewerkschaft der Ukraine zu einer Veranstaltungsrundreise nach Deutschland eingeladen haben.
Unser Gast, Pavlo Lysianskyi, ist selbst Bergmann und stellvertretender Vorsitzender der Unabhängigen Gewerkschaft der Bergarbeiter der Ukraine (NPGU).Diese Gewerkschaft hat sich nach der Auflösung der Sowjetunion von der Staatsgewerkschaft getrennt und organisiert heute 240.000 Mitglieder – hauptsächlich im Ostteil des Landes, denn dort sind die Zechen.
Wir möchten von Lysianskyi erfahren, wie die Lage der Bergleute ist, welche Forderungen sie haben und wie sie sich eine Lösung des Konflikts in der Ukraine vorstellen können.
Jakob-Moneta-Stiftung und Verein für solidarische Perspektiven - Unterstützt voninternationale sozialistische linke (isl) München, Münchner
Gewerkschaftslinke (MGL), Neue antikapitalistische Organisation (NaO) - Initiative München, Revolutionär Sozialistischer Bund/IV.Internationale (rsb) München, Sozialistisches Forum München (SFM), labournet und Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung Veranstalter: Jakob-Moneta-Stiftung und Verein für solidarische Perspektiven Ort: Initiativgruppe, Karlstr. 50 Rgb. -->
Im Jahr 2014 gab es bundesweit viele antimilitaristische Aktionen: Störungen von Aufritten der Bundeswehr auf Messen, in Schulen und Hochschulen, Sabotage und Markierung von militaristischer Infrastruktur, von zivil-militärischer Zusammenarbeit und Rüstungskonzernen. Außerdem gab es zahlreiche Kundgebungen und Demonstrationen in Solidarität mit dem emanzipatorischen Projekt in Rojava. Zum dritten Mal wurde im August das Gefechtsübungszentrum (GÜZ) bei Magdeburg geentert und Kriegslogistik sabotiert und markiert.
Der Videoclip versucht in chronologischer Reihenfolge schlaglichtartig auf antimilitaristische Ereignisse in Berlin und bundesweit zurückzublicken.
Für den 26.1. plant “Bagida” erneut einen Marsch in München. Deren Auftakt ist 18.30 Uhr am Goetheplatz, von wo aus es über die Lindwurmstraße zum Sendlinger Tor Platz gehen soll. (Die Route kann sich noch kurzfristig ändern, wir werden euch über mögliche Änderungen informieren.)Passendes Motto:
Pegida einfach mal den Marsch blasen
Wir rufen zu lauten und entschlossenen Protesten gegen Nazis, Rechtspopulist_innen und die rassistische Hetze auf: Nehmen wir “Bagida” schon am Goetheplatz in Empfang!
Over the past year, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has made a substantial shift in its communications strategy. For years, the group communicated through a methodical process that involved official statements issued through official websites, along with videos released by its media arm, al Malahem Media. Since early 2014, the group has deployed social media operatives on Twitter to spread its message and to engage with its followers and critics alike.
Under pressure from the U.S. government, Twitter regularly shuts down AQAP-affiliated accounts. AQAP, in turn, creates new ones—often just adjusting a twitter handle by one character. These accounts, of course, have no blue checkmarks to prove they are “validated” accounts, as many public figures and groups possess. Instead, AQAP has created its own system of verifying its Twitter accounts: publishing the handles through its official communication channels. For example, the group might draw up an online communique on an authoring and hosting site like JustPaste.it and include a list of Twitter handles underneath its various official pronouncements. This communique would then be posted on Jihadist web forums using accounts believed to be associated with AQAP. In other cases, AQAP might set up backup Twitter accounts and announce them through their current account before that account is shut down by Twitter.
“Whenever they get knocked down and create new [accounts], you know it’s them,” says Aaron Zelin, a specialist on jihadist movements at The Washington Institute. “Plus you can just tell from the quality and production value.”
It’s not as simple as a blue checkmark, but AQAP has proven pretty effective at maintaining its bizarro verification method.I’m a Senior al Qaeda Official, Ask Me Anything
Two months before the massacre at the offices of Charlie Hebdo in Paris, social media operatives working with AQAP hosted their own version of a Reddit-style AMA (Ask Me Anything) on Twitter. They encouraged potential jihadists, fans and followers of AQAP, as well as international journalists, to submit questions (through Twitter) that would then be put to Sheikh Nasser bin Ali al-Ansi, the senior AQAP official who later became the public face of the group’s claim of responsibility for the Paris attacks. AQAP’s social media team even set up hashtags in Arabic and English: #ask_sheikh_Aansi. After fielding hundreds of questions — there were also lots of angry people spamming and trolling the hashtag, denouncing AQAP — the group did a staggered release of four videos. The videos answered questions from journalists, the general Twitter public, and al Malahem.
“It highlights how they are trying to engage individuals and followers in a way they hadn’t done previously,” says Zelin. “Usually, in the past, things like that happened in private forums, but this is a more of an open system.”
In the final video, al-Ansi asserted that, in many cases, it is better for jihadists in Western countries to conduct attacks domestically, rather than travel to Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen or other war zones. That “shows that they are trying to be a bit selective in terms of having individuals come over to Yemen, almost having the cake and eating it too,” Zelin adds. If a plot happens that is inspired by AQAP, the group “wouldn’t necessarily have to put resources into it, but likely know the media would report it as AQAP, which could then help with recruitment and financing as well as prestige within the global community.”
When the final installment of the series was released earlier this week online, major television networks and other media outlets erroneously reported that al-Ansi was issuing a new threat after the Paris attacks when, in fact, the video was recorded prior to the massacre. Only one point from the video was reported in the media: that AQAP was calling on Muslims to conduct lone wolf terror attacks. But some of the other questions asked and answered provide key insights into the terrorist group’s current strategic thinking, particularly in light of recent events in Paris and elsewhere.The AQAP AMA
The Intercept translated the most recent video. Among the questions and answers were:
—Is it better to live under the rule of infidels or to emigrate? Do we have to leave [Western nations] or is it better to stay and to play an effective role [on behalf of the jihad]?
There is no doubt that leaving [a Western] county is better than living under the rules of the infidels. However, one important issue should be considered in that regard which is [the idea of] revenge. In other words, regarding the jihad of those individuals against the Western countries, where they reside: are they better able to do [a] revenge [attack] in one of the jihadi fronts? We might say: if he can work as an “individual jihadi” in Western countries [a lone wolf], in those countries who are fighting Islam, such as the United States, Great Britain, France, Canada, and other countries who are representing the leaders of infidelity in the war against Islam, and participating in this crusading campaign… If he can do this, it is better, and has greater [capabilities of] revenge.
—Why haven’t there been further AQAP attacks inside the US? Why don’t you move the war from Yemen to US soil?
Praise Allah, we have many good efforts outside Yemen, and our enemy knows that perfectly. He knows that so well that he closed more than 16 embassies around the world within recent years. We are preparing ourselves to fight them and we are planning to target them, and we are encouraging Muslims to do that as well. It is the duty of all Muslims, not only the duty of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. All the Islamic and Jihadi groups, who are able to attack them, should do their own part in targeting U.S. establishments and interests… By performing the Jihad and encouraging Muslims to do that, Allah will prevent the infidels’ harm. We are working on those great two approaches and Allah will show the results of those efforts hopefully. As for the future, we ask Allah to facilitate the good for us.
—Why did not we see any photos of Sheikh Anwar Al-Awlaki (the US-born radical cleric killed in a US drone strike in September 2011), after his death, rest in peace, after being killed?
They targeted the sheikh directly, so his body was torn into small pieces and those pieces were so small that they could not be photographed.
—Are the Abottobad documents (seized from Osama bin Laden’s compound) which were published by the Americans, authentic?
Yes, they are true. However, they are incomplete. We should consider that some of those letters are simply deliberations and discussions about some topics. The Americans did not publish the complete list of the letters. For example, in terms of speaking about the strategy in Yemen, there was discussions between Sheikh Osama and Dr. Ayman [al-Zawahiri, the current leader of al Qaeda globally], and [AQAP’s leadership, as well as Anwar al Awlaki]. The Americans only published the letter from Sheikh Osama, rest in peace, where he made a policy we were committed to during that period. That policy was talking about how we should work only domestically, seize the opportunity, build a strong Jihadi Group, and do outreach and target the American and Western establishments and interests. This letter is a little bit old and we had it in 2010, before the Arab revolution…. However, the “Abbottabad documents” is a school itself and we advise our brothers to read it to learn from what it has, in terms of knowledge and information. It has very important guidelines in many aspects: politics, Sharia law, mythology, the media, and all of them are important. They are advocacy messages, on a very high scale, and show how Sheikh Osama, and his brothers, were thinking. In addition, how they can measure things and how they can plan for the actions. It has some examples of the humanity and mercifulness of Sheikh Osama, rest in peace, and his compassion towards other Muslims in general as well as his long-term vision.
—Has Ayman Al-Zawahiri lost his ability to run al Qaeda’s (global) affiliates?
No, this is not true. Dr. Ayman is still guiding us. Even on small-scales issues. However sometimes there could be some misconnections in communication because of the evolving security circumstances
—What is the relationship between al Qaeda and the Islamic State (ISIS)?
Dr. Ayman [al Zawahiri] has talked about the nature of his relationship with [self-declared Caliph] al-Baghdadi in an audio address. This message is published online.
—Does AQAP believe that any Muslim who helps the Saudi monarchy is an apostate?
If the type of job he does to help the Saudi King is not a type of infidel act, we cannot say that he is an infidel. However, if that act was considered as an infidel act (such as aligning with the crusaders against the Muslims in their war, or committing a very clear infidel act); in this case, we start looking into his situation in general: whether the condition of calling him “an infidel” applies in his case.
—(“I want to apologize in advance for this question,” the anonymous facilitator asked al-Ansi on the video, before reading this question): Do you have any connections with Ali Abdullah Saleh [the former dictator of Yemen] as they said about you?”
This is not true and it is propaganda against us. It was said by the media to destroy the image of the Jihadists. We have talked about that in detail previously, so we will not discuss this.
There is no point listing any of the current AQAP-verified Twitter accounts. By the time this is published, they will likely have been suspended and resurrected at a different handle.
The post AQAP Develops Its Own Version of Reddit’s AMA and Twitter’s Blue Checkmark Verification appeared first on The Intercept.
A year and a half after NSA contractor Edward Snowden shocked the world with evidence of pervasive government surveillance, the NSA is still defending its actions, with an agency director saying the organization acted lawfully and with an eye toward preserving privacy and civil liberties.
The comments, from the Director of the NSA’s Commercial Solutions Center, John DeLong, came at a symposium on surveillance and digital privacy at which Snowden also appeared. The event, “Privacy in a Networked World,” was hosted by Harvard University’s Institute for Applied and Computational Science.
Although the top-billed participants could not actually share a stage for obvious reasons, Snowden appeared live via videolink and was interviewed by cryptography expert Bruce Schneier. Describing the evolution of the NSA from a “primarily defensive to primarily offensive” agency with regards to digital subterfuge and surveillance, Snowden alleged that NSA activities had become increasingly aggressive until the media scrutiny from the 2013 leaks ultimately forced the agency to focus on issues of transparency and accountability.
Speaking of the NSA’s own internal auditing processes, Snowden was dismissive, citing his experience that internal auditors were often “the friends and associates of those being audited,” as opposed to professional external auditors who could vet internal practices impartially.
He closed his remarks by saying that his former colleagues at NSA were not “villains”, but rather people who had been enabled to make dangerous decisions as a result of a culture of impunity which had purportedly developed at the agency.
DeLong, whose comments were scheduled after Snowden’s and who did not directly interact with him, is a longtime agency employee who was previously also the NSA’s Compliance Director. While he declined to directly comment on Snowden’s appearance at the event this year, he mentioned that he was “surprised” to see the agenda of the symposium this year but nonetheless welcomed the opportunity to dispel purported misconceptions about the agency.
Offering a spirited defense of the NSA and its surveillance activities, DeLong said it was “important not to think of the NSA as having done things which were unauthorized” and maintained that except in cases of inadvertent error, agency activities were at all times within the bounds of the law.
Adding that “protecting privacy and civil liberties is more art than science”, DeLong also made comments defending the NSA’s highly-controversial metadata collection program as being far more circumscribed and controlled than has been reported publicly. Though he was perhaps constrained for time, he did not elaborate or greatly substantiate upon this point.
A former Harvard alumni himself, DeLong also invited students in attendance to consider careers with the NSA in order to help implement the types of changes they may like to see at the organization.
Despite the potentially combustible combination of speakers, the event remained a relatively genteel and sober discussion of the NSA’s role in spying and conducting digital security in the 21st century.
The only testy moment came during the question period, when a student forced the issue with DeLong and asked him whether he thought the public debate triggered by Edward Snowden’s whistleblowing had social merit. As DeLong responded, “With regard to Snowden, all I will say is that we need to let the wheels of justice turn in his case.”
Photo: Jack Plunkett/Invision/AP
The post Even When Sharing Top Billing with Edward Snowden, the NSA Is Unrepentant appeared first on The Intercept.
After nearly 20 years as de facto ruler of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, King Abdullah ibn-Abdulaziz al-Saud died last night at the age of 90. Abdullah, who took power after his predecessor King Fahd suffered a stroke in 1995, ruled as absolute monarch of a country which protected American interests but also sowed strife and extremism throughout the Middle East and the world.
In a statement last night Senator John McCain eulogized Abdullah as “a vocal advocate for peace, speaking out against violence in the Middle East”. John Kerry described the late monarch as “a brave partner in fighting violent extremism” and “a proponent of peace”. Not to be outdone, Vice President Joe Biden released a statement mourning Abdullah and announced that he would be personally leading a presidential delegation to offer condolences on his passing.
It’s not often that the unelected leader of a country which publicly flogs dissidents and beheads people for sorcery wins such glowing praise from American officials. Even more perplexing, perhaps, have been the fawning obituaries in the mainstream press which have faithfully echoed this characterization of Abdullah as a benign and well-intentioned man of peace.
Tiptoeing around his brutal dictatorship, The Washington Post characterized Abdullah as a “wily king” while The New York Times inexplicably referred to him as “a force of moderation”, while also suggesting that evidence of his moderation included having had: “hundreds of militants arrested and some beheaded” (emphasis added).
While granting that Abdullah might be considered a relative moderate within the brazenly anachronistic House of Saud, the fact remains that he presided for two decades over a regime which engaged in wanton human rights abuses, instrumentalized religious chauvinism, and played a hugely counterrevolutionary role in regional politics.
Above all, he was not a leader who shied away from both calling for and engineering more conflict in the Middle East.
In contrast to Senator McCain’s description of Abdullah as “a vocal advocate of peace”, a State Department diplomatic cable released by Wikileaks revealed him in fact directly advocating for the United States to start more wars in the region.
In a quote recorded in a 2008 diplomatic cable, Abdullah exhorted American officials to “cut the head off the snake” by launching fresh military action against Iran. Notably, this war advocacy came in the midst of the still-ongoing bloodshed of the Iraq War, which had apparently left him unfazed about the prospect of a further escalation in regional warfare.
Abdullah’s government also waged hugely destructive proxy conflicts wherever direct American intervention on its behalf was not forthcoming. Indeed, in the case of almost every Arab Spring uprising, Saudi Arabia attempted to intervene forcefully in order to either shore up existing regimes or shape revolutions to conform with their own interests.
In Bahrain, Saudi forces intervened to crush a popular uprising which had threatened the rule of the ruling al-Khalifa monarchy, while in Syria Saudi-backed factions have helped turn what was once a popular democratic uprising into a bloody, intractable proxy war between regional rivals which is now a main driver of extremism in the Middle East.
Saudi efforts at counterrevolution and co-optation under Abdullah took more obliquely brutal forms as well.
In the midst of the 2011 revolution in Egypt, when seemingly the entire world was rallying in support of the protestors in Tahrir Square, King Abdullah stood resolutely and unapologetically on the side of Hosni Mubarak’s regime. When it seemed like Mubarak was wavering in the face of massive popular protests, the king offered to step in with economic aid for his government and demanded that President Obama ensure he not be “cast aside”.
A few years later when the pendulum swung back towards dictatorship after General Abdelfattah al Sisi’s bloody 2013 coup, Abdullah and his fellow monarchs were there to lavish much needed financial assistance upon the new regime. This support came with the endorsement of Sisi’s unrelentingly brutal crackdown on Egypt’s former revolutionaries.
With increasingly disastrous consequences, Abdullah’s government also employed sectarianism as a force to help divide-and-conquer regional populations and insulate his own government from the threat of uprising. It also cynically utilized its official religious authorities to try and equate political dissent with sinfulness.
This ostentatiously reckless behavior nevertheless seemed to win Abdullah’s regime the tacit approval of the American government, which steadfastly continued to treat him as a partner in fighting terrorism and maintaining regional stability.
Despite recent tensions over American policy towards Iran and Syria, Saudi under King Abdullah played a vital role in U.S. counterterrorism operations. The country quietly hosts a CIA drone base used for conducting strikes into Yemen, including the strike believed to have killed American-born preacher Anwar al-Awlaki. More controversially, Abdullah’s government is also believed to have provided extensive logistical support for American military operations during the invasion of Iraq; an uncomfortable fact which the kingdom has understandably tried to keep quiet with its own population.
Perhaps most importantly however, King Abdullah upheld the economic cornerstones of America’s long and fateful alliance with Saudi Arabia: arms purchases and the maintenance of a reliable flow of oil from the country to global markets. The one Saudi king who in past failed to hold up part of this agreement met with an untimely end, and was seemingly on less positive terms American government officials.
Given the foundations upon which American-Saudi ties rest, its unlikely that the relationship will be drastically altered by the passing of King Abdullah and the succession of his brother Prince Salman. Regardless of how venal, reckless, or brutal his government may choose to be, as long as it protects American interests in the Middle East it will inevitably be showered with plaudits and support, just as its predecessor was.
Photo: AP/Gerald Herbert
The post Saudi Arabia’s Tyrant King Misremembered as Man of Peace appeared first on The Intercept.
Hugo Chávez was elected President of Venezuela four times from 1998 through 2012 and was admired and supported by a large majority of that country’s citizens, largely due to his policies that helped the poor. King Abdullah was the dictator and tyrant who ran one of the most repressive regimes on the planet.
The effusive praise being heaped on the brutal Saudi despot by western media and political figures has been nothing short of nauseating; the UK Government, which arouses itself on a daily basis by issuing self-consciously eloquent lectures to the world about democracy, actually ordered flags flown all day at half-mast to honor this repulsive monarch. The Intercept will have more on this spectacle shortly, along with a real obituary.
For the moment, it is worth comparing the statements President Obama issued about the 2013 death of President Chavez with the one he issued today about the Saudi ruler. Here’s the entire Obama statement about Chavez (h/t Sami Khan):
Now here is the one today about Abdullah:
One obvious difference between the two leaders was that Chávez was elected and Abdullah was not. Another is that Chávez used the nation’s oil resources to attempt to improve the lives of the nation’s most improverished while Abdullah used his to further enrich Saudi oligarchs and western elites. Another is that the severity of Abdullah’s human rights abuses and militarism makes Chávez look in comparison like Gandhi.
But when it comes to western political and media discourse, the only difference that matters is that Chávez was a U.S. adversary while Abdullah was a loyal U.S. ally – which, by itself for purposes of the U.S. and British media, converts the former into an evil villainous despot and the latter into a beloved symbol of peace, reform and progress. As but one of countless examples: last year, British Prime Minister David Cameron – literally the best and most reliable friend to world dictators after Tony Blair – stood in Parliament after being questioned by British MP George Galloway and said: “there is one thing that is certain: wherever there is a brutal Arab dictator in the world, he will have the support of [Galloway]”; last night, the very same David Cameron pronounced himself “deeply saddened” and said the Saudi King would be remembered “commitment to peace and for strengthening understanding between faiths.”
That’s why there is nobody outside of American cable news, DC think tanks, and the self-loving Oxbridge clique in London that does anything but scoff with scorn and dark amusement when the US and UK prance around as defenders of freedom and democracy. Only in those circles of tribalism, jingoism and propaganda is such tripe taken at all seriously.
The post Compare and Contrast: Obama’s Reaction to the Deaths of King Abdullah and Hugo Chávez appeared first on The Intercept.
Kommunistische Partei Argentiniens zur politischen Lage nach dem Tod von Staatsanwalt Nisman ... Wir dokumentieren nachstehend eine Erklärung der Kommunistischen Partei Argentiniens zur politischen Lage in dem südamerikanischen Land, nachdem Staatsanwalt Nisman tot aufgefunden wurde. Dieser hatte im Fall des 1994 verübten Bombenanschlags auf das jüdische Gemeindezentrum AMIA in Buenos Aires ermittelt. Inzwischen geht auch die Regierung in Buenos Aires nicht mehr von einem Selbstmord des Juristen aus.
Angesichts des Todes des Staatsanwalts Nisman und dessen politischer Folgen erklärt die Kommunistische Partei:
Dieses Ereignis muss in den aktuellen internationalen Kontext eingeordnet werden, in dem der Imperialismus nach den Ereignissen in Paris einen starken Rechtsruck in Europa vorantreibt und seine Anstrengungen verdoppelt, die lateinamerikanischen Regierungen zu destabilisieren, die nicht automatisch an seinen Interessen orientiert sind. Für diese Ziele nutzt er die Medien, die Geheimdienste und seine konzentrierte wirtschaftliche und finanzielle Kraft.
Das wird klar angesichts der schnellen Reaktion und Mobilisierung der hiesigen Rechten, die versucht, die Regierung im letzten Jahr der Legislaturperiode noch stärker unter Druck zu setzen und die besten Bedingungen zur Durchsetzung ihrer politischen Interessen bei den Wahlen zu schaffen. ............... http://news.dkp.suhail.uberspace.de/2015/01/kommunistische-partei-argent... ..............