THE PROPAGANDA EDITION: ISSUE 47, VOLUME 74
BETTER LUCK TOMORROW
by Malik Isasis
The corporate media feeds images of violence in its most rawest forms without political context, or historical subtext. They report on symptoms of international strife like, blood, guts, tears, and American victimology rather than on the disease, or causes of said conflicts, like neo-colonial capitalism. It is a dumb-down, anti-intellectual formula that makes consumers of their reporting more susceptible to paranoia and irrational fears. For the corporate media is not in the business of advocacy, rather it is in the business of turning citizens into consumers, blind, uncritically-thinking consumers who will respond to such comic-book concepts as War on Terror; consumers who didn’t bat an eye when they were told by Bush during two occupations and a recession to go shop more.
Corporate media is a subsidiary of other conglomerates that are out to protect their assets around the world, and the news, generally reflect this goal by dividing the world up into good versus evil, and guess who is always good?
With the recent spate of hijackings of oil tankers and other cargo ships off the coast of Africa by Somalis, the corporate media is portraying Somalis as the bad guys of course, and America and its allies as the victim. See ABC News’ coverage, all one minute and thirty seconds of it.
Check the tone in a USA Today article on the matter of Somali hijackings:
The U.S. and international military forces are taking more aggressive action off the African coast as bolder and more violent pirates imperil oil shipments and other trade.
The U.S. is "very concerned about the increasing number of acts of piracy and armed robbery" off the Somali coast, he says [Navy Lt. Nate Christensen]. Somalia's weak government has admitted it can't control its territorial waters, and Nigeria is fending off a rebel group.
What’s the theme here? Somalis are violent thieves and America and its allies are victims. This of course is a reoccurring theme, obfuscation—more accurately a justification for American hegemony. Here’s the reality of the Somali hijackings, which has its roots in European and Asian overfishing in Somalia’s coastal waters.
Off the coast of Somalia more than a decade ago, commercial fishing vessels from China , Japan and European countries began illegally fishing in Somalia’s waters, not only that, these commercial fishing vessels overfished and also dumped waste. Since Somalia couldn’t police its own waters due to having a permanent unelected, corrupt Transitional Government (since 1991), fishermen had no federal protection to enforce international fishing laws.
Since then fish stocks have plummeted worldwide, shipping has exploded and ships have become much easier and rewarding to catch than fish. And while it's unlikely that all of today's Somali pirates got their start fishing, the gangs couldn't function without the knowledge and seamanship of those who did.
This is a problem we could see replayed out on a global scale as fishing becomes more difficult everywhere.
THE OIL FACTOR IN SOMALIA
The American government, with the international conglomerates pulling its strings like Gepetto, has purposely kept Somalia unstable. It is in this instability for which the U.S. can take advantage of the politically fractured country through arms sell, and funding of local and foreign militias.
In 1993, the Los Angeles Times wrote an investigative piece on the oil conglomerates’ interest in Somalia.
According to documents obtained by The Times, nearly two-thirds of Somalia was allocated to the American oil giants Conoco, Amoco, Chevron and Phillips in the final years before Somalia's pro-U.S. President Mohamed Siad Barre was overthrown and the nation plunged into chaos in January, 1991. Industry sources said the companies holding the rights to the most promising concessions are hoping that the Bush Administration's [daddy Bush] decision to send U.S. troops to safeguard aid shipments to Somalia will also help protect their multimillion-dollar investments there.
Officially, the Administration and the State Department insist that the U.S. military mission in Somalia is strictly humanitarian. Oil industry spokesmen dismissed as "absurd" and "nonsense" allegations by aid experts, veteran East Africa analysts and several prominent Somalis that President Bush, a former Texas oilman, was moved to act in Somalia, at least in part, by the U.S. corporate oil stake.
An investigative report from Media Lens in May 2008 revealed the motivations of the United States when it bombed Somalia under the guise of War on Terrorism, killing 12 twelve people the government said were Islamist militants.
Since 1996 the US has engaged in a continual "low-intensity" war in Somalia that has killed a million of that country's inhabitants, a death toll second only to the Congo during that time. Another million Somalis are homeless, refugees from the fighting. In the US, news of happenings in Somalia is scarce and often misleading. It's worth noting that Somalia sits upon an untapped lake of oil, and has significant uranium deposits as well, making it in the US interest to prevent any viable national government not under its control from coming to power.
When the poor does what the rich do, it is called a crime.
Somali fishermen saw the potential in piracy, and why wouldn’t they when other countries are making hundreds of millions in overfishing in their waters. Last year alone, Somali hijackers, formerly fishermen made $75 million dollars in ransom money taking cargo ships and hostages. This year they’ve made $50 million. It’s lucrative being a pirate—it works for the U.S., China, and Europe. Somalis’ piracy is out front, while neo-colonial piracy hides in plain sight as humanitarianism, capitalism or War on Terrorism.
BETTER LUCK TOMORROW
by Malik Isasis
The corporate media feeds images of violence in its most rawest forms without political context, or historical subtext. They report on symptoms of international strife like, blood, guts, tears, and American victimology rather than on the disease, or causes of said conflicts, like neo-colonial capitalism. It is a dumb-down, anti-intellectual formula that makes consumers of their reporting more susceptible to paranoia and irrational fears. For the corporate media is not in the business of advocacy, rather it is in the business of turning citizens into consumers, blind, uncritically-thinking consumers who will respond to such comic-book concepts as War on Terror; consumers who didn’t bat an eye when they were told by Bush during two occupations and a recession to go shop more.
Corporate media is a subsidiary of other conglomerates that are out to protect their assets around the world, and the news, generally reflect this goal by dividing the world up into good versus evil, and guess who is always good?
With the recent spate of hijackings of oil tankers and other cargo ships off the coast of Africa by Somalis, the corporate media is portraying Somalis as the bad guys of course, and America and its allies as the victim. See ABC News’ coverage, all one minute and thirty seconds of it.
Check the tone in a USA Today article on the matter of Somali hijackings:
The U.S. and international military forces are taking more aggressive action off the African coast as bolder and more violent pirates imperil oil shipments and other trade.
The U.S. is "very concerned about the increasing number of acts of piracy and armed robbery" off the Somali coast, he says [Navy Lt. Nate Christensen]. Somalia's weak government has admitted it can't control its territorial waters, and Nigeria is fending off a rebel group.
What’s the theme here? Somalis are violent thieves and America and its allies are victims. This of course is a reoccurring theme, obfuscation—more accurately a justification for American hegemony. Here’s the reality of the Somali hijackings, which has its roots in European and Asian overfishing in Somalia’s coastal waters.
Off the coast of Somalia more than a decade ago, commercial fishing vessels from China , Japan and European countries began illegally fishing in Somalia’s waters, not only that, these commercial fishing vessels overfished and also dumped waste. Since Somalia couldn’t police its own waters due to having a permanent unelected, corrupt Transitional Government (since 1991), fishermen had no federal protection to enforce international fishing laws.
Since then fish stocks have plummeted worldwide, shipping has exploded and ships have become much easier and rewarding to catch than fish. And while it's unlikely that all of today's Somali pirates got their start fishing, the gangs couldn't function without the knowledge and seamanship of those who did.
This is a problem we could see replayed out on a global scale as fishing becomes more difficult everywhere.
THE OIL FACTOR IN SOMALIA
The American government, with the international conglomerates pulling its strings like Gepetto, has purposely kept Somalia unstable. It is in this instability for which the U.S. can take advantage of the politically fractured country through arms sell, and funding of local and foreign militias.
In 1993, the Los Angeles Times wrote an investigative piece on the oil conglomerates’ interest in Somalia.
According to documents obtained by The Times, nearly two-thirds of Somalia was allocated to the American oil giants Conoco, Amoco, Chevron and Phillips in the final years before Somalia's pro-U.S. President Mohamed Siad Barre was overthrown and the nation plunged into chaos in January, 1991. Industry sources said the companies holding the rights to the most promising concessions are hoping that the Bush Administration's [daddy Bush] decision to send U.S. troops to safeguard aid shipments to Somalia will also help protect their multimillion-dollar investments there.
Officially, the Administration and the State Department insist that the U.S. military mission in Somalia is strictly humanitarian. Oil industry spokesmen dismissed as "absurd" and "nonsense" allegations by aid experts, veteran East Africa analysts and several prominent Somalis that President Bush, a former Texas oilman, was moved to act in Somalia, at least in part, by the U.S. corporate oil stake.
An investigative report from Media Lens in May 2008 revealed the motivations of the United States when it bombed Somalia under the guise of War on Terrorism, killing 12 twelve people the government said were Islamist militants.
Since 1996 the US has engaged in a continual "low-intensity" war in Somalia that has killed a million of that country's inhabitants, a death toll second only to the Congo during that time. Another million Somalis are homeless, refugees from the fighting. In the US, news of happenings in Somalia is scarce and often misleading. It's worth noting that Somalia sits upon an untapped lake of oil, and has significant uranium deposits as well, making it in the US interest to prevent any viable national government not under its control from coming to power.
When the poor does what the rich do, it is called a crime.
Somali fishermen saw the potential in piracy, and why wouldn’t they when other countries are making hundreds of millions in overfishing in their waters. Last year alone, Somali hijackers, formerly fishermen made $75 million dollars in ransom money taking cargo ships and hostages. This year they’ve made $50 million. It’s lucrative being a pirate—it works for the U.S., China, and Europe. Somalis’ piracy is out front, while neo-colonial piracy hides in plain sight as humanitarianism, capitalism or War on Terrorism.
posted by Malik Isasis at
9:58 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home