|
Selected Articles: US-China Relations, UN “Apology” to Haiti, Fake Economic News, Blood Diamonds
|
By Global Research News
Global Research, December 09, 2016
|
Url of this article:
https://www.globalresearch.ca/selected-articles-us-china-relations-un-apology-to-haiti-fake-economic-news-blood-diamonds/5561331
|
|
America-China Relations. Donald Trump Does Not Understand China
By Tom Clifford, December 09 2016
Trump is playing to his supporters who feel comfortable in blaming China for America’s ills. His nod to protectionism – and threats of high tariffs on Chinese goods – is seen by Beijing as endangering the prosperity of China. The last time Taiwan was in the spotlight in Sino-US relations was in 1995-96 in a crisis sparked by then Taiwanese leader Lee Teng-hui visiting Cornell University. China reacted by carrying out missile tests in the waters off its “rebel province”. In response, the US, the biggest display of US military force in the region since the Vietnam war, sent aircraft-carriers to the waters around Taiwan.
The United Nations’ “Incomplete Apology” to Haiti
By Kim Ives, December 09 2016
United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, who will step down at the end of this month, made his most explicit apology yet for the UN’s role and responsibility in Haiti’s cholera epidemic, the world’s worst. However, in his ballyhooed Dec. 1 address to the UN General Assembly, Ban stopped short of admitting that UN soldiers militarily occupying Haiti since 2004 introduced the deadly bacterial disease into the country in 2010.
“Fake Economic News”, Dismal US Jobs Report
By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, December 08 2016
The presstitute media delivered the false news, not from Russian propaganda websites such as the Washington Post accuses this one of being, but from Obama’s US Bureau of Labor Statistics. The false news is that the collapsing economy continues to boom with 178,000 new jobs in November and a further fall in the rate of unemployment to 4.6%. What are the facts? Nothing you will ever hear from the presstitutes or the corrupt Obama regime.
Blood Diamonds: More than One Fifth of Diamonds Sold Worldwide are Funding Bloodshed and Violence
By Sean Clinton, December 09 2016
Over one-fifth of diamonds on the global market in value terms are a significant source of funding for regimes guilty of the most grievous human rights violations. If these diamonds were funding rebel groups they would, rightly, be considered blood diamonds and banned. But these blood diamonds evade all regulation, are labelled conflict-free and masquerade as ethical diamonds.
Fossil Fuel Corruption and the Environment: The Problem with Australia’s Adani Mining
By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, December 09 2016
The relationship between the mining sector and the Australian government has been traditionally that of complicity and acceptance. Touch this sector at your peril. Changes in prime ministers, rumbles in cabinet, and the overall show have suggested the influence had by the fossil fuel lobby in the market place. Australian politicians at the state and commonwealth level have marched to its tune for some years now, seeing it as a blessed provider in the development stakes. Whatever ends up on the desk in Canberra on this subject, rest assured that this mining monster will receive an endorsement.
South Africa’s Junk Credit Rating was Avoided, but at the Cost of Junk Analysis
By Prof. Patrick Bond, December 08 2016
Standard&Poors (S&P) gave South Africa a fearful few hours of anticipation last Friday, just after dust from the political windstorm of the prior week settled. The agency downgraded the government’s securities that are denominated in the local currency (the rand) although refrained from the feared junk status on international securities. It was a moment for the ruling business and political party elites’ introspection, but in heaving a sigh of relief they are not looing far enough.
|
|
Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article.
|
|
|
|
