Monday, November 14, 2016

Brandon Turbeville Interview With Mashregh News 11-10-16

Image result for mashregh newsBrandon Turbeville
November 10, 2016
Interview Translated Into English

* Who chose Trump? Did the people's vote matter? Was the decision already made by the elite/establishment?

In my travels across the country, I have to say that I could tell that the majority of people were leaning in Trump’s direction. The real support for Hillary Clinton was small and typically isolated to very specific groups and areas. But, even within these subsets, the support was lower than for a normal democrat. That was my observation on the ground. 

But, as we know, American elections are largely just a selection process by the national oligarchs, i.e. the military industrial complex, secret societies, banks, corporations etc. Leading up to the election, we were given every indication that Clinton was the establishment’s choice. All the power players backed her. The Neo-Cons backed her. The banks backed her. The media was virtually united behind her. 

So we now have to wonder whether or not this election was planned from the very beginning or whether the oligarchs actually decided to change course at the last minute since Clinton was such an impossible sale. It appears that the ruling class has pulled a “bait and switch” technique on the electorate. They were ultimately going to choose between a fascist and a psychopathic, corrupt, warmonger whose own fascist tendencies were there for all to see. Given what I know in terms of American elections, I am hesitant to say that real democracy played into the election itself. That being said, it appears the elections did go in the direction that the people wanted. I’m not sure that qualifies as democracy though. 
At this point, however, I would say that we have avoided the worst case scenario but that is no need to be complacent. This scenario is incredibly dangerous too and we have to be prepared to get active. 

* Does Trump's victory (by whoever's will) indicate a dissatisfaction/departure from the status quo, or something else is planned for the future?

I wouldn’t think so. Remember, Obama was perceived as a breath of fresh air when he was first elected and look at what he has done. On the part of the American people, “outsiders” were big this year – Bernie Sanders and Trump for instance. Neither were truly outsiders. As for what is planned for the future, we can try to stay positive but let us never forget that Trump’s rabid militarism and lack of respect for the 1st and 4th Amendment represent a clear and present danger to us, the American people, here at home. I worry more about the domestic scene with Trump than the foreign policy aspect. But all I have to go by is vague utterances on the campaign trail. 

* By whatever account, Trump's victory was shocking. Explain to me how shocked are the people of the United States and basically the whole world.

Everyone in the U.S. is shocked. Clinton supporters thought they had the election in the bag. Trump supporters and many of us who simply follow current events looked at Clinton’s backers and the unified anti-Trump media and assumed that she would win it regardless of the actual votes. In fact, both researchers and Trump supporters truly believed she would win whether or not people actually voted for her. So it’s an incredible shock and surprise to everyone. 

Most of the people I talked to in the Middle East are pleased with the results because of Trump’s foreign policy stances which are much more reasonable, at least in terms of his rhetoric, than Clintons. 

Europeans tend to be more worried due to years of having European and white guilt drilled in to their heads. Thus, it is a shock to the politically correct senses in Europe. 

* Did Donald Trump himself think he'd be called the President-elect after the election?

That’s impossible to know for sure but, if the election was indeed decided by hidden factors, it is unlikely that he wouldn’t have known ahead of time. 

* Do you assume any kind of an out-of-the-ordinary response from the Democrats possible?

Not politically. The Democrats received a crushing blow in this election. They lost the White House, the House and the Senate. Political responses will be as any minority party’s responses typically are. I think you will see more division, however, as Soros-funded groups take to the streets, riots are encouraged and “racism” becomes the charge for every disliked policy. We are facing a time in which social unrest is a very real possibility as well as a justification for a police state crackdown at home, which Trump has demonstrated that he is willing to deliver. 

* Trump has ruthlessly bashed US media, politicians, establishment, etc. Will he work with them business-as-usual starting Jan. 20, 2017, or even as early as tomorrow?

Yes, of course. This is not really a question. Trump is a businessman and will work with other businessmen and they will continue to work with him. Politicians sling mud all the time. It’s just another day at the office. 

* Trump has taken rather unusual stances on foreign policy, most notably about relations with Russia. Do you think such a sharp turn is essentially possible in the United States government? Will he be left to his own devices to do as he has said?

It’s absolutely possible and yes he can do all those things. The question is whether or not he truly wants to and whether or not the powers that saw to his election will allow for that to happen. We certainly hope so. Rapprochement is not only something we want, it is something that is necessary to our survival on this planet. We must avoid World War 3. Whatever Trumps failings in terms of our Constitutional Rights, we hope he at least gets this aspect right.

* How do you think Trump will deal with China? Will he have good relations with President Xi?

All we have heard so far is empty campaign rhetoric. Trump never gave specifics on anything. He says the China policy will be great but we don’t know what the policy is yet. Will he encourage more trade with China to our detriment? Will he negotiate deals better? Will he eliminate other deals already made? We just don’t know. That’s been a hallmark of the campaign – no specifics. That way, the audience can project their own desires and solutions on to the blank canvas of the candidate. If Trump wants to negotiate better, eliminate Free Trade deals, and apply tariffs, then that’s good. If he wants to reduce military tensions, that’s good too. But, again, what will the policy be? No one knows. It could be exactly what we need or it could be an economic apocalypse. 

* How (if at all) different will Trump's Middle East policy be from Obama's?

Again, all we have is campaign rhetoric at this point. We hope he sticks with the line that “we should let Russia destroy ISIS” and stay out of it. But, now that he is President, the Neo-Cons, Zionists, and related interests are going to have their say and they are not interested in leaving Syria and Russia alone. Here, Trump’s rhetoric is not so bad but the question is “can we believe it?” Have we ever been able to believe political rhetoric before? Why should we now? Remember, Trump has been railing against the Iran nuclear deal as a “terrible deal” and saying that the U.S. was humiliated in the negotiations. That does not sound like a peace candidate since Iran never should have had to negotiate the deal to begin with. 

* Will Trump (be able to) leave Syria to Putin as he has promisingly proposed?

Yes, he can but the question is “will he?” We certainly hope so. 

* Will Trump's presidency be in any way better for the American people (workers, middle class, etc.) than Clinton's would?

It’s hard to compare something that hasn’t happened yet to something that will not happen. But I can say confidently that neither of them have a coherent economic plan. Clinton’s plan was old style crony socialism – i.e. forcing Americans to pay higher taxes for more “services,” forcing them to buy private products, etc. while Trump’s plan, what little actual detail there is, seems to be more “free market” economics which involves cutting and gutting, privatizing, and the like. The only positive aspect to Trump’s policy is the rhetoric against Free Trade which, at the very least, we hope he begins to dismantle. I’m not holding my breath though. 

* Trump has probably been weirdest on immigration and racial issues. Do you think, first of all, that he will actually build the famous wall he's promised?

He’s made it so much of a campaign slogan that it’s hard to see him not going forward with it. I don’t think Mexico will pay for it though. The wall is controversial to say the least but illegal immigration is a major problem. I think that Trump’s first idea to halt an immigration problem is to build a wall highlights the fascist tendencies. Will he get it done? It depends on whether or not the corporate interests still need cheaper labor and whether or not division is still a requisite for solidifying power. Regardless, look for the wall to be a centerpiece of tension and division for years to come. 

* Do you think the condition of racial and ethnic minorities, especially Muslims who have been targeted in recent years, in the US will get worse before it gets better under Trump?

Throughout the entire campaign, Trump has been labeled a racist despite no commentator being able to produce a single racist comment. This is a way to promote division but it’s also a way to focus on issues that don’t exist rather than on the issues that do. Muslims, however, do have a legitimate fear here since Trump did suggest banning them from entering the country based on their religion and suggested heavier surveillance of Muslims and the Muslim community. So I think there is a legitimate fear in the Muslim community for this reason. 

Unfortunately, everyone’s condition in the United States seems to be getting worse, regardless of race. I see minority conditions getting worse the same as everyone else’s. I don’t really see it getting better though. 

* How do you think US policy towards Iran will change under Trump? Will it get more aggressive or less interventionist?

Again, we only have rhetoric but, while Trump’s rhetoric toward Syria and Russia has been much less hawkish than Clinton and the other Republicans, his rhetoric toward Iran has been more aggressive. This shows he is not the peace candidate by any stretch of the imagination. In this area at least, we may expect to see some aggression. If we do, there should be no question as to whom Trump is working for. Still, we hope his anti-Iran rhetoric was merely a tagline being used to get him elected but we should always be cautious about simply hoping a candidate is playing politics with such a serious issue that affects the lives of so many people. 

We should also note who is truly in control of this administration. Trump has, at the very least, been compromised and stands as a person who is easily blackmailed. I don’t have high hopes for his administration or for the country. I only see things getting worse. 

* Will he really order his military to engage Iranian boats in case of an encounter in the Persian Gulf or elsewhere, as has increasingly been the case?

It’s quite possible. The anti-Iranian language has been strong in his campaign despite his rational approach to Syria. We certainly hope that his rhetoric was just that – rhetoric. We have to hope that a relationship with Putin will prevent such erratic and irrational acts as well. 

* And the obvious question: Will Trump tear the nuclear deal down? Will he be able to renegotiate JCPOA? 

He shouldn’t and he shouldn’t be able to but he very well might. That will all depend on his motivation once he gets into office. He may simply want greater concessions from Iran or he may act as a Neco-Con agent to provoke world war three. Americans have done nothing to force Trump to say anything specific so a lot of his policies are completely unknown and we only have vague comments to go by.

It’s certainly clear that, while the worst case scenario may have been avoided, the American people need to be prepared to fight for peace and domestic rights. We are entering the territory of the unknown.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.