Electoral mockery in the United States: a view from within

The U.S. presidential primaries being held by both Democratic and Republican parties have once again exposed all the flaws of the American electoral system. Party conventions erupt into mass protests because of unfair allocation of delegates.
“No, this isn’t a picture of the North Korea Party Congress. It’s from today’s #nvdemsconvention #NevadaConvention”
And it’s easy to understand the people, Nevada’s democratic delegate allocation process is not only intricate and complex – this year the rules had been changed at the last moment which enabled Hillary Clinton to steal most part of the delegates from Bernie Sanders.
Before that Senator Sanders beat former U.S. State Secretary Clinton 56% to 44% in Wyoming. Yet, due to absolutely irrational rules of the Democratic Party Clinton was awarded 11 out of 18 delegates.
“Why does the Democratic Party even have voting booths?” – MSNBC commentator is wondering.

Democratic superdelegates are even more controversial. For reference, the Democratic Party has got about 4763 delegates, who will choose their nominee for President at the National Convention taking into account the results of primaries and caucuses. However about 712 out of those 4763 are superdelegates, who will vote for whoever they like, regardless of who won in their state or district. Who are those superdelegates? These are party bigwigs, former presidents, governors, members of Congress etc. Basically they can switch their allegiance at any moment, just as it happened back in 2008, when most of Hillary Clinton’s superdelegates defected from her to Barack Obama. Does the system have anything in common with democracy? Average Americans don’t think so.

Yet, the Republican Party cupboard is full of skeletons as well. If you pay no attention to all the scandals caused by the most likely Republican nominee Donald Trump and look at the facts without any prejudice, it appears that Trump’s words about the party’s rigged electoral system absolutely make sense. So, during the Louisiana primary despite Donald Trump’s advantage of 3.6% Ted Cruz could potentially get more delegates from the state if he stayed in the race and Trump by any chance failed to win majority of the delegates in the first round. And in this case an extremely complex process of voting through various party committees would begin, while delegates from most states become unbound after the first round no matter who their voters favored.

It is even funnier in the state of Pennsylvania – 54 out of their 71 delegates are unbound from the very beginning. Therefore people choose the delegates blindly. They have no idea who their delegates will eventually vote for – it is simply not listed in the ballot!
Republican delegate from North Dakota that had neither a primary nor a caucus speaks openly that delegates at the convention choose the nominee not the voters in the primaries.

Basically, both parties are private clubs that can change the game rules as they please. In theory, they can choose anyone to run for President, paying no regard to the public opinion. It is indicative that although a half of Americans can’t make head or tail of the system, while the rest are constantly criticizing it, things stay the same from election to election. Grumbling over the electoral system flaws has become a routine of election campaigns, but as soon as the winner appears, everyone prefers to forget about them.

“Here is the way I look at it. I won, so I don’t care anymore…,” – Donald Trump said during one of his speeches.

And this is happening in the country that considers its model of democracy as the most suitable for the entire world…



Sponsors of Islamists invest into Hillary

As I’ve been keeping watching the election race, I’ve been coming to understanding that Mrs. Clinton is the most admirable as a woman of character and a nimble politician.

This person is out of any legal or moral rules. She should be a hard-boiled egg so that she could manage to gain support of either Jewish tycoons (Rockefeller, Soros), or Muslim zealots (Fetullah Gulen’s followers).

She is so convincing that an obedient herd of voters have been praising her effusively, but taking no notice of unscrupulous actions of the future U.S. President. Also at first glance such citizens’ and non-citizens’ willingness to donate millions of dollars to Clinton’s presidential race resembles sect or mass hypnosis.

It is noteworthy that in spite her vast political experience Hillary is far short of charisma of Joseph Di Mambro or Jim Jones, the leader of the People’s Temple. That is why Americans are save from mass suicides and signing over all their possessions to Mrs. Clinton. However there was a surge among influential organizations and corporations in love for HIV-positive persons, poor and disaster-affected people, as soon as it became known for certain that Clinton once again would run for the presidency. Notably that not only such American organizations as Friends of Saudi Arabia, Monsanto and ExxonMobile, but also foreign citizens occurred to be among such soft-hearted givers.

According to the Wall Street Journal, in 2014 among those who made donations to the Clinton Foundation were United Arab Emirates, a first-time donor, Qatari government committee preparing for the 2022 soccer World Cup, Oman, Canadian government agency and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. This is a remarkable list. Thus, it is known that the State Department issued rather unfavourable human rights reports about the UAE and Oman. Qatar was also black-booked by the human rights activists because of over 1,000 migrant workers have already died during the 2022 World Cup preparations. The forgoing Canadian agency has been promoting the Keystone XL pipeline’s construction in spite of environmentalists’ and some Congressmen’s harsh attacks.

With regard to Saudi Arabia, this country has been a repeat donor since the foundation’s founding. Also it has a long history of cooperation with Hillary Clinton. It’s no coincidence that George W. Bush calls her ‘his sister-in-law’.


According to a report published in the Intercept, Clinton made weapons transfers to Saudi Arabia a “top priority”.

In released by the State Department emails concerned the recent scandal Hillary celebrates heartily ‘not a bad Christmas present’. The present had occurred to be the sale of over 80 Boeing manufactured (another one of the most generous sponsors of the Clintons Foundation) F-15 jets. Those very fighters Saudis used during airstrikes in Yemen, when they hit facilities of Doctors Without Borders, a wedding hall, a center for the blind, and also killed journalists and ambulance drivers.


In 2012 the Saudi king expressed his satisfactions with such effective cooperation by a half a million dollars gift. This price is beyond the reach of reason and good manners (the majority of gifts from foreign establishment have been assessed at $ 450-650). However, they didn’t forget to make a “Non-acceptance would cause embarrassment to donor and U.S. Government” note.


Upon the whole during Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, the State Department granted increases in arms exports to 17 out of 20 countries sponsoring the Clintons Foundation. Difference for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia totaled 97%, Qatar – 1482%, Oman – 221%, the UAE – 1005%.

An Algerian case is an illustrative sample of this tried and tested simple scheme. In 2010 Clinton criticized Algeria for violations of democratic freedoms and corruption in the country. In the same year the Algerian government donated $ 500,000 to the Clintons Foundation ‘assist with earthquake relief in Haiti’. The next year the State Department conferred Algeria a one-year increase in military export authorizations, including almost 50,000 items classified as chemical and biological agents and associated equipment. Such items never were authorized for export to Algeria before.

In view of this situation, Clinton’s support of a 9/11 bill has been ever more reasoned. In fact, Hillary together with other politicians has publicly voiced that Saudi Arabia has not only been sponsoring international terrorists. But it IS a terrorist country itself having a straight-line responsibility for mass murders of thousands of innocent victims. The after 9/11 State Department’s logic suggests that Saudi Arabia should become a number-one candidate for the next “Democratic” Spring.

Does the Saudi king bother about it? He hardly does. It is just another hint that it’s about time to make another donation for HIV infected gophers, for the reduced to indigence by the Occupy-movement or for the Mars’ gardening, in other words, into the Mrs. Presidential Nominee’s pockets.

Technically the Supreme Court officially says people can give unlimited money for political campaign donations. Foreigners aren’t forbidden doing that either. However, the moral dilemma about the correctness of TAKING this money arises. For sure a sponsor presumes on the proper response of a beneficiary. As well, politicians enter into an unwritten agreement, while accepting a ‘present’. Formally we’ve become accustomed to call it lobbying. In practice this is a legalized corruption. It turns out that any lawlessness or crimes against humanity could be justified with charity purpose.

In her previous career Mrs. Clinton had been a dab hand at such agreements. President’s services are much multifarious and more expensive than Secretary of State’s ones, of course. Therefore, a new post will grant Clinton greater opportunities of working out money of Saudis and other ‘philanthropists’ by turning a blind eye to barbaric ways of things in countries, religious zealotry and open financing of Islamic extremists.

Arctic: the Ecological Mercenaries

Only 15 years ago it seemed that Arctic region was not of any interest except for scientific and investigative. Those are literally giant territories of 21 million square kilometers (which is more than 5% of entire Earth’s surface), however the only news we heard were about Arctic voyages of exploration in those days. Many considered that it would always be so.

Yet in recent years, the situation has drastically changed. Such things as the global climate change and mass deglaciation we’ve been frighten with have opened up massive opportunities for research and exploitation of interior part of the region. At once practically all Arctic countries used them for their own benefit. It occurred that Arctic has vast hydrocarbon deposits. According to the Ernst & Young’s estimation, they make up no less than 20% of all non-discovered reserves of the globe (which are actually much bigger). Also the region happened to be very rich in fish. There are more than 400 fish species including most rare ones. In addition it is a recognized fact that the progressive thinning of the Arctic icecap offer more possibilities for development of new sea routes.

The level of passion of Arctic states with those discoveries could be estimated by the quickness of ceasing that entire bustle around the global warming disaster and the necessity of its control. Just remember, how much attention this problem got just a decade ago and all those amounts of chilling information about deluging of entire countries and regions. A striking example is infamous Albert Gore who was awarded with Nobel Prize 2007 “for efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change” as one of authors of An Inconvenient Truth documentary film, which disclosed numerous facts of nature overexploitation. Now, when was the last time that you heard about it or about anything of that kind? Quite a long time ago, isn’t it? The cause of it hardly is a threat disappearance. Officials and business people have assessed risks and benefits and shut those mouths, which had a loose tongue.

These aren’t mere idle talks. This is the reality I’ve become to know of straight from the source. After meeting the ecologists from some European countries I understood that for the most part their activity in a modern world is a fulfillment of orders of particular customers and companies. They make no secret about it. What about Arctic theme, they’ve got no latitude at all.

I know Danjal Niclasen, the captain on a fishing vessel Saputi. His ship was damaged in the Davis Strait after striking ice in the night of February 21.

The incident was over at once. All crew on board are safe now. However that is no more than a mere bit of luck or the finger of God if you wish. This story could end much more tragically, if ice would strike engine space, for instance. The crew would hardly get out of a ship sinking like a rock.

The most curious is that fact that this is not the first time when seamen face such troubles exactly near the Greenland coast. Getting interested, I set out to examine the problem and buried myself in the vast sea of information about ecology, field ice and all of that kind. To my own surprise, it turned out that the Danes had been actively geologizing in the island shelf, not bothering about consequences including split off glaciers. The reason is clear. That ice float away in the direction of another country. This is why it’s easier to lay the blame on warm current washing Jakobshavn Glacier or mere ice melting. This little inquiry led me to Danish ecologists (thanks to social networks, Telegram and other resources). They confirmed this fact, but added that they aren’t going to write about it or make any statements. The cause is rather obvious. This data would adversely affect Danish energy sector. This means that they won’t win enough funding from the specialized companies they’ve been co-operating with for years.

It’s quite clear that there are no completely independent companies or organizations in any field of activity. But though I consider myself as rather rational person not living under a rock, I am shocked with cynicism of some Treehuggers. There are lobbying groups of at least two countries (Norway and Denmark, I didn’t dig even deeper) standing behind each fine piece revealing the impairment of the Arctic ecosystem and demonstrating progress in environmental protection. They’ve been at pains to divert the world’s attention from one problem turning it to another. After exchanging contacts and having communicated with some of those environmental fighters I fully realized that they even don’t intend to cover up bias of their activity. This very activity instigated me to write this feature story.

Whether those guys happened to be too chatty and cat-witted, if you’ll pardon the expression, or they consider such things common practice… I’d like to save your time and give a brief overview instead of putting on the web all our chat correspondence. Nowadays environmental watchdogs have become the part of advancing of national interests in Arctic region strategy. That is why they get such sponsorship and fussing over like an old hen at the state level. In this region Norway generally is engaged in fishing (it is much more profitable than their Statoil drilling). That is why they so easily allow raising an issue of environmental damage from Arctic hydrocarbon production, but veto the discussion and disapproval of bottom fishing practices. As if there is no such a problem at all. However it is extremely harmful for the environment.

In its turn Denmark submitted an ambitious application to the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf claiming the right to own the Lomonosov Ridge. Hence Danish rush for the shelf exploration by all means to find advantageous evidence is. Nonetheless no one bothers to keep ecological compatibility as well as to secure the ecosystem. That is why there is so few data about Danish bottom exploration, and it is exceedingly positive. This can easily be checked. This is how simple it is to localize unnecessary information, if its source is in a distant corner of the globe with difficult access. It works the best especially when it concerned the country holding eco-friendly top positions.

Besides they also hush up that fact that very often the research and working in Arctic region and subarctic territories has been followed by the closer attention of military services keeping there their secrets. Remarkable fact is that since boundary isn’t neatly-defined, it is rather easy to come in sight of the neighbor or just another country’s forces.

Thus according to the same ecologists, recently there was an incident in the North Sea. This time Danish warships forced a Norwegian vessel to return to the harbor, which was fishing in its waters. Unfairness is obvious. But they couldn’t withstand the strength. It remains secret what maneuvers the Danish were conducting, while there was no playwar planned that time. This is a drop in the bucket of similar cases.

One thing is clear: at the present time almost all countries prefer to keep silence about such incidents, hindering the information about them to leak to mass media. It may be so because many of them were noticed in similar infringements. But the question is how long would it last and couldn’t it be the calm before the storm? For instance, some acquaintances of mine hinted that those times might return when Greenpeace activists chained themselves to platforms and stole in the ships. However, this time it would be done not for environmental sake, but for reasons of state.

Raymons Gagnon