PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2020-09-19, 16:09:46
News: Forum TIP:
The SHOUT BOX deletes messages after 3 hours. It is NOT meant to have lengthy conversations in. Use the Chat feature instead.

Pages: 1 ... 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 ... 100
Author Topic: 9/11 debate - enter at your own risk!  (Read 755069 times)

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Terrorism, Immigration and Mass Manipulation

A BREAKING ALL THE RULES Editorial

http://batr.org/reactionary/011315.html

The threat of terrorism and the theatrics of bloodshed are powerful tools in the psychological warfare that is leading up to a final conflagration. Watching Paris is Burning is a sober spectacular for the mass media brainwashed, but for geopolitical observers in the know, the time proven and trusted strategy of using fear over security breaches works every time. Missing in the scores of all the manipulated “situations” is a full appreciation of the grand view of who really benefits from a high anxiety society that always succumbs into a greater level of a police state.

Framing the latest episode, the Charlie Hebdo assassinations, into a clash of civilizations is a tempting vindication to strike back at a villain that is easy to despise. However, such a simplistic response fails to understand what is really going on.

An example illustrates this point. A professional Muslim architect residing in the Middle East posted the following comments after the slaughter in Paris. “I do not blame them. Because "Christianity" is the false sect of real Prophet Messiah's call.”

The BATR response was:

“Your comments illustrate that you are your own worst enemy. You will never get any sympathy for your cause with an attitude that rationalized murder. As you are well aware, I am a Christian. If you objectives are to kill people of my faith, why would any of us want to deal with you or your fellow travelers?

You are dead wrong and need to rethink your world view. Maybe you should peddle your wares on groups that have immoral standards.”

Now it would be easy to conclude that an Islamic culture that would take satisfaction in the murder of European “infidels” in what little remains of a Christian society is all that needs to be known about followers of Mohammad. Notwithstanding, righteous disgust of an attitude that celebrates execution, ostentatiously for defiling the prophet; the actual beneficiary of the schism between European traditions and Middle East religiosity are the New World Order manipulators, who created the original circumstances to fuel this endless conflict.

The correct Christian canon of judging the case-by-case deeds of individuals, as opposed to the blanket condemnation of a peoples or society, works both ways. Only a blinded person of questionable intelligence or a fool of excessive susceptibility refuses to acknowledge that the interventionist wars waged in the name of “fighting terrorists” are a primary cause on the path to World War III.

Face facts. The creation of law enforcement and intelligent division bureaucracies to fight a supposed terrorism menace has been the biggest growth industry in the stables of the “Nefarious Warrior Organism” that dominates the planet.

All the time the deceived and gullible public buys into the presstitute narrative that protects and shields the mega financial interests that expand their influence and riches from fueling a perpetual conflict.

If puppet Western governments were serious about preventing actual terrorist attacks on their soil, they would not capitulate to the suicidal open borders culture that has turned Europe into a cesspool of foreign interlopers.

For decades the warnings from sages of traditional wisdom have argued the inevitable destruction of the Caucasian race and civilization from the invasion of non Europeans into their societies. The irrational concern of being labeled Xenophobia has made cowards of a continent that has willingly accepted a doomed fate.

It does not take a brilliant demographer to tally the statistics and project the inescapable consequences of opening the gates to incompatible customs, Sharia laws and Jihad politics. This reality is far too painful for most politicians, mainstream media or socialist libertines who are the cultural gatekeepers to admit.

With the systemic denial and cognitive dissonance that pervades this age of globalist suppression of truth and honest history, the dribble that comes out of the corporatist news outlets only serve the power brokers in the establishment order.

Add to the doubt of reported accounts, the carnage on French streets is being dissected for false flag scenarios and video tape recordings are broken down frame by frame. As with most initial reports the strange tale of the unbelievable is being sold once again to ratchet up the rage of the unsophisticated.

Dare not call it conspiracy when the pattern of and litany of past tragedies linger with the stench of lies and deceit. All the time the consolidation of world dominance and permanent warfare become the new normal for the struggling souls who are stripped of their heritage and dignity.

If disseminative impact of destructive immigrants is not enough, factor in the entrenched elements in European countries that feed on the turmoil for purely political interests other than their adopted host nations.

One such fifth column stratum of disruptive influence in continental politics favors the interests of Israel over their domicile country. Is it just a coincident that France‘s vote in favor of Palestine recognition preceded this Charlie Hebdo slaughter?

The opinionated anti-Zionist site Smoloko asks.

“With France taking measures decisively sympathetic to Islam, why would Muslim Zealots suddenly choose this moment to murder a dozen French citizens, an act that would certainly turn French public opinion against Muslims and in favor of Israel?”

In the orthodox atmosphere of tolerable discourse, the mere asking of such a question lays open the charge of being anti-Semitic. How convenient that the killers of the cartoonists are condemned for executing Free Speech of political caricatures. Contrast with simply questioning the motives and intentions, much less the actual terrorist deeds of Israel, is deemed taboo. Where is Voltaire when he is needed? And where is the same outrage?

The NeoCon chicken hawks back in America are behind much of the insane militarization of homeland insecurity. Their determination to deploy the American Empire’s war machine on behalf of Israeli supremacy in the region is obvious to any honorable eyewitness to foreign policy.

If this assessment was not true, why are there no Al-Qaida or ISIS attacks directly on Israel, while much of the rest of the surrounding countries are in full battle mode?    

The looking glass is inverted and oozes Mossad characteristics. All these seemingly puzzling terrorist onslaughts need not be fully exposed for the average confused American to ask just who gains the most from targeting the 1.6 billion Muslims as the masterminds behind terrorist operations.

For those crazed jihadists’ who are true religious fanatics, how many of them have been trained and equipped with Western special ops support?

This formula works so smoothly that each time it is repeated, the stakes are raised to a higher level. Until people wake up to this game of deception, nothing will change.

Western Europeans have a long experience with the negative outcomes from immigration, whether from the Middle East, African or Eastern Europe. EU governance is tyranny incarnate. Dangling the terrorist boogeyman in the face of ill equipped reality students and dependency docile citizens is important as economic conditions deteriorate further.

When Stephen Pollard, editor of the Jewish Chronicle states “Jews are fleeing terror-hit Paris because of growing anti-Semitism in France”, the Zionist controlled mass media propaganda is designed to convey victimhood on the kosher community.

Since that aforementioned Muslim professional has similar viewpoint towards Jews as to Christians, what is the inference? Should both Christian and Jew feel mutual solidarity, or should the lesson be that remaining separate and apart be the prudent course of conduct?

The judicious and wise person knows instinctively that maintaining a culture, a country and a community of your own kind is consistent with the natural order. How more politically incorrect can one become?

Government sponsored terror makes up the bulk of the violence that engulf the planet. When the infrequent and well publicized trophy terrorist examples are stuffed down our throats, one is shrewd to be highly skeptical.

No such reservation is needed when advocating the end to destructive immigration. This axiom is valid across all cultures and regions. Immigration in America needs to adopt this veracity just as much a Europe.

Think upon our message in this editorial and ask, do you agree or are you offended and take issue with the substance and validity of the circumstances. Those who routinely discard this advice, the affect of mass manipulation has worked well upon you.

Is the pen still mightier than the sword? Well, that depends, who is reading the content of the text or understands the symbolism in the graphic cartoon. A free people will respond not solely to the right to express free speech, but to the correctness in the truth that terrorism is the best friend of state despotism.

If the NWO elites have their way the sword will hang over you no matter that the odds are astronomically remote, so as to fall and lop off your head. FEAR is the instrument of social control. Immigration of foreigners from cultures that refuse assimilation, are poison to a traditional society. And duel loyalists that demonstrate allegiance to a Zionist regime are enemies of every real American.

SARTRE – January 13, 2015


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
“Je suis Ali Abbas”: The Forgotten Victims of State Terrorism

Je suis Ali Abbas. We are humanity, trampled to death by the European, and soaked in his hypocrisy.

Ed.note: Dr. Halpin’s summary in this case, encapsulates the terror of state origin – the US and the UK in particular.The UK almost always manages to present a beatific face – at first glance.

http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2015/01/13/514334je-suis-ali-abbas-the-forgotten-victims-of-state-terrorism/

by Dr. David Halpin

Massive terrorist attacks were hatched soon after the pretext of cinematographic ‘terrorist’ attacks in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania on September 9th 2001.

The state broadcaster in the UK pumped out the propaganda for these with all vigor and its usual guile. The people of Afghanistan were first in line, that winter bombing and invasion had been planned for some months before smoke billowed up from the Twin Towers.

Iraqi humans were to be next. Perle, Wolfowitz, Edelman, Bolton and other Zionists were sitting in our homes as bold as brass. People like Tom Mangold frightened the old ladies with stories about the nerve gas attacks on the Tokyo tube and how Sarin in a bursting light bulb could kill in seconds.

‘Free speech, fraternitė, and democracy’ were in the mix, but only a small part of broadcasting time was given over to speakers who were against terrorism by states. They naively thought the Nuremberg protocols and the Charter of the UN had meaning in international law.

The psychopathic cabal in No 10 got the cogs turning in the Ministry of Defence, the Foreign Office and MI6. A ‘dossier’ was produced in September 2002 but it turned out to be a ridiculous cut and paste job of a PhD ‘thesis’ from LA. To laugh in the faces of those with any power of analysis is usual. And there were the anthrax attacks in the ‘land of the free’.Those were surely false flags, and lo, Perle claimed that they originated from Iraq.

Alistair Campbell, Director of Communications and Strategy for prime minister Tony Blair between 1997 and 2003.

The war machinery was gathering pace in spite of a majority of British citizens which tried quite hard to throw a spanner in the works. The smiling, paramount psychopath and war criminal Blair, was undeterred.

A second ‘dossier’ was washed many times through the MoD and No 10 computers. Another psychopath and ex-Mirror journalist Alistair Campbell was the editor it seems. Saddam, the terrorist, could hit UK forces in Cyprus after a 45 minute order to launch.

This planned holocaust – the mass killing of humans by humans, as usual, gained its own momentum.

A Danish freighter, the MV Barbara, had cast off 1st February from Torquay, Devon, with four Britons aboard bound for Palestine.

(1) A symbolic fifty tonnes of food, medical supplies etc were in the hold. The purpose was to share our common humanity with our sisters and brothers in Gaza and to shout against the looming war upon the people of Iraq. As we steamed eastwards in the Mediterranean, the war and supply ships overtook us on their course for Suez. On one day the officer of the watch on our ship was interrogated five times by ‘coalition’ terrorists. (2)

On the 16th of March, brothers met to share blood. The trio who were flown to the Azores consisted of Bush, the capo di tutti capo, Blair and Aznar. (3) In fact, the attack had already started; Australian special force terrorists were already in theatre – as they say.

On the 22nd March, massed terrorists from 39 nations including Arab ones, streamed from Kuwait by land and by air, and with cruise missiles, into Iraq.

They were not wielding AK47s but were tooled up with everything. They had come to liberate the nineteen million humans in Babylon. This would include liberation of their limbs from their bodies. The altruistic and ultimate aim was to usher in a golden democracy, as experienced in those 39 nations like Saudi Arabia, the UK and the US, and in the ‘only democracy’ in the Middle East, the Zionist entity. But the plan laid out by Oded Yinon was central.

A splinter of this terror came to Ali Abbas, then 12 years of age and formerly of the village of Zafaraniya, near Baghdad about 10 days after the shocking and ‘aweing’ started. (4)

His arms were incinerated and the front of his trunk burned to a depth of an inch.

His mother who was six months pregnant, his father, brother and at least 10 other relatives were incinerated by the coalition of willing terror.

It had been reported that, just after midnight on 30 March 2003 and 10 days into “Operation Iraqi Freedom”, a weapon or two weapons exploded.

The village lay directly alongside the Al Rasheed camp. The 6th Special Republican Guard Battalion was stationed there.  The airbase was served by an 8,300 foot long runway. According to the Gulf War Air Power Survey,  there were 10 hardened aircraft shelters at Rasheed of 1991.

This had been an RAF base after 1922 from where, ironically and probably, the British had terrorized the native people. It also lay about 15 km from Baghdad airport. (5)

There had been a big battle for the bridgehead of Baghdad airport, the Special Republican Guard fighting the US 7th Infantry Division.

The Three images of Ali – view from the side, view from his feet and Ali pictured in Kuwait after amputation of his arms and excision of the deep trunk burn.

If one looks carefully one sees :-

• That his head and neck, groins and legs are unblemished. It would seem that he was irradiated through a rectangular window aperture.

• That it is appropriate to describe his arms as incinerated. The bones of some fingers are naked and white.

• That the burn over the front of his chest and abdomen tapers off down each side of his trunk. If massive thermal or nuclear radiation had been applied en face the ‘burning’ would be like this. Given the much higher thermal capacity of the trunk cf with the arms, the same energy would have required a longer time to incinerate the trunk.

• He had not moved, otherwise there would have been loss of this symmetry. Thus the incineration by the most intense nuclear irradiation took place in milliseconds.

Imagine his pain and the pain of then knowing that his mum and dad had been killed.

What was the agent of this terror?

The energy was either thermal or nuclear. A neutron shell was the most likely source. This weapon, developed by Samuel T Cohen at Livermore (6 &7) has limited blast and destroys living tissue as opposed to material like concrete or steel. It does produce radioactive isotopes.

This story, and others, which reports the removal of ‘topsoil’ (8) from Baghdad airport ( and also from Fallujah in other articles) lends support to the strong belief that ‘Enhanced Radiation’ was used on the inhabitants of Zafaraniya.

Conclusion

This act of terrorism on this family went unreported. Ali’s terrible injuries were presented as an accident of war. This was but a fragment of the conjoined terrorism of Himalayan magnitude. It has sat easily on the consciences of the Europeans and other nations from soon after Iraq was turned from blood and loss, into chaos, blood and loss.

It is noteworthy that although I have published these images several times, I have received only one comment – ‘napalm’!

Je suis Ali Abbas. We are humanity, trampled to death by the European, and soaked in his hypocrisy.

I am a Palestinian (9)

David S. Halpin : Retired orthopaedic and trauma surgeon age 74.  Fighting for justice for the Palestinian people since 2002.  Fighting for justice in many other places as well, including for an inquest into Dr David Kelly’s unnatural death.  Chartered a ship and sailed to Palestine in February 2003.  This, the Voyage of the Dove and the Dolphin, was a cry for Palestine and a great shout against the looming war on Iraq.  Founded the charity of the same name.  Been back to Gaza 8x since.  On the 10th attempt, two days into the greater shoah, I was on the Dignity when it was rammed 30 December 2008, with the clear intention of drowning the 16 of us.  Planned to return to Gaza but the entity would not allow this.

*****

The horrific images of the injuries, both mental and physical that 12 year old Ali Abbas sustained, are horrifying. You never saw this broadcast on the MSM when the cameras came rolling through showing the "Liberation of Iraq" during Operation Iraqi Freedom...

I can never stop seeing images like this, as I was there before the burnt and mutilated bodies of once human being's were cleared away. I saw some of what we did with my own eyes and as a result it is burned into my memory only to be erased by mental deterioration or death. My sentence is a life sentence for what I have done, and I shall suffer it until my last breath on this planet. I do not totally blame myself for my part in this, I was lied to the same as you and I joined the Army because it was a good option for me at the time and I wanted to protect people. The Allied military members currently serving can no longer justify what they do in the name of freedom for they have access to the same public information I do. I made my choice to leave the Army and fight for peace, a hardship to be endured for sure, but if I can do it.. so can they.. every single one of them that wants to believe they are a decent soul can prove it, and have the opportunity to do so in every moment.

Ali Abbas reflects ten years on:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/9939885/Iraq-war-victim-Ali-Abbas-reflects-ten-years-on.html


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Only one question left to ask..?

Are you all fuckin' stupid, or what ?

stu·pid (sto͞o′pĭd, styo͞o′-)
adj. stu·pid·er, stu·pid·est
1. Slow to learn or understand; obtuse.
2. Tending to make poor decisions or careless mistakes.
3. Marked by a lack of intelligence or care; foolish or careless: a stupid mistake.
4. Dazed, stunned, or stupefied: felt stupid after taking the pain medication.
5. Used to express disparagement or exasperation: Take your stupid notebook and go home.

n.
A stupid or foolish person.

BBC Documentary - Stupidity

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDsnCrSfzCQ

Are we all stupid sometimes ? Will that tendency to be stupid destroy the world ?

Idiocracy

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Private Joe Bauers, the definition of "average American", is selected by the Pentagon to be the guinea pig for a top-secret hibernation program. Forgotten, he awakes five centuries in the future. He discovers a society so incredibly dumbed down that he's easily the most intelligent person alive.

Social engineering (political science)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_engineering_%28political_science%29

Social engineering is a discipline in social science that refers to efforts to influence popular attitudes and social behaviors on a large scale, whether by governments, media or private groups. Social Engineering can also be understood philosophically as a deterministic phenomenon. As Dr. R. D. Ingthorsson alluded to, a human being is a biological creature from birth but is from then on shaped as a person through social influences (upbringing/socialisation) and is in that sense a social construction.

A social engineer is one who tries to influence popular attitudes, social behaviors, and resource management on a large scale. Social engineering is the application of the scientific method for social concern. Social engineers use the methods of science to analyze and understand social systems, so as to arrive at appropriate decisions as scientists, and not as politicians. In the political arena, the counterpart of social engineering is political engineering.

Decision-making can affect the safety and survival of literally billions of people. As expressed by German sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies in his study The Present Problems of Social Structure, society can no longer operate successfully using outmoded methods of social management. To achieve the best outcomes, all conclusions and decisions must use the most advanced techniques and include reliable statistical data, which can be applied to a social system. In other words, social engineering is a data-based scientific system used to develop a sustainable design so as to achieve the intelligent management of Earth’s resources with the highest levels of freedom, prosperity, and happiness within a population.

For various reasons, the term has been imbued with negative connotations. However, virtually all law and governance has the effect of seeking to change behavior and could be considered "social engineering" to some extent. Prohibitions on murder, rape, suicide and littering are all policies aimed at discouraging undesirable behaviors. In British and Canadian jurisprudence, changing public attitudes about a behaviour is accepted as one of the key functions of laws prohibiting it. Governments also influence behavior more subtly through incentives and disincentives built into economic policy and tax policy, for instance, and have done so for centuries.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
America’s perfect, self-sustaining terror machine: Why we’re forever doomed to a national security state

Decades after the Cold War, fear of foreign enemies real and imagined still dictates American foreign policy

http://www.salon.com/2015/01/08/americas_perfect_self_sustaining_terror_machine_why_were_forever_doomed_to_a_national_security_state_partner/

As 2015 begins, let’s take a trip down memory lane.  Imagine that it’s January 1963.  For the last three years, the United States has unsuccessfully faced off against a small island in the Caribbean, where a revolutionary named Fidel Castro seized power from a corrupt but U.S.-friendly regime run by Fulgencio Batista.  In the global power struggle between the United States and the Soviet Union in which much of the planet has chosen sides, Cuba, only 90 miles from the American mainland, finds itself in the eye of the storm.  Having lost Washington’s backing, it has, however, gained the support of distant Moscow, the other nuclear-armed superpower on the planet.

In October 1960, President Dwight D. Eisenhower instituted an embargo on U.S. trade with the island that would, two years later, be strengthened and made permanent by John F. Kennedy.  On entering the Oval Office, Kennedy also inherited a cockamamie CIA scheme to use Cuban exiles to overthrow Castro.  That led, in April 1961, to the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion in which, despite major Agency support, the exiles were crushed (after which the CIA would hatch various mad plots to assassinate the new Cuban leader).  What followed in October 1962 was “the most dangerous moment in human history” — the Cuban missile crisis — a brief period when many Americans, my 18-year-old self included, genuinely thought we might soon be nuclear toast.

Now, imagine yourself in January 1963, alive and chastened by a world in which you could be obliterated at any moment.  Imagine as well that someone from our time suddenly invited you into the American future some 52 Januaries hence, when you would, miracle of miracles, still be alive and the planet still more or less in one piece.  Imagine, as a start, being told that the embargo against, and Washington’s hostility toward, Cuba never ended.  That 52 futile years later, with Cuba now run by Fidel’s “younger” brother, 83-year-old Raul, the 11th American president to deal with the “crisis” has finally decided to restore diplomatic relations, ease trade restrictions, and encourage American visitors to the island.

Imagine being told as well that in Congress, more than half a century later, a possible majority of representatives remained nostalgic for a policy that spent 52 years not working.  Imagine that members of the upcoming 2015 Senate were already swearing they wouldn’t hand over a plug nickel to the president or the State Department to establish a diplomatic mission in Havana or confirm an ambassador or ease the embargo or take any other steps to change the situation, and were denouncing the president — who, by the way, is a black man named Barack Obama — as a weakling and an “appeaser-in-chief” for making such a move.

Perhaps that American visitor from 1963 would already feel as if his or her mind were being scrambled like a morning egg and yet we’re only beginning.  After all, our visitor would have to be told that the Soviet Union, that hostile, nuclear-armed communist superpower and partner of Washington in the potential obliteration of the planet, no longer exists; that it unexpectedly imploded in 1991, leaving its Eastern European empire largely free to integrate into the rest of Europe.

One caveat would, however, need to be added to that blockbuster piece of historical news.  Lest our visitor imagine that everything has changed beyond all recognition, it would be important to point out that in 2015 the U.S. still confronts an implacably hostile, nuclear-armed communist state.  Not the USSR, of course, nor even that other communist behemoth, China.  (Its Communist Party took the “capitalist road” in the late 1970s and never looked back as that country rose to become the globe’s largest economy!)

Here’s a hint: it fought the U.S. to a draw in a bitter war more than six decades ago and has just been accused of launching a devastating strike against the United States.  Admittedly, it wasn’t aimed at Washington but at Hollywood.  That country — or some group claiming to be working in its interests — broke into a major movie studio, Sony (oh yes, a Japanese company is now a significant force in Hollywood!), and released gossip about its inner workings as well as the nasty things actors, producers, and corporate executives had to say about one another.  It might (or might not), that is, have launched the planet’s first cyber-gossip bomb.

And yes, you would have to tell our visitor from 1963 that this hostile communist power, North Korea, is also an oppressive, beleaguered, lights-out state and in no way a serious enemy, not in a world in which the U.S. remains the “last superpower.”

You would, of course, have to add that, 52 years later, Vietnam, another implacable communist enemy with whom President Kennedy was escalating a low-level conflict in 1963, is now a de facto U.S. ally – and no, not because it lost its war with us.  That war, once considered the longest in U.S. history, would at its height see more than 500,000 American combat troops dispatched to South Vietnam and, in 1973, end in an unexpectedly bitter defeat for Washington from which America never quite seemed to recover.

2015 and Baying for More

Still, with communism a has-been force and capitalism triumphant everywhere, enemies have been just a tad scarce in the twenty-first century.  Other than the North Koreans, there is the fundamentalist regime of Iran, which ran its Batista, the Shah, out in 1979, and with which, in the 35 years since, the U.S. has never come to terms — though Barack Obama still might – without ever quite going to war either.  And of course there would be another phenomenon of our moment completely unknown to an American of 1963: Islamic extremism, aka jihadism, along with the rise of terrorist organizations and, in 2014, the establishment of the first mini-terror state in the heart of the Middle East.  And oh yes, there was that tiny crew that went by the name of al-Qaeda, 19 of whose box-cutter-wielding militants hijacked four planes on September 11, 2001, and destroyed two soaring towers (not yet built in 1963) in downtown New York City and part of the Pentagon.  In the process, they killed themselves and thousands of civilians, put apocalyptic-looking scenes of destruction on American television screens, and successfully created a sense of a looming, communist-style planetary enemy, when just about no one was there.

Their acts gave a new administration of right-wing fundamentalists in Washington the opportunity to fulfill its wildest dreams of planetary domination by launching, only days later, what was grandiloquently called the Global War on Terror (or the Long War, or World War IV), a superpower crusade against, initially, almost no one.  Its opening salvo would let loose an “all-volunteer” military (no more draft Army as in 1963) universally believed to be uniquely powerful.  It would, they were sure, wipe out al-Qaeda, settle scores with various enemies in the Greater Middle East, including Iraq, Iran, and Syria, and leave the U.S. triumphant in a way no great power had been in history.  In response to a few thousand scattered al-Qaeda members, a Pax Americana would be created on a global scale that would last generations, if not forever and a day.

Washington’s enemies of that moment would have been so unimpressive to Americans of 1963 that, on learning of the future that awaited them, they might well have dropped to their knees and thanked God for the deliverance of the United States of America.  In describing all this to that visitor from another America, you would, however, have to add that the Global War on Terror, in which giant ambitions met the most modest of opponents any great power had faced in hundreds of years, didn’t work out so well.  You would have to point out that the U.S. military, allied intelligence outfits, and a set of warrior corporations (almost unknown in 1963) mobilized to go to war with them struck out big time in a way almost impossible to fathom; that, from September 2001 to January 2015, no war, invasion, occupation, intervention, conflict, or set of operations, no matter how under-armed or insignificant the forces being taken on, succeeded in any lasting or meaningful way.  It was as if Hank Aaron had come to the plate for a more than a decade without ever doing anything but striking out.

For our by now goggle-eyed visitor, you would have to add that, other than invading the tiny Caribbean island of Grenada against no opposition in 1983 and Panama against next to no opposition in 1989, the mightiest power on the planet hasn’t won a war or conflict since World War II.  And after explaining all this, the strangest task would still lie ahead.

Our American beamed in from 1963, who hadn’t even experienced defeat in Vietnam yet, would have to be filled in on the two wars of choice Washington launched with such enthusiasm and confidence in 2001 and 2003 and could never again get out of. I’m talking, of course, about Afghanistan and Iraq, two countries that would barely have registered on an American radar screen 52 years ago, and yet would prove unparalleled quagmires (a Vietnam-era term our observer wouldn’t have yet run across). We would need to explain how the “lone superpower” of the twenty-first century would transform each of them into competitors for the “longest American war” ever.

Washington’s Iraq War began in 1991, the year the Soviet Union would disappear, and in one form or another essentially never ended.  It has involved the building of major war-making coalitions, invasions, a full-scale occupation, air wars of various sorts, and god knows what else. As 2015 begins, the U.S. is in its third round of war in Iraq, having committed itself to a new and escalating conflict in that country (and Syria), and in all that time it has won nothing at all.  It would be important to remind our visitor from the past that Barack Obama ran for president in 2008 on the promise of getting the U.S. out of Iraq and actually managed to do so for three years before plunging the country back in yet again.

The first American war in Afghanistan, on the other hand, was a CIA Cold War operation that began in 1979 just after the Soviets invaded the country and was meant as payback for Vietnam.  And yes, to confuse that visitor even more, in its first Afghan War, the U.S. actually supported the crew who became al-Qaeda and would later attack New York and Washington to ensure the launching of the second Afghan War, the one in which the U.S. invaded and occupied the country.  That war has been going on ever since.  Despite much talk about winding it down or even ending the mission there 13 years later, the commitment has been renewed for 2015 and beyond.

In both countries, the enemies of choice proved to be lightly armed minority insurgencies.  In both, an initial, almost ecstatic sense of triumph following an invasion slowly morphed into a fear of impending defeat.  To add just a fillip to all this, in 2015 a Republican majority in the Senate as well as in the House — and don’t forget to explain that we’re no longer talking about Eisenhower Republicans here — will be baying for more.

The National Security State as a Self-Perpetuating Machine

So far, America’s future, looked at from more than half a century ago, has been little short of phantasmagoric.  To sum up: in an almost enemy-less world in which the American economic system was triumphant and the U.S. possessed by far the strongest military on the planet, nothing seems to have gone as planned or faintly right.  And yet, you wouldn’t want to leave that observer from 1963 with the wrong impression.  However much the national security state may have seemed like an amalgam of the Three Stooges on a global stage, not everything worked out badly.

In fact, in these years the national security state triumphed in the nation’s capital in a way that the U.S. military and allied intelligence outfits were incapable of doing anywhere else on Earth.  Fifty-three years after the world might have ended, on a planet lacking a Soviet-like power — though the U.S. was by now involved in “Cold War 2.0” in eastern Ukraine on the border of the rump energy state the Soviet Union left behind — the worlds of national security and surveillance had grown to a size that beggared their own enormous selves in the Cold War era.  They had been engorged by literally trillions of taxpayer dollars.  A new domestic version of the Pentagon called the Department of Homeland Security had been set up in 2002.  An “intelligence community” made up of 17 major agencies and outfits, bolstered by hundreds of thousands of private security contractors, had expanded endlessly and in the process created a global surveillance state that went beyond the wildest imaginings of the totalitarian powers of the twentieth century.

In the process, the national security state enveloped itself in a penumbra of secrecy that left the American people theoretically “safe” and remarkably ignorant of what was being done in their name.  Its officials increasingly existed in a crime-free zone, beyond the reach of accountability, the law, courts, or jail.  Homeland security and intelligence complexes grew up around the national security state in the way that the military-industrial complex had once grown up around the Pentagon and similarly engorged themselves.  In these years, Washington filled with newly constructed billion-dollar intelligence headquarters and building complexes dedicated to secret work — and that only begins to tell the tale of how twenty-first-century “security” triumphed.

This vast investment of American treasure has been used to construct an edifice dedicated in a passionate way to dealing with a single danger to Americans, one that would have been unknown in 1963: Islamic terrorism. Despite the several thousand Americans who died on September 11, 2001, the dangers of terrorism rate above shark attacks but not much else in American life.  Even more remarkably, the national security state has been built on a foundation of almost total failure.  Think of failure, in fact, as the spark that repeatedly sets the further expansion of its apparatus in motion, funds it, and allows it to thrive.

It works something like this: start with the fact that, on September 10, 2001, global jihadism was a microscopic movement on this planet.  Since 9/11, under the pressure of American military power, it has exploded geographically, while the number of jihadist organizations has multiplied, and the number of people joining such groups has regularly and repeatedly increased, a growth rate that seems to correlate with the efforts of Washington to destroy terrorism and its infrastructure.  In other words, the Global War on Terror has been and remains a global war for the production of terror.  And terror groups know it.

It was Osama bin Laden’s greatest insight and is now a commonplace that drawing Washington into military action against you increases your credibility in the world that matters to you and so makes recruiting easier.  At the same time, American actions, from invasions to drone strikes, and their “collateral damage,” create pools of people desperate for revenge.  If you want to thrive and grow, in other words, you need the U.S. as an enemy.

Via taunting acts like the beheading videos of the Islamic State, the new “caliphate” in Iraq and Syria, such movements bait Washington into action.  And each new terrorist crew, each “lone wolf” terrorist undiscovered until too late by a state structure that has cost Americans trillions of dollars, each plot not foiled, each failure, works to bolster both terrorist outfits and the national security state itself.  This has, in other words, proved to be a deeply symbiotic and mutually profitable relationship.

From the point of view of the national security state, each failure, each little disaster, acts as another shot of fear in the American body politic, and the response to failure is predictable: never less of what doesn’t work, but more.  More money, more bodies hired, more new outfits formed, more elaborate defenses, more offensive weaponry.  Each failure with its accompanying jolt of fear (and often hysteria) predictably results in further funding for the national security state to develop newer, even more elaborate versions of what it’s been doing these last 13 years.  Failure, in other words, is the key to success.

In this sense, think of Washington’s national security structure as a self-perpetuating machine that works like a dream, since those who oversee its continued expansion are never penalized for its inability to accomplish any of its goals.  On the contrary, they are invariably promoted, honored, and assured of a golden-parachute-style retirement or — far more likely — a golden journey through one of Washington’s revolving doors onto some corporate board or into some cushy post in one complex or another where they can essentially lobby their former colleagues for private warrior corporations, rent-a-gun outfits, weapons makers, and the like.  And there is nothing either in Washington or in American life that seems likely to change any of this in the near future.

An Inheritance From Hell

In the meantime, a “war on terror” mentality slowly seeps into the rest of society as the warriors, weapons, and gadgetry come home from our distant battle zones.  That’s especially obvious when it comes to the police nationwide.  It can be seen in the expanding numbers of SWAT teams filled with special ops vets, the piles of Pentagon weaponry from those wars being transferred to local police forces at home, and the way they are taking on the look of forces of occupation in an alien land, operating increasingly with a mentality of “wartime policing.”  Since the events of Ferguson, all of this has finally become far more evident to Americans (as it would, with some explanation, to our visitor from 1963).  It was no anomaly, for example, that Justice Department investigators found a banner hanging in a Cleveland police station that identified the place sardonically as a “forward operating base,” a term the military uses, as the New York Times put it, “for heavily guarded wartime outposts inside insurgent-held territory.”

In the wake of Ferguson, the “reforms” being proposed — essentially better training in the more effective use of the new battlefield-style gear the police are acquiring — will only militarize them further.  This same mentality, with its accompanying gadgetry, has been moving heavily into America’s border areas and into schools and other institutions as well, including an enormous increase in surveillance systems geared to streets, public places, and even the home.

In the meantime, while a national security state mentality has been infiltrating American society, the planners of that state have been rewriting the global rules of the road for years when it comes to torture, kidnapping, drone assassination campaigns, global surveillance, national sovereignty, the launching of cyberwars, and the like — none of which will, in the end, contribute to American security, and all of which has already made the planet a less secure, more chaotic, more fragmented place.  In these last years, in other words, in its search for “security,” the U.S. has actually become a force for destabilization — that is, insecurity — across significant swaths of the planet.

Perhaps one of these days, Americans will decide to consider more seriously what “security,” as presently defined by the powers that be in Washington, even means in our world.  There can, as a start, be no question that the national security state does offer genuine security of a very specific sort: to its own officials and employees.  Nothing they do, no matter how dumb, immoral, or downright criminal, ever seems to stand in the way of their own upward mobility within its structure.

As an example — and it’s only one in an era filled with them — not a single CIA official was dismissed, demoted, or even reprimanded in response to the recent release of the redacted executive summary of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s torture report.  It hardly mattered that the report included actual criminal behavior (even by the degraded “enhanced interrogation” standards green-lighted by the Bush administration) and the grimmest kinds of abuse of prisoners, some quite innocent of anything. In an America in which, economically speaking, security has not exactly been the gold standard of the twenty-first century, it is hard to imagine any group that is more secure.

As for the rest of us, insecurity will surely be the story of our lives for the rest of the twenty-first century (as it was, of course, in 1963).  After all, on August 6, 1945, when we consciously entered the age of the apocalyptic possibility at Hiroshima, we had no way of knowing that we had already done so perhaps 200 years earlier as the industrial revolution, based on the burning of fossil fuels, took off.  Nor almost 20 years later, did that American of 1963 know this.  By 1979, however, the science adviser for the president of the United States was well aware of global warming.  When Jimmy Carter gave his infamous “malaise” speech promoting a massive commitment to alternative energy research (and got laughed out of the White House), he already knew that climate change — not yet called that — was a reality that needed to be dealt with.

Now, the rest of us know, or at least should know, and so — with what is likely to be the hottest year on record just ended — would be obliged to offer our visitor from 1963 a graphic account of the coming dangers of a globally warming world.  There has always been a certain sense of insecurity to any human life, but until 1945 not to all human life.  And yet we now know with something approaching certainty that, even if another nuclear weapon never goes off (and across the planet nuclear powers are upgrading their arsenals), chaos, acidifying oceans, melting ice formations, rising seas, flooding coastal areas, mass migrations of desperate people, food production problems, devastating droughts, and monster storms are all in a future that will be the definition of human-caused insecurity — not that the national security state gives much of a damn.

Admittedly, since at least 2001, the Pentagon and the U.S. Intelligence Community have been engaged in blue-skies thinking about how to give good war in a globally warming world.  The national security state as a whole, however, has been set up at a cost of trillions of dollars (and allowed to spend trillions more) to deal with only one kind of insecurity — terrorism and the ever-larger line up of enemies that go with it.  Such groups do, of course, represent a genuine danger, but not of an existential kind. Thought about another way, thetrue terrorists on our planet may be the people running the Big Energy corporations and about them the national security state could care less.  They are more than free to ply their trade, pull any level of fossil fuel reserves from the ground, and generally pursue mega-profits while preparing the way for global destruction, aided and abetted by Washington.

Try now to imagine yourself in the shoes of that visitor from 1963 absorbing such a future, bizarre almost beyond imagining: all those trillions of dollars going into a system that essentially promotes the one danger it was set up to eradicate or at least bring under control.  In the meantime, the part of the state dedicated to national security conveniently looking the other way when it comes to the leading candidate for giving insecurity a new meaning in a future that is almost upon us.  Official Washington has, that is, invented a system so dumb, so extreme, so fundamentalist, and so deeply entrenched in our world that changing it will surely prove a stunningly difficult task.

Welcome to the new world of American insecurity and to the nightmarish inheritance we are preparing for our children and grandchildren.

Tom Engelhardt, co-founder of the American Empire Project, runs the Nation Institute's TomDispatch.com. His latest book, "Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a Single-Superpower World" (Haymarket Books), has just been published.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The Swiss That Broke the Camel’s Back

https://www.perpetualassets.com/news/2015/01/20/the-swiss-that-broke-the-camels-back/

By Will Lehr

This is it. The hammer has fallen, the line in the sand is breached, and the camel’s back is fractured. The foundation of the financial house of cards just gave it’s first tremor. The move by the Swiss National Bank (SNB) to unpeg the franc from the euro will go down in history as the first shot in this war. The likelihood that a derivatives time bomb has been lit is near certain. Currency market moves are often the most sensitive, the most deeply tied into the interwoven system of financial ‘trading’.

Interest rate swaps, which are prevalent in the currency markets, are the largest pool of derivative leverage in the markets. These markets have literally trillions of dollars in daily turnover – source BIS. The leverage on top of these massive trades is even bigger. Most currency exchange (FX) trading accounts have 10 to 1 leverage, often 50 to 1! Currency moves are typically expressed in basis points, hundredths of a percent. When the SNB removed the franc’s peg to the euro, the currency moved about 30%. This is unprecedented.

It’s no secret that the financial world is interconnected. When there are massive disruptions in one small area, they can trigger a shakedown of the entire system- think sub-prime mortgage market in 2008. The trigger of derivative losses in sub-prime loans almost took down the system. One of the largest investment banks of the time, Lehmann Brothers took the fall, and the rest of the financial system needed a trillion dollar bailout.

A decade earlier in 1997, mimicking the events of last week, the central bank of Thailand unpegged the Thai baht from the US dollar. The event spread into the Asian Contagion. Southeast Asian economies collapsed. Russia went into a bond default, which caused the collapse of a large US hedge fund, Long Term Capital Management (LCTM), whose losses were $3.6 billion, for which Greenspan arranged a bailout.

Unlike the famed US taxpayer bailout of the banks in 2008, Greenspan convinced the largest banks to buy LTCM outright, and stop the bleeding. Although the US treasury didn’t stroke the check, a bailout was necessary to keep the system afloat. Per the maestro himself, had the bailout not been arranged the world economy could have collapsed.

“Had the failure of LTCM triggered the seizing up of markets, substantial damage could have been inflicted on many market participants, including some not directly involved with the firm, and could have potentially impaired the economies of many nations, including our own.”
~FRB Testimony, 10/1/1998

The Thai unpeg occurred in 1997. The global financial system was much healthier then. Confidence was high, participation was great, leverage was lower. The Thai baht was also a very thinly traded currency, whereas the Swiss franc is one of the heaviest traded currencies in the world today. The implications of the Swiss unpeg are incredible, the losses will be paramount. The damage done to interest rate swap derivatives is not even known yet. Stay tuned as the victims should surface soon. Look for big name banks and big numbers.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Noam Chomsky: Are We on the Verge of Total Self-Destruction?

If you ask what the world is going to look like, it’s not a pretty picture.

What is the future likely to bring?  A reasonable stance might be to try to look at the human species from the outside.  So imagine that you’re an extraterrestrial observer who is trying to figure out what’s happening here or, for that matter, imagine you’re an historian 100 years from now -- assuming there are any historians 100 years from now, which is not obvious -- and you’re looking back at what’s happening today.  You’d see something quite remarkable.

For the first time in the history of the human species, we have clearly developed the capacity to destroy ourselves.  That’s been true since 1945.  It’s now being finally recognized that there are more long-term processes like environmental destruction leading in the same direction, maybe not to total destruction, but at least to the destruction of the capacity for a decent existence.

And there are other dangers like pandemics, which have to do with globalization and interaction.  So there are processes underway and institutions right in place, like nuclear weapons systems, which could lead to a serious blow to, or maybe the termination of, an organized existence.

How to Destroy a Planet Without Really Trying

The question is: What are people doing about it?  None of this is a secret.  It’s all perfectly open.  In fact, you have to make an effort not to see it.

There have been a range of reactions.  There are those who are trying hard to do something about these threats, and others who are acting to escalate them.  If you look at who they are, this future historian or extraterrestrial observer would see something strange indeed.  Trying to mitigate or overcome these threats are the least developed societies, the indigenous populations, or the remnants of them, tribal societies and first nations in Canada.  They’re not talking about nuclear war but environmental disaster, and they’re really trying to do something about it.

In fact, all over the world -- Australia, India, South America -- there are battles going on, sometimes wars.  In India, it’s a major war over direct environmental destruction, with tribal societies trying to resist resource extraction operations that are extremely harmful locally, but also in their general consequences.  In societies where indigenous populations have an influence, many are taking a strong stand.  The strongest of any country with regard to global warming is in Bolivia, which has an indigenous majority and constitutional requirements that protect the “rights of nature.”

Ecuador, which also has a large indigenous population, is the only oil exporter I know of where the government is seeking aid to help keep that oil in the ground, instead of producing and exporting it -- and the ground is where it ought to be.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who died recently and was the object of mockery, insult, and hatred throughout the Western world, attended a session of the U.N. General Assembly a few years ago where he elicited all sorts of ridicule for calling George W. Bush a devil.  He also gave a speech there that was quite interesting.  Of course, Venezuela is a major oil producer.  Oil is practically their whole gross domestic product.  In that speech, he warned of the dangers of the overuse of fossil fuels and urged producer and consumer countries to get together and try to work out ways to reduce fossil fuel use.  That was pretty amazing on the part of an oil producer.  You know, he was part Indian, of indigenous background.  Unlike the funny things he did, this aspect of his actions at the U.N. was never even reported.

So, at one extreme you have indigenous, tribal societies trying to stem the race to disaster.  At the other extreme, the richest, most powerful societies in world history, like the United States and Canada, are racing full-speed ahead to destroy the environment as quickly as possible.  Unlike Ecuador, and indigenous societies throughout the world, they want to extract every drop of hydrocarbons from the ground with all possible speed.

Both political parties, President Obama, the media, and the international press seem to be looking forward with great enthusiasm to what they call “a century of energy independence” for the United States.  Energy independence is an almost meaningless concept, but put that aside.  What they mean is: we’ll have a century in which to maximize the use of fossil fuels and contribute to destroying the world.

And that’s pretty much the case everywhere.  Admittedly, when it comes to alternative energy development, Europe is doing something.  Meanwhile, the United States, the richest and most powerful country in world history, is the only nation among perhaps 100 relevant ones that doesn’t have a national policy for restricting the use of fossil fuels, that doesn’t even have renewable energy targets.  It’s not because the population doesn’t want it.  Americans are pretty close to the international norm in their concern about global warming.  It’s institutional structures that block change.  Business interests don’t want it and they’re overwhelmingly powerful in determining policy, so you get a big gap between opinion and policy on lots of issues, including this one.

So that’s what the future historian -- if there is one -- would see.  He might also read today’s scientific journals.  Just about every one you open has a more dire prediction than the last.

“The Most Dangerous Moment in History”

The other issue is nuclear war.  It’s been known for a long time that if there were to be a first strike by a major power, even with no retaliation, it would probably destroy civilization just because of the nuclear-winter consequences that would follow.  You can read about it in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.  It’s well understood.  So the danger has always been a lot worse than we thought it was.

We’ve just passed the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis, which was called “the most dangerous moment in history” by historian Arthur Schlesinger, President John F. Kennedy’s advisor.  Which it was.  It was a very close call, and not the only time either.  In some ways, however, the worst aspect of these grim events is that the lessons haven’t been learned.

What happened in the missile crisis in October 1962 has been prettified to make it look as if acts of courage and thoughtfulness abounded.  The truth is that the whole episode was almost insane.  There was a point, as the missile crisis was reaching its peak, when Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev wrote to Kennedy offering to settle it by a public announcement of a withdrawal of Russian missiles from Cuba and U.S. missiles from Turkey.  Actually, Kennedy hadn’t even known that the U.S. had missiles in Turkey at the time.  They were being withdrawn anyway, because they were being replaced by more lethal Polaris nuclear submarines, which were invulnerable.

So that was the offer.  Kennedy and his advisors considered it -- and rejected it.  At the time, Kennedy himself was estimating the likelihood of nuclear war at a third to a half.  So Kennedy was willing to accept a very high risk of massive destruction in order to establish the principle that we -- and only we -- have the right to offensive missiles beyond our borders, in fact anywhere we like, no matter what the risk to others -- and to ourselves, if matters fall out of control. We have that right, but no one else does.

Kennedy did, however, accept a secret agreement to withdraw the missiles the U.S. was already withdrawing, as long as it was never made public.  Khrushchev, in other words, had to openly withdraw the Russian missiles while the U.S. secretly withdrew its obsolete ones; that is, Khrushchev had to be humiliated and Kennedy had to maintain his macho image.  He’s greatly praised for this: courage and coolness under threat, and so on.  The horror of his decisions is not even mentioned -- try to find it on the record.

And to add a little more, a couple of months before the crisis blew up the United States had sent missiles with nuclear warheads to Okinawa.  These were aimed at China during a period of great regional tension.

Well, who cares?  We have the right to do anything we want anywhere in the world.  That was one grim lesson from that era, but there were others to come.

Ten years after that, in 1973, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger called a high-level nuclear alert.  It was his way of warning the Russians not to interfere in the ongoing Israel-Arab war and, in particular, not to interfere after he had informed the Israelis that they could violate a ceasefire the U.S. and Russia had just agreed upon.  Fortunately, nothing happened.

Ten years later, President Ronald Reagan was in office.  Soon after he entered the White House, he and his advisors had the Air Force start penetrating Russian air space to try to elicit information about Russian warning systems, Operation Able Archer.  Essentially, these were mock attacks.  The Russians were uncertain, some high-level officials fearing that this was a step towards a real first strike.  Fortunately, they didn’t react, though it was a close call.  And it goes on like that.

What to Make of the Iranian and North Korean Nuclear Crises

At the moment, the nuclear issue is regularly on front pages in the cases of North Korea and Iran.  There are ways to deal with these ongoing crises.  Maybe they wouldn’t work, but at least you could try.  They are, however, not even being considered, not even reported.

Take the case of Iran, which is considered in the West -- not in the Arab world, not in Asia -- the gravest threat to world peace.  It’s a Western obsession, and it’s interesting to look into the reasons for it, but I’ll put that aside here.  Is there a way to deal with the supposed gravest threat to world peace?  Actually there are quite a few.  One way, a pretty sensible one, was proposed a couple of months ago at a meeting of the non-aligned countries in Tehran.  In fact, they were just reiterating a proposal that’s been around for decades, pressed particularly by Egypt, and has been approved by the U.N. General Assembly.

The proposal is to move toward establishing a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the region.  That wouldn’t be the answer to everything, but it would be a pretty significant step forward.  And there were ways to proceed.  Under U.N. auspices, there was to be an international conference in Finland last December to try to implement plans to move toward this.  What happened?

You won’t read about it in the newspapers because it wasn’t reported -- only in specialist journals.  In early November, Iran agreed to attend the meeting.  A couple of days later Obama cancelled the meeting, saying the time wasn’t right.  The European Parliament issued a statement calling for it to continue, as did the Arab states.  Nothing resulted.  So we’ll move toward ever-harsher sanctions against the Iranian population -- it doesn’t hurt the regime -- and maybe war. Who knows what will happen?

In Northeast Asia, it’s the same sort of thing.  North Korea may be the craziest country in the world.  It’s certainly a good competitor for that title.  But it does make sense to try to figure out what’s in the minds of people when they’re acting in crazy ways.  Why would they behave the way they do?  Just imagine ourselves in their situation.  Imagine what it meant in the Korean War years of the early 1950s for your country to be totally leveled, everything destroyed by a huge superpower, which furthermore was gloating about what it was doing.  Imagine the imprint that would leave behind.

Bear in mind that the North Korean leadership is likely to have read the public military journals of this superpower at that time explaining that, since everything else in North Korea had been destroyed, the air force was sent to destroy North Korea’s dams, huge dams that controlled the water supply -- a war crime, by the way, for which people were hanged in Nuremberg.   And these official journals were talking excitedly about how wonderful it was to see the water pouring down, digging out the valleys, and the Asians scurrying around trying to survive.  The journals were exulting in what this meant to those “Asians,” horrors beyond our imagination.  It meant the destruction of their rice crop, which in turn meant starvation and death.  How magnificent!  It’s not in our memory, but it’s in their memory.

Let’s turn to the present.  There’s an interesting recent history.  In 1993, Israel and North Korea were moving towards an agreement in which North Korea would stop sending any missiles or military technology to the Middle East and Israel would recognize that country.  President Clinton intervened and blocked it.  Shortly after that, in retaliation, North Korea carried out a minor missile test.  The U.S. and North Korea did then reach a framework agreement in 1994 that halted its nuclear work and was more or less honored by both sides.  When George W. Bush came into office, North Korea had maybe one nuclear weapon and verifiably wasn’t producing any more.

Bush immediately launched his aggressive militarism, threatening North Korea -- “axis of evil” and all that -- so North Korea got back to work on its nuclear program.  By the time Bush left office, they had eight to 10 nuclear weapons and a missile system, another great neocon achievement.  In between, other things happened.  In 2005, the U.S. and North Korea actually reached an agreement in which North Korea was to end all nuclear weapons and missile development.  In return, the West, but mainly the United States, was to provide a light-water reactor for its medical needs and end aggressive statements.  They would then form a nonaggression pact and move toward accommodation.

It was pretty promising, but almost immediately Bush undermined it.  He withdrew the offer of the light-water reactor and initiated programs to compel banks to stop handling any North Korean transactions, even perfectly legal ones.  The North Koreans reacted by reviving their nuclear weapons program.  And that’s the way it’s been going.

It’s well known.  You can read it in straight, mainstream American scholarship.  What they say is: it’s a pretty crazy regime, but it’s also following a kind of tit-for-tat policy.  You make a hostile gesture and we’ll respond with some crazy gesture of our own.  You make an accommodating gesture and we’ll reciprocate in some way.

Lately, for instance, there have been South Korean-U.S. military exercises on the Korean peninsula which, from the North’s point of view, have got to look threatening.  We’d think they were threatening if they were going on in Canada and aimed at us.  In the course of these, the most advanced bombers in history, Stealth B-2s and B-52s, are carrying out simulated nuclear bombing attacks right on North Korea’s borders.

This surely sets off alarm bells from the past.  They remember that past, so they’re reacting in a very aggressive, extreme way.  Well, what comes to the West from all this is how crazy and how awful the North Korean leaders are.  Yes, they are.  But that’s hardly the whole story, and this is the way the world is going.

It’s not that there are no alternatives.  The alternatives just aren’t being taken. That’s dangerous.  So if you ask what the world is going to look like, it’s not a pretty picture.  Unless people do something about it.  We always can.

Noam Chomsky is Institute Professor Emeritus in the MIT Department of Linguistics and Philosophy.  A TomDispatch regular, he is the author of numerous best-selling political works, including Hopes and Prospects, Making the Future, and most recently (with interviewer David Barsamian), Power Systems: Conversations on Global Democratic Uprisings and the New Challenges to U.S. Empire (The American Empire Project, Metropolitan Books).

[Note: This piece was adapted (with the help of Noam Chomsky) from anonline video interview that Javier Naranjo, a Colombian poet and professor, did for the website What, which is dedicated to integrating knowledge from different fields with the aim of encouraging the balance between the individual, society, and the environment.]


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
GERALD CELENTE – The Whole System Is About To Collapse. Think For Yourself, Dont Trust Authority

http://investmentwatchblog.com/gerald-celente-the-whole-system-is-about-to-collapse-think-for-yourself-dont-trust-authority/

Virtually everything that you do is being watched. Do you drive a car? Do you watch television? Do you use a cell phone? As you do any of those things, information about you is being recorded and tracked. We live at a time when personal privacy is dying. And it is not just governments that are doing this.

In fact, sometimes private companies are the biggest offenders. It turns out that gathering information about all of us is very, very profitable. And both government entities and private companies are going to continue to push the envelope when it comes to high tech surveillance until people start objecting to what they are trying to do. If we continue down the path that we are currently on, it is inevitable that we will end up living in an extremely restrictive “Big Brother” police state where basically everything that we do is very closely watched, monitored, tracked and controlled. And such a day may be much closer than you think.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Russia and China ‘Furiously’ Buying Up Gold As “a Global Currency Crisis – Albeit Unstated – is Underway”

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/russia-and-china-furiously-buying-up-gold-as-a-global-currency-crisis-albeit-unstated-is-underway_01202015

A larger global currency shift is underway…

And it may be happening much more quickly than anyone has realized.

Things are definitely in motion. Call it a game of musical chairs, or an exercise in rearranging chairs on the Titanic, or just that a tilting balance of power. Just don’t make the mistake of thinking this is all routine.

As Michael Snyder just reported:

    The absolutely stunning decision by the Swiss National Bank to decouple from the euro has triggered billions of dollars worth of losses all over the globe.

    [...]

    And these are just the losses that we know about so far.  It will be many months before the full scope of the financial devastation caused by the Swiss National Bank is fully revealed.  But of course the same thing could be said about the crash in the price of oil that we have witnessed in recent weeks.  These two “black swan events” have set financial dominoes in motion all over the globe.  At this point we can only guess how bad the financial devastation will ultimately be.


The key to understanding how the hammer will fall may lie in: gold.

In the material world that governs politics and economics, there has always been one golden rule: he who has the gold makes the rules.

Put China at the top of the next generation of rule makers, then.

China has been quietly stockpiling gold for years now. In fact, it is stockpiling so much gold that many have speculated that it may be building a gold-backed yuan currency that would make the Dollar pale in comparison on the global market.

Bottom line: no one knows just exactly how much gold China has amassed:

    Buying surreptitiously allows Beijing to buy bullion at bargain prices; if the world knew how much gold China was really amassing, a run on gold the likes of which the globe has never seen would likely ensue. “We believe China is controlling the gold price because it is buying in such a way so as not to push prices up.” That’s the opinion of respected precious-metals analyst Julian Phillips of The Gold Forecaster, along with a host of other informed sources. (source)

    It is widely believed that China has accumulated larger – possibly much larger – reserves since. (source)


Lots of other countries are rapidly buying up gold, too, including – Serbia, Greece, Ecuador, Mexico, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan.

But reportedly no one is buying gold at a faster pace than Russia.

Back in August it was reported that:

    Russia’s increase is the most dramatic, according to the recent report from the IMF. The Russian central bank has almost doubled its gold holdings within the last 5 years to 1,094.8 tonnes in June of this year. China’s Central Bank followed with an increase of 75% from its holdings in 2009.

Bloomberg reported in November:

    The country has tripled its gold reserves since 2005 and is holding the most since at least 1993, IMF data show.

There is little doubt that gold plays a major factor in Russia’s posturing during a global showdown that involves proxy war and military tensions in the Ukraine, Syria, Iraq and other parts of the globe.

    Moscow’s purchase of bullion and the assault on the bank can be seen as tactics of a single strategy designed to break the monopoly of the dollar. Gold is Russia’s hedge against that hegemony; it can’t be hacked.

More than that, Putin has been positioning his motherland to team up with China to solidify the emerging BRICS system which aims to thwart decades of Anglo financial dominance with a un-dollar currency system that will also include a development bank.

    Russia’s response has been to buy gold and turn east, cementing deals with China and, it would seem, firing the opening salvos in a cyber currency war with the U.S. (source)

Warnings have sounded about a tipping of the global balance:

    Russia is also increasing its gold reserves. China and Russia have been exchanging their U.S. dollar reserves and buying physical gold. Last year we speculated that this dynamic would create a shortage in gold leading to much higher prices. Russia and China now rank in the top ten countries by gold reserves.

    With Russia now in what appears to be a currency war with the U.S., they may find a willing partner in China to create an alternative international financial system that does not rely upon or use the dollar. Irrespective of either country’s intentions, their physical gold buying sprees continue unabated. (source)


To that end, Russia has been amassing as much gold as possible, in a bid to outmaneuver its enemies in a silent economic war to hold onto its independence and further project its status.

Nearly every bit of gas and oil that Russia sells to neighbors in Europe and Asia is converted from dollars into gold reserves – and even with the collapsing oil price, that amount could still be staggering.

Many have pointed to the gold and oil trade off as Putin’s grand chess strategy:

    Thus, the Western world, built on the hegemony of the petrodollar, is in a catastrophic situation. In which it cannot survive without oil and gas supplies from Russia. And Russia is now ready to sell its oil and gas to the West only in exchange for physical gold! The twist of Putin’s game is that the mechanism for the sale of Russian energy to the West only for gold now works regardless of whether the West agrees to pay for Russian oil and gas with its artificially cheap gold, or not.

If it ever comes to throwing down the gold and putting everyone’s cards on the table – ounce for ounce, and ton for ton, China and Russia will be major contenders in the global system, worthy of the kind of respect that equates both sovereignty and diplomatic power.

Keep in mind that China is also the world’s leading gold miner, producing more than 420 metric tons in 2013 numbers, with Russia ranked behind the U.S. as the fourth largest with 220 tons produced each year.

BRIC by BRIC a new system is being erected.

    China has quietly declared war on the U.S. worthless dollar but can you blame them? They already have in place Chinese Yuan Swap facilities, which started the non U.S. dollar trade practice years ago. In 2012 China completed trade agreements with most nations they trade with called BRICS. They also have a BRIC Development Fund with a reported $200 billion already funding infrastructure needs and to deal with their toxic U.S. T Bonds. They will be busy replacing these bonds with gold and the chartered bank (Bank of China, Peoples Bank of China) will compete with the IMF and World Bank. (source)

The strings that come with IMF and World Bank loans give the U.S. and Europe leverage over developing countries, and thus, control. With a competing development bank, China and Russia will literally be building the infrastructure for growing global control.

Germany Has Already ‘Called’ – The World Second Largest Holder of Gold Has Demanded Repatriation of Its American Holdings

The elephant in the room of this entire affair is, of course, the United States. Ostensibly, they are far and away the world’s largest holder of gold, officially holding more than 8,000 tons of gold, and further housing thousands of tons of gold for various allies – especially in Europe.

However, very serious speculation has arisen about the veracity of U.S. claims to gold possession. No audit has taken place of Fort Knox, where the gold is held, since the Eisenhower administration, and many believe that significant portions have been lent or sold on the market to meet other obligations. Conventional wisdom, touted by such official mouthpieces as CBS, asserts that despite lacking confirmation of this gold through an audit, the question of who holds the gold just doesn’t matter anymore:

    Fort Knox began losing its luster when the United States went off the gold standard in 1971. Before that, gold bars packed into a secure vault gave people faith in the country’s currency. Today, however, Fort Knox’s gold is now an asset on the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet, not a key part of our monetary system.

With decades of the U.S. dominating world finance through the petrodollar, no one was in a position to demand answers to this plaguing question, including the European nations with substantial deposits there.

However, things have changed since the 2008 financial crisis. The petrodollar is fading, and with it, American hegemony. Numerous European countries are now demanding, politely or not, to repatriate their gold.

For Germany, it has become an important question economically as well as politically. Nominally, it is the world’s second wealthiest in gold reserves, with more than 3,300 tons. However, the vast majority of its holdings have been kept in New York and London, due to post-World War II spheres of influence in Europe. With worries about the future of global economics, and a keen eye on the demise of the dollar, Germany has become decisive about keeping its gold closer to home.

Despite a 2012 decision in Germany to repatriate more than 600 tons of gold being held by the New York Federal Reserve, only 5 tons had actually been transferred across the Atlantic at the start of 2014, with the Bundesbank reassuring the German people that all is well, despite delays in the process.

Was their gold actually there, or have the delays been due to the need to buy back physical gold to meet demands on their ‘call’?

While this remains officially unclear, a fresh report yesterday claimed that Germany’s gold repatriation was still underway, and supposedly ‘on schedule’:

    “The Bundesbank successfully continued and further stepped up its transfers of gold,” the central bank said in a statement.

    “In 2014, 120 tonnes of gold were transferred to Frankfurt from storage locations abroad: 35 tonnes from Paris and 85 tonnes from New York.”

    According to the German central bank’s own data, 1,447 tonnes are stored at the Federal Reserve Bank in New York, 438 tonnes at the Bank of England in London and 307 tonnes at the Banque de France in Paris.

    Under the Bundesbank’s new gold storage plan in 2013, it decided to bring back 674 tonnes from abroad by 2020 and store half of its gold in its own vaults.


The Dutch were apparently more successful in quickly repatriating some 122 tons of gold from the New York Fed back in November:

    As the debate regarding whether or not Switzerland should keep the bulk of its gold reserves at home on Swiss soil reaches it’s climax – the referendum takes place on Sunday – it is telling that the Dutch announced on Friday that they have just secretly repatriated 122 tonnes of their sovereign gold reserves from New York back to Amsterdam.

    The Dutch Central Bank went so far as to state that the action was designed to install public confidence in the ability of the central bank to manage crises. The prospect of further shipments from the U.S. remains open as they are keeping the logistical details secret.


Meanwhile, during this silent drama, the Ukraine has been rapidly emptied out of its gold reserves.

Following the coup in Ukraine, the nation’s gold reserves mysteriously plummeted to “near zero”, with reserves depleting from from about $1.8 billion in gold reserves to “near zero,” raising speculation that it was transferred to the U.S. Meanwhile, some $874 million in gold was officially sold in October 2014 to service its debts. Did the Federal Reserve steal Ukraine’s gold to meet calls on its lacking gold reserves?

And Now the Swiss…

The recent shock announcement that the Swiss are decoupling from the Euro is the latest domino to fall, and could set off the long-feared chain reaction.

Many are asking if it signals the end of the Euro as a currency… and if so, what else after that?

    The Swiss had vowed to not allow the franc to rise beyond 1.20 francs per euro. With the removal of that cap, the franc soared as much as 30% against the euro on Thursday, an unheard-of move in the currency markets.

    It tells the world loudly that a global currency crisis – albeit unstated – is underway … that Western economies and Western sovereign debt is so out of whack that the only ammo left in the arsenal is currency.

    Currencies are now being sacrificed in an effort to save economies. And the only winner in that environment is gold. (source)

If possession is said to be 9/10ths of the law, and he who has the gold makes the rules, what does that tell you about fiat currencies, digital currencies and the balance of global power?


Are you prepared?

Is anyone?

Brace yourself…


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The US Military's Stunning Conspiracy Theory Emerges From The Archives: "ISIS Leader Does Not Exist"

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-20/us-militarys-stunning-conspiracy-theory-emerges-archives-isis-leader-does-not-exist

Having noted that voter angst has been riled, propagandized, and fear-mongered to the point at which the most pressing priority for Congress is to 'fix' terrorism, it is perhaps not entirely surprising that we discover - deep down in the archives - that giving the public someone to 'hate' as opposed to something may have been an entire fiction. As The New York Times exposed in 2007, Abdullah Rashid al-Baghdadi, the titular head of the Islamic State, according to Brigadier General Kevin Bergner - the chief American military spokesman at the time - never existed (and was actually a fictional character whose audio-taped declarations were provided by an elderly actor named Abu Adullah al-Naima).

Via The New York Times (2007),

    For more than a year, the leader of one the most notorious insurgent groups in Iraq was said to be a mysterious Iraqi named Abdullah Rashid al-Baghdadi.
     
    As the titular head of the Islamic State in Iraq, an organization publicly backed by Al Qaeda, Baghdadi issued a steady stream of incendiary pronouncements. Despite claims by Iraqi officials that he had been killed in May, Baghdadi appeared to have persevered unscathed.
     
    On Wednesday, a senior American military spokesman provided a new explanation for Baghdadi's ability to escape attack: He never existed.
     
    Brigadier General Kevin Bergner, the chief American military spokesman, said the elusive Baghdadi was actually a fictional character whose audio-taped declarations were provided by an elderly actor named Abu Adullah al-Naima.
     
    The ruse, Bergner said, was devised by Abu Ayub al-Masri, the Egyptian-born leader of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, who was trying to mask the dominant role that foreigners play in that insurgent organization.
     
    The ploy was to invent Baghdadi, a figure whose very name establishes his Iraqi pedigree, install him as the head of a front organization called the Islamic State of Iraq and then arrange for Masri to swear allegiance to him. Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's deputy, sought to reinforce the deception by referring to Baghdadi in his video and Internet statements.
     
    The evidence for the American assertions, Bergner announced at a news briefing, was provided by an Iraqi insurgent: Khalid Abdul Fatah Daud Mahmud al-Mashadani, who was said to have been captured by American forces in Mosul on July 4.
     
    According to Bergner, Mashadani is the most senior Iraqi operative in Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. He got his start in the Ansar al-Sunna insurgent group before joining Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia more than two years ago, and became the group's "media emir" for all of Iraq. Bergner said that Mashadani was also an intermediary between Masri in Iraq and bin Laden and Zawahiri, whom the Americans assert support and guide their Iraqi affiliate.
   
    "Mashadani confirms that al-Masri and the foreign leaders with whom he surrounds himself, not Iraqis, made the operational decisions" for Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, Bergner said.
     
    ...
     
    Bruce Riedel, a former CIA official and a Middle East expert, said that experts had long wondered whether Baghdadi actually existed. "There has been a question mark about this," he said.
     
    Nonetheless, Riedel suggested that the disclosures made Wednesday might not be the final word on Baghdadi and the leaders of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. Even Mashadani's assertions, Riedel said, might be a cover story to protect a leader who does in fact exist.
     
    "First, they say we have killed him," Riedel said, referring to the statements by some Iraqi government officials. "Then we heard him after his death and now they are saying he never existed. That suggests that our intelligence on Al Qaeda in Iraq is not what we want it to be."
   
    American military spokesmen insist they have gotten to the truth on Baghdadi. Mashadani, they say, provided his account because he resented the role of foreign leaders in Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. They say he has not repudiated the organization.

Ironman 3 anyone?

*  *  *

So he was a ghost back then.... is he a ghost again, a propaganda test-tube baby designed purely to put a face on ISIS and the biggest bogeyman of the current global anti-terrorist mania, so necessary to boost global QE in lieu of a world war (for now)?

It's certainly easier for an average joe to 'hate' a demonic leader than an amorphous 'thing' called 'Radical Islam' - just ask President Obama.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Russia and Iran Sign Military Cooperation Agreement

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/russia-and-iran-sign-military-cooperation-agreement/514626.html

Russia and Iran have signed a military cooperation agreement following Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu's visit to the Islamic Republic on Tuesday, news agency RIA Novosti reported.

Shoigu said after the signing ceremony in Tehran that Russia and Iran — both of which have been sanctioned by the West — had been growing closer in recent years, and that the new military cooperation agreement is "a significant step in strengthening these relations."

The agreement lays out "a theoretical framework of cooperation in the military sphere," he said.

Shoigu said the agreement featured an increase in naval cooperation, including visits by Russian and Iranian naval forces to each other's ports.

No mention was made of any breakthrough in arms trade negotiations, which was said to be a part of Shoigu's official negotiations with his Iranian counterpart, Hossein Dehghan.

Analysts told The Moscow Times before the meeting that a breakthrough on arms sales would not happen if Russia continued to deny Iran's demand for the delivery of S-300 air defense systems, which were suspended in accordance with U.N. sanctions against Tehran in 2010.

Shoigu will next travel to India, where he is expected to hold similar negotiations with his Indian counterparts. Russia and India are much closer military and military-industrial partners than Moscow and Tehran.

Russia Could Supply Iran With S-300 Air Defense System


http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/russia-could-supply-iran-with-s-300-air-defense-system/514652.html

Russia might deliver a long-overdue S-300 air defense missile system to Iran, honoring a contract that was canceled in 2010 following strong pressure from the West, Iranian and Russian media said on Tuesday.

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu is visiting Tehran and signed an agreement with Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehghan to boost cooperation, Iran's Fars semi-official news agency said.

Russia's TASS news agency quoted Shoigu as saying the agreement hashed out a "theoretical framework of cooperation in the military sphere," and also features an increase in naval cooperation, particularly visits by Russian and Iranian naval forces to each other's ports.

Although Shoigu made no mention of a breakthrough in arms negotiations with the two countries — which have both come under western sanctions — Iran's Fars said that Moscow and Tehran would resolve problems with the delivery of the advanced missile system.

Russian state news agency RIA Novosti confirmed the issue was under discussion.

"A step was taken in the direction of cooperation on the economy and arms technology, at least for such defensive systems such as the S-300 and S-400. Probably we will deliver them," RIA Novosti quoted Colonel General Leonid Ivashov as saying.

Ivashov is the former head of the defense minister's department of international cooperation.

No further details were immediately available.

Dmitry Medvedev, then the Russian president, canceled a contract to supply Tehran with the advanced missile system in 2010 in the wake of United Nations sanctions imposed on Iran over its disputed nuclear program.

The United States and Israel heavily lobbied Russia to block the missile sale, saying it could be used to shield Iran's nuclear facilities from possible future air strikes. Iran in turn has taken Russia to arbitration to finalize the sale.

Ivashov said that Russia's ties with Iran had strengthened recently due to Western sanctions that they are both now facing and added that the two countries were looking to expand their cooperation in other areas.

The S-300 advanced missiles have a 125-mile (200-km) range and Russia has stoked tensions with the West by trying to sell the system to other Middle Eastern countries, including Syria.

Russia's ties with the West are at Cold War lows over the conflict in Ukraine, where Kiev says Moscow has sent troops and arms to support pro-Russian rebels in the country's east. Russia denies the allegations.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Democide

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/democide

Democide is a term revived and redefined by the political scientist R. J. Rummel as "the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide and mass murder." Rummel created the term as an extended concept to include forms of government murder that are not covered by the term genocide, and it has become accepted among other scholars.[1][2][3] Rummel presents his definition without referencing any previous uses, but the term democide was defined and used in English more than 40 years earlier by Theodore Abel.[4] In the 20th century, democide passed war as the leading cause of non-natural death (according to Rummel).[5]
Definition

Democide is the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide and mass murder. Democide is not necessarily the elimination of entire cultural groups but rather groups within the country that the government feels need to be eradicated for political reasons and due to claimed future threats. According to Rummel, genocide has three different meanings. The ordinary meaning is murder by government of people due to their national, ethnic, racial or religious group membership. The legal meaning of genocide refers to the international treaty on genocide, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. This also includes nonlethal acts that in the end eliminate or greatly hinder the group. Looking back on history, one can see the different variations of democides that have occurred, but it still consists of acts of killing or mass murder. A generalized meaning of genocide is similar to the ordinary meaning but also includes government killings of political opponents or otherwise intentional murder. In order to avoid confusion over which meaning is intended, Rummel created the term democide for the third meaning.[6]

The objectives of such a plan of democide include the disintegration of the political and social institutions of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups; the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity; and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups.[7]

Rummel defines democide as "the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder". For example, government-sponsored killings for political reasons would be considered democide. Democide can also include deaths arising from "intentionally or knowingly reckless and depraved disregard for life"; this brings into account many deaths arising through various neglects and abuses, such as forced mass starvation. Rummel explicitly excludes battle deaths in his definition. Capital punishment, actions taken against armed civilians during mob action or riot, and the deaths of noncombatants killed during attacks on military targets so long as the primary target is military, are not considered democide.[8]

He has further stated: "I use the civil definition of murder, where someone can be guilty of murder if they are responsible in a reckless and wanton way for the loss of life, as in incarcerating people in camps where they may soon die of malnutrition, unattended disease, and forced labor, or deporting them into wastelands where they may die rapidly from exposure and disease."

Some examples of democide cited by Rummel include the Great Purges carried out by Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union, the deaths from the colonial policy in the Congo Free State, and Mao Zedong's Great Leap Forward, which resulted in a famine killing millions of people. According to Rummel, these were not cases of genocide because those who were killed were not selected on the basis of their race, but were killed in large numbers as a result of government policies. Famine is classified by Rummel as democide if it fits the definition above.

For instance, Rummel only recently classified Mao Zedong's Great Leap Forward as democide. He had believed that Mao's policies were largely responsible for the famine, but that Mao was misled about it, and finally when he found out, he stopped it and changed his policies. Therefore, thought Rummel, it was not an intentional famine and thus not a democide. However, claims from Jung Chang and Jon Halliday's controversial Mao: the Unknown Story allege that Mao knew about the famine from the beginning but didn't care, and eventually Mao had to be stopped by a meeting of 7,000 top Communist Party members. Based on the book's claims, Rummel now views the famine as intentional and a democide.[9]

Research on democide

Rummel's sources include scholarly works, refugee reports, memoirs, biographies, historical analyses, actual exhumed-body counts and records kept by the murderers themselves. He estimates the death-toll for each country over the course of a century, along with a low- and a high-end estimate to account for uncertainty. These high-end estimates might be considered absurd estimates by others.

Rummel's counts 43 million deaths due to democide inside and outside the Soviet Union during Stalin's regime.[citation needed] This is much higher than an often quoted figure of 20 million. Rummel has responded that the 20 million estimate is based on a figure from Robert Conquest's 1968 book The Great Terror, and that Conquest's qualifier "almost certainly too low" is usually forgotten. Conquest's calculations excluded camp deaths before 1936 and after 1950, executions from 1939–1953, the vast deportation of the people of captive nations into the camps and their deaths 1939–1953, the massive deportation within the Soviet Union of minorities 1941–1944 and their deaths, and those the Soviet Red Army and secret police executed throughout Eastern Europe after their conquest during 1944–1945. Moreover, the Holodomor that killed 5 million in 1932–1934 is also not included.[citation needed]

His research shows that the death toll from democide is far greater than the death toll from war. After studying over 8,000 reports of government-caused deaths, Rummel estimates that there have been 262 million victims of democide in the last century. According to his figures, six times as many people have died from the inflictions of people working for governments than have died in battle.

One of his main findings is that liberal democracies have much less democide than authoritarian regimes.[10] He argues that there is a relation between political power and democide. Political mass murder grows increasingly common as political power becomes unconstrained. At the other end of the scale, where power is diffuse, checked, and balanced, political violence is a rarity. According to Rummel, "The more power a regime has, the more likely people will be killed. This is a major reason for promoting freedom." Rummel concludes that concentrated political power is the most dangerous thing on earth."

Several other researchers have found similar results. "Numerous researchers point out that democratic norms and political structures constrain elite decisions about the use of repression against their citizens whereas autocratic elites are not so constrained. Once in place, democratic institutions — even partial ones — reduce the likelihood of armed conflict and all but eliminate the risk that it will lead to geno/politicide."[11]

For books, articles, data, and analyses regarding democide, see Rummel's website. In particular, he has an extensive FAQ. He has also made his many sources and the calculations used, from a pre-publisher manuscript of his book Statistics of Democide, available online.

Researchers often give widely different estimates of mass murder. They use different definitions, methodology, and sources. For example, some include battle deaths in their calculations. Matthew White has compiled some of these different estimates.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The UN Plan to Disarm Civilians

http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/books/item/14887-the-un-plan-to-disarm-civilians

In Global Gun Grab: The United Nations Campaign to Disarm Americans, William Norman Grigg exposes the UN's worldwide campaign to eliminate civilian ownership of firearms and explains the dangers facing Americans.

William Norman Grigg, a senior editor of The New American, has covered numerous United Nations events, including the 1994 population summit in Cairo, the 1995 social development summit in Copenhagen, the 2000 Millennium Forum at UN headquarters in New York City, and the 2001 small arms conference, also at UN headquarters. Like many who have toured the UN, he has seen firsthand the statue of a Colt Python revolver (a civilian weapon), its barrel twisted into a knot, in a courtyard in front of the UN building. He has also seen the UN's "Meditation Room" and the pagan imagery near its entrance, which symbolize the UN's contempt for traditional Judeo-Christian morality every bit as much as the anti-gun statue symbolizes its antipathy for civilian-owned firearms.

Grigg has spent many hours listening to speakers and panelists at UN meetings, where the would-be architects of world government are generally much more explicit in venting their authoritarian designs than they are when they address the "unwashed." He has also spent countless hours studying UN documents. He knows that the UN is not, and was never intended to be, a mere forum for debate. It is instead, and was always intended to be, part of the framework for an eventual world government.

Grigg is not only a capable researcher but an accomplished writer and thinker. Regular readers of The New American are well acquainted with his powerful prose, having read innumerable articles by him in the pages of this magazine. They are also familiar with his mastery of a range of issues, including the UN.

But more and more, it is becoming impossible to address other important issues — from federal land grabs to abortion — without taking into account the intended transfer of power from the U.S. to the UN. In 1995 Grigg wrote his blockbuster book Freedom on the Altar, which exposed the UN's war against God and family. In his just-released book, the subject of this review, he explains that "in matters of disarmament, all roads lead to the UN."

In Global Gun Grab, Grigg reveals the real intent behind the UN's call for "general and complete disarmament." That intent, he convincingly demonstrates, has much more to do with acquiring a monopoly of power than with eliminating all armaments. Whether the armament in question is a weapon of mass destruction or a Colt Python revolver, the UN seeks a globalized police apparatus that will enable it to impose its will on all the nations and peoples of the Earth. That apparatus will control the world's armaments. And those armaments, Grigg persuasively argues, will be used, not to enforce world peace, but to impose world tyranny.

Grigg also shows how the UN game plan has been unfolding, not only in faraway lands where civilian populations have been disarmed, but even here in the United States of America.

From Rwanda to America

Grigg's small book is tightly written and fast-paced. The reader is whisked from the killing fields of Rwanda to Hometown, U.S.A. It is therefore impossible, in a short review, to provide the reader with a comprehensive summary. A few examples will have to suffice.

To put the UN threat in its proper perspective, Grigg shows how the UN, rather than usurping power directly, is instead the beneficiary of power that is being transferred to it by globalist insiders. He notes the role of the Council on Foreign Relations, the ubiquitous private organization that has long dominated our foreign policy establishment. He also discusses Freedom From War: The United States Program for General and complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World, the State Department document that President John F Kennedy submitted to the UN in September 1961.

Grigg recalls that in "the third stage of the Freedom From War plan, 'States would retain only those forces, non-nuclear armaments, and establishments required for the purpose of maintaining internal order; they would also support and provide agreed manpower for a UN Peace Force.' Stage III further provided that the 'manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes.' " The Freedom From War scenario, Grigg points out, remains to this day "the official framework for U.S. arms control policy."

That policy is frightening in light of the historical record of oppression by tyrannical governments of disarmed populations. Political scientist R. J. Rummel, who coined the term "democide" to describe the systematic murder by governments of their subject populations, calculates that at least 170 million human beings were killed by their governments during the 20th century, making (in Grigg's words) "the unrestrained, lawless state in all of its manifestations" the "single largest source ... of lethal violence." Indeed, "mass murder is the only field of endeavor in which the state outperforms its private sector competition."

Of course, the danger of gun confiscation leading to mass murder exists even if the initial gun restrictions are put in place by sincere liberals who are attempting (however foolishly) to reduce crime. In Hitler's Germany, for example, the gun laws that "proved so useful to the Nazi regime were enacted by its predecessor, the liberal Weimar Republic." "Once a population has been disarmed by a relatively humane government," Grigg warns, "it is deprived of the most valuable means of resisting the rise of a more corrupt ruling elite."

He also explains why "tyrants who seek to disarm their would-be subjects physically must first disarm them psychologically." So-called gun "buy-back" (or "turn-in") programs, which entice peaceful citizens to surrender firearms in exchange for cash or other enticements, are part of the psychological ploy. A key objective is to "demonize guns as intrinsically evil," thereby "preparing the public for more aggressive civilian disarmament measures."

Another aspect of psychological disarmament is the outlandish "zero tolerance" school policy that seeks to "indoctrinate children in the belief that guns and other weapons are such evil objects that they can't be touched, seen, spoken of, alluded to, or even thought of by students, upon penalty of expulsion and incarceration." Grigg cites numerous examples, including instances of suspension or other punishment for drawing pictures of guns, playing "cops and robbers," and possessing tiny replicas of firearms.

In a chapter devoted to the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, Grigg details the role played by Kofi Annan, who was then chief of UN peacekeeping operations. At least 800,000 Tutsis were slaughtered by the Hutu-dominated government and its killing squads. On one occasion, Canadian Lt. General Romeo Dallaire, commander of UN military forces deployed to Rwanda in 1993 to administer a cease-fire, sought permission to raid a government weapons cache. He had been briefed by a defector from the Hutu regime, who also warned that the government planned to register all Tutsis in the capital of Kigali, possibly to pave the way for their extermination. Incredibly, Grigg writes, General Dallaire was not only forbidden "to disarm the government killing squads," but ordered "to share his information with the Hutu government." The fax order, it was determined later, was authored by Annan.

The Rwandan genocide occurred in large part because the "civilian population was disarmed, except for militia units under central government control." The UN peace accord had "called for efforts to confiscate 'all weapons distributed to or illegally acquired by civilians,"' but before the killing began "the Hutu-dominated government had distributed automatic rifles and hand grenades to official militias and paramilitary gangs. It was this firepower that made the genocide possible."

Grigg also describes UN "peacekeeping" campaigns in Croatia and Somalia, concluding that from those actions "we can piece together the UN's civilian disarmament 'escalation ladder': First comes the psychological disarmament campaign to persuade civilians to turn in their guns; then comes a show of force to intimidate them into giving up their weapons. Typically, it is only after these efforts fail that lethal military force ... would be used."

Grigg contends that those Americans "who expect an apocalyptic invasion by blue-helmeted UN troops are fixating on the wrong threat. A much more plausible scenario is that UN civilian disarmament policies would be enforced by Americans against Amen cans." The main threat posed by the UN "is not invasion, but subversion," and in the foreseeable future "the chief impact that the UN will have upon American institutions and policies will come in the form of 'harmonization' — meaning that our laws and governmental policies will be adjusted to conform with our nation's supposed 'international obligation' as defined in UN treaties and conventions." The most serious threat we face "comes not from the UN itself but from American institutions that are being corrupted and placed at the service of the UN's agenda — particularly the U.S. military and our law enforcement agencies."

Call to Action

In the final chapter of his captivating overview of the UN gun grab, Grigg argues that the goal of gun owners and the American people as a whole must be to get the U.S. out of the UN in order to remove the UN threat. Reform is not the answer.

Noting the "active and growing constituency for American withdrawal from the world body," Grigg reminds his readers of the tireless work of the John Birch Society "to educate and mobilize the American people at the grass-roots level." The Society, he states, "devotes its efforts to the strategy employed by the Founding Fathers in the decades leading up to American independence: educating the citizenry in sound principles of government; warning the public about the existence of an organized, covert threat to our liberties and free institutions; and mobilizing patriots in an organized, principle-centered effort to defeat the enemies of freedom."

In short, Grigg's book is not just a compact digest of vital information, it is also a call to action. This reviewer could not recommend it more highly.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Citizen shoots trailer park gunman, saves Texas officer

An armed Good Samaritan grabbed his pistol to help take out a suspect who shot at an officer

Aug 31, 2012

http://www.policeone.com/Officer-Safety/articles/5939904-Citizen-shoots-trailer-park-gunman-saves-Texas-officer/

By PoliceOne Staff

EARLY, Texas — An officer under fire in a tense trailer park standoff was saved when an armed Good Samaritan grabbed his pistol to help take out the suspect.

The incident began when Charles Ronald Conner shot and killed two neighbors and their dogs in an quickly-escalating argument over excrement found on his property, according to KENS 5.com. As Sgt. Steven Means of the Early Police Department arrived at the bloody scene, Conner hid behind a tree and fired at the officer from an assault rifle.

Means took cover behind his police cruiser and returned fire using his own assault rifle, but neighbor Vic Stacy, 66, said that from inside his trailer, it appeared the officer might have difficulty getting a clear shot — so he leant a hand.

"I thought 'he's fixin' to kill that boy,'" Stacy told the Brownwood Bulletin. "And that's why I squared off and hit him in the leg and knocked him down."

Police estimate Stacy was about 150 feet away when he fired his .357 magnum pistol, striking Conner four times. Investigators determined as Conner returned fire to Stacy, Means also hit Conner at least twice — and a combination of their bullets killed him.

Police praised Stacy for his outstanding shooting in the incident, which happened July 29, and willingness to step in to a dangerous confrontation.

"The citizen that fired these shots did a tremendous job out there," Brown County Sheriff Bobby Grubbs said. "Had he not had a gun and the presence of mind to do this, we don't know what the outcome would've been."

Gun Owner Saves Cop’s Life by Shooting Deranged Gunman! (VIDEO)


http://www.guns.com/2012/08/01/texas-gun-owner-shoot-out/


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
PROPAGANDA & FEAR MONGERING WORKS

http://www.theburningplatform.com/2015/01/19/propaganda-fear-mongering-works/

When I see the results of polls like the one below, I realize there is no chance the majority will do anything to reverse the course of our nation in terminal decline. It will take a complete collapse and bloody reset before we have a chance at putting this country back on a sustainable rational course.

How the fuck can Americans actually think terrorism should be Obama and Congress’ top priority? Are Americans really that stupid? WTF do they want Obama and Congress to do? Double the DHS budget? Increase electronic surveillance on our communications? Give local police more military hardware? Ban guns? Repeal the 4th Amendment?

Do the ignorant masses know their actual chances of being killed by a terrorist? To say the chances are astronomically miniscule is an understatement. See for yourself:

    You are 35,079 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist attack
    You are 33,842 times more likely to die from cancer than from a terrorist attack
    You are 23,528 times more likely to die from obesity than from a terrorist attack
    You are 5,882 times more likely to die from medical error than terrorism.
    You are 4,706 times more likely to drink yourself to death than die from terrorism.
    You are 1,904 times more likely to die from a car accident than from a terrorist attack.
    You are 2,059 times more likely to kill yourself than die at the hand of a terrorist.
    You are 452 times more likely to die from risky sexual behavior than terrorism.
    You are 353 times more likely to fall to your death doing something idiotic than die in a terrorist attack.
    You are 271 times more likely to die from a workplace accident than terrorism.
    You are more than 9 times more likely to be killed by a law enforcement officer than by a terrorist.
    You are 110 times more likely to die from contaminated food than terrorism.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-terrorism-statistics-every-american-needs-to-hear/5382818

The fact Americans think terrorism is our top priority proves that Edward Bernays was an evil genius. The combination of mass media and propaganda can convince the willfully ignorant and dumbed down populace of anything. Facts are unnecessary when fear and feelings are far more powerful. We are truly doomed.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
South by Southwest: Arrest in deadly vehicle crash

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-26571991

Police have arrested a man suspected of driving through a pedestrian area at the South by Southwest festival, killing two and injuring 23.

Jerusalem Pedestrians Are The New Intifada Target

Palestinian militants are using cars as weapons of mass destruction on Israeli pedestrians

http://www.vocativ.com/world/israel-world/car-intifada/

Jerusalem natives are looking over their shoulders as they walk the streets due to an increase in so-called “Run-down” attacks targeting pedestrians. Two attacks in as many days have seen Palestinian militants plow vehicles into gatherings of pedestrians at high speed, causing death and injury. The latest attack, which took place on Wednesday, left one dead and 14 injured, when a minivan slammed into a group of pedestrians at a tram crossing.

The lo-fi attacks are unnervingly simple, and the fact that they don’t involve any weaponry or explosives means that every car in Jerusalem with a motivated individual behind the wheel is now viewed as a potential weapon of mass destruction—and impossible for security forces to screen. The technique is far from new—Israel has seen dozens of similar attacks since the end of the 80’s. But in the context of Jerusalem’s heightened tensions, with many saying a “third intifada” is just around the corner, this accessible means of causing terror has found favor with Palestinian militant groups again.

Cars as Weapons of Mass Destruction?

http://www.activeresponsetraining.net/cars-as-weapons-of-mass-destruction

A couple weeks ago, I posted about Islamist terrorists using a car (rather than a gun or bomb) to commit a mass killing.  Did you know that the same thing has occurred in the United States as well?

http://www.activeresponsetraining.net/terrorist-attack-in-china

I’m betting that most of you folks didn’t hear about the Islamist terrorist attack in China.  If you don’t know anything about it, pay attention…

Details are reported http://www.shanghaidaily.com/national/Police-say-Beijing-car-incident-was-terrorist-attack-detain-5-suspects/shdaily.shtml. Remember, this terrorist attack happened in China (where guns are outlawed)….

Terrorists drove their car into a crowd of people and then set themselves and the car on fire with gasoline. Three dead. 40 more injured.

I look for more of these “unconventional” terrorist acts in the future. Think about what you might do to prevent something like this.   Not much, huh?

There really isn’t anything anyone can do to prevent something like this.  Are you going to outlaw cars and gasoline?

That’s why the terrorists will choose to go this route in the future.  It’s up to you to figure out how not to become a victim.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Putin playing with fire in Europe: Brzezinski

http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/01/21/394182/Putin-playing-with-fire-Brzezinski

US foreign policy pundit Zbigniew Brzezinski says Russian President Vladimir Putin is playing with fire in Europe, adding that the United States and its allies should deploy troops to the Baltic states of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia to stop Russia from capturing them.

Brzezinski, who served as national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Wednesday that Putin might attempt to take over Baltic countries in a sudden attack.

The three northern European countries are called the Baltic states because they are located east of the Baltic Sea.

Brzezinski, known for his animosity towards Russia and its leaders, said a  nightmare scenario could be that "one day -- and I literally mean one day -- he [Putin] just seizes Riga and Tallinn,” referring to the capitals of Latvia and Estonia.

"And then we'll say how horrible, how shocking, how outrageous. But, of course, we can't do anything about it," said the Polish American geostrategist, the author of The Grand Chessboard.

Brzezinski also called on Washington to provide Ukraine with lethal weapons to deter Russia.

He said that by not providing that assistance to Ukraine "simply increases Russia's intentions to escalate tensions. In Europe, Putin is playing with fire, financing and arming a local rebellion."

"We need to do something to make Putin question before he escalates," he said.

Brzezinski went on to say that "I do recommend pre-positioning of some forces," in the Baltic countries.

The US accuses Russia of arming troops fighting alongside pro-Russian forces in eastern Ukraine. Moscow denies any involvement in the fighting.

Amid escalating US-Russia tensions over Ukraine during the past months, the Pentagon in April 2014 sent hundreds of troops to the ex-Soviet Baltic states and Poland.

US President Barack Obama also travelled to Estonia in September to meet with the leaders of Baltic states.

European NATO allies have sent hundreds of troops for exercises to the Baltic region in recent months. The alliance has also boosted its air force presence in the region.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Putin to Barroso: “If I want, I’ll take Kiev in two weeks”

http://investmentwatchblog.com/putin-to-barroso-if-i-want-ill-take-kiev-in-two-weeks/

Ukraine, Putin’s blackmail on the European summit: ‘If I want to take Kiev in two weeks “

He says that when he asked about the military boundless in Ukraine, the Russian leader went to the threats: “The problem is this – it’s the answer told by Tsar Barroso – but what if I want to take Kiev in two weeks.” As if to say, do not provoke me to anger with new sanctions. Even the British Cameron – that in view of the NATO summit Thursday in Cardiff is working in a multinational force of 10 thousand men to send a signal to the Kremlin – is drastic: “This time we can not meet the demands of Putin, has already taken the Crimea and we can not allow that to take over the country, we risk repeating the mistakes made ??in Monaco in ’38, do not know what will happen next. ” Prophetic since yesterday Putin has suggested negotiations to crystallize the situation in Crimea and other areas controlled by the separatists. Several delegations confirm the dialogue between the leaders, but in many invite you to weigh carefully since during an exchange “frank” behind closed doors often the concepts are forced to support their position. Renzi invites colleagues to calm, said to understand the but concerns that Russia remains a strategic from the point of view of economic, energy and theaters of crisis in Syria and Iraq

http://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2014/09/01/news/ucraina_il_ricatto_di_putin_sul_vertice_europeo_se_voglio_prendo_kiev_in_due_settimane-94791280/

Here’s the summary of the article:

The article says that 3 countries oppose new sanctions, Hungary, Slovakia and Cyprus. Lithuanian president was harsh saying again that “Russia is at war with Europe”.

Apparently Merkel is infuriated at Putin for not doing what he said he would (heh) and stressed the need for new sanctions. She said they need to act otherwise Russia might start trouble in Lithuania or Estonia (at this point the room is silent and the scenario described is scary).

Then Barroso takes the stand and basically says that Putin told him if he (Putin) wants, he can take Kiev in 2 weeks. Cameron is pissed as always.

Renzi asks everyone to calm down and says that Russia is important for us economically, energetically and strategically (helps with Syria and Iraq). They say “no” to providing weapons to Kiev but gives the 7 day ultimatum of “3rd level sanctions”. This will target the financial and banking sector.

Washington and Bruxelles don’t want to harm the Russian population but instead go for the oligarchs.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Journalist Educated to Lie and Betray - Confession and Book

http://12160.info/profiles/blogs/journalist-educated-to-lie-and-betray-confession-and-book

Dr. Udo Ulfkotte, author of the book, "Bought Journalists", reveals his insight as working in Europe in the journalism industry. He asserts that he has been bribed by western influences like the CIA to promote their propaganda.

‘German politicians are US puppets’

German journalist Udo Ulfkotte, former correspondent from Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, one of the largest German newspapers. He has published a book, Gekaufte Journalisten (“Purchased Journalists”), in which he describes how American and German politicians sway the German media, so that those journalists give the desired spin to world events. Ulfkotte claims that reporters are urged to bias their writing primarily to favor the American position and to oppose Russia. Udo Ulfkotte spoke to about how exactly this occurs and about the path his life is taking today after these revelations were made public.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The ISIS comedy continues…

http://www.intifada-palestine.com/2015/01/isis-comedy-continues/

ISIS’s string pullers in Washington and Tel Aviv are trying to drag the whole world into their farcical stage-play. Thanks to a slew of ‘beheading videos’ and contrived ‘terror incidents’ that struck a number of Western capitals in recent months, much of the Western world has reluctantly signed up with America’s counterfeit crusade against the radical group.

One can’t help but laugh at the way in which our loathsome leaders try to pull the wool over our eyes time and again.

These cowards in high places have resorted to fantastical lies and clownish frauds to keep us complacent and ignorant.

This latest chicanery should make you grin.

Just hours after Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe made an “anti-terrorism” pact with Israel and pledged $200 million towards the anti-ISIS coalition led by the United States, ISIS released a video threatening to kill two Japanese hostages.

The infamous British-accented Islamic State fighter, who allegedly beheaded a string of hostages over recent months including American photojournalist James Foley, appears in a new video demanding a ransom of $200 million in exchange for the release of the two Japanese captives. Slattery observes that,

     “The video seems to be a composite as the three men were clearly not filmed in the same place at the same time. The hostage of the left, free-lance journalist Kenji Goto, has shadows on the right side of his face, while self-styled military consultant and former homeless person Haruna Yukawa has shadows on the left side of his face. Also, Yukawa’s jumpsuit billows in the wind, while Goto’s is mostly still. Furthermore, both hostages fail to show the slightest emotion as the masked man points a knife at each of their heads and threatens to kill them.”

 All of ISIS’s HBO-quality productions look to be shot in some sort of professional studio, perhaps even in Hollywood. Everything about the group, from its menacing black flags, Toyota trucks and masked Kalashnikov-wielding ‘bad-guys,’ appears calibrated to fit a cinematic stereotype of the ‘Muslim radical’ and ‘violent Arab.’ This is not reality, it is carefully choreographed theater, produced and directed by the US-Israeli Military Industrial Complex.

 The lead antagonist of this mediocre action flick, ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, may not even exist at all. According to a New York Times report, the self-styled ‘caliph’ may have been a fictional character from the outset.

 Entitled “Leader of Al Qaeda group in Iraq was fictional, U.S. military says,” the 2007 Times report explains that Abdullah Rashid al-Baghdadi, the head of ‘Islamic State in Iraq’ (precursor to ISIS), was a wholly fabricated personality whose public declarations were voiced by an elderly Iraqi actor named Abu Adullah al-Naima.

 US military spokesman Brigadier General Kevin Bergner acknowledged this fact, but tried to lay the blame for the hoax on al-Qaeda itself, suggesting that the purpose of the ruse was to put an ‘Iraqi face’ on a foreign-backed group, thereby drawing in more recruits from local militants opposed to the US invasion.

 But even if that is to be believed, al-Qaeda itself, from its inception, was nothing more than a loose conglomeration of Jihadist mercenaries on the payroll of the CIA. The group’s leaders are, for the most part, double agents for the CIA, Mossad and MI6, fronting as ‘Islamic radicals’; a phantom enemy manufactured to serve the geopolitical objectives of the true ‘Axis of Evil’ ­– the US, Britain and Israel.

 Is this phantom ‘al-Baghdadi’ from 2007 the residual chieftain of ISIS? If the previous head of ‘Islamic State in Iraq’ was merely a performer putting on a spectacle for the credulous masses, as the US military admits, then what makes this latest incarnation of the shadowy terror kingpin any less chimeric?

 “Debunkers” will of course say that the admittedly mythical ‘al-Baghdadi’ and his present-day doppelganger are two different persons. But absent any kind of hard evidence that the terrorist ringleader is a real person with a real background, and considering his group’s dubious antecedents, it would be foolish to have any faith in the whole delusory affair.

 All of this follows a pattern of US and Israeli intelligence psy-ops. In 2002, Israel exposed its hand behind a bungled operation to establish a counterfeit ‘al-Qaeda cell’ in the Gaza Strip. In December of that year Ariel Sharon asserted the presence of al-Qaeda in the Strip, and then had Mossad agents go out and recruit Gaza Arabs into a fake faction of al-Qaeda loyalists with promises of money and other allurements. The existence of the phony ‘terror cell,’ cultivated by Mossad itself, was then used by Sharon and company as a pretext to attack the beleaguered coastal enclave.

 That Israeli deception signifies a broader stratagem of duplicity employed by Western secret services that willingly do Israel’s bidding free of charge. In the name of ‘exporting democracy’ – code speak for ‘eliminating threats to Israel’ – the Zionist-controlled West fakes threats and engineers crises in order to steer their populations into the neocon ideological fold, thereby easing the public into consenting to endless wars of aggression and constant curtailments of civil liberties.

 It’s the same old game, over and over again, but people keep falling for it.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   
Group: Guest
It’s the same old game, over and over again, but people keep falling for it.

Do you think it is a matter of people falling for it, or is it more likely people inherently know they have lost control of their government and no longer care anymore?

I seriously think we are at a point in history where our self-appointed leaders could stop with all the charades, simply come out on television, say exactly what they are going to do, then do it.  No one would stop them.

We are only a razor's edge away from the complete elimination of advertising, as a cost saving measure, where corporations simply contact your bank, take whatever money they want and call it good.  Individuals have no recourse as it is now.

What I see happening at the corporate level, based on my current employment, is these corporations simply feed each other.  They have little interest in the individual.  And with the fascist merger of business and government, the little guy is all but dead, only kept around to do the grunt work of the corporations.  Once all this work has been farmed out to sweat shops overseas or replaced by robotics, corporations will be completely untied from human involvement.  You will have a few suits and that will be it.  Everyone else will be left to starve to death.

Anyway, back to the point, I feel that people see the writing on the wall.  They know their days are numbered.  They continue to do what they do because there seems to be no other option for them.  I'm sure they hate it and feel hopeless, but the feeling isn't strong enough to make any serious effort to change course.  I'm not even sure they could if they wanted to.  With the full-on assault destroying their lives, day by day, how can people muster the fortitude to fight back in any meaningful way.

Soon, you won't be seeing all this propaganda, it won't be needed.  The real power on this planet will simply do as it wants, when it wants and how it wants, with zero resistance.  They may even tell you plainly in advance, just to fulfill some inner sickness.  Yes, I think what they have planned for us will become as apparent as the nose on our face.  This ship is too big to stop or turn around now.  We can only hope it runs aground, or tears a hole in its hull and sinks.
   

Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 727
The ISIS comedy continues…

ISIS’s string pullers in Washington and Tel Aviv are trying to drag the whole world into their farcical stage-play. Thanks to a slew of ‘beheading videos’ and contrived ‘terror incidents’ that struck a number of Western capitals in recent months, much of the Western world has reluctantly signed up with America’s counterfeit crusade against the radical group.

people keep falling for it.

This should be renamed the '911 BS thread - hike your pants'  You obviously don't know anything about Islam or you too are a Muslim propagandist.  Before talking like this why don't you learn about what you are talking about. 


---------------------------
"Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must, to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material"  Nicola Tesla

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."  Edmund Burke
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
This should be renamed the '911 BS thread - hike your pants'  You obviously don't know anything about Islam or you too are a Muslim propagandist.  Before talking like this why don't you learn about what you are talking about.  

The comments to which you refer, were not mine. I merely re-posted the article to allow people to make up their own minds about the truth of the matter. The author of the comments is clearly indicated in the source link, so I suggest you take the issue up with him.

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of Intifada-Palestine.com or any other I. P. authors.

A Muslim propagandist indeed... you have no idea how silly that makes you look! I smell desperation!  ;D

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/desperation     <---- That is a source link ;)

des·per·a·tion
 (dĕs′pə-rā′shən)
n.
1. The condition of being desperate.
2. Recklessness arising from despair.

About the Author

Brandon Martinez

Brandon Martinez is an independent writer and journalist from Canada who specializes in foreign policy issues, international affairs and 20th and 21st century history. For years he has written on Zionism, Israel-Palestine, American and Canadian foreign policy, war, terrorism and deception in media and politics. His articles and analysis have appeared on Press TV, Veterans News Now, Media With Conscience News, Whatsupic, Intifada Palestine, Information Clearing House, What Really Happened, and other alternative media outlets. He is the co-founder of Non-Aligned Media (http://nonalignedmedia.com) and the author of an upcoming book addressing Israeli involvement in the 9/11 attacks;)  Readers can contact him at martinezperspective[at]hotmail.com or visit his blog at http://martinezperspective.com
« Last Edit: 2015-01-23, 01:17:17 by evolvingape »


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 727
@ea
The desperation is not mine, if you don't believe in what your posting why are you posting it?  You must think the same way.

Knowledge of islam goes along way when trying to descern the truth.


---------------------------
"Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must, to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material"  Nicola Tesla

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."  Edmund Burke
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
The desperation is not mine
I respectfully disagree! The timing of your post is crucial, and people are starting to understand just how critical timing is..

if you don't believe in what your posting why are you posting it?

I have already answered this question, see the quote below.

I merely re-posted the article to allow people to make up their own minds about the truth of the matter.

You must think the same way.

In some respects I do, and in some respects I do not. You make many assumptions that are not backed up by credible source's, or critical thought.

Knowledge of islam goes along way when trying to descern the truth.

Yes, knowledge of Islam is a part of the journey when studying global geopolitics across many centuries, and even millennia. I agree it is a small part of trying to discern the truth, and a small part of the big picture. Note I used the word "small"..


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
Everyman decries immorality
Debunking the "The Saudis did 9-11" nonsense!

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/debunksaudis.php#axzz3PfSK8ws2

The official story of 9-11 is collapsing almost as fast as the Obamacare website. Most Americans are now well aware of the strange collapse of WTC Building 7, the video that captures the sound of the actual explosion that initiates the collapse of WTC7, the very strange behavior of the Secret Service as President Bush read about goats at Booker Elementary School. We have all seen the photographs that confirm the remains of demolition "cutter charges" in the remains of the towers. And we all know how the BBC reported that Building 7 collapsed 26 minutes before it actually happened. indicating a script was being followed (but alas, not carefully enough).

With the official story in free fall, Americans are wondering just who did this heinous deed. With the US Government itself the prime suspect, many are asking if the US Government had help from an outside nation, one with a long track record of world-changing dirty tricks.

There is a great deal of evidence that implicates the nation of Israel as a co-conspirator with the Bush administration. First, there was the massive Israeli spy ring uncovered in the United States just before 9-11, and how some of the "Dancing Israelis" arrested after being seen cheering and dancing as the World Trade Towers collapsed turned out to be Mossad spies! Then there was the strange case of Odigo, an Israeli-owned company whose New York offices received a warning about the attacks before the planes used in the attacks had even left the ground! All four of the hijacked planes departed from airport gates whose security was provided by the same Israeli security company. Israel has a long track record of playing dirty tricks against the United States and other countries, including the Lavon affair (framed on Egypt), Israel's attack on the USS Liberty (initially framed on Egypt), and Israel's smuggling a radio transmitter into Libya that was used to send fake messages that tricked President Reagan into bombing Libya.

As people start to seriously examine the plethora of evidence regarding Israel's numerous perfidies it comes as no surprise that recently we have seen Israel's "useful idiots" launch a propaganda campaign to claim that Saudi Arabia was behind the 9-11 attacks, based on a lawsuit brought against Saudi Arabia by the families of the victims, and a secret report that Representatives Stephen F. Lynch and Walter B. Jones are demanding be made public; a report that purportedly claims Saudi arabia was behind 9-11. But anyone can bring a lawsuit against anyone for anything. That does not mean the lawsuit allegations are true. Nonsense lawsuits are a reality of the modern US court system, as are lawsuits staged primarily as political and propaganda stunts, which is what this appears to be. Likewise, the report the Representatives wish to make public appears to be the US Government's attempt to "get ahead of the ball" and craft a new lie to replace the one that has failed. At the very least these two pieces of propaganda are intended to deflect interest away from Israel. At worst, it is the start of the campaign to justify military invasion of that country, just as Saddam's nuclear weapons were the excuse to invade Iraq, and the more recently (and thankfully failed) attempt to justify invasion of Syria by claiming Syria's government was gassing their own people.

As I have mentioned before, the best way to tell if you are being lied to is to look for what should be there but isn't. In the case of the claim that Saudi Arabia was behind 9-11, what should be there and isn't is a motive for Saudi Arabia to do something like that.

George Bush had a motive to do 9-11. He needed that "new Pearl Harbor" to enrage Americans into the century of war called for by the Project For The New American Century. Israel certainly had a motive to do 9-11 and frame Muslims for it, to trick Americans into siding with Israel's continued land grabs and wars against Israel's enemies, with Israel's agenda being (as it was with the Lavon affair, the USS Liberty, and the Libyan radio hoax) that Americans fight those wars for them!

Saudi Arabia does not have a history of dirty tricks, nor a demonstrated ability to carry out such deceptions. More to the point, Saudi Arabia has no motive to attack the United States. The Saudi princes have grown very rich indeed through the Petrodollar arrangement. Saudi Arabia buys many American products and weapons ($61 billion in 2011), and unlike Israel, the American taxpayer does not have to give them the money first with which to buy those weapons. Whereas Israel constantly takes money out of the US, the Saudis pour it in! Private Saudi investment in the US economy is over $400 billion. Saudi Arabia is a major creditor to the US Government. Exact figures are hard to find but Saudi Arabia has loaned the US Government hundreds of billions of dollars.

Saudi Arabia is not going to risk an attack on the US because all that wealth would vanish. The Saudi wealth inside the US would be frozen or seized, and the outstanding loans to the US would never be repaid. The "useful idiots" trying to save Israel by blaming 9-11 on Saudi Arabia have yet to come up with a motive for the Saudis to do something like 9-11 that risks losing all that cash.

Remember that Saudi Arabia was being framed for 9-11 right from the start. One of the accused hijackers, a Saudi Pilot named Saeed Al-Ghamdi, was still alive after 9-11 and sued the US Government for defaming him.

And finally, here is some common sense that totally undermines the attempt to frame Saudi Arabia for 9-11. If Saudi Arabia really wanted to hurt the United States, they don't need to fly airplanes into skyscrapers to do it. All they have to do is ask for their money back, all at once. The resulting damage to the US financial system would make 9-11 look like a minor inconvenience in comparison.

And it would be perfectly legal for Saudi Arabia to ask for their money back.

Which is why we know that the claim that Saudi Arabia was behind 9-11 has no more basis in fact than the claim that Saddam had nuclear weapons or that Assad gassed his own people right in front of the UN chemical weapons inspectors.

As the media tries to blame Saudi Arabia for 9-11, it is worth recalling that the Bush administration initially claimed that Iraq was behind 9-11 to sell the 2003 invasion, then later admitted Iraq had actually been innocent. So there is a pattern of the US simply using 9-11 as a "one size fits all" excuse to invade yet another oil rich nation.

At the very least, even if you accept the new claim that Saudi Arabia was behind 9-11, then it means the US Government was lying when they claimed Afghanistan and then Iraq were behind it! So why would you trust them now?

The text in red indicates source link's at original article location for further study, plus Video of George W Bush admitting they lied about Iraq being involved in the terrorist attacks of 9/11.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   
Pages: 1 ... 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 ... 100
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2020-09-19, 16:09:46