Can America survive another eight years of liberal/neocon domination of Washington, D.C.? (would we want to?)
The past seven presidential administrations (Bush, Sr. – Obama) and congresses (Republican and Democratic) have taken the United States to the brink of oppression–and maybe destruction. That’s 28 years (counting 2016) of continuous domination by liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans. And make no mistake about it: there is virtually NO DIFFERENCE between liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans. They work in tandem. Best buds. Same agenda. Twins. Same parties. Same golf outings. Same clubs. Same money-grubbing. Controlled by the same people. Ad infinitum.
Under these liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans, the United States has become the most spied on country in the history of mankind. The brute-force of Washington, D.C., has all but expunged the Natural Law principles that founded this nation. Pulpit and pew; people and priest; magistrate and citizen; professor and student; newscaster and viewer: for the most part, they have all fallen in lockstep with the establishment Democrat and Republican parties. Hardly anyone understands the principles upon which our Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights were founded–including, and especially, the miscreants in Washington, D.C.
Beyond that, liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans have taken America into a perpetual state of war. Take down those yellow flags, folks, because our troops aren’t EVER coming home.
Not only have the liberal/neocon miscreants in D.C., made enemies out of virtually every country on the planet, they seem determined to make enemies out of the American citizenry. Just listen to the things our FBI and Justice Department spokesmen are saying about US–We the People. They seem to consider US more of an enemy than our enemies. Just like in banana republics, our prisons are filled with people who should be regarded as political prisoners. At the same time, sure-enough real criminals such as G.W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton enjoy the lifestyle of kings and queens.
Add tens of millions of illegal aliens who have absolutely no understanding of constitutional government, who respect nothing but raw power, and who see government as nothing more than something to give them stuff, and the problem is exacerbated exponentially. Yet, both liberal Democrats and neocon Republicans are facilitating this invasion of illegal aliens that is taking place–and will continue to take place if Paul Ryan and most of the Republican and Democrat leadership have their way (which they probably will).
In addition, the vast majority of our elected representatives and senators in D.C., appear drunk with power and personal ambition. It truly seems that hardly any of them give a hoot in hell what the Constitution says. They are in it for themselves–the country be damned!
The Republican-controlled House of Representatives had an opportunity to do something truly significant to reverse the power of the neocons over politics in D.C., by electing a genuine anti-establishment conservative. Sadly, they chose instead to elect another royal neocon, Paul Ryan, as Speaker. Republican House members could not have made a WORSE choice.
Paul Ryan has a Cumulative Freedom Index Score of 58% by the New American Magazine–which offers one of the more accurate assessments of a congressman or senator’s voting record.
Ryan voted for TPA, the horrific jobs-killing NAFTA-type trade bill–also called Obamatrade. He voted for Country of Origin Labeling Amendments Act, which repealed the requirements for Country of Origin labeling (which keeps Americans in the dark about where their food is coming from) and ceded authority over food-related regulations to the World Trade Authority (WTO).
Ryan voted for the National Cybersecurity Protection Advancement Act (NCPA). Rep. Justin Amash (R-Michigan) rightly warned, “These bills violate the Fourth Amendment, override privacy laws, and give the government unwarranted access to the personal information of potentially millions of Americans.”
Paul Ryan voted against a bill that would have prevented U.S. taxpayer dollars from being given to “Syrian rebels.” Those Syrian rebels, of course, are ISIS terrorists. Ryan is simply another warmongering neocon like Dick Cheney, John Boehner, Lindsey Graham, and John McCain.
Ryan voted against a bill that would have prevented the further militarization of our local and State police agencies by prohibiting the U.S. military from supplying local police departments with combat military equipment, such as drones, armored vehicles, grenade launchers, and bombs. These military utensils are more fitted for the military occupation of a hostile territory–which apparently is the way Paul Ryan and his fellow liberal/neocons in Washington, D.C., must view the American homeland.
Paul Ryan voted against an amendment that would have prevented the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens. “Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) introduced an amendment to prohibit the indefinite military detention of any person detained under the Authorization for the Use of Military Force authority in the United States, its territories, or possessions by providing immediate transfer to a trial and proceedings by a court. It also would strike language that would provide for mandatory military custody of covered parties.
“The House [with John Boehner and Paul Ryan’s leadership] rejected Smith’s amendment. Indefinite military detention is a blatant violation of the Sixth Amendment, and an executive who can wield such powers is akin to a monarch or dictator. As Rep. Smith said during consideration of the amendment: ‘That is an enormous amount of power to give the Executive: to take someone and lock them up without due process. It is an enormous amount of power to grant the Executive, and I believe places liberty and freedom at risk in this country.’”
The Conservative Review also gives Paul Ryan an “F” grade on their scorecard. They note that Ryan voted to fund Planned Parenthood. Ryan also voted against killing Obama’s amnesty deal for illegal aliens.
Amnesty for illegals is one of Ryan’s priorities. He “promised” conservatives in the House that he would delay amnesty until 2017 (BIG DEAL), but everyone knows Ryan will most definitely ram an amnesty deal through the House. On this issue, Ryan is WORSE than Boehner.
“On Monday the Remembrance Project, a group which honors the memory of Americans killed by illegal aliens, hosted a press conference. Breitbart News spoke exclusively to many of the victim’s family members about their thoughts on House Republican leadership.
“‘We don’t want Paul Ryan whatsoever. He’s worse than Boehner. We’ve seen what he will do [if he’s elected Speaker]’ said the Remembrance Project’s founder, Maria Espinoza.
“A newly-aired PBS documentary shows how that Paul Ryan and Mick Mulvaney labored with Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) to push Rubio’s amnesty agenda through the House of Representatives. Rush Limbaugh has warned that if Ryan is Speaker and Rubio is President, ‘Then in the first 12 months of the Rubio…administration, first 12-to-18 months, the donor-class agenda is implemented, including amnesty and whatever else they want. That is the objective here.’
“‘All of us are against Ryan [as Speaker] and Marco Rubio [for President] because we’re against amnesty,’ Mary Ann Mendoza told Breitbart News exclusively.”
Just recently, the neocon Mitt Romney admitted what most of us knew all along (but what he vehemently denied on the presidential campaign trail in 2012): that he supports Obamacare and proudly helped pave the way for it. And, of course, who did Neocon Romney choose as his running mate? Neocon Matt Ryan.
Just this week, the new incoming House Speaker Paul Ryan is supporting John Boehner and Barack Obama as they collaborate together to remove another debt ceiling limitation for the current federal spending bill. As a Breitbart.com report said the deal “effectively writes lame-duck President Obama a blank check to rack up debt.”
And, as I have told you before, the Gun Owners of America (GOA) has warned that a Ryan speakership would be “Boehner on Steroids.” GOA also said that a Ryan speakership “would be disastrous for gun owners.”
Replacing John Boehner with Paul Ryan is like trading a fox for a coyote. Neither one had or has any intention of guarding America’s constitutional hen house.
I tell you the truth: the ONLY thing that stands between us and open oppression is tens of millions of gun owners in this country. Our national media (and much of our local media–especially in big cities) is no help. In fact, they are enthusiastic supporters of our demise. Our institutions of higher learning are no help. And our pastors and churches have almost totally capitulated. For the most part, they provide no help for the cause of liberty. NONE.
How long is it going to take for our State governors and legislatures to realize that, like it or not, sooner or later the only way to preserve liberty will be to follow the example of our patriot forebears and separate from an out-of-control, power-mad American Crown–which is exactly the way D.C., is behaving. If an abused wife has the legal and moral right to separate from an abusive husband, abused states certainly have a legal and moral right to separate from an abusive federal government.
Of the current crop of presidential candidates, the only one that I think has a true grasp of the Constitution (even if he doesn’t always act like it) is Rand Paul. But his campaign is already on life-support.
For example, I live in what might be the strongest Ron Paul county in America. One still sees Ron Paul bumper stickers all over the place. So far, I have not seen one single Rand Paul bumper sticker. Not one! That is as big a testament to Rand’s inability to excite the Ron Paul revolutionaries and constitutionalist/libertarians as one could ever find.
Donald Trump is successfully taking on the establishment unlike anyone is modern politics. I see that as a huge net positive. Frankly, I like a lot of things he is saying. But other things he says concern me greatly. And maybe what I’m concerned about the most is what he is NOT saying–I haven’t heard him say anything about the Constitution.
As for the rest of the candidates, I don’t trust any of them–including Ben Carson and Ted Cruz.
Ben Carson’s emphatic promotion of government-forced vaccinations is anathema to anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge and appreciation for the Constitution and Bill of Rights. His support for forced-vaccinations portrays a vast constitutional ignorance. Plus, I see Carson as extremely weak on the Second Amendment. His initial belief was that people who live in big cities should not be allowed to own semi-automatic firearms. After entering the presidential race, and taking fire for his statements from GOP constituents, he seems to have changed his position. But I don’t trust that this is as much him “seeing the light” as it is him “feeling the heat.” As brilliant a mind as he has for medicine, I see Carson as constitutionally challenged.
Ted Cruz is just another rabid neocon when it comes to foreign policy. The neocon wars of aggression in the Middle East would undoubtedly continue unabated (and probably even escalate) under a Cruz presidency. No thanks.
Jeb Bush is the neocon’s neocon. He is the quintessential establishment insider–and his list of contributors reflects this fact. In spite of the support Bush is receiving from establishment insiders, his campaign is floundering. If Jeb withdraws, establishment support will most likely fall to Marco Rubio’s campaign. Rubio is an establishment player through and through. In fact, as noted above, Rubio would be as bad as Barack Obama when it comes to amnesty for illegals. It does appear that the globalists are posturing a Rubio/Ryan team to take America into the New World Order.
Regardless, I am convinced of one thing: when the meltdown, or breakup–or whatever else you want to call it–happens, I am EXACTLY where I want to be. Like Switzerland in the middle of WW II, this region of the country will NEVER surrender its guns or its liberties. If the East Coast and West Coast want to dive headlong into oppression, let them. The Redoubt isn’t budging. Our resolve is as fixed as our mountains.
I hope Texas can hold out too.
I ask again: Can America survive another eight years of liberal/neocon domination of Washington, D.C., because that’s probably what we are looking at.
Maybe the better question is, Can your State and region survive?
P.S. As I said last week, I am pleased to announce that James Jaeger’s brand new film, “Midnight Ride: When Rogue Politicians Call For Martial Law,” will be premiered on Friday, November 6, 2015, from 6pm through 11pm Mountain Time. Distinguished luminaries such as Pat Buchanan, Larry Pratt, Ron Paul, G. Edward Griffin, Sheriff Richard Mack, Stewart Rhodes, Edwin Vieira, Jr., and several others are featured in this film. I am honored to also be featured.
I invite readers to go to my website on Friday evening, November 6, and watch the premiere of this outstanding film. And please tell your friends. DVDs of the film will also be available the night of the premiere via my website. Watch the film here:
Congressional Republicans were desperate to score political points in the Benghazi saga. So desperate that they finally decided to masquerade as …peaceniks.
During the recent grilling of Hillary Clinton, the Republicans — who have rarely seen a war they didn’t like — actually criticized the former Secretary of State for ignoring the difficulty of successful regime change. (No mention was made of how well George W. Bush’s regime change has gone in Iraq.)
Further, they claimed that she had run roughshod over her own experts, who warned that US involvement in a 2011 air campaign in support of rebels would lead, at best, to new problems, and that they (the Republicans) had anticipated the chaos that marks Libya today.
“You initiated a policy to put the United States into Libya…. You were the prime mover…. You were concerned about image, you were concerned about credit,” Rep. Peter J. Roskam (R-IL) told her. “If Libya unraveled, you had a lot to lose.”
This new line of attack was simply the latest in a series of attempts to damage her over Benghazi, none of which seem to have eroded confidence among those inclined to give her their vote, or even among those on the fence. It was essentially a hail mary pass, and we will see if the public blames her for the morass that is Libya today — a country where chaos and extremism now reign.
WHAT THE GOP DARES NOT ASK
But, quick: What was Libya really about? If you don’t know, then you’re no different from most people, including most members of Congress — as evidenced by the debate in 2011, and by the discourse since. Seemingly missed by all: getting rid of Muammar Qaddafi was never really about protecting the lives of Libyans.
No, it was, like everything else in geopolitics — about money. Or, more precisely, the invaluable resources to be had, and about a national leader who would not play ball with those who wanted those resources. Of course, the establishment was not about to level with us, so it lied.
WhoWhatWhy was on the case from the beginning in Libya, pointing out the deceptive propaganda campaign that was unleashed to guarantee that war was inevitable.
The real questions Hillary Clinton ought to be asked — but which the Republicans cannot ask because they are as complicit as anyone — is why she pushed for Qaddafi’s ouster. And why she was apparently so comfortable with misleading the American people about the actions taken in their name.
As the US enters the thick of yet another presidential election, we urge everyone to consider just why it is that the inevitable nominees from both parties can be expected to perpetuate the same historical myths. And why whoever is elected can be counted on to commit troops, dollars and lives to still more such military adventures. Or misadventures.
WHAT HISTORICAL MYTHS? KEEP READING
To learn more, we invite you to read our original reports published when it was all unfolding. They chronicle how US officials disseminated (with media complicity) an unending stream of brazen lies designed to advance a hidden, predetermined agenda.
Here are links to a couple of those past stories (summaries edited for space):
The public was told that the sole purpose of what was to be very limitedbombing was to protect rebelling Libyan civilians from massive retaliation by Qaddafi. However, protecting civilians apparently didn’t generate sufficient US public support for intervention, so we started to hear about other purported justifications for going in: Qaddafi was so odious he was encouraging his soldiers to … commit mass rape! And if that wasn’t enough, he was giving them Viagra! Oh, and condoms!
You can’t make this sort of thing up. And yet that’s just what the NATO crew did — made it up.
“Why Libya?” Why were the United States and its allies suddenly so worried about the rights of Libyans under the long-ruling Qaddafi? And why did the West initiate a no-fly zone, commence massive bombing runs, and virtually create, train, supply and fund a rebel army?
For an answer, we need only look to the “usual suspects” — oil companies, financial houses such as Goldman Sachs — all engaged in quintessential corporate intrigue. Just the sort that never seems to come out in … the corporate media.
And here are a few more Libya-related stories from the You-Can’t-Make-This-Up Department:
What’s the connection between the G7 summit in Germany, President Putin’s visit to Italy, the Bilderberg club meeting in Austria, and the TTIP – the US-EU free trade deal – negotiations in Washington?
We start at the G7 in the Bavarian Alps – rather G1 with an added bunch of “junior partners” – as US President Barack Obama gloated about his neo-con induced feat; regiment the EU to soon extend sanctions on Russia even as the austerity-ravaged EU is arguably hurting even more than Russia.
Predictably, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande caved in – even after being forced by realpolitik to talk to Russia and jointly carve the Minsk-2 agreement.
The hypocrisy-meter in the Bavarian Alps had already exploded with a bang right at the pre-dinner speech by EU Council President Donald Tusk, former Prime Minister of Poland and certified Russophobe/warmonger: “All of us would have preferred to have Russia round the G7 table. But our group is not only a group (that shares) political or economic interests, but first of all this is a community of values. And that is why Russia is not among us.”
So this was all about civilized “values” against “Russian aggression.”
The “civilized” G1 + junior partners could not possibly argue whether they would collectively risk a nuclear war on European soil over a Kiev-installed ‘Banderastan’, sorry, “Russian aggression.”
Instead, the real fun was happening behind the scenes. Washington factions were blaming Germany for making the West lose Russia to China, while adult minds in the EU – away from the Bavarian Alps – blamed Washington.
Even juicier is a contrarian view circulating among powerful Masters of the Universe in the US corporate world, not politics. They fear that in the next two to three years France will eventually re-ally with Russia (plenty of historical precedents). And they – once again – identify Germany as the key problem, as in Berlin forcing Washington to get involved in a Prussian ‘Mitteleuropa’ Americans fought two wars to prevent.
As for the Russians – from President Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov downwards – a consensus has emerged; it’s pointless to discuss anything substantial considering the pitiful intellectual pedigree – or downright neo-con stupidity – of the self-described “Don’t Do Stupid Stuff” Obama administration policy makers and advisers. As for the “junior partners” – mostly EU minions – they are irrelevant, mere Washington vassals.
It would be wishful thinking to expect the civilized “values” gang to propose alternatives for the overwhelming majority of citizens of G7 nations getting anything other than Mac-jobs, or barely surviving as hostages of finance-junkie turbo-capitalism which only benefits the one percent.Rather easier to designate the proverbial scapegoat – Russia – and proceed with NATO-infused fear/warmongering rhetoric.
Iron Lady Merkel also found time to pontificate on climate change – instilling all and sundry to invest in a “low-carbon global economy.” Few noticed that the alleged deadline for full “decarbonization” was set for the end of the 21st century, when this planet will be in deep, deep trouble.
G7 summit at the Elmau castle in Kruen near Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany (Reuters / Christian Hartmann)
Obama’s neocon-induced newspeak continues to rule that Russia dreams of recreating the Soviet empire. Now compare it to what President Putin is telling Europe.
Last week, Putin found time to give an interview to the Milan-based Corriere della Sera at 2 am; the interview was published as the Bavarian Alps show went on, and ahead of Putin’s June 10 visit to Italy. Russia’s geopolitical interests and US- Russia relations are depicted in excruciating detail.
So Putin was a persona non grata at the G1 plus junior partners? Well, in Italy he visited the Milan Expo; met Prime Minister Renzi and Pope Francis; reminded everyone about the “privileged economic and political ties” between Italy and Russia; and stressed the 400 Italian companies active in Russia and the million Russian tourists who visit Italy every year.
Crucially, he also evoked that consensus; Russia had represented an alternative view as a member of the G8, but now “other powers” felt they no longer needed it. The bottom line: it’s impossible to have an adult conversation with Obama and friends.
And right on cue, from Berlin –where he was displaying his sterling foreign policy credentials, Jeb Bush, brother of destroyer of Iraq Dubya Bush, fully scripted by his neocon advisers, declared Putin a bully and rallied Europe to fight, what else, “Russian aggression.”
The rhetorical haze over what was really discussed in the Bavarian Alps only began to dissipate at the first chords of the real sound of music; the Bilderberg Group meeting starting this Thursday at the Interalpen-Hotel Tyrol in Austria, only three days after the G1 plus junior partners.
Possible conspiracies aside, Bilderberg may be defined as an ultra-select bunch of elite lobbyists – politicians, US corporate honchos, EU officials, captains of industry, heads of intelligence agencies, European royals – organized annually in a sort of informal think tank/policy-forming format, to advance globalization and all crucial matters related to the overall Atlanticist agenda. Call it the prime Atlanticist Masters of the Universe talkfest.
To make things clear – not that they are big fans of transparency – the composition of the steering committee is here. And this is what they will be discussing in Austria.
Naturally they will be talking about “Russian aggression” (as in who cares about failed Ukraine; what we need is to prevent Russia from doing business with Europe).
Naturally they will be talking about Syria (as in the partition of the country, with the Caliphate already a fact of post-Sykes-Picot life).
Naturally they will be talking about Iran (as in let’s do business, buy their energy and bribe them into joining our club).
But the real deal is really the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – the alleged “free trade” deal between the US and the EU. Virtually all major business/finance lobbyists for the TTIP will be under the same Austrian roof.
And not by accident Bilderberg starts one day before “fast track” presidential authority is to be debated at the US Congress.
Russian President Vladimir Putin (R) meets Pope Francis during a private meeting at Vatican City, June 10, 2015 (Reuters / Gregorio Borgia)
WikiLeaks and a ton of BRICS
Enter WikiLeaks, with what in a fairer world would be a crucial spanner in the works.
The fast track authority would extend US presidential powers for no less than six years; that includes the next White House tenant, which might well be ‘The Hillarator’ or Jeb “Putin is a bully” Bush.
This presidential authority to negotiate dodgy deals includes not only the TTIP but also the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA).
WikiLeaks, just in time, published the Healthcare Annex to the secret draft “Transparency” chapter of the TPP, along with each country’s negotiating position. No wonder this draft is secret. And there’s nothing “transparent” about it; it’s an undisguised hold-up of national healthcare authorities by Big Pharma.
The bottom line is that these three mega-deals – TTP, TTIP and TiSA – are the ultimate template of what could be politely described as global corporate governance, a Bilderberg wet dream. The losers: nation-states, and the very concept of Western democracy. The winners: mega-corporations.
Julian Assange, in a statement, succinctly nailed it “It is a mistake to think of the TPP as a single treaty. In reality there are three conjoined mega-agreements, the TiSA, the TPP and the TTIP, all of which strategically assemble into a grand unified treaty, partitioning the world into the West versus the rest. This ‘Great Treaty’ is described by the Pentagon as the economic core to the US military’s ‘Asia Pivot.’ The architects are aiming no lower than the arc of history. The Great Treaty is taking shape in complete secrecy, because along with its undebated geostrategic ambitions it locks into place an aggressive new form of transnational corporatism for which there is little public support.”
So this is the real Atlanticist agenda – the final touches being applied in the arc spanning the G1 + added junior partners to Bilderberg (expect a lot of crucial phone calls from Austria to Washington this Friday). NATO on trade. Pivoting to Asia excluding Russia and China. The West vs. the rest.
Now for the counterpunch. As the show in the Bavarian Alps unrolled, the first BRICS Parliamentarian Forum was taking place in Moscow – ahead of the BRICS summit in Ufa next month.
Neocons – with Obama in tow – knock themselves out dreaming that Russia has become “isolated” from the rest of the world because of their sanctions. Since then Moscow has signed major economic/strategic contracts with at least twenty nations. Next month, Russia will host the BRICS summit – 45 percent of the world’s population, a GDP equivalent to the EU, and soon bigger than the current G7 – as well as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit, when India and Pakistan, currently observers, will be accepted as full members.
G1 plus junior partners? Bilderberg? Get a job; you’re not the only show in town, any town.
US policy think-tank Brookings Institution confirms that contrary to propaganda, US-Saudi “moderates” and Turkey-Qatar “Islamists” have been coordinating all along.
The war in Syria continues to drag on, with a recent and renewed vigor demonstrated behind an opposition long portrayed as fractured and reflecting a myriad of competing foreign interests. Chief among these competing interests, the public has been told, were the US and Saudis on one side, backing so-called “moderate rebels,” and Turkey and Qatar on the other openly backing Al Qaeda and its various franchises including the Islamic State (ISIS).
However, for those following the conflict closely, it was clear from the beginning and by the West’s own admissions that success hinged on covertly providing arms, cash, equipment, and both political and military support to Al Qaeda and other sectarian extremists, not opposed by Saudi Arabia, but rather by using Saudi Arabia as the primary medium through which Western material support could be laundered.
And this fact is now confirmed in a recent article published on the Brookings Institution’s website titled, “Why Assad is losing.”
It states unequivocally that (emphasis added):
The involvement of FSA groups, in fact, reveals how the factions’ backers have changed their tune regarding coordination with Islamists. Several commanders involved in leading recent Idlib operations confirmed to this author that the U.S.-led operations room in southern Turkey, which coordinates the provision of lethal and non-lethal support to vetted opposition groups, was instrumental in facilitating their involvement in the operation from early April onwards. That operations room — along with another in Jordan, which covers Syria’s south — also appears to have dramatically increased its level of assistance and provision of intelligence to vetted groups in recent weeks. Whereas these multinational operations rooms have previously demanded that recipients of military assistance cease direct coordination with groups like Jabhat al-Nusra, recent dynamics in Idlib appear to have demonstrated something different. Not only were weapons shipments increased to the so-called “vetted groups,” but the operations room specifically encouraged a closer cooperation with Islamists commanding frontline operations.
Overall, Brookings is pleased to report that with the infiltration and overrunning of much of Idlib in northern Syria, it appears their long-stated goal of creating a seat of power for their proxies within Syria’s borders and perhaps even extending NATO aircover over it, may finally be at hand. Brookings still attempts to perpetuate an adversarial narrative between the West and Al Qaeda, despite admitting that it was only with Western backing that recent offensives spearheaded by Al Qaeda itself were successful.
The above mentioned Brookings article also alludes to a grander geopolitical landscape taking shape beyond the Syrian conflict. It states in regards to the US now openly backing what is for all intents and purposes an Al Qaeda-led offensive that:
The most likely explanation for such a move is pressure from the newly emboldened regional alliance comprising Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. The United States also is looking for ways to prove its continued alignment with its traditional Sunni Gulf allies, amid the broader context of its rapprochement with Iran.
The continuation, even expansion of the US-backed conflict in Syria is the most telling evidence of all regarding the disingenuous nature of America’s rapprochement with Iran. The entire goal of destabilizing and potentially overthrowing the government in Syria is to weaken Iran ahead of a similar campaign of encirclement, destabilization, and destruction within Iran itself.
The fact that events in Syria are being accelerated, with Brookings itself admitting that “international and ideological differences,” have been “pushed to the side,” illustrates a palpable desperation among the West to finish the conflict in Syria in hopes of moving forward toward Iran before regional dynamics and Iran’s own defensive posture renders moot the West’s entire regional agenda, jeopardizing its long-standing hegemony across North Africa and the Middle East.
Similarly rushed operations appear to be underway in Yemen. With Western-backed conflicts embroiling virtually every nation surrounding Iran, the idea that the US seeks anything but Iran’s eventual destruction, let alone “rapprochement” must surely have no one fooled in Tehran.
While Brookings enthusiastically reports on the continued destruction in Syria it itself played a part in engineering and promoting, it still admits that overthrowing Syria’s legitimate government is not inevitable. While it attempts to portray Syria’s allies as withdrawing support for Damascus, the reality is that if and when Syria falls, Syria’s allies are indisputably next in line.
Iran will face an entire nation handed over to Al Qaeda and other heavily armed and well-backed sectarian extremists dreaming of a cataclysmic confrontation with Tehran, fueled by a global network of US-Saudi backed madrases turning out legions of ideologically poisoned zealots. And beyond Iran, Russia faces the prospect of its Caucasus region being turned into a corridor of terror aimed straight at the heart of Russia itself.
The conflict in Syria is but a single battle among a much larger war — a global war constituting what is basically a third World War, fought not upon vast but clearly defined fronts, but rather through the use of fourth generation warfare, proxies, mercenaries, economics, and information. For those that fail to see how Syria is linked to the survival of many nations beyond its borders and the very concept of a multi-polar world built upon the concept of national sovereignty, they invite not just Damascus’ defeat, but that of the world as we know it.
Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
The recent scandal involving the sexual abuse of African children carried out by members of a UN peacekeeping mission, despite numerous efforts of this international organization to play it down, will not be ignored. And the international community must finally recall what was the original purpose of the UN as established by allied powers after the Second World War in the name of peace and security for all people on the planet.
According to a series of publications by Bruxelles2, France Info, Guardian and a number of other media outlets, a number of French and Georgian soldiers that were employed in the UN peacekeeping operation “Sangaris” in Central Africa, are responsible of child sexual abuse.
It should be recalled that an armed conflict between the government of the Central African Republic and Muslim rebels, many of which took part in the civil war of 2004-2007, resulted in the French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian announcing that France would deploy a thousand soldiers in CAR to carry out a UN peacekeeping mission. On December 9, 2013 the United States decided to take part in this operation, while the Georgian parliament also agreed to send its soldiers to CAR a year later, on February 22, 2014. By June 2014 the number of Georgian Armed Forces in the Central African Republic reached 140 members.
According to the French news agency France Info, French and Georgian soldiers were raping children aged 8 to 15 years in the area near M’Poko airport and were subjecting them to sexual exploitation.
Some of the incidents that occurred between December 2013 and June 2014 in a refugee camp at M’Poko airport were depicted in a special UN closed report that was titled “Sexual Abuse on Children by International Armed Forces.” In particular, the document contains witnesses of local boys that were subjected to sexual exploitation, including rape and homosexual relations in exchange for food and water. The majority of the victims were orphans, increasing their vulnerability. In the summer of 2014 this report was handed over to the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva, however no action was taken to investigate the factual findings.
In these circumstances and in order to stop systematic child rape in CAR, one of the staff members of the Geneva Branch of the United Nations Anders Kompass had given those documents to French authorities on his on initiative, in hopes that they would take effective measures to investigate the described incidents and punish those responsible. However, the highest ranks of the United Nations didn’t seem willing to “wash their dirty linen in public”, instead they are now planning to sack the “snitch” for an “unauthorized disclosure of proprietary information.”
In this regard, one must note that in the past the United Nations has been caught trying to conceal incidents of pedophilia numerous times, including sexual exploitation of children in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Kosovo and Bosnia, along with concealing incidents involving sexual harassment in Haiti, Burundi and Liberia.
Recently, some serious accusations against the UN were made by James Wasserstrom, a former US diplomat that was fired from the UN once he expressed his suspicions about the corruption among senior officials of the former UN mission in Kosovo. In particular, this former diplomat stressed the fact that instead of punishing Anders Kompass, this international organization must have taken all possible measures to prevent such abuse in the future, along with punishing all responsible figures in a timely manner. A responsible official of the Swedish Foreign Ministry Anders Ronquist, has also raised his voice in the defense of Anders Kompass, stating that those incidents must never again occur in the future. There’s little doubt that those crimes along with the UN’s attempts to hide them do not erode the credibility of this international organization.
But the fact is that this credibility has already been jeopardized by numerous cases of unjustified use of force initiated by certain UN members to achieve their own geopolitical goals. Once the UN became a political servant of Washington, it has started serving US military contractors that hungry for even more bloodshed all across the globe. This policy has already led to the death and suffering of hundreds of thousands of civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and other countries of the Middle East, along with Africa and the former Yugoslavia.
If there’s going to be no change in the policies and actions of the United Nations officials now, it is possible that this organization may suffer the sorry fate of its predecessor – the League of Nations, that was just as unable to prevent conflicts and global threats to humanity on the basis of respect to international laws.
The recent arrests of two New York women for allegedly planning an Islamic State-inspired attack in America has brought the spotlight onto controversial literature, specifically a 1970s book known as ‘The Anarchist Cookbook.’ While people like Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) have condemned the work and believes things like it should be banned, critics are more concerned with the methods and lack of accountability in America’s security community.
In addition, what corporate media will not discuss is that the the FBI informant who reportedly recruited the women, was also the one who introduced the book to the women.
Ben Swann interviews author and critic Heidi Boghosian about this trend of FBI informants who recruit terror suspects only to “foil” the plot.
Referencing “bomb-making” paraphernalia seized from Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s apartment, Chakravarty told the court that, “there is evidence, at least in part, that the bombs were built at 410 Norfolk Street.”
What the jury didn’t know is that in May 2014, prosecutors said they had no evidence the bombs were constructed at Norfolk Street, and in October 2014, a year-and-a-half after the bombings, the FBI said it still had no idea where the bombs were built, or who actually built them.
The government’s own witness, FBI explosives expert David McCollum, testified he could not determine where the bombs were constructed—a fact seemingly forgotten by Chakravarty during closing arguments Monday.
And when prosecutors tried to explain away the total lack of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s fingerprints on the ‘bomb making’ materials, they simply tossed aside the pressing issue of who really constructed the marathon bombs and where:
“Inspire magazine [an Al Qaeda publication] advises to wear gloves when building bombs—it could mean the defendant was wearing gloves,” said Chakravarty. “But more important than who built the bombs is how they used the things.”
While no one was expecting anything other than a guilty verdict for Tsarnaev, the question of who built the bombs and where is a salient one. It should concern anyone who would seek to prevent future bombings.
In the rush to condemn Dzhokhar to death, why is the government seemingly content to ignore evidence that might point to the involvement of others in the planning and execution of the attack? What is their overall objective here?
For context, see this article in the Christian Science Monitor, on a recent case in which the FBI lured an unstable young man into a bomb plot and then practically handed him a bomb—albeit one that, at least in that case, was inert. This follows a long history of the FBI “helping” those expressing anger at the US to fulfill their wildest fantasies of revenge, before busting them. That the FBI was in contact with Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the now-dead elder brother of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, prior to the Boston bombings, obviously deserves much more attention given the uncertain provenance of the bombs themselves.
The 150th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s murder is one more reminder from the past of a distinctive feature of the American system. This is that some American presidents reach office by assassination, not by election. More importantly, when this happens, a lot of facts are usually going to be left at best unexplained, and often covered up.
Few Americans know, for example, that in 1991 the body of President Zachary Taylor, who died in 1841 after a year in office, was exhumed and found to contain suspicious amounts of arsenic. But the New York Times announced that further analysis showed the amounts of arsenic were no more than what is normally found in the body, confirming that Taylor died a natural death.
Same Junk Science used in JFK Assassination
Wikipedia claims that this is proven by Neutron Activation Analysis (NAA) at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, citing an article on the Lab website that is forbidden to the public. Wikipedia does not mention that NAA analysis on the same Isotope Reactor was used four decades ago to analyze the bullets killing John F. Kennedy. (The use of NAA analysis of lead in bullets, once used to bolster the “single bullet theory” of Lee Harvey Oswald’s guilt, has since been decisively discredited by other U.S. Government experts at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory. In November 2007 the FBI announced that it would no longer rely in criminal cases on the inaccurate evidence produced by comparative bullet lead analysis.)”
Even more mysteries surround the assistance provided Lincoln’s assassin, John Wilkes Booth. In a recent article, the Washington Post described Booth as “embittered,” the term used by Psychology Today to “analyze” Lee Harvey Oswald. Other more scholarly studies have argued that Booth was originally plotting not the murder but the abduction of Lincoln, Vice-President Johnson, and Secretary of State Seward. This was part of a coherent strategy to throw the determination of the next president into the hands of the Supreme Court, where Chief Justice Roger Taney had already shown in the Dred Scott case that he was pro-slavery and sympathetic to the South.
Speculation of a cover-up about Booth has abounded since the time that four of his associates in the crime were swiftly hanged. A benign explanation for the cover-up would be the desire to avoid dealing with the possibility that Booth had been guided or at least assisted in his plotting by the Confederate Secret Service. This was suspected almost immediately when a Vigenère Cipher table (a code used by the South) was discovered among Booth’s effects. At that time a strong need to restore unity to a divided nation would have been an ample motive to present Booth, like Oswald a century later, as an embittered loner.
It is now pretty well established, by historian Thomas Goodrich and others, that Booth had traveled widely to Canada and elsewhere as a spy and courier for the Confederate Secret Service. Other historians have concluded, in the words of David Herbert Donald, that “at least at the lower levels of the Southern secret service, the abduction of the Union President was under consideration.”
Whether Booth was following orders in his activities or was acting on his own is less clear. But it is certain that Booth was able to elude capture for 12 days after the assassination by using safe houses in Virginia along an escape route which the Confederate Secret Service had previously organized.
The cover-up about Booth has long survived any original motive for it. Only in the last half century have we begun to see books like William Tidwell’s Come Retribution: The Confederate Secret Service and the Assassination of Lincoln. Yet from time to time we still continue to hear from authors like Jim Bishop and Bill O’Reilly, who write profitable best-sellers, one arguing that Booth, the other that Oswald, was essentially a loner.
An egregious attempt to present Booth as a loner was that of former CIA Director Allen Dulles, at an early executive session of the Warren Commission on January 16, 1964. Dulles explained that, according to a book he was handing out to members of the Commission, European assassinations were the work of conspiracies—but American assassins acted alone.
Given that two of Booth’s targets, Lincoln and Seward, were killed almost simultaneously in different parts of the city (Seward was stabbed by Lewis Powell in his bed during the Lincoln assassination), John J. McCloy promptly objected, arguing that “the Lincoln assassination was a plot.” Undeterred, Dulles shot right back: “Yes, but one man was so dominant that it almost wasn’t a plot.” Dulles was using his authority to indicate what he thought the Commission should conclude. Seven months later the Warren Report amply fulfilled his wish and declared that the death of Kennedy was, too, the work of a loner.
Polio is something I have more than a passing acquaintance with. Two days before my fifth birthday a medical doctor in Minneapolis diagnosed me with polio. I only learned decades later that it was not polio, poliomyelitis or infantile paralysis as it was also called. It was shortly after World War II. Then a few years later we were presented Jonas Salk and the polio vaccine, and the world believed that because of that vaccine and the Sabin variant, polio had been stamped out. The reality was that polio was not and is not a “virus,” nor did the vaccines of Salk or Sabin eradicate.
The symptoms that were given the name “polio” had dramatically declined several years before the first vaccine and Salk claimed the credit for his vaccine which was released in 1955. The symptoms that got the name polio came from a team at the Rockefeller University in 1910. Those symptoms were listed as fever, severe headache, stiff neck and back, deep muscle pain. Pretty vague.
Many, many things can cause fever and such symptoms in a small child, for example being raped by someone they thought loved them or experiencing other trauma. It has been suggested that there was a major wave of in-family child rapes as soldiers returned from the traumas of their own war experiences in World War II. It was convenient for some to label the upsurge in such symptoms as polio and create a national media scare that was to most Americans in the early 1950’s more terrifying than Joe Stalin and communism. The drug industry got a huge boost and today, even newborns are jabbed multiple times in the first weeks of their fragile lives with concoctions that have been documented not to prevent viral infection but to make weak, sick and in some tragic cases autistic or even dead children.
The Rockefeller University in New York had begun literally playing around with children with the symptoms later formalized as polio as far back as 1910. Simon Flexner, first director of the predecessor to the Rockefeller University, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, had produced the symptoms later named polio. He did that in a rhesus monkey which then transmitted the disease from one animal to another. Flexner was a close friend and advisor of John D. Rockefeller, Jr., son of the founder of the Standard Oil trust.
Albert Sabin, creator of the Sabin polio vaccine had come out of the Rockefeller University. Human experiments with untested versions of the polio vaccines were done on already crippled children in care homes, on children in homes for the mentally insane and on that Rockefeller family plantation for human experiments, Puerto Rico.
Since that time the Rockefellers, some of the world’s most ardent financial backers of eugenics, have been at the center of the developments around what was named polio and its “vaccine.”
Eugenics was a fraudulent social theory that a “better society” could be created by eliminating “undesirable” human blood lines and promoting the desirable types like those of Rockefellers or DuPonts or their likes. To the present day eugenics is the guiding ideology of the very rich, loveless American oligarchs including Bill Gates and David Rockefeller. To this day the major financial backers of the criminal activities of the UN WHO (World Health Organization) and their fraudulent swine flu pandemic scares are the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Gates, GAVI and Murder Inc.
Several years ago, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation, along with the World Bank, UNICEF, the WHO and a group of pharmaceutical companies, united all in something called GAVI and set out to bring massive polio vaccination first to India. GAVI: The Vaccine Alliance was founded by the Gates Foundation in 2000 as a “public-private partnership” to unite in assaulting poorer developing countries with the Big Pharma vaccine industry they would otherwise be spared.
In India Gates, Rockefellers and WHO with their Big Pharma partners convinced the Indian government to spend some $8 billion of their scarce funds, along with a tiny amount of “seed” money from GAVI partners, to vaccinate Indian children.
An article in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics in 2012 concluded, “In 2011, there were an extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP. Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated.” Instead, Gates and Company proclaimed India “polio” free.
They ignored the fact their “polio” vaccines were killing and paralyzing 48,000 Indian children because the WHO definition of polio allowed them the casuistry. NPAFP stands for Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis. The medical-industrial complex are masters at coming up with names.
By calling it non-polio, they defined polio as eradicated in India. But their vaccines are killing and paralyzing tens of thousands of children. So by the WHO semantics the GAVI vaccines did not caused a single case of “polio.” It did cause 48,000 cases of something far deadlier and more damaging, Acute Flaccid Paralysis, a condition the WHO admits is clinically indistinguishable from polio and which occurred in direct proportion to the doses of polio vaccine received.
A similar phenomenon took place at the same time in neighboring Pakistan. In 2011 the Paktstan Tribune reported, “A government inquiry has found that polio vaccines for infants funded by the Global Alliance for Vaccination and Immunisation are causing deaths and disabilities in regional countries including Pakistan. Geneva-based officials of GAVI, Jeffrey Rowland and Dan Thomas, were contacted by e-mail but they did not respond. “ GAVI spent a mere 7.8% of the total cost of the mass vaccination in Pakistan, of Rs26 billion. The Tribune continued, “Pakistan will be spending Rs24.2 billion from its own resources on the purchase of new and under-used vaccines at much higher cost as compared to their equivalent vaccines.” The Gates-Rockefeller-WHO polio vaccination program in Pakistan killed an estimated 10,000 and crippled tens of thousands more.
Now the focus has moved to another US warzone, Syria.
Polio in Syria?
For two decades Syria has been polio-free. Now, beginning 2013 in the wake of their criminal efforts in Pakistan and India, the WHO has declared the presence of polio outbreaks in Syria and accused President Assad of refusing vaccine teams – the previous ones in Pakistan, laced with CIA agents.
The “polio” spreading in war-ravaged Syria, where the CIA and Pentagon and their assets such as ISIS and CIA-funded opposition have destroyed homes and driven millions into refugee status, is vaccine-caused, just as in India and just as in Pakistan. The polio spreading through Syria is “vaccine-derived polio,” specifically, the same strain of “non-polio acute flaccid paralysis” as in India and Pakistan that coincided with the mass vaccinations with Sabin oral vaccines by GAVI. The vaccine originated from the oral polio vaccine developed by former Rockefeller University researched, Sabin, which contains an attenuated vaccine-virus or active polio virus along with unknown adjuvants or boosters the drug companies prefer not to reveal.
Kindah al-Shammat, Syrian Minister of Social Affairs, said at the time that, “The virus originates in Pakistan and has been brought to Syria by the jihadists who come from Pakistan.”
WHO Rockefeller Tetanus abortions
If this sounds improbable take a close look at a recent expose by a concerned group of Kenyan doctors about a vaccine developed by WHO in conjunction with the Rockefeller and Gates foundations. The Kenya Catholic Doctors Association discovered an antigen that causes miscarriages in a tetanus vaccine that is being administered to 2.3 million girls and women by the World Health Organization and UNICEF. Since 1972 the Rockefeller Foundation has worked in secrecy with the WHO and various pharmaceutical companies to fund a WHO program in “reproductive health.” There they developed an innovative tetanus vaccine.
In the early 1990’s, according to a report from the Global Vaccine Institute, the WHO oversaw massive vaccination campaigns against tetanus in Nicaragua, Mexico and the Philippines. Comite Pro Vida de Mexico, a Roman Catholic lay organization, became suspicious of the motives behind the WHO program. When they tested numerous vials of the vaccine they, like in Kenya today, found they contained the same Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin, or HCG. They found that to be very curious in a vaccine designed to protect people against lock-jaw arising from infection with rusty nail wounds. Tetanus is also rather rare, so why a mass vaccination campaign and that for only women of child-bearing age?
HCG is a natural hormone needed to maintain a pregnancy. However, when combined with a tetanus toxoid carrier, it stimulated the formation of antibodies against HCG, rendering a woman incapable of maintaining a pregnancy, a form of concealed abortion.
The pattern is clear. The global agenda of Rockefellers, Gates, Clintons, Bushes and their very rich loveless friends is racist. It calls for elimination of non-white populations, genocide. Their tools of choice include wars everywhere from Afghanistan to Pakistan to Libya to Syria to Ukraine. It includes campaigns of massive select vaccinations in war-torn countries. It includes setting the CIA and Mossad to the job of creating fake Islamic “jihadist” terrorists to kill and main and create the cover for a Washington “war on terror.” Their only problem of late is that these strategies are failing. That’s bad news for the paranoid oligarchs, good news for sane remnants of the human race, human beings.
Overt Nazi Right Sector leader Dmytro Yarosh openly boasts about “fighting Jews and Russians till I die.” He’s a wanted man.
In July 2014, Interpol issued a warrant for his arrest for “public incitement to terrorist and extremist activities involving the use of mass media.”
Russia issued criminal charges against him for inciting extremist activities. Its Supreme Court banned Right Sector activities on Russian territory.
Yarosh openly urges “more active resistance against Russia.” He calls Moscow “an enemy.” He threatened to blow up gas pipelines between both countries.
He was part of US-orchestrated Maidan protests ousting Ukraine’s legitimate government in February 2014.
He was directly involved in the May 2014 Odessa massacre killing hundreds – shooting them in cold blood, bludgeoning them to death, butchering them with axes, throwing them out of windows.
He rejects Minsk’s ceasefire terms. He vows to continue fighting.
Despite his overt Nazism and criminal record, he’s a member of Ukraine’s parliament.
Over the weekend, state-controlled television reported:
“Chief of the General Staff Viktor Muzhenko and the leader of the Ukrainian Volunteer Corps agreed to appoint Dmytro Yarosh adviser to the commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.”
“They also squared a format of cooperation between (his Right Sector fighters) with the Ukrainian Armed Forces.”
“Muzhenko and Yarosh agreed about that at yesterday’s meeting at the General Staff of the Ukrainian army.”
On April 3, Poroshenko advisor Yuri Biryukov said Right Sector thugs will be incorporated into Ukraine’s army as contract soldiers.
So-called Ukrainian Volunteer Corps (DUK Right Sector) members will be part of its 79th air mobile brigade. They’ll be used as death squad assassins – targeting Donbass freedom fighters and any other anti-regime elements.
According to Kiev’s defense ministry, they’ll be “subordinated to (Ukraine’s) military leaders.”
They’ll obey central command orders. Yarosh said “DUK is ready to perform common tasks with the Army, ready to obey the army leadership in matters relating to national defense against an external enemy, which enables every patriot to protect Ukraine.”
Code language for his intention to continue committing cold-blooded murder – targeting anyone nationwide against fascist rule.
He’ll introduce legislation legalizing private military groups – death squads by any standard.
“I think it could be a good option for people who can’t get back from war inside their heads,” he said.
“This will provide jobs for many people and stability in the country,” he added.
Right Sector thugs and likeminded groups will be officially authorized to continue Ukraine’s so-called “anti-terrorist operation” – cold-blooded murder by any standard, war crimes too serious to ignore.
A Final Comment
On April 6, Sputnik News reported on Forbes magazine’s Russian edition claiming Poroshenko asked Putin “to take Donbass.”
He refused suggesting it be declared an independent territory. Sputnik News said the offer supposedly came during February Minsk ceasefire talks.
Forbes quoted its unnamed source saying:
“He (Poroshenko) said to me (Putin) directly: ‘Take Donbass.’ I (Putin) answered him: ‘Are you nuts? I don’t need Donbass.’ ”
” ‘If you don’t need it, declare it independent.’ ” Putin said Kiev isn’t ready to oblige.
End economic blockade and restore pensions and social benefits, he added.
Forbes said another Minsk participant explained the comments between both leaders differently.
Saying “Poroshenko offered Russia to take Donbass for financial support. Putin said that it would only be possible if Donbass becomes part of Russia.”
As long as “Donbass is part of Ukraine, all the payments shall be done by the Ukrainian side.”
Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov commented as follows:
“It is not very good that some participants of the meeting have revealed the content of their conversation with the president.”
“Leave it to their own conscience whether it was truth or untruth. I am not going to comment on it.”
Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs Aleksandr Shokhin head claims Putin’s comments were distorted, saying:
“The conversation was about the relationship between Russia and Ukraine, about the adherence to the Minsk agreements, but I am not going to retell his words.”
“This was a wrong interpretation and I have no intention to either comment on it or retell it.”
Whatever Putin said or didn’t say in Minsk, Donbass remains a self-declared autonomous part of Ukraine.
Kiev’s dirty war didn’t end. It slowed ahead of plans to escalate it at Obama’s discretion.
US combat forces are working directly with Ukraine’s military. They’ll begin training its Nazi death squads later in April.
They want to kill Russians. Direct confrontation may follow.