Wondering why there's been no new posts for a few days? Normally I update daily (Saturdays excepted). Well, I'm moving across the country right now. I'll return with the goods by the end of the week.
By the way, there's a new image for the top of the site in the works. Coming soon.
And until I return, don't forget about the most important all time posts: HERE
But more urgently than all of this is the news that has transpired since Friday. I picked the wrong days to move, because this stuff is very important. See Prison Planet's coverage of the latest news here, including this very important story:
Buchanan: Climate Bill Is Transfer Of Wealth To World Government
During an appearance on MSNBC, political commentator Pat Buchanan correctly defined the “Climate Bill” for what it really is, not just a new tax on the American people, but a complete transfer of power and wealth to a global government that is using the manufactured fear of global warming to grease the skids for total domination.
6/26/09
Ben Bernanke fearmongers on audit-the-Fed bill
"My concern about the legislation is that if the GAO is auditing not only the operational aspects of the programs and the details of the programs but making judgments about our policy decisions would effectively be a takeover of policy by the Congress and a repudiation of the Federal Reserve would be highly destructive to the stability of the financial system, the Dollar and our national economic situation."
Translation: Let us conduct monetary policy in secret, seize your wealth through inflation, monetize the government's debt to further enable its wars, police state, and other evils, and of course, let us keep bailing out our friends on Wall Street and serving our globalist masters. If you don't let us do these things secretly, then the wonderful status quo will be disrupted!!
Translation: Let us conduct monetary policy in secret, seize your wealth through inflation, monetize the government's debt to further enable its wars, police state, and other evils, and of course, let us keep bailing out our friends on Wall Street and serving our globalist masters. If you don't let us do these things secretly, then the wonderful status quo will be disrupted!!
6/25/09
Bonhoeffer the peace-maker
Via Lew Rockwell.com Blog, a great quotation from Dietrich Bonhoeffer.
Bonhoeffer, persecuted dissenter from the Nazi regime, penned the famous work, The Cost of Discipleship. To be a disciple of Jesus is to seek to imitate the life and teachings of Jesus:
The followers of Christ have been called to peace. And they must not only have
peace but also make it. To that end they renounce all violence and tumult. … His disciples keep the peace by choosing to endure suffering rather than inflict it on others. They maintain fellowship where others would break it off. They renounce hatred and wrong. In so doing they overcome evil with good, and establish the peace of God in the midst of a world of war and hate.
C.S. Lewis the libertarian
C.S. Lewis quoted on The Beacon Blog:
I fully embrace the maxim (which . . . borrows from a Christian) that “all power corrupts.” I would go further. The loftier the pretensions of the power, the more meddlesome, inhuman, and oppressive it will be. Theocracy is the worst of all possible governments. All political power is at best a necessary evil: but it is least evil when its sanctions are most modest and commonplace, when it claims no more than to be useful or convenient and sets itself strictly limited objectives. Anything transcendental or spiritual, or even anything very strongly ethical, in its pretensions is dangerous and encourages it to meddle with our private lives. Let the shoemaker stick to his last. Thus the Renaissance doctrine of Divine Right is for me a corruption of monarchy; Rousseau’s General Will, of democracy; racial mysticisms, of nationality. And Theocracy, I admit and even insist, is the worst corruption of all.
—From The World’s Last Night: And Other Essays, by C.S. Lewis
Neo-con position on Iran soaked with irony, contradiction
Neo-Cons Are Cheerleading For A Terrorist Who Helped Kill Hundreds Of U.S. Marines
The new “patriotism” - Phony conservatives throw their support behind Butcher of Beirut who directed bloody terror campaign against U.S.
Paul Joseph Watson - Prison Planet.com - Wednesday, June 24, 2009
The horrible irony to arise out of the riots and protests in Iran is that many Neo-Cons and phony conservatives, in their unified effort to enthusiastically embrace the Anglo-American establishment’s agenda for regime change, are cheerleading for a brutal thug who directed a terrorist campaign that killed hundreds of U.S. Marines in the 1980’s.
This once again proves that slack-jawed Neo-Con twits, ditto-heads for phony conservative media whores like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, have no loyalty whatsoever to America, but only to the corrupt power structure which they like to believe they are a part of.
Apparently, the new form of ‘patriotism’, the new incarnation of ’support the troops’ - is to support someone who helped massacre hundreds of U.S. troops just two decades ago.
We are referring of course to Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the former Prime Minister of Iran who directed the bloody attacks on the U.S. embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Beirut in 1983. Sold by the media and hailed by Neo-Cons as the avatar of Iranian democracy, Mousavi was also “fingered Mousavi for the 1988 truck bombing of the U.S. Navy’s Fleet Center in Naples, Italy, that killed five persons, including the first Navy woman to die in a terrorist attack,” reports CQ Politics.
Regarding the Beirut bombings, which killed 220 U.S. Marines, CIA Middle East field officer Bob Baer wrote in TIME Magazine that Mousavi, “Dealt directly with Imad Mughniyah,” who ran the Beirut terrorist campaign and was “the man largely held responsible for both attacks.”
As Paul Craig Roberts writes, “The American media’s one-sided and propagandistic coverage of the Iranian election has made an American hero out of the defeated candidate, Mousavi.”
This charade has been vigorously amplified by phony right-wingers. As Raw Story notes, Neo-Cons have sided with the opposition against the boogeyman Ahmedinajed, to the point of grunting with delight at scenes broadcast by Fox News of police being beaten to a pulp by rioters. This makes for an odd contrast to their usual sentiment, towards anti-war protesters in the U.S. for example, for whom their newly found concern about police brutality towards demonstrators goes out of the window.
Similar feigned concern for demonstrators is being played out by TV talking heads across the networks. Take this former CIA agent for example, who informs Wolf Blitzer of his worries about how the Iranian Revolutionary Guard are treating protesters, warning that dissidents will be “disappeared”.
Oh the irony! For it was the CIA that trained the brutal Savak security force, copying techniques used by the Nazis to train the Gestapo, following the CIA’s overthrow of the democratically elected Mosaddeq government in 1953. Savak engaged in the systematic torture, disappearance, and execution of thousands of the new puppet regime’s opponents before the 1979 revolution, all with the blessing of the United States government.
Neo-Cons and establishment media figures have also seized upon the tragic death of “Neda” as another reason why regime change is needed, aghast at shocking scenes of an innocent women dying. This new found emotion at the sight of Middle Easterners bleeding to death on the streets was strangely absent during “shock and awe” and the eight year combined occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, during which hundreds of thousands have died in similar circumstances.
In a Free Republic thread about possible CIA involvement in Iran - which is a proven fact and not even up for debate - “Freepers” express their desire to see a little more meddling by way of CIA support for the opposition and the demonstrators - presumably by way of more money for Al-Qaeda offshoot terrorist groups like Jundullah and Mujahedeen-e Khalq to carry out more bombings and kill more people as part of the CIA’s now public destabilization program in Iran. [...]
Saddam wanted alliance with U.S.
Declassified Documents Reveal Saddam Wanted Alliance With U.S.
New revelations further debunk manufactured pretext for war
Paul Joseph Watson - Prison Planet.com - Thursday, June 25, 2009
Another piece of evidence to add to the patently obvious fact that the United States had resolved to bomb Iraq shortly after 9/11 and that the WMD charade was a staged sideshow is the fact that, according to newly released interrogation documents, Saddam Hussein actually wanted an alliance with the U.S. because he was more afraid of Iran.
“Saddam Hussein feared Iran’s arsenal more than a U.S. attack, and even considered asking ex-President George W. Bush “to protect” Iraq from its neighbor, once secret FBI files show,” reports the New York Daily News.
“The FBI interrogations of the toppled tyrant - codename “Desert Spider” - were declassified after a Freedom of Information Act request.”
Hussein told interrogators that he was more afraid of Iran than the U.S., and would have sought an alliance with Bush in order to protect his country from the “fanatic” Iranian ayatollahs.
Saddam also called Osama Bin Laden a “zealot” and swore that he never sought an alliance with the terror mastermind, adding that he would have preferred to seek a partnership with North Korea.
Hussein repeated that he had ordered the destruction of any remaining WMD before the invasion. “By God, if I had such weapons, I would have used them in the fight against the U.S.,” he added.
So desperate were the Bush administration to find a pretext to go into Iraq, that they even proposed staging provocations that would be blamed on Saddam.
As was highlighted again in the news last week, once it became obvious that UN inspectors would fail to find weapons of mass destruction, the government discussed alternative scenarios to hoodwink the UN into signing a new resolution authorizing military action.
One such proposal was to paint a U2 reconnaissance aircraft in UN colors and fly it over Iraqi territory, goading Saddam to order to aircraft shot at and thus violating UN resolutions.
The new revelation that Saddam would have been happy to become a military ally of the U.S. against Iran proves once again that the invasion of Iraq was not about making the Middle East safer or “liberating” a suppressed population - it was about creating a strategic foothold for U.S. imperial expansion in the region, taking over lucrative resources while handing out no bid contracts to military-industrial cronies, and providing a launch pad for the destabilization campaign and future attack on Iran.
6/23/09
Seeing Through All the Propaganda About Iran
Eric Margolis - Lew Rockwell.com - Tuesday, June 23, 2009
WASHINGTON – Iran’s political crisis continues to blaze. It’s still impossible to say which leaders or factions will emerge victorious, but one thing is certain: the earthquake in the Islamic Republic is shaking the Mideast and deeply confusing everyone, including the US government.
Highlighting the complexity of this crisis, Meir Dagan, the head of Israel’s intelligence agency, Mossad, reportedly voiced his hope that Iran’s embattled president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, would remain in office. On the surface, that sounds absurd, since Ahmadinejad is Israel’s Great Satan.
But, according to Dagan, if Ahmadinejad’s supposedly “moderate” rival, Mir Hossein Mousavi, came to power, it would be harder for Israel to keep up its propaganda war against Iran over Tehran’s nuclear program.
Besides, added the Mossad chief, the devil you know is better.
Meanwhile, we have been watching an intensifying western propaganda campaign against Iran, mounted by the US and British governments. What we hear is commentary and analysis that comes from bitterly anti-regime Iranian exiles, “experts” with an ax to grind, and US pro-Israel neocons yearning for war with Iran.
In viewing the Muslim world, Westerners keep listening to those who tell them what they want to hear, rather than the facts. We are at it again in Iran.
President Barack Obama’s properly stated he would refrain from being seen to “meddle” in Iran’s internal affairs in spite of calls by hard-line Republicans for American action – whatever that might be. Obama did the right thing by apologizing for the US/British coup that overthrew Iran’s democratic Mossadegh government in 1953.
But that was not the whole story. Washington has been attempting to overthrow Iran’s Islamic government since the 1979 revolution and continues to do so in spite of pledges of neutrality in the current crisis.
The US has laid economic siege to Iran for 30 years, blocking desperately needed foreign investment, preventing technology transfers, and disrupting Iranian trade. In recent years, the US Congress voted $120 million for anti-regime media broadcasts into Iran, and $60-75 million funding opposition parties, violent underground Marxists like the Mujahidin-i-Khalq, and restive ethnic groups like Azeris, Kurds, and Arabs under the so-called “Iran Democracy Program.”
The arm of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, remains withered from a bomb planted by the US-backed Mujahidin-i-Khalq, who were once on the US terrorist list.
Pakistani intelligence sources put CIA’s recent spending on “black operations” to subvert Iran’s government at $400 million.
According to an ABC News investigation, President George Bush signed a “finding” that authorized an accelerated campaign of subversion against the Islamic Republic. Washington’s goal was “regime change” in Tehran and installation of a pro-US regime of former Iranian royalist exiles.
While the majority of protests we see in Tehran are genuine and spontaneous, Western intelligence agencies and media are playing a key role in sustaining the uprising and providing communications, including the newest electronic method, via Twitter. These are covert techniques developed by the US during recent revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia that brought pro-US governments to power.
The Tehran government made things worse by limiting foreign news reports and arresting prominent politicians. Its leadership is increasingly – and dangerously – split over how to handle the protests.
We also hear lot of hypocrisy from Western capitals. Washington, Ottawa, London and Paris piously accused Iran of improper electoral procedures while utterly ignoring the total lack of democracy in their authoritarian Mideast allies such as Egypt, Morocco, and Saudi Arabia, that never hold elections and throw political opponents into prison and torture them. Compared to them, Iran, for all its faults, is almost a model of democratic governance.
The US, France and Saudi Arabia just cooperated to rig Lebanon’s recent elections, dishing out millions in bribe money to ensure victory of the pro-US faction. France’s President Nicholas Sarkozy had the chutzpah to rebuke Iran for improper election procedures after returning from the funeral of Gabon’s dictator, Omar Bongo, who had ruled for 41 years and supplied France with cheap oil.
When Hamas won a fair and square democratic election in Gaza, the US and Israel swiftly moved to mount a coup against the new Palestinian government.
US senators, led by John McCain, blasted Iran for not respecting human rights. That’s pretty rich after they just voted to bar the public release of ghastly torture photos from US prisons in Iraq, want secret US prisons kept open, and champion torture.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, one of the dimmest bulbs in the weak-wattage Republican ranks, called for US intervention in Iran. Graham was an architect of the Iraq fiasco. Let’s air assault the warlike senator into downtown Tehran.
Über-moral Canada, which backed Pakistan’s military dictatorship under Gen. Pervez Musharraf, accused Tehran of unfair elections. [...]
WASHINGTON – Iran’s political crisis continues to blaze. It’s still impossible to say which leaders or factions will emerge victorious, but one thing is certain: the earthquake in the Islamic Republic is shaking the Mideast and deeply confusing everyone, including the US government.
Highlighting the complexity of this crisis, Meir Dagan, the head of Israel’s intelligence agency, Mossad, reportedly voiced his hope that Iran’s embattled president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, would remain in office. On the surface, that sounds absurd, since Ahmadinejad is Israel’s Great Satan.
But, according to Dagan, if Ahmadinejad’s supposedly “moderate” rival, Mir Hossein Mousavi, came to power, it would be harder for Israel to keep up its propaganda war against Iran over Tehran’s nuclear program.
Besides, added the Mossad chief, the devil you know is better.
Meanwhile, we have been watching an intensifying western propaganda campaign against Iran, mounted by the US and British governments. What we hear is commentary and analysis that comes from bitterly anti-regime Iranian exiles, “experts” with an ax to grind, and US pro-Israel neocons yearning for war with Iran.
In viewing the Muslim world, Westerners keep listening to those who tell them what they want to hear, rather than the facts. We are at it again in Iran.
President Barack Obama’s properly stated he would refrain from being seen to “meddle” in Iran’s internal affairs in spite of calls by hard-line Republicans for American action – whatever that might be. Obama did the right thing by apologizing for the US/British coup that overthrew Iran’s democratic Mossadegh government in 1953.
But that was not the whole story. Washington has been attempting to overthrow Iran’s Islamic government since the 1979 revolution and continues to do so in spite of pledges of neutrality in the current crisis.
The US has laid economic siege to Iran for 30 years, blocking desperately needed foreign investment, preventing technology transfers, and disrupting Iranian trade. In recent years, the US Congress voted $120 million for anti-regime media broadcasts into Iran, and $60-75 million funding opposition parties, violent underground Marxists like the Mujahidin-i-Khalq, and restive ethnic groups like Azeris, Kurds, and Arabs under the so-called “Iran Democracy Program.”
The arm of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, remains withered from a bomb planted by the US-backed Mujahidin-i-Khalq, who were once on the US terrorist list.
Pakistani intelligence sources put CIA’s recent spending on “black operations” to subvert Iran’s government at $400 million.
According to an ABC News investigation, President George Bush signed a “finding” that authorized an accelerated campaign of subversion against the Islamic Republic. Washington’s goal was “regime change” in Tehran and installation of a pro-US regime of former Iranian royalist exiles.
While the majority of protests we see in Tehran are genuine and spontaneous, Western intelligence agencies and media are playing a key role in sustaining the uprising and providing communications, including the newest electronic method, via Twitter. These are covert techniques developed by the US during recent revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia that brought pro-US governments to power.
The Tehran government made things worse by limiting foreign news reports and arresting prominent politicians. Its leadership is increasingly – and dangerously – split over how to handle the protests.
We also hear lot of hypocrisy from Western capitals. Washington, Ottawa, London and Paris piously accused Iran of improper electoral procedures while utterly ignoring the total lack of democracy in their authoritarian Mideast allies such as Egypt, Morocco, and Saudi Arabia, that never hold elections and throw political opponents into prison and torture them. Compared to them, Iran, for all its faults, is almost a model of democratic governance.
The US, France and Saudi Arabia just cooperated to rig Lebanon’s recent elections, dishing out millions in bribe money to ensure victory of the pro-US faction. France’s President Nicholas Sarkozy had the chutzpah to rebuke Iran for improper election procedures after returning from the funeral of Gabon’s dictator, Omar Bongo, who had ruled for 41 years and supplied France with cheap oil.
When Hamas won a fair and square democratic election in Gaza, the US and Israel swiftly moved to mount a coup against the new Palestinian government.
US senators, led by John McCain, blasted Iran for not respecting human rights. That’s pretty rich after they just voted to bar the public release of ghastly torture photos from US prisons in Iraq, want secret US prisons kept open, and champion torture.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, one of the dimmest bulbs in the weak-wattage Republican ranks, called for US intervention in Iran. Graham was an architect of the Iraq fiasco. Let’s air assault the warlike senator into downtown Tehran.
Über-moral Canada, which backed Pakistan’s military dictatorship under Gen. Pervez Musharraf, accused Tehran of unfair elections. [...]
6/22/09
Could Iranian unrest be western-fomented?
Steve Watson breaks down current and historical points of interest regarding Western meddling in Iranian affairs. Could the current Iranian unrest be fomented in part by western intel?
From Infowars.net:
Iran finds US-backed MKO/MEK fingermarks in riots
The terrorist Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) has reportedly played a major role in intensifying the recent wave of street violence in Iran.
The announcement of the results of the election were planned in advance:
Corporate-controlled media mouthpieces had already declared Mousavi the winner even before the people of Iran had had an opportunity to cast their vote. When the result turned out to be contrary to their perceived wisdom, it was immediately denounced as “rigged”. It seems even Mousavi had fallen for this propaganda because as soon as the polls closed, he told a press conference in Tehran that he had “won”. How he could make such a claim when no results had come in?
The Western media supported the opposition’s claims by focusing the news on opposition rallies and demonstrations against Ahmadinejad, while ignoring the pro-Ahmadinejad rallies which were on some occasions much bigger. The BBC was so desperate to push the pro-Mousavi cause, it claimed that pictures of a massive pro-Ahmadinejad rally were of a pro-Mousavi rally. A retraction followed after we pointed out the grossly misleading claim. Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Hassan Qashqavi, said Monday that some European countries and the US have played a major role in provoking the post-election violence that killed scores of people in the past few days.
The 1953 CIA coup in Iran:
Recently admitted to by Obama, in 1953 the CIA and MI6 carried out Operation Ajax (officially TP-AJAX), a covert operation by the United Kingdom and the United States to remove the democratically elected nationalist cabinet of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh from power, to support the Pahlavi dynasty and consolidate the power of Mohammed Reza Pahlavi in order to preserve the Western control of Iran’s hugely lucrative oil infrastructure.
The ousting was achieved by means of staged bombings and shootings which were blamed on the Iranian government in order to antagonize the population and enable the coup.
During the coup, the CIA also bribed Iranian government officials, businessmen, and reporters, and paid Iranians to demonstrate in the streets.
Cheney, Neocons Considered Killing Americans in Pretext to Attack Iran:
Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh reveals how the neocons convened around Dick Cheney and brainstormed ways to kick off World War IV, as they fondly call their pet project to take out the Muslims and foment a contrived “clash of civilizations.”
KEY ARTICLE - CIA Covert destabilization campaign is ongoing:
Military, intelligence, and congressional sources say a secret war is being vamped to bring down the current Iranian leadership. This involves funding anti-government terrorist groups inside Iran, such as Jundullah and the MEK/MKO.
On May 23, 2007, Brian Ross and Richard Esposito reported on ABC News: “The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert “black” operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell ABC News.”
U.S. Govt has only subverted Iranian democracy
Iran Had a Democracy Before We Took It Away
Chris Hedges - Truthdig - Monday, June 22, 2009
Iranians do not need or want us to teach them about liberty and representative government. They have long embodied this struggle. It is we who need to be taught. It was Washington that orchestrated the 1953 coup to topple Iran’s democratically elected government, the first in the Middle East, and install the compliant shah in power. It was Washington that forced Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh, a man who cared as much for his country as he did for the rule of law and democracy, to spend the rest of his life under house arrest. We gave to the Iranian people the corrupt regime of the shah and his savage secret police and the primitive clerics that rose out of the swamp of the dictator’s Iran. Iranians know they once had a democracy until we took it away.
The fundamental problem in the Middle East is not a degenerate and corrupt Islam. The fundamental problem is a degenerate and corrupt Christendom. We have not brought freedom and democracy and enlightenment to the Muslim world. We have brought the opposite. We have used the iron fist of the American military to implant our oil companies in Iraq, occupy Afghanistan and ensure that the region is submissive and cowed. We have supported a government in Israel that has carried out egregious war crimes in Lebanon and Gaza and is daily stealing ever greater portions of Palestinian land. We have established a network of military bases, some the size of small cities, in Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Kuwait, and we have secured basing rights in the Gulf states of Bahrain, Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates. We have expanded our military operations to Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Egypt, Algeria and Yemen. And no one naively believes, except perhaps us, that we have any intention of leaving.
We are the biggest problem in the Middle East. We have through our cruelty and violence created and legitimized the Mahmoud Ahmadinejads and the Osama bin Ladens. The longer we lurch around the region dropping iron fragmentation bombs and seizing Muslim land the more these monsters, reflections of our own distorted image, will proliferate. The theologian Reinhold Niebuhr wrote that “the most significant moral characteristic of a nation is its hypocrisy.” But our hypocrisy no longer fools anyone but ourselves. It will ensure our imperial and economic collapse.
The history of modern Iran is the history of a people battling tyranny. These tyrants were almost always propped up and funded by foreign powers. This suppression and distortion of legitimate democratic movements over the decades resulted in the 1979 revolution that brought the Iranian clerics to power, unleashing another tragic cycle of Iranian resistance.
“The central story of Iran over the last 200 years has been national humiliation at the hands of foreign powers who have subjugated and looted the country,” Stephen Kinzer, the author of “All the Shah’s Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror,” told me. “For a long time the perpetrators were the British and Russians. Beginning in 1953, the United States began taking over that role. In that year, the American and British secret services overthrew an elected government, wiped away Iranian democracy, and set the country on the path to dictatorship.”
“Then, in the 1980s, the U.S. sided with Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq war, providing him with military equipment and intelligence that helped make it possible for his army to kill hundreds of thousands of Iranians,” Kinzer said. “Given this history, the moral credibility of the U.S. to pose as a promoter of democracy in Iran is close to nil.
Especially ludicrous is the sight of people in Washington calling for intervention on behalf of democracy in Iran when just last year they were calling for the bombing of Iran. If they had had their way then, many of the brave protesters on the streets of Tehran today—the ones they hold up as heroes of democracy—would be dead now.”
Washington has never recovered from the loss of Iran—something our intelligence services never saw coming. The overthrow of the shah, the humiliation of the embassy hostages, the laborious piecing together of tiny shreds of paper from classified embassy documents to expose America’s venal role in thwarting democratic movements in Iran and the region, allowed the outside world to see the dark heart of the American empire. Washington has demonized Iran ever since, painting it as an irrational and barbaric country filled with primitive, religious zealots. But Iranians, as these street protests illustrate, have proved in recent years far more courageous in the defense of democracy than most Americans.
Where were we when our election was stolen from us in 2000 by Republican operatives and a Supreme Court that overturned all legal precedent to anoint George W. Bush president? Did tens of thousands of us fill the squares of our major cities and denounce the fraud? Did we mobilize day after day to restore transparency and accountability to our election process? Did we fight back with the same courage and tenacity as the citizens of Iran? Did Al Gore defy the power elite and, as opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi has done, demand a recount at the risk of being killed?
President Obama retreated in his Cairo speech into our spectacular moral nihilism, suggesting that our crimes matched the crimes of Iran, that there is, in his words, “a tumultuous history between us.” He went on: “In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians.” It all, he seemed to say, balances out.
I am no friend of the Iranian regime, which helped create and arm Hezbollah, is certainly meddling in Iraq, has persecuted human rights activists, gays, women and religious and ethnic minorities, embraces racism and intolerance and uses its power to deny popular will. But I do not remember Iran orchestrating a coup in the United States to replace an elected government with a brutal dictator who for decades persecuted, assassinated and imprisoned democracy activists.
I do not remember Iran arming and funding a neighboring state to wage war against our country. Iran never shot down one of our passenger jets as did the USS Vincennes—caustically nicknamed Robocruiser by the crews of other American vessels—when in June 1988 it fired missiles at an Airbus filled with Iranian civilians, killing everyone on board. Iran is not sponsoring terrorism within the United States, as our intelligence services currently do in Iran. The attacks on Iranian soil include suicide bombings, kidnappings, beheadings, sabotage and “targeted assassinations” of government officials, scientists and other Iranian leaders. What would we do if the situation was reversed? How would we react if Iran carried out these policies against us?
We are, and have long been, the primary engine for radicalism in the Middle East. The greatest favor we can do for democracy activists in Iran, as well as in Iraq, Afghanistan, the Gulf and the dictatorships that dot North Africa, is withdraw our troops from the region and begin to speak to Iranians and the rest of the Muslim world in the civilized language of diplomacy, respect and mutual interests. The longer we cling to the doomed doctrine of permanent war the more we give credibility to the extremists who need, indeed yearn for, an enemy that speaks in their crude slogans of nationalist cant and violence. The louder the Israelis and their idiot allies in Washington call for the bombing of Iran to thwart its nuclear ambitions, the happier are the bankrupt clerics who are ordering the beating and murder of demonstrators. We may laugh when crowds supporting Ahmadinejad call us “the Great Satan,” but there is a very palpable reality that has informed the terrible algebra of their hatred.
Our intoxication with our military prowess blinds us to all possibilities of hope and mutual cooperation. It was Mohammed Khatami, the president of Iran from 1997 to 2005—perhaps the only honorable Middle East leader of our time—whose refusal to countenance violence by his own supporters led to the demise of his lofty “civil society” at the hands of more ruthless, less scrupulous opponents. It was Khatami who proclaimed that “the death of even one Jew is a crime.” And we sputtered back to this great and civilized man the primitive slogans of all deformed militarists. We were captive, as all bigots are, to our demons, and could not hear any sound but our own shouting. It is time to banish these demons. It is time to stand not with the helmeted goons who beat protesters, not with those in the Pentagon who make endless wars, but with the unarmed demonstrators in Iran who daily show us what we must become.
The fight of the Iranian people is our fight. And, perhaps for the first time, we can match our actions to our ideals. We have no right under post-Nuremberg laws to occupy Iraq or Afghanistan. These occupations are defined by these statutes as criminal “wars of aggression.” They are war crimes. We have no right to use force, including the state-sponsored terrorism we unleash on Iran, to turn the Middle East into a private gas station for our large oil companies. We have no right to empower Israel’s continuing occupation of Palestine, a flagrant violation of international law. The resistance you see in Iran will not end until Iranians, and all those burdened with repression in the Middle East, free themselves from the tyranny that comes from within and without. Let us, for once, be on the side of those who share our democratic ideals.
Chris Hedges is the former Mideast bureau chief of the New York Times. His Truthdig column can be found every Monday.
Chris Hedges - Truthdig - Monday, June 22, 2009
Iranians do not need or want us to teach them about liberty and representative government. They have long embodied this struggle. It is we who need to be taught. It was Washington that orchestrated the 1953 coup to topple Iran’s democratically elected government, the first in the Middle East, and install the compliant shah in power. It was Washington that forced Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh, a man who cared as much for his country as he did for the rule of law and democracy, to spend the rest of his life under house arrest. We gave to the Iranian people the corrupt regime of the shah and his savage secret police and the primitive clerics that rose out of the swamp of the dictator’s Iran. Iranians know they once had a democracy until we took it away.
The fundamental problem in the Middle East is not a degenerate and corrupt Islam. The fundamental problem is a degenerate and corrupt Christendom. We have not brought freedom and democracy and enlightenment to the Muslim world. We have brought the opposite. We have used the iron fist of the American military to implant our oil companies in Iraq, occupy Afghanistan and ensure that the region is submissive and cowed. We have supported a government in Israel that has carried out egregious war crimes in Lebanon and Gaza and is daily stealing ever greater portions of Palestinian land. We have established a network of military bases, some the size of small cities, in Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Kuwait, and we have secured basing rights in the Gulf states of Bahrain, Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates. We have expanded our military operations to Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Egypt, Algeria and Yemen. And no one naively believes, except perhaps us, that we have any intention of leaving.
We are the biggest problem in the Middle East. We have through our cruelty and violence created and legitimized the Mahmoud Ahmadinejads and the Osama bin Ladens. The longer we lurch around the region dropping iron fragmentation bombs and seizing Muslim land the more these monsters, reflections of our own distorted image, will proliferate. The theologian Reinhold Niebuhr wrote that “the most significant moral characteristic of a nation is its hypocrisy.” But our hypocrisy no longer fools anyone but ourselves. It will ensure our imperial and economic collapse.
The history of modern Iran is the history of a people battling tyranny. These tyrants were almost always propped up and funded by foreign powers. This suppression and distortion of legitimate democratic movements over the decades resulted in the 1979 revolution that brought the Iranian clerics to power, unleashing another tragic cycle of Iranian resistance.
“The central story of Iran over the last 200 years has been national humiliation at the hands of foreign powers who have subjugated and looted the country,” Stephen Kinzer, the author of “All the Shah’s Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror,” told me. “For a long time the perpetrators were the British and Russians. Beginning in 1953, the United States began taking over that role. In that year, the American and British secret services overthrew an elected government, wiped away Iranian democracy, and set the country on the path to dictatorship.”
“Then, in the 1980s, the U.S. sided with Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq war, providing him with military equipment and intelligence that helped make it possible for his army to kill hundreds of thousands of Iranians,” Kinzer said. “Given this history, the moral credibility of the U.S. to pose as a promoter of democracy in Iran is close to nil.
Especially ludicrous is the sight of people in Washington calling for intervention on behalf of democracy in Iran when just last year they were calling for the bombing of Iran. If they had had their way then, many of the brave protesters on the streets of Tehran today—the ones they hold up as heroes of democracy—would be dead now.”
Washington has never recovered from the loss of Iran—something our intelligence services never saw coming. The overthrow of the shah, the humiliation of the embassy hostages, the laborious piecing together of tiny shreds of paper from classified embassy documents to expose America’s venal role in thwarting democratic movements in Iran and the region, allowed the outside world to see the dark heart of the American empire. Washington has demonized Iran ever since, painting it as an irrational and barbaric country filled with primitive, religious zealots. But Iranians, as these street protests illustrate, have proved in recent years far more courageous in the defense of democracy than most Americans.
Where were we when our election was stolen from us in 2000 by Republican operatives and a Supreme Court that overturned all legal precedent to anoint George W. Bush president? Did tens of thousands of us fill the squares of our major cities and denounce the fraud? Did we mobilize day after day to restore transparency and accountability to our election process? Did we fight back with the same courage and tenacity as the citizens of Iran? Did Al Gore defy the power elite and, as opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi has done, demand a recount at the risk of being killed?
President Obama retreated in his Cairo speech into our spectacular moral nihilism, suggesting that our crimes matched the crimes of Iran, that there is, in his words, “a tumultuous history between us.” He went on: “In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians.” It all, he seemed to say, balances out.
I am no friend of the Iranian regime, which helped create and arm Hezbollah, is certainly meddling in Iraq, has persecuted human rights activists, gays, women and religious and ethnic minorities, embraces racism and intolerance and uses its power to deny popular will. But I do not remember Iran orchestrating a coup in the United States to replace an elected government with a brutal dictator who for decades persecuted, assassinated and imprisoned democracy activists.
I do not remember Iran arming and funding a neighboring state to wage war against our country. Iran never shot down one of our passenger jets as did the USS Vincennes—caustically nicknamed Robocruiser by the crews of other American vessels—when in June 1988 it fired missiles at an Airbus filled with Iranian civilians, killing everyone on board. Iran is not sponsoring terrorism within the United States, as our intelligence services currently do in Iran. The attacks on Iranian soil include suicide bombings, kidnappings, beheadings, sabotage and “targeted assassinations” of government officials, scientists and other Iranian leaders. What would we do if the situation was reversed? How would we react if Iran carried out these policies against us?
We are, and have long been, the primary engine for radicalism in the Middle East. The greatest favor we can do for democracy activists in Iran, as well as in Iraq, Afghanistan, the Gulf and the dictatorships that dot North Africa, is withdraw our troops from the region and begin to speak to Iranians and the rest of the Muslim world in the civilized language of diplomacy, respect and mutual interests. The longer we cling to the doomed doctrine of permanent war the more we give credibility to the extremists who need, indeed yearn for, an enemy that speaks in their crude slogans of nationalist cant and violence. The louder the Israelis and their idiot allies in Washington call for the bombing of Iran to thwart its nuclear ambitions, the happier are the bankrupt clerics who are ordering the beating and murder of demonstrators. We may laugh when crowds supporting Ahmadinejad call us “the Great Satan,” but there is a very palpable reality that has informed the terrible algebra of their hatred.
Our intoxication with our military prowess blinds us to all possibilities of hope and mutual cooperation. It was Mohammed Khatami, the president of Iran from 1997 to 2005—perhaps the only honorable Middle East leader of our time—whose refusal to countenance violence by his own supporters led to the demise of his lofty “civil society” at the hands of more ruthless, less scrupulous opponents. It was Khatami who proclaimed that “the death of even one Jew is a crime.” And we sputtered back to this great and civilized man the primitive slogans of all deformed militarists. We were captive, as all bigots are, to our demons, and could not hear any sound but our own shouting. It is time to banish these demons. It is time to stand not with the helmeted goons who beat protesters, not with those in the Pentagon who make endless wars, but with the unarmed demonstrators in Iran who daily show us what we must become.
The fight of the Iranian people is our fight. And, perhaps for the first time, we can match our actions to our ideals. We have no right under post-Nuremberg laws to occupy Iraq or Afghanistan. These occupations are defined by these statutes as criminal “wars of aggression.” They are war crimes. We have no right to use force, including the state-sponsored terrorism we unleash on Iran, to turn the Middle East into a private gas station for our large oil companies. We have no right to empower Israel’s continuing occupation of Palestine, a flagrant violation of international law. The resistance you see in Iran will not end until Iranians, and all those burdened with repression in the Middle East, free themselves from the tyranny that comes from within and without. Let us, for once, be on the side of those who share our democratic ideals.
Chris Hedges is the former Mideast bureau chief of the New York Times. His Truthdig column can be found every Monday.
6/21/09
Bush, Blair planned manufactured Iraq provocation
Confidential memo reveals US plan to provoke an invasion of Iraq
Jamie Doward, Gaby Hinsliff and Mark Townsend
The UK Guardian - June 21, 2009
A confidential record of a meeting between President Bush and Tony Blair before the invasion of Iraq, outlining their intention to go to war without a second United Nations resolution, will be an explosive issue for the official inquiry into the UK’s role in toppling Saddam Hussein.
The memo, written on 31 January 2003, almost two months before the invasion and seen by the Observer, confirms that as the two men became increasingly aware UN inspectors would fail to find weapons of mass destruction (WMD) they had to contemplate alternative scenarios that might trigger a second resolution legitimising military action.
Bush told Blair the US had drawn up a provocative plan “to fly U2 reconnaissance aircraft painted in UN colours over Iraq with fighter cover”. Bush said that if Saddam fired at the planes this would put the Iraqi leader in breach of UN resolutions.
The president expressed hopes that an Iraqi defector would be “brought out” to give a public presentation on Saddam’s WMD or that someone might assassinate the Iraqi leader. However, Bush confirmed even without a second resolution, the US was prepared for military action. The memo said Blair told Bush he was “solidly with the president”. [...]
Jamie Doward, Gaby Hinsliff and Mark Townsend
The UK Guardian - June 21, 2009
A confidential record of a meeting between President Bush and Tony Blair before the invasion of Iraq, outlining their intention to go to war without a second United Nations resolution, will be an explosive issue for the official inquiry into the UK’s role in toppling Saddam Hussein.
The memo, written on 31 January 2003, almost two months before the invasion and seen by the Observer, confirms that as the two men became increasingly aware UN inspectors would fail to find weapons of mass destruction (WMD) they had to contemplate alternative scenarios that might trigger a second resolution legitimising military action.
Bush told Blair the US had drawn up a provocative plan “to fly U2 reconnaissance aircraft painted in UN colours over Iraq with fighter cover”. Bush said that if Saddam fired at the planes this would put the Iraqi leader in breach of UN resolutions.
The president expressed hopes that an Iraqi defector would be “brought out” to give a public presentation on Saddam’s WMD or that someone might assassinate the Iraqi leader. However, Bush confirmed even without a second resolution, the US was prepared for military action. The memo said Blair told Bush he was “solidly with the president”. [...]
2nd Amdt to be stripped from those on watch list
The Rahm Immanuel agenda of using the arbitrary terrorist "watch list" as a basis for banning gun sales to ever wider segments of the population is underway.
The New York Times reports, "[Senator Frank] Lautenberg plans to introduce legislation on Monday that would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales to people on terror watch lists."
So, all the government will have to do to prevent gun ownership is place you--upon its own discretion and subject to no review--on a "watch list," which Rahm Immanuel says identifies you as "maybe a possible terrorist."
Take that, America! You lose your Second Amendment right because some bureaucrat says you're "maybe a possible terrorist." You're not convicted of anything. Not even charged! And you can't even know the basis for why you're on the list.
The New York Times reports, "[Senator Frank] Lautenberg plans to introduce legislation on Monday that would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales to people on terror watch lists."
So, all the government will have to do to prevent gun ownership is place you--upon its own discretion and subject to no review--on a "watch list," which Rahm Immanuel says identifies you as "maybe a possible terrorist."
Take that, America! You lose your Second Amendment right because some bureaucrat says you're "maybe a possible terrorist." You're not convicted of anything. Not even charged! And you can't even know the basis for why you're on the list.
Call the police if you see an anti-NWO bumper sticker
VA State Police Say Anti-NWO and Gun Rights Activists are Terrorists
Kurt Nimmo - Prison Planet.com - Sunday, June 21, 2009
Another document designating Americans as terrorists has surfaced. The document, entitled “Crisis Controlled: Assessing Potential Threats of Violence,” authored by Trooper John R. Wright, is posted on the official website of the Commonwealth of Virginia, under the Department of Human Resources Management.
In March, the Virginia State Police and the Virginia Fusion Center produced a report entitled “2009 Virginia Terrorism Threat Assessment.” In response, Virginia Governor Timothy M. Kaine ordered an investigation of the fusion center. The report designates university-based students groups as terrorist groups.
Presented in slideshow format, the latest document lists gun rights, pro-life, constitutional issues, tax protesters, and “anti-government groups” as domestic terror threats. Anarchists, separatists, “single issue,” and religious cults are listed along with al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hizballah, al-Jihad, Aryan Nations, neo-Nazi, skinheads, black separatists, and the Klu Klux Klan. [...]
Wright urges citizens to actively become snoops and instructs them to consider innocuous behavior as suspected terrorist activity. People who avoid community contact and value privacy are to be considered possible terrorists, as well as those who make “unusual purchases” or have “numerous visitors/meetings.”
Wright’s slideshow provides the following as an example of a terrorist lead:
Kurt Nimmo - Prison Planet.com - Sunday, June 21, 2009
Another document designating Americans as terrorists has surfaced. The document, entitled “Crisis Controlled: Assessing Potential Threats of Violence,” authored by Trooper John R. Wright, is posted on the official website of the Commonwealth of Virginia, under the Department of Human Resources Management.
In March, the Virginia State Police and the Virginia Fusion Center produced a report entitled “2009 Virginia Terrorism Threat Assessment.” In response, Virginia Governor Timothy M. Kaine ordered an investigation of the fusion center. The report designates university-based students groups as terrorist groups.
Presented in slideshow format, the latest document lists gun rights, pro-life, constitutional issues, tax protesters, and “anti-government groups” as domestic terror threats. Anarchists, separatists, “single issue,” and religious cults are listed along with al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hizballah, al-Jihad, Aryan Nations, neo-Nazi, skinheads, black separatists, and the Klu Klux Klan. [...]
Wright urges citizens to actively become snoops and instructs them to consider innocuous behavior as suspected terrorist activity. People who avoid community contact and value privacy are to be considered possible terrorists, as well as those who make “unusual purchases” or have “numerous visitors/meetings.”
Wright’s slideshow provides the following as an example of a terrorist lead:
“I saw a white male, about 6 ft tall wearing black combat pants, a black t-shirt, and boots with the pants tucked in, taking notes for at least 2 hours outside the front entrance to the Courthouse. He was standing near a brown Ford pick-up truck, PA SYE-141, with a rusting tailgate and a bumper sticker that said, “Say No to the New World Order”. (Emphasis added.)In other words, if you listen to Alex Jones, have an anti-NWO bumper sticker on your vehicle, or wear certain clothing you may be reported to the Virginia State Police as a possible terrorist worthy of “subsequent investigation.” [...]
6/19/09
ACLU, C4L to sue TSA
ACLU, Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty sue TSA over ‘illegal’ detention
Stephen C. Webster - Raw Story - Friday, June 19, 2009
The American Civil Liberties Union may have just earned itself a few more Republican admirers.
Announcing a lawsuit against the Transportation Security Administration for the “illegal” detention of the Campaign for Liberty’s treasurer in April at a St. Louis airport, the ACLU damned what it called a “troubling pattern” of aggressive invasions of privacy by the TSA.
Steve Bierfeldt, the man at the center of the controversy, recorded his confrontation with the airport security agents on his phone. The audio caused waves of indignation across the Internet, as he was seemingly harassed merely for carrying cash and Ron Paul campaign material.
In it, he is clearly wary of the security agents and takes steps to ensure he says nothing to incriminate himself under questioning by the agents. He told journalists later that he was also fearful of the agents because of the so-called “Missouri memo” that, while retracted, branded Ron Paul supporters as potential “militia.”
The Campaign for Liberty was founded by Texas Republican Congressman Ron Paul, who attracted a groundswell of support during his failed bid for the GOP presidential nomination. Many of the group’s members were in St. Louis in early April for a major rally.
“Due to the current economical [sic] and political situation, a lush environment for militia activity has been created,” the retracted memo reads. It goes on to cite possible militia members as people who talk about the New World Order conspiracy, express anger with the Federal Reserve banking system, resist paying taxes, warn other citizens about the perceived dangers of radio frequency identification (RFID) or lobby for a return to strict constitutionalism as possible threats to law enforcement.
More than half of the U.S. House of Representatives have co-sponsored Congressman Ron Paul’s proposed legislation to audit the Federal Reserve. Hearings and debate on the bill by the full House are expected next month.
Along with specifically highlighting former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr as icons of the militia movement, it also cautioned police to be on the lookout for bumper stickers advertising third party candidates, or people with copies of the United States Constitution. The Missouri Department of Public Safety later apologized profusely after the three men signed a letter demanding a retraction, and the state’s Lt. governor promised to look into the memo’s origins.
“Mr. Bierfeldt’s experience represents a troubling pattern of TSA attempting to transform its valid but limited search authority into a license to invade people’s privacy in a manner that would never be accepted outside the airport context,” said ACLU attorney Larry Schwartztol in a Thursday media advisory. “Just as the Constitution prevents the police on the street from conducting freewheeling searches in the hopes of uncovering wrongdoing, it protects travelers from the kind of treatment Mr. Bierfeldt suffered.”
The release adds: “TSA officials have the authority to conduct safety-related searches for weapons and explosives. According to the ACLU’s lawsuit, TSA agents are using heightened security measures after 9/11 as an excuse to exceed their search authority and engage in unlawful searches that violate the privacy rights of passengers. The lawsuit also charges that unconstitutional searches and detention by TSA agents have become the norm.”
6/18/09
$15 Trillion: Cost of past year of bailouts
The cost of the past year of bailouts now has reached $15 Trillion.
Take out World War II and see the cost of all of America's most expensive programs in the entire history of this country--a whopping $3.92 Trillion:
If you add World War II to the figures, it reaches $7.52 Trillion.
So, the total of all the unbelievably expensive endeavors that the U.S. Government has pursued, including World War II is still only HALF of the $15 Trillion total from the past year of government and Fed bailout commitments alone.
Take a look at the size of all of these enormous historic programs compared to the size of the bailouts for the past year.
Take out World War II and see the cost of all of America's most expensive programs in the entire history of this country--a whopping $3.92 Trillion:
If you add World War II to the figures, it reaches $7.52 Trillion.
So, the total of all the unbelievably expensive endeavors that the U.S. Government has pursued, including World War II is still only HALF of the $15 Trillion total from the past year of government and Fed bailout commitments alone.
Take a look at the size of all of these enormous historic programs compared to the size of the bailouts for the past year.
Lincoln not a friend of blacks
How To Lie About Lincoln
Lew Rockwell.com Blog - Thomas DiLorenzo - June 17, 2009 06:20 AM
A friend recently sent me an article from Newsmax magazine by Newt Gingrich and William Forstchen entitled “Abraham Lincoln, On His 200th Birthday: What Would He Say to Us Today.” There are almost no historical facts in the article, as is typical of “Lincoln scholarship.” Instead, nearly every point is made by referencing a “story” (without documenation of where the story came from), quoting one of Dishonest Abe’s own political speeches, and proclaiming over and over what a kindhearted angel he supposedly was. The article proudly boasts that Lincoln now sits upon his “throne” that is “modeled after Grecian temples.”
The biggest piece of misinformation in the article is the authors’ boast that “Lincoln was the first president to invite and socially greet a delegation of African-Americans into the White House.” Professor Henry Louis Gates of Harvard told me this is not true when I mentioned this meeting to him last year in an interview – there had already been such a meeting. But Gingrich and Forstchen misinform their readers by not explaining the purpose of the meeting. The purpose was to urge/entice these free black men to lead by example and deport themselves to Liberia (See Abraham Lincoln: Speeches and Writings, vol. 2, 1859-1865, pp. 353-357). Lincoln did not believe that a multi-racial society was either possible or desirable in America. “You and I are different races,” Lincoln told the free black men in 1862. “This physical difference,” he said, “is a great disadvantage to us both,” and “affords a reason at least why we should be separated . . . . It is better for us both, therefore, to be separate.” He then urged the men to leave America for Liberia. They wisely turned him down.
Gingrich and Forstchen mention this meeting to give their readers the false impression that Lincoln was racially enlightened. The reality is that he was as much a white supremacist as any man of his time, and proved it with his lifelong fetish for “colonization” or deportation of all black people from the U.S. (He was one of the “managers” of the “Illinois Colonization Society” that used state tax dollars to deport free blacks out of the state).
Paul, Celente on Fed regulatory take-over
Also, Thomas DiLorenzo adds,
After the Fed caused the current economic crisis, Obama proposed yesterday to give the Fed sweeping new powers and authority to supposedly regulate and eliminate “systemic risks” in the economy. You know, the kind of risks the Fed has been in the business of creating for some ninety years now. If the creation of the housing bubble by the Fed is not an example of the creation of “systemic risk,” then there is no such thing as systemic risk (one of Bernanke’s pet research topics when he was an academic).
The Fed will continue to inflate and cause boom-and-bust cycles, including the one that is already in the works and which will dwarf the housing bubble in the next couple of years. Then it will blame that crisis on the “failure of capitalism” and lobby for even more extreme central planning powers.
End the Fed now, before it kills (the economy) again.
War funding bill to bail out IMF
House Passes Bill With “Global Bailout” Provision
Billions in taxpayer dollars to be handed over to European banks through the IMF
Steve Watson - Infowars.net - Wednesday, June 17, 2009
The House has passed a war funding bill which had tagged onto it a completely unrelated provision to hand over $5 billion to secure $108 billion in loans to the IMF.
The chamber voted 226 to 202 yesterday to forward the legislation to the Senate, which may take it up later this week, reports Bloomberg News. The measure in the bill will also increase the U.S. member contribution to the IMF by $8 billion and authorize the United States to back the IMF’s plan to sell 400 tons (12.97 million ounces) of gold.
It was placed in the bill at the behest of the Obama administration in order to fulfil the president’s pledge to the G20 in April, to contribute toward a $500 billion boost for the IMF, which it says will go toward “helping poorer nations” during the economic downturn.
However, as we have previously reported, the proposal constitutes an international version of the Wall Street bailout; a $100+ billion bailout for the IMF, which amounts to a bailout for European banks facing big losses in Central and Eastern Europe.
“This will directly benefit Western Europe’s banks, ensuring that their CEE subsidiaries will receive the support they need to weather the recession and remain lucrative businesses.” a Banking Business Review report stated at the time.[...]
Billions in taxpayer dollars to be handed over to European banks through the IMF
Steve Watson - Infowars.net - Wednesday, June 17, 2009
The House has passed a war funding bill which had tagged onto it a completely unrelated provision to hand over $5 billion to secure $108 billion in loans to the IMF.
The chamber voted 226 to 202 yesterday to forward the legislation to the Senate, which may take it up later this week, reports Bloomberg News. The measure in the bill will also increase the U.S. member contribution to the IMF by $8 billion and authorize the United States to back the IMF’s plan to sell 400 tons (12.97 million ounces) of gold.
It was placed in the bill at the behest of the Obama administration in order to fulfil the president’s pledge to the G20 in April, to contribute toward a $500 billion boost for the IMF, which it says will go toward “helping poorer nations” during the economic downturn.
However, as we have previously reported, the proposal constitutes an international version of the Wall Street bailout; a $100+ billion bailout for the IMF, which amounts to a bailout for European banks facing big losses in Central and Eastern Europe.
“This will directly benefit Western Europe’s banks, ensuring that their CEE subsidiaries will receive the support they need to weather the recession and remain lucrative businesses.” a Banking Business Review report stated at the time.[...]
Brazilian President: "Time for a New World Order"
Time for ‘new world order’: Brazilian President
AFP - Wednesday, June 17, 2009
The global financial crisis has reduced the differences between nations and created the opportunity to form a new world order, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said Wednesday.
Speaking after a meeting with Kazakhstan’s President Nursultan Nazarbayev in the Kazakh capital Astana, Lula called on the global community to seize on the crisis to create a fairer world for developing nations.
“I want to say that before the crisis, there were many countries which had greater significance than others, and some countries which had no significance at all,” he said through a translator.
“After the crisis, everyone has become similar. We have the possibility to create a new world order and together we should improve our relations.”
Lula arrived in Kazakhstan Wednesday following the first-ever summit between fellow developing economic powerhouses Russia, India and China — together with Brazil dubbed the BRIC nations — in the Russian city of Yekaterinburg.
Nazarbayev, head of Central Asia’s largest economy, is keen to secure a larger role for his government in world affairs.
AFP - Wednesday, June 17, 2009
The global financial crisis has reduced the differences between nations and created the opportunity to form a new world order, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said Wednesday.
Speaking after a meeting with Kazakhstan’s President Nursultan Nazarbayev in the Kazakh capital Astana, Lula called on the global community to seize on the crisis to create a fairer world for developing nations.
“I want to say that before the crisis, there were many countries which had greater significance than others, and some countries which had no significance at all,” he said through a translator.
“After the crisis, everyone has become similar. We have the possibility to create a new world order and together we should improve our relations.”
Lula arrived in Kazakhstan Wednesday following the first-ever summit between fellow developing economic powerhouses Russia, India and China — together with Brazil dubbed the BRIC nations — in the Russian city of Yekaterinburg.
Nazarbayev, head of Central Asia’s largest economy, is keen to secure a larger role for his government in world affairs.
Fake anti-Iran propaganda
Western world lied to and told that a pro-Ahmadinejad rally was an anti-Ahmadinejad protest. Amazing BBC propaganda. See Paul Watson's story on this.
And, no I'm not a fan of Ahmadinejad, but lying and government propaganda are wrong, so let's expose it.
Update: 6/21/09 -- BBC has issued a retraction.
And, no I'm not a fan of Ahmadinejad, but lying and government propaganda are wrong, so let's expose it.
Update: 6/21/09 -- BBC has issued a retraction.
Fed to become master-regulator
Obama Regulatory Reform Plan Officially Establishes Banking Dictatorship In United States
Move to hand privately-owned Federal Reserve complete regulatory power over entire U.S. economy heralds new form of government
Paul Joseph Watson & Steve Watson - Prison Planet.com - Thursday, June 18, 2009
President Obama’s plan to give the privately-owned and unaccountable Federal Reserve complete regulatory oversight across the entire U.S. economy, which is likely to be enacted before the end of the year, will officially herald the beginning of a new form of government in the United States - an ultra-powerful banking dictatorship controlled by a small gaggle of shadowy and corrupt elitists.
The new rules would see the Fed given the authority to “regulate” any company whose activity it believes could threaten the economy and the markets.
This goes a step further than the centrally planned economies of the Soviet Union or Communist China, in that the Federal Reserve is not even accountable to the U.S. government, it is a private entity that according to former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan, is accountable to nobody but the banking families that own it.
Obama’s regulatory “reform” plan is nothing less than a green light for the complete and total takeover of the United States by a private banking cartel that will usurp the power of existing regulatory bodies, who are now being blamed for the financial crisis in order that their status can be abolished and their roles handed over to the all-powerful Fed.
According to an Associated Press report today, Democratic leaders have committed to enacting the plan before the end of the year and Republicans in both the House and Senate have indicated that they won’t stand in the way of the overhaul.
“The final plan….is expected to sidestep most jurisdictional disputes and simply impose across the board standards to be applied by all financial regulators, according to administration and industry sources, ” reports the Washington Times.
In other words, the Fed, which is already totally unaccountable to Congress, is to be placed in complete control of the entirety of the U.S. financial system, to do as it wishes without repercussion.
As the LA Times reports, the government, in conjunction with the private Federal Reserve, would effectively have the clout to simply seize and take over any company it desires.
In order to appease those opposed to the plan, such as Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, chairman of the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, the Obama administration has agreed to create a “watchdog” council of regulators to “advise the Fed”.
However, as former chairman Alan Greenspan has most recently pointed out, given that the Fed is an independent entity, and therefore accountable to no one, it will have the power to simply reject and overrule any advice it is offered.
Pointing out the flagrant conflict of interest in empowering the Federal Reserve to essentially regulate itself, Professor of public affairs at the University of Texas at Austin Robert Auerbach writes, “The Federal Reserve has massive conflicts of interest that make it ill suited for its present regulatory functions and certainly for an expanded regulatory reach. The officials leading the Fed today preside over an organization that is run in substantial part by the bankers they regulate. Bank regulation begins at its 12 district Federal Reserve Banks, each governed by a nine-member board of directors, two-thirds of whom are elected by the bankers in the district.”
As economic author Nomi Prins highlights, Obama’s plan does nothing whatsoever to fix the excesses of financial institutions blamed for the financial collapse, it only ensures their continued operation and an expansion of the practices that contributed to the economic crisis in the first place.
“The ’sweeping overhaul’ of the financial system detailed by Geithner on behalf of the Obama administration does not overhaul the system at all,” writes Prins, “giving the Fed a bigger role, creating a ‘council of regulators’ to oversee the existing oversight bodies and allowing the biggest Wall Street players to maintain their status, leaves the system intact.”
“The Federal Reserve is not a fully public entity. It has amassed a set of $7.87 trillion worth of facilities and other entities through which it has lavished cheap loans in return for questionable collateral from the banking system. It has kept the true nature of these transactions a secret despite numerous FOIA requests. And, it has actively promoted the creation of bigger institutions in a chaotic environment, rather than putting the brakes on the creation of these giants,” concludes Prins.
Proof that the agenda of implementing overt financial dictatorship is being carefully coordinated can be seen in the fact that an almost identical scheme is also being set up in the United Kingdom, where “The governor of the Bank of England has called for greater powers to allow it to fulfil its new role of promoting financial stability,” according to a BBC report.
Just as in the U.S., King is calling for traditional independent regulatory bodies to be all but abolished and replaced by the Bank of England itself, which just like the Federal Reserve is a private outfit with no accountability to the government whatsoever. [...]
How simultaneously dangerous and ridiculous it is that the Federal Reserve is given more authority to oversee the economy. This is the same privately run entity that refused to comply with congressional demands for transparency and disclose the destination of trillions dollars in bailout funds. It is the same privately owned entity that has withheld internal memos, in spite of freedom of information act requests. It is the same private entity, run for the most part by European banking elites, that has arrogantly refused to tell Senators and Congressmen which banks were in receipt of government loans.
The government is ready to hand over everything to a monolithic private corporation and a gaggle of bastard banker offspring, that have gobbled up an amount close to the entire GDP of the country in taxpayers’ money and figuratively stuck the middle finger up regarding questions over where that money has gone.
It can be no more apparent than at this time that legislation to audit, repeal and eventually end the Federal Reserve, must be supported by Americans if they want to see their children and their grandchildren grow up without indentured debt and entrenched servitude to a fascistic marriage of private banks and hugely inflated government.
Move to hand privately-owned Federal Reserve complete regulatory power over entire U.S. economy heralds new form of government
Paul Joseph Watson & Steve Watson - Prison Planet.com - Thursday, June 18, 2009
CIVICS NEWS Comment: Watch videos on the Fed here--
~FIAT EMPIRE
~America Freedom to Fascism
~THE MONEY MASTERS
President Obama’s plan to give the privately-owned and unaccountable Federal Reserve complete regulatory oversight across the entire U.S. economy, which is likely to be enacted before the end of the year, will officially herald the beginning of a new form of government in the United States - an ultra-powerful banking dictatorship controlled by a small gaggle of shadowy and corrupt elitists.
The new rules would see the Fed given the authority to “regulate” any company whose activity it believes could threaten the economy and the markets.
This goes a step further than the centrally planned economies of the Soviet Union or Communist China, in that the Federal Reserve is not even accountable to the U.S. government, it is a private entity that according to former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan, is accountable to nobody but the banking families that own it.
Obama’s regulatory “reform” plan is nothing less than a green light for the complete and total takeover of the United States by a private banking cartel that will usurp the power of existing regulatory bodies, who are now being blamed for the financial crisis in order that their status can be abolished and their roles handed over to the all-powerful Fed.
According to an Associated Press report today, Democratic leaders have committed to enacting the plan before the end of the year and Republicans in both the House and Senate have indicated that they won’t stand in the way of the overhaul.
“The final plan….is expected to sidestep most jurisdictional disputes and simply impose across the board standards to be applied by all financial regulators, according to administration and industry sources, ” reports the Washington Times.
In other words, the Fed, which is already totally unaccountable to Congress, is to be placed in complete control of the entirety of the U.S. financial system, to do as it wishes without repercussion.
As the LA Times reports, the government, in conjunction with the private Federal Reserve, would effectively have the clout to simply seize and take over any company it desires.
In order to appease those opposed to the plan, such as Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, chairman of the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, the Obama administration has agreed to create a “watchdog” council of regulators to “advise the Fed”.
However, as former chairman Alan Greenspan has most recently pointed out, given that the Fed is an independent entity, and therefore accountable to no one, it will have the power to simply reject and overrule any advice it is offered.
Pointing out the flagrant conflict of interest in empowering the Federal Reserve to essentially regulate itself, Professor of public affairs at the University of Texas at Austin Robert Auerbach writes, “The Federal Reserve has massive conflicts of interest that make it ill suited for its present regulatory functions and certainly for an expanded regulatory reach. The officials leading the Fed today preside over an organization that is run in substantial part by the bankers they regulate. Bank regulation begins at its 12 district Federal Reserve Banks, each governed by a nine-member board of directors, two-thirds of whom are elected by the bankers in the district.”
As economic author Nomi Prins highlights, Obama’s plan does nothing whatsoever to fix the excesses of financial institutions blamed for the financial collapse, it only ensures their continued operation and an expansion of the practices that contributed to the economic crisis in the first place.
“The ’sweeping overhaul’ of the financial system detailed by Geithner on behalf of the Obama administration does not overhaul the system at all,” writes Prins, “giving the Fed a bigger role, creating a ‘council of regulators’ to oversee the existing oversight bodies and allowing the biggest Wall Street players to maintain their status, leaves the system intact.”
“The Federal Reserve is not a fully public entity. It has amassed a set of $7.87 trillion worth of facilities and other entities through which it has lavished cheap loans in return for questionable collateral from the banking system. It has kept the true nature of these transactions a secret despite numerous FOIA requests. And, it has actively promoted the creation of bigger institutions in a chaotic environment, rather than putting the brakes on the creation of these giants,” concludes Prins.
Proof that the agenda of implementing overt financial dictatorship is being carefully coordinated can be seen in the fact that an almost identical scheme is also being set up in the United Kingdom, where “The governor of the Bank of England has called for greater powers to allow it to fulfil its new role of promoting financial stability,” according to a BBC report.
Just as in the U.S., King is calling for traditional independent regulatory bodies to be all but abolished and replaced by the Bank of England itself, which just like the Federal Reserve is a private outfit with no accountability to the government whatsoever. [...]
How simultaneously dangerous and ridiculous it is that the Federal Reserve is given more authority to oversee the economy. This is the same privately run entity that refused to comply with congressional demands for transparency and disclose the destination of trillions dollars in bailout funds. It is the same privately owned entity that has withheld internal memos, in spite of freedom of information act requests. It is the same private entity, run for the most part by European banking elites, that has arrogantly refused to tell Senators and Congressmen which banks were in receipt of government loans.
The government is ready to hand over everything to a monolithic private corporation and a gaggle of bastard banker offspring, that have gobbled up an amount close to the entire GDP of the country in taxpayers’ money and figuratively stuck the middle finger up regarding questions over where that money has gone.
It can be no more apparent than at this time that legislation to audit, repeal and eventually end the Federal Reserve, must be supported by Americans if they want to see their children and their grandchildren grow up without indentured debt and entrenched servitude to a fascistic marriage of private banks and hugely inflated government.
6/17/09
ABC to openly propagandize for Obama
State Run News: ABC Turns Programming Over To Government
Corporate news giant imitates Communist China, Soviet Union and North Korea, blocks dissenting voices to promote Obama health care agenda
Paul Joseph Watson - Prison Planet.com - Monday, June 16, 2009
Completely dispensing with any notion of independence or impartiality, ABC News is set to mimic the likes of Communist China and North Korea by completely turning its news coverage over to the government and excluding any dissenting opinions to promote President Obama’s health care agenda.
The night of Wednesday June 24th will officially herald the open commencement of state run news, imitating similar systems in historical dictatorships such as the Soviet Union, where Pravda was the official propaganda organ of the Central Committee of the Communist Party from 1912 to 1991.
In China, the vast majority of news outlets are completely owned and controlled by the Communist Party. Negative viewpoints about government policy are blocked and news developments that could reflect badly on China are ignored and censored. An almost identical system of media also exists in Stalinist North Korea.
Still, at least the Chinese and the North Koreans don’t try to hide the fact that the press is state run, unlike ABC News, owned by the corporate giant Walt Disney Company, which masquerades as an independent news outlet yet in little over a week will completely turn over its news coverage to act as enthusiastic propagandist for the government’s health care “reform” program.
The coverage will be in addition to ABC News’ regular programming, which is already vehemently pushing the government’s agenda on this issue.
“On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care — a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!,” according to the Drudge Report.
“ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.”
“The network plans a primetime special — ‘Prescription for America’ — originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.”
In a complaint to ABC News, Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay called the decision “astonishing,” noting that ABC had rejected a request that dissenting voices from all sides of the political spectrum be represented.
ABC News’ announcement that they will openly turn over their news coverage to the government while censoring dissenting opinions goes one step further than the Bush administration, who at least made the effort to keep their fake news scandal a secret until it was exposed in 2005.
Under Bush, the government produced fake news packages and distributed them to local news networks around the country, most of which aired them without question. The fake news packages were also broadcast on a national level by CNN. Reporters and pundits were also paid off by the government to promote specific policies.
Corporate news giant imitates Communist China, Soviet Union and North Korea, blocks dissenting voices to promote Obama health care agenda
Paul Joseph Watson - Prison Planet.com - Monday, June 16, 2009
Completely dispensing with any notion of independence or impartiality, ABC News is set to mimic the likes of Communist China and North Korea by completely turning its news coverage over to the government and excluding any dissenting opinions to promote President Obama’s health care agenda.
The night of Wednesday June 24th will officially herald the open commencement of state run news, imitating similar systems in historical dictatorships such as the Soviet Union, where Pravda was the official propaganda organ of the Central Committee of the Communist Party from 1912 to 1991.
In China, the vast majority of news outlets are completely owned and controlled by the Communist Party. Negative viewpoints about government policy are blocked and news developments that could reflect badly on China are ignored and censored. An almost identical system of media also exists in Stalinist North Korea.
Still, at least the Chinese and the North Koreans don’t try to hide the fact that the press is state run, unlike ABC News, owned by the corporate giant Walt Disney Company, which masquerades as an independent news outlet yet in little over a week will completely turn over its news coverage to act as enthusiastic propagandist for the government’s health care “reform” program.
The coverage will be in addition to ABC News’ regular programming, which is already vehemently pushing the government’s agenda on this issue.
“On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care — a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!,” according to the Drudge Report.
“ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.”
“The network plans a primetime special — ‘Prescription for America’ — originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.”
In a complaint to ABC News, Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay called the decision “astonishing,” noting that ABC had rejected a request that dissenting voices from all sides of the political spectrum be represented.
ABC News’ announcement that they will openly turn over their news coverage to the government while censoring dissenting opinions goes one step further than the Bush administration, who at least made the effort to keep their fake news scandal a secret until it was exposed in 2005.
Under Bush, the government produced fake news packages and distributed them to local news networks around the country, most of which aired them without question. The fake news packages were also broadcast on a national level by CNN. Reporters and pundits were also paid off by the government to promote specific policies.
6/15/09
Pentagon: Protest = "low level Terrorism"
DoD Training Manual Describes Protest As “Low-Level Terrorism”
Pentagon training course says engaging in First Amendment is terrorist activity
Steve Watson - Infowars.net - Monday, June 15, 2009
Current Department of Defense anti-terrorism training course material states that the exercise of First Amendment rights in the U.S. constitutes terrorist activity.
The ACLU has written to the DoD regarding its Antiterrorism and Force Protection Annual Refresher Training Course, which advises personnel that political protest amounts to “low-level terrorism”.
“It has come to our attention that the Department of Defense’s Annual Level I Antiterrorism (AT) Training for 2009 misinforms Department of Defense (DoD) personnel that certain First Amendment-protected activity may amount to “low level terrorism” The ACLU writes.
“We are writing to ask that you take immediate steps to remedy this situation.” the letter to acting Under-Secretary Gail McGinn states.
A PDF of the ACLU’s letter also contains print outs of the relevant sections of the course material.
The training introduction reads:
“Anti-terrorism (AT) and Force Protection (FP) are two facets of the Department of Defense (DoD) Mission Assurance Program. It is DoD policy, as found in DoD I 2000.16, that the DoD Components and the DoD elements and personnel shall be protected from terrorist acts through a high priority, comprehensive, AT program. The DoD’s AT program shall be all encompassing using an integrated systems approach.”
The first question of the Terrorism Threat Factors, “Knowledge Check 1″ section reads:
In order to proceed, users must give the “correct” answer as “Protests”.
According to the document, all DoD personnel are required to complete the course on a yearly basis.
The ACLU points out that although in and of itself the classification of protest as terrorism is deeply disturbing, it is even more alarming when viewed in the context of the Pentagon’s long term efforts to crack down on organized dissent.
The surveillance and pre-emptive arrest of protesters, on charges of “domestic terrorism”, at last year’s RNC by the FBI is also cited by the ACLU.
Other precedents that the ACLU neglected to mention in it’s letter include, most recently, the fact that the FBI were spying on “Tea Party” protesters nationwide.
One week prior to those revelations, we also reported that the Maryland National Guard was put on alert in anticipation of the nationwide protests, while a Homeland Security spokesman refused to deny that protesters would be under surveillance from the DHS.
The Maryland National Guard issued a Force Protection Advisory on April 11 which warned the National Guard to be on alert during the Tea Party protests because Guardsmen and Guard facilities might become “targets of opportunity.” The contact point for the document was listed as the Antiterrorism Program Coordinator.
The advisory was almost exactly the same as a United States Army Reserve Command Force Protection Advisory that was issued last November before the nationwide End the Fed protests, warning that protesters were congregating across the country to demonstrate against the private Federal Reserve.
Over the last few years we have seen countless examples of security assessment reports from the likes of the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, as well as police training manuals, which state that anti-war protesters, gun owners, veterans, Ron Paul supporters and those who merely cite the Constitution should be equated with extremists.
The continued surveillance of protesters, in addition to the ongoing agenda to equate dissent with terrorism, highlights the fact that the architecture of the police state, which was massively expanded under George W. Bush, has not been dismantled or relaxed by an Obama administration that promised “change,”. If anything, it has only grown bigger.
The Obama administration’s announcement that the illegal warrantless surveillance of American citizens, a program initiated under Bush, will continue and in fact intensify under Obama, is another shining example of the fact that - no matter who is in power and no matter the political persuasion of those being watched - all Americans who have the temerity to exercise constitutional rights are considered dangerous and worthy of being targeted by the federal government with surveillance tools supposedly introduced to fight terrorists.
Pentagon training course says engaging in First Amendment is terrorist activity
Steve Watson - Infowars.net - Monday, June 15, 2009
Current Department of Defense anti-terrorism training course material states that the exercise of First Amendment rights in the U.S. constitutes terrorist activity.
The ACLU has written to the DoD regarding its Antiterrorism and Force Protection Annual Refresher Training Course, which advises personnel that political protest amounts to “low-level terrorism”.
“It has come to our attention that the Department of Defense’s Annual Level I Antiterrorism (AT) Training for 2009 misinforms Department of Defense (DoD) personnel that certain First Amendment-protected activity may amount to “low level terrorism” The ACLU writes.
“We are writing to ask that you take immediate steps to remedy this situation.” the letter to acting Under-Secretary Gail McGinn states.
A PDF of the ACLU’s letter also contains print outs of the relevant sections of the course material.
The training introduction reads:
“Anti-terrorism (AT) and Force Protection (FP) are two facets of the Department of Defense (DoD) Mission Assurance Program. It is DoD policy, as found in DoD I 2000.16, that the DoD Components and the DoD elements and personnel shall be protected from terrorist acts through a high priority, comprehensive, AT program. The DoD’s AT program shall be all encompassing using an integrated systems approach.”
The first question of the Terrorism Threat Factors, “Knowledge Check 1″ section reads:
Which of the following is an example of low-level terrorism activity?
Select the correct answer and then click Check Your Answer.
Attacking the Pentagon
IEDs
Hate crimes against racial groups
Protests
In order to proceed, users must give the “correct” answer as “Protests”.
According to the document, all DoD personnel are required to complete the course on a yearly basis.
The ACLU points out that although in and of itself the classification of protest as terrorism is deeply disturbing, it is even more alarming when viewed in the context of the Pentagon’s long term efforts to crack down on organized dissent.
The surveillance and pre-emptive arrest of protesters, on charges of “domestic terrorism”, at last year’s RNC by the FBI is also cited by the ACLU.
Other precedents that the ACLU neglected to mention in it’s letter include, most recently, the fact that the FBI were spying on “Tea Party” protesters nationwide.
One week prior to those revelations, we also reported that the Maryland National Guard was put on alert in anticipation of the nationwide protests, while a Homeland Security spokesman refused to deny that protesters would be under surveillance from the DHS.
The Maryland National Guard issued a Force Protection Advisory on April 11 which warned the National Guard to be on alert during the Tea Party protests because Guardsmen and Guard facilities might become “targets of opportunity.” The contact point for the document was listed as the Antiterrorism Program Coordinator.
The advisory was almost exactly the same as a United States Army Reserve Command Force Protection Advisory that was issued last November before the nationwide End the Fed protests, warning that protesters were congregating across the country to demonstrate against the private Federal Reserve.
Over the last few years we have seen countless examples of security assessment reports from the likes of the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, as well as police training manuals, which state that anti-war protesters, gun owners, veterans, Ron Paul supporters and those who merely cite the Constitution should be equated with extremists.
The continued surveillance of protesters, in addition to the ongoing agenda to equate dissent with terrorism, highlights the fact that the architecture of the police state, which was massively expanded under George W. Bush, has not been dismantled or relaxed by an Obama administration that promised “change,”. If anything, it has only grown bigger.
The Obama administration’s announcement that the illegal warrantless surveillance of American citizens, a program initiated under Bush, will continue and in fact intensify under Obama, is another shining example of the fact that - no matter who is in power and no matter the political persuasion of those being watched - all Americans who have the temerity to exercise constitutional rights are considered dangerous and worthy of being targeted by the federal government with surveillance tools supposedly introduced to fight terrorists.
6/11/09
Ron Paul's audit-the-Fed bill update
Ron Paul's audit the Fed bill has more than 1/2 of the House of Representatives co-sponsoring it! Yeah!
Update 6/12: And it's going to the full House floor for debate! 222 Co-sponsors for the bill!
US House to debate Ron Paul’s ‘Audit the Fed’ bill
See also:
Congress growing backbone, standing up to Fed?
Update 6/12: And it's going to the full House floor for debate! 222 Co-sponsors for the bill!
US House to debate Ron Paul’s ‘Audit the Fed’ bill
See also:
Congress growing backbone, standing up to Fed?
UK crackdown on raising your own kids
Home education crackdown over abuse fear
Graeme Paton - London Telegraph - Thursday, June 11, 2009
Parents educating their children at home face a Government crackdown following claims lessons could be a “cover for abuse”.
For the first time, all parents will be forced to register children with local councils.
Extra support will also be made available as part of “significantly strengthened” guidelines to regulate education for up to 50,000 under-16s in England.
The move - to be unveiled in a report by Graham Badman, former director of education at Kent Council - will be strongly resisted by parents’ groups who insist it represents an unprecedented infringement on family life.
One parent insisted closer scrutiny was “downright insulting” as children were safer at home than school. [...]
Graeme Paton - London Telegraph - Thursday, June 11, 2009
Parents educating their children at home face a Government crackdown following claims lessons could be a “cover for abuse”.
For the first time, all parents will be forced to register children with local councils.
Extra support will also be made available as part of “significantly strengthened” guidelines to regulate education for up to 50,000 under-16s in England.
The move - to be unveiled in a report by Graham Badman, former director of education at Kent Council - will be strongly resisted by parents’ groups who insist it represents an unprecedented infringement on family life.
One parent insisted closer scrutiny was “downright insulting” as children were safer at home than school. [...]
Beck: 9/11 truthers love al Qaeda, hate Jews & America
Update 6/12: Keith Olbermann also smears Ron Paul in his explanation of the shooter, and Rush Limbaugh also implicates 9/11 truth by association.
Glenn Beck has reached a new level of absurdity, stating that "9/11 truthers want to destroy the country." Seriously. Listen to the clip below. Those who want a serious investigation into the unanswered questions surrounding that horrific terrorist attack are motivated by a desire to end America.
Hmm...aren't most of the 9/11 truthers also Constitutionalists and super-patriots? Glenn, what are you talking about?
And then Beck also tries to paint skeptics of the official 9/11 narrative as racist anti-Semites. He and his guest state--with no evidence whatsoever--that the recent shooter at the Holocaust Museum was a "hero of 9/11 truthers."
A) No he wasn't. I'd never heard to the guy until now. B) Even if he was a 9/11 truther, that would be guilt by association to say that the 9/11 truth movement is racist and anti-Semitic. Since Rush Limbaugh is a user of Oxycontin, does that mean all neo-con talk radio personalities including Glenn Beck are also probably users?
Also, why, when media propagandists are trying to go after the 9/11 truth movement, do they always insist on playing the Jew card--painting physicists, engineers, architects, former intelligence officers, foreign cabinet members and members of parliaments as anti-Semitic. The 9/11 truth movement doesn't say, as Glenn Beck says, that "the Jews did it." What a silly mischaracterization of the serious scientific research that is the mainstream 9/11 truth movement.
And the idea that 9/11 truthers are in league with al Qaeda is the most preposterous thing I've ever heard on the mainstream media (except when that MSNBC guy said "Obama is sort of God.") Just listen to Richard Gage (700 Architects/Engineers call for a new 9/11 investigation). Glenn Beck would have you believe he's a closet Jew-hating, America-destroying al Qaeda member. Absurd.
Oh, and don't forget, this isn't the first time Beck has gone down this road:
“These truthers are exactly the kind of people who want to rock this nation’s foundation, tear us apart and plant the seeds of dissatisfaction in all of us” said Beck. He later said the 9/11 truth movement is “the kind of group a Timothy McVeigh would come from,” insinuating the movement is intent on violence.
In November of 2007, Beck the operative teamed up with the scurrilous ex-Marxist and neocon David Horowitz to denounce Ron Paul’s supporters as terrorists. “Beck opened up his show segment by inferring that the U.S. military should be used to silence domestic dissent against the war, claiming that those he would later identify as Ron Paul supporters, libertarians and the anti-war left and link with terrorists, were a ‘physical threat,’” wrote Paul Joseph Watson for Prison Planet.
“When you enlist in the U.S. military, you have take an oath that says you’re gonna support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies - foreign and domestic - we talk a lot on this program about the foreign threats - maybe we should spend some time tonight on the domestic one….the physical threat may be developing domestically as well,” said Beck.
Well, here's the clip of the duplicitous Glenn Beck who one minute is a friend of Ron Paul and constitutionalists, and the next, he has CIA operatives on his show to smear good Americans.
6/10/09
"Obama is sort of..."? Did he really just say that?
How dare Ronald Reagan, the American president, be "all about America"?
Yes, Obama is so much better, because he stands "ABOVE AMERICA."
This MSNBC news man actually says that. Listen. Obama stands above the Constitution and the country. Oh, Obama, you're such a great internationalist! Thank you for not being all about America.
Oh, and that's not the worst of it. "Obama is sort of ... "
Just listen to the clip. At about the 30 second mark.
Related:
~Obama: Thy Kingdom Come, Thy Will Be Done
~American Civic Religion: Obama as Moses, Messiah, and more
No surprise. The 72-year-old wasn't being violent.
New video shows officer shove, then taser 72-year-old great grandmother
David Edwards - Raw Story - Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Fox News has obtained police dashboard video of the tasering of a 72 year old great grandmother in Travis County, TX.
The police claim that after Kathryn Winkfein was stopped for driving 15 miles over the speed limit in a construction zone, she disobeyed an order to sign the speeding ticker, used profane language, and became “violent.” They say the officer who tasered her and took her to be booked for resisting arrest was completely justified.
However, Winkfein says that’s a lie, and the video appears to back her up.
It shows Constable Richard McCain screaming, “Get over here now!” Winkfein replies, “Give [the ticket] to me and I’ll sign it.” Instead, the officer reaches out and pushes her, and she starts complaining, “Oh, you’re going to shove me? You’re going to shove a seventy-two year old woman?”
McCain then tasers her. As Winkfein lies on the ground screaming, he orders, “Now put your hands behind your back. Put your hands behind your back or you’re going to be tasered again.”
Fox’s Brian Kilmeade commented after running the video, “Officers insisted they acted by the book. What book is that?”
David Edwards - Raw Story - Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Fox News has obtained police dashboard video of the tasering of a 72 year old great grandmother in Travis County, TX.
The police claim that after Kathryn Winkfein was stopped for driving 15 miles over the speed limit in a construction zone, she disobeyed an order to sign the speeding ticker, used profane language, and became “violent.” They say the officer who tasered her and took her to be booked for resisting arrest was completely justified.
However, Winkfein says that’s a lie, and the video appears to back her up.
It shows Constable Richard McCain screaming, “Get over here now!” Winkfein replies, “Give [the ticket] to me and I’ll sign it.” Instead, the officer reaches out and pushes her, and she starts complaining, “Oh, you’re going to shove me? You’re going to shove a seventy-two year old woman?”
McCain then tasers her. As Winkfein lies on the ground screaming, he orders, “Now put your hands behind your back. Put your hands behind your back or you’re going to be tasered again.”
Fox’s Brian Kilmeade commented after running the video, “Officers insisted they acted by the book. What book is that?”
CIVICS NEWS Comment: See the previous post on this by Will Grigg, Taser Torture used as Pain Compliance. Also, a reader hit the nail on the head on this issue on the comments of that previous post:
The problem here is that this lady, like most of us, has not received oper obedience training.
The officers involved no doubt are well trained in the standard police se of Force Continuum. We, the people are not. They will perceive a ituation to be escalating but we might just be angry. The officer's "commands" might not make sense to use because as free people, we do not normally accept "commands".
Let's face it. Pain compliance is torture. Despite what the past couple of presidents have asserted, torture is part of our culture.
GM, Amtrak and an Increasingly Fascist America
GM, Amtrak and an Increasingly Fascist America
Ron Paul - Prisonplanet.com - Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Last week, General Motors finally declared bankruptcy. Many in government thought $20 billion in taxpayer dollars would save the company, but as predicted, it only postponed the inevitable. The government will dump another $30 billion into GM and take a 60 percent controlling interest for it. Public officials are now involving themselves in tactical business decisions such as where GM’s headquarters should move and what kind of cars it will build.
The promise that this is temporary and will eventually be profitable is supposed to ease the American people into accepting this arrangement, but it is of little comfort to those who remember similar promises when the American taxpayers bought Amtrak. After three years, government was supposed to be out of the passenger rail business. 40 years and billions of dollars later, the government is still operating Amtrak at a loss, despite the fact that they have created a monopoly by making it illegal to compete with Amtrak. Imagine what they can now do to what is left of the great American auto industry!
In a truly free market, GM would get your money one way and one way only – by selling you a car you want, at a price you are willing to pay. Instead, the government is giving public money to a private company in spite of the market signals it has been sending. Throwing money at GM does not stop it from being an engine of wealth destruction; on the contrary, it simply gives it more wealth to destroy.
Had it been allowed to fail naturally, the profitable pieces of GM would have been bought up and put to good use by now. The laid off employees would likely have found new jobs and all that capital would be in private hands, reinvested in companies that produce products demanded by consumers. Instead, we are all poorer now.
Political pressure, rather than the rule of law, is deciding how to divide up the remains of GM. The bondholders had billions in retirement savings invested in the company, and though they were entitled to nearly three times as much as the United Auto Workers, the bondholders were left with just a 10 percent stake compared to the union’s 17.5 percent stake. For their 60 percent stake, taxpayers have a future of constant bailouts to look forward to.
Comingling public control of private business is known as fascism. While today’s politicians may feel emboldened with all their new power, history will only repeat itself as all this collapses on itself. It is the height of hubris for bureaucrats and politicians to attempt to control the market and the freewill of the American people. In the end, the market always wins out. Maybe one day future generations will wise up and allow free markets to function and thrive without the albatross of government around its neck. For now, it looks like those in charge have not learned the lessons of the past, and have doomed us to repeat those mistakes once again.
Congress growing backbone, standing up to Fed?
Bill To Audit Federal Reserve Now Has 207 Co-Sponsors
New names being added every day, momentum building for Ron Paul
New names being added every day, momentum building for Ron Paul
At time of writing, a bill that would see the Federal Reserve bank audited for the first time in 59 years has 207 cosponsers in the House and is gaining traction with every single day.
This means just 11 more are needed for a majority to be reached in the House.
If enacted, HR 1207 will amend title 31 of the United States Code and reform the manner in which the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is audited by the Comptroller General of the United States.
In other words, for the first time since 1950, the the independent financial powerhouse that creates and regulates all money in the US will be forced by law to open its books.
HR 1207 was sponsored and introduced by Rep. Ron Paul. On February 26, 2009, it was referred to the House Committee on Financial Services, where it remains under consideration.
HR 1207 also has a companion bill, S 604: F R Sunshine Act of 2009, in the Senate. [...]
-----------------------------------------------------
Daniel Tencer - Raw Story - Wednesday, June 10, 2009
The congressional panel investigating what happened to all that bank bailout money has issued a subpoena to the Federal Reserve, asking them to hand over all documents relating to the takeover of Merrill Lynch by the Bank of America.
On January 1, BofA finalized its purchase of Merrill Lynch for just over $29.1 billion. That made the bank eligible for an additional $20 billion in federal rescue money, bringing BofA’s total to some $45 billion. Now, Reps. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) and Edolphus Towns (D-NY) want to know exactly what the banks and the Federal Reserve agreed to when they arranged the deal last year. [...]
6/9/09
Margaret Sanger, pro-"choice" and Hitler's Eugenics
Margaret Sanger’s Case For Eugenics
Amy de Miceli - No One Has to Die Tomorrow - June 9, 2009
“The campaign for birth control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims of eugenics.” Birth Control Review, 1921
As the Founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger is considered a hero to many for bringing choice to women in America. However, it becomes obvious from Sanger’s own words and publications that she did not care about freedom of choice, but cared only for a superior race, and she had a plan to “prevent multiplication of this bad stock”.
Sanger was a member of the American Eugenics Society. She was a eugenicist who wanted to forcefully sterilize people, she wrote many articles and books on the subject. In 1922 she wrote The Pivot of Civilization, (HG Wells wrote the introduction)and she refers to people as “human weeds” and morons who did not deserve to have children. In The Case for Birth Control she offers a vague list of random reasons that would justify sterilization, it included anyone that was “poor” and people with children that are “not normal.” With such ambiguous standards, virtually anyone could be labeled as unfit.
The US Supreme Court authorized forced sterilization of “undesirables” for over 40 years in America, and by 1933 most states had adopted Eugenics Sterilization Laws, before Hitler began Eugenics in Germany.
Hitler admired the work of Margaret Sanger, and modeled many of his Eugenics Laws after America’s. Coincidentally, Hilter’s director of the Racial Hygiene Society, Ernst Rudin was the same man that Sanger had previously commissioned for her own agenda, publishing his work in her magazine, the Birth Control Review.
In 1939 Margaret Sanger began “The Negro Project”and to bring people along willingly she enlisted black preachers to support sterilization. She outlined the deceitful plan in a letter to Clarence Gamble of the Procter and Gamble Empire,
“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.” [...]
Margaret Sanger has been paraded around as an advocate for “women’s rights”, her historic value has been overinflated, and her dark history has been, (and is being) rewritten by the main stream media. Life Magazine for example, has even placed Margaret Sanger as one of the “most important people of the century” which may be true… if you are a eugenicist.
“The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
CIVICS NEWS Comment: See HERE for more of her Hitlerian quotations. And this woman has elementary schools named after her?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
