Is any one still reading
this almost defunct magazine ? I regret that it has
almost closed down in this The environment in
northern European countries is presently catastrophic
weather, and also lately an animal disease so related in
effect to nuclear pollution that one wonders why science
is not informing us of the mythical midge supposed to be
biting our sheep and cattle to cause abnormal foetal
birth horrors. Could our grazing animals in fact be
victims of the storms blowing Depleted Uranium from the
sands of the Middle East, or the strange gravity of the
North Pole subject to a circulation and gathering of
nuclear activity that continues to infinitely affect us
all since the criminal years of military scientific
developments, the Atom Bomb; tests and explosions, deaths
and apologies, cancer and wars all carried out by the
fast buck merchants who are the true enemies of mankind?
Time, the infinite, is so huge and man's imitation of the
enormous disparity between a small working family life
and the ruling legal networks and markets of supply
imitates time so exactly that discourse vanishes,
shoulders shrug that we are "without a voice",
the young wander away across national borders to find
work and survival. The entire theatre of life that must
be lived becomes devoid of reality - even food is
constantly in diets reconstructed, as are recipes,
endlessly reported and photographed and disected for
medicinal values that none of us can understand, probe or
linger over the endless changes of advice . Also everyone
is asked to run off into the distance for miles for
exercise, or contort themselves into yoga. Even criminals
state that a course of Yoga turns around their lives -
omitting to mention that atlast, made aware of their
bodies, their minds begin to realise that there is
something wrong in the system, something wrong in the
world.
The following is the most serious text I have read recently, revealing as it does the American and UK strategy, to misinform the public, to devastate the Arab Spring where any formidable non-violent group seeks diplomatic negotiation, and to defame known Western Peace advocates like Kofi Annan and Lakhdar Brahimi by manoeuvering govt. military strategies behind the scenes in complete contradiction to these advocates, their visits to the Middle East, pulverising their reputations. (2.11.2012Hilary Clinton, Croatia :Responding to a question about US policy in Syria, Clinton dismissed efforts by United Nations Special Envoy Lakhdar Brahimi, declaring that the US “cannot and will not wait” for the UN to broker a political solution to the war in Syria. Instead, Washington will unilaterally seek to escalate that war with the aim of effecting regime-change and installing a puppet government aligned with US interests in the Middle East.) Another accused of fraudulent informattion has
just slipped up, as revealed by Israel Shamir: ************************************** PROMISSORY NOTES ARE high on the news agenda at the moment with the government seeking a deal to avoid paying the €3.06 billion due on 31 March, while a court last week ruled against a businessman who challenged their legality. The government is staking much of its credibility on securing a deal to avoid paying out €3.06 billion of the €30.06 billion promissory notes issued in respect of primarily Anglo Irish Bank three years ago. But significant doubts remain about the likelihood of securing an agreement with the European Central Bank. As well as that last week the High Court said that businessman David Hall’s challenge to the ‘prom’ notes’ legality was not valid as he was not a TD. He may yet appeal to the Supreme Court and a number of TDs could take their own case. But as it stands, on 31 March Ireland will give €3.06 billion to the Central Bank and this money will be destroyed. How and why has it come to this? Last week we asked for your questions and we had a few of our own that we wanted answered, so we asked the experts including the Department of Finance, the independent TD Stephen Donnelly, and the financial blogger Namawinelake. Here’s what we found out. What is a promissory note?A promissory note is an IOU. Some of you may be used to writing your friends or family IOUs for say a tenner or similar amounts, but governments and banks deal in much bigger amounts with slightly more complex arrangements.However the fundamentals are similar. Usually promissory notes will carry conditions such as agreeing to pay back a specific sum at a fixed date in the future with interest and crucially, distinguishing them from actual IOUs, they contain a specific promise to pay the money. How was this done? Finance minister Brian Lenihan wrote a promissory note to the IBRC – basically saying “We owe you €31 billion” – which the bank used as collateral to borrow from the Cental Bank of Ireland’s emergency liquidity assistance (ELA) fund. Under the agreement, the State agreed to pay €3.06 billion every year to the IBRC until 2023 and smaller payments after that to satisfy the principal and the interest.Instalments were scheduled for repayment annually from March 2011 to March 2031 with the interest on the principal varying from year-to-year, according to the Department of Finance. A comparatively smaller amount of around €250 million in promissory notes were issued in respect of Educational Building Society (EBS).The repayment works like this: The government pays the money to IBRC, which gives it to the Central Bank of Ireland, which then destroys this money. This is done electronically in case you were thinking they were burning a huge wad of €100 notes on Dame Street. Why is the money destroyed?When Brian Lenihan drew up the promissory notes he effectively created the cash which the Central Bank gave to IBRC (Remember the State didn’t have the money to pay the Anglo/Irish Nationwide debt). IBRC uses this money to pay off bondholders (yep those guys) and plug the gaps created by the massive losses it has taken on property loans gone sour. www.thejournal.ie comment observed on page http://www.thejournal.ie/anglo-promissory-notes-ecb-775366-Feb2013/ The Journal.ie article above
and some of the posts above, are talking as if we were in
some way personably responsible for the Corruption/Criminality/Stupidity
of This year our government will be calling around to our
homes, with bills and Direct Debit’s for us to pay
for the corruption and criminal acts of those corrupt/criminal
elites listed above. However, the governments of Ireland, never have a
problem with blaming the victims and covering up for
Inbred elites. Comment
fromEditor J.Braddell: I recently visited an old friend,
a retired banker - he was in a deep rage about all that
has happened and said that these bankers(above) should
have been arrested and "put in chains". Iris-scanning & recognition,
facial-scanning & recognition, gait-scanning &
recognition, voiceprint-scanning & recognition,
license-plate scanning & recognition, x-ray scanning
& recognition, millimeter-wave scanning &
recognition, molecular-scanning & recognition, and
future scanning & recognition technologies, all
combined with ground-based, underwater-based, aerial-based,
orbital and other space-based, highly capable detection
systems, with all of their massive and unending streams
of data being rapidly and efficiently plumbed and
analyzed by increasingly sophisticated and incredibly
robust data-mining-&-analysis systems -- and this is
just the beginning. FBI Banned from Iceland: FBI agents landed in Reykjavík
without prior notification in an attempt to investigate
WikiLeaks operations in the country, but Home Secretary
Ögmundur Jónasson found out about the visit and forced
them to leave the country, with the Icelandic government
then issuing a formal protest to US authorities,
according to Islandsbloggen. http://rixstep.com/1/20130131,00.shtml
How the U.S.
Is Helping to Kill Peace in Syria In practice, as President Obama implied,
the U.S. government has played a "disguised, quiet,
media-free" [4] but
nonetheless significant role in the escalation of
violence in Syria. As early as last December, even as a
Qatari-funded YouGov opinion poll found that 55% of Syrians still
supported President Assad [5],
former CIA officer Philip Giraldi reported [6] that
unmarked NATO planes were delivering weapons and
militiamen from Libya to Turkish air-bases near the Free
Syrian Army (FSA) headquarters in Iskanderum. British and
French special forces were training FSA recruits, while
CIA officers and U.S. special forces provided the FSA
with communications equipment and intelligence. Turkey
was already committed to attacking or invading Syria
whenever the West gave the green light. Obama didn't bother to mention the new
hope for a peaceful settlement of the crisis with the
appointment of Kofi Annan as a U.N. Special
Representative to Syria just a few days before this
interview. In fact, just as Kofi Annan launched his last-ditch peace plan [7],
the U.S. and its allies took critical steps to ensure
that the forces they were supporting in Syria would keep
fighting, instead of agreeing to the ceasefire that was
the essential first step in Annan's plan. President Sarkozy of France initiated a
series of international meetings under the Orwellian
rubric "Friends of Syria [8],"
at which the U.S., its NATO allies and the absolute
monarchs of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) publicly
offered unconditional support to their Syrian proxies
instead of pressing them to cooperate with the Annan plan.
Saudi Arabia and Qatar pledged more weapons, backed by a
U.S. commitment of $15 million in "non-lethal"
aid, including satellite radio systems like the ones NATO's
proxy forces used in Libya in 2011. As the New York Times noted in June [9],
"What has changed since March is an influx of
weapons and ammunition to the rebels." The same
article described Turkish Army trucks delivering anti-tank
weapons to the Syrian border, and CIA officers in
southern Turkey controlling the flow of weapons into
Syria. The timing of the three "Friends
of Syria" meetings could not have been worse for any
hope that Western-backed forces would comply with the
Annan plan. The first meeting was held in Tunisia the day
after Annan's appointment and the second was in Istanbul
on April 1, nine days before the initial cease-fire was
due to take effect. At that meeting, the Syrian National
Council (SNC) declared it would use its newfound
financial support to start paying salaries to FSA
fighters, a timely move that discouraged rebels inside
Syria from laying down their arms. It's no coincidence that the main
"outside" players in Syria's civil war are the
same countries that led and supplied the "NATO
rebels" in Libya in 2011, in a war that cost at least
25,000 lives [10] and
plunged Libya into a state of chaos with no clear end in
sight a year later. U.S. officials pay lip-service to the
obvious differences between Libya and Syria, but their
actions and those of their allies reveal that the same
forces are trying to adapt what they see as a successful
regime-change strategy in Libya to achieve a similar goal
in Syria, knowing full well that it will be even more
bloody and destabilizing. In Libya and Syria, Western powers and
Arab monarchies turned the Arab Spring on its head. They
diverted the world's attention from their efforts to
contain or repress nonviolent revolutions in Tunisia,
Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen, and not least, U.S.-occupied Iraq,
harnessing the hopes raised by the Arab Spring to their
own interests. In Libya and Syria, as in Iraq, they have
exploited sectarian and ethnic differences to divide and
conquer with little regard for human life or for the
integrity of these complex societies, sowing the seeds of
long-term instability and future "blowback." The Western media have stoked fears of
impending bloodbaths and cast the schemes of Persian Gulf
emirs and Western policy-makers as reluctant "humanitarian
interventions." The resulting violence has been far
greater than the violence it claims to be preventing, but
this predictable cause and effect has been easily buried
in the frenzied media coverage of escalating wars. Rwanda,
where the West failed to intervene, is pulled out as a
trump card to justify each new intervention, establishing
a pattern in which the West has ensured maximum violence
everywhere -- on the one hand by failing to stop
genocidal violence in Rwanda and the DRC and on the other
hand by aggression and escalation everywhere else, from
Kosovo to Syria. The post-Cold War doctrine of "humanitarian
intervention" or "R2P" (responsibility
to protect) [11] is
an effort to carve out an exception to the U.N. Charter's
universal prohibition on the use of military force [12].
R2P's emotional appeal to the court of public opinion
challenges the wisdom forged in the hell of two world
wars that war is too terrible to be justified by such
arguments. In practice, R2P has provided cover for a new
U.S. doctrine of "information warfare" which
Major Ralph Peters explored more honestly for military
readers in a U.S. Army War College
journal article [13] in
1997: One of the defining bifurcations of the
future will be the conflict between information masters
and information victims... [Information] seduces, betrays,
yet remains invulnerable. How can you counterattack the
information others have turned upon you?... Societies
that fear or otherwise cannot manage the flow of
information simply will not be competitive. They might
master the technological wherewithal to watch the videos,
but we will be writing the scripts, producing them, and
collecting the royalties. Our creativity is devastating...
The de facto role of the US armed forces will be to keep
the world safe for our economy and open to our cultural
assault. To those ends, we will do a fair amount of
killing. We are building an information-based military to
do that killing... We are already masters of information
warfare. And so, in Libya, the "information
masters" ensured that the world saw only the rag-tag
NATO rebels, never the British, French and Qatari
special forces [14] that
armed, trained and ferried them along the
coast on board NATO warships[15] and
led them to victory, even when Qatari special forces led
the final assault on Libya's Bab Al-Azizia military
headquarters [16] in
Tripoli. U.S. forces were even more invisible, as they
"led from behind" and conducted their share of 9,700 total air strikes [17] in
six months, the heaviest bombardment anywhere since Iraq
in 2003. Once the dust has settled on tens of
thousands of graves, some latter-day Lawrences of Arabia
will cut book and film deals to tell us the "inside"
story of how they brought down and butchered Gaddafi. But
the dramatic images they produce will still be subject to
the careful manipulation of the information masters, who
will by then have the benefit of hindsight as they decide
how the heroic liberators of Libya should be remembered.
As Winston Churchill cheerfully told his cabinet when
British voters sent them packing in 1946: "Never
fear, gentlemen. History will be kind to me,
for I shall write it. [18]" But one of the basic questions that
historians will have to answer about the Arab Spring is
this: why did revolutions against Western puppets in the
Arab world remain mainly nonviolent, while those against
independent governments turned into bloody civil wars?
The initial response of the Libyan and Syrian governments
to nonviolent protests was no more brutal than in Egypt,
Iraq, Bahrain or Yemen. Every government killed peaceful
protesters, disappeared and tortured dissidents and tried
desperately to hold onto power, and the early death tolls
were comparable. The critical difference was the role of
the U.S. and its allies: the "information masters."
In response to rebellions in Libya and Syria, Western
politicians and media used pro-Western exile communities
as critical tools in their regime-change strategies,
shaping narratives that ensured Western public support
for violent anti-government forces. They promoted exile
groups as governments-in-waiting in a way that would have
been unthinkable in Yemen, Bahrain or Iraq, where U.S.
special forces instead continued to train and support
regime forces as they committed atrocities that Western
media consumers were only dimly aware of. Western public perceptions of the new
battlefield in Syria were shaped by a sophisticated
"information warfare" operation that used
Western media coverage to demonize the Syrian government,
legitimize unsubstantiated reports of large numbers of
civilian casualties, broadcast sometimes fabricated
reports by "Syrian activists [19]"
directly into Western living-rooms, and present the
Western public with the classic false choice between
"doing something" and "doing nothing." From the outset, the U.S. and its
allies selectively supported the Turkish-based Free
Syrian Army and Syrian National Council (SNC) instead of
the National Coordinating Body
for Democratic Change (NCB) [20] that
was formed by the political opposition that took to the
streets in Syria in March 2011. The Western "information
warfare" narrative that peaceful protesters were
forced to take up arms by the severe repression of the
Syrian government ignores the clear distinction between
the NCB and the FSA, and it fails to explain why this
only appears to have happened in Libya and Syria. The NCB was formed in June 2011 by 15
opposition groups and several independent figures who
were leading anti-government protests. The three
fundamental principles they have consistently agreed on
are nonviolence, non-sectarianism and opposition to
foreign intervention in Syria. Their detailed plan for a
political transition in Syria has many common points with
Kofi Annan's peace plan, suggesting broad Syrian and
international agreement on a way forward that belies
Western claims that no political solution exists and that
violent regime change is the only viable option. These
common points include the release of political prisoners;
withdrawal of the army from urban areas; allowing foreign
journalists free access throughout the country; and a
political transition leading to free and fair elections. A review of the 15 parties that make up
the NCB helps to explain why capitalist Western
governments and their monarchist Arab allies do not
support it. It is chaired by Hassan Abdul Azim, the
leader of the Democratic Arab Socialist Union, and it
includes the Arab Revolutionary Workers' Party; the
Communist Labor Party; the Democratic People's Party;
Together for a Free Democratic Syria; the Arab Socialist
Movement; and the Syrian Union Party; along with four
Kurdish parties and several regional parties. The NCB has serious differences with
the Turkish-based Syrian National Council (SNC), which
the "Friends of Syria" meeting on April 1, 2012
recognized as "the umbrella group under which
opposition groups are gathering." Despite these
differences, the NCB has tried to engage with the Western-backed
opposition-in-exile. It has taken part in meetings with
the SNC and other groups to try and develop a unified
political opposition in Syria, and NCB delegations have
travelled to Moscow, Beijing, Tehran, and Arab capitals,
and met with Western ambassadors in Syria. In an interview with the French
newspaper L'Humanite [21] on July 29, the NCB's Haytham
Manna was asked whether the peaceful and democratic
popular movement that began the revolt in 2011 had now
been dispossessed by the mainly Islamist armed groups.
Here's his reply (my translation): The armed groups and the military
solution adopted by the regime have eradicated civil
resistance. So, whatever the strength and the number of
peaceful demonstrations today, they are less than a tenth
of what we saw a year ago. There's a retreat from
peaceful action. And today, if there's a small
demonstration in a village, nobody pays attention, as if
it doesn't make any difference. Military action has taken
the upper hand over a political discourse that could
regroup and create a peaceful solution in the short term
in Syria. Asked whether the NCB's divisions with
the SNC and the FSA are weakening the opposition, Manna
replied, The idea that something had to be built
from the outside weakened what was happening inside the
country. They thought that a structure outside the Syrian
people could represent it internationally. But it's a
structure that's really not representative of Syrian
society or political forces in the country and, what's
more, it depends on the will of three states: France,
Turkey and Qatar. The SNC, despite the financial,
diplomatic and media support it has obtained, has not
achieved its goal. Now there's a search for another
formula to unify the opposition. Meanwhile, the armed
groups have gained ground and become radicalized. Because
the money came from Salafist groups all along. This
"Salafization" of some of the military groups
has plunged us into civil war. On one side, there is fear
of extremism in a moderate society where 26 religious and
ethnic groups coexist. Foreign intervention, whether it's
official or not, has favored an Islamist ideological
trend to the detriment of democratic and secular forces.
It's also favored acts of vengeance and political
assassination on a sectarian basis. These acts are
manipulated and influenced by non-Syrian jihadist
movements that are starting to find a place in the
country and who coordinate with the Islamist armed groups.
The power vacuum is a danger, because civil resistance is
poorly organized or often absent because of the presence
of the armed groups. The political solution for a
transition period doesn't exist. There's no timetable
agreed on among different opposition forces. This lack of
coordination gives the advantage to the most extreme
Islamist groups. Secular leaders were murdered by the
regime in the first months, which opened the door to the
Islamists. When you marginalize the political solution,
you marginalize democratic forces. Finally, L'Humanite asked
Manna about the Annan plan. He said: Annan's proposals were a chance for a
peaceful transition. Sadly, right from the start, Qatar
buried the plan and opted to militarize the opposition.
Western powers were also thinking of a "Plan B."
So, without regional and international support, a plan
like this can't succeed. They're leaving arms to settle
the issue, whether it's the loyalist army or the
dissident or Islamist armed groups. We will pay very
dearly for this absence of a political solution. There
are local conflicts breaking out. This is compost for a
civil war that can lead to rule by militias, but
certainly not to the creation of an army that can protect
the population in a time of transition. Clearly, Kofi Annan's peace plan
presented a problem for what Haytham Manna referred to as
the West's "Plan B." Installing a pro-Western
government in Syria as in Libya requires Western-backed
forces to gain military control of Syria to dictate that
outcome. As in Libya, there are Western-based exiles who
could fit the bill, and the SNC could function as "the
umbrella group under which opposition groups are
gathering," as the Friends of Syria declared. But
the kind of peaceful political transition that Kofi Annan's
plan called for would not achieve that result -- there is
still too much support for the Baathist government, and
the legitimate political opposition inside the country,
as represented by the NCB, would not stand for a Western-Islamist
takeover of Syria. So, the West's Plan B seems to require
that Syria must first be torn apart by a bloody civil war
that will kill hundreds of thousands of people, until
Syrians become so desperate that the loss of their
sovereignty will seem a small price to pay for a
restoration of peace. On the other side, the Syrian
government is equally determined to use as much force as
necessary to prevent this from succeeding. Lakhdar
Brahimi's effort to revise and revive Annan's peace plan
is a final chance for the U.S. and its allies to rein in
their proxies and step back from the brink. The Syrian
government agreed to his call for a cease-fire during the
three-day Eid al-Adha holiday, but once again, the Western-backed rebels
rejected it [22].
The stage is set for far greater bloodshed and chaos, and
the U.S. government's actions have been critical, maybe
even decisive, in plunging the people of Syria into this
crisis and preventing a peaceful resolution. Nicolas J. S. Davies is author of Blood
On Our Hands: The American Invasion and Destruction of
Iraq. He wrote the chapter on "Obama At War"
for the just released book, Grading the 44th
President: A Report Card on Barack Obama's First Term as
a Progressive Leader Links: ....and a vital assessment from thedish@thedish.org
The result is that a nation that once, for better or
worse, was full of people who could strike out for
unknown regions to stake a claim on land when they
didn’t even know how to farm (land admittedly
belonging to native Americans who could understandably be
expected to react with aggressive hostility to being
expropriated), who could weather brutal winters with
nothing to get them through but a musket and a store of
root vegetables in the cellar, who could stand up to the
mightiest military of its day and throw off a colonial
yoke and boldly create a new country, now cowers in fear
at the imagined threats of a landlocked group of
uneducated and incredibly poor people living in a country
that is a throwback to the 16th century. America is supposedly the "Land of the Free and
the Home of the Brave," as our un-singable national
anthem puts it at its most un-singable point, but to tell
the truth, it is no longer either of those things. Don't
believe me? Just try telling a cop who stops you for
standing off the side of the road with your thumb out and
says you are breaking the law against hitchhiking, that
he is wrong and that the law does not in fact bar
thumbing. For exercising your right of free speech, even
if you were polite about it, he will in response threaten
you with arrest. Argue (which is your right), and
you’re likely to be slammed against his vehicle,
cuffed, and dragged off to the slammer. Never mind that
the cop is wrong about the law, and that your charges
will be tossed out later. If you resist, or mouth off
further during this arrest process, you might even be
tased. In the end, you are busted, probably bruised, too,
and you’ll be detained for a couple of hours until
your family can come spring you by paying an extortionate
bail. In an environment like this, you're not free, and the
cop is certainly anything but brave. And that is the
situation we're in today in the U.S. When the Twin Towers in New York City were attacked
and struck by two planes and collapsed, I agree it was a
horrible shock, but at no point was the survival of the
United States, or even of the American people, threatened.
Even if you throw in the attack by a third plane on the
Pentagon, which collapsed a section of the world’s
biggest building, the US wasn’t facing any
existential risk. But the reaction of the American public
to this attack on 9-11-2001, encouraged mightily by the
US government, was to hunker down, beg for police-state
laws, and to stop all normal activity. (In fact, any
serious damage to the US following those attacks was
caused by the reaction of government, business and the
people of the US to the event, not by the events
themselves.) In my town, the local school board canceled all school
trips for the rest of the 2001-2 school year, claiming,
with the full support of most of the parents in the
school district, that there was a risk that terrorists
might attack school buses! This is not rational behavior.
It is irrational fear. The same fear that has led to public support for bi-partisan
funding of the most bloated, grotesquely over-armed
military in the history of the world. That pork barrel
military is not any good at fighting wars, as the defeat
in Iraq, and the looming defeat in Afghanistan by forces
armed with AK-47 rifles and home-made mines has proved,
and it’s not any good at fighting terrorism, as the
spreading of fundamentalist Muslim terror groups across
the Middle East and northern Africa demonstrate, but it
creates a warm feeling of comfort for terrified Americans
to see those huge nuclear-powered aircraft carriers,
bristling with heavily armed fighter bombers on their
decks, plowing through the ocean, just as it makes people
comfortable to see US troops, puffed out with body armor
so that they look like pro-football players on a gridiron,
standing at the ready at some far off desert outpost.
They’re "keeping us safe," people think,
even as they rush out to buy guns in record numbers. The worst thing about all this fear and fear-mongering
is that it has turned the US into a nation of conspiracy
theorists, so ready to believe the most far-fetched plots
and schemes by the rich and powerful that we Americans
are unable to see the real challenge facing not just us,
but the entire world: the threat of catastrophic climate
change. And that is a very real threat that cannot be
avoided by cowering in a basement or by electing some
tough-talking chief executive, or by buying guns. It can
only be tackled by taking bold united action as a people
to change the whole basis of the socio-economic system
from one premised on encouraging wasteful consumption to
one based upon utility and on bettering the lot of all as
efficiently as possible -- and doing this not just as a
nation, but in collaboration with the rest of the world. It is time for Americans to reject the fear-mongering,
and to take responsibility for our own society and
government. We don’t need a leader who will "keep
us safe." We need a leader who will denounce fear,
who will declare that the freedoms that are enshrined in
the Constitution’s Bill of Rights are the foundation
of this nation, and that we will rely on them, not police
and armies, to move the country forward to face the real
challenges of the future. About Me: Dave Lindorff is an
investigative reporter, a columnist for CounterPunch, and
a contributor to Businessweek, The Nation, Extra! and
Salon.com. He received a Project Censored award in 2004.
Dave is also a founding member of the online newspaper
ThisCantBeHappening! at www.thiscantbehappening.net. From The Ramparts
Junious Ricardo Stanton
Election Thoughts and Observations “President
Obama merely carried on exactly where Bush left off, and
exactly where presidential candidate Mitt Romney will
pick up if elected in 2012. In reality the White House is
not responsible for the creation of policy. It merely
serves as public relations, selling a particular
narrative to the public, and taking the fall (with little
or no consequence) for when details emerge implicating
the US in the global state sponsorship of terrorism.
Behind Bush, Obama, and Romney are corporate-financier
funded think tanks that craft policy and/or the talking
points used to sell such policy to an unwitting public.”
US establishment admits arming Al Qaeda, but blames
it on "Obama the Muslim." by Tony
Cartalucci http://www.landdestroyer.blogspot.com/
Like many of you I watched the last debate to see for
myself what each candidate was saying in an effort to
glean their positions and try to figure out what to
expect from their presidency. I was extremely
disappointed. I saw nothing to energize me to believe
this country’s political system cares about what
matters to me: peace, economic stability and opportunity,
or an end to US imperialism and an increasing police
state. I
warned in 2008 Barack Obama was being put up/set up to be
the fall guy and patsy for when the warmongering
international bankers/Kleptocrats pulled the plug on the
US economy thus destroying the working class and lurching
the country towards a regional if not a global war with a
flash point in the “Middle East”. Nothing
I’ve seen during the past four years or during that
last televised debate on Monday has changed my mind. The
only thing is, now I suspect Mitt Romney is the one the
NeoCons, the international bankers, the Zionist lobby and
corporate oligarchs want in the White House because they
trust him to carry out their imperialist agendas more
than they do Obama who they feel is not aggressive enough. When
I watched the last debate I was sickened by what I saw. I
saw a Mitt Romney whose eyes and body language revealed
he was uncomfortable and unsure of himself. He was a man
desperately hoping to avoid making another major foreign
policy gaff so he agreed with Obama on almost everything.
Romney did what he’s been doing ever since the
private video was posted on YouTube showing him telling
his super wealthy campaign contributors what he actually
thinks and feels about 47% of the people, he lied! Romney
was exposed in that video but his employment of the
“Big Lie” technique seems to be working. The
Big Lie was used to perfection by the Nazis in Germany
who got it from US media; you repeat a lie (or an ad
slogan) over and over again forcibly enough and people
will believe you. Perhaps this is why the poll numbers
are tightening in Romney’s favor despite the YouTube
video. We
cannot discount stupidity, short memories or plain
ol’ USA racism to play a major factor in the
election. As will vote rigging and fraud; after all the
US is a banana republic bar none. Racism as we know is a
mental illness. US symptoms are a severe dislike for
people of a darker hue and an attempt by the bigot to
compensate for his or her feelings of inadequacy and
inferiority by putting people of color down. This
explains why down and out white folks even consider
voting for people like Romney and Ryan who have shown
utter contempt for them and their situation since day one.
In fact when you read the Romney Team’s policy
statements and position papers you see they want to make
things worse!! No
matter how out of touch with the masses Romney and Ryan
appear to be, the yahoos will vote for them against their
own interests just to “defeat” Obama who they
see as a “black man”, a Muslim and/or a
Socialist etc. This is classic divide and rule strategy
especially since the Romney programs will turn out the
same way the Reagan and Bu$h trickle down policies did, a
disaster. Since
he was outshone in the first debate, Obama has been on
the defensive and now recently on the attack. During the
last debate Obama clearly exposed Romney as a
disingenuous prevaricating flip-flopper on all of his
previous positions. But it may be too little too late to
give Obama any momentum because the hard core fascists,
the fear mongers and racists have worked themselves into
such a frenzy, they actually see light at the end of the
tunnel. When Obama demonstrated vulnerability by losing
the first debate, the fascists behind Romney saw an
opportunity to take Obama out, to get rid of him for good.
Obama
is under immense pressure because the facts are not on
his side. Unemployment is at an all time high, millions
of mortgages are underwater, millions of people are
facing foreclosure, Blacks and Latinos have lost
trillions of dollars in home equity we can never recover,
as have white folks, the economy is in deep trouble and
there is nothing either Obama or Romney can do about it. But
the Romney-Ryan team has told us clearly, if we are awake
to see and hear what they’ve said, what their true
agenda for this country is. Think George W Bu$h, Chris
Christie of New Jersey or Scott Walker of Wisconsin on
steroids. The ALEC agenda of union busting, devastating
social program cuts, juxtaposed against massive corporate
welfare and huge tax breaks for the rich will become
national policy. This country will go back to the robber
baron era in terms of socio-economic peonage, class
rigidity and inequality.
The corporate media is no help because their agenda is to
trick us into falling for their okey-doke reality.
That’s why since the 1950’s in early television
shows they put laugh tracks in comedies to condition us
to go along with their flim-flam. Think about this for a
minute, if something is really funny, we laugh; we
don’t need to be prompted by a sound track of people
laughing to make us laugh do we? The corporate
programmers view us as simpletons and morons who need to
goaded and duped into reacting to “the reality”
they create. This is why they hire talking head
propagandists to interpret what we see during the debates
so they can put their spin and smell on the images and
sound bytes they play over and over again to brainwash us
into going along with their program. None
of the networks or cable news channels are covering the
real issues our lives or reveal what the politicians have
promised their Wall Street supporters or the corporate
donors who are filling their campaign coffers to the tune
of billions of dollars. We need to wake up and realize
the United States is a banana republic ruled by a
corporate (and an increasingly hereditary) oligarchy hell
bent on a rigid class structure of the super rich at the
top, a mid level of technocrat and military/security
state then the rest of us. Both candidates are
essentially for the same things, working on behalf of the
same plutocrats, it’s just Obama’s campaign
rhetoric is kinder and gentler.
|
of Palesti