[youtube://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC9WAf3NqHY#t=48 450 300]Comments »
[youtube://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEcZFgSnVP0#t=34 450 300]
“Submitted by Brandon Smith of Alt-Market.com,
When one studies history, all events seem to revolve around the applications and degenerations of war. Great feats of human understanding, realization and enlightenment barely register in the mental footnotes of the average person. War is what we remember, idealize and aggrandize, which is why war is the tool most often exploited by oligarchy to distract the masses while it centralizes power.
With the exception of a few revolutions, most wars are instigated and controlled by financial elites, manipulating governments on both sides of the game to produce a preconceived result. The rise of National Socialism in Germany, for instance, was largely funded by corporate entities based in the U.S., including Rockefeller giant Standard Oil, JPMorgan and even IBM, which built the collating machines specifically used to organize Nazi extermination camps, the same machines IBM representatives serviced on site at places like Auschwitz. As a public figure, Adolf Hitler was considered a joke by most people in German society, until, of course, the Nazi Party received incredible levels of corporate investment. This aid was most evident in what came to be known as the Keppler Fund created through the Keppler Circle, a group of interests with contacts largely based in the U.S.
George W. Bush’s grandfather, Prescott Bush, used his position as director of the New York-based Union Banking Corporation to launder money for the Third Reich throughout the war. After being exposed and charged for trading with the enemy, the case against Bush magically disappeared in a puff of smoke, and the Bush family went on to become one of the most powerful political forces in America.
Without the aid of international conglomerates and banks, the Third Reich would have never risen to power.
The rise of communism in Russia through the Bolshevik Revolution was no different. As outlined in Professor Antony Sutton’s book Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution with vast detail and irrefutable supporting evidence, it was globalist financiers that created the social petri dish in which the communist takeover flourished. The same financiers that aided the Nazis…[youtube://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaFklTLNy8c 450 300]
The two sides, National Socialism and communism, were essentially identical despotic governmental structures conjured by the same group of elites. These two sides, these two fraudulent ideologies, were then pitted against each other in an engineered conflict that we now call World War II, resulting in an estimated 48 million casualties globally and the ultimate formation of the United Nations, a precursor to world government.
Every major international crisis for the past century or more has ended with an even greater consolidation of world power into the hands of the few, and this is no accident.
When I discuss the concept of the false left/right paradigm with people, especially those in the liberty movement, I often see a light turn on, a moment of awareness in their faces. Many of us understand the con game because we live it day to day. We see past the superficial rhetoric of Republican and Democratic party leadership and take note of their numerous similarities, including foreign policy, domestic defense policy and economic policy. The voting records of the major players in both parties are almost identical. One is hard-pressed to find much difference in ideology between Bush and Barack Obama, for example; or Obama and John McCain; or Obama and Mitt Romney, for that matter.
When I suggest, however, that similar false paradigms are used between two apparently opposed nations, the light fades, and people are left dumbstruck. Despite the fact that globalist financiers shoveled capital into the U.S., British, German and Soviet military complexes all at the same time during World War II, many Americans do not want to believe that such a thing could be happening today.
In response, I present the crisis in Ukraine versus the crisis in Syria…
Ukraine Versus Syria
It seems as though much of the public has already forgotten that at the end of 2013, the U.S. came within a razor’s edge of economic disaster — not to mention the possibility of World War III. The war drums in Washington were thundering for “intervention” in Syria and the overthrow of Bashar Assad. The only thing that saved us, I believe, were the tireless efforts of the independent media in exposing the darker motives behind the Syrian insurgency and the bloodlust of the Obama Administration. The problem is that when the elites lose one avenue toward war and distraction, they have a tendency to simply create another. Eventually, the public is so overwhelmed by multiple trigger points and political powder kegs that they lose track of reality. I often call this the “scattergun effect.”
The crisis in the Ukraine is almost a carbon copy of the civil war in Syria, culminating in what I believe to be the exact same intent.
Money from globalist centers has been flowing into the Ukrainian opposition since at least 2004, when the Carnegie Foundation was caughtfiltering funds to anti-Russian political candidate Viktor Yushchenko, as well as to the groups who supported him.
The Ukrainian Supreme Court called for a runoff due to massive voter fraud and the rise of the pro-Western Orange Revolution, determining the winner to be Yushchenko over none other than Viktor Yanukovych. Yanukovych went on to win the 2010 elections, and the revolution returned to oust him this year.
It has been discovered that the current revolution has also been receiving funds from NATO and U.S. interests, not just from the State Department, but also from billionaires like Pierre Omidyar, the chairman of eBay and the new boss of journalist Glen Greenwald, the same journalist who is now famous for being the first to expose National Security Agency documents obtained by Edward Snowden.
Much of the monetary support from such financiers was being funneled to men like Oleh Rybachuk, the right-hand man to Yanukovych during the Orange Revolution and a favorite of neoconservatives and the State Department in the U.S.
The International Monetary Fund has also jumped at the chance to throw money at the new Ukrainian regime, which would prevent default of the country and allow the opposition movement to focus their attentions on Russia.
The revolution in Syria was also primarily driven by Western funds and arms transferred through training grounds like Benghazi, Libya. There is much evidence to suggest that the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was designed to possibly cover up the arming of Syrian rebels by the CIA, who had agents on the ground who still have not been allowed to testify in front of Congress.
After this conspiracy was exposed in the mainstream, globalist-controlled governments decided to openly supply money and weapons to the Syrian insurgency, instead of ending the subterfuge.
Some revolutions are quite real in their intent and motivations. But many either become co-opted by elites through financing, or they are created from thin air from the very beginning. Usually, the rebellions that are completely fabricated tend to lean toward extreme zealotry.
The Syrian insurgency is rife with, if not entirely dominated by, men associated with al-Qaida. Governments in the U.S. and Israel continue to support the insurgency despite their open affiliation with a group that is supposedly our greatest enemy. Syrian insurgents have been recorded committing numerous atrocities, including mass execution, the torture of civilians and even the cannibalism of human organs.
The revolution in Ukraine is run primarily by the Svoboda Party, a National Socialist (fascist) organization headed by Oleh Tyahnybok. Here is a photo of Tyahnybok giving a familiar salute:
So far, the opposition in Ukraine has been mostly careful in avoiding the same insane displays of random violence that plagued the Syrians’ public image. It is important to remember though that mainstream outlets like Reuters went far out of their way in attempts to humanize Syrian al-Qaida. Their methods were exposed only through the vigilance of the independent media. With the fascist Svoboda in power in the Ukraine, I believe it is only a matter of time before we see video reports of similar atrocities, giving Russia a perfect rationalization to use military force.
I am now thoroughly convinced that John McCain is a pasty ghoul of the highest order. He claims to be conservative yet supports almost every action of the Obama Administration. He is constantly defending anti-Constitutional actions by the Federal government, including the Enemy Belligerents Act, which was eventually melded into the National Defense Authorization Act; NSA surveillance of U.S. citizens; and evengun control.
And for some reason, the guy makes appearances like clockwork right before or during major overthrows of existing governments. McCain was in Libya during the coup against Moammar Gadhafi.
McCain showed up to essentially buy off the rebels in Tunisia.
McCain hung out with al-Qaida in Syria.
And, what a surprise, McCain met with the Ukrainian opposition movement just before the overthrow of Viktor Yanukovych. Here is a photo of McCain giving a speech to the opposition with none other than Neo-Nazi Oleh Tyahnybok standing over his left shoulder.
Why McCain? I have no idea. All I know is, if this guy shows up in your country, take cover.
Russia In The Middle
The great danger in Syria was not necessarily the chance of war with Assad. Rather, it was the chance that a war with Assad would expand into a larger conflagration with Iran and Russia. Russia’s only naval facility in the Mideast is on the coast of Tartus in Syria, and Russia has long-standing economic and political ties to Syria and Iran. Any physical action by the West in the region would have elicited a response from Vladimir Putin. The mainstream argument claims that the threat of Russian intervention scared off Obama, but I believe the only reason war actions were not executed by the White House and the globalists was because they didn’t have even minimal support from the general public. For any war, you need at least a moderate percentage of the population to back your play.
In Ukraine, we find the globalists creating tensions between the West and the East yet again. Russia’s most vital naval base sits in Crimea, an autonomous state tethered to the Ukrainian mainland. Currently, Russia has flooded Crimea with troops in response to the regime change in Ukraine. The new Ukrainian government (backed by NATO) has called this an “invasion” and an act of war, while Western warmongers like McCain and Lindsay Graham spread the propaganda meme that Russia made such a move only because Putin believes the Obama Administration to be “weak.”
Clearly, the idea here is to engineer either high tensions or eventual war between Russia and the United States. Syria failed to produce the desired outcome, so the Ukraine was tapped instead.
Energy Markets And The Dollar At Risk
In Syria, any U.S. led military action would have resulted in the immediate closing of the Straight of Hormuz by Iran, threatening to obstruct up to 30% of global petroleum shipments. Foreign resentment could have easily led to the abandonment of the U.S. dollar as the petro-currency. Both China and Russia implied the possibility of an economic response to American intervention, though they did not officially go into specifics. In all likelihood, the dollar’s world reserve status would have been damaged irrevocably.
In the Ukraine, the chance of intervention has been countered with VERY specific threats from Russia, including a freeze on natural gas imports to the European Union through Gazprom, which supplies approximately 30% of the EU’s fuel. In 2009, a temporary Ukranian pipeline closure led to widespread shortages across Europe. While some in the mainstream claim that Russia’s influence over EU energy has “diminished” the fact is a loss of 30% of natural gas reserves for an extended period would inflate energy prices wildly and cripple the EU’s economy.
Another specific reaction given by Russia is the dumping of U.S. treasury bonds. Russia’s bond holdings may not seem like much leverage, except for the fact that China has now publicly backed Russian efforts in the Ukraine, just as they backed Russian opposition to U.S. activities in Syria. A dump of bonds by Russia would invariably be followed by a Chinese dump as well. In fact, China and Russia have been setting the stage for a global dollar decoupling since at least 2008. I have been warning for years that globalists and central bankers needed a “cover event”, a distraction or scapegoat imposing enough to provide a veil of chaos in which they could then destroy the greenback as the world reserve and usher in a global currency system. The Ukraine crisis offers yet another opportunity for this plan to unfold.
The False Paradigm And The Globalist Chessboard…..”Comments »
“Submitted by Zachary Zeck via The Diplomat,
On Thursday a senior Indian official appeared to endorse Russia’s position in Ukraine in recent days, even as Delhi urged all parties involved to seek a peaceful resolution to the diplomatic crisis.
When asked for India’s official assessment of the events in Ukraine, National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon responded:
“We hope that whatever internal issues there are within Ukraine are settled peacefully, and the broader issues of reconciling various interests involved, and there are legitimate Russian and other interests involved…. We hope those are discussed, negotiated and that there is a satisfactory resolution to them.”
The statement was made on the same day that Crimea’s parliament voted to hold a referendum for secession from Ukraine.
Local Indian media noted that Menon’s statement about Russia’s legitimate interests in Ukraine made it the first major nation to publicly lean toward Russia. As my colleague Shannon has reported throughout the week, many of China’s public statements could be interpreted as backing Russia in Ukraine, despite Beijing’s own concerns about ethnic breakaway states and its principle of non-interference.
However, at other times, including at the UN Security Council, Beijing has appeared to be subtly rebuking Moscow by suggesting that its unilateral path threatened regional and global stability. At the very least, however, Beijing has characteristically not gone as far as the U.S. and the West in publicly scolding Vladimir Putin for the military intervention in Crimea.
Ukraine certainly appeared to interpret India’s endorsement of Russia’s legitimate interests as far more hostile than Beijing’s position on Russia’s actions. According to the Telegraph India, a Ukrainian embassy spokesperson stationed in Delhi responded to Menon’s comments by saying: “We are not sure how Russia can be seen having legitimate interests in the territory of another country. In our view, and in the view of much of the international community, this is a direct act of aggression and we cannot accept any justification for it.”
The larger question, of course, is why India decided to take such a relatively pro-Russian stance on the Ukraine issue? There are a number of possibilities….”
The question now is who backed said nationalist right wingned neo nazi fascists?
“(Reuters) – When protest leaders in Ukraine helped oust a president widely seen as corrupt, they became heroes of the barricades. But as they take places in the country’s new government, some are facing uncomfortable questions about their own values and associations, not least alleged links to neo-fascist extremists.
Russia’s president Vladimir Putin claims Ukraine has fallen into the hands of far-right fascist groups, and some Western experts have also raised concerns about the influence of extremists. Yet many Ukrainians see the same groups as nationalist stalwarts and defenders of the country’s independence.
Two of the groups under most scrutiny are Svoboda, whose members hold five senior roles in Ukraine’s new government including the post of deputy prime minister, and Pravyi Sector (Right Sector), whose leader Dmytro Yarosh is now the country’s Deputy Secretary of National Security.
Right Sector activists wearing black ski masks, bullet-proof vests and military fatigues still hold several buildings close to Kiev’s Independence Square. Activists on the street declined to speak to Reuters about their organization. An individual described as their “commander” directed a reporter to two spokespeople who also declined requests for interviews.
On Tuesday the group called for supporters to patrol Wikipedia. In a posting on Vkontakte, the Russian equivalent of Facebook, Right Sector wrote: “We appeal to people who can make changes to Wikipedia. In the English version (with Russian worse) Right Sector is depicted as an organization that has a fascist and neo-Nazi views, with appropriate consequences. If you have an opportunity – correct this misunderstanding.”
According to Wikipedia’s logs, on Monday the Right Sector entry described the party as having “borderline fascist or neo-fascist views.” On Tuesday the page was modified 174 times, including changes to describe Right Sector as an “organization to protect demonstrators” and a “youth patriot organization.”
After the intervention of Wikipedia administrators, the page was locked and reverted to saying that Right Sector was “described by major Western newspapers as having far right or neo-fascist views.”
Expert opinions on Svoboda in particular are divided. Per Anders Rudling, an associate professor at Lund University in Sweden and researcher on Ukrainian extremists, has described Svoboda as “neo-fascist”. He told Britain’s Channel 4 News: “Two weeks ago I could never have predicted this. A neo-fascist party like Svoboda getting the deputy prime minister position is news in its own right.”
But Ivan Katchanovski, a political scientist at the University of Ottawa who has studied the far-right in Ukraine, disagreed that Svoboda was so extreme. “Svoboda is currently best described as a radical nationalist party, and not as fascist or neo-Nazi,” he said. “It is now not overtly anti-Semitic.”….”
“MOSCOW—Russia’s upper house of parliament will support Crimea in its bid to join the Russian Federation, the speaker of the upper house of parliament said Friday.
“If the people of Crimea decide to join Russia in the referendum, we, as the upper house, will certainly support this decision,” Valentina Matvienko said at a meeting with Vladimir Konstantinov, his counterpart in the Crimean parliament.
A delegation from the Crimean peninsula were in Moscow to meet parliamentarians who warmly welcomed the guests and signaled their willingness to support the neighboring region.
Later Friday a group of military and civilian personnel from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe are making another attempt to enter the Crimean peninsula, after being stopped at two border checkpoints the day before, a spokesman for the organization said.
“The group is on their way from Kherson, where they spent the night, and is heading to a checkpoint in the area of a village called Chungar,” Shiv Sharma said, adding that the group of about 40 people is scheduled to arrive around 1330 local time (1130 GMT).
The group, from 22 of the OSCE member states, is traveling to Crimea to assess the situation on Ukraine’s Black Sea peninsula from a military perspective…..”Comments »
“The current crisis is not about Crimea. It is about the rights of Russian-speakers throughout Ukraine whom the Kremlin wants to protect from violence and discrimination. Russia does not want a military intervention in Crimea and does not want to take Crimea from Ukraine.
There is a political solution to this crisis. First, create a coalition government in Kiev composed of all parties, including those from the east and south of the country. The current government is dominated by anti-Russian extremists from western Ukraine.
Second, Ukraine needs to draft a democratic constitution that has guarantees for Ukraine’s Russian-speaking population that would grant official status to the Russian language and establish the principle of federalism.
Third, presidential and parliamentary elections must be held soon. Independent election observers must play an active role in ensuring that the elections are free and fair. There is a real danger that they will be manipulated by the neo-Nazi militants who de facto seized power in a coup.
If these democratic and peaceful solutions to the crisis in Ukraine are rejected by the opposition forces that have seized power in Kiev, I am afraid that Russia will have no other choice but to revert to military means. If the junta leaders want to avoid war, they need to adopt Moscow’s peaceful and democratic proposals and adhere to them.
Those currently in power in Kiev are carrying out a political strategy that is not so much pro-European as it is anti-Russian, as evidenced by the surprisingly heavy-handed tactics the U.S. and European Union have employed in Ukraine. In the end, a minority executed a violent coup that removed the democratically elected and legitimate president of Ukraine.
The Kremlin believes that the current Ukrainian leadership will manipulate the elections planned for May 25 to install a single leader or coalition government functioning much as former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili did in Tbilisi. A “Ukrainian Saakashvili” will unleash an even more repressive campaign of intimidation against Russian-speakers, one that over several years would stoke anti-Russia hysteria among the general population.
After that, Kiev may evict Russia’s Black Sea Fleet from Sevastopol and purge Crimea of any Russian influence. Ukraine could easily become a radicalized, anti-Russian state, at which point Kiev will fabricate a pretext to justify taking subversive action against Moscow. This looks especially likely considering that ruling coalition members from the neo-fascist Svoboda and Right Sector parties have already made territorial claims against Russia. They could easily send their army of activists to Russia to join local separatists and foment rebellion in the North Caucasus and other unstable regions in Russia. In addition, Russia’s opposition movement will surely want to use the successful experience and technology of the Euromaidan protests and, with the help and financial support of the West, try to carry out their own revolution in Moscow. The goal: to remove President Vladimir Putin from power and install a puppet leadership that will sell Russia’s strategic interests out to the West in the same way former President Boris Yeltsin did in the 1990s.
The official census puts the Russian minority in Ukraine at 16 percent of the total population, although that number was falsified. The actual number is closer to 25 percent. Surveys indicate that 45 percent of the country’s population speak Russian at home, 45 percent speak Ukrainian and 10 percent speak both languages. In the most recent Gallup survey….”Comments »
“Amid simmering tensions between the US and Russia over the crisis in Ukraine, US Navy officials say a US guided-missile destroyer which is en route to the Black Sea has been sent there on a “routine” deployment.
According to the US Navy, the USS Truxtun departed the Greek port of Souda Bay on Thursday for joint training with Romanian and Bulgarian forces, AFP reported.
“While in the Black Sea, the ship will conduct a port visit and routine, previously planned exercises with allies and partners in the region,” the US Navy said in a statement.
Despite the US Navy’s assertion that the move is a “routine” deployment, it comes one day after the Pentagon announced plans for expanding aviation training in Poland and sending more F-15 fighter jets to police the skies over Baltic states.
Tensions between Washington and Moscow have intensified over the recent political crisis in Ukraine….”Comments »
“A former US Senate foreign policy analyst describes Washington’s decision to impose sanctions on a number of Russian and Ukrainian individuals as a “dangerous” move which can only “turn up the heat” with regard to the crisis in Ukraine.
“I think that there is a fundamental choice in front of the United States and Europe in dealing with the crisis in Ukraine. It really boils down to: Do we try to find a political solution that would reconcile the different parts of Ukraine with one another?” asked James Jatras in an interview with Press TV on Thursday.
US President Barack Obama signed an executive order on Thursday imposing a ban on visas and property of individuals whom the United States accuses of violating the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.
The US restrictions come after the local administration of Ukraine’s strategic Crimea region called for a referendum on March 16 in order to decide whether the autonomous region should join Russia or not…..”Comments »
[youtube://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3hY1eagq88 450 300]
“While the world is convinced that Putin’s Tuesday press conference was an admission of blinking to the west, the reality is anything but that, and hours ago Crimea’s parliament voted to join Russia on Thursday and its Moscow-backed government set a referendum within 10 days on the decision in what Reuters said is a “a dramatic escalation of the crisis over the Ukrainian Black Sea peninsula.” To be sure, the Crimea – which has an ethnic Russian majority – affiliation to Moscow as opposed to Kiev is well-known, yet still the sudden acceleration of moves to bring Crimea formally under Moscow’s rule came as European Union leaders gathered for an emergency summit to seek ways to pressure Russia to back down and accept mediation. And now all Putin has to do is sit back and say the people have spoken and without spilling a drop of blood has effectively split the country in two parts, with the entire east of Ukraine, where pro-Russian sentiment also runs high – sure to follow Crimea. Just as we said from the very beginning.
The Crimean parliament voted unanimously “to enter into the Russian Federation with the rights of a subject of the Russian Federation”. The vice premier of Crimea, home to Russia’s Black Sea military base in Sevastopol, said a referendum on the status would take place on March 16. The announcement, which diplomats said could not have been made without Russian President Vladimir Putin’s approval, raised the stakes in the most serious east-west confrontation since the end of the Cold War.
Far from seeking a diplomatic way out, Putin appears to have chosen to create facts on the ground before the West can agree on more than token action against him.
EU leaders had been set to warn but not sanction Russia over its military intervention after Moscow rebuffed Western diplomatic efforts to persuade it to pull forces in Crimea, with a population of about 2 million, back to their bases. It was not immediately clear what impact the Crimean moves would have.
European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said in a Twitter message: “We stand by a united and inclusive #Ukraine.”
French President Francois Hollande told reporters on arrival at the summit: “There will be the strongest possible pressure on Russia to begin lowering the tension and in the pressure there is, of course, eventual recourse to sanctions.”
To be sure, the new Kiev government – which may or may not have killed its own citizens in order to rise to power while blaming the atrocities on Yanukovich as described yesterday – has responded in kind to how Putin views them, and declared the referendum illegal and opened a criminal investigation against Crimean Prime Minister Sergei Askyonov, who was appointed by the region’s parliament last week. The Ukrainian government does not recognise his authority or that of the parliament. Still, it is by now far too late for Kiev to enforce its will in Crimea.
In the meantime…”Comments »
Why Has the Main Stream Media Ignored Anti Semitism in the Ukraine ?…and No Hillary, Russia is Not Like Hitler’s Germany
Spindoctors will not stop spewing garbagio: Hillary Clinton Compares Russia to Hitler
“In World War II, the United States fought against rabidly anti-Semitic fascists. In 2014, the United States helps them overthrow democratically-elected governments. And the sick thing is that the mainstream media is acting an an accomplice because it is purposely ignoring or greatly playing down the rabid anti-Semitism in Ukraine. The anti-Semitism of many of the “reformers” that have seized power in Kiev does not fit with the narrative that the U.S. government is trying to push, so the mainstream media conveniently turns a blind eye to the fact that the United States is essentially helping neo-Nazis take power. In fact, leaders of the Svoboda Party have been appointed to numerous important positions throughout the new government. As you will read about below, the head of the Svoboda Party has denounced the “criminal activities” of “organized Jewry”, another top Svoboda official regularly quotes Joseph Goebbels, and the Party itself was known as “the Social-National Party” (in reference to National Socialists) until 2004. There is a long history of anti-Semitism in Ukraine, but our politicians in Washington D.C. don’t seem to care about that. All they seem to care about is making sure that there is not a pro-Russian government in Ukraine no matter what the cost.
There is a reason why Russian President Vladimir Putin cited “ultranationalists” as one of the reasons why Russian troops had to intervene in Ukraine. What we are seeing in Ukraine right now is eerily reminiscent of what we saw in Nazi Germany before World War II. The following comes from a recent Gawker article…
Earlier this week, a synagogue in the country’s southeast was firebombed. There have been multiple reported beatings of Jews and acts of vandalism at Kiev synagogues. A leading rabbi in Kiev has called for Jews to leave the city and the country, if possible—though he later said he was stressing that it’s dangerous for everyone out there—and the Israeli embassy has reportedly advised members of the Jewish community to stay off the streets.
Some people are dismissing these as “isolated incidents”. Well, then how do you explain the white power flags and other neo-Nazi symbols that have been going up all around Kiev? In the video posted below, you can see a white power flag that has been erected in a city government building in Kiev…”Comments »
“Threats by the U.S. and European powers to impose tough sanctions on Russia over its incursion into Ukraine have run into a difficult economic reality: The West has as much at stake as Moscow.
While sanctions were central to international efforts to exert pressure on countries such as Iran and Myanmar in recent years, Russia’s sheer size and economic entanglement with the West make it much harder to isolate.
Russian President Vladimir Putin answers journalists’ questions on situation in Ukraine on March 4.Associated Press
Russian President Vladimir Putin seized the point at a news conference on Tuesday in Moscow, warning that all sides would suffer if sanctions were imposed.
“Those who are thinking of imposing the sanctions should be the ones first of all to think about their consequences,” he said. “I think in the modern world, when everything is so interconnected and everyone depends on everyone else in one way or another, it’s of course possible to do some damage to one another, but it will be mutual damage.” …”Comments »
“Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens believes the Second Amendment should be amended.
In order to clear up what one commentator calls the “exquisitely awkward 18th century syntax,” Stevens proposes adding five words to the present version of the Second Amendment. Stevens’ revised Second Amendment would read:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the militia shall not be infringed.
In his newest book, Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution, Stevens offers the following defense of his proposed change:
Emotional claims that the right to possess deadly weapons is so important that it is protected by the federal Constitution distort intelligent debate about the wisdom of particular aspects of proposed legislation designed to minimize the slaughter caused by the prevalence of guns in private hands.
Slaughter caused by the prevalence of guns in private hands? The fact is that it is governments, not civilians, that have been responsible for the killing of over 300 million people in the 20th century alone.
Stevens’ proposal not only would allow regimes to retain access to their weapons, but would leave private citizens powerless to oppose future slaughters…..”Comments »
As with all politics it is hard to know what the real truth is, given all the spin doctors in play. Senator McCain was recently quoted as saying “we are all Ukranians.” While the philosophical apects of that statement may be true, we have seen that fighting for democracy and freedom is the biggest bunch of bullshit being put on our plates for at least the recent past if not for the better part of the last century.
Perhaps Russia is the one strong hold the west can not control. Perhaps this pisses the west off more than anything. It is a wonder why Snowden chose Russia to hide out.
Perhaps the west, primarily Europe, is not happy with Russia having a strong grip over oil and gas and would like to have Ukaraine in the EU clutches to further control resources and pipelines.
I’m not done analyzing this scenario yet, but posturing by the west and producing idle threats will not help the situtation.
“After a week of mystery as to his whereabouts, ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych surfaced on Friday, February 28 — in Russia. At a press conference in the city of Rostov-on-Don, in southwestern Russia, Yanukovych was defiant and still vainly hoping to be restored to power. The Russian state-run “news” agency, RT (Russia Today) provided an account of his media appearance, which included these excerpts:
Ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich pledges to fight for Ukraine. He addressed a press conference in southern Russia, appearing in public for the first time since he fled Kiev amid bloody riots.
“No one has ousted me,” Yanukovich told reporters. “I had to leave Ukraine because of a direct threat to my life and the lives of my family.”
According to Yanukovich, “nationalist fascist-like fellows representing the absolute minority of Ukrainians” took over power in Ukraine.
He described the situation in Ukraine as “complete lawlessness,” “terror” and “chaos”, saying that the politicians, including MPs [Members of Parliament], have been threatened and are working under threats…. The current Ukrainian parliament is “not legitimate,” and the people in power are spreading the propaganda of violence, Yanukovich asserted.
RT’s Irina Galushko, who was covering the story, tweeted:
#Yanukovich?: I’m an acting president; I haven’t resigned, I haven’t been impeached, and I’m still alive (3ways a pres could be ousted – IG)
Yanukovych vanished from the Ukrainian capital of Kiev on Sunday, February 23, as the protests, riots, and violence that had been building since November, along with mass defections by his former political allies, made it clear that his regime was no longer viable. According to various reports, the 63-year-old Yanukovych left Kiev in a limousine convoy with a handful of bodyguards and his 39-year-old girlfriend Lyubov Polezhay, leaving his wife behind.
The party fled by ground and then by helicopter, with speculation that it was headed either to Ukraine’s southern Crimea region (the Black Sea ports of Sevastopol or Balaklava being most mentioned as destinations) or eastward to the Donetsk region, where Yanukovych was born. Both of these areas have large Russian populations and provided much of his political base. His first language is Russian, and his lack of proficiency in the Ukrainian language did not help to endear him to the Ukrainian people, who have suffered under Russian and Soviet dominance for many generations.
Yanukovych, who was a member of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union when Ukraine was still part of the Soviet Union, is an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, and most of the political blocs that supported Yanukovych are composed of “former” communists who simply changed their labels and adopted Ukrainian nationalist rhetoric. Yanukovych got his big break into politics in 2002 when President Leonid Kuchma, a former member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, appointed him prime minister.
But now Yanukovych is on the run, a hunted man. On Monday, February 24, the new interim government of Ukraine issued an arrest warrant for him and other former top officials, charging them with “mass killing of civilians.” Reportedly, at least 82 people, mostly demonstrators, were killed in clashes during the demonstrations in Kiev’s Maidan Square.
In scenes reminiscent of the fall of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, many of the news stories out of Ukraine have focused on Yanukovych’s luxurious residence, known as the “bling palace,” and his extensive automobile collection. As in Putin’s Russia, the Ukraine under Yanukovych (as well as under his predecessors Kuchma and Kravchuk) has been rife with corruption and crony “capitalism,” with former communist officials transformed into billionaire oligarchs who have “privatized” former state resources and enjoy special privileges and government contracts.
“New” Government, Same Old Oligarchs
One of Yanukovych’s most important supporters has been Rinat Akhmetov, reputedly a former mafia enforcer, now an energy and metals tycoon whom Forbes, in 2013, listed as #47 among the world’s richest billionaires, with a personal net worth of $15.4 billion. According to the Ukrainian edition of Forbes, the various businesses in Akhmetov’s extensive empire obtained 31 percent of all state contracts in January 2014.
Yanukovych’s son Oleksandr tops even this, says Forbes, having “won” 50 percent of state contracts in the same period. Akhmetov, who was a member of the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine’s 450-member unicameral parliament, until stepping down in 2012, reportedly still controls a group of around 50 MPs (Members of Parliament), mostly in Yanukovych’s Party of Regions.
Dmytro Firtash, an energy/chemicals/banking/real estate magnate allegedly controls another 30 MPs. Billionaire Vadim Novinsky, Ukraine’s third richest man, is an MP in the Party of Regions and also swings considerable political weight. Banking oligarch Serhiy Tihipko (alternately spelled Sergei Tigipko), a Party of Regions MP and former governor of Ukraine’s central bank, is one of the players frequently cited as a contender in the upcoming presidential elections, scheduled by Parliament for May 25 of this year.
Another power player who has remained largely under the media radar during the past few months of turmoil is metals and media mogul Victor Pinchuk, Ukraine’s second richest oligarch. He is a former MP and is married to the daughter of “former” communist President Leonid Kuchma. He not only retains influence in parliament, but through his media holdings influences public opinion. His Victor Pinchuk Foundation funds numerous NGOs and works closely with the George Soros-aligned Open Ukraine Foundation and the Arseniy Yatseniuk Foundation…..”Comments »
“On Tuesday the Supreme Court ruled in Fernandez v. California that when a resident who objects to the search of his residence is removed through a lawful arrest, the remaining resident may give police consent to search without first demanding a warrant.
While the back story is much more complicated than the above summary, the ruling diminishes Fourth Amendment protections from unreasonable searches and seizures. In this case, it was the three dissenting liberal judges on the court who gave the majority a lesson in how the Fourth Amendment is designed to restrain police power. In previous decisions, the court has ruled that anyone objecting to a warrantless search provides sufficient deterrent to such searches. This would apply even in cases where other residents approve such a search. In a word, it just takes one who knows his rights to be able effectively to defend them. Following Tuesday’s decision, that is no longer the case.
Fernandez attacked an innocent on the streets of Los Angeles back in 2009, and then ran back to his apartment to hide. When police arrived at the apartment his wife opened the door. When Fernandez heard the commotion at the door, he shouted: “You don’t have right to come in here! I know my rights!” The police, noting that his wife was bleeding, arrested Fernandez on suspicion of domestic violence but returned an hour later to search his apartment for evidence linking him to the street attack. His wife consented both verbally and in writing to the warrantless search. The search turned up enough evidence to convict Fernandez and send him to prison for fourteen years….”Comments »
Nobody will argue that Gaddafi was an all around good guy.
We do know that Gaddafi made a pledge to, (click here,) help route out terrosits.
We do know dollar hegemony was potentially threatened by Gaddafi’s recreation of a, (click here,) gold backed Dinar.
We also know that Gadaffi, like Hussein, was keeping the peace between religous sects and jailing religous militants.
We know that after Gaddafi was killed that all militants were released from prison and an Al-Qaeda flag was flown.
Now that hindsight is 20-20, and all those guys who are said to be wearing tinfoil hats can say they told you so, why are we as a nation standing for this type of foreign policy?
As Albert Einstein once said:
‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing’
So i ask you: Are you good men and women of the Christian faith ? Afterall, this is a Christian nation and your lord Jesus Crist promoted non violence, asking you to turn the other cheek. Do you think just maybe, you might be disobeying the laws of your God? Have you washed the blood off your hands yet? Talk among yourselves.
“Two politicians could be sentenced to death over a cartoon deemed offensive to Islam when a verdict is issued in their case on Sunday 2 March, said Amnesty International. The organization is calling for the charges against them to be dropped immediately.
The cartoon, which depicts a group of men discussing the role of women in society, appeared on a Libyan National Party electoral campaign poster in the main streets of Libyan cities ahead of parliamentary elections in 2012.
“It is shocking that two political figures may face a firing squad over a cartoon that was published on an electoral campaign poster. No one should be prosecuted for freely expressing his or her views in public – however offensive they may seem to others,” said Said Boumedouha, Deputy Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Amnesty International.
“Libyans must be free to speak their minds, regardless of whether those views are expressed verbally, or appear on a poster, in a poem or a newspaper article. It is ludicrous that doing so could be considered a crime punishable by death.”
The cartoon caused an uproar because, unintentionally, it featured the same character used to depict the Prophet Mohammed in anti-Islamic comic published by the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. However, the Libyan poster made no reference to Islam or the Prophet Mohammed….”Comments »
“A federal judge ruled Thursday that the NYPD’s secret spying on Muslims in schools, restaurants, and mosques with no evidence of wrongdoing is perfectly legal, and it was the media’s exposure of this surveillance that was the real cause of harm. The decision prompted outcry from civil rights and racial justice advocates.
“The idea that the only harm was that you found out you are being spied on is ridiculously absurd logic,” said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesperson for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, in an interview with Common Dreams. “When a judge says it’s okay for a government to do any level of spying on a religious community, that has a chilling effect,”
U.S. District Judge William Martini in Newark, New Jersey, on Thursday tossed out the lawsuit Hassan v. City of New York, brought against the NYPD by a group of New Jersey-based Muslims—including an Iraq war veteran and the former principle of a Muslim girls’ grade school—who had been directly targeted by the surveillance. In a complaint filed by the civil rights organization Muslim Advocates and counseled by the Center for Constitutional Rights, the plaintiffs charged they had been unlawfully targeted on the basis of race, religion, and country of origin, causing them direct harm.
Martini—a Bush appointee and former Republican congressman—rejected their argument, writing, “The more likely explanation for the surveillance was to locate budding terrorist conspiracies.”
The judge went on to argue that the Pulitzer Prize-winning Associated Press investigations of the NYPD’s spying on Muslim communities—not the surveillance itself—caused harm to the plaintiffs. He wrote,
None of the Plaintiffs’ injuries arose until after the Associated Press released unredacted, confidential NYPD documents and articles expressing its own interpretation of those documents. Nowhere in the Complaint do Plaintiffs allege that they suffered harm prior to the unauthorized release of the documents by the Associated Press. This confirms that Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries flow from the Associated Press’s unauthorized disclosure of the documents. The harms are not “fairly traceable” to any act of surveillance.
“Martini essentially said that what the targets didn’t know didn’t hurt them,” writes Dan Froomkin for The Intercept.
Center for Constitutional Rights Legal Director Baher Azmy slammed the ruling: “In addition to willfully ignoring the harm that our innocent clients suffered from the NYPD’s illegal spying program, by upholding the NYPD’s blunderbuss Muslim surveillance practices….”Comments »