Interview with Infowars.com writer Patrick Henningsen who discusses where the Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman case is really heading, and explains the mass psychology behind America’s mainstream media news cycle. Henningsen also explains how the White House’s Saul Alinski cadres are fomenting a new race war in 2012. As the MSM deploys local news stories of murder as ‘national distractions’, the US media continues to divert attention away from other, more important events that could affect the day to day lives of every American.
The problem with McCarthy’s article is that the first two are real, but the last one is pure speculation – and out of pure convenience, he’s combined all three as if they one issue. There goes our mainstram media, raising the climate change alarm:
“But scientists are warning that they may be only the first of a considerable number of new infections, including some affecting humans, which are being helped to spread north through Europe by the warming climate.”
Unfortunately, this tired practice of cheap conflation will not benefit humanity any longer.
It is yet another instance where the mainstream media is falling head over heals for climate change, while a very real environmental crisis – the ongoing infusion of GMOs into our now contaminated global food supply chain - is allowed to run completely out of control. And what are the consequences of this?
This is not the first livestock crisis to hit Europe. In the 1990′s we saw CJD, or ‘Mad Cow’ disease take numerous human lives, and more famously, Britain’s catatrophic outbreak of foot and mouth disease, a plague which was originally believed to have been caused by a natural – both ravaged herds and cost the agriculture industry and the state billions by the final tally. Foot and Mouth was eventually reported to have originated in a UK bio lab and released (intentionally, or unintentionally, has yet to be proven) into the ecosystem – a highly unnatural event. Based on this past findings of man-made pathogens, it only stands to reason that the current Schmallenberg outbreak may be the result of an unintended contamination between livestock herds and madmade industrial substances.
Infowars interviewed GMO expert Jeffery Smith recently, where he revealed that, in fact, new discoveries on how GMOs could be ruining the internal organs and digestive tracts of livestock are coming out as we speak. He highlighted cases of aborted fetal tissue caused by a new organism only visible under an electron microscope. A study was done to determine the cause of the aborted animal fetuses and showed how when animal feed was treated with Monsanto Corp’s ‘Round-up’ chemical, there were high concentrations of this new, undiscovered deadly organism.
Jeffrey M. Smith Exposes Mystery Virus Triggering Aborted Fetuses: The Alex Jones Show, February 23, 2012
This organism was then taken to a preganant chicken where it killed the fetus within 24 to 48 hrs. It looks and acts like fungus, and is found to have caused spontaneous abortions in animals. One year ago, Dr. Don Huber, Professor Emeritus at Purdue University, warned the USDA of a wild spread infertility amongst livestock due to this new GMO ‘Round-up Ready’ pathogen and declared this as nothing less than “an emergency”.
USDA has allowed Monsanto to perform its own GMO studies, and no studies conducted on humans, the population at large has exposed itself to a potential threat whereby not only is the damage done to the our human and livestock DNA is permanent, but the cost in lives and money is almost incalulable.
Could the recent Schmallenberg sheep and cow crisis in the UK be somehow linked to a possible GMO-related pathogen in our food supply chain? If it is even remotely possible, one would sincerely hope that every green journalist on staff at the Independent, Guardian, Times of London, Washington Post and the New York Times – would be looking into this and related stories right this moment.
Or they could just continue to connect every natural eco or weather event… to climate change.
Scandal after scandal has hit the UN’s elite IPCC Climate Change clique, discrediting their so-called science, that same science which we were all told was ‘certain’. Since then, the public have since realized how this scam was constructed and how truly massive it is… including Al Gore and ’scientific concensus’ members’ ties to the global Carbon Exchanges markets. Knowing this, many in the climate camp could no longer support those old computer-modelled global warming theories. It will go down in history as one of the biggest (and most lucrative) lies ever sold.
‘Green’ journalism, or more specifically - climatist journalism, has long since infected most corporate compartments of the mainline media, exhibiting an irresistible tendency to combine any emerging crisis in nature with the liberal popular mythology of global warming and climate change. Since 2005, aplocalyptic antecdotes of rising seas and computer-modeled projections of nonexistent warming have colored the green press keeping environmental activists and scientists busy chasing a phantom menace.
Proponents of the climatist ‘precautionary principle’ should beware, because there is a very dear price that humanity may be paying as a result of this flamboyant period of mythology ushered in by the likes of the UN’s IPCC clique, Al Gore, Michael Mann and James Hansen. With all the time, talent, and hundreds of billions already wasted on trying to monetize CO2 and pushing various global warming theories, real envirnomental (and actual apocolyptic events) have been allowed to ravage the ecosystem unchecked – specifically, we are talking about Monsanto’s GMO food empire, and a very, very unregulated international nuclear power industry. In the case of GMOs, it may even be too late to undo the damage.
It’s time for the public to think seriously about what would happen if the present unregulated GMO industry were to damage not only our human food supply, but our human DNA itself.
Currently, we are the guinea pigs in this global experiment.
LONDON – We can already see exact parallels with the current PR operation to bring down Syria with how Libya went down. In one story published today, it seems that one award-winning mainstream newspaper has been caught red-handed running faux news on Syria - and incredibly, it’s not the first time this exact story has been used.
Late last week, reporter Alastair Beach of The Independent newspaper based in London, cited “evidence” in his article entitled “Assad’s slaughter of the innocents“, claiming that Syrian President Assad’s security forces have indiscriminately killed scores of newborn babies in Homs this week, as his article claims:
“Bashar al-Assad’s bloody siege of Homs intensified yesterday as clear evidence emerged that his indiscriminate shelling of the restive town had started claiming innocent victims, including at least 18 premature babies and three entire families. The evidence came as civilians in the besieged city endured a fifth day of incessant shellfire – the worst yet, according to eyewitnesses – with dozens of other people being killed as the brutal assault continued.”
Writer Beach’s source for his claims seem to originate from only one organization, not in Syria – but in London. Surprisingly, the Independent’s chief source for the alleged horrors in question is a nearly invisible organization known as the ”Syrian Observatory for Human Rights”(SOHR) (and to make matters worse, there are two competing SOHR orgs in London- with the same name although the Independent does not provide a link to either org), who claim to have an office based in London, but apparently have no address or contact phone number listed - only and email address. Even murkier however, is that fact that there are no names associated with the SOHR on their website, and many of its articles have been written under the fictitious pen name known as “Rami Abdul Rahman“.
It’s likely that “Rami Abdul Rahman” could be one Rami Abdelrahman, depicted in other online press coverage as head of the SOHR, and is reported to have met withBritain’s Foreign Secretary,William Hague at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on November 21, 2011.
One can only conclude that with no names or contact information, the SOHR is – by definition - a very well-hidden, clandestine lobbying organization, and in this case, it appears to be lobbying for regime change in Syria, from inside Britain’s Foreign Office.
Before regime change in Tripoli, the US, France and Britain relied on the likes of Soliman Bouchuiguir, the former Libyan League for Human Rights president with ties to NATO’s National Transitional Council (NTC), helped to generate numerous lies needed by the west to justify NATO’s now famously titled “humanitarian intervention” – allegedly to protect Libyans. This human rights impostor – like his present day Syrian counterpart Rami Abdelrahman who may very well have ties to the Paris-based rebel coalition known as Syrian National Council (SNC), made then Colonel Moumar Gaddafi a targeted by spreading lies of alleged state crimes – but with with no evidence, as outlined in documents released last October by the publication Voltaire. Syria’s President Assad is currently undergoing the exact same treatment, and in the exact same manner.
Babies in incubators: a recycled media hoax
Amazingly, this exact same story was also making the rounds recently in August of 2011, when a similar claim was busy circulating online through various social networks including Twitter in Arabic - the exact same tale of premature babies who died in their incubators when Syrian forces cut off electricity to hospitals during their assault, not in Homs, but on the city of Hama.
Electronic Infidada reported on the August 2011 baby hoax, stating back then, “Evidence suggests it is a cruel hoax, and the pictures of the “dead babies” widely circulated online are false.” They went on to outline parallels between the August faux story and other past regime change PR campaigns:
“URGENT – Syria | The electricity was cut today from the city of Hama, and the outage included the hospitals. Following this, the Shabiha [state militia] deliberately destroyed the electricity generators in the hospitals which led to the deaths of all the premature babies (more than 40 in a single hospital).”
The fact that an award-winning newspaper like the UK’s Independent would use such a shadowy outfit to support one of its most shocking headlined stories on the crisis in Syria – is also surprising in itself. The biggest problem with both seperate claims of dying babies in incubators put forward by the SOHR, and circulated in the corporate media by the likes of The Independent and CNN, is that at no point along the line, has the SOHR been held accountable for what are patently unsubstantiated claims.
Lobbying groups and their governments in-exile are traditionally the source of anti-regime “heart-string” reports which have in the past been passed on for broadcast by major media outlets, which naturally follows with favoring pre-emptive military strike, or as recently seen with Libya – a ‘humanitarian intervention’.
We can see how the corporate media will knowingly run sensationalist, unverified accounts of human rights events in countries like Libya and Syria, but what about out elected leaders? Will they too run with these same wild claims in order to make their public case for war?
No doubt. Members of the NATO governments have also been assigned their roles in making intervention possible. Britain’s William Hague seems to be running point on the PR campaign for regime change in Syria. Following Russia and China’s veto of the UN’s recent revolution for action in Syria, Hague condemned the decision – and used wild, unverified statistics most likely gleaned from his friend at the SOHR, as reported by the Guardian:
“More than 2,000 people have died since Russia and China vetoed the last draft resolution in October 2011,” he said after the vote. “How many more need to die before Russia and China allow the UN security council to act?”
Journalist Tony Cartalucci reported back in December regarding the clandestine activities of SOHR, adding:
It is quite clear that the “Syrian Observatory for Human Rights” based in London and receiving the entirety of their reports via “phone” & YouTube videos from Syria, is working in coordination with both US-funded NGOs and the British Foreign Minister. Considering that Hague similarly coddled Libyan opposition leaders in London while playing a key role in promoting the NATO attack on Libya and the subsequent installation of a BP oilman as “prime minister,” Abdelrahman’s consorting signifies a verbatim repeat of the now openly fraudulent and genocidal NATO campaign in Libya.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights serves as the exclusive source of “reports” coming out of Syria despite the fact that it is actually, entirely based in London. While it is verified that the NGOs it works in tandem with are US-funded, the Observatory itself fails to publish where its money comes from or the backgrounds of those that constitute its membership. We then, are expected to simply believe on face value a mysterious organization whose head meets with the British government and their unverified “witness accounts” as evidence to initiate military intervention at the cost of potentially millions of lives.
The UN based the whole premise for its Security Council Resolution 1973 for Libya on reports from western-backed Libyan rebels and the NTC. Their wild claims included – unbelievably and highly reported by the western media - that Gaddafi led jet attacks on his own people, and killed more than 6,000 unarmed protester cum civilians in the run up to NATO intervention. This jet claim was needed as a key component in order to get a No Fly Zone included in resolution 1973.
During the run-up to their vote on the matter, no due diligence was carried out by any of the UN member states, which stands to reason, why the whole UN Libyan affair – from beginning to end, was planned and executed as a political operation - hardly of any humanitarian concern.
Here we are again, at another crossroads, so soon after the last one. And like clockwork, the same patterns are emerging to sway western public opinion, this time against President Assad and his Syrian government. It seems that consumers of the press in the west are being force fed another endless diet of false claims designed to sway public opinion in favor of military action by NATO, or NATO-backed allies in Syria, and later in Iran.
This writer has already attempted to contact SOHR via their email address, in order to receive further clarification as to the source of their recent claims that Assad’s security forces are responsible for the death of 18 newborn babies, but have yet to receive any response from the London-based organization.
On the surface, the latest spat between the West and Iran looks like a step closer to war, with tensions reaching a fever pitch on both sides of this potential conflict. Upon closer examination however, present conditions are not particularly ideal for a preemptive strike against Iran by the US and Israel. There is still much money to be made from the current crisis – on both sides, before the winds of war could be unleashed on the region.
Military posturing by the United States and Israel near the Strait of Hormuz reached a new level this week with announcement of Austere Challenge 12, a naval drill which looks designed to apply increased pressure on Iran to abandon their alleged nuclear weapons ambitions. At the same time, Iran has announced it will be shoring up its defensive positions by conducting its own war games in neighboring waters. From a military standpoint, exactly how far and how fast these tensions escalate is still uncertain. There have been a number of key indicators though in the last week that hint at a longer, drawn out affair.
Real military conflict not looking favourable
Unlike Iraq or Afghanistan – two countries which offered little or no real military resistance when attacked by the US, Iran actually has the means to fight back and sustain its defensive position, as well as retaliate regionally, over a long period of time. The first target would be any US naval vessels parked or patrolling regional waters. Such a scenario may lead to a multi-regional World War III condition, and without a doubt, will be hugely unpopular in the West, plunging a global economy into a worldwide depression.
In addition, the US and Israel have yet to secure Syria and eliminate the military might of loyal Iranian allies Hezbollah in Lebanon – which must be done in order for the US and Israel to gain the upper hand regionally. Both these points are key factors in achieving a green light for any preemptive strike against Tehran, and both those lights are currently red.
Most experts are also in agreement that any serious clash between the West and Iran could result in a disruption in the flow of oil to a petroleum-dependent global economy that surely needs it now – more than ever.
These stark realities could be pushing the current standoff closer towards a stalemate, than towards the hot conflict that many mainstream media analysts are expecting to take place between now and spring 2012.
Signals from traditional US military and ‘coalition’ ally Great Britain are also not looking great. Addressing a recent conference entitled, “NATO and the Case for Collective Defense in the 21st Century” at Atlantic Council in Washington, the UK’s Defense Secretary Philip Hammond clearly noted, “We would not be in favor of a preemptive strike on Iran.”
Sanctions will not isolate Iran for long
US-led calls for economic sanctions against Iran may partially isolate Iran politically in the short-term, but they do not have the teeth to sustain enough severe pressure over the long run.
Already this week, South Korea announced that it will still be buying Iranian crude oil in 2012. China is also defying the US call for sanctions, stating its plans to make Iran its second largest oil importer in 2012. In addition to these, another trading partner of Iran – Japan, is expecting to receive an exemption from US penalties on Japanese banks doing business with Iran. “We are not considering banning imports,” Japan Times quoted a Japanese Foreign Ministry late last week.
Major oil companies are also represented throughout America’s elite clique of foreign policy think tanks, and like their corporate siblings in the defense industry, they will also reap huge dividends from the appearance of instability and crisis around the Persian Gulf. Such a ‘strategy of tension’ normally sees winners in those industries which are best placed to benefit.
Unlike the steady dollar slide between 2007-2008 which help drive the oil price spike of over $140 per barrel during the summer of 2008, this week’s oil highs of over $100 per barrel are a direct result of the present war-hype and threats of escalation. This will result in an overnight bumper economy for many of the OPEC petrol nations, as well as the major US oil distribution and retail corporations.
A New Cold War is emerging
The West’s last real military standoff was against the former Soviet bloc which came to a political finale in 1991 following the disintegration of the Iron Curtain. It was the world largest-ever arms race, fueled by 20th Century power politics, played out in the form of a Cold War.
The real winners of this long Cold War between the West and the Soviet bloc were those military defense contractors who became incredibly wealthy and influential as a result of decades of 20th Century global power politics. Their influence remains to this day and already, a handful of companies have reaped incredible rewards from the current protracted diplomatic deadlock with Iran. It is little wonder that some of these same corporations actually dictate most US foreign policy to a large degree, through their own CEO’s and board members that also belong to the dominant US-UK foreign policy think tanks including the Council on Foreign Relations, Chatham House and the Atlantic Council who then dictate their international policy recommendations to Washington and London, whose governments finally adopt these as official foreign policy. Their names include Lockheed Martin, General Electric, Raytheon, Boeing and others.
As the threat of a regional confrontation with Iran continues to drag itself out, the trend of profitability looks likely to continue as most of the West’s regional partners continue to both re-arm and upgrade their own defense systems – with US-made hardware.
The Arab GCC countries like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Kuwait have already begun their process of re-arming. In December 2011, the United States announced a $3.48 billion arms deal with the UAE, which included state-of-the-art THAD missile defense systems, as part of a wider American effort to build up missile defenses among Gulf allies to counter Iran. On December 29, the White House announced that it was sending nearly $30 billion worth of F-15 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, part of a $60 billion package – the largest arms deal in history.
In addition, the US and Saudi Arabia signed a $1.7 billion deal earlier in 2011 to boost their Patriot missile batteries, and Kuwait put in their order to purchase 209 GEM-T missiles – at a cost of $900 million. These regional missile defense strategies will also need land-based interceptors to knock out incoming missiles, backed up by a detection network… aboard a group of US Navy Aegis-class warships. By the time this current round of re-arming is complete, US defense contractors will have seen a rise in profits which also means a rise in their all-important share prices.
Still, despite all these significant acquisitions on the part of the GCC so far, by no means do they provide blanket protection from an Iranian retaliatory strike against the Arabian Western allies. They are simply the latest chapter in that time-honoured tradition of Washington stoking regional tension on one hand, and America’s arms industry bleeding the Arab states of hard cash for still more expensive military hardware on the other. The Arabs can naturally afford to pay for their new military hardware from a sustained surge in world oil prices…. caused by the continued hyping of a potential military confrontation which could block the oil industry’s most key transit waterway – the Strait of Hormuz. One can see the geopolitical relationship between these events happening right now.
Here we have the ideal set of conditions for a New Cold War to emerge in the early 21st Century – one where the Western Axis powers of the US, Europe, Israel and the Emirates sit on one side, and Iran, Syria, China, Russia sit on the other. This Cold War will be more about sub-regional dominance in terms of economics – natural gas, mineral and trade relationships, than it will about the political ideologies that seemed to dominate the infamous 20th Century face-off.
How long this current stalemate drags on is anyone’s guess right now, but one thing is for sure – while it continues to brew, there are still massive profits to be made by key players in both the global defense and petroleum industries.
As the US and Iranian governments escalate tensions in the already volatile Straits of Hormuz, and China and Russia begin openly questioning Washington’s interference in their internal politics, the world remains on a knife-edge of military tension.
Far from being a dispassionate observer of these developments, however, the media has in fact been central to increasing those tensions and preparing the public to expect a military confrontation. But as the online media rises to displace the traditional forms by which the public forms its understanding of the world, many are now beginning to see first hand how the media lies the public into war.
As the New Year comes to a close and 2012 beckons, Alex Jones talks to Infowars writer and 21st Century Wire editor Patrick Henningsen about the current geopolitical scene, also discussing Monsanto’s GM plague, Syria, Iran and the digital revolution. Watch in two parts:
Below is a clip from Al Jazeera’s Empire, where Professor Dan Plesch and Patrick Henningsen discuss the cause and effect scenarios should the US and Israel go in unilaterally with an attack on Iran. Watch here:
If anyone has any doubts as to how out of touch the Arab League is with regards to Arab events, they only have to digest this twisted piece of theater taking place in Cairo.
Members of the Arab League scheduled an emergency meeting today in Cairo, Egypt to work out what exactly they ‘must do about Syria’ – while outside of their conference (in Egypt, the world’s largest Arab country), a shamelessly violent US-backed military junta continues to crack the heads of genuine unarmed protesters in Tahrir Square.
Meanwhile, no harsh words from Hillary Clinton, no democracy speeches from Obama, and certainly no condemnation from the Arab League – most of whom run military-style dictatorships back in their respective countries. Certainly, US puppet Bahrain can shoot who it wishes in its streets, and you will hear nothing from the Arab League. And certainly, not a peep from the UN.
The Arab League has now publicly adopted the official Western propaganda line for this latest contrived stage of a so-called “humanitarian crisis” in Syria, claiming that President Bashar al-Assad has refused to end a ‘brutal crackdown on anti-government protesters’ in his country.
The irony here is only eclipsed by the hypocricy of the pro-American Arab League. As Syria struggles to maintain order with CIA and MI6-backed armed rebels running wild inside its own borders, Egypt’s unelected military regime have murdered 35 and seriously injured over 1,500 of its own unarmed citizens protesting the military’s illegal occupation of the country’s civilian government. In addition, Syria’s own neighbor Turkey are hosting a 15,000-strong force of paramilitary insurgents called the “Free Syria Army” over Syria’s Turkish border.
This confirms the existence of an armed force operating with the covert approval of the Turkish government, and follows evidence that their attacks inside of Syria are placing Syrian security forces into body bags. Any US, UK, French or Israeli support of this armed insurrection is a clear violation of international law, and as is the case for Libya, this should be viewed as a crime against humanity. But do not expect the UN to raise any objections here.
Somehow, the hypocrisy does not seem to bother Arab Leaguers, as Egyptian blood runs through the streets of Cairo. Instead, the Arab League stick to Washington, London and Tel Aviv’s agenda for Syria of economic sanctions, a No-Fly Zone and of course, regime change.
While Syria fights against a western-backed civil war in its own country, the UN are no where to be found – a sad international situation which brings back memories of another useless international ‘league’ – The League of Nations, founded as a result of the Paris Peace Conference that ended the First World War.
During Hitler’s rise to military dominance, the League aptly stood by and did nothing as Germnay’s aggressive war machine marched eastward through Czechoslovakia, and later Poland in the early days of WWII. The result was the that feeble nature of the League of Nations was exposed on a global stage. Historically, the parallels between the reasons for the League’s collapse and today’s castration of the United Nations in New York have never been so stark:
On 23 June 1936, in the wake of the collapse of League efforts to restrain Italy’s war against Abyssinia, British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin told the House of Commons that collective security had…
“failed ultimately because of the reluctance of nearly all the nations in Europe to proceed to what I might call military sanctions … The real reason, or the main reason, was that we discovered in the process of weeks that there was no country except the aggressor country which was ready for war … [I]f collective action is to be a reality and not merely a thing to be talked about, it means not only that every country is to be ready for war; but must be ready to go to war at once. That is a terrible thing, but it is an essential part of collective security.”
. Ultimately, Britain and France both abandoned the concept of collective security in favour of appeasement in the face of growing German militarism under Hitler.
In 2011, and under the cloak of UN Resolution 1973, the recent illegal war and destruction of sovereign state Libya by Western Axis powers and their NATO military coalition, demonstrated the same policy of appeasement by UN member states towards the ambitions of the US, Britain, France, Italy and Israel – whose joint strike led to the dismembering of the Libyan state and its government. Following the war, Western nations have shamelessly moved in to carve up Libya’s state assets and bolster its new unelected government.
Recent reports of the detention of 7,000 people in prisons and camps by the anti-Gaddafi forces, along with hundreds of reports of brutal rape, torture and extrajudicial assassination by NATO-backed Libyan rebels – all met with a deafening silence from the UN – as it was indeed complicit in the looting and raping of Libya by the West under the cynical disguise of “humanitarian intervention”.
UN member states will normally stand back, preferring not to challenge the US and partner Israel, for fear of economic and political reprisals. This policy of economic and political retribution was demonstrated recently as the US threatened the withdraw the funding for the UN’s own UNESCO branch following a successful application for international recognition via UNESCO membership by fledgling state Palestine. Ultimately, the US retains control over the UN, because the US pays for most it, as well as hosts UN operations. This fact alone nearly compromises the entire institution.
Following the US lead, Israel proceeded to pile on additional punitive measures against Palestine, threatening to build an additional 2,000 settler homes and freeze the transfer of Palestinian tax funds – all for joining UNESCO.
Despite the open corruption and illegal coercion present through the Palestine debacle, once again, the UN and its member states remained mostly silent – further proof of the non functionality of the UN. Those who did voice an objection, would never be able to back it up with any real action, as the issue becomes swallowed into the UN’s internal politics and its impressive multi-billion dollar bureaucracy.
The Arab League has shown itself to be nothing more than a passive functionary of US and NATO nation interests in the Middle East, and the UN has become nothing more than a newLeague of Nations, and acts a passive functionary of US and its partners.
Unfortunately for the Syrians – as it was for Libya, regime change in Syria and the carving up of that country’s resources and national assets are a high priority now for the US and its Axis powers. And nothing can stop them, save for another powerful nation intervening on Syria’s behalf.
Certainly, the UN will not do anything this time but flash a green light as it did with Libya, making the UN one of the biggest obstacles to international justice and material accomplice to injustice the world has ever seen.
The Arab League and the UN are simply two bad apples of the same bunch, and both need to exit from the world stage sooner than later.
The Syrian affair is just the latest in a string of UN-sponsored, Western regime change and economic rape project by the West – nothing more.
Meanwhile real reformers are beaten to death in Cairo, right in front of our eyes.
It’s not so much we are witnessing history unfold, as it is Washington’s hypocrisy unravel before our eyes.
Inside the beltway, things like original ideas, humility, honor and integrity appear to be in very short supply.
Washington, known to be infested with lobbyists and politico busy-bodies who run from one briefing to the next, from one press conference to the next, in a drive to conduct their symphonies of policy and PR in a desperate bid to remain relevant to their constituents- the American people. Granted, some try harder than others, but most fall short of their constitutional oath.
Double standards are a big problem for America's leadership right now.
They are the high-flying political class in the United States, an elite tribe who are so detached from reality that it’s become an almost embarrassment to watch. The Orwellian doublespeak which is currently emanating out the State Department’s office of nation-building is hitting new highs.
Our leaders grandstand on the TV, visibly fawning Tunisia and Egypt during the much celebrated Arab Spring. As the bells of freedom were still ringing in the distance, Egypt soon found itself sucked into the vortex of a military dictatorship – while Tunisia shifted from secular to hard-line Islamic Sharia society.
Washington still felt it was somehow ‘winning’ when they went on to demand that both Libya and Syria to ‘show restraint and let democracy take it’s natural course’.
Even if – armed insurgents were burning down government buildings in Tripoli, and or firing upon and killing police in Syria.
President Obama confidently that other governments “must be responsive for their citizens aspirations”.
Even if – those citizens are being backed and financed by the US State Department, Whitehall, Élysée Palace and allies Qatar.
Secretary of State Clinton ordered Libya to “respect the universal rights of its own people, including the right to free expression and assembly.”
Even if – her own government cannot even manage to cater for this right any more, even in the United States of America.
Hillary later cracked a cruel joke about Gaddafi’s assassination.
Watch this video and you will have a decent idea of what hypocrisy means today in the US:
In the US, the erosion of our basic rights provided by the Bill of Rights and US Constitution has been a long and painful process.
9-11 gave us the naziesque Patriot Acts I & II – two bills which have achieved nothing since their inception, and yet, are still as enthusiastically championed by Barack Obama as they were by GW Bush.
The anti-war demonstrations of 2003 gave us “free speech zones”, in country where freedom to assemble, where and when you want, used to be a god-given inalienable right. Now its a mere privilege.
The G20 demonstrations of 2009 gave us police brutality on a mass militarized scale, not seen before domestically. Thousands of paramilitary police where shipped in to Pittsburgh, sound canons were deployed and students were chased down, tear gassed and beaten in what came to known as forced compliance.
Even an obvious avant garde demonstration, a silent disco at the Jefferson Memorial saw police beat and injure Americans who were only trying to test the vital signs of a US Constitution in critical condition.
What elite political performers like Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton are really saying to the governments of Libya, and now Syria, and later to Algeria and Iran- is that you cannot put down an armed insurrection in your countries, but in the US we reserve the right to beat and shoot our own citizens, and arrested without charges- if they attempt to demonstrate in public.
In other words, “Do as we say, not as we do.”
President Obama will have the world believe that America is less brutal to its own citizens than the rest of the world, but as hundreds of thousands of people in the Occupy Movement now get their first taste of civil disobedience, it is inevitable that some will be unlucky enough to get the hard end of the state’s velvet fist. Indeed, Occupy protester and Iraq veteran Scott Olsen found this out the hard way in Oakland last week when he suffered a fractured skull at the hands of local police.
And the Occupy Movement will also learn very quickly that we cannot ignore the rights which our US political elite have been denying the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and Libya for all these years now- and expect to be afforded those same rights by the same criminal US government here at home.
We are witnessing a culture in decline- a people who for the most part, are having trouble remembering what made it unique in the first place, and so many who can think of nothing more frightening than to be called to live up to any of those ideals – who forgot what freedom actually is.
The level of Washington’s hypocrisy, its arrogance – has never been on display so vividly as it is today. It’s a clear indication of a society in decline.
What will surely accelerate this decline is a mass chunk of Americans who still to this day, remain unaware that these changes in society have even taken place. And more to the point, too many are ever willing to profit, or make their daily crust from this hyper-security police state. This is one of the signs of a civilization in decline.
It’s obvious to even a casual observer that our super-celebrity politicians have permanently lost touch with reality, and sadly, this tribe will never come back to the source of liberty.
It’s high time for Americans to stop making excuses for the lobbyists, the wars, the pork, the bailouts- and for selling out the principles which once made it an inspiration to so many others around the world. Stop making excuses for elite bureaucrats and Wall Street tycoons.
This is a watershed moment in history.
Will America get it right, or descend further into a ridiculous police state?
It was inevitable that a movement which has struggled to agree on a manifesto, would in the end, do the bidding of the very elite globalist powers that they are demonstrating against to begin with.
Instead of achieving freedom from Central Bank debt enslavement, naive Occupiers appear to have taken the bait, pulling the mob towards endorsing a global taxation system, and one to be administered…by a brand new global government body.
As the Occupy Movementsets its sights on the upcoming G20 Summit in France on November 3-4, its globalist handlers behind the scenes have succeeded in carefully directing its crowds towards the Holy Grail of all socialist super-states - the celebrity supported, trendy “Robin Hood Tax”, also known as a Tobin Tax, a financial transaction tax levied on all transactions involving shares, bonds and derivatives. Or so the plan goes…
The resulting funds, they claim, counted in the hundreds of billions of dollars per year, would go toward popular Bono-led liberal heart-string fantasy causes like ‘reducing poverty in the third world’, social programs and surprise, surprise… “combating climate change” and perhaps even saving polar bears – a move that would surely please desperate men like Al Gore (but a complete waste of money seeing that man-made global warming has already been thoroughly discredited).
ROBIN HOOD TAX: Utopian idea, taxing rich and taxing carbon - will not work.
The rallying cry for this globalist wet dream is coming directly from the supposed brain-child of the Occupy Movement, the globalist-backed and Soros foundation-funded organization, Ad Busters, quietly shepherding its flock towards one of the biggest revenue spinning and control scams ever conceived.
“Canada-based Adbusters wants the Occupy Wall Street protest movement against economic inequality to take to the streets to call for a 1 percent tax on such deals ahead of a November 3-4 summit of the Group of 20 (G20) leading economies in France.
“Let’s send them a clear message: We want you to slow down some of that $1.3 trillion easy money that’s sloshing around the global casino each day — enough cash to fund every social program and environmental initiative in the world,” the activist group said on its website, www.adbusters.org.
Adbusters put out the initial call for Occupy Wall Street and since protesters set up camp in a park in New York City’s financial district on September 17, they have inspired solidarity demonstrations and so-called occupations around the world.”
One might feel some compassion for Occupiers, keen to grab all of that “easy money sloshing around”… if only utopia was that easy.
Ultimately, any Robin Hood Tax will most likely end up in a giant fund to “ensure that banks are adequately capitalized”, and one which will be used to bailout, or insure big bank losses and trillions in gambling derivative bets gone bad.
In reality, a Robin Hood Tax does just the opposite of what its name represents. Rather than stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, it is designed to steal more money through taxation from working people- money which will end up directly in the hands of institutions like the US Federal Reserve and its cartel of Wall Street banks.
In addition, such a power to levy tax will bring with it new taxes bolted on later, blanket financial taxes will eventually end up on the end of things like cash withdrawls and money transfers. Sadly, this is how governments behave.
OWS losing the plot
It’s very easy for the throngs of young protesters to fall into an obvious socialist, or collectivist trap, as many naive young Americans are unable, or unwilling, to liberate themselves from the Hegelian dialectic which tells them that the government must raise taxes and spending in order to achieve any social progress.
It’s obvious that the number one and two problems in America are a lack of jobs and creeping inflation, a duel plague which is fueling a dropping standard of living in the US and Europe- and ultimately dissent globally. Occupiers are not asking why their government allowed US corporations to ship millions of American jobs off shore, and why it never bothered to offer incentives to foreign corporations to relocate in the US. Likewise Occupiers have not identified that their own Federal Reserve is robbing them every day by creating artificial scarcity, driving the kind of boom and bust cycles which ultimately rob Americans of their life saving and assets.
Rather than demand an additional new monster system of taxation, Occupiers should first be asking if any government can be trusted to spend their tax revenue responsibly. Certainly today it seems that pork rules in Washington and Obama’s Administration is presiding over the biggest budget deficit in the history of the US. This should be cause for alarm, yet, it’s hardly mentioned by the Occupy crowd.
Incredibly, the Occupy Movement are not asking the government to cut spending- and become fiscally responsible.
They might also consider asking their beloved government in Washington – and elsewhere around the globe too, where all their tax revenue actually goes right now. If they understood that at present, their Federal Income Tax(in some cases, collected at gunpoint by the IRS) goes directly to paying off the debt which their government owes on each and every dollar printed by the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank.
Any market tax would have to go global in order to keep industry within participating nations. Occupiers would surely be wary of allowing a Federal or global government to erect a new massive taxation system, no? Apparently, one of the great features of the Occupy Movement in America is their overwhelming loyalty and trust in the Obama administration. If it were a Republican administration in power, then it is certain that demonstrations would take a much more anti-government tone.
The OWS has, to their credit, urged protesters to close their bank accounts and transfer their money to credit unions with a bank transfer day on November 5th, certainly a step in a positive direction. But is it enough?
Real Solution: Disengage with the financial system
It’s an age-old saying, “If you’re not happy, then get out”. OWS protesters should be talking about taking steps to completely disengage from the system that enslaves them- this might include removing their hard-earned liquidity from the system by canceling all credit cards, not taking out student loans, or pointless car and electronic loans.
Another obvious trap of the Robin Hood Tax is that it could(and will) be used target all transactions – including pension funds. Occupiers might instead consider not paying in their pensions and 401K’s into stock market-indexed retirement funds. For older protesters, it might be a case of shifting their IRAs into gold and silver-backed retirement funds, disallowing the speculators and gamblers on Wall Street to decimate their life savings any further.
Has their been any call for a mass protest against the IRS, who continue to defy the US Constitution by robbing each and every working American of their labor and property in order to service their national debt to the Federal Reserve cartel? Certainly this would rock the establishment overnight. The Occupy Movement would have struck the most serious- and the most obvious blow imaginable, one which would finally call into question the legitimacy of the unconstitutional Federal income tax.
Or even better, Occupiers might consider taking the total expenditure of the US military domestically and overseas , and divide by the number of working Americans, giving them an individual figure of money which each protester will refuse to hand over to the Federal government in taxation- a peace protest combined with an intelligent liberty move by free men and women.
Sadly, none of these kind of truly revolutionary ideas have come out of the Liberty Square protests. Instead, all they could manage in the end, is to latch on to one of the most misleading and tyrannical establishment schemes, TheRobin Hood Tax - where the 99% end up giving the 1% even more of their hard-earned cash. It addresses the symptom of the financial collapse, not the problem, leaving all the old players still in play to create more bubbles and make fortunes by crashing new markets.
Ironic, but this is the current direction which the angry, but naive OWS mob is being led.
If any of the 99% truly believe that the top-tier banks would happily give away billions per year to the new Robin Hood Taxman, then think again.
As history shows, their new tax will likely be imposed more stringently on small to medium size institutions and fund managers in an effort to drive out any competition to the mega banks- who already enjoy cuts to corporate income tax, and in some cases, pay no tax at all. Big banks are safe, but smaller competition will surely be hit hard by a Robin Hood Tax- ensuring the current hierarchy stays exactly as it is. This has always been the way when blanket government regulations and punitive taxes come into play.
In typically disingenuous fashion, when a mob has no clear objective it normally plays follow the leader. In this case, the leader is foundation-funded Ad Busters, who have supplied the directionless, brainless OWS movement with the very master plan to its own demise.
There, the Supreme General Assembly has taken the bait.
Gaddafi has exited the stage, and now Syria looks to be the next target for the regime change gang in Washington DC.
Viewers need to pay attention to the popular talking points coming out through the mainstream globalist media via Washington designed to sway public opinion against the ruling government in Damascus. Watch the following interview segments hosted by Aaron Dykes, with Patrick Henningsen reporting for Infowars.com on events going on across the Middle East and North Africa:
21st Century Wire
