a six minute video of an interview with william cooper concerning bush and clinton in which he speaks of our current reality which ain't what the tv tells you it is;
https://youtu.be/5G-M8GqJvcY
Friday, December 7, 2018
the title of this article by caitlin johnstone is: Nikki Haley To Be Replaced By Blonde Version Of Nikki Haley,
and i think that's a good intro for the stuff below;
When UN Ambassador Nikki Haley announced her upcoming resignation from the position, establishment loyalists spent the day awash with grief that the Trump administration was losing one of its remaining moderate Republican voices.
“Nikki Haley, ambassador to the United Nations, has resigned, leaving the administration with one less moderate Republican voice,” tweeted the New York Times, without
defining what specifically is “moderate” about relentlessly pushing for
war and starvation sanctions at every opportunity and adamantly
defending the slaughter of unarmed Palestinian protesters with sniper
fire.
“Too bad Nikki Haley has resigned,” tweeted law
professor turned deranged Russia conspiracy theorist Laurence Tribe.
“She was one of the last members of Trumplandia with even a smidgen of
decency.”
Well I’ve got some good news for those who lamented the loss of a virulent psychopathic war whore
as UN ambassador, and bad news for any anti-interventionist Trump
voters who’ve been secretly hoping this administration would use Haley’s
vacancy to move in a less hawkish direction: you’re getting another one
just like her. According to multiple sources,
Trump has confirmed early rumors and selected State Department
Spokeswoman and former Fox News pundit Heather Nauert as Haley’s
replacement.........https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2018/12/07/nikki-haley-to-be-replaced-by-blonde-version-of-nikki-haley/
carroll quigley is one of the most aware individuals of the last century and also quite influential in the 'right' circles, including his influence on clinton, so what follows is his take on the state of 'our' government and society;
Summary of Prof. Carroll Quigley’s
Last Public Lecture Given Months Before He Died:
“The 3rd. Oscar Iden Lecture 1978”
By Christopher M. Quigley B.Sc., M.M.I.I., M.A.
“This shift from customary conformity to decision making by some other power, in its final stages, results in the dualism of almost totalitarian imperialism and an amorphous mass culture of atomised individuals.
The fundamental, all pervasive cause of World instability today is the destruction of communities by the commercialization of all human relationships and the resulting neurosis and psychosis.
Another reason for the instability of the Western system is that two of the main areas of sovereignty are not included in the state structure: control of credit/banking and corporations. These two elements are therefore free of political controls and responsibility.
They have largely monopolized power in Western Civilization and in American society. They are ruthlessly going forward to eliminate land, labour, entrepreneur-management skills and everything else the economists once told us were the chief elements of production.........https://www.theburningplatform.com/2018/12/06/summary-of-carroll-quigleys-last-public-lecture-by-christopher-quigley/
Summary of Prof. Carroll Quigley’s
Last Public Lecture Given Months Before He Died:
“The 3rd. Oscar Iden Lecture 1978”
By Christopher M. Quigley B.Sc., M.M.I.I., M.A.
“This shift from customary conformity to decision making by some other power, in its final stages, results in the dualism of almost totalitarian imperialism and an amorphous mass culture of atomised individuals.
The fundamental, all pervasive cause of World instability today is the destruction of communities by the commercialization of all human relationships and the resulting neurosis and psychosis.
Another reason for the instability of the Western system is that two of the main areas of sovereignty are not included in the state structure: control of credit/banking and corporations. These two elements are therefore free of political controls and responsibility.
They have largely monopolized power in Western Civilization and in American society. They are ruthlessly going forward to eliminate land, labour, entrepreneur-management skills and everything else the economists once told us were the chief elements of production.........https://www.theburningplatform.com/2018/12/06/summary-of-carroll-quigleys-last-public-lecture-by-christopher-quigley/
should you be one of those 'consumers' who regularly congratulate yourself on how much you keep up with the 'news' you may have had a different take on the bits in the first paragraph, however you'd be entering muddy water to conclude the tv told you the full story;
The contrived outrage regarding Putin’s high five with Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad Bin Salman obscures the fact that Russia-Saudi and the Saudi-US relations are completely different.
The US relationship with Saudi Arabia, a longstanding outrage among those who take US foreign policy rhetoric about “human rights” seriously, is widely in question. The slaughter of Jamal Khoshoggi, a journalist associated with the Washington Post, carried out in a particularly brutal manner, was hard to overlook. The fact that the USA sells huge amounts of weapons and purchases huge amounts of oil from a despotic monarchy that still practices public beheadings, while normally overlooked, has suddenly become a widespread topic of debate. The atrocities in Yemen, currently committed by the Kingdom in effort to restore puppet leader Mansour Hadi, are suddenly now up for debate as well, with liberals suddenly being outraged by crimes they previously ignored.
However, those forces that seek to change the conversation, have latched on to clever conversational diversion. Yes, while the US government’s relationship with the Saudi monarchy is one of billions of dollars in weapons sales and contracts with Wall Street’s four supermajor oil monopolists, Russian President Vladimir Putin is being blasted for giving a “high five” to the Saudi Crown Prince at the G20 in Argentina.
The clip has been widely circulated by Russia’s detractors as “proof” that Russia’s relationship is somehow the moral equivalent of the US relationship with the Saudi autocrats. Not only has the short video clip circulated the web, but a confused sketch on the popular US comedy sketch took it to even further, confused levels.
The reality is that Russia’s foreign policy and Saudi foreign policy
simply do not coincide. Russia is supporting the Syrian Arab Republic,
Saudi Arabia supports those working to violently overthrow it. Russia is
friendly with the Islamic Republic of Iran and closely financially tied
to it, while Saudi Arabia seeks to isolate Iran and pushes anti-Shia
sectarianism among the Muslims of the world....https://www.globalresearch.ca/hand-gestures-or-human-lives-russia-saudi-arabia-and-the-united-states/5661967
The contrived outrage regarding Putin’s high five with Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad Bin Salman obscures the fact that Russia-Saudi and the Saudi-US relations are completely different.
The US relationship with Saudi Arabia, a longstanding outrage among those who take US foreign policy rhetoric about “human rights” seriously, is widely in question. The slaughter of Jamal Khoshoggi, a journalist associated with the Washington Post, carried out in a particularly brutal manner, was hard to overlook. The fact that the USA sells huge amounts of weapons and purchases huge amounts of oil from a despotic monarchy that still practices public beheadings, while normally overlooked, has suddenly become a widespread topic of debate. The atrocities in Yemen, currently committed by the Kingdom in effort to restore puppet leader Mansour Hadi, are suddenly now up for debate as well, with liberals suddenly being outraged by crimes they previously ignored.
However, those forces that seek to change the conversation, have latched on to clever conversational diversion. Yes, while the US government’s relationship with the Saudi monarchy is one of billions of dollars in weapons sales and contracts with Wall Street’s four supermajor oil monopolists, Russian President Vladimir Putin is being blasted for giving a “high five” to the Saudi Crown Prince at the G20 in Argentina.
The clip has been widely circulated by Russia’s detractors as “proof” that Russia’s relationship is somehow the moral equivalent of the US relationship with the Saudi autocrats. Not only has the short video clip circulated the web, but a confused sketch on the popular US comedy sketch took it to even further, confused levels.
the empire may be about to get us into more hot water and this time could be the last if things play out as they might, and at the link below you can get more of the story;
With the infamous Gulf of Tonkin incident as historical precedent, there’s a real possibility that the U.S. government could stage an incident in the Persian Gulf that would allow the Trump administration to push for military intervention in the Persian Gulf targeting Iran.
***
Earlier this week, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani repeated an earlier threat to block ships from leaving the Persian Gulf if the U.S. government continues to seek to block Iranian oil exports. Rouhani’s comments came a day after the U.S. sent an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf on Monday in an apparent “show of force,” ending the longest period the U.S. had gone without an aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf over the past two decades.
While some – at the time – anticipated that the U.S.’ deployment of the aircraft carrier was an empty threat meant to intimidate Iran, new developments suggest that there may soon be a military showdown in the Persian Gulf’s strategic Strait of Hormuz as Iranian and regional media have reported that the Iranian Navy has deployed a large naval contingent of 58 fleets to the northern waters of the Indian Ocean near the Persian Gulf. According to Iranian naval commander Rear Admiral Hossein Khanzadi, the naval contingent is closely monitoring the area as they await orders from the Iranian government.
The large deployment follows President Rouhani’s recent comments delivered on Tuesday in Iran’s Semnan Province. Rouhani stated that
With the infamous Gulf of Tonkin incident as historical precedent, there’s a real possibility that the U.S. government could stage an incident in the Persian Gulf that would allow the Trump administration to push for military intervention in the Persian Gulf targeting Iran.
***
Earlier this week, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani repeated an earlier threat to block ships from leaving the Persian Gulf if the U.S. government continues to seek to block Iranian oil exports. Rouhani’s comments came a day after the U.S. sent an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf on Monday in an apparent “show of force,” ending the longest period the U.S. had gone without an aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf over the past two decades.
While some – at the time – anticipated that the U.S.’ deployment of the aircraft carrier was an empty threat meant to intimidate Iran, new developments suggest that there may soon be a military showdown in the Persian Gulf’s strategic Strait of Hormuz as Iranian and regional media have reported that the Iranian Navy has deployed a large naval contingent of 58 fleets to the northern waters of the Indian Ocean near the Persian Gulf. According to Iranian naval commander Rear Admiral Hossein Khanzadi, the naval contingent is closely monitoring the area as they await orders from the Iranian government.
The large deployment follows President Rouhani’s recent comments delivered on Tuesday in Iran’s Semnan Province. Rouhani stated that
“If someday, the United States decides to block Iran’s oil [exports], no oil will be exported from the Persian Gulf.”Rouhani had made a similar threat earlier this year in July. An estimated 30 percent of the world’s seaborne oil passes through the Persian Gulf and thus the Gulf’s chokepoint – the Strait of Hormuz – which Iran claims to “completely control.”.......https://www.globalresearch.ca/persian-gulf-of-tonkin-ingredients-all-in-place-for-us-war-on-iran/5662075
we may be about to give up our first amendment rights to free speech to allow our israeli masters the comfort of silence concerning their crimes;
Democrat Ben Cardin, a senator from Maryland and a ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is determined to sneak through anti-BDS legislation during the lame duck session of Congress.
Most Americans are either ignorant or vaguely aware of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions aimed at Israel for its criminal treatment of the Palestinians. This is because the movement is scantily covered by the corporate propaganda media, but also because millions of Americans couldn’t care less what happens to the Palestinians, even though the Israeli military and its ethnic cleansing program are funded in large part by their tax dollars.
Liberty is dead in America. Prior to the American Revolution, the colonies boycotted British goods. In 1774, the First Continental Congress called for a boycott and this was enforced by new committees authorized by the Congress.
Boycotts are legend—from Gandhi organizing a boycott of British goods to the bus boycotts in Montgomery and Tallahassee during the Civil Rights movement. The predecessors of today’s Zionists used a boycott to stop the importation of German products in the US, Britain, Poland, and Mandatory Palestine. Additionally, Jews imposed a boycott on Henry Ford in the 1920s.
All of that is largely forgotten, mostly because Americans don’t do history and their political understanding is sculpted and curtailed by the state and its propaganda media. The corporate media has managed to portray BDS as rabid antisemitism. .....https://www.globalresearch.ca/anti-bds-derangement-syndrome/5662045
Democrat Ben Cardin, a senator from Maryland and a ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is determined to sneak through anti-BDS legislation during the lame duck session of Congress.
Most Americans are either ignorant or vaguely aware of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions aimed at Israel for its criminal treatment of the Palestinians. This is because the movement is scantily covered by the corporate propaganda media, but also because millions of Americans couldn’t care less what happens to the Palestinians, even though the Israeli military and its ethnic cleansing program are funded in large part by their tax dollars.
Liberty is dead in America. Prior to the American Revolution, the colonies boycotted British goods. In 1774, the First Continental Congress called for a boycott and this was enforced by new committees authorized by the Congress.
Boycotts are legend—from Gandhi organizing a boycott of British goods to the bus boycotts in Montgomery and Tallahassee during the Civil Rights movement. The predecessors of today’s Zionists used a boycott to stop the importation of German products in the US, Britain, Poland, and Mandatory Palestine. Additionally, Jews imposed a boycott on Henry Ford in the 1920s.
All of that is largely forgotten, mostly because Americans don’t do history and their political understanding is sculpted and curtailed by the state and its propaganda media. The corporate media has managed to portray BDS as rabid antisemitism. .....https://www.globalresearch.ca/anti-bds-derangement-syndrome/5662045
this is longer than what i usually post but it contains much wisdom and several videos. in this article by the saker you will learn why its not russians we must be wary of;
The AngloZionist propaganda machine is constantly warning us that Russia is about to invade some country. The list of candidates for invasion is long and ranges from Norway to the Ukraine and includes the Baltic statelets, Poland and even countries further West. Of course, we are also told that NATO and the US are here to prevent that. Well, thank God for them, right?
But what is conspicuously missing from this narrative is a discussion of the possible Russian motives for such a military move. Typically, we are merely told that Russia has broken the European post-Cold War order and borders by “annexing” Crimea and by sending military forces into the Donbass. Anybody with an IQ at room temperature or above by now realizes that both of these claims are total bunk. The ones who indeed broke the post-Cold War international order and borders were the NATO member states when they used military force, in complete illegality, to break-up Yugoslavia. As for the people of Crimea, they had the opportunity to vote about their future in a referendum, very much unlike the inhabitants of Kosovo which had no such opportunity. As for the 08.08.08 war, even the Europeans who eventually, and very reluctantly, agreed that it was, in fact, Saakashvili who started this conflict, not Russia.
But let’s set all this aside and assume that the Russian leaders would not hesitate to use military force again if it was to their advantage. Let’s assume that, yes, the Russians are up to no good and that they might well try to bite-off some other piece of land somewhere in Europe.
Such an assumption would immediately raise a crucial question: why would the Russians want to do that?..........https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/12/no_author/why-russia-wont-invade-the-ukraine-the-baltic-statelets-or-anybody-else/
The AngloZionist propaganda machine is constantly warning us that Russia is about to invade some country. The list of candidates for invasion is long and ranges from Norway to the Ukraine and includes the Baltic statelets, Poland and even countries further West. Of course, we are also told that NATO and the US are here to prevent that. Well, thank God for them, right?
But what is conspicuously missing from this narrative is a discussion of the possible Russian motives for such a military move. Typically, we are merely told that Russia has broken the European post-Cold War order and borders by “annexing” Crimea and by sending military forces into the Donbass. Anybody with an IQ at room temperature or above by now realizes that both of these claims are total bunk. The ones who indeed broke the post-Cold War international order and borders were the NATO member states when they used military force, in complete illegality, to break-up Yugoslavia. As for the people of Crimea, they had the opportunity to vote about their future in a referendum, very much unlike the inhabitants of Kosovo which had no such opportunity. As for the 08.08.08 war, even the Europeans who eventually, and very reluctantly, agreed that it was, in fact, Saakashvili who started this conflict, not Russia.
But let’s set all this aside and assume that the Russian leaders would not hesitate to use military force again if it was to their advantage. Let’s assume that, yes, the Russians are up to no good and that they might well try to bite-off some other piece of land somewhere in Europe.
Such an assumption would immediately raise a crucial question: why would the Russians want to do that?..........https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/12/no_author/why-russia-wont-invade-the-ukraine-the-baltic-statelets-or-anybody-else/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)