Click here to submit Tips... contact me... information or news articles you wrote that pertain to this site!
American Immorality Is At A Peak
When Chris Floyd is at his best, as he is below, he puts things in perspective for readers that they otherwise never confront. Obama has won reelection, and his supporters think that somehow things are going to be different. Fat chance.
While evil continues to envelop America, the public is focused on CIA director General Petraeus’ resignation. The FBI spied on him and found that he was having an affair with his biographer, a woman 20 years younger than his 60 years.
What is it with Americans and sex? Why is an illicit affair the ONLY reason for removing someone from political office? Why is it that government officials, presidents and vice presidents included, can violate US statutory law and torture people, spy on Americans without the necessary warrants, murder US citizens without due process, confine US citizens to dungeons for life without evidence and due process of law, start multi-trillion dollar wars on the basis of contrived allegations that have no basis in fact, murder civilians in seven countries, overthrow legitimate governments, and all of these massive crimes against humanity can be accepted as long as no one in Washington gets any sex out of it? Is this feminism’s contribution to American morality?
Has the United States, the hero of the cold war, become in its behavior and motivations the enemy it overcame? Why does Washington want hegemony over the world? Why does Washington want this hegemony so badly that Washington is willing to murder women, children, aid workers, husbands and fathers, village elders, anyone on earth including its own American heroes?
What is the evil that drives Washington?
How can the evil that drives Washington be contained, stamped out, prevented from destroying the human race?
What does the world do when it confronts unbridled evil, which is what Washington is?
The Reality of the “Lesser Evil”
Is This Child Dead Enough for You?~ Chris Floyd
To all those now hailing the re-election of Barack Obama as a triumph of decent, humane, liberal values over the oozing-postule perfidy of the Republicans, a simple question:
As we all know, these drone missiles are, like the president who wields them, super-smart, a triumph of technology and technocratic expertise. We know, for the president and his aides have repeatedly told us, that these weapons — launched only after careful consultation of the just-war strictures of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas — strike nothing but their intended targets and kill no one but “bad guys.” Indeed, the president’s top aides have testified under oath that not a single innocent person has been among the thousands of Pakistani civilians — that is, civilians of a sovereign nation that is not at war with the United States — who have been killed by the drone missile campaign of the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.
Yet somehow, by some miracle, the missile that roared into the residential area where Naeemullah lived did not confine itself neatly to the house it struck. Somehow, inexplicably, the hunk of metal and wire and computer processors failed — in this one instance — to look into the souls of all the people in the village and ascertain, by magic, which ones were “bad guys” and then kill only them. Somehow — perhaps the missile had been infected with Romney cooties? — this supercharged hunk of high explosives simply, well, exploded with tremendous destructive power when it struck the residential area, blowing the neighborhood to smithereens.
As Wired reports, shrapnel and debris went flying through the walls of Naeemullah’s house and ripped through his small body. When the attack was over — when the buzzing drone sent with Augustinian wisdom by the Peace Laureate was no longer lurking over the village, shadowing the lives of every defenseless inhabitant with the terrorist threat of imminent death, Naeemullah was taken to the hospital in a nearby town.
Dead enough not to disturb your victory dance in any way? Dead enough not to trouble the inauguration parties yet to come? Dead enough not to diminish, even a little bit, your exultant glee at the fact that this great man, a figure of integrity, decency, honor and compassion, will be able to continue his noble leadership of the best nation in the history of the world?
Do you have children? Do they sit your house playing happily? Do they sleep sweetly scrunched up in their warm beds at night? Do they chatter and prattle like funny little birds as you eat with them at the family table? Do you love them? Do you treasure them? Do you consider them fully-fledged human beings, beloved souls of infinite worth?
How would you feel if you saw them ripped to shreds by flying shrapnel, in your own house? How would you feel as you rushed them to the hospital, praying every step of the way that another missile won’t hurl down on you from the sky? Your child was innocent, you had done nothing, were simply living your life in your own house — and someone thousands of miles away, in a country you had never seen, had no dealings with, had never harmed in any way, pushed a button and sent chunks of burning metal into your child’s body. How would you feel as you watched him die, watched all your hopes and dreams for him, all the hours and days and years you would have to love him, fade away into oblivion, lost forever?
What would you think about the one who did this to your child? Would you say: “What a noble man of integrity and decency! I’m sure he is acting for the best.”
Would you say: “Well, this is a bit unfortunate, but it’s perfectly understandable. The Chinese government (or Iran or al Qaeda or North Korea or Russia, etc. etc.) believed there was someone next door to me who might possibly at some point in time pose some kind of threat in some unspecified way to their people or their political agenda — or maybe it was just that my next-door neighbor behaved in a certain arbitrarily chosen way that indicated to people watching him on a computer screen thousands of miles away that he might possibly be the sort of person who might conceivably at some point in time pose some kind of unspecified threat to the Chinese (Iranians/Russians, etc.), even though they had no earthly idea who my neighbour is or what he does or believes or intends. I think the person in charge of such a program is a good, wise, decent man that any person would be proud to support. Why, I think I’ll ask him to come speak at my little boy’s funeral!”
Is that what you would say if shrapnel from a missile blew into your comfortable house and killed your own beloved little boy? You would not only accept, understand, forgive, shrug it off, move on — you would actively support the person who did it, you would cheer his personal triumphs and sneer at all those who questioned his moral worthiness and good intentions? Is that really what you would do?
Well, that is what you are doing when you shrug off the murder of little Naeemullah. You are saying he is not worth as much as your child. You are saying he is not a fully-fledged human being, a beloved soul of infinite worth. You are saying that you support his death, you are happy about it, and you want to see many more like it. You are saying it doesn’t matter if this child — or a hundred like him, or a thousand like him, or, as in the Iraqi sanctions of the old liberal lion, Bill Clinton, five hundred thousand children like Naeemullah — are killed in your name, by leaders you cheer and support. You are saying that the only thing that matters is that someone from your side is in charge of killing these children. This is the reality of “lesser evilism.” [http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/to-honor-value-of-single-life-first.html]
Before the election, we heard a lot of talk about this notion of the “lesser evil.” From prominent dissidents and opponents of empire like Daniel Ellsberg and Noam Chomsky and Robert Parry to innumerable progressive blogs to personal conversations, one heard this basic argument: “Yes, the drone wars, the gutting of civil liberties, the White House death squads and all the rest are bad; but Romney would be worse. Therefore, with great reluctance, holding our noses and shaking our heads sadly, we must choose the lesser evil of Obama and vote accordingly.”
I understand that argument, I really do. I don’t agree with it, as I made plain here many times before the election. I think the argument is wrong, I think our system is so far gone that even a “lesser evil” is too evil to support in any way, that such support only perpetuates the system’s unconscionable evils. But I’m not a purist, not a puritan, not a commissar or dogmatist. I understand that people of good will can come to a different conclusion, and feel that they must reluctantly choose one imperial-militarist-corporate faction over the other, in the belief that this will mean some slight mitigation of the potential evil that the other side commit if it took power. I used to think that way myself, years ago. Again, I now disagree with this, and I think that the good people who believe this have not, for whatever reason or reasons, looked with sufficient clarity at the reality of our situation, of what is actually being done, in their name, by the political faction they support.
But of course, I am not the sole arbiter of reality, nor a judge of others; people see what they see, and they act (or refrain from acting) accordingly. I understand that. But here is what I don’t understand: the sense of triumph and exultation and glee on the part of so many progressives and liberals and ‘dissidents’ at the victory of this “lesser evil.” Where did the reluctance, the nose-holding, the sad head-shaking go? Should they not be mourning the fact that evil has triumphed in America, even if, by their lights, it is a “lesser” evil?
If you really believed that Obama was a lesser evil — 2 percent less evil, as I believe Digby once described the Democrats in 2008 — if you really did find the drone wars and the White House death squads and Wall Street bailouts and absolution for torturers and all the rest to be shameful and criminal, how can you be happy that all of this will continue? Happy — and continuing to scorn anyone who opposed the perpetuation of this system.
The triumph of a lesser evil is still a victory for evil. If your neighborhood is tyrannized by warring mafia factions, you might prefer that the faction which occasionally doles out a few free hams wins out over their more skinflint rivals; but would you be joyful about the fact that your neighborhood is still being tyrannized by murderous criminals? Would you not be sad, cast down, discouraged and disheartened to see the violence and murder and corruption go on? Would you not mourn the fact that your children will have to grow up in the midst of all this?
So where is the mourning for the fact that we, as a nation, have come to this: a choice between murderers, a choice between plunderers? Even if you believe that you had to participate and make the horrific choice that was being offered to us — “Do you want the Democrat to kill these children, or do you want the Republican to kill these children?” — shouldn’t this post-election period be a time of sorrow, not vaulting triumph and giddy glee and snarky put-downs of the “losers”?
If you really are a “lesser evilist” — if this was a genuine moral choice you reluctantly made, and not a rationalization for indulging in unexamined, primitive partisanship — then you will know that we are ALL the losers of this election. Even if you believe it could have been worse, it is still very bad. You yourself proclaimed that Obama was evil — just a bit “lesser” so than his opponent. (2 percent maybe.) And so the evil that you yourself saw and named and denounced will go on. Again I ask: where is the joy and glory and triumph in this? Even if you believe it was unavoidable, why celebrate it? And ask yourself, bethink yourself: what are you celebrating? This dead child, and a hundred like him? A thousand like him? Five hundred thousand like him? How far will you go? What won’t you celebrate?
And so step by step, holding the hand of the “lesser evil,” we descend deeper and deeper into the pit.
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following.
In the 2012 edition of Occupy Money released this month, Professor Margrit Kennedy writes that a stunning 35% to 40% of everything we buy goes to interest. This interest goes to bankers, financiers, and bondholders, who take a 35% to 40% cut of our gross domestic product.
That helps explain how wealth is systematically transferred from Main Street to Wall Street. The rich get progressively richer at the expense of the poor, not just because of “Wall Street greed” but because of the inexorable mathematics of our private banking system.
This hidden tribute to the banks will come as a surprise to most people, who think that if they pay their credit card bills on time and don’t take out loans, they aren’t paying interest. This, says Kennedy, is not true. Tradesmen, suppliers, wholesalers and retailers all along the chain of production rely on credit to pay their bills. They must pay for labor and materials before they have a product to sell and before the end buyer pays for the product 90 days later. Each supplier in the chain adds interest to its production costs, which are passed on to the ultimate consumer. Kennedy cites interest charges ranging from 12% for garbage collection, to 38% for drinking water to, 77% for rent in public housing in her native Germany.
Her figures are drawn from the research of economist Helmut Creutz, writing in German and interpreting Bundesbank publications. They apply to the expenditures of German households for everyday goods and services in 2006; but similar figures are seen in financial sector profits in the United States, where they composed a whopping 40% of US business profits in 2006. That was five times the 7% made by the banking sector in 1980. Bank assets, financial profits, interest, and debt have all been growing exponentially.
Exponential growth in financial sector profits has occurred at the expense of the non-financial sectors, where incomes have at best grown linearly.
Israeli, U.S. Elections and Gaza Strikes - More Than Coincidence
New Israeli Assault On Gaza: Hypocrisy Of Slaughter - Israel's Orwellian Account Of Gaza Campaign
It’s probably the world’s most tragic never-ending story.For almost 65 years now, Israel has been bombing, maiming and humiliating the Palestinians, bulldozing their homes and placing Gaza in lock-down mode turning it into the world’s largest concentration camp.
In the latest outbreak of violence this week both sides are accusing the other, “You started it!”Who knows? At this stage, does it really matter anymore who started the violence?
On Wednesday 14th, an Israeli helicopter attack killed Hamas military wing leader Ahmed Jabari, triggering a violent reaction from Hamas which rained little rockets over southern Israeli towns, which in turn brought in more Israeli air attacks killing 19, injuring 100 and leaving six children dead.
Israel ended an effective truce with armed groups in Gaza yesterday when it extrajudicially executed Hamas military commander Ahmed al-Jabari. Israel says its military activity in Gaza is aimed at stopping crude rocket fire in Gaza. Between the beginning of the year through 6 November, 71 Palestinians were killed by Israeli forces in Gaza while 19 Israelis were injured by Palestinian fire from Gaza and none killed, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
Senator Dianne Feinstein Moves To Ban ALL Assault Rifles, High Capacity Magazines, and Pistol Grips
Mac Slavo: The agenda no longer needs to be hidden from public view. With President Obama winning another term and democrats taking control of the Senate, the move to fundamentally change America from within has begun – with a vengeance.
Now, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), who has championed gun control in her state for decades and co-wrote the original assault weapons ban enacted by the federal government in the 1990's, wishes to bring even more stringent federal mandates to the land of the free.
What is being proposed by Feinstein is the most significant attack on the second amendment in history.
Beyond the Dutroux Affair
The reality of protected child abuse and snuff networks
1)This site continues to be visited by Belgian and Dutch Justice departments, just as many major news outlets. There's never been one complaint about the pictures used.
2)Some of the earlier used America-based sources to compare the Dutroux Affair with have been deleted. Not reliable.
3)For all the people who have faith in the alternative media: Alex Jones only published this article (as a news item) on Prison Planet after paying him $500. And only then did several other major "alternative" sites pick it up (Rense; D.I. in the UK; H.M. in Canada). But interestingly, soon thereafter, the amount of money offered didn't seem to matter anymore. After some initial support years back for several superficial articles, they mostly refuse to link to the infinitely more detailed and more documented articles about the Pilgrims, the 1001, Le Cercle or the follow-up articles of Beyond Dutroux. In other words, ISGP does not support any other writer or publisher on these topics... not one. Other (alternative) writings tend to be superficial, partly wrong, undocumented, and mixed in with typical disinformation that for some reason is being spread on an ever increasing scale via websites, blogs and forums (the Cercle crowd has already given some insight on that). See the FAQ for details.
4)On the internet you can find several prominent skeptical articles about the only witness who ever went public: X1. It's obvious that these articles still have a huge capacity to seed doubt. Just know that all of the claims they make have been based on manipulations, as this article will show.
GMO babies now being engineered in labs under guise of preventing incurable disease
(NaturalNews) Life, whether human or otherwise, is no longer sacred to many of today's scientists, who actually believe that tampering with the genetic blueprints of living beings will somehow improve humanity and create a better world. And this disturbing reality became ever more apparent recently when genetic butchers at Oregon Health & Sciences University (OHSU) announced their discovery of a way to manipulate the DNA of human embryos to obstruct normal gene transfer and create genetically "superior" babies that are supposedly less prone to disease.
According to the Chicago Tribune, these genetically-modified (GM) embryos are not yet intended to actually produce real, living children -- although it is only a matter of time before this nightmare becomes a reality (remember the movie Gattaca?) -- but they will be used in the present to investigate how babies of the future might avoid certain inherited diseases. By combining the genes of one man with those of two women, OHSU researchers claim they have devised a way to effectively replace "defective" genes with normal ones.
All observers admit it: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did everything in his power to destroy President Barack Obama’s political career.
President Obama should return the favor.
He should destroy Netanyahu’s career in the biggest, most spectacular way possible – by busting Netanyahu for 9/11.
The major US and international media, owned and operated by cheerleaders for Israel, are so terrified by this prospect that they are trying to pretend it is “business as usual” between the US and Israel – maybe even between Obama and Netanyahu – despite the obvious blood feud between the US president and the Israeli prime minister.
One exception: The post-election Yahoo News story headlined “Obama victory spells trouble for Israel’s Netanyahu.” The author, Jeffrey Heller, writes: “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces an even more awkward time with Washington and re-energized critics at home who accused him on Wednesday of backing the loser in the US presidential election. With Iran topping his conservative agenda, Netanyahu will have to contend with a strengthened second-term Democratic president after four years of frosty dealings with Barack Obama and a rift over how to curb Tehran’s nuclear program.”
Heller’s article frames the dispute between Obama and Netanyahu according to the Israeli propaganda template. It suggests that Obama’s only two choices are (a) to launch a major war against Iran, as desired by Netanyahu, or (b) to continue imposing sanctions to starve the Iranian people, in order to punish Iran’s leaders for pursuing a peaceful nuclear energy program – a program that is completely legal under international law, unlike Israel’s massive, illegal nuclear weapons program!
These may be the only two choices that are acceptable to Israel. But they are not the only choices available to Americans.
American strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski, in his 1999 book The Grand Chessboard, pointed out that the most important single element of a viable US strategy in Eurasia is friendship with Iran. What Brzezinski did not state outright, but left for the discerning reader to discover “between the lines,” is that Israel is badly damaging US national interests by forcing the US to be an enemy of Iran.
Israel hates Iran because Iran’s leaders, like the vast majority of the people of the Middle East, do not accept apartheid Israel as a legitimate state.
That is indeed a problem for Israel. But why is it a problem for the US?
If the US maintained good relations with Iran – not a client state relationship as existed under the Shah, but a friendship-of-equals based on mutual respect and shared interests – the US strategic position in Eurasia would be greatly enhanced.
Then why is the US starving the Iranian people, murdering Iranian scientists, paying MEK terrorists to bomb and kill large numbers of innocent people, and generally doing everything it can to hurt Iran? The short answer: Because Israeli interests dictate US Mideast policy.
Some apologists for Israel claim that it’s really about US dollar hegemony. They say that Iran’s move to sell oil and gas in other currencies threatens the US dollar, which is why the US is so antagonistic to Iran.
What these critics don’t understand is that the US dollar is not the US dollar. It’s the Zionist dollar.
The US dollar is issued by the Federal Reserve, a private corporation owned by the biggest “American” banks. But those banks are not really American. The leading banksters who create American dollars out of nothing, backed by nothing, are ethnically Jewish and primarily loyal to the state of Israel.
To put it simply: The Rothschild-led bankster cartel has been occupying Palestine since 1917. And it has been occupying the USA since the Federal Reserve coup d’état of 1913.
So the US and Iran are actually allies, not adversaries, in the battle against Zionist dollar hegemony.
The Zionist bankster cartel that prints our currency out of thin air can easily print enough money to buy up virtually all major Western media. That’s why most Westerners have unconsciously accepted a pro-Israel world-view.
But today, thanks to Netanyahu’s overweening chutzpah, Obama and allied forces in the US military and intelligence communities have a chance to do what no US President since JFK has dared to do: Tell Israel to go to hell.
All Obama has to do is go on television and announce: “We have discovered credible evidence of Israeli involvement in 9/11 and the subsequent cover-up. As of this moment, I am declaring a state of national emergency based on undeniable evidence that our nation has been covertly attacked and occupied by a hostile foreign power. I have ordered the FBI to arrest several thousand suspected Israeli agents, and I will be forming a second 9/11 Commission, led by former President Carter, to expose the full, horrible truth about the 9/11 attacks.”
Such “scorched earth” payback from Obama would be exactly what Netanyahu deserves.
Netanyahu, a close personal friend of confessed 9/11 criminal Larry Silverstein, went on record immediately after 9/11 chortling that the attack on America was “very good.”
Then he quickly added that what he really meant was that 9/11 was very good for Israel.
It is time for President Obama to make Netanyahu eat those words. It is time for the President to shove those words right back down Netanyahu’s throat. It is time for Barack Obama to demonstrate that he is President of the proudly independent United States of America, not just a puppet of Israel and its bankster mafia. It is time for President Obama to end Israel’s stranglehold on American finance, American media, and American foreign policy.
It is time for President Obama to give Netanyahu the payback he has worked so hard to earn.
But does President Obama have the courage, integrity and statesmanship to save the world’s biggest power, the USA, from a filthy little country run by certifiable madmen?
Does he have the courage to do the one thing that will end the phony “war on terror,” and earn him his thus-far-undeserved Nobel Peace Prize? Does he have the vision to do the one thing that could win him “greatest president ever” status in the history books?