Tuesday, December 30, 2014

Chain Reaction of Problems Coming In 2015: “Collapse Will Be On A Scale That Is Many Magnitudes Greater Than 2008″


"While losing 50,000 or even a million jobs will have a major impact on consumer spending, and thus the economy, the real problem is the massive amount of leveraged bets and debt currently in the system. There are trillions of dollars of derivatives and leverage at play in financial markets, much of it centering around the oil & gas industry. Should the price of oil remain at these levels or go even lower then a lot of major financial institutions are going to be in trouble."



[SHTF Plan]If you’re like most Americans, then you are absolutely loving the price you paid this week for a gallon of gas. Just a couple of years ago it was not uncommon to see a $75 price tag for filling up your car. Today, you might be driving off for half that amount.

On the surface the recent drop in the price of oil has been a huge boost to America’s pocket books. But according to some analysts we shouldn’t be too quick to celebrate. The U.S. Oil and Gas industry has seen incredible job growth during the recession, with nearly 800,000 new jobs being attributed to domestic fracking and drilling expansion. At over $100 barrel, there was plenty of money to go around.

But with a sub-sixty dollar price point, it’s quite possible that all economic hell is about to break loose.

For many it has already begun.

Thousands of recently highly paid workers have been laid off after the oil price plummeted 50 percent in 2014. At least four American oil-producing states are already facing budget problems due to decreasing oil revenues.

[...]

In a study published last year, the Council on Foreign Relations warned the largest job losses caused by sharp decline in oil prices are going to take place in North Dakota, Oklahoma and Wyoming, where the number of drilling rigs is decreasing.

[...]

According to Tom Runiewicz, a US industry economist at IHS Global Insight, if oil stays around $56 a barrel till the middle of the next year, companies providing services to oil and gas industry could lose 40,000 jobs by the end of 2015, while oil and gas equipment manufacturers could slash up to 6,000 jobs.

These workers can earn more than $1,700 a week, much higher than the average $848 a week payment for other workers, the WSJ reported. When experienced workers lose their highly paid jobs, they stop paying their bills.

Source: RT


Those are the conservative estimates and they are based on a $56 price point, which is almost exactly where we are today. But Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations have suggested the price could drop to $40 or even as low as $20.

In such a scenario we could easily see widespread layoffs in an industry that currently employs over 10 million Americans.

But that’s not even the worst of it.

While losing 50,000 or even a million jobs will have a major impact on consumer spending, and thus the economy, the real problem is the massive amount of leveraged bets and debt currently in the system. There are trillions of dollars of derivatives and leverage at play in financial markets, much of it centering around the oil & gas industry. Should the price of oil remain at these levels or go even lower then a lot of major financial institutions are going to be in trouble.

In a recent interview with King World News, John Ing says that not only did Congress remove financial safeguards when they passed their latest budget bill, but by doing so they left America susceptible to a disaster that will make 2008 look like a dress rehearsal.

While everybody appears to be celebrating the record highs on Wall Street, we are also seeing a loss of public trust. One key example of this loss of public trust is when you look at the $1.1 trillion spending bill in the U.S., where there was the dilution of the Dodd-Frank Act which now allows for bail-ins in the United States… This will lead to disastrous consequences…

[...]

Meanwhile, the derivatives monster has gotten even bigger. With the drop in the oil price we have yet to see the impact of the credit default swaps and what this will mean for the stability of the global financial system.

This will certainly set off a chain reaction of problems in 2015.

[...]

The 2008 collapse was just a dress rehearsal compared to what the world is going to face this time around. This time we have governments which are even more highly leveraged than the private sector was.

So this time the collapse will be on a scale that is many magnitudes greater than what the world witnessed in 2008.

Full Interview: King World News via Steve Quayle


On top of all the other problems being faced by Americans – low wages, lackluster job growth, increased medical care costs, rising prices on essential goods, and more taxes to name a few – could the sudden drop in the price of oil could be the trigger that sends the whole thing crashing down?

As we saw in 2008 it can happen quickly. Within a matter of a few weeks trillions of dollars in wealth were vaporized and America fell into it’s worst recession since the 1930′s.

This time, as John Ing notes, the magnitude of the crash will be significantly worse and even the U.S. Treasury Department has warned that the system is so volatile that should there be even a single hiccup in our government’s ability to borrow money it would lead to a catastrophic effect lasting more than a generation.

America sits on the brink of the largest financial and economic collapse in the history of the world and the recent drop in the price of oil could be the Black Swan no one saw coming.

Those who fail to position themselves accordingly could experience serious damage to their wealth and well-being if and when this happens. Time is running short and now is the time to prepare. After the panic starts it will be too late.


CDC issues flu vaccine apology: this year's vaccine doesn't work!


[Natural News]For the first time we can remember, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are going on the record, saying the flu vaccine won't work this year. The warning comes just before the busiest part of flu season, in January and February. Unfortunately, there won't be any refund for any of the patients or insurance companies who spent money on flu shots earlier this fall.

But don't worry. Just when you thought perhaps the CDC could boost their credibility, they found a way to put a sales pitch on the end of their warning. The CDC says if you do come down with the flu, there's a cure. It's just going to cost more money. Money that will end up profiting pharmaceutical giants, GlaxoSmithKline and Roche. CDC officials are urging doctors to prescribe two specific antiviral medications for any patients who come in with flu symptoms.

Just last week, the CDC issued a warning, prompting Americans to take the flu vaccine if they haven't already. Health officials said they had 160 million flu shots on the shelves and ready to go. But just earlier this week, Italy launched an official investigation after about a dozen people died within 48 hours of getting the flu shot. Their national health agency issued an immediate warning, saying DON'T take the vaccine. Here in America, the CDC isn't going that far. In fact, they found a way of turning this failed vaccine into a promotion for yet another big pharma drug.

Here's the news report view:




And here's an original laboratory research report from Natural News earlier this year. I personally conducted the ICP-MS heavy metals analysis of these flu vaccines and have the raw count data to prove it. Mercury particle counts at atomic masses 200, 201 and 202 were through the roof on these laboratory tests.

Don't you find it astonishing that it takes a private ICP-MS laboratory with no ties to government funding, universities or the FDA to finally test flu vaccines and report the truth? (To my knowledge, Natural News is the only news organization in the world that owns a cutting-edge private mass spectrometry instrument and uses it for scientific research in the public interest...)

Flashback: Flu vaccines laboratory confirmed to contain crazy high concentrations of mercury
Mercury tests conducted on vaccines at the Natural News Forensic Food Lab have revealed a shockingly high level of toxic mercury in an influenza vaccine (flu shot) made by GlaxoSmithKline (lot #9H2GX). Tests conducted via ICP-MS document mercury in the Flulaval vaccine at a shocking 51 parts per million, or over 25,000 times higher than the maximum contaminant level of inorganic mercury in drinking water set by the EPA.(1)

The tests were conducted via ICP-MS using a 4-point mercury calibration curve for accuracy. Even then, the extremely high level of mercury found in this flu shot was higher than anything we've ever tested, including tuna and ocean fish which are known for high mercury contamination.

In fact, the concentration of mercury found in this GSK flu shot was 100 times higher than the highest level of mercury we've ever tested in contaminated fish. And yet vaccines are injected directly into the body, making them many times more toxic than anything ingested orally. As my previous research into foods has already documented, mercury consumed orally is easily blocked by eating common foods like strawberries or peanut butter, both of which bind with and capture about 90% of dietary mercury.

Here are the actual results of what we found in the influenza vaccine from GSK (lot #9H2GX):

Aluminum: 0.4 ppm
Arsenic: zero
Cadmium: zero
Lead: zero
Mercury: 51 ppm

All tests were conducted via calibrated, high-end ICP-MS instrumentation as shown in these lab videos.

Doctors, pharmacists and mainstream media continue to lie about mercury in vaccines
As you take in the scientifically-validated fact that mercury exists at very high concentrations in flu vaccines, keep in mind that most doctors, pharmacists and members of the mainstream media continue to stage an elaborate lie that claims mercury has "already been removed from vaccines."

Never mind the fact that the use of mercury is admitted right on the package containing the vaccine vial. And now, Natural News has scientifically confirmed the mercury content of flu vaccines using high-end laboratory instrumentation. The existence of high mercury in flu shots is irrefutable.

Anyone who claims mercury has been removed from all vaccines is either wildly ignorant or willfully lying. And anyone who would knowingly allow themselves to be injected with mercury is probably already a victim of the kind of brain damage well known to be caused by mercury.


Read more


... Americans' Slipping Sense Of Duty


"In 2014 about a fourth of them said there’s no duty to keep informed, volunteer or speak English."~~ An Associated Press-GfK poll


[Patriot Rising]Americans’ commitment to some traditional obligations of citizenship has slipped.

Americans are a little less likely to ask what they can do for their country these days.

An Associated Press-GfK poll found that the sense of duty has slipped since a similar survey three decades earlier. Civic virtues such as staying informed or serving on a jury don’t seem as important as they once did ? especially among the younger generation.

The findings fit with research that’s been worrying many experts who study civic engagement or advocate for teaching more about civics in school.

“I don’t see any recovery,” said Rutgers University Professor Cliff Zukin. “The people who were 40 two decades ago aren’t as engaged as the people who were 60 two decades ago. This generational slippage tends to continue.”

Here are five things to know about Americans’ sense of civic duty:


CITIZENSHIP’S NOT WHAT IT USED TO BE

Americans’ commitment to some traditional obligations of citizenship has slipped.

An Associated Press-GfK poll repeated questions asked in 1984 about six civic-minded activities: voting, volunteering, serving on a jury, reporting crime, knowing English and keeping informed about news and public issues.

Of the six, only voting and volunteering were embraced about as strongly as three decades ago, when NORC at the University of Chicago posed those questions to Americans on the General Social Survey, but volunteering doesn’t rank very high on the list for many.

While just 28 percent say volunteering is “a very important obligation” that a citizen owes the country, three-fourths of Americans consider voting central to citizenship.

Nonetheless, only about 36 percent of eligible voters turned out for November’s midterms, according to University of Florida Associate Professor Michael P. McDonald’s analysis. That’s the lowest since World War II.


BUT BIG MAJORITIES STILL FEEL AN OBLIGATION

Despite some sliding, Americans still think U.S. citizenship carries some duties as well as rights.

About 9 out of 10 say that reporting a crime you witness, voting in elections, knowing English and serving on a jury when called are at least “somewhat important” obligations.

And each of those is still rated “very important” by a majority. It’s just that, except in the case of voting, those majorities have slipped by an average of about 13 percentage points.

“There are a lot of arguments about how our society has shifted toward a rights focus instead of an obligation focus,” said Scott Keeter, director of survey research at the Pew Research Center. But Keeter isn’t convinced there’s enough evidence to support that conclusion.

“It’s a little early to pull the alarm bells about the demise of our civic culture,” he said.


SENSE OF DUTY LOWEST IN THE YOUNG

Young people are feeling less dutiful, or maybe just showing their libertarian streak.

In every category except volunteering, adults under 30 were less likely than their elders to see any obligation, and also felt less obliged than young people of the past.

In 2014 about a fourth of them said there’s no duty to keep informed, volunteer or speak English.

Young adults felt the most responsibility about reporting a crime: two-thirds said that’s “very important,” and the rest were divided between “somewhat important” and “not an obligation.”

Still, in 1984, their parents’ generation was much more devoted to maintaining law and order ? 86 percent of young adults then called reporting crime “very important.”


Read more


America's debt clock real time

Sunday, December 28, 2014

Christmas Vs Xmas: A Political Reading


"Once the original class origins of the Christmas story were erased and the conflict between the absolutist state and civil society were abolished, the capitalist class inserted its own ‘props’ into the story: the Xmas tree became the site for consumer ‘gifts’; the Xmas ‘stocking’ had to be filled with consumer goods; the Xmas day image required the “happy family” opening up boxes of consumer goods – bought on credit at 20% interest rates."


[Global Research]The fundamental ‘change’, engineered by the capitalist class in pursuit of profits, was to take the ‘Christ Story’ out of Christmas and to convert the weeks before and after into a consumer orgy. Aided and abetted by “secularist allies”, the capitalist class succeeded in eliminating any reference to the Christmas story, including the nativity scene and carols commemorating it, from public spaces. The significant social message, embedded in the Christmas story, is diluted by well-meaning cultural diversity-promoters, who demand ‘equal time for ‘Hanukah’ (a Jewish narrative celebrating war, conquest and the slaughter of ‘apostate-assimilated-Hellenized’ Jews by traditionalists-fundamentalists – an event not even mentioned in the Hebrew Bible) and “Kwanzaa” (a holiday invented in the 1960’s by a cultural black nationalist preaching “self-help”).

In place of the Christmas story, we have been given anachronistic ‘Nordic tales of tree worship’ and ‘gift giving’ by an obese bearded sweat-shop owner employing stunted slave workers *(‘Hi Ho, Hi Ho! It’s off to work we go; we work all day, we get no pay! Hi Ho, Hi Ho!’). This has become the dominant mythology driving the consumerist – profiteering of the global commercial – capitalist production chain.

Over time, it came to pass that ‘Christmas’ commercial sales became the centerpiece of capital accumulation. New and powerful sectors of capital entered the field. Finance capital, particularly credit card companies charging debtors usurious, interest rates over 20% per year, became central to and the principal beneficiaries of the great transformation of the Christmas story.

"Community solidarity, the sharing of food, shelter, learning and fraternal good cheer, in the face of persecution by a criminal state and an avaricious ruling class, defines the spirit of Christmas. The Christmas story affirms the virtues of social solidarity and not individual consumerism. It defines a moment in which the deep bonds of humanity displace the shallow comfort of commodities. It is the celebration of a moment in which the values and virtues of breaking bread in a fraternal community take precedence over the accumulation of wealth."


The new, modern, secular monetized, relativized Christmas story redefined the entire meaning of the holiday.

First, there was the language ‘excision’; the prefix was altered. Christ-mas became Xmas. The X symbol left out what constituted the original narrative and circumstances surrounding the celebration of the birth of Jesus.

Once the original class origins of the Christmas story were erased and the conflict between the absolutist state and civil society were abolished, the capitalist class inserted its own ‘props’ into the story: the Xmas tree became the site for consumer ‘gifts’; the Xmas ‘stocking’ had to be filled with consumer goods; the Xmas day image required the “happy family” opening up boxes of consumer goods – bought on credit at 20% interest rates.

The driving force behind the phony props and imagery is a command headquarters composed of capitalist manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers, market analysts, publicists, consultants, advertisers, investors, factory owners employing a vast army of low paid workers in Asian manufacturing sweatshops and huge corporate retail outlets with minimum wage salespeople. Christmas sales are the major profit maximizing occasion for the entire year: The success or failure of commercial capitalism rides on the profits accrued between November 30 and January 7.

The entire capitalist edifice rests on the notion that “Xmas” is about large-scale buying and selling of consumer goods; it is about ensuring that class inequalities and racial divisions are temporarily blurred; that repressive police state intrusions into the privacy of family life are forgotten and that social solidarity is replaced by an orgy of individual consumerism.

‘Xmas’ is a time to celebrate massive profiteering, based on the indebtedness of the ‘masses’. It is a time for downsized workers to buy imported goods on credit from manufacturers who had relocated to low wage regions: Price consciousness replaces class consciousness. Picketing US retailers, who import from Bangladesh sweatshop death traps, where workers ‘earn’ $25 a month, goes against the ‘Xmas spirit’. ‘Buy and feel free’! It’s a time to be jolly!

The new secular, monetized ‘Xmas’ is a consumer-driven commercial event motivated by profits, advertisement and the mindless worship of ‘the market’. Family and neighborly relations are now tied to the cash nexus: Who buys or receives the most expensive gifts experiences the greatest gratification. ‘Gift giving’ is based on ‘consumer spending’; who could imagine any alternative!

Millions of atomized individuals compete to buy the most commodities that their credit/debit cards can cover. ‘Virtue’ becomes ‘success’ in the frantic engagement with the market. From the perspective of political power, individual consumerist consciousness means submission to ‘the market’ as well as submission to the ruling class, which dominates ‘market relations’.

The entire ‘Xmas’ period highlights the fact that market relations between wage-earning/salaried individuals and commercial/financial elites take precedence over productive (and state) relations between capital and labor. In “the market” the struggle is between consumers over commodities, overseen by commercial capital. In the new Xmas story the consumer is the centerpiece; the market is the mediator of all social relations. The ‘Christ story’ has been relegated to a periphery, if not totally excluded. At most, the story is reduced to a birth scene witnessed by cows, sheep and three ‘Kings’.

The conversion of Christmas into the massive Xmas-market event broadens its consumer appeal, increases sales and profits. Potential consumers from all religions (and the non-religious) can join the consumer orgy. It is not about values, ethics or beliefs – it’s about buying, selling, debt and accumulation. To be a successful commercial event ‘Christians’ must suppress the politics and ethics of the Christ story, which is dramatically opposed to the immersion in the marketplace.

The Politics of the Christmas Story


"The Christmas story does not resonate with the owners, investors and publicists of big commercial enterprises who have converted the multitude into worshipers of their little plastic cards. Taking ‘Christ out of Christmas’ and destroying the joy and fellowship and solidarity of shared humanity embodied in the celebration of the birth of Christ is essential in order to continue to accumulate wealth. Putting the ‘Christ story’ back into Christmas is a step toward defeating consumerist consciousness and recreating social solidarity, so necessary for ending injustice."


The protagonists of the Christmas story, Joseph and Mary, are a working class household living at a subsistence level. Joseph, a carpenter, is partially out of work and earns a minimum wage. They live frugally, spend their meager earnings on essentials and travel cheaply on a donkey. To escape a repressive government they migrate in search of security, hoping to find a new home. The pregnant Mary and her unemployed husband Joseph look for sympathy and solidarity among the poor. They knock on doors but the landlords send them away. Only a poor farmer offers them a place – they can share a barn with the sheep and cows.

In the face of an uncertain future and a troubled present, Mary and Joseph receive material support from local residents in Bethlehem . Three wise men (the Magi or mathematicians from Persia ) are internationalists who travel to greet the new family. They show great concern for the new born baby Jesus by perhaps offering hiss family a scholarship so he can study mathematics and science…. The coming together of local neighborhood people and the three educated “outsiders” to celebrate the birth of Christ and offer support to the homeless family, dispossessed migrants, has been an event for wonder and celebration.

Community solidarity, the sharing of food, shelter, learning and fraternal good cheer, in the face of persecution by a criminal state and an avaricious ruling class, defines the spirit of Christmas. The Christmas story affirms the virtues of social solidarity and not individual consumerism. It defines a moment in which the deep bonds of humanity displace the shallow comfort of commodities. It is the celebration of a moment in which the values and virtues of breaking bread in a fraternal community take precedence over the accumulation of wealth.

The Christmas story, the trials and travails of Mary and Joseph and baby Jesus resonate with millions of American workers today: especially those who have lost employment and been dispossessed of their homes. The Christmas story resonates with the tens of millions of immigrants persecuted and jailed by tyrannical states. The Christmas story resonates with the millions of people of color who are “stopped and frisked” by a militarized police.

The Christmas story does not resonate with the owners, investors and publicists of big commercial enterprises who have converted the multitude into worshipers of their little plastic cards. Taking ‘Christ out of Christmas’ and destroying the joy and fellowship and solidarity of shared humanity embodied in the celebration of the birth of Christ is essential in order to continue to accumulate wealth. Putting the ‘Christ story’ back into Christmas is a step toward defeating consumerist consciousness and recreating social solidarity, so necessary for ending injustice.


America's debt clock real time
Obama In China: Taking Candy From A Baby

Barack Obama meets the Great Wall of Chinese protectionism


"Chinese leader Xi Jinping knows something Barack Obama doesn’t: America is finished. The U.S. economy is an ocean liner holed below the waterline. In the stateroom, the band plays on – but, on the bridge, the outcome is clear."~~Eamonn Fingleton@FORBES Magazine



By Eamonn Fingleton

[FORBES]Chinese leader Xi Jinping knows something Barack Obama doesn’t: America is finished. The U.S. economy is an ocean liner holed below the waterline. In the stateroom, the band plays on – but, on the bridge, the outcome is clear.

With the arguable exception of the late-era Soviet Union, America is sinking faster than any Great Power in history.

As a proportion of national output, America’s foreign debts are already larger than those of any Great Power since the rotten-to-the-core Ottoman empire a century ago. For those who need reminding, the Ottoman empire, which had flourished for more than six centuries, was then within a decade of final collapse.

Because every dollar of current-account deficit (the current account is the largest and most meaningful measure of trade) represents an extra dollar that has to be funded from abroad, America’s foreign indebtedness is now accumulating at a rate of more than $1 billion a day.

There is no way America can export itself back to national solvency. As Xi Jiping knows only too well, this is a matter of technology. As soon as American corporations come up with a more efficient new production technology, they ship it to China or elsewhere overseas where it will boost the productivity of foreign workers. Any corporation that wants to sell in China must not only manufacture there but bring its best technology. Then it is expected to export back to the United States.

"As Chinese leaders know better than anyone, the ultimate issue is American corruption. Washington is actually far more corrupt than Beijing. If you want to get something done in Washington, you do what you do in Jakarta: just slip some money to the right people. The point was made as far back as a generation ago by the prominent Japanese commentator and author Shintaro Ishihara. From an East Asian point of view, the United States is already, in its political dynamics, a Third World country."


All this means that the American economy has passed the tipping point. It is now simply too hollowed out to make a recovery. Even apparently solid U.S. manufacturers like Boeing BA +0.3%, Caterpillar CAT +0.54%, and Corning Glass have long since sourced many of their most advanced components and materials from Japan, Korea, Germany, and other manufacturing-focused nations. (For a closer look at Boeing, click here and here. Much of Boeing’s most valuable technology has long since been transferred to East Asia, not least its avionics and its incomparable wing technology.)

In proceeding full steam ahead towards national bankruptcy, the United States is world history’s ultimate example of the triumph of ideology over commonsense. Beginning in the Eisenhower era, succeeding Washington administrations have bet the farm on ever-freer trade. Supposedly this would strengthen American economic leadership. To say the least, the powers that be in Tokyo, Seoul, and Taipei, as well as in Bonn, Frankfurt, and West Berlin, discreetly laughed at such epochal naïveté.

No nation has understood the stupidity of America’s trade policy more clearly than post-Mao China. On the one hand, American leaders have thrown the U.S. market wide open to Chinese exports. On the other, they have ignored Beijing’s in-your-face blocking of virtually all advanced American exports to China. The United States has been by far the most serious victim of Chinese protectionism.

As Chinese leaders know better than anyone, the ultimate issue is American corruption. Washington is actually far more corrupt than Beijing. If you want to get something done in Washington, you do what you do in Jakarta: just slip some money to the right people. The point was made as far back as a generation ago by the prominent Japanese commentator and author Shintaro Ishihara. From an East Asian point of view, the United States is already, in its political dynamics, a Third World country.

Even South Korea, with just one-seventh of America’s population, is a bigger exporter to China than the United States. On a per-capita basis, South Korea’s China exports are eight times larger than America’s. Korea’s exports moreover consist almost entirely of leading First World goods such as highly miniaturized electronic components, whereas the main things America sells to China are Third World-ish items such as iron ore, coal, and wheat.

This is not to suggest that American brands are absent from China. Actually they are everywhere. But virtually all American-brand goods sold in China are made there — using American production knowhow that, in some cases, has taken the American nation generations to build up. In an egregious sell-out of the American national interest, U.S. corporations now almost reflexively comply with China’s technology demands. Unlike their peers in places like Korea, Japan, Germany, and Taiwan, they have not had much choice: whereas other nations’ governments stand behind their corporations and work hard to stem the leakage abroad of key production technologies, Washington lets the “wisdom” of the market prevail.

"No nation has understood the stupidity of America’s trade policy more clearly than post-Mao China. On the one hand, American leaders have thrown the U.S. market wide open to Chinese exports. On the other, they have ignored Beijing’s in-your-face blocking of virtually all advanced American exports to China. The United States has been by far the most serious victim of Chinese protectionism."


As the New York Times has pointed out, a current example concerns Intel and Qualcomm, which have very similar technologies that China is angling to acquire. From Beijing’s point of view, it is taking candy from a baby. The two American companies can be pitted against one another in the certainty that one or other will soon cave. It is the group versus the individual and in a well-organized groupist society, the group always prevails.

There is a one-way valve here. Key production technologies leak out of the United States: they don’t leak in. Other nations have industrial policies to make sure that their most productive technologies stay at home. By contrast in a latter-day America, corporations have no national loyalty and they have every reason to transfer their technologies abroad. That way they can aim to earn brownie points with foreign governments, not least the communist regime in Beijing. Their executives also max out their stock options.


America's debt clock real time

Monday, May 26, 2014

Boko Haram, Western media and Truth Dissolved

video
Video; courtesy CNN


Photo courtesy CNN



“Whether the Chibok schoolgirls are found or not, the US and western imperialist militaries will use the opportunity to seek a permanent base in the country, and play more roles in the internal security policies. With this will be deeper involvement of western imperialism in the politics and economics of the country. He, who controls the defence, dictates the pace of the politics and by extension controls the economy.”~~Kola Ibrahim

"#BringBackOurGirls masks the reality that Washington’s real mission is to protect corporate theft of Nigeria’s wealth.”~~Danny Haiphong

A couple of years ago, Boko Haram terrorists went on a rampage in Bornu State at the North Eastern part of Nigeria. It was reported that their mission was to destroy all telecommunication masts in that State in their bid to evade capture. They had come to the conclusion that those masts aided in pinpointing their location. In the end, a good number of these telecommunication masts were destroyed in the State and at other localities.

About a month ago, Nigerians had a rude awakening; an ever-changing number of Nigerian girls had been kidnapped from school as they sought to sit for their exams. Both the Nigerian government and witnesses reported they had been evacuated by Boko Haram terrorists into the dreaded Sambisa forest, a cave-littered stronghold and camp for these ruthless terrorists.

One of the girls who reportedly escaped told C.N.N these terrorists came in a convoy of seven lorries. A convoy of seven lorries is a very visible target, especially in the dead of night. It is noisy and in the North Eastern hinterland was sure to leave a continuous cloud of dust in its wake. The sound produced on approach would have served as sufficient alarm to the residents of Chibok and the numerous vigilantes that patrolled those areas.

Photos courtesy NoDisinfo.com

Watching the same C.N.N channel a few days later with my kids, my youngest daughter asked why the girls didn’t call someone for help. I naively told her it was because kidnapped girls don’t have access to telephones. Then to my utter surprise she said “But look, that girl has a black mobile phone!” And indeed she did! My daughter ran up to the TV and said pointing “And that’s another one that seems to be fiddling with a mobile phone too!” I froze as the implications of what had been pointed out to me sank in.


It was Nigeria’s First Lady who first called attention to the fact that perhaps those girls were not kidnapped at all. At the time, people felt she was insensitive and callous. She was shouted down all over the place but there is in fact evidence to suggest that she may have been absolutely right after all. If you can still find this video online, I urge you to take a careful look at the girl in the black hijab and also keep your eyes on the girl in the grey hijab squatting in front and to the right of her. She is the one with the black mobile phone featured on C.N.N.

Photo courtesy CNN

There is no doubt that those girls featured as Nigeria’s kidnapped school children had cell phones. Let us forget for a quick moment that they do not look harassed or stressed out and ignore the fact that they all looked exceptionally well-tended and at ease. The question that nags me most is does Sambisa forest have network service? Which telecommunication service provider would be so foolish as to set up service in the middle of that dense forest, especially consideration that Boko Haram had set about destroying telecommunications masts in Bornu State? Why would Boko Haram tolerate the presence of telecommunication masts in their stronghold and camps knowing as they did it could lead to their capture? Most importantly, why in the world would ruthless terrorists allow kidnapped girls the use of their mobile phones? It just did not add up, something sure smelt like fish.

These observations did not just cause me deep reflections but very serious concern as well. I wanted to know who benefits from all of this. What their motives were and where it was leading us. My country and people have been deeply traumatized by these goings-on. Kids fear for their lives on their way to and back from school. These terrorists have not only terrorized parents but traumatized kids as well.

Kola Ibrahim’s excellent article, Boko Haram and the West’s Military Intervention in Nigeria, brings to life all my suspicions. In it he states “The current messianic status being accorded western imperialist governments of the United States (US), Britain, France, etc as being expressed in major newspapers in the country and internationally, is misplaced and indeed dangerous. Of course, behind the latest imperialist intervention is Nigeria’s bankrupt, corrupt capitalist ruling class, through i[t]s rotten politics, which has failed Nigerians in all areas. While the western governments claim that only a few military and intelligence forces will be involved, the reality is that the country is in [fact] a protracted foreign military hostage.”

Mr. Ibrahim further states “Whether the Chibok schoolgirls are found or not, the US and western imperialist militaries will use the opportunity to seek a permanent base in the country, and play more roles in the internal security policies. With this will be deeper involvement of western imperialism in the politics and economics of the country. He, who controls the defence, dictates the pace of the politics and by extension controls the economy.”

The frightful reality that emerges from the above deduction is especially true if the girls are not found. Not finding these girls would prolong foreign interference and subterfuge in my country. It would create the excuse for these foreign interventionists to entrench themselves and expand their tentacles in areas that leave us open to foreign domination. The longer the search goes on, the deeper and far-reaching this foreign entrenchment becomes.


In another excellent article, “Bring Back Our Girls” Campaign: Reinforcing U.S. Imperialism, the Root of Terrorism in Africa, Danny Haiphong observes that “The #BringBackOurGirls campaign has become the loudest voice for U.S. imperialism and military domination of Africa. Its only message is that the U.S. “do something” – as if America is not already responsible for the death of millions of Africans in Congo, Somalia and elsewhere. #BringBackOurGirls masks the reality that Washington’s real mission is to protect corporate theft of Nigeria’s wealth.”

Mr. Haiphong maintains that “US imperialism is the real terrorist for African people and the root of terrorism in Africa… The rhetoric emanating from the mainstream, corporate campaign reinforces US imperialism in Africa, which essentially is a continuation of hundreds of years of Western colonialism, white power, and neo-colonialism on the continent.”

He notes that “US military intervention finds ideological justification in the Western worldview that claims Africa, and in this case Nigeria, is ungovernable without “aid” from US imperialism. Yet “aid” from US imperialist interests has been happening for years in Nigeria and all that has come from it is more poverty, internal conflict, and land theft.” and he concludes by insisting “So, while some may tweet #BringBackOurGirls, the movement we really need to build is one that demands US imperialism out of Africa all together.”

The claims by Western media that some parents have identified eighty-eight of those girls as their kids simply cannot be true. If it were true C.N.N reporters at Chibok would have been inundated with tribes of parents wailing in agony upon their arrival. When it comes to their children, Nigerian parents are fearless. If they could go into Sambisa forest in pursuit of their kids that fateful night with crude bows and arrows as reported by C.N.N, there would be nothing in this world to stop them from airing their frustrations to the media en block. Fear would never have been an issue.

What we saw were a few recurrent faces repeating the same narrative about government not doing enough to find their kids. Sambisa forest does not have network coverage because Boko Haram members know it is a tool that aids tracking them. Besides, it is unprofitable for telecommunications providers to waste resources mapping out such areas. Wild animals have no use for such facilities.

Clearly then, if these girls were texting on mobile phones, it must follow they were not in Sambisa forest. Also, if they had the freedom to use their mobile phones then too, it must follow they were under no form of duress or captivity. So, what’s going on here? Who are these girls featured by Western media as Nigeria’s kidnapped school girls? Are they even Nigerians? Where did people on the run, plodding ever deeper into Sambisa forest, find the time to make three hundred hijabs for ‘kidnapped’ school girls and sit them for recitals and photo ops? Look at all those girls, no signs of sleep deprivation or fatigue, no stress marks, no tears. In fact, they are as fresh as lilies by the river bed.

If you ask me, it’s all tales from Hollywood told to dissolve the truth.



America's debt clock real time

Thursday, March 27, 2014

Western Unity Against Russia a Masterpiece of Illusion


The crisis in legitimacy for Washington and its coterie of allies stems from the fact that these countries are no longer the economic powers that they once were. The centre of global economic gravity is shifting to the BRICS – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, among other emerging economies. Asia, Africa and Latin America are the future; North America and Europe are the past~~ Finian Cunningham


by Finian Cunningham

When US President Barack Obama opened his tour of Europe this week it had the unmistakable choreography of a scripted set piece: lights, camera, action etc. The storyline is a familiar trope. America, the shining beacon of democracy and human rights, comes to the rescue of European damsels in distress just before they are ravaged by bestial European recidivism for war.

European political figures of increasingly low caliber are indulging this American parody of reality by appearing to unite around Obama’s call for tougher sanctions against Russia. Britain’s David Cameron and his German and French counterparts, Angela Merkel and Francois Hollande, issued warnings of imposing economic penalties on Russian businesses and industries. Lots of bombast and melodrama were on cue, but there was a distinct lack of guts to follow.

For Obama’s European visit this week it seemed more than a coincidence that the president made his first public statement from an Amsterdam museum. The choice of such a rarefied venue to launch Obama’s shuttle diplomacy may at first seem odd.

As the Washington Post reported:

"President Obama delved into a day of diplomacy Monday as he sought to rally the international community around efforts to isolate Russia following its incursion into Ukraine."

And yet the US president chooses a museum to begin this seemingly important diplomatic week? It was Amsterdam’s Rijksmuseum where he pronounced on international law and the need for a unified response to sanction Russian "violation of sovereignty and territorial integrity of other nations".

The American leader’s utterances were made while standing in front of Rembrandt’s masterpiece, The Night Watch. Completed in 1642, the life-size portrait of Dutch soldiers is considered to be among the world’s finest art collection. The painting, by the way, had to be put into secret storage between 1939-45 to save it from damage during World War II.

Obama declared:

"Europe and America are united in our support of the Ukrainian government and the Ukrainian people; we're united in imposing a cost on Russia for its actions so far".

The subliminal message here is: Washington is coming to Europe as a rallying force for good, to defend democratic principles, civilized values and to defeat barbarity. Obama’s presumption has a deep resonance with American mythology of 'exceptionalism' and benign power.

American actor-director George Clooney’s new World War Two film, Monuments Men, is an example of this syrupy American vanity and travesty of history. Clooney’s latest film –– about how a specially assigned American team led a mission to save European art collections from Nazi looting – tends to reinforce the American myth that it was they who rescued Europe from savage war and destruction during the 20th century. American intervention in the First and Second World Wars is, in the 'exceptional' American national mythology, portrayed as a noble sacrifice that pulled Europe back from the brink of nihilism to the light of liberal democracy.

Echoing this contrived chorus line, the Western media are casting Russia, led by Vladimir Putin, as the biggest threat to European peace since the end of the Cold War more than 20 years ago. Never mind the inescapable fact that it was Soviet Russia that largely defeated German fascism in 1945.

But between the simplistic lines, there is plenty of evidence that the Washington-led allies are far from united or confident about their handling of Russia and the recent upheaval over Ukraine.

Firstly, there is a crisis of legitimacy for the so-called Western leaders. When the members of the Group of Seven were later photographed in The Hague huddled around a table with little flags indicating their nationalities, the gathering had all the gravitas of a school canteen. The G7 statement on the cancellation of the planned Group of Eight summit in Russia’s Sochi said:

"We will suspend our participation in the G8 until Russia changes course and the environment comes back to where the G8 is able to have a meaningful discussion."

That doesn’t sound like a statement with conviction. «We will suspend our participation…», not «we ban Russia», betrays a lot of anxious horse-trading among the elitist club to come up with a «unified» statement.


The crisis in legitimacy for Washington and its coterie of allies stems from the fact that these countries are no longer the economic powers that they once were. The centre of global economic gravity is shifting to the BRICS – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, among other emerging economies. Asia, Africa and Latin America are the future; North America and Europe are the past.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was not engaging in churlish politics of envy when he shrugged off the G8 forum as a redundant entity anyway. It is fact.

Thus, from this Western club, the threat of economic sanctions against Russia for alleged violations over Ukraine sounds decidedly hollow and impotent.

The Western crisis of political legitimacy is also manifest among its own public. This week saw a hammering for France’s ruling Socialist Party in local elections and the rise of the anti-establishment and deeply Euro-skeptic National Front. French President Francois Hollande’s personal poll rating has hit an all-time low, and this same chronic disaffection with the political class can be seen in other Western states too. Stagnant economies and record levels of poverty and unemployment are undermining the authority of incumbent Western leaders and governments.

So, despite attempts to muster gravitas and purpose over events in Ukraine and alleged wrongdoing by Russia, the Western public has no appetite to listen to sanctimonious political sermons. How can these politicians find the urgency and financial wherewithal to suddenly throw billions of dollars at Ukraine, when there is so much social need neglected closer to home?

Public disaffection with national governments is extended to the supranational European Union. This also explains the dramatic rise in the National Front in France and the growing popularity of similar anti-EU nationalistic parties elsewhere across Europe. A common theme is contempt for aloof European bureaucrats, who seem more interested in EU enlargement in tandem with ever-more economic austerity for citizens.

The notion that reviled European figures, such as Cameron and Hollande, are photographed with equally despised European bureaucrats Herman Van Rompuy and Jose Manuel Barroso – and that this image is supposed to somehow represent a strong, united popular front for American-led sanctions against Russia is laughable and illusory.

This cabal of politicians may have the appearance of unity, but what does such elite 'unity' mean when they are increasingly diminished in the eyes of their own populations and the rest of the world?

Even within this cabal, the apparent unity is unconvincing. The tougher sanctions that Washington has been pushing for, have so far not been adopted by the European Union – despite the rhetoric.

Notably, German chancellor Angela Merkel pointedly refused to take the provocative line of 'banning' Russia from the G8, which Washington, London and Paris would have preferred. Merkel contradicted the French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, who was earlier insisting that Russia had been suspended from the forum.

Merkel’s less confrontational attitude was also reiterated by Italian Foreign Minister, Frederica Mogherini, who reminded everyone that Russia is "an important [trading] partner" and that a forum for dialogue should not be closed.

Away from the G7 clique, both the Finnish and Belgian governments also cautioned against diplomatic confrontation with Moscow. EU and NATO member Norway said that it was canceling bilateral military arrangements with Russia, but it reportedly added that other areas of relations with Russia were to remain normal. Swiss President Didier Burkhalter said that his country would not be implementing US or EU sanctions against Russian financiers.

Many of the 300 million or so European citizens – in spite of the official attitude of some leaders – are well aware of the importance of bilateral trade with Russia. EU trade with Russia is tenfold the volume that exists between the US and Russia.

Top of the EU-Russian trade is oil and gas, which accounts for some one-third of average EU supply. In the eastern part of the bloc, the Russian supply of gas constitutes 80-100 per cent of total consumption.

Germany’s commercial bond with Russia is of strategic importance, not just for Germany but for the rest of Europe too. German businesses sold $60 billion-worth of goods to Russia last year. Not surprisingly, the German business class is vociferously opposed to any further ratcheting up of sanctions against Russia. Germany’s export group, BGA, says any such move would be "catastrophic" for the more than 6,000 German companies that do business there.

Another German business figure, Eckhard Cordes, the head of the Eastern Committee, a powerful Russia-oriented business lobby, also expressed apprehension at the impact of sanctions. He told German media:

"We have a strategic partnership . . . to bring our peoples together. And now we want to cover ourselves with sanctions? I find that difficult to imagine".

That liability for Europe’s largest economy is an onerous constraint on Merkel. Der Spiegel commented on Merkel’s dilemma:

"Her election victory last autumn was partly the result of her promise to protect Germany from unpleasantness related to the euro [currency] crisis. That is what they are now expecting from Berlin's course on the Ukraine crisis: security and stability".

Across Europe, businessmen, industrialists, workers and the general public understand that the bravado of economic sanctions against Russia – articulated by an increasingly unrepresentative and illegitimate political class – will hurt them the most – in their daily lives. The wider public knows that belligerent elites in Washington, London, Paris and Brussels have much less to lose from pursuing a confrontation with Russia.

Perhaps in decades past, nations could be rallied around a flag with jingoistic political speeches. In today’s globalized economy, that kind of patronizing influence has expired, and any attempt to revive it is viewed with even more contempt.

Paolo Scaroni, the head of Italian energy giant ENI, told the Financial Times in blunt terms:

"We need Russian gas every day. They need our money every year or two years. If, in the middle of a tough winter, we don’t have Russian gas, we are in trouble. But Russia is not in trouble if they get our money the day after".

Scaroni also confirmed what other energy analysts have said recently, namely, that the South Stream natural gas project from Russia to Europe has been thrown into uncertainty over the Ukraine tensions between Moscow and Brussels.

That project promised to boost gas supplies to the EU, which would probably have lowered costs to consumers. Now, thanks to the saber rattling of Washington and its tiny club of EU 'leaders', that project is in jeopardy.

What this points to is a huge disconnect between politicians in Washington and Europe and the wider population. That disconnect stems from deep economic and social issues related to the demise of capitalist society, but the latest debacle with Russia over Ukraine is bringing the public disaffection to the fore.

The Western public also knows that the Western news media are not telling the full story. The latter seem to be more committed to purveying a self-serving narrative for an elitist political agenda rather than revealing what is really at stake with regard to Ukraine.

Russian security measures on its border with Western-destabilized Ukraine and in the constitutionally reunited southern province of Crimea are distorted as monstrous acts of aggression. Russia’s legitimate cautionary national security measures are presented as an evil specter threatening to "splinter Europe" – in the words of German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier.

This cartoon-like portrayal is bereft of salient facts, facts that are known to the public from its access to alternative news media. Such as the fact that Washington and its European allies are the ones who initiated the unrest over Ukraine by overseeing a coup d’état in Kiev on February 23 – after three months of orchestrated street violence. It is Western governments that have violated international law and sovereignty – and not for the first time. The new unelected Western-backed regime in Kiev is composed of neo-Nazis and other fascists who have unleashed chaos and violence across Ukraine – the latest examples being attacks on pro-Russian officials and property, armed robberies of Russia-bound trains and the harassment of neutral media services.

There have been calls for mass murder and terrorism against Russian people by the coup plotters, including the Western elites’ darling pro-democracy princess, Yulia Timoshenko, who was recently caught relishing the idea of "whacking" Russians and turning Russian territory into ash from a nuclear strike.

But don’t let facts get in the way of a good story, as the Western elites might say. And that story is that Europe is nearly at war again because of "old barbaric habits". What’s more, it is America – "the brave, democratic America" – that is once again bringing Europe back to civilized peace and harmony, this time from Russian despotism, as opposed to Nazi fascism of before.

The trouble for Washington and its elite European allies is that the wider public is not buying this hackneyed narrative. The wider public rightly see US-led NATO aggression and lebensraum in Europe as the problem, not alleged Russian expansionism…

On the same day that Obama was lecturing Europeans about international law and civilized norms, his National Security Advisor on Russia, Michael McFaul was writing in the New York Times opinion pages. McFaul, who was recently the ambassador to Russia, wrote an astounding falsification of history in which he declared that Vladimir Putin was "a revisionist autocratic leader [who] instigated this new confrontation… similar to the last century, the ideological struggle between autocracy and democracy has returned to Europe," wrote McFaul. "We [the US] are ready to lead the free world in this new struggle".

This elite Western narrative espoused by Obama and his club of bankrupt European non-entity politicians has by now alienated a global audience at home and around the world. Certainly not in the Rembrandt class, but most people can now see elite Western posturing as a masterpiece of illusion.


America's debt clock real time

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

Paint Thinner in Children's Cereal Exposed

A lot of home builders and painters will know what trisodium phosphate (TSP) is. But a lot of them don't know that they eat it for breakfast!

Even though it appears right on the ingredients label, a lot of people don't realize it's an industrial cleaning agent. It gets worse (see below video), the government doesn't even want you to clean with it because it's considered bad for the environment. It's an okay part of a complete breakfast though!


Nick Brannigan and Vicky LePage hit the streets of Las Vegas again to show people what's up:



America's debt clock real time
My Photo of the Day

Putin playing chess


America's debt clock real time

Sunday, March 23, 2014

Russia under attack


"To neutralize Russia, Washington broke the Reagan-Gorbachev agreements and expanded NATO into former constituent parts of the Soviet Empire and now intends to bring former constituent parts of Russia herself–Georgia and Ukraine–into NATO. Washington withdrew from the treaty that banned anti-ballistic missiles and has established anti-ballistic missile bases on Russia’s frontier. Washington changed its nuclear war doctrine to permit nuclear first strike." ~~Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy


by Paul Craig Roberts

In a number of my articles I have explained that the Soviet Union served as a constraint on US power. The Soviet collapse unleashed the neoconservative drive for US world hegemony. Russia under Putin, China, and Iran are the only constraints on the neoconservative agenda.

Russia’s nuclear missiles and military technology make Russia the strongest military obstacle to US hegemony. To neutralize Russia, Washington broke the Reagan-Gorbachev agreements and expanded NATO into former constituent parts of the Soviet Empire and now intends to bring former constituent parts of Russia herself–Georgia and Ukraine–into NATO. Washington withdrew from the treaty that banned anti-ballistic missiles and has established anti-ballistic missile bases on Russia’s frontier. Washington changed its nuclear war doctrine to permit nuclear first strike.

All of this is aimed at degrading Russia’s deterrent, thereby reducing the ability of Russia to resist Washington’s will.

The Russian government (and also the government of Ukraine) foolishly permitted large numbers of US funded NGOs to operate as Washington’s agents under cover of “human rights organizations,” “building democracy,” etc. The “pussy riot” event was an operation designed to put Putin and Russia in a bad light. (The women were useful dupes.) The Western media attacks on the Sochi Olympics are part of the ridiculing and demonizing of Putin and Russia. Washington is determined that Putin and Russia will not be permitted any appearance of success in any area, whether diplomacy, sports, or human rights.

The American media is a Ministry of Propaganda for the government and the corporations and helps Washington paint Russia in bad colors. Stephen F. Cohen accurately describes US media coverage of Russia as a “tsunami of shamefully unprofessional and politically inflammatory articles.” http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37635.htm

As a holdover from the Cold War, the US media retains the image of a free press that can be trusted. In truth, there is no free press in America (except for Internet sites). See for example: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/12/us-press-freedom-index-2014_n_4773101.html During the later years of the Clinton regime, the US government permitted 5 large conglomerates to concentrate the varied, dispersed and somewhat independent media.The value of these large mega-companies depends on their federal broadcast licenses.Therefore, the media dares not go against the government on any important issue. In addition, the media conglomerates are no longer run by journalists but by corporate advertising executives and former government officials, with an eye not on facts but on advertising revenues and access to government “sources.”

Washington is using the media to prepare the American people for confrontation with Russia and to influence Russians and other peoples in the world against Putin. Washington would love to see a weaker or more pliable Russian leader than Putin.

Many Russians are gullible. Having experienced communist rule and the chaos from collapse, they naively believe that America is the best place, the example for the world, the “white hat” that can be trusted and believed. This idiotic belief, which we see manifested in western Ukraine as the US destabilizes the country in preparation for taking it over, is an important weapon that the US uses to destabilize Russia.

Some Russians make apologies for Washington by explaining the anti-Russian rhetoric as simply a carryover from old stereotypes from the Cold War. “Old stereotypes” is a red herring, a misleading distraction. Washington is gunning for Russia. Russia is under attack, and if Russians do not realize this, they are history.

Many Russians are asleep at the switch, but the Izborsk Club is trying to wake them up. In an article (February 12) in the Russian weekly Zavtra, strategic and military experts warned that the Western use of protests to overturn the decision of the Ukraine government not to join the European Union had produced a situation in which a coup by fascist elements was a possibly. Such a coup would result in a fratricidal war in Ukraine and would constitute a serious “strategic threat to the Russian Federation.”

The experts concluded that should such a coup succeed, the consequences for Russia would be:

— Loss of Sevastopol as the base of the Russian Federation’s Black Sea Fleet;

— Purges of Russians in eastern and southern Ukraine, producing a flood of refugees;

— Loss of manufacturing capacities in Kiev, Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov where
contract work is done for the Russian military;

— Suppression of the Russian speaking population by forcible Ukrainianization;

— The establishment of US and NATO military bases in Ukraine, including in Crimea
and the establishment of training centers for terrorists who would be set upon the
Caucasus, the Volga Basin, and perhaps Siberia.

— Spread of the orchestrated Kiev protests into non-Russian ethnicities in cities of
the Russian Federation.

The Russian strategists conclude that they “consider the situation taking shape in Ukraine to be catastrophic for the future of Russia.”

What is to be done? Here the strategic experts, who have correctly analyzed the situation, fall down. They call for a national media campaign to expose the nature of the takeover that is underway and for the government of the Russian Federation to invoke the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 in order to convene a conference of representatives of the governments of Russia, Ukraine, the USA, and Great Britain to deal with the threats to the Ukraine. In the event that the Budapest Memorandum governing the sovereignty of Ukraine is set aside by one or more of the parties, the experts propose that the Russian government, using the precedent of the Kennedy-Khrushchev negotiations that settled the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, negotiate directly with Washington a settlement of the developing crisis in Ukraine.

This is a pipe dream. The experts are indulging in self-deception. Washington is the perpetrator of the crisis in Ukraine and intends to take over Ukraine for the precise reasons that the experts list. It is a perfect plan for destabilizing Russia and for negating Putin’s successful diplomacy in preventing US military attack on Syria and Iran.

Essentially, if Washington succeeds in Ukraine, Russia would be eliminated as a constraint on US world hegemony, Only China would remain.

I suspected that Ukraine would come to a boiling point when Putin and Russia were preoccupied with the Sochi Olympics, leaving Russia unprepared. There is little doubt that Russia is faced with a major strategic threat. What are Russia’s real options? Certainly the options do not include any good will from Washington.

Possibly, Russia could operate from the American script. If Russia has drones, Russia could use drones like Washington does and use them to assassinate the leaders of the Washington-sponsored protests. Or Russia could send in Special Forces teams to eliminate the agents who are operating against Russia. If the EU continues to support the destabilization of Ukraine, Russia could cut off oil and gas supplies to Washington’s European puppet states.

Alternatively, the Russian Army could occupy western Ukraine while arrangements are made to partition Ukraine, which until recently was part of Russia for 200 years. It is certain that the majority of residents in eastern Ukraine prefer Russia to the EU. It is even possible that the brainwashed elements in the western half might stop foaming at the mouth long enough to comprehend that being in US/EU hands means being looted as per Latvia and Greece.

I am outlining the least dangerous outcomes of the crisis that Washington and its stupid European puppet states have created, not making recommendations to Russia. The worst outcome is a dangerous war. If the Russians sit on their hands, the situation will become unbearable for them. As Ukraine moves toward NATO membership and suppression of the Russian population, the Russian government will have to attack Ukraine and overthrow the foreign regime or surrender to the Americans. The likely outcome of the audacious strategic threat with which Washington is confronting Russia would be nuclear war.

The neoconservative Victoria Nuland sits in her State Department office happily choosing the members of the next Ukrainian government. Is this US official oblivious to the risk that Washington’s meddling in the internal affairs of Ukraine and Russia could be triggering nuclear war? Are President Obama and Congress aware that there is an Assistant Secretary of State who is provoking armageddon?

Insouciant Americans are paying no attention and have no idea that a handful of neoconservative ideologues are pushing the world toward destruction.


Dr. Roberts was awarded the Treasury Department’s Meritorious Service Award for “his outstanding contributions to the formulation of United States economic policy.”

In 1987 the French government recognized him as “the artisan of a renewal in economic science and policy after half a century of state interventionism” and inducted him into the Legion of Honor.

He is listed in Who’s Who in America and Who’s Who in the World.


America's debt clock real time
Ukraine: Swastikas, A Cool Russian Head, "International Community" Threatens World War 111



"In the practical application of policies, our Western partners - the United States first and foremost - prefer to be guided not by international law, but by the right of strength. They believe in their exceptionalism, that they decide on the fate of the world, that they are always right."~~ Vladimir Putin


by Felicity Arbuthnot

US Secretary of State, John Kerry representing a country which makes Genghis Khan look like a wimp when it comes to illegal invasions, still retains the prize for jaw dropper of the decade: "You just don't, in the 21st century, behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pre-text", he pontificated on CBS' "Face the Nation."

On the thirteenth anniversary of the illegal invasion of Iraq and the total destruction of it's "sovereignty and territorial integrity", by America and Britain, Prime Minister David Cameron has scuttled off to Brussels for a meeting of European Union Ministers to agree (on) a "robust response" to Russia - who has fired not a shot, invaded no one and threatened nothing except to respond that if sanctions were imposed on Russia they might consider a trading response. Fair enough, surely?

The government of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea called a referendum, distinctly disturbed by the threat by Kiev's US proxy government that the Russian language was to have no status, and Jews and blacks would not be tolerated.

A fraction under 97% voted to cede to Russia, with a turnout of over 80% - an electoral enthusiasm of which Western governments could only dream.

As much of the main stream media and the usual politicians thundered of voting under pressure or even at gunpoint, one hundred and thirty five international observers from twenty three countries said, consistently, they saw no pressure of any sort, and they had "not registered any violations of voting rules."

President Putin also points out the double standards:

"Our Western partners created the Kosovo precedent with their own hands. In a situation absolutely the same as the one in Crimea they recognized Kosovo's secession from Serbia legitimate while arguing that no permission from a country's central authority for a unilateral declaration of independence is necessary"

Further reminding that the UN International Court of Justice agreed to those arguments.

"It's beyond double standards. It's a kind of baffling, primitive and blatant cynicism. One can't just twist things to fit interests, to call something white on one day and black on the next one."

Clearly referring the threats and onslaughts on sovereign nations of recent years, he added, on being accused of violating international law: "Well, it's good that they at least recalled that there is international law ... Better late than never", commenting with some validity, that his nation's stance on Crimea was in no way similar.

And there is that ill-used (by the usual suspects) "Reponsibility to Protect", defined as including: "crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing and their incitement", precisely what the bunch that has taken over the government in Kiev has threatened, with the Jewish community in Kiev feeling so besieged that: "Ukrainian Rabbi Moshe Reuven Azman, called on Kiev's Jews to leave the city and even the country if possible ..."

The UN definition of Responsibility to Protect also stipulates that States have a responsibility to "encourage and assist" in fulfilling responsibility in protection of those threatened and at risk. Russia has arguably done as requested by its former State and neighbour and as laid out by the UN. Yes, of course there is self interest, with NATO encroaching ever closer and the country's Black Sea Fleet based in Crimea and NATO countries, the US and UK planning military exercises with Ukraine - but Russia's actions have been a model of peaceable, threat free strategy.

President Putin expressed all admirably:

"Russia is an independent and active participant of international relations. Just like any nation it has national interests that must be taken into consideration and respected."

He laid out the double standards:

"In the practical application of policies, our Western partners - the United States first and foremost - prefer to be guided not by international law, but by the right of strength. They believe in their exceptionalism, that they decide on the fate of the world, that they are always right."

Law was disregarded in Yugoslavia in 1999, bombed by NATO with no UN mandate, Afghanistan, Iraq. Perversion of the UN Resolution on Libya, which was for a no fly zone, not bombing the country in to submission - a tragic, shameful travesty with the horror of the murder of the country's Leader, most of his family, over which Hillary Clinton laughed as she said: "We came, we saw, he died." Clinton of course, has now called Putin "Hitler".

The "coloured revolutions" in Europe and the Arab world were simply more of the same by other means, Putin stated, but in: "Ukraine the West crossed a red line", with Russia's wish for dialogue and compromise ignored.

The red line was in that: "The coup-imposed authorities in Kiev voiced their desire to join NATO, and such a move would pose an imminent threat to Russia."

Meanwhile, escaped from the American asylum, Vice President Joe Biden said that the U.S. stands resolutely with Baltic States in support of the Ukrainian people against Russian aggression. "Russia cannot escape the fact that the world is changing and rejecting outright their behavior", Biden said, after meeting Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite and Latvian President Andris Berzins. What aggression exactly?

However, as ever, the all (law?) is more complex: "Current international law combines two contradictory principles: a government's territorial integrity on the one hand, and a nation's right to self-determination on the other, according (to) Maxim Bratersky of the Center for Comprehensive European and International Studies at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow."

The West recognized Kosovo's independence from Serbia in 2008, based (on) the principle of right to self-determination. "Kosovo is a mirror image of the current situation in Crimea", says Bratersky:

"In sending troops into Kosovo, NATO did not allow the Serbs to intervene in the referendum. The UN did not give NATO's forces a mandate to send troops into Kosovo."

He also points out that South Sudan ceded from Sudan in 2011 (with world leaders or their Ambassadors attending the celebrations). East Timor became independent of Indonesia, both endorsed by the UN. Mutual agreement ruled, as with Crimea and the Russian Federation.

In 1997, the British returned Hong Kong to Chinese jurisdiction.

"But on the whole, the system of international law does not function. The side that has the most bayonets wins," Bratersky states. "Kosovo is a vivid example of this."

In trade and energy supplies, Russia has a lot of bayonets and the coffers of the EU and US are woefully low.

David Cameron has grand plans to "celebrate" the centenary of the start of World War 1 this year, he still seems hell bent on celebrating it by starting World War 111.

As this is finished, in response to the US placing travel bans on Russian politicians and public figures, rather than engaging in a diplomatic exchange of views, Russia has: "announced sanctions against several advisers to President Obama as well as a number of lawmakers, including House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid - retaliation after President Obama announced economic sanctions against Russia.

The sanctions ban Boehner, Reid, and Senators Mary Landrieu, Daniel Coats, Robert Menendez, John McCain, as well as Obama advisers Caroline Atkinson, Daniel Pfeiffer, and Benjamin Rhodes from entering Russia.

Someone please chuck that Obama Nobel Peace Prize in to the Potomac.


America's debt clock real time