Called Killary a what?....

War On All Fronts

by Paul Craig Roberts

The Russian government has finally caught on that its political opposition is being financed by the US taxpayer-funded National Endowment for Democracy and other CIA/State Department fronts in an attempt to subvert the Russian government and install an American puppet state in the geographically largest country on earth, the one country with a nuclear arsenal sufficient to deter Washington’s aggression.

Just as earlier this year Egypt expelled hundreds of people associated with foreign-funded “non-governmental organizations” (NGOs) for “instilling dissent and meddling in domestic policies,” the Russian Duma (parliament) has just passed a law that Putin is expected to sign that requires political organizations that receive foreign funding to register as foreign agents. The law is based on the US law requiring the registration of foreign agents.

Much of the Russian political opposition consists of foreign-paid agents, and once the law passes leading elements of the Russian political opposition will have to sign in with the Russian Ministry of Justice as foreign agents of Washington. The Itar-Tass News Agency reported on July 3 that there are about 1,000 organizations in Russia that are funded from abroad and engaged in political activity. Try to imagine the outcry if the Russians were funding 1,000 organizations in the US engaged in an effort to turn America into a Russian puppet state. (In the US the Russians would find a lot of competition from Israel.)

The Washington-funded Russian political opposition masquerades behind “human rights” and says it works to “open Russia.” What the disloyal and treasonous Washington-funded Russian “political opposition” means by “open Russia” is to open Russia for brainwashing by Western propaganda, to open Russia to economic plunder by the West, and to open Russia to having its domestic and foreign policies determined by Washington.

“Non-governmental organizations” are very governmental. They have played pivotal roles in both financing and running the various “color revolutions” that have established American puppet states in former constituent parts of the Soviet Empire. NGOs have been called “coup d’etat machines,” and they have served Washington well in this role. They are currently working in Venezuela against Chavez.

Of course, Washington is infuriated that its plans for achieving hegemony over a country too dangerous to attack militarily have been derailed by Russia’s awakening, after two decades, to the threat of being politically subverted by Washington-financed NGOs. Washington requires foreign-funded organizations to register as foreign agents (unless they are Israeli funded). However, this fact doesn’t stop Washington from denouncing the new Russian law as “anti-democratic,” “police state,” blah-blah. Caught with its hand in subversion, Washington calls Putin names. The pity is that most of the brainwashed West will fall for Washington’s lies, and we will hear more about “gangster state Russia.”

China is also in Washington’s crosshairs. China’s rapid rise as an economic power is perceived in Washington as a dire threat. China must be contained. Obama’s US Trade Representative has been secretly negotiating for the last 2 or 3 years a Trans Pacific Partnership, whose purpose is to derail China’s natural economic leadership in its own sphere of influence and replace it with Washington’s leadership.

Washington is also pushing to form new military alliances in Asia and to establish new military bases in the Philippines, S. Korea, Thailand, Vietnam, Australia, New Zealand, and elsewhere.

Washington quickly inserted itself into disputes between China and Vietnam and China and the Philippines. Washington aligned with its former Vietnamese enemy in Vietnam’s dispute with China over the resource rich Paracel and Spratly islands and with the Philippines in its dispute with China over the resource rich Scarborough Shoal.

Thus, like England’s interference in the dispute between Poland and National Socialist Germany over the return to Germany of German territories that were given to Poland as World War I booty, Washington sets the stage for war.

China has been cooperative with Washington, because the offshoring of the US economy to China was an important component in China’s unprecedented high rate of economic development. American capitalists got their short-run profits, and China got the capital and technology to build an economy that in another 2 or 3 years will have surpassed the sinking US economy. Jobs offshoring, mistaken for free trade by free market economists, has built China and destroyed America.

Washington’s growing interference in Chinese affairs has convinced China’s government that military countermeasures are required to neutralize Washington’s announced intentions to build its military presence in China’s sphere of influence. Washington’s view is that only Washington, no one else, has a sphere of influence, and Washington’s sphere of influence is the entire world.

On July 14 China’s official news agency, Xinhua, said that Washington was interfering in Chinese affairs and making China’s disputes with Vietnam and the Philippines impossible to resolve.

It looks as if an over-confident US government is determined to have a three-front war: Syria, Lebanon, and Iran in the Middle East, China in the Far East, and Russia in Europe. This would appear to be an ambitious agenda for a government whose military was unable to occupy Iraq after nine years or to defeat the lightly-armed Taliban after eleven years, and whose economy and those of its NATO puppets are in trouble and decline with corresponding rising internal unrest and loss of confidence in political leadership.

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/

I have never heard this said as simply or as well. Class war at its best.

The folks who are getting the free stuff don't like the folks who are paying for the free stuff, because the folks who are paying for the free stuff can no longer afford to pay for both the free stuff and their own stuff.

And, the folks who are paying for the free stuff want the free stuff to stop.

And the folks who are getting the free stuff want even more free stuff on top of the free stuff they are already getting!

Now... the people who are forcing the people who pay for the free stuff have told the people who are RECEIVING the free stuff that the people who are PAYING for the free stuff are being mean, prejudiced, and racist.

So... the people who are GETTING the free stuff have been convinced they need to hate the people who are paying for the free stuff by the people who are forcing some people to pay for their free stuff and giving them the free stuff in the first place.

We have let the free stuff giving go on for so long that there are now more people getting free stuff than paying for the free stuff.

Now understand this. All great democracies have committed financial suicide somewhere between 200 and 250 years after being founded. The reason?

The voters figured out they could vote themselves money from the treasury by electing people who promised to give them money from the treasury in exchange for electing them.

The United States officially became a Republic in 1776, 231 years ago. The number of people now getting free stuff outnumbers the people paying for the free stuff. We have one chance to change that in 2012. Failure to change that spells the end of the United States as we know it.


ELECTION 2012 IS COMING

A Nation of Sheep Breeds a Government of Wolves!

Forrest,

Cool name, and Welcome to the conversation!

-Todd

What's up with this Todd? More GOoPer lies?

Pennsylvania admits there has been no voter fraud

by Joan McCarter Follow

Tomorrow, Judge Robert Simpson will hear the case the ACLU has brought on behalf of Viviette Applewhite and others against the state of Pennsylvania for its new voter ID law. That case should be significantly bolstered by the admission from the state itself that there is no history of in-person voter fraud in the state. Essentially it's a law in search of a problem.

The state signed a stipulation agreement with lawyers for the plaintiffs which acknowledges there “have been no investigations or prosecutions of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania; and the parties do not have direct personal knowledge of any such investigations or prosecutions in other states.”
Additionally, the agreement states Pennsylvania “will not offer any evidence in this action that in-person voter fraud has in fact occurred in Pennsylvania and elsewhere” or even argue “that in person voter fraud is likely to occur in November 2012 in the absense of the Photo ID law.”

The new voter ID law Pennsylvania passed is one of the most restrictive of all the states, requiring ID that in many cases doesn't exist, for example municipal employee photo IDs with expiration dates, which these types of ID don't actually have. These restrictions could keep more than a million registered voters from voting, and many of those voters don't realize it, believing the ID they possess will suffice at the polls.

The state of Pennsylvania, of course, argued in passing the laws that they did so to prevent voter fraud, which they just admitted in legal documents doesn't exist. But we know what the real reason is. Republican House Leader Mike Turzai told us: "[...] Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done."

More than a million Pennsylvania citizens—including registered, active voters—disenfranchised not because of the problem of voter fraud, but to win the state for Mitt Romney.

Do you like horsies Todd? Rmoney does.

Monday

Hello, human diary. It is I again, Mitt Romney, your better.

Life on the campaign trail has settled into a dull routine. Meet with fundraisers; give my predetermined speeches to those fundraisers; receive briefings on where the next fundraisers will be. Even selecting a vice presidential unit has become tedious, as we have concluded that the remaining candidates are largely interchangeable entities, and that we could probably make the final determination based on a series of flips of a Mercury silver dime. (That is my favorite of all the silver dimes, because that fellow has wings on his ears, which is quite uproarious. It makes me chuckle just thinking about it.)

Today I met with executives for several defense contractors, commiserating with them about how offensive it was for my opponent to suggest that the government played a role in their businesses. We all agreed that government really ought to have no role in business, except for purchasing provisions, providing grants, granting subsidies and subsidizing purchases. I told them that as a unit of great wealth myself I understood their predicament thoroughly, and that if they were to elect me president I would see to it that government played a much larger role in their businesses, but only in the aforementioned manners.

I will soon be rolling out my official foreign policy positions. I have instructed my staff to produce them as rapidly as possible, or to at least give me fair warning as to what they might be. I met one of the units we have rented from the previous administration in order to determine our foreign policy; I must confess, Mr. Diary, that the fellow makes me nervous. He gives one the impression of a very angry walrus, perhaps one who once had a fish stolen from them and who has ever since engaged themselves in a decades-long campaign to avenge the deed, possibly via the use of nuclear weaponry. I asked him if he liked watersport, but he said no, which is a shame.

On Tuesday I will depart for a tour of several foreign nations. I am especially looking forward to my stay in England, where I will meet with both the prime minister and my horse.

Tuesday

Hello, human diary. It is I, Mitt Romney, your better.

As a last bit of preparation for my trip overseas, today I gave a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars. Since they have the word "foreign" prominently in their name, the campaign thought it would be a good transitory step towards speaking with actual foreigners. It also made for a good opportunity to speak of my own foreign policy; sadly, as we are still working towards formulating one, we were not able to take advantage of the occasion. Instead we padded things out with some condemnations of government leaks, which are bad things.

I was able, however, to at least clarify my previous position on Afghanistan, which for some reason individual citizens continue to press me on (the press units, at least, have mostly moved on). I announced that if I were president, I would seek to leave Afghanistan in 2014, as the current president previously announced, but I announced that I would not announce that position because announcing it would be wrong. I believe I was able to satisfactorily clarify the sharp difference between my and my opponent's position on this matter.

Now I am off to various foreign locales. We have scheduled them according to their degree of foreignness (London, then Israel, then Poland), which will give the foreign policy team yet more time to draft a foreign policy. By the time we arrive in Poland, I can only hope they have finally decided whether or not I approve of that nation. It would be irritating to have to un-visit the country retroactively.

How are those heat advisories treatin' ya Todd? Good thing there's nothing to that global climate change deal. Right Todd?

Hopey1616...actually women produce less carbon dioxide thru respiration then men therefor men should be carbon taxed at higher rate.

Hello, human diary. It is I again, Hopey1616, your better. I cannot write much today, Mr. Diary, because I got my panties wet....


The Obama GITMO myth

BY GLENN GREENWALD

Most of the 168 detainees at Guantanamo have been imprisoned by the U.S. Government for close to a decade without charges and with no end in sight to their captivity. Some now die at Guantanamo, thousands of miles away from their homes and families, without ever having had the chance to contest accusations of guilt. During the Bush years, the plight of these detainees was a major source of political controversy, but under Obama, it is now almost entirely forgotten. On those rare occasions when it is raised, Obama defenders invoke a blatant myth to shield the President from blame: he wanted and tried so very hard to end all of this, but Congress would not let him. Especially now that we’re in an Election Year, and in light of very recent developments, it’s long overdue to document clearly how misleading that excuse is.

Last week, the Obama administration imposed new arbitrary rules for Guantanamo detainees who have lost their first habeas corpus challenge. Those new rules eliminate the right of lawyers to visit their clients at the detention facility; the old rules establishing that right were in place since 2004, and were bolstered by the Supreme Court’s 2008 Boumediene ruling that detainees were entitled to a “meaningful” opportunity to contest the legality of their detention. The DOJ recently informed a lawyer for a Yemeni detainee, Yasein Khasem Mohammad Esmail, that he would be barred from visiting his client unless he agreed to a new regime of restrictive rules, including acknowledging that such visits are within the sole discretion of the camp’s military commander. Moreover, as SCOTUSblog’s Lyle Denniston explains:

Besides putting control over legal contacts entirely under a military commander’s control, the “memorandum of understanding” does not allow attorneys to share with other detainee lawyers what they learn, and does not appear to allow them to use any such information to help prepare their own client for a system of periodic review at Guantanamo of whether continued detention is justified, and may even forbid the use of such information to help prepare a defense to formal terrorism criminal charges against their client.


The New York Times Editorial Page today denounced these new rules as “spiteful,” cited it as “the Obama administration’s latest overuse of executive authority,” and said “the administration looks as if it is imperiously punishing detainees for their temerity in bringing legal challenges to their detention and losing.” Detainee lawyers are refusing to submit to these new rules and are asking a federal court to rule that they violate the detainees’ right to legal counsel.

Long before, and fully independent of, anything Congress did, President Obama made clear that he was going to preserve the indefinite detention system at Guantanamo even once he closed the camp. President Obama fully embraced indefinite detention — the defining injustice of Guantanamo — as his own policy.

cont.

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/23/the_obama_gitmo_myth/