When the Bush administration started lobbying for war with Iraq, they used as rationale a definition of preemption (generally meaning anticipatory use of force in the face of an imminent attack) that was broadened to allow for the waging of a preventive war in which force may be used even without evidence of an imminent attack. They also were able to convince much of the American public that Saddam Hussein had something to do with the attacks of 9/11, despite the fact that no evidence of a link has been uncovered. Consequently, many people supported the war on the basis of 1) a policy that has no legal basis in international law and 2) a totally unfounded claim of Iraqi guilt.
What most people do not know, however, is that certain high ranking officials in the Bush administration have been working for regime change in Iraq for the past decade, long before terrorism became an important issue for our country. In 1997 they formed an organization called the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). They have sought the establishment of a much stronger U.S. presence throughout the Mideast and Iraq's Saddam Hussein has been their number one target for regime change. Members of this group drafted and successfully passed through Congress the Iraqi Liberation Act, giving legal sanctions for an invasion of the country, and funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to Hussein opposition groups called the Iraqi National Congress and The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq.
© PJMedia.com
Attorney General Eric Holder canceled an appearance before the Oklahoma City Police Department's graduating cadet class Thursday amid angry protests over his scheduled visit.
Mr. Holder was expected to deliver remarks at the afternoon graduation ceremony, according to his official itinerary sent out by the Justice Department Thursday morning.
A Justice Department spokesman denied that the trip was canceled because of the possibility of a hostile reception. An early meeting at the Justice Department delayed Mr. Holder's departure from Washington, causing him to miss the graduation ceremony, spokesman Brian Fallon said in an email.
"The attorney general had been looking forward to addressing the cadets, and regrets he cannot attend in person," Mr. Fallon said. "He extends his heartfelt congratulations to the cadets and their families."
Chris Elliott
GuardianSun, 04 May 2014 15:03 UTC
© Russian govt
Trolling covers a multitude of sins but
a particularly nasty strain has emerged in the midst of the armed conflict in
Ukraine, which
infests comment threads on
the Guardian and elsewhere, despite the best efforts of moderators.
Readers and reporters alike are concerned that these are from those paid to troll, and to denigrate in abusive terms anyone criticising
Russia or President Vladimir Putin.
One complaint came to the readers' editor's office on 6 March. "In the past weeks [I] have become incredibly frustrated and disillusioned by your inability
to effectively police the waves of Nashibot trolls who've been relentlessly posting pro-Putin propaganda in the comments on Ukraine v Russia coverage.
"... the quantity of
pro-Kremlin trolling on this topic ... which has been documented extensively since 2012 as
a real and insidious threat to online communities of idea and debate,
has rendered commenting on these articles all but meaningless, and a worthless exercise in futility and frustration for anyone not already being
mind-controlled by the Kremlin."
On 23 April the writer complained again: "
One need only pick a Ukraine article at random, pick any point in the comments at random, and they will find themselves in a sea of incredibly aggressive and hostile users (the most obvious have accounts created since February 2014 ... but there also exist those who registered with the
Guardian before the high point of the crisis)
who post the most biased, inciteful [sic] pro-Kremlin, anti-western propaganda that seems as if it's taken from a template, so repetitive are the statements. Furthermore, these comments are consistently capturing inordinate numbers of 'recommends',
sometimes on the order of 10 to 12 times what pro-Ukrainian comments receive."
Comment: Props to the Guardian for publishing such an exemplary propaganda piece! Somebody's gotta do it, and Chris Elliott takes up the task with inhuman vim and vigor. There's so much wrong with Elliott's piece above that it's hard to know where to start. First of all, yes, many governments have paid internet trolls to maintain the accepted talking points and party line on a whole host of issues. But 'Missy' Elliott misses the crux of the matter: how many pro-Kiev comments are being posted by American govt-hired trolls? Why no outrage about the open secret called Hasbara, Israel's online army of brainwashed and brainwashing Net trolls?
Second, why on earth should anti-Kiev comments be described as "particularly nasty", an "infestation", "insidious", "inciteful" [sic]? Let's remember what we're talking about here! After all, a pro-Kiev commenter, by supporting the "Western" narrative, must at least implicitly support the following: externally directed coups against legally elected governments, the murder of innocent people fed up with their corrupt leaders, said leaders ordering troops to kill their fellow citizens, right-wing nazi extremists, the deliberate murder of unarmed civilians by burning them alive, shooting them in the head, strangling pregnant women, et cetera ad nauseam. Using nasty words to describe something that is inherently anti-nastiness is a classic propaganda technique. Is your government engaged in nefarious, murderous, treasonous behavior? Well, just describe the opposition as "particularly nasty", an "infestation", "insidious", "inciteful" and you'll be right as rain!
Third, there is "no conclusive evidence" that this is a Russian campaign! Did it not even enter the empty-headed Elliott's mind that these comments reflect what people actually think? That they're fed up with the murderous regime installed by Western advisers and manipulators, and that online comments reflect this? It's plain as day who's in the wrong here: Kiev, the West, NOT Russia or the anti-Kiev protestors in Ukraine.
Fourth, we have only one response to the Guardian's 'commenter' quoted above, who wrote, "Furthermore, these comments are consistently capturing inordinate numbers of 'recommends', sometimes on the order of 10 to 12 times what pro-Ukrainian comments receive": that's the way it should be!
© AP
Did Hillary Clinton accomplish anything as secretary of State? That question is in the news at the moment because an Associated Press reporter asked something like it this week at a Foggy Bottom briefing and a State Department spokeswoman fumbled the response.
The specific subject was the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, a periodic reassessment of State Department organization that was a particular focus of Secretary Clinton. At Tuesday's press briefing, spokeswoman Jen Psaki announced that the 2014 edition of the QDDR is now under way. So AP's Matt Lee asked Ms. Psaki an obvious question: "Off the top of your head, can you identify one tangible achievement that the last QDDR resulted in?"
No, not really. She punted.
"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out - Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out - Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak for me."
- Martin Niemoller
© beefcakepantyhose
Despite what some may think, the Constitution is no magical incantation against government wrongdoing. Indeed, it's only as effective as those who abide by it. However, without courts willing to uphold the Constitution's provisions when government officials disregard it and a citizenry knowledgeable enough to be outraged when those provisions are undermined, it provides little to no protection against SWAT team raids, domestic surveillance, police shootings of unarmed citizens, indefinite detentions, and the like.
Unfortunately, the courts and the police have meshed in their thinking to such an extent that anything goes when it's done in the name of national security, crime fighting and terrorism. Consequently, America no longer operates under a system of justice characterized by due process, an assumption of innocence, probable cause and clear prohibitions on government overreach and police abuse. Instead, our courts of justice have been transformed into courts of order, advocating for the government's interests, rather than championing the rights of the citizenry, as enshrined in the Constitution.
Just recently, for example, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in
U.S. v. Westhoven that driving too carefully, with a rigid posture, taking a scenic route, and having acne are sufficient reasons for a police officer to suspect you of doing something illegal, detain you, search your car, and arrest you - even if you've done nothing illegal to warrant the stop in the first place.
In that same vein, the U.S. Supreme Court declared in a 5-4 ruling in
Navarette v. California that police officers can, under the guise of "reasonable suspicion," stop cars and question drivers based solely on anonymous tips, no matter how dubious, and whether or not they themselves witnessed any troubling behavior.
RTSun, 04 May 2014 15:09 UTC
The Ukrainian military has started an operation against pro-autonomy activists in the city of Mariupol, southeastern Ukraine, as well as the town of Konstantinovka, according to local self-defense activists.
The troops have moved into Mariupol and have surrounded an administrative building held by anti-government protesters. The protesters have set up barricades and are burning tires.
There are a few hundred activists inside the building. They told RT that the army is warning them that if they do not leave the building in the coming minutes, they will be fired at and the building will be seized.
"I am in the center of the city, there are a lot of ambulances outside the local administration building, gunfire is being heard, armored vehicles have entered the city and are moving towards the center," witness Tatyana told RT by phone. "People are going there as well, to prevent the soldiers from shooting. We are hoping they won't shoot at civilians, though from what we've seen before, we are not sure anymore."
© Pando Daily
The following story
by David Sirota at PandoDaily is simply excellent. It zeros in on the secretive and rapidly expanding relationship between private equity firms and the public pensions that invest in them. It shows a crony capitalist love affair greased by lobbyist influence peddlers known as "placement agents," as well as non-public agreements between PE firms and public pensions chock full of conflicts of interest, extremely high fees and underperformance. Unbelievably, in many instances the trustees of the public pensions are not allowed to know what funds the "fund of funds" invest in. This makes due diligence impossible, and in one particularly egregious example it led the Kentucky Retirement Systems to unknowingly invest in SAC Capital despite the fact it was under SEC investigation at the time.
Furthermore, with the Wall Street Journal reporting back in 2011 that $37 of every $100 dollars invested in Blackstone's investment pool coming from state and local pension plans, it appears that taxpayers are once again being fleeced by the financial oligarch class. Additionally, it appears to answer a recent question I posed in my piece:
Is the Credit Bubble Popping? Carlyle Group Warns on Frothiness and Junk Bond Deals Get Pulled. After reading about a growing pool of insane "dividend deals" and payment-in-kind" notes being issued, I wondered who in their right mind was buying these deals. Well, based on the complete lack of competence and due diligence happening at public pension funds, I think we have solved part of the mystery.
The chief villain in this article will be no stranger to readers of this site. It is Blackstone, the private equity giant who I have criticized many times on these pages for
buying up homes all across America in "all cash" deals, making homes unaffordable to average American peasants. Of course, Blackstone is just one of many, but given its size and influence, highlighting its practices is probably quite representative.
© J. Scott ApplewhiteSenate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nev. makes a cutting gesture across his neck, referencing House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who caused an uproar last week when he made the same gesture to order microphones cut as the top Democrat on his panel was trying to speak about the Internal Revenue Service scandal over targeting of conservative political groups, Tuesday, March 11, 2014, during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, March 11, 2014. Reid said that he thought the accusations of IRS misdeeds deserved answers.
Hoping to galvanize their base further, Republicans are casting the midterm elections as a golden opportunity to fire Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the Nevada Democrat who has served as lead blocker for President Obama's liberal agenda on Capitol Hill and chief opponent of GOP legislation.
The attacks are being espoused inside and outside the Capital Beltway and could become staples of the Republican message as the party looks to pick up the six seats needed to take the Senate gavel out of Mr. Reid's hands.
On Wednesday, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus described Mr. Reid as "dirty" and "unethical."
The RNC circulated a memo that played up a Federal Election Commission inquiry into campaign cash that Mr. Reid reimbursed after using the money to purchase gifts for his granddaughter.
RTSun, 04 May 2014 15:00 UTC
© Reuters/Yevgeny VolokinA protester walks past a burning pro-Russian tent camp near the trade union building in Odessa May 2, 2014.
Despite clear evidence that the pro-Kiev radicals set Odessa's House of Trade Unions ablaze on Friday killing dozens, the mainstream media is being ambiguous about the causes of the tragedy.
On Friday, Ukraine's eastern town of Odessa saw brutal street battles between pro-autonomy activists and nationalist radicals which left 46 people dead. The majority of the victims died in the Trade Unions House that was set on fire by pro-Kiev
radicals.
Very carefully worded commentary on the tragedy in Odessa came from the mainstream Western media, as if they were trying to avoid assigning the blame to those who actually set the building on fire. Their coverage of the event was heavily reliant on statements from Kiev that blamed the violence on pro-autonomy activists, as well as witness accounts given by the nationalist Right Sector members.
Based on their reports, it may seem that the House of Trade Unions just caught fire.
© Nation of Change
Just in case you haven't been keeping up with the 'tin-foil' hat conspiracies, increasingly proven to be true, the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York, is the center of a
secret global economy that has bailed out
American International Group Inc., huge insurance companies like AIG,
Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co.,
J.P. Morgan,
Societe Generale and
Deutsche Bank AG, among others.
The secret
cabal's control over international markets is becoming less of a mystery as increasing numbers of markets reveal themselves so obviously to be fixed. The cabal cheats the 99 percent with Libor interest rates, foreign exchanges, and gold, silver, and platinum price fixing. Then there's high-frequency trading (HFT), where Wall Street banks use supercomputers to monitor incoming stock market orders, analyze their likely impact on prices, and place orders ahead of those trades to capture a bit of the price impact, called 'stealing' if it were properly named.
HFT data helps to explain the
frenzy in today's markets: The most aggressive firms tend to earn the biggest profits, hence the incentive to trade as quickly and as often as possible. Furthermore, these traders make their money at the expense of everyone else, including less-aggressive high- frequency traders. It is simply the latest and greatest scam on stock holders looking for real value in a company, thinking they can compete with the big guys.
Just a few weeks ago, 132 nations decided they've had enough of the 'secret' money jig we've all been dancing to. One of the largest coalitions of developing nations in history has urged Secretary-General of the United Nations
Ban Ki-moon, to provide, "as soon as possible...alternative options for banking services." 132 countries, including China are done with the funny money scheme.
Comment: Props to the Guardian for publishing such an exemplary propaganda piece! Somebody's gotta do it, and Chris Elliott takes up the task with inhuman vim and vigor. There's so much wrong with Elliott's piece above that it's hard to know where to start. First of all, yes, many governments have paid internet trolls to maintain the accepted talking points and party line on a whole host of issues. But 'Missy' Elliott misses the crux of the matter: how many pro-Kiev comments are being posted by American govt-hired trolls? Why no outrage about the open secret called Hasbara, Israel's online army of brainwashed and brainwashing Net trolls?
Second, why on earth should anti-Kiev comments be described as "particularly nasty", an "infestation", "insidious", "inciteful" [sic]? Let's remember what we're talking about here! After all, a pro-Kiev commenter, by supporting the "Western" narrative, must at least implicitly support the following: externally directed coups against legally elected governments, the murder of innocent people fed up with their corrupt leaders, said leaders ordering troops to kill their fellow citizens, right-wing nazi extremists, the deliberate murder of unarmed civilians by burning them alive, shooting them in the head, strangling pregnant women, et cetera ad nauseam. Using nasty words to describe something that is inherently anti-nastiness is a classic propaganda technique. Is your government engaged in nefarious, murderous, treasonous behavior? Well, just describe the opposition as "particularly nasty", an "infestation", "insidious", "inciteful" and you'll be right as rain!
Third, there is "no conclusive evidence" that this is a Russian campaign! Did it not even enter the empty-headed Elliott's mind that these comments reflect what people actually think? That they're fed up with the murderous regime installed by Western advisers and manipulators, and that online comments reflect this? It's plain as day who's in the wrong here: Kiev, the West, NOT Russia or the anti-Kiev protestors in Ukraine.
Fourth, we have only one response to the Guardian's 'commenter' quoted above, who wrote, "Furthermore, these comments are consistently capturing inordinate numbers of 'recommends', sometimes on the order of 10 to 12 times what pro-Ukrainian comments receive": that's the way it should be!