Puppet MastersS


Handcuffs

NDAA - No More Sweet Land of Liberty: This IS Happening in America

Nat Hentoff
The Ukiah Daily Journal
Sat, 28 Apr 2012 01:59 UTC
Image
© washingtonpeacecenter.net
With instant news coming at us continuously on cable and online, there may well be Americans who are unaware of the strong reaction to Barack Obama's signing of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012. The law impelled Kenneth Roth, the executive director of the respected Human Rights Watch, to declare:

"President Obama will go down in history as the president who enshrined indefinite detention (imprisonment) without trial in U.S. law" ("U.S.: Refusal to Veto Detainee Bill a Historic Tragedy for Rights," hrw.org, Dec. 15, 2011).

This includes U.S. citizens.

Just as ignited is Judge Andrew Napolitano, the senior judicial analyst at Fox News, who, irrespective of his ultimate employer, is TV's most compellingly informed protector of the Constitution. He warns:

"Essentially, this legislation would enable the president to divert from the criminal justice system, and thus to divert from the protections of the Constitution, any person he pleases" ("Can Congress Steal Your Constitutional Freedoms?" townhall.com, Dec. 1, 2011).

As if he were our king.

Sounds like typical election year bombast, doesn't it? But as I reported last week, the president, without going to court, can cage a U.S. citizen only "suspected of association" with our terrorist enemies ("Congress, Obama Codify Indefinite Detention," Sheldon Richman, The Future of Freedom Foundation, fff.org, Dec. 27, 2011).
Read More...
War Whore

Kent State Revisited: the Wars and Repression Continue Unabated

William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn
The Guardian
Wed, 02 May 2012 10:14 UTC
Image
© Time & Life imagesNational Guard troops move in on a student protest at Kent State Ohio on 4 May 1970
To this day, military repression permeates the US. But as history has shown, resistance will always follow.

Again and again, we learn that war abroad will find a way home.

On 30 April 1970, Richard Nixon announced the US invasion of Cambodia, a sovereign nation the US had been secretly bombing for several months. It was a saturation campaign involving 120 strikes a day by B-52s carrying up to 60,000 pounds of bombs each. But in the common doublespeak of war, the president claimed: "This is not an invasion of Cambodia ... once enemy forces are driven out of these sanctuaries and once their military supplies are destroyed, we will withdraw".

Nixon's aggression against Cambodia was accompanied by a verbal assault on those inside the US opposing the war: "we live in an age of anarchy, both abroad and at home", he intoned. The next day, Nixon went to the Pentagon to clarify the point: "you see these bums ... blowing up the campuses ... burning up the books, I mean storming around about this issue ... you name it, get rid of the war, there'll be another one".

On the rolling spring lawns of Kent State in the American heartland, students continued to press against an illegal, immoral war of occupation. The first entering classes of black students formed themselves into what was to become a growing wave of black student unions. Returning veterans were throwing their medals back at the war-mongers, and themselves becoming students.

Two days after the official invasion of Cambodia, 900 national guardsmen amassed on the Kent State campus. M-1 rifles were raised, and within 13 seconds, 61 shots were fired on unarmed students - four were dead, nine wounded. It was, the official presidential commission on campus unrest later found, "a nation driven to use the weapons of war upon its youth".
Read More...
Stop

Thousands in Jordan Call for End of Peace Treaty with Israel


Haaretz
Fri, 04 May 2012 00:00 UTC
Image
© Agence France-PresseJordanians burn an improvised Israeli flag during a protest against the current government following Friday noon prayers in downtown Amman, May 4, 2012.
In series of nationwide protests, leftist and Islamist activists call to cut ties with Israel, burning Israeli flags and chanting 'death, death to Israel.'

Thousands of Jordanians took to the streets on Friday demanding an end to the country's 18-year-old Wadi Araba peace treaty with Israel.

In a series of nationwide protests, leftist and Islamist activists urged Amman to cut ties with Israel, burning Israeli flags and chanting "death, death to Israel" and "the people want an end to Wadi Araba."

Protesters rallied in seven cities across the country, urging authorities to expel the Israeli ambassador from Amman, chanting "no to a Zionist embassy on our land."

Protest organizers, including the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood and youth movements, said the demonstrations came as a direct response to King Abdullah's recent nomination of Prime Minister Fayez Tarawneh, who served as a key figure in the 1994 Jordan-Israel peace process.
Read More...
Propaganda

Propaganda Left and Right

Paul Craig Roberts
Informationclearinghouse.info
Sat, 05 May 2012 16:25 UTC
Some readers have come to the erroneous conclusion that the Matrix consists of Republican Party disinformation as if there is no disinformation from the left. Others think that propaganda is the business of Obama and the Democrats. In fact, propaganda from the right, the left and the middle are all part of the disinformation fed to americans.

If I may give some examples: The other day Chuck Colson, one of the Nixon officials imprisoned for Watergate crimes, died. This gave NPR the opportunity to relive the Nixon horror.

What precisely was the Nixon horror? Essentially, there was no such thing. Watergate was about President Nixon lying about when he learned about the Watergate burglary.

When Nixon learned about the burglary, he did not act on it prior to his reelection, because he reasoned, rightly, that the Washington Post would blame him for the burglary, although he had nothing to do with it, in the hopes of preventing his reelection.
Read More...
Vader

The President's Private War

Judge Andrew P. Napolitano
Fox News
Thu, 03 May 2012 00:00 UTC
obama war drones
© UnknownThousands of civilians have been killed in US drone attacks on Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen and Libya.
Did you know that the United States government is using drones to kill innocent people in Pakistan? Did you know that the Pakistani government has asked President Obama to stop it and he won't? Did you know that Pakistan is a sovereign country that has nuclear weapons and is an American ally?

Last week, the Obama administration not only acknowledged the use of the drones; it also revealed that it has plans to increase the frequency and ferocity of the attacks. White House counterterrorism adviser John O. Brennan argued that these attacks are "in full accordance with the law" and are not likely to be stopped anytime soon.

Brennan declined to say how many people were killed or just where the killings took place or who is doing it. But we know that Obama has a morbid fascination with his plastic killing machines, and we know that these machines are among the favored tools of the CIA. We also know that if the president had been using the military to do this, he'd be legally compelled to reveal it to Congress and eventually to seek permission.

We know about the need to tell Congress and ask for permission because of the War Powers Act. This law, enacted in 1973 over President Nixon's veto, permits the president to use the military for 90 days before telling Congress and for 180 days before he needs congressional authorization. Obama must believe that he can bypass this law by using civilian CIA agents, rather than uniformed military, to do his killing.

Comment: For more information about the use of drones please read:
Celebrating our "Warrior President"
Obama's Death Panels: Jeremy Scahill at the Drone Summit
Spy in the Sky: Is It Only a Matter of Time Before Drone Technology is Used in Civil Society?
Police State: "Robots R'US": Military-Style Drones on 63 Military Bases In The USA

Read More...
Bizarro Earth

Best of the Web: Analysing Syria - The West's Greatest Fear

Dan Glazebrook
Information Clearing House
Sat, 05 May 2012 00:00 UTC
Image
© Ahmed Jadallah/ReutersFree Syrian Army fighters patrol a street in the Damascus suburb of Saqba.
Western attempts to destroy Syria have not been going to plan, revealing that what the West fears most is a peaceful resolution to the crisis

The strategy was simple, clear, tried and tested. It had been used successfully not only against Libya, but also Kosovo (in 1999), and was rapidly underway in Syria. It was to run as follows: train proxies to launch armed provocations; label the state's response to these provocations as genocide; intimidate the UN Security Council into agreeing that "something must be done"; incinerate the army and any other resistance with fragmentation bombs and Hellfire missiles; and finally install a weak, compliant government to sign off new contracts and alliances drawn up in London, Paris and Washington, whilst the country tore itself apart.

Result: the heart torn out of the "axis of resistance" between Iran, Syria and Hizbullah, leaving Iran isolated and the West with a free hand to attack Iran without fear of regional repercussions.

This was to be Syria's fate, drawn up years ago in the high- level planning committees of US, British and French defence departments and intelligence services. But this time, unlike in Libya, it has not all gone according to plan.

First, there was Russia and China's veto of the "regime change" resolution at the UN Security Council in October 2011, followed by a second veto in February of this year. This meant that any NATO attack on Syria would be denied the figleaf of UN approval, and seen instead as a unilateral act of aggression not just against Syria, but potentially also against China and Russia as well.

Vicious and reckless as they are, even Cameron, Sarkozy and Obama do not necessarily have the stomach for that kind of a fight. That left the burden of destroying the Syrian state to NATO's proxy forces on the ground, the "Free Syrian Army" -- a collection of domestic and (increasingly) foreign militias, mostly ultra-sectarian Salafi extremists, along with a smattering of defectors and Western special forces.

Comment: For a better idea of what is really going on in Syria please read the Sott Focus: Syria's Bloody CIA Revolution - A Distraction? by Joe Quinn.

For additional information read:

Mossad, Blackwater, CIA Led Operations in Homs

Wikileaks: US-led NATO Troops Operate Inside Syria

Read More...
Mr. Potato

'Socialist' Francois Hollande wins French presidency


BBC News
Sun, 06 May 2012 13:36 UTC
Image
Socialist Francois Hollande has been elected as France's new president.

He got about 52% of votes in Sunday's run-off, according to early projections, against 48% for centre-right incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy.

Mr Sarkozy has admitted defeat, saying: "Francois Hollande is the president of France and he must be respected."

Analysts say the vote has wide implications for the whole eurozone. Mr Hollande has vowed to rework a deal on government debt in member countries.

Exuberant Hollande supporters have already converged on Place de la Bastille in Paris - a traditional rallying point of the Left - to celebrate.

Mr Hollande capitalised on France's economic woes and President Sarkozy's unpopularity.
Read More...
Die

Adieu Sarkozy?

Alain Gresh
Le Monde Deplomatique
Sat, 05 May 2012 00:00 UTC
Nicolas Sarkozy and Francois Hollande
© The TelegraphNicolas Sarkozy and Francois Hollande
The first round of the presidential election encouraged François Hollande, the left's candidate, and discouraged the incumbent president. And now for the crucial alliances

What did the first round of voting on 22 April tell us about the French presidential election? The turnout was very high, around 80%, contrary to what many commentators and pundits had expected. This confirmed the central place of the presidential election ("the queen of the elections"), which decides France's main orientation over the next five years.

François Hollande with 28.63% of the votes came in ahead of Nicolas Sarkozy at 27.18%, the first time since the beginning of the Vth Republic in 1958 that a president trying to win a second term has failed to beat his challenger. This is a clear sign of the French electorate's rejection of Sarkozy and a repudiation of his government's policies - especially economic and social, with their resultant high unemployment. Sarkozy was "le président des riches" (president of the wealthy), but there was also a resounding "non" to his personal behaviour since, for many French people, Sarkozy has discredited the presidential role. In one particularly symbolic incident, he insulted a demonstrator in front of television cameras.

Marine Le Pen, daughter of Jean-Marie Le Pen of the far-right Front National party, took 18% of the votes, not that different from the percentage her father won in the 2002 presidential election (more than 16.8%; another far-right candidate won 2.3%), and far more than her father's 10.44% in 2007. Why this difference? In 2007 Sarkozy ran a dynamic campaign, defended ideas important to the far right (security, immigrants) and took some of their votes. This time, despite a campaign that was very rightwing (especially against immigrants and Islam), he failed.
Read More...
Light Sabers

A Putsch Against War

Uri Avnery
Antiwar.com
Sat, 05 May 2012 00:00 UTC
Meir Dagan (left) with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
© Associated PressMeir Dagan (left) with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Generals and secret police chiefs get together for an attack on the politicians

In some countries, they arrest the president, occupy government offices and TV stations and annul the constitution. They then publish Communique No. 1, explaining the dire need to save the nation from perdition and promising democracy, elections etc.

In other countries, they do it more quietly. They just inform the elected leaders that, if they don't desist from their disastrous policies, the officers will make their views public and precipitate their downfall.

Such officers are generally called a "junta", the Spanish word for "committee" used by South American generals. Their method is usually called a "putsch", a German-Swiss term for a sudden blow. (Yes, the Swiss actually had revolts some 170 years ago.)

What almost all such coups have in common is that their instigators thrive on the demagoguery of war. The politicians are invariably accused of cowardice in face of the enemy, failure to defend national honor, and such.

Not in Israel. In our country we are now seeing a kind of verbal uprising against the elected politicians by a group of current and former army generals, foreign intelligence and internal security chiefs. All of them condemn the government's threat to start a war against Iran, and some of them condemn the government's failure to negotiate with the Palestinians for peace.

Only in Israel.

Comment:
Will the Real Benjamin Netanyahu Please Stand Up?
Netanyahu, Israel's Mussolini

Read More...
Bad Guys

The Fraud of "Humanitarian Wars"

Glenn Greenwald
Salon
Wed, 02 May 2012 05:44 UTC
All wars, even the most unjustifiably aggressive, are wrapped in the same pretty rhetorical packaging

Last month, I spoke at the University of Chicago as part of an event entitled "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Empire: Humanitarian Intervention and Neo-Orientalism." Sponsored by the Muslim Students Association, the event also included Oxford Professor Tariq Ramadan, law professor and U.N. war crimes expert M. Cherif Bassiouni, and University of Chicago Professor Jennifer Pitts. My talk, roughly 30 minutes long, focused on how so-called "humanitarian interventions" are manipulatively used to justify wars of aggression and self-interest, and can be heard on the player below (my talk begins at roughly 57:40: simply move the cursor to that mark, as it loads quickly). The full event, including the other three talks and the question-and-answer session - all of which was really quite excellent - can also be viewed on the player below by starting at the beginning, or can be heard here.

Read More...