lundi 23 mai 2011

US and Pakistan Near Open War

Webster Tarpley
May 23, 2011

China has officially put the United States on notice that Washington’s planned attack on Pakistan will be interpreted as an act of aggression against Beijing. This blunt warning represents the first known strategic ultimatum received by the United States in half a century, going back to Soviet warnings during the Berlin crisis of 1958-1961, and indicates the grave danger of general war growing out of the US-Pakistan confrontation.

“Any Attack on Pakistan Would be Construed as an Attack on China”

Responding to reports that China has asked the US to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty in the aftermath of the Bin Laden operation, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu used a May 19 press briefing to state Beijing’s categorical demand that the “sovereignty and territorial integrity of Pakistan must be respected.” According to Pakistani diplomatic sources cited by the Times of India, China has “warned in unequivocal terms that any attack on Pakistan would be construed as an attack on China.” This ultimatum was reportedly delivered at the May 9 China-US strategic dialogue and economic talks in Washington, where the Chinese delegation was led by Vice Prime Minister Wang Qishan and State Councilor Dai Bingguo.1 Chinese warnings are implicitly backed up by that nation’s nuclear missiles, including an estimated 66 ICBMs, some capable of striking the United States, plus 118 intermediate-range missiles, 36 submarine-launched missiles, and numerous shorter-range systems.

Support from China is seen by regional observers as critically important for Pakistan, which is otherwise caught in a pincers between the US and India: “If US and Indian pressure continues, Pakistan can say ‘China is behind us. Don’t think we are isolated, we have a potential superpower with us,’” Talat Masood, a political analyst and retired Pakistani general, told AFP.2

The Chinese ultimatum came during the visit of Pakistani Prime Minister Gilani in Beijing, during which the host government announced the transfer of 50 state-of-the-art JF-17 fighter jets to Pakistan, immediately and without cost.3 Before his departure, Gilani had stressed the importance of the Pakistan-China alliance, proclaiming: “We are proud to have China as our best and most trusted friend. And China will always find Pakistan standing beside it at all times….When we speak of this friendship as being taller than the Himalayas and deeper than the oceans it truly captures the essence of our relationship.”4 These remarks were greeted by whining from US spokesmen, including Idaho Republican Senator Risch.

The simmering strategic crisis between the United States and Pakistan exploded with full force on May 1, with the unilateral and unauthorized US commando raid alleged to have killed the phantomatic Osama bin Laden in a compound at Abottabad, a flagrant violation of Pakistan’s national sovereignty. The timing of this military stunt designed to inflame tensions between the two countries had nothing to do with any alleged Global War on Terror, and everything to do with the late March visit to Pakistan of Prince Bandar, the Saudi Arabian National Security Council chief. This visit had resulted in a de facto alliance between Islamabad and Riyadh, with Pakistan promising troops to put down any US-backed color revolution in the kingdom, while extending nuclear protection to the Saudis, thus making them less vulnerable to US extortion threats to abandon the oil-rich monarchy to the tender mercies of Tehran. A joint move by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to break out of the US empire, whatever one may think of these regimes, would represent a fatal blow for the fading US empire in South Asia.

As for the US claims concerning the supposed Bin Laden raid of May 1, they are a mass of hopeless contradictions which changes from day to day. An analysis of this story is best left to literary critics and writers of theatrical reviews. The only solid and uncontestable fact which emerges is that Pakistan is the leading US target — thus intensifying the anti-Pakistan US policy which has been in place since Obama’s infamous December 2009 West Point speech.

Gilani: Full Force Retaliation to Defend Pakistan’s Strategic Assets

The Chinese warning to Washington came on the heels of Gilani’s statement to the Pakistan Parliament declaring: “Let no one draw any wrong conclusions. Any attack against Pakistan’s strategic assets, whether overt or covert, will find a matching response…. Pakistan reserves the right to retaliate with full force. No one should underestimate the resolve and capability of our nation and armed forces to defend our sacred homeland.”5 A warning of full force retaliation from a nuclear power such as Pakistan needs to be taken seriously, even by the hardened aggressors of the Obama regime.

The strategic assets Gilani is talking about are the Pakistani nuclear forces, the key to the country’s deterrent strategy against possible aggression by India, egged on by Washington in the framework of the US-India nuclear cooperation accord. The US forces in Afghanistan have not been able to conceal their extensive planning for attempts to seize or destroy Pakistan’s nuclear bombs and warheads. According to a 2009 Fox News report, “The United States has a detailed plan for infiltrating Pakistan and securing its mobile arsenal of nuclear warheads if it appears the country is about to fall under the control of the Taliban, Al Qaeda or other Islamic extremists.” This plan was developed by General Stanley McChrystal when he headed the US Joint Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. JSOC, the force reportedly involved in the Bin Laden operation. is composed of Army Delta Force, Navy SEALs and “a high-tech special intelligence unit known as Task Force Orange.” “Small units could seize [Pakistan’s nukes], disable them, and then centralize them in a secure location,” claimed a source quoted by Fox.6

Obama Has Already Approved Sneak Attack on Pakistan’s Nukes

According to the London Sunday Express, Obama has already approved an aggressive move along these lines: “US troops will be deployed in Pakistan if the nation’s nuclear installations come under threat from terrorists out to avenge the killing of Osama Bin Laden… The plan, which would be activated without President Zardari’s consent, provoked an angry reaction from Pakistan officials… Barack Obama would order troops to parachute in to protect key nuclear missile sites. These include the air force’s central Sargodha HQ, home base for nuclear-capable F-16 combat aircraft and at least 80 ballistic missiles.” According to a US official, “The plan is green lit and the President has already shown he is willing to deploy troops in Pakistan if he feels it is important for national security.”7

Extreme tension over this issue highlights the brinksmanship and incalculable folly of Obama’s May 1 unilateral raid, which might easily have been interpreted by the Pakistanis as the long-awaited attack on their nuclear forces. According to the New York Times, Obama knew very well he was courting immediate shooting war with Pakistan, and “insisted that the assault force hunting down Osama bin Laden last week be large enough to fight its way out of Pakistan if confronted by hostile local police officers and troops.”

The Shooting Has Already Started

The shooting between US and Pakistani forces escalated on Tuesday May 17, when a US NATO helicopter violated Pakistani airspace in Waziristan. Pakistani forces showed heightened alert status, and opened fire immediately, with the US helicopter shooting back. Two soldiers at a Pakistani check post on the border in the Datta Khel area were wounded.8

Possible Pakistani retaliation for this border incursion came in Peshawar on Friday, May 20, when a car bomb apparently targeted a 2-car US consulate convoy, but caused no American deaths or injuries. One Pakistani bystander was killed, and several wounded. In other intelligence warfare, Ary One television reported the name of the CIA station chief in Islamabad, the second top US resident spook there to have his cover blown in six months.

US Envoy Grossman Rejects Pakistani Calls To Stop Border Violations

US Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan Marc Grossman, the replacement for the late Richard Holbrooke, on May 19 arrogantly rejected Pakistani calls for guarantees that no more Abottabad-style unilateral operations would be mounted in Pakistan.9 In refusing to offer such assurances, Grossman claimed that Pakistani officials had never demanded respect for their border in recent years.10

In the midst of this strategic crisis, India has gone ahead with inherently provocative scheduled military maneuvers targeting Pakistan. This is the “Vijayee Bhava” (Be Victorious) drill, held in the Thar desert of north Rajastan,. This atomic-biological-chemical Blitzkrieg drill involves the Second Armored Corps, “considered to be the most crucial of the Indian Army’s three principal strike formations tasked with virtually cutting Pakistan in two during a full-fledged war.”11

The Nation: A CIA-RAW-Mossad Pseudo-Taliban Countergang

One way to provide the provocation needed to justify a US-Indian attack on Pakistan would be through an increase in terrorist actions attributable to the so-called Taliban. According to the mainstream Pakistani media, the CIA, the Israeli Mossad, and the Indian RAW (Research and Analysis Wing) have created their own version of the Taliban in the form of a terrorist countergang which they control and direct. According to one account, “Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operatives have infiltrated the Taliban and Al-Qaeda networks, and have created their own Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) force in order to destabilize Pakistan.” The former Punjab Regional Commander of the Pakistani Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI), retired Brigadier General Aslam Ghuman, commented: “During my visit to the US, I learned that the Israeli spy agency Mossad, in connivance with Indian agency RAW, under the direct supervision of CIA, planned to destabilize Pakistan at any cost.”12 Was this countergang responsible for last week’s double bombing in Waziristan, which killed 80 paramilitary police?

According to the same account, Russian intelligence “disclosed that CIA contractor Raymond Davis and his network had provided Al-Qaeda operatives with chemical, nuclear and biological weapons, so that US installations may be targeted and Pakistan be blamed….” Davis, a JSOC veteran himself, was arrested for the murder of two ISI agents, but then released by the Pakistani government after a suspicious hue and cry by the State Department.

CIA Claims The New Al Qaeda Boss Lives in Waziristan

If the US needs a further pretext for additional raids, it will also be easy to cite the alleged presence in Waziristan of Saif al-Adel, now touted by the CIA as bin Laden’s likely successor as boss of al Qaeda.13 It is doubtless convenient for Obama’s aggressive intentions that Saif al-Adel can be claimed to reside so close to what is now the hottest border in the world, and not in Finsbury or Flatbush.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

In the wake of the unauthorized May 1 US raid, the Pakistani military chief General Kayani had issued his own warning that similar “misadventures” could not be repeated, while announcing that US personnel inside Pakistan would be sharply reduced. In the estimate of one ISI source, there are currently about 7,000 CIA operatives in country, many of them unknown to the Pakistani government. US-Pakistan intelligence sharing has reportedly been downgraded. In response to Kayani’s moves, the CIA limited hangout operation known as Wikileaks once again showed its real nature by attempting to discredit the Pakistan commander with dubious US cable reports that he had demanded more Predator drone attacks, not fewer, in recent years.

Especially since Obama’s West Point speech, the CIA has used Predator drone attacks to slaughter civilians with the goal of fomenting civil war inside Pakistan, leading to a breakup of the country along the ethnic lines of Punjab, Sind, Baluchistan, and Pushtunistan. The geopolitical goal is to destroy Pakistan’s potential to be the energy corridor between Iran and China. Selig Harrison has emerged as a top US advocate for Baluchistan succession.

Since May 1, six reported US Predator drones attacks have slain some 42 Pakistani civilians, goading public opinion into a frenzy of anti-US hatred. In response, a joint session of the Pakistani parliament voted unanimously on May 14 to demand an end to American missile strikes, calling on the government to cut NATO’s supply line to Afghanistan if the attacks should continue.14 Since the Karachi to Khyber Pass supply line carries as much as two thirds of the supplies needed by the Afghanistan invaders, such a cutoff would cause chaos among the NATO forces. All of this points to the inherent insanity of provoking war with the country your supply line runs through.

US Wants to Use Taliban Boss Mullah Omar Against Pakistan

The State Department dropped all preconditions for negotiating with the Taliban back in February, and the US is now reported by the Washington Post to be talking with envoys of Mullah Omar, the legendary one-eyed leader of the Quetta Shura or Taliban ruling council. It is apparent that the US is offering the Taliban an alliance against Pakistan. US regional envoy Grossman is hostile to the Pakistanis, but when it comes to the Taliban he has been nicknamed “Mr. Reconciliation.”15 By contrast, the US is said to be determined to assassinate the head of the Haqqani network using a Bin Laden-type raid. The Pakistanis are equally determined to keep the Haqqani as an ally.

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)

If China stands behind Pakistan, then Russia might be said to stand behind China. Looking forward to the upcoming June 15 meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Chinese President Hu praised Sino-Russian relations as being “at an unprecedented high point,” with an “obvious strategic ingredient.” In a press conference this week, Russian President Medvedev was obliged indirectly to acknowledge that the much-hyped Obama “reset” with Russia had amounted to very little, since the US ABM missile program in Romania and the rest of eastern Europe, so obviously directed against Russia, means that the START treaty is of dubious value, thus raising the specter of a “new Cold War.” Given the NATO assault on Libya, there would be no UN resolution against Syria, said Medvedev. Putin has been right all along, and Medvedev is trying to imitate Putin to salvage some chance of remaining in power.

Are We in July 1914?

The crisis leading to World War I began with the Sarajevo assassinations of June 28, 1914, but the first major declaration of war did not occur until August 1. In the interim month of July 1914, large parts of European public opinion retreated into a dreamlike trance, an idyllic la-la land of elegiac illusion, even as the deadly crisis gathered momentum. Something similar can be seen today. Many Americans fondly imagine that the alleged death of Bin Laden marks the end of the war on terror and the Afghan War. Instead, the Bin Laden operation has clearly ushered in a new strategic emergency. Forces which had opposed the Iraq war, from MSNBC to many left liberals of the peace movement, are variously supporting Obama’s bloody aggression in Libya, or even celebrating him as a more effective warmonger than Bush-Cheney because of his supposed success at the expense of Bin Laden. In reality, if there were ever a time to mobilize to stop a new and wider war, this is it.

This post first appeared on Webster Tarpley’s website.



2 “China-Pakistan alliance strengthened post bin Laden,” AFP, May 15, 2011,




6 Rowan Scarborough,”U.S. Has Plan to Secure Pakistan Nukes if Country Falls to Taliban, Fox News, May 14, 2009.

7 “US ‘To Protect Pakistan,” London Sunday Express, May 15, 2011,


9 “US refuses to assure it will not act unilaterally,”

10 “No US assurance on unilateral ops,”

11 “Getting leaner and meaner? Army practices blitzkrieg to strike hard at enemy,” Times of India, May 10, 2011,

12 “CIA has created own Taliban to wreak terror havoc on Pakistan, claims Pak paper,” ANI, May 12,

13 “New al-Qaeda chief in North Waziristan,” May 19, 2011




Donald Rumsfeld confronted on Aspartame and Iraq War

Saad Ali and Anthony
WeAreChange Chicago
May 23, 2011

CHICAGO, IL- Former Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, strolled into Chicago on May 17, 2011, for a speech at the globalist think tank, Chicago Council on Global Affairs. The audience was mainly comprised of your average “Coke drinking, McDonald’s eating” yuppie, ready to bow down to Mr. Rumsfeld. They clapped and cheered as he approached the podium and delivered his globalist speech. The praising of such a criminal was mind blowing, and something had to be done. Mr. Rumsfeld’s “accomplishments” have caused humanitarian suffering worldwide.

To start off, Rumsfeld is responsible for contributing to the approval of the artificial sweetener Aspartame. The known carcinogen has caused millions of people suffering around the world. Headaches, dizziness, neurological degeneration, macular degeneration, optic neuritis, insomnia, seizures, irregular heart rhythm, multiple sclerosis, lupus, Alzheimer’s disease, autism, Tourettes syndrome, birth defects, Lou Gehrig’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, leukemia, low blood platelet, and diabetes are a few of the illnesses and disease caused by this poisonous drug. Think about how much better our health could be had Mr. Rumsfeld not pushed Aspartame into the market for human consumption. (Visit Natural News for more information)

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

Furthermore, Rumsfeld is highly responsible for the destruction of Iraq, the death of one million Iraqi’s, and thousands of US soldiers. Based on the false claim that Saddam Hussein had WMD’s, they took the initiative and bombed Iraq. Extensive evidence proves that 9/11 was absolutely an inside job. Recently on the Mancow Show, Rumsfeld was asked what he tells people about building 7, and he replied by asking, “What is building 7?”… “I have no idea. I have never heard that.”

With all this in mind, how can people actually sit there and listen to this murdering terrorist praise his latest globalist, garbage, and worthless book? Saad Ali of We Are Change Chicago and Anthony from We Are Change Ohio attended the event. Fortunately, the heavily controlled Q&A session did not follow through as planned.

Saad was given a chance to ask a question, so he asked, “Some of your greatest accomplishments have been cause to some of the most horrible human suffering… One million dead in Iraq, thousands of dead Americans, legalizing Aspartame, How do you live with that sir?” Rumsfeld announced that he would take on the Aspartame part, and the audience chuckled.

He completely lied about the truth of what Aspartame can do to the human body, and in turn said that it was “the most studied food additive.” He said that it was “good” for the body and that people who believe that Aspartame causes various health issues, as it has been proven to do over and over, are “conspiracy theorists.”

Unsatisfied with his answer, Saad demanded a response for the one million innocent Iraqi’s who were murdered during the Iraq war. He stood up and asked, “What about the one million Iraqi’s?” Security immediately ran towards Saad and began grabbing his camera, while the globalist, shoe-licking mediator demanded Saad to sit down. He refused to sit down, and spoke his mind, hoping the audience would realize that this traitor had deceived America at the expense of the people of Iraq and our own US soldiers. Security grabbed Saad and dragged him out of the building.

Anthony of We Are Change Ohio walked in as Saad was kicked out, and security immediately grabbed him and escorted him out of the building. How or why they knew we were together is still unknown.

The audience members walking out of the building had mixed views on the confrontation. Some felt that it was necessary to scold and question him on such issues, and some were completely disgusted by the confrontation (The guy at the end.)

The wars have resulted in the death of millions of innocent men, women, and children. Their God given right of living, loving, and enjoying this life has been stripped by criminals like Rumsfeld. Billions of people have fallen victim to the poisonous chemical Aspartame, and their lives will never be the same.

These are crimes on humanity, and not on an individual race, religion, creed, nation, or people. A crime on humanity is a crime on us all. We are in this together, and we must fight for justice for one another. Please, take advantage of the few rights we still have, and get out there while you still can. Peacefully demand answers from these murderers and wake up your friends and family.


Alain Soral: Entretien de Mai 2011 - VIDEO

Entretien mensuel d’Alain Soral, président d’Égalité & Réconciliation.

Thèmes abordés :

Mise au point après "l’affaire Guillon", les faux antisionistes belges, Michel Collon et Noam Chomsky, Sionisme et Judaïsme, l’affaire DSK, la mort de Ben Laden, Obama - Israël et la Palestine, la rencontre entre Omar Djellil et Stéphane Durbec, l’affaire des quotas dans le football français, Carla Bruni, la boutade de Lars Von Trier au festival de Cannes.

Alain Soral - entretien de mai 2011 par ERTV


Quelques rappels utiles sur Dominique Strauss-Kahn

Pendant que les médias s’acharnent à le présumer innocent, il ne faut pas oublier qui est cet homme.


- Il a occupé les fonctions de ministre de l’Industrie et du Commerce international de 1991 à 1993, période durant laquelle il a participé aux négociations commerciales de l’Uruguay Round préparatoire à la création de l’Organisation mondiale du commerce (OMC).

- En 1994, il participe avec Raymond Lévy, alors PDG de Renault, à la création du Cercle de l’Industrie, cercle spécialisé dans la défense de l’industrie française à Bruxelles, dont il devient le vice-président et où il côtoie des grands patrons.

- En 1997, Lionel Jospin, nouveau Premier ministre, le nomme ministre de l’Économie, des Finances et de l’Industrie. Il est l’artisan de privatisations massives, notamment celle de France Télécom, alors que le programme de Lionel Jospin excluait expressément cette dernière. Sous son impulsion, le gouvernement Jospin (1997-2002) a privatisé davantage que les gouvernements de droite Balladur et Juppé réunis (31 milliards d’euros contre 25,7), notamment quelques fleurons de l’économie française qui échappent ainsi au contrôle public : Air France, Aérospatiale (EADS), Thomson, Autoroutes du Sud de la France, France Télécom, Eramet, des compagnies d’assurances (GAN, CNP), des banques (Crédit Lyonnais, CIC, Marseillaise de Crédit, Crédit Foncier de France)…

- En mai 2005, il sort un DVD en faveur du « oui » au projet de traité établissant une Constitution pour l’Europe. Le « non » l’emportera en France à plus de 54%.

- Le 17 septembre 2006, il déclare : « Les universités françaises sont en train de plonger dans les palmarès internationaux. Il faut créer une concurrence entre les établissements et mettre fin à l’hypocrisie du diplôme unique. Ce qui n’empêche pas de garder le système dans le public et de conserver une vision égalitaire ». Il ajoute : « Pour moi, il n’y aurait pas de scandale à ce que la chaire de physique nucléaire de Paris-VI soit financée par EDF, si EDF trouve que c’est bon pour son image. Mais ce n’est pas dans les mœurs |1| ».

- Le 18 novembre 2008, il est décoré des insignes de Grand officier de l’ordre de la République par le dictateur tunisien Ben Ali. A cette occasion, M. Strauss-Kahn déclare : « l’économie tunisienne va bien, malgré la crise, (...) la politique économique qui est conduite est saine, et je pense que c’est un bon exemple à suivre pour beaucoup de pays (...) le jugement que porte le FMI sur la politique tunisienne est très positif (...) les choses continueront de fonctionner correctement |2| ».

- En novembre 2008, à l’issue de sa visite en Libye, il déclare : « Le Maghreb a connu des progrès remarquables et son potentiel est considérable. (…) J’ai félicité les participants à la Conférence de Tripoli d’avoir adopté le plan d’action pour accélérer les réformes en matière de facilitation des échanges, d’intégration financière et de la promotion du secteur privé et des projets communs. (…) Le défi principal est de maintenir le rythme des réformes en cours visant entre autres à réduire la taille de l’État. Dans ce contexte, le Programme de distribution de la richesse comporte à la fois une bonne occasion et certains risques. S’il est structuré et mis sur pied convenablement, ce programme pourrait promouvoir le secteur privé tout en minimisant les risques posés pour l’offre de services publics essentiels |3| ».

- « On vit 100 ans, on ne va pas continuer à avoir la retraite à 60 ans » (Le Figaro, 20 mai 2010). Le ministre du Travail de Nicolas Sarkozy, Eric Woerth, le remercie publiquement pour sa position en faveur de la réforme des retraites |4|.

|1| « Depuis New-York, Strauss-Kahn veut dynamiter les facs », Libération, 19 septembre 2006 et sur un site de soutien à sa candidature aux primaires du Parti socialiste :

|2| Voir la vidéo :

|3| Communiqué de presse consulté le 12 mars 2011,

|4| Dépêche AFP, « Retraites : merci à DSK (Woerth) », 7 octobre 2010


The War on Ron Paul
May 23, 2011

Susan Westfall

Whether the media establishments want to admit it or not, and believe me they don’t, Ron Paul IS the ‘front runner’ for the republican primary. Despite voracious denials and vitriolic arguments from almost every quarter to the contrary, he is the only one with a chance of shutting out Obama for the presidency in 2012. He appeals to all sides of the aisle, and is attracting the much sought after independent swing vote almost as fast as he has the youth of the nation. The Internet is indisputably Ron Paul country as countless polls and google trends have repeatedly shown. The gradual change in political rhetoric flowing out of Washington, D.C. over the last 3 years reflects an explosion of interest in the freedom message he spreads so tirelessly. The continuous growth in popularity of talk and news shows focusing on freedom and the Constitution broadcasts loud and clear the rising prominence of issues he has brought to the debate. For anyone with any powers of discernment, it’s a no-brainer.

Photo by Justin Ruckman.

So why do media pundits, dime a dozen politicians, and innumerable experts of self-aggrandized consequence spend great swathes of time, effort, and someone’s money working so hard to convince the people otherwise? You can’t turn on a TV, pick up a paper or surf the Internet without encountering the words “He can’t win,” or some other lame variation repeated ad nauseam with great gusto. According to all the most acclaimed talking heads, that mythical beast “The Front Runner” has yet to be seen on the horizon and is still to arise from some unknown lair, “blazing a new trail” of GOP fame and success across political skies sometime in the not too distant future. Their blind adherence to this tired refrain boggles the mind. Personally, I can find only one reason for the constant repudiation…fear. Fear of the known…Ron Paul, and fear of the unknown…future largess. The status-quo is cornered and its biggest backers are flailing in desperation through media and political mouthpieces.

With decades of consistency on record as proof, it is well known by all in Washington that Ron Paul will not compromise his principles for money, power or personal gain. Ron Paul is simply…not for sale. Lobbyists for special interests have never been able to rent his vote. This is such an undisputed reality that they don’t even darken the door of his congressional office. His opinion can not be leased by the highest bidder, nor his silence ensured through threats and coercion. He is a man who stands his ground, refusing to back down, flip-flop, or play the political game of corporate footsie that entangles so many on the Hill. This is the kind of strength America not just needs, but deep down hungers for in a president. America does not need a president with the strength to circumvent law by executive order, ignore Congress and engage in needless conflicts, or break international and common law to achieve a victory. Those who stand to lose the most under a president who would not compromise the peoples’ liberties, the Constitution or the rule of law for any reason are deathly afraid of Ron Paul.

If we apply Donald Rumsfeld’s ludicrous scale of measurement, in use long before he popularized the phrase during his tenure as Secretary of Defense, then Ron Paul could aptly be termed a “known, known”. Needless to say, much heated discussion has probably occurred in many a smoky back room about this unpleasant reality. Logic tells us that a good number of those rooms might even be located in the Pentagon. Ron Paul has never made a secret of the fact that he would like to: reduce military spending to that needed for defense only; bring the troops home from all foreign bases; and restore foreign affairs to a non-interventionist policy more befitting a Republic that purports to be the shining example of liberty. Accomplishing these goals would of course mean a vast reduction in the present size and budget of the military industrial complex and can be only a cause for apprehension in those quarters. If recent world events are any indication, the threat must be great indeed. In an unprecedented flurry of efficiency the military, under direction of Commander in Chief Obama, has recently not only rescued another country from tyrannical oppression, but tracked down and killed the world’s worst terrorist, Osama Binladen, thus proving its undoubted worth and necessity. Unfortunately, the tyrant really isn’t gone yet and no one can figure out exactly what happened with the bin laden operation. Nevertheless, we’ve been assured of the worthiness of our current pedal-to-the-metal monetary support for the military industrial complex. If we haven’t then we’re obviously unpatriotic and borderline terrorists ourselves.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • Buy 3 Get 1 FREE!

Of course no one would actually dare accuse Ron Paul of being unpatriotic. They’d be laughed right off the media stage, no matter how lofty their perch. So the approach is made from a different angle. That of foreign aid. Dr. Paul has clearly stated on numerous occasions that he would cut foreign aid to all countries, not only because of our fiscal situation but also because he believes we should respect the sovereignty of all nations and not try to dictate their policies through bribes or bombs. Cutting foreign aid in and of itself does not seem to be a problem. Polls reflect that a majority of Americans support cuts to foreign aid. However, the idea of cutting all foreign aid brings on an instantaneous and seemingly mass hysteria with regards to Israel. If we dare to look past AIPAC and other lobbyist groups for answers which contain more rational ideas than the usual accusations of anti-semitism, unpatriotic betrayal, or abandonment of democratic friends, informative sources soon surface. In a report by John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt of University of Chicago and Harvard University respectively, the “special relationship” between the US and Israel is explained more fully. Surprisingly, the military complex appears to play a weighty role here as well. A brief look at some benefits specific to Israel include: retaining 25% of aid dollars to subsidize its own defense industry instead of spending 100% to subsidize the US defense industry as other countries must do; not having to account for how aid dollars are spent; and being provided ” with nearly $3 billion to develop weapons systems like the Lavi aircraft that the Pentagon did not want or need.” There is a plethora of information in just this one report that evidences the detrimental effects of the “special relationship” American taxpayers purchase annually with their foreign aid dollars with what would appear to be little or no benefit to themselves. Interestingly, there is growing evidence of a substantive support in Israel itself for an end to US foreign aid which is seen by many there as “an affront against Israeli liberty and sovereignty, as well as a drain on the development of numerous sectors of the Israeli economy, such as the weapons and biotechnology industries.” Based on just the above facts it can be argued that perhaps it’s time for the American people to debate the prudence of an industrial complex deciding our military decisions, instead of a decisive military defending our national borders.

Having hurled their verbal slings and arrows of foreign policy insanity and foreign aid abandonment, most pundits proceed to trot out the next big issue to be refuted…individual liberties. Of course they don’t often mention those actual words, but delve deeply right to the perceived heart of the issue…heroin. Ron Paul wants to “legalize heroin” is touted gleefully to choruses of “and prostitution!” A round of smirks is the cue for visions of marauding bands of crazed, drug abusing prostitutes to begin dancing through the viewers’ heads and scare them out of ever considering Ron Paul as a viable candidate for anything, much less republican party nominee. A thinking person might wonder why the fascination and focus on heroin, other than for the shock value of course, whenever individual liberty is mentioned. “Protecting individual liberty,” Ron Paul often explains, “is the purpose of all government. Individual liberty is the right to your life, the right to your property and the right to keep the fruits of your labor.” With those two simple sentences and a clear constitutional understanding of what they actually mean in regards to federal government overreach, almost everything that the status quo fights to maintain is essentially negated. Is it any wonder the most inflammatory phrases are employed at every opportunity to derail the very idea?

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)

No matter how much Washington, D.C. wishes to protect Americans from themselves, lift them out of poverty, provide for their well-being, or ensure their safety from dangerous products and enemies, it cannot do so without infringing on their individual liberties and violating the Constitution. The federal government we live with today no longer serves the interests of the American people, but serves the special interests of: corporate cronyism; militarism for profit influence and empire; centrally planned debt management, counterfeiting, fraud and currency debasement. Those who would maintain the status quo, despite its almost certain destructive end, are beginning to realize just how much they have underestimated the power of a quiet, consistent message of truth delivered to the people by a man of principle. A man who would be president not for the power he could wield over the people, but for the power he would give to the people by restoring their Republic. So war has been declared again, but this time the war is on liberty…and Ron Paul.


TSA Backs Down from Prom Night Grope

Kurt Nimmo
May 23, 2011

Last week it was announced that TSA goons would conduct a grope-down of students during prom night at a Santa Fe high school. The TSA promised to move from airports into the New Mexico high school after two girls said security personnel groped them and a federal judge ruled the TSA should conduct pat-downs at dances or graduations.

On Friday, the Santa Fe school district announced the planned TSA-led grope-down.

The judge’s ruling indicates the federal government and the TSA believe they should be conducting searches. The TSA has moved from airports to train and bus stations. TSA boss Napolitano has said she envisions the agency ultimately groping citizens at malls and hotels.

On Saturday night, however, the TSA did not conduct the searches at the Santa Fe high school as promised. Government searching students is now a well-established practice at public schools.

Santa Fe superintendent Bobbie Gutierrez told KOAT News in Albuquerque that instead of TSA goons with blue latex gloves, the court allowed Santa Fe High School to use state police to search students.

KOAT does not want the media to share its video, but you can see a report on the TSA back down over on YouTube.


America 2011

The American Dream
May 23, 2011

What kind of place is America in 2011?  Sadly, it is one giant sea of conformity.  If you traveled across the United States 40 or 50 years ago, you would encounter a vast array of cultures and you would meet a wonderful mix of people.  But today America is slowly but surely becoming standardized.  It seems like wherever you go you will find a Wal-Mart and a McDonald’s.  Thanks to Hollywood and the mass media, people all over the country dress the same and look the same and talk the same.  Sure there are various subcultures out there, but even many of those subcultures are virtually the same on one coast as they are on the other.  The things that gave flavor to our local communities are dying off in favor of greater conformity and greater profit.  Today, most retail stores and most restaurants are corporate owned.  Most small businesses that attempt to go up against the Wal-Marts, the Targets, the Burger Kings or the Home Depots of the world have already been stomped out of existence or are in the process of being stomped out of existence.  Eventually, if we are not careful, corporate conformity is going to dominate everything from the Atlantic to the Pacific.  Some may view this as “progress”, but is this really what the American Dream is supposed to be all about?  Is this really the “America” that we want to pass down to future generations?

Our society has become so homogenized that we don’t really question it anymore.  We all watch American Idol, we all buy the same boring looking cars we see advertised on television and we all buy the same mass-produced corporate products down at Costco.

For many Americans, doing something “exotic” means going out to Applebee’s on Friday night.

If you are under 40 years of age and you have never been out of the country you should really make it a point to do that. Today there are millions upon millions of young Americans that have no idea what “another culture” even looks like.  All they know is how America does things and they have been taught that the American way of doing things is always the best.

Sadly, sometimes we think our way is so superior that it should be forced upon the rest of the world.

When this nation was founded, our founding fathers were extremely suspicious of large concentrations of power.  Corporations did not dominate early America.  Instead, millions of individuals and small businesses worked together to make this country great.  Back in those days a “family store” could be started without fear that a corporate giant like Wal-Mart would come waltzing in to crush it.

When Wal-Marts started to spread across the United States, almost everyone loved them.  The prices were lower, the selection was much greater and Wal-Mart brought jobs to the community.

When I would visit family or friends they would always excitedly talk about the new Wal-Mart that was going up somewhere nearby.  They saw Wal-Mart as a sign of progress and something that would make their lives better.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

Unfortunately, we now know that all of that corporate conformity comes at a very high price.

When Wal-Mart moves into a community, often dozens of local businesses can’t compete and are forced to close.

Wal-Mart does bring jobs, but they are really crappy jobs.  A very, very small percentage of Wal-Mart jobs will even come close to enabling someone to support a family.

But Wal-Mart is making a ton of money.  So where does all of that money go?

It goes out of the local community and into the pockets of the Wal-Mart shareholders.

Wal-Mart is like a giant vacuum cleaner.  It sucks the wealth out of our local communities and it transfers it into the hands of the very wealthy.

But don’t all of the products sold at Wal-Mart support American businesses and American jobs?


Just go into a Wal-Mart some time and start picking up products.  You will notice that the vast majority of them are made outside of the United States.

Americans love to buy stuff made in China.  And the big corporations love that because they are more than happy to pay slave labor wages to workers in places like China and India.

But I don’t want to just pick on Wal-Mart.  The vast majority of our retail establishments are now owned by huge corporations.  They all crush small businesses and they all suck wealth out of our local communities.

Most of us have enjoyed the “low, low prices” that the mega-corporations have brought in, but as inflation has gone up faster than our wages, large numbers of Americans have had to go into debt in order to enjoy all of these cheap products.

Today, what the average American family owes is equivalent to 136% of what an average American family makes each year.

We have a national addiction to debt.  To the corporations and the banks we are viewed as “consumers” and the goal is to drain as much money out of us as possible.  They want us to be completely dependent on them so that we will be snared in the trap of “consumerism” forever.

The fact that corporations have become so dominant in our society is a huge reason why wealth has become so concentrated at the top.  Today, the bottom 50 percent of all Americans own just 2.5% of the wealth.  In a true capitalist society this would not happen because individuals and small businesses would be able to compete fairly in the marketplace and would be thriving.

But unfortunately, our system greatly favors giant corporations today.  In fact, what we have in our country today is much more aptly called “corporatism” rather than “capitalism”.  The vast majority of Americans work for either a giant corporation or for the government.    We even teach our children that they should go to college and study hard so that they can “get a job” rather than telling them that they should endeavor to “start a business” someday.

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)

If nothing changes, wealth and power will continue to become even more concentrated in the hands of the few.  Meanwhile, America will just continue to become a giant sea of corporate conformity and a very boring place.

“America 2011″ is not nearly as interesting as America was 50 years ago.  We are becoming defined by our greedy corporate overlords.  We just blindly conform and we let others do our thinking for us.

If our founding fathers could see us today, they would be absolutely horrified.


Corsi: Trump Conspired With Obama To Neutralize Birther Controversy

Paul Joseph Watson
May 23, 2011

Corsi: Trump Conspired With Obama To Neutralize Birther Controversy 230511top

Image: Wikimedia Commons

As he prepares to release shocking new evidence and name the people who he claims were behind the forgery of Barack Obama’s long form birth certificate, author Jerome Corsi sensationally accused short-lived Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump of “working with Obama” to neutralize the birther controversy.

Appearing on the Alex Jones Show, Corsi said that he now completely discounted the apparent efforts of Donald Trump to force the release of Obama’s birth certificate, stating, “I’m completely convinced at this point Donald Trump was subterfuge, that he…. was working with Obama.”

Trump’s role according to Corsi was to “beat the drums big” and craft a false resolution to the controversy in order to make the press “go to sleep” and get his $60 million dollar television contract with NBC, owned by General Electric, which is closely allied with the Obama administration.

Regarding who actually helped the administration create the forgery, Corsi pointed out that “they were stuck with the guys who were close to them,” because putting out a proposal for outside experts to forge the document would have been far too risky.

“I’m pretty well on the trail of linking the characteristics of this document to someone who’s going to have a lot of explaining to do,” said Corsi, adding that he was “hot on the trail” of one individual who “may have had a hand in this,” and that his identity would be released this week.

“The forger is someone who does not work in government, he works in the media and is close to the administration and would have been within the circle of friends that may have been called on to do the forgery or participate in the forgery,” said Corsi.

Corsi said that the information contained in his book, Where’s the Birth Certificate?, and the new revelations he was about to unleash would mean the Obama administration “would not survive,” because the evidence proves the administration has tried to preserve itself using “criminal fraud”.

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t

“I got a call about three weeks before it was released from one of my sources in Hawaii and I was told that the new long form birth certificate had been forged, had been slipped into the log book,” said Corsi, noting that efforts to create the fake began shortly after reporter Mike Evans let slip that Hawaii Governor and close friend Neil Abercrombie had been shocked at his failure to find Obama’s long form birth certificate, and were timed to pre-empt the release of Corsi’s book.

During the interview, Corsi listed numerous examples of where the new birth certificate was clearly forged, including an obvious misspelling on the stamp and a “smiley face” that appears in the signature of the doctor once the document is blown up to 800 per cent, both of which don’t occur in the hundreds of other examples of the signature that Corsi has studied.

The letters in the document also share identical pixelations despite the fact that they are purportedly from a typewriter, which would produce different pixelations if transferred to an electronic document every time. The identical pixelations prove that the document was created on a modern computer.

Another aspect of the birth certificate pointing to forgery is the fact that the electronic PDF document released by the White House clearly shows evidence of ‘kerning’ – where parts of letters overlap each other for a pleasing visual effect – this is produced by modern computers and was not possible on 1960′s typewriters.

“The administration will not show the original, in 1961 there were no computers, where’s the original paper birth certificate if it exists?” asked Corsi, adding that the original document needs to undergo forensic analysis. Corsi visited the Hawaii Department of Health as well as the Kapi’olani Medical Center in an attempt to see the original certificate or patient records for Obama’s mother Ann Dunham, but was told that police would be called if he didn’t vacate the premises.

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)

During an interview with a Denver radio station last week, Corsi said he was about to release bombshell evidence that proved the alleged Obama birth certificate released last month was a composite of three different birth certificates from other individuals born at the same hospital.

“I’m going to be telling the entire world about this scandal over the next few weeks,” Corsi said in a separate interview. “This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.”

In an effort to derail the success of Corsi’s book, Esquire Magazine then put out a hoax article claiming that publisher Joseph Farah had ordered the book to be pulled from store shelves. Farah is considering whether to launch a lawsuit in response.

Watch Corsi’s full interview with Alex Jones below.

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show.