Contributed by The End Run

False Flag Dirty Tricks Against Ron Paul Campaign Fully Exposed

Coming on the heels of last week’s dirty deception by the Huntsman campaign, several rabidly anti-Ron Paul political activists have been caught planning another vicious “false flag”-style dirty trick against the presidential candidate and his supporters, this time in South Carolina, where the next GOP primary will take place.

The plot, which was being hatched over Facebook, involved dressing up in hooded Ku Klux Klan (KKK) robes, posing as Ron Paul supporters (complete with Ron Paul signs), and “follow[ing] Paul around South Carolina”, making “sure to get photographed by the media.”

The thread proposing the idea was started earlier this week by Jere Brower of neighboring Georgia on the wall of the “Stop Ron Paul 2012″ Facebook group.   On Wednesday, January 11th, Brower wrote:

“If you live in South Carolina and want to have some real fun with these Paulbots here is what we do- go online and buy or make your very own KKK robe, complete with hood (hood is important).  Then get some Ron Paul signs off the internet or make your own.  Follow Paul around South Carolina and be sure to get photographed by the media.  Again, hoods are important.  All can be Klansmen for Paul. Black, white, Jewish, Asian- those Paulbots will shit a brick!”

He quickly got a second from one Chris Collins of Gainesville, GA (only about an hour’s drive from the South Carolina border), who said: “That is seriously a great idea! Anyone wanna volunteer???”

Minutes later, Brower replied: “Chris, if we can get ten of us to do it, I am down, but where does one get KKK robes????”

When another member opined that the plan was not worth carrying out, Collins objected: “Well, actually, I disagree.  Why not show the world the truth about the type on ilk that supporters Ron Paul?  Let me think on this, Jere.”

The next post came from a Rex Foster, who recommended that the Paul haters infiltrate the Paul campaign by volunteering to make phone calls for the candidate.  They could tell South Carolina voters that they were calling on “behalf of Ron Paul’s campaign”, and then spout non-sense about “lizard people” in an attempt to turn the voters off to Paul.

The thread was flagged by lacrossewatchdog.org earlier today, who credited Patrick McEwen of the Capital Free Press for the tip.  News of the plot spread to a number of Ron Paul grassroots websites, whose members quickly sounded the alarm and took the story somewhat viral on social media sites like Facebook and Twitter.

The negative attention prompted the “Stop Ron Paul 2012″ group to remove the thread late Friday evening, but not before many activists captured screen shots.

Around the time that the thread was removed, and after getting bombarded with negative Tweets and Facebook messages, Brower posted a message to Facebook saying, “Someone has hacked my shit.”

When questioned by another user about whether the supposed “hacking” pertained to his financial information, Brower replied: “Nah, messed with my facebook, fucked with my email, messed around with work files.”

This claim, which is apparently meant to explain away the offending thread, does not pass the smell test.  The thread was posted three days ago, with several follow-up posts by Brower.

Furthermore, The End Run has examined his publicly-available Twitter and Facebook posts and found many examples of him calling “Paulbots” “clinically insane”, falsely accusing Ron Paul of wanting to “legalize child prostitution” and being “against children going to school”, attempting to conflate him and his supporters with the KKK and racism, using vulgar language to disparage them, and so forth.

These posts go back months. When Kelly Clarkson tweeted that she supports Ron Paul, he repeatedly trolled her Facebook page, accusing her of wanting to burn crosses. Here is a screen shot of some samples.  (Warning: Vulgar language.)

According to his publicly-viewable LinkedIn page (archived here), Brower works for Google as a “Field Operations Specialist”.   He lists his “Specialties” as “Crisis management, social media, media relations, brand specialist, event planning, event management”.

At this point I have seen no evidence that he was acting on behalf of Google or any other entity other than himself, but this connection may at least be worth looking into, especially in light of the ties between Google and the recent uprising in Egypt.

Brower served in the U.S. Army during the mid and late 90′s (possibly as late as 2002, according to one source), and has several older pictures of himself in uniform on his Facebook page.

He is listed on VetFriends.com as having reached the rank of Specialist (SPC).

On Facebook, he lists The Prince by Machiavelli as one of his favorite books.

Throughout 2011, Brower repeatedly voiced his strong support for former candidate Herman Cain on  Facebook and Twitter, and pictures of him with Cain have emerged.

However, it is important to note that I have seen no evidence thus far that he is directly tied to the campaign.

Unless strong and credible evidence emerges tying him to the Cain campaign, it would be unfair to hold Cain responsible for his behavior.

Likewise, it would be totally unfair to try to paint all Herman Cain supporters with a broad brush due to Brower’s shameful behavior.

Every candidate has loathsome individuals supporting them, and it is clear that most Cain supporters — and indeed most people in general — would not contemplate stooping to these kinds of tactics.  (Brower has also Tweeted support for a Donald Trump candidacy, by the way.)

As for Chris Collins, who called Brower’s plan “seriously a great idea” and asked for volunteers: his listed activities include “Jackson County GOP”, “Tea Party Movement”, “Freemasonry”, and “Jefferson Georgia Tea Party Patriots”.  (Again, this does not mean that any of these groups as a whole, or any other members of them, necessarily endorse or even know about what he was plotting with Brower.)

Collin’s page also lists HermanCain.com as a past “employer”.  However, I have found no corroboration for this, so he may just have put that there to show his support.

It’s important to note that anyone can list themselves as being employed by anyone else on Facebook.  Once again, until further evidence comes forward, it is not safe to assume that he actually worked for Cain, and certainly not that Cain is somehow behind this anti-Paul plan.  Recently Collins has been posting lots of anti-Ron Paul and pro-Rick Santorum articles.

Lacrosswatchdog.org has noted that South Carolina has a history of political dirty tricks, such as Karl Rove’s disgraceful “push polling” during the 2000 GOP Primary.

The proposed plot against Ron Paul is similar to one that was carried out against his son Rand Paul during his Senate campaign, when a supporter of Democrat Jack Conway dressed up as a “Rand fan” to try to make Rand Paul supporters look crazy and racist in front of the media, but was later caught participating in a march for Conway. He was subsequently identified as Tyler Collins, a liberal activist who campaigned for Barack Obama.

Similar tactics have also been planned and executed against the “Tea Party movement” by (for example) “anarchist” provocateurs wanting to “act on behalf of the Tea Party” in disgraceful ways in order to “damage the public’s opinion of them”, and fake “Nazi Youth” who crashed a tax day protest by the Santa Fe Tea Party.

Here is a good example of activists with cameras and anti-racism signs non-violently confronting a supposed “KKK” member who infiltrated a “Tea Party” rally in St. Louis, which may be instructive if any such people show up in South Carolina this week.

In South Carolina, Ron Paul has recently surged to 20% in the polls, following his impressive second place showing in New Hampshire, where he garnered 24% of the vote.

(Note: All of the information in this article was already a matter of public record, and much of it was publicly posted to the internet by Brower and Collins.)

Related Posts:

• U.S. Intelligence Agencies Pushing Iran’s U.S. Terrorist Attack Plot Propaganda, Again.
• Argentina says Monsanto contractor abuses workers
• Iran makes arrests in scientist assassination
• UCSF Professor: “Society Will Pay a Huge Price in Cancer” Because of DHS Full Vehicle X-Ray Machines
• Mossad Operatives Posed as CIA Operatives

January 15, 2012

Source: Charlotte Observer

The country’s biggest banks are overwhelmingly supporting Mitt Romney’s bid for the Republican presidential nomination, an Observer analysis of federal campaign contributions shows.

Employees at the five largest U.S. banks by assets, including Bank of America Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co., gave Romney about $600,000 through the first three quarters of 2011, according to the most recent filings available from the Federal Election Commission.

The second-largest recipient of bank employee contributions, President Barack Obama, had far less, about $200,000, the analysis showed. The Republican presidential hopeful with the second-highest total, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, dropped out of the race in mid-August.

Romney received more from employees of those top five banks than all the other candidates combined, helping make the former Massachusetts governor the best-financed candidate in the Republican nomination battle, which is heating up in South Carolina ahead of Saturday’s primary.

Read More….

Related Posts:

• Goldman Sachs Employees Have Donated How Much Money To Mitt Romney?!
• Obama to Use Pension Funds of Ordinary Americans to Pay for Bank Mortgage “Settlement”
• Federal Prosecutor to Take 5th Amendment in Fast and Furious Probe
• Russia Says NATO, Persian Gulf Nations Plan to Seek No-Fly Zone for Syria
• Bain Capital Owns Clear Channel (Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, Etc.)

January 13, 2012

Source: The American Dream

Wouldn’t it be great if a Republican presidential candidate could just buy the support of just about every major conservative talk show host in America?  Well, it may not be as far-fetched as you may think.

Clear Channel owns more radio stations (850) than anyone else in the United States.  They also own Premiere Radio Networks, the company that syndicates the radio shows of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck, among others.  Needless to say, Clear Channel basically owns conservative talk radio in the United States.  So who owns Clear Channel?  Well, it turns out that Bain Capital is one of the primary owners of Clear Channel.  Yes, you read that correctly.  The company that Mitt Romney ran for so long is one of the “big bosses” over virtually all conservative talk radio in America.  Of course Mitt Romney is not running Bain Capital anymore.  He is a “retired partner”, but he still has a huge financial stake in Bain Capital.  We’re talking about millions upon millions of dollars.  If you doubt this, just check out page 34 of this public financial disclosure report.  So if you have been wondering why so many conservative talk show hosts are being so incredibly kind to Mitt Romney, this just might be the answer.

In the media world, there is a clear understanding that you simply do not bite the hand that feeds you.  Some of the most prominent conservative talk radio hosts are earning tens of millions of dollars a year.

If you were making tens of millions of dollars a year, wouldn’t you be very careful to avoid offending your boss?

The deal in which Bain Capital became one of the owners of Clear Channel was initiated just a short time before Mitt Romney’s first run for president.  The following comes from Wikipedia….

On November 16, 2006, Clear Channel announced plans to go private, being bought out by two private-equity firms,Thomas H. Lee Partners and Bain Capital Partners for $18.7 billion, which is just under a 10 percent premium above its closing price of $35.36 a share on November 16 (the deal values Clear Channel at $37.60 per share).

The deal was finalized in 2008.  Today, Bain Capital is still one of the primary owners of Clear Channel.

One of the subsidiaries of Clear Channel is Premiere Radio Networks.

Premiere Radio Networks distributes a whole host of conservative talk radio shows.  Everyone in the conservative world knows names such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck.  Clear Channel also controls some other conservative talk radio hosts (such as Michael Savage and Mark Levin) that are not part of the Premiere Radio family.

The power that Premiere Radio Networks has is absolutely staggering.  The following is directly from the official Clear Channel website….

Premiere Radio Networks Inc., a subsidiary of Clear Channel Communications, syndicates 90 radio programs and services to more than 5,000 radio affiliations and reaches over 190 million listeners weekly.  Premiere Radio is the number one radio network in the country and features the following personalities:  Rush Limbaugh, Jim Rome, Casey Kasem, Ryan Seacrest, Glenn Beck, Bob (Kevoian) & Tom (Griswold), Delilah, Steve Harvey, Blair Garner, George Noory, John Boy and Billy, Big Tigger, Dr. Dean Edell, Bob Costas, Sean Hannity and others. Premiere is based in Sherman Oaks, California, with 13 offices nationwide.

So do you think that any of those hosts is going to risk viciously attacking Mitt Romney and Bain Capital during this election season?

Not likely.

One of the controversies that has plagued Premiere Radio Networks in recent years has been the uproar over their use of paid actors to call in to their radio shows.

The following comes from Wikipedia….

Clear Channel, through its subsidiary, Premiere Radio Networks, auditions and hires actors to call in to talk radio shows and pose as listeners in order to provide shows, carried by Clear Channel and other broadcasters, with planned content in the form of stories and opinions. The custom caller service provided by Premiere Radio ensures its clients they won’t hear the same actor’s voice for at least two months in order to appear authentic to listeners who might otherwise catch on.

So perhaps that explains where some of the “Romney callers” come from.

There is nothing illegal about what Romney and Bain Capital have done, but it sure does not pass the “smell test”.

Conservative talk radio has the potential to sway millions of conservative voters in one direction or another, and it is just not proper for Bain Capital and Romney to have such an overpowering financial interest in conservative talk radio.

And yes, Mitt Romney is still bringing in lots of money from Bain Capital.  The following comes from a Wikipedia article about Mitt Romney….

At the time of his departure, Romney negotiated an agreement with Bain Capital that allowed him to receive a passive profit share as a retired partner in some Bain Capital entities, including buyout and investment funds.^[62][57] With the private equity business continuing to thrive, this deal would bring him millions of dollars in income each year.^[57] As a result of his business career, by 2007 Romney and his wife had a net worth of between $190 and $250 million, most of it held in blind trusts.^[62] An additional blind trust existed in the name of the Romneys’ children and grandchildren that was valued at between $70 and $100 million as of 2007.^[63] The couple’s net worth remained in the same range as of 2011, and was still held in blind trusts.

In addition, Bain Capital and Bain & Company continue to pour huge amounts of money into Romney’s campaign coffers.

Just check out the following list of the biggest donors to the Romney campaign.  These numbers come from opensecrets.org….

Goldman Sachs $367,200
Credit Suisse Group $203,750
Morgan Stanley $199,800
HIG Capital $186,500
Barclays $157,750
Kirkland & Ellis $132,100
Bank of America $126,500
PriceWaterhouseCoopers $118,250
EMC Corp $117,300
JPMorgan Chase & Co $112,250
The Villages $97,500
Vivint Inc $80,750
Marriott International $79,837
Sullivan & Cromwell $79,250
Bain Capital $74,500
UBS AG $73,750
Wells Fargo $61,500
Blackstone Group $59,800
Citigroup Inc $57,050
Bain & Co $52,500

As with anything, whenever you want to get to the real truth you just need to follow the money.

Earlier this week, Sean Hannity told Rick Perry that his attacks on Mitt Romney’s time at Bain Capital sounded like something that “Occupy Wall Street” would say.

Just the other day, Rush Limbaugh compared Rick Perry to Fidel Castro and rabidly defended Mitt Romney on his radio program….

“There’s no way you can try to dress that up,” Limbaugh fumed. “I don’t understand it. Well, politically I understand it, but that’s just absurd. It’s sad. ‘Cause I really, really, really like Rick Perry! I really do. I had such hopes! I did. I’ll tell you, I did, but all of this talk about “corporate raiders,” and as I listen to politicians start talking about capitalism, lights are going off in my head. “Maybe they don’t really know what it is. Maybe they’re under some misconception about what capitalism is, because this characterization of it? A distinction with venture capitalism and vulture capitalism? This bite from Perry doesn’t compute.”

So why are these conservative talk show hosts defending Mitt Romney so furiously?

I think now we know.

It is all about the money.

When you have enough money, you can get conservative talk show hosts to promote an extremely liberal candidate.

Yes, of course Bain Capital does not “control” what these talk show hosts say.

Yes, of course some of the talk show hosts toss some light criticism at Romney from time to time.

But they simply do not go after Romney like they should be.

The truth is that Mitt Romney is really a Democrat that is masquerading as a Republican.  When you closely examine his record, he is very similar to Obama.

There is no way in the world that any self-respecting conservative should ever cast a single vote for him.

But right now Mitt Romney is running away with the race for the Republican nomination.

If Republicans can be fooled this badly, is there any hope for the future of the Republican Party?

Related Posts:

• ‘Israeli Mossad agents posed as CIA spies to recruit terrorists to fight against Iran’
• Obama-appointed US trade adviser linked to illegal deal in Congolese gold
• Goldman Sachs Employees Have Donated How Much Money To Mitt Romney?!
• Iran accuses IAEA inspectors of helping assassins
• Banks overwhelmingly support Romney

Executive Summary

It’s not about Party — It’s about Principle.
It’s not about Personality — It’s about Policy.

So here IS how this 2012 election will go.
1) Ron Paul will win the GOP nomination, or
2) Ron Paul will run 3rd party, or
3) Ron Paul supporters will WRITE IN Ron Paul’s name during the general election.

Either way, supporters of the Ron Paul policies and principles will not support the status quo simply because there is a party name attached to the candidate. Voting for Establishment candidates (status quo) has brought the American people and the United States to the edge of the cliff. Some of us (Ron Paul supporters) are not going to jump off the cliff. We choose to live free, sovereign and prosperous lives.

The GOP and disenfranchised Democrats, Independents and Libertarians have a choice. Vote for Ron Paul in the primaries and general election or very probably attempt to survive with another four years of what we’ve been getting for the past twenty years – only worse.

Understand this … If Ron Paul does not win, it makes no difference who else wins because everyone except Ron Paul will implement the same globalist principles and policies that have been in effect and building for at least the last fifty years in America.

IF you are one of the disenfranchised members of the Republican and Democratic parities and IF you are an Independent that knows that war is not peace; that debt is not wealth; that slavery is not liberty; that ignorance is not understanding; that the current system is not serving you and your interests — then IT IS TIME TO REGISTER AS A REPUBLICAN for the 2012 elections and CAST YOUR VOTE FOR THE PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES OF RON PAUL by VOTING FOR RON PAUL. No opportunity lasts forever. There is a time to act and that time is now IF you want to get your personal security (economic and liberty) back under your control.

Background …

The neocons succeeded in their co-opting of the Republican Party and the ‘conservative’ media. The ‘neo-liberals’ co-opted the Democrat Party and the ‘liberal’ media. The Globalists succeeded in co-opting both parties, the media, education and government until the Globalist agenda was uninterrupted by national elections and changes in the party that won control of government.

Republicans, Democrats and Independents who valued constitutional government, a sound economy, a secure nation, excellence in education, accountability at all levels and in all institutions and organizations began to see ALL of these things disappearing. What are some of these ‘things?’

Constitutional Government: limited, constitutional government, checks and balances, the Bill of Rights, justice in law enforcement and judicial system, individual liberty without government interference in our daily lives, a secure and valid electoral process (accurate counting and reporting of votes cast)

Sound Economy: strong self-sufficient industrial base, sound money, a true free market and true capitalism

National Security: a sovereign and self-sufficient United States, secure borders and regulated immigration, a non-interventionist foreign policy (per our Founders)

Excellence in Education: teaching not only literacy but creativity, an understanding of constitutional government, self-rule, balance of powers, sovereignty, justice, personal liberty, property rights, inventiveness and principles of personal responsibility and entrepreneurialism

Accountability: accountability in government and the market place

On the Republican Party side, the Limbaughs, Hannities and O’Rilleys began to call any member of the Republican Party a liberal wacko who espoused support of the above policies and principles. At first, such Republican rank and file were insulted, confused and angry that these mainstream (controlled) media personalities had the power to shape the message for ALL Republicans. The same is essentially true on the Democratic side and the ‘liberal’ mainstream media personalities. Those Democrats too were basically told to shut up and accept the new party line.

So now here we are fifteen to twenty years after this major unification of the globalist message and policy has been in effect. The lock-step adherence to this globalist agenda by both major parties has resulted in a unified agenda being pursued in Washington, D.C. regardless of which party or personality wins the seats of power up for election. And here’s where it begins to get dicey for the co-opters.

A critical mass of Americans is beginning to wakeup to the fraud that is being played upon them. More Americans awake to understand this fraud each and every day. So now, the power of the Party label is fading at an incredibly fast pace.

More and more people are taking off their colors, patches and pins and are replacing all those childish things with principles. More and more people are beginning to recognize the cult of personalities (political and media celebrity) and are beginning to replace that with specific policies that support their principles.

This brings us to Ron Paul and the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election. It’s not about the Republican Party — it’s about the principles. It’s not about Ron Paul as a person — it’s about the policies.

So all of this media propaganda attempting to condition the American people to believe that supporters of Ron Paul’s principles and policies are members of a personality cult or ‘paulbots’ is not only wrong – it’s laughable. Paul supporters are way beyond cult-like worship of celebrity personalities and bigoted party memberships. Paul supporters a looking FAR beyond Ron Paul.

It’s now very clear to the awakened and awakening Americans that the REAL cult members — the REAL ‘polibots’ — are those sad individuals who believe that only the Republican or Democratic parties can produce the next president of the United States of America.

The REAL political cultists are those people who have drank the Establishment’s mainstream status quo koolaid and as a result have adopted the current globalist agenda of perpetual war, the deindustrialization of the western industrialized nations, the destruction of national sovereignty and secure borders, the destruction of national currencies, the destruction of literate populations, the destruction of constitutional liberties and the implementation of controlled police-state societies where personal privacy and dignity are considered acts of terrorism.

So refer to the Executive Summary once again to see how this 2012 election is going to go.

NOTES:
• List of countries by proven oil reserves

David Sadler
www.david-sadler.org

David Sadler ran for Congress in the 12th Congressional District of Illinois in 2002 as a Republican. The state and national Republican Party suppressed his campaign. He maintains the neocons have hijacked the GOP, but that the neocons do not speak for traditional, liberty-minded conservatives.

Related Posts:

• Ron Paul Wins Presidential Straw Poll at CPAC
• Ron Paul: ‘Pretty sad’ that Limbaugh is GOP leader
• Today’s 2 cents post ‘election’
• Nader, Ron Paul, Kucinich Speak to Occupy Wall Street: Repeal the Federal Reserve Act
• Are These GOP Candidates Running For President of the U.S.—or Israel?

Related Posts:

• Jon Huntsman: Mitt Romney Would Be An Agent For The Big Banks
• Ron Paul-Haters Caught Planning To Dress Up As KKK, Pose As Paul Supporters
• Banks overwhelmingly support Romney
• Cannabis Treatment Threatens Deadly Painkiller Industry
• Iowa Caucus Proves That It’s Time To “Throw Israel Under The Bus”

Related Posts:

• Mexico Drug War Deaths Over Five Years Now Total 47,515
• Iowa Caucus Proves That It’s Time To “Throw Israel Under The Bus”
• Forced Sterilization Victims Granted $50,000 Over Admitted US ‘Eugenics’ Program
• Mafia is now Italy’s ‘biggest bank’ – and they’re squeezing the life out of small business
• Who Owns The Media? The 6 Monolithic Corporations That Control Almost Everything We Watch, Hear And Read

by Keith Johnson

So, Israel firster Mitt Romney won the Iowa caucus? Go figure. Do you think this statement had anything to do with it?:

“I will travel to Israel on my first foreign trip. I will reaffirm as a vital national interest Israel’s existence as a Jewish state. I want the world to know that the bonds between Israel and the United States are unshakable.”

Or how about this one:

“I will enhance our deterrent against the Iranian regime by ordering the regular presence of aircraft carrier task forces, one in the Eastern Mediterranean and one in the Persian Gulf region. I will begin discussions with Israel to increase the level of our military assistance and coordination. And I will again reiterate that Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon is unacceptable.”

I could showcase a few more examples of where Romney’s allegiances truly lie…but what’s the point?

I guess we should count our blessings. Though Ron Paul came in third, it’s still an impressive victory when you consider that Iowa is an evangelical stronghold, whose voter support for the state of Israel takes precedence over any concern they might have for their own country.

Without a doubt, Paul performed better than any other candidate. He definitely made the case that he was the best suited to deliver this nation from the unsound fiscal policies of the Treasury Department and the privately owned Federal Reserve. But that was obviously a secondary concern for the voters in Iowa. Paul had to be defeated because he stuck true to his principals, and made it clear that he would not send more of our children to die in yet another Jewish war of survival.

How else would you explain why Rick Santorum came in second? He wasn’t going anywhere until he revealed on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he would demand that Iran’s nuclear sites be dismantled, and then launch an attack against them after they inevitably refused.

Of course Michelle Bachman and Newt Gingrich are even more devoted to Israel. So why did they finish behind Paul? The voters apparently had what alcoholics call a “moment of clarity,” and realized that neither of them stood a chance of defeating Obama. Bachman is a blithering idiot who can barely spell America (let alone serve its best interests), and the serial adulterer/hypocrite Gingrich has way too much baggage.

Speaking of Newt, didn’t he just get through weeping over his long dead mother? Poor guy…now he has something new to cry about. And I would wager that these tears are a lot more genuine. That’s right, Newt! You ain’t foolin’ anybody. We know the only thing you have an emotional attachment to is your political career and the Zionist masters who fund it.

Remember last June, when Newt urged the Jewish Republican Coalition in Beverly Hills to “never underestimate the hold that Israel has on the American heart.”

Speak for yourself, Newt. So far as America is concerned: while I agree that Israel certainly does have a hold on one of our organs, I would argue that it resides a bit further south. Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu certainly has his fingers clenched around that organ, and uses it as a steering mechanism to further his criminal agenda. Don’t take my word for it. Back in 2001, he bragged that, “I know what America is. America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction.”

Nothing has changed, and the Iowa caucus proves it. It’s not just media manipulation and vote fraud that guides that vote. Iowa is a microcosm of the 70 million Christian Zionists, evangelicals and other dispensationalists who represent the most coveted voting block in America.

These psychotics believe that their unwavering support for the state of Israel is the “golden ticket” they need to gain access through the pearly gates. They’re counting on a catastrophic war in the Middle East to hasten the return of Jesus Christ, who will then descend from the clouds and gather them up in one fel swoop. Once deposited safely in heaven, Christ can then go about his business wiping out the rest of his creation.

For decades, false prophets like Jerry Falwell; Hal Lindsey; Pat Robertson; Tim Lehay and John Hagee have all promised that the return of Christ is just around the corner. But since none of these prophecies ever come to pass, Christian Zionists have grown tired of waiting and believe it’s time to take matters into their own hands. They figure if they can stoke the flames of Armageddon themselves, it just might send up the right smoke signal to get the good Lord’s ass in gear.

That’s why the war rhetoric and saber rattling against Iran by all of these GOP hopefuls is so appealing to them. Who else would be attracted to a presidential candidate who promises to take their nation to war if elected? To the rest of us, the thought of heading into yet another hot conflict is nothing less than horrific. But the Christian Zionists don’t care because they’re confident that they won’t be around to see it. By the time the feces hits the oscillating wind generator, they’ll be watching the action from a ringside seat in heaven while toasting marshmallows and singing “Kumbaya.”

And what is to become of all the Jewish people that these evangelical nut jobs claim to love so dearly? Let’s not kid ourselves. These people are certainly no friends of the Jews. Their doctrine is ultimately hostile to Judaism, and requires that all Jews must convert to Christianity or perish along with the rest of us. So why do we often find collaboration between Christian Zionists, and some segments of the Jewish community, who might otherwise find this kind of “convert or die” theology offensive?

Another quote that is commonly attributed to Netanyahu is, “My opinion of Christian Zionists? They’re scum. But don’t tell them that. We need all the useful idiots we can get right now.”

While I have a hard time believing that Netanyahu would be so careless as to say something like that in public, it can’t be far from how some Jews feel, particularly those who rely on the billions of American dollars we send Israel each year, along with the weapons and manpower required to continue these wars that are being waged on their behalf.

Yes…Christian Zionists are the useful idiots who facilitate Israel’s criminal activity, and they’re also the one’s who are taking this nation into another war. They’ll get the mushroom clouds they want, but they won’t be watching them from heaven. Discounting their dispensationalist fantasy of an end-times scenario, what does war with Iran really mean? Forget about $500 per gallon oil. That’s the least of our worries. War with Iran means war with Russia and China. War with Iran means World War III.

The Russian Ministry of Defense recently issued a bulletin to PM Putin and President Medvedev stating that China’s President Hu has now agreed “in principal” that the only way to stop US led western aggression is through “direct and immediate military action” and that Hu has ordered his Naval Forces to “prepare for warfare.”

That dovetails with a statement from Major General Zhao Zhangzhong of the Chinese National Defense University, who said that China “would not hesitate to protect Iran” even if it led to a third World War, and that not hesitating to fight a third World War would be entirely for domestic political needs. China currently buys large quantities of oil from Iran and is their third largest trading partner.

As for Russia? On December 18, 2011, Russian Centre for Socio-Political Studies Director Vladimir Yevseyev insisted that Russia would stop any military attack against Iran, adding that that “a military attack against Tehran will be a serious problem for Russia, because Caucasus and Central Asia are strategic regions for Russia.”

He’s not the only Russian sounding the alarm. According to Press TV, “Last week, Russian Ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin vehemently criticized any plans of attacking Iran, describing the measure as “a very dangerous scenario” which could lead to a “regional catastrophe.”

Regional my ass! We’re talking about WWIII, folks—brought to you by the same people who brought us the last two World Wars! So much for the claim that “Israel is a strategic ally of the US.”

Don’t you just love clichés? The hardcore supporters of the criminal Israeli state certainly do. How many times have you heard these one-liners recited ad nouseum?

“Israel is the only democracy is the Middle East.”

“You can’t trade land for peace.”

“We have to prevent another Holocaust.”

And then there’s my favorite: “Israel has a right to exist.” Does it? “No country has a right to exist,” proclaimed former CIA heavyweight Michael Scheuer during a 2010 C-SPAN interview. “The United States doesn’t have a right to exist. Britain doesn’t have a right to exist. Bolivia doesn’t have a right to exist! Countries exist if they can get along with their neighbors, if they have a thriving economy and a social system which is equitable. If countries have a right to exist, we would be resurrecting the Soviet Union, the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, and every other country that has gone down the tubes.”

That’s one way to put it. But I would argue that not only does Israel have no right to exist…it doesn’t exist. At least not according to International law. Why? Because although the UN General Assembly recommended the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine back in 1947, it was never ratified in the Security Council. Israel, therefore, is an illegitimate nation.

Furthermore, “when we think of Israel’s right to exist, we often think of the 1967 borders as though somehow it is written that when you discuss two states, the 1967 borders are what we are to discuss,” says human rights attorney Lamis Deek of Al-Awda New York. “Nowhere is that written. It is an arbitrary date picked on the date of another occupation. It could have been ‘48 or ‘47 or 2001. There’s nowhere that it says that we have to stick to the green line or the 1967 borders.”

Of course these are all legal arguments. Would I be forced to change my tune if Israel did obtain formal recognition by the UN? Certainly not. No outside entity has the moral authority to govern the indigenous population. Only the Palestinians have the right to control land that their ancestors have inhabited for thousands of years.

Anyway, back to clichés. It seems like every year or so, the Israeli Hasbara machine introduces a new phrase that is then picked up and recited by journalists and politicians. One of the more recent ones is that “President Obama threw Israel under the bus” when he recommended that Israel resume peace talks based upon 1967 borders. That really got the Israeli loyalists up in arms.

Of course Obama later backpedaled and proved to be the biggest obstacle to Palestinian statehood. “Peace is hard work,” Obama declared to the UN General Assembly last September. “Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the United Nations. If it were that easy, it would have been accomplished by now.”

As if that weren’t bad enough, he had to get down on his knees and grovel before his Zionist masters. “America’s commitment to Israel’s security is unshakable,” said Obama. “Our friendship with Israel is deep and enduring.”

Obama certainly has not thrown Israel under the bus…but he should. As a matter of fact, Israel should be thrown from a moving train. After all, Israel is the engineer behind the controls of this runaway locomotive, and our politicians are the ones shoveling coal into the boiler.

Isn’t it high time we got our asses out of the caboose, jumped a few freight cars, and took control of this thing before it jumps the tracks?

ALL ABOARD! Next stop: New Hampshire!

Related Posts:

• The US-Iran economic war
• Rick Santorum’s anti-gun history
• CNN Pulls the Plug on Live Feed of Soldier Talking About Voting for Ron Paul
• WAR DRUMS: Israel Warns US Jews: Iran Could Strike Here
• Goldman Sachs Employees Have Donated How Much Money To Mitt Romney?!

January 4th, 2012

Military personnel from the Fourth Psychological Operations Group based at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, have until recently been working in CNN’s hq in Atlanta.

CNN is up in arms about our report in the last issue of CounterPunch concerning the findings of the Dutch journalist, Abe de Vries about the presence of US Army personnel at CNN, owned by Time-Warner. We cited an article by de Vries which appeared on February 21 in the reputable Dutch daily newspaper Trouw, originally translated into English and placed on the web by Emperor’s Clothes. De Vries reported that a handful of military personnel from the Third Psychological Operations Battalion, part of the airmobile Fourth Psychological Operations Group based at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, had worked in CNN’s hq in Atlanta.

De Vries quoted Major Thomas Collins of the US Army Information Service as having confirmed the presence of these Army psy-ops experts at CNN, saying, “Psy-ops personnel, soldiers and officers, have been working in CNN’s headquarters in Atlanta through our program, ‘Training with Industry’. They worked as regular employees of CNN. Conceivably, they would have worked on stories during the Kosovo war. They helped in the production of news.”

Related Posts:

• Belarus: Browsing Foreign Websites a Misdemeanor
• Gary Webb’s Drug War Reporting Vindicated
• Third Aircraft Carrier Group Coming To Iran
• Anger over secret drug trials on Indian children
• Library Sends Police To Collect Overdue Books From 5-Year-Old

January 3, 2012

Source: The American Dream

Once again, the Republican Party is being tempted to vote for “the lesser of two evils”.  A lot of Republicans are actually considering voting for Mitt Romney because they have bought the lie that he has “the best chance” of defeating Barack Obama in 2012.  But just because he is the Republican candidate that is most like Barack Obama does not mean that he has the best chance of defeating him.  The truth is that no self-respecting Republican should ever vote for Mitt Romney.  A vote for Mitt Romney is a vote for the New World Order.  Romney comes from the financial establishment, he is being showered with money from the financial establishment and he supports all of the goals of the financial establishment.  This year, millions upon millions of dollars are being funneled into Romney’s campaign and into pro-Romney organizations.  The New World Order is literally trying to buy the 2012 election for their dream candidate.  Romney would be the ultimate Wall Street puppet, and if you cast a vote for Mitt Romney you are playing right into the hands of the financial elite.

If you do not believe that a vote for Mitt Romney is a vote for the New World Order, just consider Mitt Romney’s positions on the issues….

#1 The Federal Reserve

To the financial elite, there is no more important financial institution in the United States than the Federal Reserve, and Mitt Romney is a huge supporter of the Federal Reserve.

During one Republican debate, Romney actually tried to explain to all of us why “we need to have a Fed“.

Not only that, Mitt Romney has stated that he is not really concerned about what is going on over at the Federal Reserve.  Mitt Romney has publicly stated that he is “not going to take my effort and focus on the Federal Reserve“.

That kind of talk is music to the ears of the financial elite.

Also, Romney fully supported the reappointment of Ben Bernanke as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve despite his absolutely horrific track record.

#2 Money From The Bankers

Mitt Romney is getting far, far, far more money from Wall Street bankers than any other Republican candidate.

In a recent article entitled “The Big Wall Street Banks Are Already Trying To Buy The 2012 Election“, I detailed how numbers compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics show that Mitt Romney is getting more money from the employees of the “too big to fail” Wall Street banks than all of the other Republican candidates combined.

The following is an excerpt from that article that shows how much money employees of those banks (and their spouses) gave to various candidates for president during the first 9 months of 2011….

Mitt Romney: $813,300
Barack Obama: $198,874
Tim Pawlenty: $101,515
Rick Perry: $58,900
Jon Huntsman: $28,250
Ron Paul: $13,104
Herman Cain: $2,715
Michelle Bachmann: $1,500
Newt Gingrich: $1,250

Even though Romney’s poll numbers have been in the mid to low 20s most of the time, employees of the big Wall Street banks gave him $813,300 during the first 9 months of 2011 and they only gave $105,719 to the rest of the Republican candidates that were still in the race at the end of the third quarter combined.

#3 The Wall Street Bailouts

During the last financial crisis, Mitt Romney was a very enthusiastic supporterof the Wall Street bailouts.

Back in 2009, Romney delivered a speech in which he made the following statement about bailing out Wall Street….

“I know we didn’t all agree on TARP. I believe that it was necessary to prevent a cascade of bank collapses. For free markets to work, there has to be a currency and a functioning financial system.”

During the Wall Street bailouts, gigantic mountains of money were transferred from the pockets of U.S. taxpayers into the hands of greedy Wall Street bankers.

Wall Street would definitely like to have someone in the White House who will bail them out once again when the next great financial crisis strikes.

#4 Health Care

Republicans are supposed to be against Obamacare, and yet millions upon millions of them plan to vote for someone that came up with the plan that Obamacare was based upon.

Barack Obama has admitted that much of his health care plan came directly from what Mitt Romney did up in Massachusetts.  In fact, a recent MSNBC articlebrought to light some new information about the relationship between Romneycare and Obamacare….

Newly obtained White House records provide fresh details on how senior Obama administration officials used Mitt Romney’s landmark health-care law in Massachusetts as a model for the new federal law, including recruiting some of Romney’s own health care advisers and experts to help craft the act now derided by Republicans as “Obamacare.”

The records, gleaned from White House visitor logs reviewed by NBC News, show that senior White House officials had a dozen meetings in 2009 with three health-care advisers and experts who helped shape the health care reform law signed by Romney in 2006, when the Republican presidential candidate was governor of Massachusetts.

Conservatives all over the country have been loudly denouncing the individual health insurance mandate in Obamacare, but Mitt Romney has had the gall to claim that the individual health insurance mandate that he signed into law as governor of Massachusetts was based on “conservative principles”.

So how has Romneycare worked out for residents of Massachusetts?

Well, according to the Daily Caller, health care costs and health insurance premiums have gone up dramatically in Massachusetts….

Since the bill became law, the state’s total direct health-care spending has increased by a remarkable 52 percent. Medicaid spending has gone from less than $6 billion a year to more the $9 billion. Many consumers have seen double-digit percentage increases in their premiums.

That doesn’t sound good.

Romney now says that he wants to “repeal” Obamacare, but what he means by repeal may not be what you and I mean by repeal.

Someone should ask Romney what he meant when he stated that he wants “to eliminate some of the differences, repeal the bad, and keep the good” in Obamacare.

#5 Free Trade

One of the key goals of the New World Order is to create a one world economic system.  That is why so many of our politicians continue to push “free trade” even though tens of thousands of U.S. businesses and millions of U.S. jobs have gone overseas.

Of course Mitt Romney is a huge advocate of the “free trade” agenda.

The following quote comes directly from the Romney campaign website….

Access to foreign markets is crucial to growing our economy. We must reassert American leadership in international negotiations, follow through on commitments we have already made, and push aggressively for advantageous new agreements.

But the results of this “free trade” agenda have been absolutely nightmarish for the United States.  According to U.S. Representative Betty Sutton, America has lost an average of 15 manufacturing facilities a day over the last 10 years.  During 2010 it got even worse.  That year, an average of 23 manufacturing facilities a day shut down in the United States.

In all, more than 56,000 manufacturing facilities in the United States have permanently closed down since 2001.

Globalism is ripping our economy apart a little bit more every day, and if Romney is elected the globalist agenda will only accelerate.

#6 Taxes

The New World Order loves to extract taxes from the American people.  It was not a coincidence that the Federal Reserve and the individual income tax came into existence at nearly the exact same time nearly 100 years ago.

During his time as governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney significantly raised taxes. The following is an excerpt from a CBS News article….

Mitt Romney’s Harvard MBA and gold-plated resume convinced many business leaders he would follow in the tradition of corporate-friendly Republicans when he was elected governor of Massachusetts in 2002.

Within three years, some had a vastly different opinion, after Romney’s efforts raised the tax bill on businesses by $300 million

That same article also notes that Romney jacked up “fees and fines” on Massachusetts taxpayers substantially during his tenure as governor….

Romney and lawmakers also approved hundreds of millions in higher fees and fines during his four years in office.

Many in the Massachusetts business community were quite disgusted with Romney by the end of his term.  Peter Nicholas, the chairman of Boston Science Corporation, says that “tax rates on many corporations almost doubled because of legislation supported by Romney.”

#7 Government Spending

The New World Order loves big government and big government spending.

And let there be no doubt – Mitt Romney is a big spender when it comes to government money.

Government spending in Massachusetts increased significantly under Mitt Romney.  This was especially true for the last two budgets passed under Romney.  In fiscal year 2006, government spending in Massachusetts increased by 7.6 percent.  In fiscal year 2007, government spending in Massachusetts increased by a whopping 10.2 percent.

#8 Global Warming

It turns out that Mitt Romney is a believer in the theory of man-made global warming.  In fact, Al Gore recently praised Mitt Romney on his blog. In a post entitled “Good for Mitt Romney — though we’ve long passed the point where weak lip-service is enough on the Climate Crisis“, Al Gore lavished the following praise on the former Massachusetts governor….

“While other Republicans are running from the truth, he is sticking to his guns in the face of the anti-science wing of the Republican Party”

Not only that, it is also very important to remember that while Mitt Romney was governor, Massachusetts became the very first state to pass a law to regulate carbon emissions.

#9 Cap And Trade

If Mitt Romney becomes president, he is going to cram the radical green agenda right down our throats.

While campaigning for president in 2007, Mitt Romney said that he would fully support a global “cap and trade” carbon tax scheme as long as the entire world goes along with it….

“I support Cap-and-Trade on a global basis but not the USA going alone. I want to do it with other nations involved and on a global scale.”

#10 Illegal Immigration

Mitt Romney is very, very soft on illegal immigration.  Back in 2007, Mitt Romneymade the following statement….

“But my view is that those 12 million who’ve come here illegally should be given the opportunity to sign up to stay here”

Of course that will only encourage millions more to come here illegally, but Mitt Romney does not seem too concerned about that.

#11 Gun Control

One of the key goals of the New World Order is to disarm the American people, and Mitt Romney has been a huge supporter of gun control laws.  When he was running for governor in Massachusetts, he made the following statement….

“We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts- I support them…I believe they help protect us, and provide for our safety.”

#12 Abortion

Mitt Romney has a long record of supporting the population control agenda of the global elite.

He claims that he is “pro-life” now, but Mitt Romney also once claimed that he was more “pro-choice” than Ted Kennedy.

Not only that, Romney once forced Christian hospitals and Massachusetts taxpayers to subsidize abortions in the state of Massachusetts.  You can see evidence of this right here.

If he becomes president, Romney will be just like George W. Bush – a president that gives lip service to the pro-life crowd but that does next to nothing to actually stop abortion.

#13 The Pharmaceutical Industry

Just like the banking industry, the pharmaceutical industry is almost completely dominated by the New World Order.  And the pharmaceutical industry has been absolutely showering money on Mitt Romney.

According to the CDC, the percentage of Americans that say that they have taken a prescription drug within the last 30 days has risen to almost 50 percent.

If Mitt Romney becomes president, it will be a new “golden age” for the pharmaceutical industry and that number will likely go even higher.

#14 The TSA

It recently came out that very elderly women are being strip-searched by TSA agents at U.S. airports, but Mitt Romney continues to fully support the TSA.

So if Romney becomes president we will continue to have to endure incredibly dehumanizing searches before we are allowed on to our flights.

#15 The Homeland Security Apparatus

Mitt Romney has stated repeatedly that he wants to make “homeland security” even stronger.

I have previously written about how Bush and Obama have turned America into a giant prison where virtually everything we do is watched, monitored, listened to, tracked and recorded in order to keep us all “safe”.

Well, Romney believes that all of this is necessary as part of the “war on terror”, and if Romney becomes president he will almost certainly push the envelope even farther.

#16 Guantanamo Bay

Mitt Romney has publicly stated that he would like to double the number of prisoners in Guantanamo Baby.

Just check out what Romney said during one Republican debate….

Now we’re going to — you said the person’s going to be in Guantanamo. I’m glad they’re at Guantanamo. I don’t want them on our soil. I want them on Guantanamo, where they don’t get the access to lawyers they get when they’re on our soil. I don’t want them in our prisons. I want them there.

Some people have said, we ought to close Guantanamo. My view is, we ought to double Guantanamo.

#17 NDAA

Barack Obama just signed a law which allows the U.S. military to arrest American citizens on U.S. soil, detain them indefinitely and ship them off to Guantanamo Bay for endless “interrogation” sessions.  Mitt Romney has nottaken a position against this horrible new law.

The truth is that if you look at the history of what he has done (not what he now says), Mitt Romney is virtually a clone of Barack Obama.

If the 2012 election is Romney vs. Obama, it really does not matter which one of them wins.  Either one of them would do the bidding of the New World Order.

But millions of Republicans are being fooled.  They don’t realize that Romney will say just about anything to get elected.

Mitt Romney’s wife, Ann Romney, once made the following statement about her husband….

“He can argue any side of a question. And sometimes you think he’s really believing his argument, but he’s not.”

So how do we know if he is telling the truth now?

The following is an epic video which demonstrates very clearly how dramatically Mitt Romney has flip-flopped over the years….

Sadly, most elections in America are not determined by the voters.

Rather, most elections in America are determined by money.

Republican candidates spent more than $10 million on television and radio ads in Iowa in the month of December alone.

Those ads have a huge impact on voters.

So who is spending the most money?

Well, according to a recent article in the Des Moines Register, pro-Romney forces are spending the most money even though Romney is not even really campaigning in Iowa….

Together, Romney and the super PAC going to bat for him had over half the ad buys in Iowa in December among the spending the Register examined.

If you can believe it, one pro-Romney “super PAC” actually spent $2.85 million in Iowa during the month of December.

$2.85 million can buy quite a bit of propaganda.

Sadly, in federal elections the candidate that raises the most money wins about90 percent of the time, and Mitt Romney has raised far, far more money than the other Republican candidates have.

It would be nice to stick it to the establishment for once, but the reality is that it is really hard to go up against a candidate that is backed by millions upon millions upon millions of dollars.

But even if Mitt Romney only wins 30 or 40 percent of the delegates during the nominating process, that is still going to make it nearly impossible for any other candidate to win the nomination before the Republican convention.

In a previous article, I described how the new Republican voting rules are going to make a “brokered convention” much more likely….

The key is that most Republican primaries and caucuses will now allocate delegates using a proportional system rather than a “winner take all” system.  Back in 2008, John McCain did very well in early “winner take all” primaries and wrapped up the Republican nomination very, very quickly.  Nothing like that will happen in 2012.  In fact, if the field remains crowded it is going to be very difficult for any candidate to accumulate more than 50 percent of the delegates by the time the Republican national convention rolls around.

If Mitt Romney wins more than 50 percent of the delegates during the primary season, the Republican establishment will let him have the nomination of course.

But if he is unable to do so, the Republican establishment will move heaven and earth to make sure that a candidate that they do not like does not accumulate more than 50 percent of the delegates.

Either way, the Republican establishment is going to do everything that they can to end up with a candidate of their choosing to go up against Barack Obama.

So can a miracle still happen?

Of course it can.

But just realize that it is going to take an all-out effort to overcome the power of the establishment.

A half-hearted effort simply is not going to get the job done.

Related Posts:

• Leaked: US to Start ‘Trade Wars’ with Nations Opposed to Monsanto, GMO Crops
• New York City Surveillance Center Staffed with Employees from Large Wall Street Firms
• Obama-appointed US trade adviser linked to illegal deal in Congolese gold
• Goldman Sachs Employees Have Donated How Much Money To Mitt Romney?!
• Today’s 2 cents post ‘election’

December 27, 2011

Jeremy R. Hammond
Alt-Market

This article, originally titled “Ron Paul: Propagandist Or Prophet?”, was written by Jeremy R. Hammond and published at Foreign Policy Journal

Ron Paul is “the best-known American propagandist for our enemies”, writes Dorothy Rabinowitz in a recent Wall Street Journal hit piece. To support the charge, she writes that Dr. Paul “assures audiences” that the terrorist attacks of 9/11 “took place only because of U.S. aggression and military actions”. It’s “True,” she writes, that “we’ve heard the assertions before”, but only “rarely have we heard in any American political figure such exclusive concern for, and appreciation of, the motives of those who attacked us”—and, she adds, he doesn’t care about the victims of the attacks.

The vindictive rhetoric aside, what is it, exactly, that Ron Paul is guilty of here? It is completely uncontroversial that the 9/11 attacks were a consequence of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. The 9/11 Commission Report, for instance, points out that Osama bin Laden “stresses grievances against the United States widely shared in the Muslim world. He inveighed against the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, the home of Islam’s holiest sites. He spoke of the suffering of the Iraqi people as a result of sanctions imposed after the Gulf War, and he protested U.S. support of Israel.”

Notice that Rabinowitz doesn’t actually deny that the 9/11 attacks were motivated by such U.S. policies as these. Rather, Ron Paul’s sin is that he actually acknowledges this truth. The fact that other political figures choose to ignore or deny this fact hardly reflects poorly on Dr. Paul. Refusing to bury one’s head deeply up one’s arse, as Rabinowitz is so obviously willing to do, is hardly a character trait to be faulted.

From this position of willful ignorance, Rabinowitz then implores her readers that “a President Paul” would “be making decisions about the nation’s defense, national security, domestic policy and much else.” The conclusion one is supposed to draw is that anyone who could actually acknowledge the ugly truth that 9/11 was a consequence of U.S. foreign policy isn’t fit for office; only someone who is willing to delude him or herself that the U.S. was attacked because “they hate our freedoms” is worthy of the presidency. Anyone who wishes to changeU.S. foreign policy is unfit; only a person who is willing to continue the status quo should be allowed a seat in the Oval Office.

Rabinowitz warns that “The world may not be ready for another American president traversing half the globe to apologize for the misdeeds of the nation he had just been elected to lead.” It’s not clear who she has in mind with the “another”, but it’s by now a familiar refrain. “I’ll never apologize for the United States of America. Ever. I don’t care what the facts are,” President George H. W. Bush declared to the world after a U.S. warship had shot down an Iranian civilian airliner in Iranian airspace, killing all 290 passengers aboard, including 65 children. Surely, any president willing to apologize for the murder of innocent children must not lead the nation. The horror of the thought!

And then there is Dr. Paul’s position with respect to Iran. He recently urged his host in an interview “to understand that Iran’s leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, had never mentioned any intention of wiping Israel off the map.” Here, again, it’s notable that Rabinowitz doesn’t actually dispute this. Dr. Paul is, of course, correct. The claim that Iran has threatened to acquire nuclear weapons to “wipe Israel off the map” is a complete fabrication of Western media propaganda, and mainstream corporate news agencies know it is a fabrication, but repeat it obligatorily anyway.

Rabinowitz presumably does, as well, so instead of challenging Dr. Paul on the facts, she quotes him saying “They’re just defending themselves” and writing, “Presumably he was referring to Iran’s wishes for a bomb.” In the interview referred to, Dr. Paul had said, “I don’t want them to get the nuclear weapon”, but pointed out that Israel’s defense minister, “Ehud Barak said that they’re acting logically, and they’re acting in their self-interest, and if he was an Iranian, he would probably think the same way” (Dr. Paul is correct on this, also; it’s true thatBarak has “quipped that if he were an Iranian, he would take part in the development of nuclear weapons”).

Rabinowitz also disinclines herself to point out what Dr. Paul said next: “But there is a gross distortion to this debate that they are on the verge of a nuclear weapon. There is no evidence that they are on the verge of a nuclear weapon, and we shouldn’t be ready to start another war” (Dr. Paul is correct on this, too, and has rightly drawn parallels to the current propaganda about Iran and the lies that preceded the war on Iraq).

So, once again, we see that Ron Paul’s true sin is his failure to jump on board with the war propaganda. A further sin is that he said after 9/11 that “there was ‘glee in the administration because now we can invade Iraq.’” But is the contention that those policymakers responsible for the war on Iraq were not happy that they now had the opportunity to do so sustainable? Is Rabinowitz unaware that in 1996, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser coauthored a document prepared for the government of Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, which made the case for overthrowing Saddam Hussein’s regime? Or that the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), whose membership was a virtual who’s who of so-called “neoconservatives” calling for war on Iraq, had a manifesto calling for regime change and stating that the “process of transformation” of the U.S. military into a force to “preserve American military preeminence” around the globe “is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor”? That PNAC director Robert Kagan acknowledged that the 9/11 attacks were the “Pearl Harbor” he and his ilk were looking for,writing in the Washington Post that 9/11 must be used to “to launch a new era of American internationalism. Let’s not squander this opportunity”?

Yet again, it becomes evident that Ron Paul’s sin is that he is too willing to be honest with the American people and speak the truth about U.S. foreign policy. Just as Dr. Paul predicted and warned about the housing bubble and financial crisis of 2008, so did he predict and warn prior to 9/11 that U.S. foreign policy would result in what the intelligence community terms “blowback”. Ron Paul has a long record of speaking truth to power and making predictions that have come to pass.

Rabinowitz concludes, “It seemed improbable that the best-known of American propagandists for our enemies could be near the top of the pack in the Iowa contest, but there it is.” That Ron Paul has emerged in Iowa as a frontrunner is a hopeful sign that Americans are waking up to the realities of U.S. foreign policy and are tired of crude propagandists for U.S. wars and empire insulting their intelligence, as Rabinowitz—who is a member of the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board—does so well in her column.

Related Posts:

• Bold Alligator: Massive 11-Nation Military Drill Aimed At Fending Off Iran In The Straits of Hormuz
• Marines ‘assault’ US beaches in amphibious drill
• Common Food Items Could Contain 180 Times More Fluoride Than Tap Water
• New York City Surveillance Center Staffed with Employees from Large Wall Street Firms
• The DHS Defends Globalism, Not America

December 19, 2011

Source: Washington’s Blog

Ron Paul Pulls Into the Lead

The Atlantic notes:

A new poll from Public Policy Polling shows that Ron Paul has taken the lead in the Iowa caucus race, while Newt Gingrich’s support is fading fast. A different Gallup poll shows Gringrich still holding the lead, but slipping, while The New York Times has Paul in the lead as well.

Gingrich has seen his numbers in the PPP poll drop from 27 percent to 14 percent in just three weeks, while his favorability rating is now split at 46 percent for to 47 percent against, the worst of any candidate not named Jon Huntsman.

***

Perhaps the most telling secondary question was, “Do you think Newt Gingrich has strong principles?” Only 36 percent say that he does, but for Paul that number was 73 percent.

Why is Mr. Paul so popular?

As I pointed out in September, Americans overwhelmingly want:

• The Federal Reserve to be reined in if not abolished

• The never-ending, open-ended, goalpost-moving wars to stop and the troops to be brought home

• Our liberties to be restored, and the martial law indefinite detention idiocy to be reversed

Paul has consistently championed these three American wishes for three decades. None of the other Republican (or Democratic) candidates are on the right side of history on any of these issues.

Related Posts:

• You Won’t Believe How Corrupt, Lazy And Stinking Rich Our Congress Critters Have Become
• Obama Signs Indefinite Detention Without Trial Bill Into Law; Claims His Regime Won’t Use It
• Arab Spring: Egypt Strikes Back
• The Leading Cause of Breast Cancer: Medical Radiation
• The American Fascist Sandwich: Indefinite Detention and Internment Camps

  Email 157 Smaller Font Text Larger Text | Print

Melina Mara/The Washington Post/Getty Images

Ron Paul has gone Hollywood.

Appearing on “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno” Friday, the presidential hopeful took a swipe at his GOP rivals telling the crowd that Michele Bachmann “hates Muslims.”

When asked by host Jay Leno what he thought of his rivals, Paul shook his head, slowed his voice and said, “she doesn’t like Muslims, she hates them, she wants to go get ‘em” — in reference to the comments Bachmann has made on the campaign trail over her willingness to attack Iran over its suspected nuclear program.

Bachmann, who is campaigning today in Iowa, rejected Paul’s comments.

“Of course I don’t hate Muslims,” Bachmann told ABC News adding “that’s an absolutely outrageous statement.”

Bachmann then elaborated on her view that Iran is trying to obtain a nuclear weapons program to destroy Israel and the United States.

“With all due respect to my colleague, I think Ron Paul would make a very dangerous president because he doesn’t understand this threat,” Bachmann added.

The comment was especially surprising for Paul, who up until now has shied away from personal attacks.

The comment even left the audience and host Jay Leno momentarily stunned.

In reference to Rick Santorum, Paul said he can’t stop talking about “gay people and Muslims.”

When asked what he thought of Mitt Romney, Paul thought for a second and replied, “he was governor of Massachusetts?”

The answer generated laughs from the audience and Paul responded, “that’s where he should stay at.”

Paul used the rare late night appearance to elaborate on some of his libertarian leaning positions such as getting rid of federal drug laws in favor of state regulations.

Paul added that the federal government should “protect the right to do with our own body what we want.”

When asked if he was in favor of seat belt laws, Paul quickly shot back “I’m in favor of seat belts, not seat belt laws.”

Paul walked out to a standing ovation by the mainly youthful audience. The fact wasn’t lost on Leno who noted that he drew lots of support from young people.

“Young people are principled,” said Paul adding that “after a while you get mixed up.”

Paul also touched on his ongoing feud with Donald Trump, telling Leno that the New York real estate magnate is “a little offended” he didn’t accept his GOP debate invitation.

Paul said “he thinks I can’t win.”

Leno shot back, “why don’t you remind him you won 12 times.”

The Congressman again said he has “no intention” of running on a third party ticket but added he hasn’t ruled it out.

When asked who his favorite president was, Paul in a nod to his nickname “Dr. No,” responded Grover Cleveland because “he loved to veto bills.”

Related Posts:

• Iowa Caucus Proves That It’s Time To “Throw Israel Under The Bus”
• 17 Reasons Why A Vote For Mitt Romney Is A Vote For The New World Order
• Goldman Sachs Employees Have Donated How Much Money To Mitt Romney?!
• Obama says he doesn’t even need NDAA to indefinitely detain Americans
• CNN Pulls the Plug on Live Feed of Soldier Talking About Voting for Ron Paul

Surging Ron Paul cuts into Newt Gingrich’s dream of winning Iowa caucus

Texas Liberetarian trails by one percentage point in poll

BY Jonathan Lemire
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Saturday, December 17 2011, 7:01 PM

Charlie Neibergall/AP

Texas Rep. Ron Paul (r.) and GOP front-runner Newt Gingrich share stage at debate in Iowa this month but it may be Paul who gets the last laugh.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/surging-ron-paul-cuts-newt-gingrich-dream-winning-iowa-caucus-article-1.993193#ixzz1gqBfjavw

Related Posts:

• Ron Paul Is Now the Republican Frontrunner
• Goldman Sachs Employees Have Donated How Much Money To Mitt Romney?!
• ‘Fast and Furious’ Linked to Immunity Deal Between U.S. and Sinaloa Cartel, Trafficking Defendant Alleges in Court Papers
• News: FDA Won’t Act Against Ag Antibiotic Use
• Sniper Detectors Coming to America’s Heartland

December 14, 2011

Source: RawStory

Speaking to conspiracy talk show host Alex Jones on Tuesday, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) said he believes that Attorney General Eric Holder should be “immediately fired,” and that President Barack Obama is pushing for the legalization of “martial law” in the U.S.

In his comments about Holder, Paul, who’s in a close second place among Iowa Republican primary voters, suggested that his role in the “fast and furious” gun-running scandal should be enough to leverage him from office.

“He should be immediately fired and then there should be an investigation to find out if charges should be made,” he said. “That’s obviously over the top. All these kind of sting operations and false-flag, this is criminal. They do it constantly. I think they were doing that when there was this so-called attempt to kill the Saudi, or, the Iranian ambassador. That kind of stuff. They should be investigated.”

He went on to say that although House Republicans are investigating Holder, he wasn’t sure if the attorney general would ever face charges. “But I think he deserves to have charges up against him,” Paul added.

Holder, who put a stop to the sting operations that saw U.S. agents selling guns to straw buyers, then attempting to track them as they made their way into Mexico, has said he will not resign over the scandal. About 2,000 guns went missing in the investigation. Though several hundred have been recovered, many of them were found at gruesome cartel crime scenes.

The Republican frontrunner also took issue with the inclusion of an “indefinite detention” provision in a defense budget authorization bill that recently made its way through Congress. The provision cements into law the power claimed by the Bush administration and reaffirmed by the Obama administration, letting authorities detain American citizens under military custody, without formal charges against them or access to legal representation.

As a candidate, then-Senator Obama said repeatedly that should not happen in the U.S., but as president he pushed Congress to approve that very power, and created by executive order a system of once-yearly reviews for detainees in military custody. He’s threatened to veto the bill, which is currently being renegotiated, but only because it imposes too many checks on the administration’s power to detain prisoners.

“You know our government has been involved with the CIA, in overthrowing governments for a long, long time, and of course last spring, I guess it was in February, the administration admitted they could assassinate American citizens,” Paul told Jones. “Now they’re putting it into law. This, to me, is an extremely wrong way to go. This is a giant step. This should be the biggest news going right now, literally legalizing martial law.

Read More…

Related Posts:

• Indefinite detention bill passes in Senate On Bill of Rights Day
• Obama, Congress back legalization of a police state
• In a World of Violence and Oppression, Peace and Freedom are Extremist Views
• Ron Paul Takes Swipes at GOP Rivals, Says Michele Bachmann ‘Hates Muslims’
• The Carrier IQ conspiracy

December 13, 2011

Source: RawStory

Over the weekend, struggling Republican presidential candidate Gary Johnson reminded MSNBC viewers that GOP frontrunner Newt Gingrich had once to called to punish some drug offenders with death.

“Newt Gingrich, in 1997, proposed the death penalty for marijuana — for possession of marijuana above a certain quantity of marijuana,” Johnson explained. “And yet, he is among 100 million Americans who’ve smoked marijuana.”

“I would love to have a discussion with him on the fact that he smoked pot, and under the wrong set of circumstance he proposed the death penalty for, potentially, something that he had committed. I have troubles with that,” he added.

Johnson, a former New Mexico governor who has advocated for marijuana legalization since 1999, is at least partially correct about Gingrich’s position.

As Speaker of the House, Gingrich introduced the “Drug Importer Death Penalty Act of 1996.”

The bill would have required a “sentence of death for certain importations of significant quantities of controlled substances.” It would have applied to anyone convicted more than once of carrying 100 doses — or about two ounces — or marijuana across the border. Defendants would have had a window of 18 months to file their one and only appeal.

Read More…

Related Posts:

• Here IS How This 2012 U.S. Election IS Going To Go