Wednesday, January 29, 2020

Americans are being manipulated into hating one another so that the Left can usher in an authoritarian government — don’t fall for it

by JD Heyes, Natural News:

During ESPN’s First Takeprogram on Tuesday, longtime network personality Steven A. Smith, who is black, threw down the race card as he lectured viewers about the ethnic nuances of the First Amendment.

As Breitbart News reported, Smith was complaining about a statement made by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, who is white, when responding to a question about players sitting or engaging in some other act of protest during the playing of the National Anthem, which occurs before each and every game.

“The national anthem is a special moment for me. It’s a point of pride. That is a really important moment but we also have to understand the other side — that people do have rights, and we want to respect those,” he said when speaking to Arizona Cardinals season ticket holders.

Goodell went on to note that he had visited with New York Jets fans a week before, and a player whom he did not identify was asked the same thing. The player, the commissioner recalled, said there was “a time and a place” to engage in protest.

“That’s what we all have to, sort of, understand — the responsibility of doing it at the right time and in the right way,” Goodell said.

Well, that set Smith off.

“Roger Goodell is not the man to make that statement,” Smith claimed.

Really, Steven? How come?

“I’m going to say something that’s going to be controversial. I don’t give a damn,” he said. “No white person has the right to tell black folks when you should protest about something. Because usually protests that emanates from the black community is due in large part because of the transgressions exacted against that community by those who don’t happen to be black.”

Translated: If you’re not black, then shut up about this.

The thing is Roger Goodell never said: “Blacks can’t protest the National Anthem.” But because Steven A. Smith has so conditioned himself to see hatred and racism under every rock, he took the NFL commissioner’s very neutral statement as some sort of attackon black players (most of the players in the NFL are black. By far most of those who are protesting the anthem by not standing and placing their hands over their hearts are black).

You people don’t tell my people what to do, think or say. Only my people can tell my people what to do, think or say.

Well, here’s the problem with that kind of thinking: We can’t be Americans if only part of us want to be. (Related: Are we nearing civil war?)

The American Right is certainly not blameless, but the bulk of today’s violent political division has been inculcated, spread and fomented by the Marxist Left, Charlottesville notwithstanding.

Bankrolled by extremist billionaires like George Soros, Alt-Left groups like Antifa, Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street and others have sprung up in recent years, attacking American history and traditions as illegitimate, corrupt and ideologically inferior. Their members show up at political rallies and events with the specific goal of shutting down speech they have deemed “racist” and “bigoted,” even though it’s not.

One Antifa organizer told CNN: “The idea in Antifa is that we go where they (right-wingers) go. That hate speech is not free speech. That if you are endangering people with what you say and the actions that are behind them, then you do not have the right to do that.

“And so we go to cause conflict, to shut them down where they are, because we don’t believe that Nazis or fascists of any stripe should have a mouthpiece.”

That is precisely Steven A. Smith’s mentality, as well as the mentality of those who agree with him. They really believe that certain Americans — be it due to their skin color, political beliefs, cultural leanings or social attitudes — don’t have a right to express themselves under the same First Amendment they use, and that they, by some divine authority, have been empowered to decide what speech and what viewpoints are valid.

Read More @ NaturalNews.com

Charlottesville 2

0

by Paul Craig Roberts, Paul Craig Roberts:

What the liberal/progressive/left is trying to do with Charlottesville is to associate Trump supporters with White Supremacists and in this way demonize Trump supporters so that they will not have a voice when Trump is overthrown in a coup. Or it can be put in a different way: Charlottesville is being used by someone to discredit Trump and the people who elected him in order to pave the way for a coup, and the liberal/progressive/left is enabling the plot.

Upon reflection, I think that for most of the liberal/progressive/left the denunciations and one-sided interpretation of Charlottesville are just the ingrained knee-jerk reaction of people brought up in Identity Politics. In Identity Politics, everyone is a White Hat except racist, sexist, homophobic, gun-nut white males. The only tolerable white males are those who accept this characterization of themselves. All others are “white supremacists” or “nazis.”

From what I read on progressive websites, those imbued with Identity Politics are letting the emotionalism of the politics run away with them. My friend, Rob Kall, who is fair and open-minded and posts my columns on OpEdNews, including those to which he takes exception, writes: “Trump is Now the Leader of White Supremacists and Nazis.” Rob reaches this conclusion because Trump held both sides responsible for the violence in Charlottesville. By seeing equivalence between the two sides, Trump “made it clear that he was siding with the White Supremacists, giving them aid, support and encouragement.” https://www.opednews.com/articles/Trump-is-Now-the-Leader-of-by-Rob-Kall-Donald-Trump_Hate-Groups-Neo-Nazis_White-Supremacist-170816-650.html (You might remember Jean Kirkpatrick who denounced liberals for seeing moral equivalence between the Soviet Union and the US.) I doubt this is the way Trump saw his statement. From the news videos I saw, there seemed to be plenty of hate on both sides. Certainly, there is plenty of hate for Trump among progressives.

In the Washington Post, Alexandra Petri finds Trump’s words condemning the violence on both aides to be “despicable words.” Petri apparently thinks that, counter to what the news coverage shows, the counter protesters did not engage in any violence, or else she thinks that violence from this side was justified but not violence from the other side. She condemns Trump for his statement: “We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides.” In her opinion, the last three words, “on many sides” shows that Trump is partial to White Supremacists. http://www.denverpost.com/2017/08/15/donald-trumps-despicable-words/

Richard Eskow joins the chorus. He links together deaths in Charlottesville, New York, Portland, Charleston, under “white nationalist terror” and hands them to Trump.https://www.opednews.com/articles/Trump-Won-t-Say-It-But-We-by-Richard-Eskow-Hatred_Terrorism_Trump-Mental-State_White-Male-Effect-170814-424.html

The Daily Kos also equates Trump’s blaming both sides for the violence, which is what the media reports show to be the case, with a defense of “white supremacist/neo-Nazi violence.”https://www.opednews.com/articles/Trump-defends-white-suprem-by-Daily-Kos-Protest_Trump-Insults_Violence_White-Male-Privilege-170815-734.html

Joe Macare at Truthout tells us that “Truthout will continue to report on the threat of neo-Nazis in the street — as well as those in the White House who are in lockstep with their agenda. We’ll talk to the people organizing against fascism on all fronts. We won’t equivocate or condemn ‘both sides.’ We won’t blame the Nazis’ targets for the hate they receive. But we know that these are not the only faces of racism. Whether it manifests itself in education policy, in gentrification, in economic inequality, in racist policing or in the United States’ immigration and ‘defense’ policies, Truthout will continue exposing white supremacy in all its forms.”

Truthout’s Anna Sutton expresses her “Heartbreak, Anger.” She doesn’t know where to begin. But she sees a fundraising opportunity. Make a donation and Truthout will “tell it like it is” against the “corporate and right-wing media” that are “bending over backwards to normalize Trump and the violence and xenophobia displayed by his rabid followers.” One wonders what corporate right-wing media she is talking about, The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, all of which denounce Trump 24/7?

How do we avoid the question: who is over the top, the “alt-right” at Charlottesville or their progressive critics?

Over at CounterPunch, a remnant of America’s left-wing, John Eskow tells us that he has walked among white supremacists “since I first learned to walk. They surrounded me in blue-collar Utica, New York—an early capitol of Rust Belt America, back in the 1950s.”

Here is Identity Politics’ association of the working class with White Supremacy. The all-powerful, all-threatening White Supremacists could do nothing to prevent—who?—from offshoring their jobs to Asia. But these people, who are so powerless that they could not even save their own jobs, are a great threat to us good people, who sat sucking our thumbs in unconcern while their economic lives were snuffed out. https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/08/16/among-the-racists/

CounterPuncher John Wight, prior to affirming the dogma that from the very beginning America has been “synonymous with white supremacy,” first unleashes both barrels on the liberal/progressives: “Strident declamations against fascism in Charlottesville from those who supported fascists in Kiev, calls for action to be taken against extremists in America by those who’ve been supporting them in Syria. What is this if not rank hypocrisy?”

Ah, so, why did the liberal/progressives align with the military/security complex and the neoconservatives against Donald Trump who declared, to his undoing, his intention to normalize relations with Russia, thus removing the enemy needed to justify the $1 trillion annual budget of the military/security complex? These vast monies could have gone into health care for the unprovided, into public assistance for the unprovided, but the liberal/progressive/left would not have it. If the liberal/progressives are so against violence and hate, why do they support the hate campaign against Trump and Russia?

Has Identity Politics made the liberal/progressive/left deaf, dumb, and blind such that their reality is limited to the emotions that Identity Politics produces?

This is a valid question. It is not meant to be derogatory. It is meant to lead to an understanding of our plight as a country. How does a country in which blacks are taught to hate whites, women are taught to hate men, and whose history is explained as white oppression successfully deal with the defining issues of our time?

Indeed, such a country is incapable of even recognizing the real issues. It seems clear enough that our doom is certain.

Identity Politics has such a firm hold on universities, media, all sorts of subject areas in public schools such as black studies, women studies, race studies, native American studies, and in Democratic Party politics that reality is absent from the picture. Most of what is deplored by Identity Politics are simply products of history, not of the evil intentions of white males. It once was the case that the function of liberal progressivism was to reform what was inherited from the past and had been morally outgrown. But this progressive agenda has been abandoned to hate that is just as wrong and deadly as the hate to which the liberal progressives object. So we are left with what: hate against hate. This is not promising.

Read More @ PaulCraigRoberts.com

Iran’s President Tacitly Admits Iran is Cheating on Nuclear Agreement

0

by David Haggith, The Great Recession Blog:

Countering recent US sanctions and President Trump’s talk of ending the “bad” nuclear agreement with Iran, Iran’s president threatened to restart its nuclear program. If his threat is true as stated, he unwittingly admitted something highly supportive of Trump’s position:

Mr. Rouhani said that a reconstituted nuclear program would be “far more advanced,” a veiled threat that the country could start enriching uranium up to the level of 20 percent…. “Iran will definitely revert to a far more advanced situation than it had before the negotiations, not in a matter of weeks or months but in a matter of days or hours.” (New York Times)

If Iran is capable of ratcheting up its program in a matter of weeks to enrich uranium to 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}, that means it has been purchasing and stockpiling all the equipment it needs to do that because such equipment cannot be built and installed that fast. So, the equipment is “stored” in a manner that is ready to go. That, in itself, probably violates the terms of the agreement (known as the “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action”).

HOWEVER, there is only one way Iran can have the capability to ratchet up production to “more advanced” levels than it had before the negotiations “in a matter of days or hours.” While I have no expertise in such equipment, it does not strike me as the kind of production process where you push a button, and you’re up and running with 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} enriched uranium coming out the other end in a matter of hours.

The New York Times seems to have missed that little tidbit. In fact, all the mainstream media stories today are missing this. Reuters, the BBC, CBS, the Wall Street Journal and CNN are all reported yesterday that Iran’s president said Iran could abandon the nuclear deal within hours. He did NOT say that. He stated quite plainly that Iran could be in “a more advanced situation” than it had before negotiations within hours — not that it could be out of the deal in that much time, but that it could show itself to be in a more advanced situation than existed before the deal.

CBS News almost got it right. They reported the words of the Iranian president as follows:

In an hour and a day, Iran could return to a more advanced (nuclear) level than at the beginning of the negotiations” that preceded the 2015 deal, Rouhani said. He did not elaborate.

But then they minimized those words in their own reportage to match the rest of the MSM by claiming Rouhani said he could exit the deal in that much time, missing completely the import of their record of his words, which said he could get to a more advanced nuclear level in just that much time. Unlike the rest of the MSM, they did, however, admit,

It was not immediately clear what Rouhani was referring to – and whether he meant Iran could restart centrifuges enriching uranium to higher and more dangerous levels.

There is a huge difference between what Iran’s president actually said and the way the mainstream media is trying to minimize his words. No doubt the MSM doesn’t want to admit Trump was right when he said during the campaign, “Never ever EVER in my life have I seen any transaction so incompetently negotiated as our deal with Iran.”

The words of Rouhani’s nuclear chief below certainly clarify what Rouhani was threatening if some people are finding it difficult to understand (because they don’t want his statement to mean what he appears to have said).

What did Iran’s president actually threaten?

The head of Iran’s nuclear program made clear that Rouhani did mean 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} enrichment and that Iran would be able to demonstrate that ability in a surprising way:

Ali Akbar Salehi, president of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, said the country could go up to 20 percent enrichment to “surprise the Americans.” (from The New York Times article above)

The clarification, if it is really needed, is right there in the original story. The MSM just doesn’t want to see it.

It would be no surprise whatsoever to find out that Iran could exit the deal in a day and an hour. It would also be no surprise at all to find out that Iran could build up the resources needed to start enriching uranium to 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}. They’ve already done that in the past. It would, however, certainly be a surprise to many to see 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} uranium being produced in a matter of hours, as that would indicate they were already carrying out such enrichment or that they never got rid of their 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} uranium as the JCPA required, either of which would verify that Trump was right about the agreement being a bad deal.

The only way Iran could now demonstrate production increases to 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} enrichment within hours (or “a day and an hour,” depending on which version of the story you read) is if its equipment is already producing highly enriched uranium so that all Iran would have to do to beat the high levels of enrichment that were known before the negotiations would be to start revealing what they are already producing!

Iran’s existing 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} enrichment fueled the JCPA in the first place. It is why the JCPA required Iran reduce its stock of 3.5{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} to a level that would not allow it to make enough 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} to become rapidly dangerous. So, how is it that Iran is now able to surprise the Americans with 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} enrichment in “days or hours?”

You can say this is just typical Iranian saber rattling, but since Iran’s president made this statement to the world as an argument against congress’s new sanctions and Trump’s statements that they are violating Obama’s nuclear agreement, I say we take him at his word. It is, after all, his argument as he chooses to make it. His word is that Iran can demonstrate 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} enrichment to the US within hours. (And it’s possible he even meant something more than 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} enrichment. I’m just limiting my understanding of his words to what his top energy dog claimed.)

Prior to the JCPA, Iran was known to already have enough 3.5{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} in the right gaseous form for further enrichment to make seven bombs if enrichment continued, using the centrifuges Iran already had. So, showing the world some uranium enriched to 3.5{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} wouldn’t cause anyone to raise an eyebrow because 1) the JCPA already allows that, and 2) it would not be “a far more advanced situation than … before the negotiations.”

In fact, even having some 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} is not a situation that is advanced beyond what existed before the negotiations. Iran already had hundreds of kilograms of 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} enriched uranium prior to the agreement in both solid (fuel) form and gaseous form (ready to be enriched to bomb-grade). That fact alone causes one to lean beyond the nuclear boss’s statement of a surprise at 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}. At 20{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}, the only surprise could be in how quickly Iran is able to produce that level of enrichment, meaning that the agreement hasn’t curtailed Iran’s breakout time to a nuclear bomb.

How long does uranium enrichment take?

The Washington Institute stated just before the nuclear accord was signed that it would take 18,000 centrifuges (the maximum number Iran was known to own before the agreement) only five weeks to turn the 3.5{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} level of enrichment that Iran is openly allowed under the accord into enough highly enriched uranium (90{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}) to make a single bomb (27kg enriched to 90{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}). That is why Iran was also required under the JCPA to reduce its number of available centrifuges to 6,500.

Read More @ TheGreatRecessionBlog.com

Why Was This ‘Crowd Hire’ Company Recruiting $25 An Hour ‘Political Activists’ In Charlotte Last Week?

0

from ZeroHedge:

Trump ignited a political firestorm yesterday during an impromptu press conference in which he said there was “blame on both sides” for the tragic events that occurred in Charlottesville over the weekend.   

Now, the discovery of a craigslist ad posted last Monday, almost a full week before the Charlottesville protests, is raising new questions over whether paid protesters were sourced by a Los Angeles based “public relations firm specializing in innovative events” to serve as agitators in counterprotests.

The ad was posted by a company called “Crowds on Demand” and offered $25 per hour to “actors and photographers” to participate in events in the “Charlotte, NC area.”  While the ad didn’t explicitly define a role to be filled by its crowd of “actors and photographers” it did ask applicants to comment on whether they were “ok with participating in peaceful protests.”  Here is the text from the ad:

Actors and Photographers Wanted in Charlotte

 

Crowds on Demand, a Los Angeles-based Public Relations firm specializing in innovative events, is looking for enthusiastic actors and photographers in the Charlotte, NC area to participate in our events. Our events include everything from rallies to protests to corporate PR stunts to celebrity scenes. The biggest qualification is enthusiasm, a “can-do” spirit. Pay will vary by event but typically is $25+ per hour plus reimbursements for gas/parking/Uber/public transit.

 

For more information about us, please visit www.crowdsondemand.com

 

If you’re interested in working with us, please reply to this posting with the following info:

  • Full Name
  • Prior relevant experience (as an actor/performer, photographer, brand ambassador, political activist, etc)
  • When are you usually available for work?
  • Resume (optional)
  • If you’re a photographer, what equipment do you use?
  • Are you ok with participating in peaceful protests (optional)?

And a screenshot of the original post:

So what is “Crowds on Demand?”  According to their own website, they’re in the business of sourcing large crowds of people to “provide clients with protests, rallies, [and] flash-mobs” all over the country.  They even have an entire page on their website dedicated to “Protests and Rallies.”

Are you looking to create a buzz anywhere in the United States? At Crowds on Demand, we provide our clients with protests, rallies, flash-mobs, paparazzi events and other inventive PR stunts. These services are available across the country in every major U.S city, every major U.S metro area and even most smaller cities as well. We provide everything including the people, the materials and even the ideas. You can come to us with a specific plan of action and we can make it happen. OR, you can approach us with a generalidea and we can help you plan the strategy then execute it.

 

We’ve made campaigns involving hundreds of people come to action in just days. We have a proven record of delivering major wins on even the toughest campaigns and delivering phenomenal experiences with even the most logistically challenging events.

Read More @ ZeroHedge.com

Discredited Forbes.com attacks self-reliance, claiming people who live in rural areas are “delusional” moochers

0

by Lance D Johnson, BugOut News:

Forbes.com is quickly becoming one of the most discredited publications on the web. For 10 years, Forbes.com published the works of Henry Miller, a writer later discovered to be on Monsanto’s payroll, who published pro-Roundup propaganda for the site. Forbescurrently publishes articles by Kavin Senapathy, a paid biotech operative who routinely spews hate for organic food and farming, and bashes non-GMO food activists.

Now, a Forbes writer is attacking self-reliant individuals and calling them “delusional moochers.” The writer in question, Adam Ozimek, is a senior economist in the West Chester office of Moody’s Analytics. His article, Dear Homesteaders, Self-Reliance Is a Delusion, claims that people who live in rural areas are only “mooching off of the civil society.”

According to Ozimek, people who grow their own food, hunt and raise their own animals are “delusional” moochers. Those who know first-aid and who make their own remedies, are also “delusional” moochers. People who build furniture and fix their own homes are considered “delusional” moochers. People who generate and conserve energy are considered “delusional” moochers.

The Forbes writer, who is obviously the delusional one, says he is a “big fan of shows about doomsday preppers, homesteaders, survivalists, generally people who live off the grid,” but says that “off the grid people are not self-reliant” and are only “mooching off of the civil society, government, and safety net the rest of us contribute to.”

It’s hard to take this writer seriously, for the simple fact that his knowledge of self-reliance comes solely from watching TV shows. His biggest criticism of self-reliant individuals is that they may end up seeking medical treatment they can’t afford when they become “extremely sick.” He blames such individuals for potentially needing hospital care in the future and not being able to pay for it. He assumes that when all else fails, they will seek charity care or Medicaid benefits.

One of the virtues of self-reliance is learning how not to depend on modern medicine and the medical system. An individual can quickly save tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars on healthcare costs by simply learning how to eat better and treat themselves at home. Not to mention, learning how to take care of one’s own health saves time, energy, and mitigates the risks that come from taking side-effect ridden pharmaceuticals.

As an economist, Dr. Ozimek should be writing about all the ways in which self-reliant individuals save money on healthcare.

Instead, Dr. Ozimek stereotypes self-reliance, as if people who learn new skills are somehow separate from the rest of society and should not receive help if necessary. For some reason, he thinks that all thrifty, skillful individuals are exempt from paying property taxes, income taxes, sales taxes, gasoline taxes, and other fees when they participate in society, and therefore are not allowed to receive any services from society.

Homesteaders and self-reliant individuals are an asset to society because they are not draining society of resources. Their self-reliance is a gift to their community and country because they are not constantly seeking to take from others or receive handouts. Self-reliant individuals care about the poor because they do whatever it takes to provide, allowing welfare to be distributed first to the truly handicapped and sick. Self-reliance is less about consumption and more about producing. Self-reliance is not some title or achievement one reaches; self-reliance is something one is always striving toward. Self-reliance is the definition of personal responsibility. We should all strive for more independence and accept the personal responsibility that comes with it. The less we require from society, the less control these failing systems will have over our lives.

Read More @ BugOut.News

Watch Don Lemon Whitewash Antifa In 90 Seconds [VIDEO]

by Peter Hasson, Daily Caller:

CNN anchor Don Lemon whitewashed on Tuesday the violent far-left “anti-fascist” (or “antifa”) agitators behind many of the violent riots around the country.

Lemon was responding to President Trump’s press conference in which he blamed violent actors on “both sides” for the violence in Charlottesville over the weekend. Lemon responded by claiming antifa is a “protest group” simply “protesting hate in America” whose “tactics” maybe “weren’t exactly right.” (RELATED: In Their Own Words: Anti-Trump ‘Resistance’ Leaders Say They Want To Make America ‘Ungovernable’)

(In reality, antifa activists say they want to overthrow democracy and all of American civil society.)

“I’m saddened, Wolf. Sitting here, thinking as we were about to go on the air, ‘what am I going to say to Wolf Blitzer? What am I going to say to my colleagues, to the country and the world who is watching?’ This is a sad moment for the country. I think it was an awful moment for the person who was supposed to represent the highest office of the land. There today you saw the real Donald Trump proving all of his critics right in that moment,” Lemon began. (RELATED: CNN’s Sara Sidner Defends Antifa Violence [VIDEO])

“Everyone was sitting there watching, saying ‘here we go, his true colors are coming out.’ To equate a group that is a protest group, two protests group. Yes, they are both protest groups, calling antifa. They were there protesting fascism. Maybe their tactics weren’t exactly right. It is messy. There is a difference between the two groups,” Lemon continued.

“One is a Nazi, white supremacist group. What they want to do is extinguish people that look like me and you, Wolf, Jewish people, black people, even women. They don’t think we are equal. The other is a protest group, protesting a political and racism movement. I am not saying that that group, all of their tactics are right. They were there protesting hate in America.” (RELATED: In Their Own Words: Anti-Trump ‘Resistance’ Leaders Say They Want To Make America ‘Ungovernable’)

Read More @ DailyCaller.com

Governments to Control Large Cash Transactions

by Martin Armstrong, Armstrong Economics:

I have been pointing out the crisis we face moving forward. The gist of this is the total fiscal mismanagement of government for which we, the people, are always blamed. This hunt for taxes has led down the path of eliminating currency. While people think Bitcoin is an answer, they do not understand government no less the law. The need only pass a law that anyone who fails to report what they have in Bitcoin is criminal and they get to confiscate all your assets.

Switzerland has its “wealth tax” which they argue is nothing just 0.02{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528}. However, it requires you to report all assets worldwide. They then know what you have and it is merely one vote away at anytime to raise the tax or impose criminal penalties for failure to report everything.

We have stood by and what India cancel all high denomination notes. Try walking around with €500 notes in Europe and they look at you funny or won’t accept them. ATM machines have been reduced in Europe to taking a maximum of €200 in cash at best. This is all th hunt for taxes because government cannot function ethically no less morally.

Now the German Federal Minister of Finance Wolfgang Schäuble is proposing to control large cash transactions claiming this will prevent black money transactions and money laundering. Of course, they see these two issues not as typical crime like drugs, but tax avoidance.

Schäuble is coming up with an alternative for the resistance to eliminating cash is rising globally. He knows he cannot abolish cash. If you cannot eliminate cash, then Schäuble said there should be an upper limit placed on cash transactions, from which cash transactions must be registered and reported to the tax authorities. This will also happening in Europe where you cannot pay for a hotel bill greater than €1000. Schäuble said cash transactions must be registered who are the parties to the transaction to prevent the black money transactions, money laundering and terrorist financing.

It has become painfully obvious that the real winner in the Terrorism War was Ben Laden. What this single man did was change the entire world into a hunt for taxes. He destroyed our liberty like no other invader in history. He has certainly made the list of the top 10 most influential people in history, but has not surpassed Karl Marx.

Read More @ ArmstrongEconomics.com

BOOM! FBI Reopening FOIA Request into Clinton-Lynch Tarmac Meeting

0

by Joshua Caplan, The Gateway Pundit:

FOX News host Sean Hannity took to Twitter Tuesday evening to announce to his over 2.7 million followers that the FBI is reopening a FOIA request submitted by American Center for Law and Justice organization in relation to the infamous Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting.

“The ACLJ is reporting that the FBI is reopening its FOIA request into the Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting… More at 10pm #Hannity,” tweeted Sean Hannity.

On Monday, the ACLJ announced it submitted FOIA-obtained documents regarding the Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

ACLJ reports:

We just delivered 413 pages of documents on the clandestine Clinton-Lynch meeting to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee.

These documents – relevant to the Committee’s ongoing oversight of former Obma Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and specifically her role in the criminal investigation of former Secretary Hillary Clinton – were received as a result of our litigation against the Department of Justice for failing to comply with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

In addition to the FOIA-obtained documents, we also provided the Senate Judiciary Committee a complete timeline of the most relevant communications and events that occurred after Attorney General Lynch secretly met with former President Bill Clinton on July 27, 2016, on the Phoenix Airport tarmac.

This timeline and these documents include evidence of:

  • Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s alias email account;

  • Numerous redactions, including main “talking points,” in circumvention of FOIA;

  • Comey-led FBI lies on the existence of requested documents;

  • DOJ-Media collusion;

  • A White House connection; and

  • Revelations that Obama-loyalists are now investigating themselves.

In our letter, we urged the Senate Judiciary Committee “to thoroughly complete their oversight in order to ensure the American people that our judicial system is indeed blindly applicable to everyone.”

President Trump’s attorney, Jay Sekulow, read the timeline breakdown of the Lynch-Clinton tarmac docs on his radio show Friday morning.

Sekulow pointed out that upper level crisis management stepped in and responded to an email inquiry within ONE MINUTE of the news breaking that Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton met on the Phoenix tarmac in June of 2016. The internal panic is very telling. The Obama administration along with Lynch and Comey were doing everything they could to get this under control by creating talking points to deceive the public.

Read More @ TheGatewayPundit.com

Next on Liberals’ List for Destruction: Confederate Carvings at Stone Mountain Memorial

0

by Warner Todd Huston, Breitbart:

As fights over Confederate monuments continue across the country, liberals are again gearing up to force the state of Georgia to destroy the giant carvings of three Confederate Civil War generals on the side of state-owned Stone Mountain.

This week, Democrat candidate for Gov. Stacey Abrams released a statement calling for the destruction of the 158-foot-long bas-relief first started in 1923, according to the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

The African American Democrat called the monument a “blight” on Georgia, and slammed the monument as having been funded by the KKK, despite that it was the state and federal governments that paid for most of its creation.

Abrams laid out her case in a long series of Tweets posted on August 15.

Indeed, liberals have been fighting to have the carving removed at least since the Charleston church shooting in the summer of 2015.

While lost cause supporters did organize to initiate the project back in 1915, their money ran out quickly, and their support stopped when only one figure was fairly begun. In fact, the project laid fallow for 36 years until the state and the federal government became involved in the late 1950s and floated the funds to finish the carvings.

The site was purchased by the state of Georgia in 1958, but the sculpture was still incomplete due to the two World Wars, funding problems, and numerous missed deadlines and disputes. It was not completed until 1972. Indeed, in 1960 when the state purchased the property, the agreement that allowed the Klan to meet on the grounds in perpetuity was canceled by the state.

The Georgia General Assembly created the Stone Mountain Memorial Association soon after that and in 1960 launched a competition to have the memorial completed. The work was finished 12 years later.

Read More @ Breitbart.com

Two Paradigms, One Choice

by Harley Schlanger, LaRouche PAC:

The strategic significance of the Aug. 11 telephone conversation between President Trump and Xi Jinping, as emphasized at the time by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, was further evident in yesterday’s publication in Xinhua of China’s “readout” on that call. It emphasized the same essential points contained in the earlier White House readout—including the need for a peaceful, negotiated solution to the Korean crisis—but added in conclusion that, “on the Korean nuclear issue, Trump said the United States fully understands China’s efforts in resolving it, and is willing to continue to keep close contacts with Beijing on major international and regional issues of common concern.”

So not only did the “extremely close” relationship between the two leaders—forged at their personal meetings at Mar-a-Lago and the G20 summit—come into play to try to cool out the current Korean crisis, and prevent a British-instigated war from exploding; that relationship is also a stated, strategic factor for addressing other “major international and regional issues of common concern” as they come up.

What would happen if President Trump were to develop a similar working relationship with Russia’s Vladimir Putin? What if the Big Three—of Trump, Xi and Putin—were to jointly work for global infrastructure projects based on the Belt and Road Initiative, and for combatting the enemies of humanity such as London’s terrorism and drug apparatus?

The British Empire and their lackeys in Wall Street and Washington know the answer to those questions. And the very thought of it makes them fear for their very existence, and that of their system of financial looting and genocide.

That is why they will not give up on their house of cards fabrication about non-existent “collusion” by Trump, with non-existent Russian “hacking” of the DNC’s computers, to further their non-existent interference in the last U.S. Presidential election. Never mind that there was never a shred of evidence to prove any of those charges; never mind that there is now a growing avalanche of evidence of the British Empire’s controlling hand in all of those lies, and of the plot to overthrow the Trump Presidency, either by coup or by assassination.

The LaRouche movement’s role in achieving the breakout of coverage of the VIPS memo has been at the center of exposing that British intention, with positive results to date.

To which the British Empire’s only answer has been “silver or lead”—the tried and tested technique of Dope, Inc.’s drug capos for bringing about obedience. How else to explain the totally lopsided votes in the House and the Senate on the Russian sanctions bill? Only five individuals voted their conscience: The remainder voted either the “silver” they were offered as Wall Street backing for their election campaigns; or because of the “lead” of FBI blackmail and scandals; or both.

Read More @ LaRouchePAC.com

Trump Administration Targets Data on 1.3 Million Americans for Visiting a Website

0

by Michael Krieger, Liberty Blitzkrieg:

There are two points I want to hammer home in today’s piece. First, we all need to accept that Donald Trump is not some sort of crazy aberration in U.S. politics, but rather basically just the ghastly continuation of the authoritarianism and militarism which has characterized our insane society since we experienced a civilization-wide mental breakdown following the attacks of 9/11.

I’ve written about this ongoing cultural insanity on many occasions, but most passionately in my 2013 piece, How I Remember September 11, 2001:

In the days following the collapse, all I wanted was for the towers to be rebuilt just like before. I wanted the skyline back to what I had know since the day I came into this earth at a New York City hospital to be restored exactly as I had always known it. Career-wise, I felt I should leave Wall Street. I thought about going back to graduate school for political science, or maybe even join the newly created Department of Homeland Security (yes, the irony is not lost on me). I read a lengthy tome on Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda. I was an emotional and psychological mess, and it was when I was in this state of heightened distress that my own government and the military-industrial complex took advantage of me.

It wasn’t just me of course. It was an entire nation that was callously manipulated in the aftermath of that tragedy. The courage and generosity exhibited by so many New Yorkers and others throughout the country and indeed the world was rapidly transformed into terrifying fear. Fear that was intentionally injected repeatedly into our daily lives. Fear that translated into pointless wars and countless deaths. Fear that was used to justify the destruction of our precious civil rights. Fear that was used to initiate a gigantic power grab and the source of tremendous profits for the corporate-statists and crony-capitalsits. Unfortunately, that is the greatest legacy of 9/11.

If you take an honest look at Trump, what you’ll see is an authoritarian goon building upon the more marketable authoritarianism that came before him in the persons of George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Many people thought that by electing Trump they would break the cycle, but the cycle is continuing with reckless abandon and will probably continue on its present course until the U.S. empire collapses on itself.

The second point I want to make is that our centralized authoritarian government and deep state will use all idiotic acts of violence committed by protestors and counter-protestors to target the civil liberties of the rest of us. I discussed this at length in yesterday’s post, but it bears repeating.

I consider anyone, whether they claim to be on the “right” or the “left,” who advocates street violence or attends protests armed to fight, to be a serious danger to the rest of us since their actions play directly into the best interests of oligarchs and those who wish to crack down on the public at large. I call for all honest and reasonable people across the political spectrum to denounce such tactics, and I consider anyone advocating for street violence to be an enemy of the public at large, irrespective of what or who they claim to be fighting for. As John Lennon noted:

When it gets down to having to use violence, then you are playing the system’s game. The establishment will irritate you – pull your beard, flick your face – to make you fight. Because once they’ve got you violent, then they know how to handle you. The only thing they don’t know how to handle is non-violence and humor.

Public acts of violence give dastardly governments the excuse they need to crack down on civil liberties. If you engage in such behavior or endorse it, you are a huge part of the problem. This isn’t a forecast or prediction either, it’s happening right now.

For example, here’s The Hill reporting on how the Department of Justice is demanding information on 1.3 million Americans who simply visited a website.

The Department of Justice has requested information on visitors to a website used to organize protests against President Trump, the Los Angeles-based Dreamhost said in a blog post published on Monday.

Dreamhost, a web hosting provider, said that it has been working with the Department of Justice for several months on the request, which believes goes too far under the Constitution.

DreamHost claimed that the complying with the request from the Justice Department would amount to handing over roughly 1.3 million visitor IP addresses to the government, in addition to contact information, email content and photos of thousands of visitors to the website, which was involved in organizing protests against Trump on Inauguration Day.

“That information could be used to identify any individuals who used this site to exercise and express political speech protected under the Constitution’s First Amendment,” DreamHost wrote in the blog post on Monday. “That should be enough to set alarm bells off in anyone’s mind.”

TechDirt also had an excellent article on the subject. Here’s an excerpt:

Not all search warrants are bad. Indeed, most of them are perfectly legitimate, and meet the qualifications under the 4th Amendment that there is probable cause of a crime being committed, and the warrant is narrowly tailored to seek out evidence to support that. But… not always. As Ken “Popehat” White explains in a recent blog post, the Justice Department has somehow obtained the mother-of-all bad search warrants while trying to track down people who were involved in protests of Donald Trump’s inauguration back in January. The government has brought felony charges against a bunch of protestors from the inauguration, and now it appears the DOJ is going on a big fishing expedition.

DreamHost has now responded in court, saying that the warrant violates the 4th Amendment and appears to endanger the 1st Amendment rights of protestors. They also claim that it violates the Privacy Protection Act and that there are some jurisdictional issues with it as well. DreamHost also has a nice blog post about the whole thing:

This is, in our opinion, a strong example of investigatory overreach and a clear abuse of government authority.

Or, as the filing notes:

Where a search warrant endangers First Amendment interests, the warrant must be scrutinized with “particular exactitude” under the Fourth Amendment. See Zurcher v. Stanford Daily, 436 U.S. 547, 565 (1978). “The First Amendment is often inconvenient. But that is beside the point. Inconvenience does not absolve the government of its obligation to tolerate speech.”Int’l Soc’y for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. v. Lee, 505 U.S. 672, 701 (1992) (Kennedy, J., concurring). The government’s search warrant (“Search Warrant”) here requires non-party DreamHost, LLC (“DreamHost”) to turn over every piece of information it has about every visitor to a website expressing political views concerning the current administration. This information includes the IP address for the visitor, the website pages viewed by the visitor, even a detailed description of software running in the visitor’s computer. In essence, the Search Warrant not only aims to identify the political dissidents of the current administration, but attempts to identify and understand what content each of these dissidents viewed on the website. The Search Warrant also includes a demand that DreamHost disclose the content of all e-mail inquiries and comments submitted from numerous private e-mail accounts and prompted by the website, all through a single sweeping warrant.

The Search Warrant cannot survive scrutiny under the heightened particular exactitude standard required by the presence of the First Amendment issues. It fails to identify with the required particularity what will be seized by the government. It also fails to provide DreamHost with any assurance that the government will return or destroy the large portion of the information irrelevant to the government’s criminal case or cases. These features render the Search Warrant unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. In addition, the Search Warrant violates the privacy protections of the Privacy Protection Act, a statute enacted specifically to address such instances, and is without a jurisdictional basis.

Read More @ LibertyBlitzkrieg.com

Is North Korea Showing the Emperor is Naked?

0

by Pepe Escobar, Sputnik News:

Amid the thick fog of (rhetorical) war between Washington and Pyongyang, it’s still possible to detect some fascinating writing on the (unbuilt) wall.

A case can be made that President Trump is using North Korea to kick the 24/7 Russia-gate narrative out of the US news cycle. It’s certainly working. After all, in Exceptionalistan weltanschauung, the prospect of war and its possible rewards certainly trumps hazy accusations of Russian hacking and election interference.

Capitol Hill would never even consider an attempt to impeach a president — on top if it surrounded by generals — while American geopolitical primacy is in danger. Besides, Congress has already made it explicit Trump does not even need permission to bomb North Korea.

So, according to this working hypothesis, if Robert Mueller finds anything seriously damaging to the Trump brand, the president might actually consider a bomb North Korea/wag the dog operation.

Meanwhile, anybody paying attention to what Edward Snowden has disclosed in detail knows hackers of all persuasions are fine tuned to all Mueller-related IT systems and cell phone communications. They will know what Team Mueller has managed to find on Trump in real time — and plan their contingencies accordingly.

As for the rhetorical war itself, a US intel source used to thinking outside the Beltway box points to the crucial variable, South Korea; “South Korea will not maintain its alliance with the US the day they believe that the US will attack North Korea to protect itself at the expense of the death of thirty million people in South Korea. South Korea is in secret talks with China for a major security treaty because of the US position that they will bomb North Korea in their own defense irrespective of the destruction of South Korea which the US would regard as most unfortunate.”

Don’t expect to read about these secret Beijing-Seoul talks on Western corporate media. And that’s only part of the equation. The source adds, “there are secret talks between Germany and Russia over the US joint sanctions against those two nations and a realignment of the German position back to the Bismarckian Ostpolitik of a new Reinsurance Treaty with Russia.”

Assuming these secret negotiations bear fruit, the consequences will be nothing short of cataclysmic; “The European and Asian security systems of the United States may be about to collapse due to the turmoil in Washington which is unhinging all of the United States alliances. As Congress undermines Donald Trump, the United States is presently jeopardizing all its major strategic relationships.”

Seoul Framed as “Collateral Damage”

Meanwhile, serious questions remain over North Korea’s true military capabilities. As an independent Asia intel source familiar with the Korean peninsula observes, “submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) as well as land-based nuclear missiles are available on the black market, so North Korea would have no trouble acquiring them. North Korea knows that if they do not have a nuclear deterrent capacity they could be subject to a similar destruction that occurred with Iraq and Libya. In addition, the irresponsible threats against North Korea by [US Secretary of State] Tillerson, who should retire to his fishing haunts, could do grave damage to the US, for if North Korea believes the US will strike they will not wait as Saddam Hussein, having learned their lesson from that, but they will strike first.”

So the real issue, once again, is whether Pyongyang already is in possession of SLBMs as well as land-based nuclear capacity, acquired through the black market. The Asia intel source adds, “North Korea presently has twenty Romeo class submarines which, according to Heritage expert Bruce Klingner, have the capacity to carry nuclear SLBMs. These Romeo class submarines have a range of 9,000 miles and the distance from Pyongyang to New York City is 6,783 miles. These submarines could be refueled, for instance, in Cuba, Therefore, it is not inconceivable to find a North Korean submarine offshore New York City equipped with a ballistic nuclear missile in a showdown at the O.K. Corral with Washington D.C.”

US Think Tankland is developing a creepy consensus when it comes to North Korea. Every analyst worth his paycheck knows that North Korea’s nuclear program sites are widely dispersed and ultra-reinforced; everyone also knows that devastating North Korea artillery is concentrated near the demilitarized zone (DMZ) within striking distance of Seoul. Still, this is all being spun as part of an aseptic narrative where the US is “extremely reluctant” to bomb.

It’s obviously hard for CIA types to publicly acknowledge that Pyongyang is — successfully — creating the framework for a new brand of negotiation with the US as well as with South Korea, China and Russia. Any rational, non-Dr. Strangelove intellect knows there is no military solution to this drama. North Korea is already a de facto nuclear power — and diplomacy will have to take it into account.

Neocon/neoliberalcon War Party/CIA types though bet on — what else — war. And fast — before the much-hyped point of no return when Pyongyang acquires a deliverable nuclear weapon. That’s where, predictably, most factions of the deep state converge with Trump. And that’s the stuff of all sorts of chilling scenarios, pointing once again to Washington having no qualms sacrificing its South Korean “ally”.

Read More @ SputnikNews.com