AP Reveals 8 Ways Obama’s “Most Transparent Administration Ever” Blocks Information

“We have put in place the toughest ethics and transparency laws of any administration in history,” President Obama proclaimed four short years ago… However, as AP Washington Bureau Chief Sally Buzbee said recently, the fight for access to public information has never been harder, and in fact, the problem extends across the entire federal government and is now trickling down to state and local governments. Here is Buzbee’s list of eight ways Obama’s “most transparent” administration is making it hard for journalists to find information and cover the news…

 

Remember, this is the most transparent and open administration ever…

 

Though, it seems, as AP reports, that is simply not true…

1) As the United States ramps up its fight against Islamic militants, the public can’t see any of it. News organizations can’t shoot photos or video of bombers as they take off — there are no embeds. In fact, the administration won’t even say what country the S. bombers fly from.

 

2) The White House once fought to get cameramen, photographers and reporters into meetings the president had with foreign leaders overseas. That access has become much rarer. Think about the message that sends other nations about how the world’s leading democracy deals with the media:  Keep them out and let them use handout photos.

 

3) Guantanamo: The big important 9/11 trial is finally coming up. But we aren’t allowed to see most court filings in real time — even of nonclassified material. So at hearings, we can’t follow what’s happening. We don’t know what prosecutors are asking for, or what defense attorneys are arguing.

 

4) Information about Guantanamo that was routinely released under President George W. Bush is now kept secret. The military won’t release the number of prisoners on hunger strike or the number of assaults on guards. Photo and video coverage is virtually nonexistent.

 

5) Day-to-day intimidation of sources is chilling. AP’s transportation reporter’s sources say that if they are caught talking to her, they will be fired. Even if they just give her facts, about safety, for example. Government press officials say their orders are to squelch anything controversial or that makes the administration look bad.

 

6) One of the media — and public’s — most important legal tools, the Freedom of Information Act, is under siege. Requests for information under FOIA have become slow and expensive. Many federal agencies simply don’t respond at all in a timely manner, forcing news organizations to sue each time to force action.

 

7) The administration uses FOIAs as a tip service to uncover what news organizations are pursuing. Requests are now routinely forwarded to political appointees. At the agency that oversees the new health care law, for example, political appointees now handle the FOIA requests.

 

8) The administration is trying to control the information that state and local officials can give out. The FBI has directed local police not to disclose details about surveillance technology the police departments use to sweep up cellphone data. In some cases, federal officials have formally intervened in state open records cases, arguing for secrecy.

*  *  *

If you like your transparency, in this case, you can’t keep it!




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1uoXQHs Tyler Durden

AP Reveals 8 Ways Obama's "Most Transparent Administration Ever" Blocks Information

“We have put in place the toughest ethics and transparency laws of any administration in history,” President Obama proclaimed four short years ago… However, as AP Washington Bureau Chief Sally Buzbee said recently, the fight for access to public information has never been harder, and in fact, the problem extends across the entire federal government and is now trickling down to state and local governments. Here is Buzbee’s list of eight ways Obama’s “most transparent” administration is making it hard for journalists to find information and cover the news…

 

Remember, this is the most transparent and open administration ever…

 

Though, it seems, as AP reports, that is simply not true…

1) As the United States ramps up its fight against Islamic militants, the public can’t see any of it. News organizations can’t shoot photos or video of bombers as they take off — there are no embeds. In fact, the administration won’t even say what country the S. bombers fly from.

 

2) The White House once fought to get cameramen, photographers and reporters into meetings the president had with foreign leaders overseas. That access has become much rarer. Think about the message that sends other nations about how the world’s leading democracy deals with the media:  Keep them out and let them use handout photos.

 

3) Guantanamo: The big important 9/11 trial is finally coming up. But we aren’t allowed to see most court filings in real time — even of nonclassified material. So at hearings, we can’t follow what’s happening. We don’t know what prosecutors are asking for, or what defense attorneys are arguing.

 

4) Information about Guantanamo that was routinely released under President George W. Bush is now kept secret. The military won’t release the number of prisoners on hunger strike or the number of assaults on guards. Photo and video coverage is virtually nonexistent.

 

5) Day-to-day intimidation of sources is chilling. AP’s transportation reporter’s sources say that if they are caught talking to her, they will be fired. Even if they just give her facts, about safety, for example. Government press officials say their orders are to squelch anything controversial or that makes the administration look bad.

 

6) One of the media — and public’s — most important legal tools, the Freedom of Information Act, is under siege. Requests for information under FOIA have become slow and expensive. Many federal agencies simply don’t respond at all in a timely manner, forcing news organizations to sue each time to force action.

 

7) The administration uses FOIAs as a tip service to uncover what news organizations are pursuing. Requests are now routinely forwarded to political appointees. At the agency that oversees the new health care law, for example, political appointees now handle the FOIA requests.

 

8) The administration is trying to control the information that state and local officials can give out. The FBI has directed local police not to disclose details about surveillance technology the police departments use to sweep up cellphone data. In some cases, federal officials have formally intervened in state open records cases, arguing for secrecy.

*  *  *

If you like your transparency, in this case, you can’t keep it!




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1uoXQHs Tyler Durden

Fear And Loathing In Scotland – Why The "NO"s Won & Lessons Learned From The Vote

Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

Yesterday morning, as I sat down for my ritualistic dose of caffeine and began to write, I noticed that I had auspiciously planted myself in front of two older women from the UK. One was from Scotland, the other from somewhere else in the United Kingdom with an accent I couldn’t quite place. The non-Scottish woman asked her friend for thoughts on the independence referendum. The Scottish woman replied that she would have voted “YES,” but that her friends were all voting “NO.” She said that “they were afraid.”

Upon overhearing this, I felt a pit form in my stomach. Almost all of the enthusiasm that I had for the day was immediately drained. Not only was I excited to see a historically defiant and proud people vote for independence, but yesterday marked the launch of the Contributor section of Liberty Blitzkrieg. It was a big day for me, yet all of a sudden it was as if the atmosphere suddenly evaporated and despair filled the air. Although no results had yet been reported, I knew the result. It was going to be NO.

I’m pretty sure I have absolutely zero Scottish blood in me, but I felt a strong sense of pride and camaraderie with the rebellious northerners. They had a chance to really kickstart a peaceful process of political decentralization that would spread like brushfire across the world. From Caledonia to Catalonia. From Quebec to these United States. It would have been an unstoppable force. It would be humanity proudly waving a flag of liberty and saying we can be fully integrated within the world at large without being ruled from a centralized power far from where we live. This is my dream and vision for the future and I was hopeful the Scots could lead the way. Unfortunately, this did not happen.

In the wake of the results, I have witnessed a great deal of bitterness and anger about the vote. While I can relate to such sentiments, I try to take a much more constructive and optimistic approach to the future. First and foremost, we should all be proud that the vote happened at all. So many people within the so-called “liberty movement” are discouragingly extreme pessimists. While proclaiming to fight for liberty, many of them seem to think we are powerless in the face of the powerful. To them, the independence referendum is proof that nothing can ever be changed. I completely disagree with this perspective.

The vote did happen, and the people of Scotland were given a choice. They said NO. I have always maintained that my vision of the future is not a world homogeneously looking like the type of community I personally want to live in, but rather a planet consisting of an almost infinite variety of different, autonomous, interacting, and prosperous communities. There will be so many choices, and such freedom of movement, that pretty much anyone of any disposition can find a place they feel they fit in and can call home. Nobody is ever subject to a life sentence within a particular political structure they had no role in creating just because they happened to be born there.

So that’s my vision, but how are we supposed to get there? Well for one thing, via powerful political movements such as the ones the Scots just pulled off. As a result of this movement, the people of Scotland were given a very important choice. A choice that 99.9% of the humans who have ever lived on planet earth have never had. This in itself is an important achievement. If the Scots voted NO, who am I or anyone else to say they made the right or wrong decision? They were given a real choice, a vote that actually mattered for once, and for that we should be encouraged. As I noted on Twitter yesterday:

Although I specifically mentioned the U.S., the above sentiment applies to the entire world. People everywhere should frequently hold direct referendums on specific issues that matter to them. The idea of representative democracy, in which we select some captured politician who will merely vote along the lines of special interests is outdated, immoral, childish and feudal. Recall the Princeton study that showed the U.S. is an oligarchy where the will of the people have zero effect on policy. So clearly we already know the status quo is not working for the vast majority of people.

So with that big picture vision out of the way, are there any positives those who favor decentralization can take from Scotland’s independence referendum other than the fact dedicated people actually made it happen? Yes, I believe there are many important takeaways, several of which are instructive going forward.

First, there’s the fact that fear was a driving force behind the NO voters. Fear is something I spent a lot of time addressing in posts several years ago. Fear is necessary in a very small number of scenarios we face as humans, but it is unfortunately applied in myriad situations where it makes our situations worse, not better. Fear is what allows despots to take and retain power. Fear is what keeps you from living life and achieving your goals. Fear is paralyzing. Fear makes a people reject their own independence.

Recall that the older lady yesterday (I would guess she was in her 70s) stated that her friends were all voting NO because they were “afraid.” This line took an increased level of significance for me later in the day as I was reading a lengthly article in the UK Telegraph and came across the following quote:

Screen Shot 2014-09-19 at 10.09.11 AM

So with that in mind, it’s important to ask, who was fearful and why?

With the results now finalized, we have some definitive answers to this question. The post referendum polling done by Lord Ashcroft has been going around Twitter this morning, and the results are simply incredible. See below:

Screen Shot 2014-09-19 at 10.28.56 AM

The NO vote was entirely secured by overwhelming support from those aged above 55. In fact, the “better together” camp failed to win any of the age groups below 55 years of age. For the 65+ crowd it was simply a blowout. 73% of them voted NO. So in a nutshell, old people filled with fear blocked independence. Similarly, fearful old people bailed out the banks in the U.S. several years ago, putting a nail in the coffin of the middle class and the youth generally. See what I am getting at here?

What we now know for certain is that old people in positions of wealth and power, and the ability to frighten others of their generation, is proving to be the most significant obstacle to global change. For those of us who wish to see paradigm shifting changes, this is a very positive realization. For starters, the older generation will gradually fade away, and the promises made to them via pensions will not be on the table for younger generations. Pensions were a huge issue for the 65+ crowd when it came down to their voting decisions.
 The BBC noted that:

A recent BBC poll found that pensions came second in a list of the 10 things that mattered most to voters – only the economy was deemed more important.

The economy and pensions. So basically old people on the way out felt like they had a reasonable handle on what to expect under the current regime, and didn’t want to rock the boat. It’s really as simple as that.

Going forward, the older generation problem will naturally resolve itself. So we know that the youth will be deciding the future. Thus, the real question becomes, what will influence the youth?

As a result of the horrific and self-interested choices of older generations, the youth will be left with a much more difficult and uncertain future. This is already happening, but it will worsen considerably following the next severe economic decline, likely to start in late 2015.

My biggest concern is that fear will be used to drive the passions of the youth, rather than constructive, positive influences. We know that fear is an extremely powerful driver, and it more often than not leads to disastrous decision making. There is no doubt that the youth will decide the future, but will their passions be driven by negative emotions like fear, or positive sentiments like creativity, compassion and community? Only time will tell, but its up to us to be aware of this dynamic, understand exactly what is at stake, and attempt influence the outcome as positively as possible.




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/XC5tQ3 Tyler Durden

Fear And Loathing In Scotland – Why The “NO”s Won & Lessons Learned From The Vote

Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

Yesterday morning, as I sat down for my ritualistic dose of caffeine and began to write, I noticed that I had auspiciously planted myself in front of two older women from the UK. One was from Scotland, the other from somewhere else in the United Kingdom with an accent I couldn’t quite place. The non-Scottish woman asked her friend for thoughts on the independence referendum. The Scottish woman replied that she would have voted “YES,” but that her friends were all voting “NO.” She said that “they were afraid.”

Upon overhearing this, I felt a pit form in my stomach. Almost all of the enthusiasm that I had for the day was immediately drained. Not only was I excited to see a historically defiant and proud people vote for independence, but yesterday marked the launch of the Contributor section of Liberty Blitzkrieg. It was a big day for me, yet all of a sudden it was as if the atmosphere suddenly evaporated and despair filled the air. Although no results had yet been reported, I knew the result. It was going to be NO.

I’m pretty sure I have absolutely zero Scottish blood in me, but I felt a strong sense of pride and camaraderie with the rebellious northerners. They had a chance to really kickstart a peaceful process of political decentralization that would spread like brushfire across the world. From Caledonia to Catalonia. From Quebec to these United States. It would have been an unstoppable force. It would be humanity proudly waving a flag of liberty and saying we can be fully integrated within the world at large without being ruled from a centralized power far from where we live. This is my dream and vision for the future and I was hopeful the Scots could lead the way. Unfortunately, this did not happen.

In the wake of the results, I have witnessed a great deal of bitterness and anger about the vote. While I can relate to such sentiments, I try to take a much more constructive and optimistic approach to the future. First and foremost, we should all be proud that the vote happened at all. So many people within the so-called “liberty movement” are discouragingly extreme pessimists. While proclaiming to fight for liberty, many of them seem to think we are powerless in the face of the powerful. To them, the independence referendum is proof that nothing can ever be changed. I completely disagree with this perspective.

The vote did happen, and the people of Scotland were given a choice. They said NO. I have always maintained that my vision of the future is not a world homogeneously looking like the type of community I personally want to live in, but rather a planet consisting of an almost infinite variety of different, autonomous, interacting, and prosperous communities. There will be so many choices, and such freedom of movement, that pretty much anyone of any disposition can find a place they feel they fit in and can call home. Nobody is ever subject to a life sentence within a particular political structure they had no role in creating just because they happened to be born there.

So that’s my vision, but how are we supposed to get there? Well for one thing, via powerful political movements such as the ones the Scots just pulled off. As a result of this movement, the people of Scotland were given a very important choice. A choice that 99.9% of the humans who have ever lived on planet earth have never had. This in itself is an important achievement. If the Scots voted NO, who am I or anyone else to say they made the right or wrong decision? They were given a real choice, a vote that actually mattered for once, and for that we should be encouraged. As I noted on Twitter yesterday:

Although I specifically mentioned the U.S., the above sentiment applies to the entire world. People everywhere should frequently hold direct referendums on specific issues that matter to them. The idea of representative democracy, in which we select some captured politician who will merely vote along the lines of special interests is outdated, immoral, childish and feudal. Recall the Princeton study that showed the U.S. is an oligarchy where the will of the people have zero effect on policy. So clearly we already know the status quo is not working for the vast majority of people.

So with that big picture vision out of the way, are there any positives those who favor decentralization can take from Scotland’s independence referendum other than the fact dedicated people actually made it happen? Yes, I believe there are many important takeaways, several of which are instructive going forward.

First, there’s the fact that fear was a driving force behind the NO voters. Fear is something I spent a lot of time addressing in posts several years ago. Fear is necessary in a very small number of scenarios we face as humans, but it is unfortunately applied in myriad situations where it makes our situations worse, not better. Fear is what allows despots to take and retain power. Fear is what keeps you from living life and achieving your goals. Fear is paralyzing. Fear makes a people reject their own independence.

Recall that the older lady yesterday (I would guess she was in her 70s) stated that her friends were all voting NO because they were “afraid.” This line took an increased level of significance for me later in the day as I was reading a lengthly article in the UK Telegraph and came across the following quote:

Screen Shot 2014-09-19 at 10.09.11 AM

So with that in mind, it’s important to ask, who was fearful and why?

With the results now finalized, we have some definitive answers to this question. The post referendum polling done by Lord Ashcroft has been going around Twitter this morning, and the results are simply incredible. See below:

Screen Shot 2014-09-19 at 10.28.56 AM

The NO vote was entirely secured by overwhelming support from those aged above 55. In fact, the “better together” camp failed to win any of the age groups below 55 years of age. For the 65+ crowd it was simply a blowout. 73% of them voted NO. So in a nutshell, old people filled with fear blocked independence. Similarly, fearful old people bailed out the banks in the U.S. several years ago, putting a nail in the coffin of the middle class and the youth generally. See what I am getting at here?

What we now know for certain is that old people in positions of wealth and power, and the ability to frighten others of their generation, is proving to be the most significant obstacle to global change. For those of us who wish to see paradigm shifting changes, this is a very positive realization. For starters, the older generation will gradually fade away, and the promises made to them via pensions will not be on the table for younger generations. Pensions were a huge issue for the 65+ crowd when it came down to their voting decisions.  The BBC noted that:

A recent BBC poll found that pensions came second in a list of the 10 things that mattered most to voters – only the economy was deemed more important.

The economy and pensions. So basically old people on the way out felt like they had a reasonable handle on what to expect under the current regime, and didn’t want to rock the boat. It’s really as simple as that.

Going forward, the older generation problem will naturally resolve itself. So we know that the youth will be deciding the future. Thus, the real question becomes, what will influence the youth?

As a result of the horrific and self-interested choices of older generations, the youth will be left with a much more difficult and uncertain future. This is already happening, but it will worsen considerably following the next severe economic decline, likely to start in late 2015.

My biggest concern is that fear will be used to drive the passions of the youth, rather than constructive, positive influences. We know that fear is an extremely powerful driver, and it more often than not leads to disastrous decision making. There is no doubt that the youth will decide the future, but will their passions be driven by negative emotions like fear, or positive sentiments like creativity, compassion and community? Only time will tell, but its up to us to be aware of this dynamic, understand exactly what is at stake, and attempt influence the outcome as positively as possible.




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/XC5tQ3 Tyler Durden

Beware Dangerous Global Dirigisme


Courtesy of the SlealthFlation Blog:

Like many of our readers, I clearly have a very hard time reconciling a U.S. stock market making new all-time-highs almost daily, especially in the face of what most economists consider to be a weak domestic economy with negligible growth prospects.  Moreover, when you layover the thoroughly stalled and certainly weaker overall global economic picture, it’s even harder to rationalize.  Finally, throw into the mix the gravity of threatening geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and Russia, the two nations with the largest stockpiles of tactical nuclear weapons on earth, as well as the disintegrating Middle East mayhem, and the market actually welcomes it.  Something majorly does not add up, well, to this idiot anyways.

14516383-3d-kleine-geschaftsleute-zeigen-marktwachstum-und-leistung-und-erfolgreiches-unternehmenI know, I know, I know the economy is not the stock market.  What are you some kind of an moron.  But, let’s be honest with each other, the listed companies on the exchanges that make up the market in aggregate, do in fact represent the country’s economic condition at large. Therefore, if the overall economy has poor growth prospects, it surely stands to reason that the equity values which intrinsically measure the future earnings of those companies should in point of fact reflect that future weakness. Yet, we continue to achieve new highs almost daily? Some will tell you that it’s not so much the underlying value of the companies that is driving the market to new highs, but rather the Fed QE policy, printing ever free flowing funds which relentlessly increase financial asset values as the currency is consistently devalued, causing higher and higher prices. Well, if that were truly the case, wouldn’t rabid inflation be upon us in a general way, and thus reflected in all things cash buys?  The debased money still seems to be holding its value against certain other goods, right?  Not to mention that CPI is supposedly below 1% (rolls eyes).  Still others will tell you that it’s the astounding technology advances of our times driving the productivity gains which are behind these sensational stock valuations.  This I can buy into somewhat for several market sectors, at least where increased margins are concerned, but not across the board.   Moreover, during the past several quarters overall revenues have slowed, which has clearly been reflected in softer earnings growth for the majority of companies. Yet remarkably, the market continues making new highs, seeing nothing but clear skies above and continued smooth sailing ahead.  Call me a stubborn, but this idiot remains increasingly skeptical. FWIW, what I really see here is a entirely captured market being indirectly inflated by a complicit FED which through it’s multinational mega bank agents, whom also happen to be it’s board members, is desperrately trying to keep an impaired monetray and financial system afloat at all costs. They have reduced the market to a bill board, and themselves to foolish financial cheerleaders dubiously relying on a wealth effect that has yet to materialize. They also are well aware that the pension income stream demand 7% returns to maintain solvency. Where are they gonna get that? The eviceratted treasury market?  What I really see is nominal synthetic stock market gains, juiced by stock buy backs via zirp infested money, which are not a productive conduit for economic growth. I mean really, all time highs with little to no median income growth and nearly 60 million Americans permanently on food stamps.  What gives?

20140307_progressIf one dares to make the unfathomable hair-brained assumption that the market is quite possibly not reflecting and perhaps even blatantly misrepresenting econo
mic reality, what can really be going on here? What’s really driving the ballistic buying binge?  I realize that the momos and trendos among us don’t give a damn, as they continue to rake in coin via a market seemingly tailor made to reward their systematic approach to trading, almost as if it were specifically designed to entice and encourage their fabulous feeding frenzy. Now that their orginal sugar daddy has been repolaced by who’s your Mommy, it seems reason enough to satisfy them. We remain unconvinced, and still require real rational answers to feel grounded in economic reality. What is really behind this seemingly illegitimate, and laughably ludicrous levitation?  Well, open your mind to the matrix, as we have an entirely spectacular answer for you all, which may well identify what is really operating behind the scenes.  Brace yourselves, if it’s even remotely accurate, it is truly terrifying.

Behold our bold brash belief or bogus bloviated buffoonery:

The-Bank-For-International-Settlements-at-Night-Photo-by-WladyslawMost of us will acknowledge that an International Banking Cabal is in full control of the major Central Banks which orchestrate the current monetary order that the globe’s financial system runs on.  Moreover, you would have to have been living under a rock to have not noticed that, ever since the financial crisis of 2008, the political authorities leading the developed Nation’s of the world’s are now willfully subservient to their respective central banks which take their marching orders form the TBTF multinational banks which own them.  The cabal’s overriding self serving interests are suposedly paramount to us all. Yet, this avaricious international banking cartel has no allegiance other then unto itself.

Astonishingly, even the once revered ideal of national sovereignty itself has had its wings effectively clipped by this elite banking class. Perhaps the most obvious example of the abject subjugation, is the European Union, with its ECB imposed EURO hand cuffs firmly casting an iron grip around previously magnificent autonomous nations such as Italy and Spain, rendering them to a sad sorry state of subordinate EU foot stools.  How thoroughly we have permitted the self seeking interests of those privileged few closest to the powerful money levers control our collective destiny.  I dare say, many of you here seem to have acquiesced, and now actually welcome the money drug dealers. Beware my friends, as the pusher soon owns the junkie!


We are begining to genuinely believe that there may well exist self appointed elites running the deep state, acting as demigod’s directing our deferential dependency and the deliberate dollar’s demise, nefariously orchestrating a bold and grand scheme to complete the outright capture of our entire monetary existence.  It’s our contention, that all of this supposed tumult on the ground in Ukraine, is none other than globalist ongoing destabilization of the world’s sovereign Nation states designed to open the door for an IMF backed SDR new global monetary order, with the intent of establishing total financial hegemony over the world and all its natural resources, including those that are human.


9780805055764_p0_v1_s260x420These depraved puppet masters already have the European nation states right where they want them via their EU/ECB headlock strangle hold. They have rendered China entirely dependent on an export based / low wage economic growth model, as they have done with all the BRICS. They have destabilized MENA to disembowel OPEC. The next two chess pieces to fall will first be the once mighty Russian queen, followed by the indisputable king USA. The last move is to undermine the United States’ Petro dollar reserve currency supremacy. This final checkmate will be achieved by initiating a disastrous energy war.  They will require a raging resource war to destabilize the USD. The current covert NGO which manufactured and fomented riots in Kiev’s Maiden square, pitting Ukraine against Russia, is simply another carefully crafted conflict. They tried with Iraq and failed, they tried with Iran and failed, they tried with Libya and failed, they tried with Syria and failed, now they are desperately trying with Ukraine.  The American people could quite possibly fall for this last scheme. The MSM has certainly been working overtime to paint that Putinator prick as a dreadfully dangerous despot intent on world domination. Pay attention America, the international bankers want war, same as it ever was.


 

The following piece written by Brandon Smith provides provocative historical evidence of the int’l banks’ lust for war:

 With the exception of a few revolutions, most wars are instigated and controlled by financial elites, manipulating governments on both sides of the game to produce a preconceived result. The rise of National Socialism in Germany, for instance, was largely funded by corporate entities based in the U.S., including Rockefeller giant Standard Oil, JPMorgan and even IBM, which built the collating machines specifically used to organize Nazi extermination camps, the same machines IBM representatives serviced on site at places like Auschwitz. As a public figure, Adolf Hitler was considered a joke by most people in German society, until, of course, the Nazi Party received incredible levels of corporate investment. This aid was most evident in what came to be known as the Keppler Fund created through the Keppler Circle, a group of interests with contacts largely based in the U.S.

George W. Bush’s grandfather, Prescott Bush, used his position as director of the New York-based Union Banking Corporation to launder money for the Third Reich throughout the war. After being exposed and charged for trading with the enemy, the case against Bush magically disappeared in a puff of smoke, and the Bush family went on to become one of the most powerful political forces in America.

Without the aid of international conglomerates and banks, the Third Reich would have never risen to power.

The rise of communism in Russia through the Bolshevik Revolution was no different. As outlined in Professor Antony Sutton’s book Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution with vast detail and irrefutable supporting evidence, it was globalist financiers that created the social petri dish in which the communist takeover flourished.  The same financiers that aided the Nazis…

The two sides, National Socialism and communism, were essentially identical despotic governmental structures conjured by the same group of elites. These two sides, these two fraudulent ideologies, were then pitted against each other in an engineered conflict that we now call World War II, resulting in an estimated 48 million casualties globally and the ultimate formation of the United Nations, a precursor to world government.

Every major international crisis for the past century or more has ended with an even greater consolidation of world power into the hands of the few, and this is no accident.

The very same cunning crafty cabal has synthetically pumped the U.S. Stock and Bond markets to precariously unstable new all time highs, under very dubious circumstances.  Could this have been orchestrated to create the most economic havoc possible once the plug is pulled on all USD denominated financial assets? The devastating simultaneous detonation of both the U.S. debt and equity markets ultra bubbles would decimate the USD and what was left of the public’s faith in the U.S. financial markets. Is idea really such a stretch, are the conspiracy kooks actually onto something? Once the rabid globalist successfully provoke a major resource war, the oil market will shoot straight through the roof, interest rates will spike, and a US stock market crash of epic proportion will ensue.  After the dreadfully disastrous devastating dollar fall out, the entire world will be on its knees begging and pleading for the finacial internationalists at the IMF/BIS/WBG to save the days with their own sponsored global SDR currency regime to reset the world’s monetary meltdown mess. The Banksters w
ill have us eating out of their filthy hands. Their masterful maniacal mission mercilessly accomplished.

Banking-Elite-infograph




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1p6wfrh Bruno de Landevoisin

Shocking Anti-Islam Ad Campaign Coming To New York City Buses And Subways

In a move that is certain to further escalate already stretched racial tensions in America’s most cosmopolitan city, some 100 New York City buses will soon carry jarring anti-Islamic posters which feature photos of an ISIS beheading victim, his alleged executioner, Adolf Hitler, declare “Yesterday’s moderate [Muslim] is today’s headline” and proclaim “It’s not Islamophobia, it’s Islamorealism” as part of an “educational campaign.” According to the NY Daily News, the ads, paid for by flame-throwing blogger Pamela Geller, at a cost of $100,000, are intended as an “education campaign” to warn of the “problem with jihad” and Islamic sharia law, Geller said.

Below are some of the ads which will soon grace 100 buses and at the entrances of the E. 59th St. station and the Columbus Circle station.

In one poster, a photo from the video in which U.S. journalist was killed is sits next to a photo of a British man suspected of being the militant behind the ISIS beheadings.

A second ad contains a 1940s photo of a pro-Nazi Palestinian leader chatting with Adolf Hitler under the headline, “Islamic Jew-Hatred: It’s in the Quran.”

Pamela Geller, creators of the anti-jihad subway ads, speaks at an MTA meeting two years ago.

As Al Arabiya reports, the ads also target the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a civil rights group based in Washington D.C. by linking it to Hamas.

“Geller is a known hater and there’s no law in this country that forces her to tell the truth,” Corey Saylor, a CAIR spokesman told the Daily news, adding that the group had considered suing Geller but did not think it was worth it.

 

Geller’s message, however, does not come unopposed and it is none other than new NYC Mayor de Blasio who spoke up against Geller’s campaign:

 

“These ads are outrageous, inflammatory and wrong, and have no place in New York City, or anywhere. These hateful messages serve only to divide and stigmatize when we should be coming together as one city,” New York City Mayor de Blasio told the U.S. daily.

 

“While those behind these ads only display their irresponsible intolerance, the rest of us who may be forced to view them can take comfort in the knowledge that we share a better, loftier and nobler view of humanity,” he said.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority admitted that the ads will offend public-transportation passengers but had no choice but to allow them.

It tried to block Geller several years ago when she wanted to post ads in the subway that labeled enemies of Israel as “savages.”

 

The MTA said the ads violated its “no demeaning” language policy. But a judge ruled that rejecting the ads violated Geller’s First Amendment rights.

 

“If you read the court decision on this, our hands are tied,” said MTA spokesman Adam Lisberg.

Following that battle, the MTA updated its policy to force all viewpoint ads like Geller’s to contain language clearly stating that the opinions expressed are not the transit agency’s. Geller’s new ads will contain the disclaimer.

Because surely every stunned observer of the iconic picture of US journalist Foley about to be beheaded, plastered on NYC mass transit, will stop and carefully read all the way to the fine print. And some still wonder why the animosity between middle-eastern religious groups leads to ever rising animosity and ever greater bloodshed.




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1tGEiQU Tyler Durden

The Middle East Needs Free Markets, Not Troops

As Washington prepares to battle with ISIS, Dr. Imad-ad-Dean
Ahmad of the Islamic libertarian tank Minaret of Freedom Institute warns
that warfare won’t lead to stability in the Middle East.

In March, Reason TV interviewed Dr. Ahmad, who believes free
market policies are the best way to bring peace and prosperity to
the region—and are compatible with Islamic teaching.

Watch Can
Muslims be Free Marketeers?
above and read the original post
below:

“The biggest fear in the Muslim world is the association in
their minds of free markets with imperialism,” says Dr.
Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad, president of the Minaret of Freedom
Institute
. “But those of us familiar with the history of
libertarian thought know that true devotees of the free market have
always been opposed to imperialism.”

There is nothing inherent in Islam or the Koran, claims
Ahmad, that prohibits Muslim-majority countries from joining the
world economy. The Minaret of Freedom
Institute
 seeks to educate Muslims and non-Muslims on the
libertarian values within the Islam religion. Ahmad sat down
with Reason TV’s Nick Gillespie to discuss how libertarian and
Islamic values actually complement one another.  

About 15 minutes.

Produced by Amanda Winkler. Camera by Winkler and Joshua
Swain. 

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1uoKzPk
via IFTTT

France Releases Video Of Its First Airstrike Against ISIS

Several months ago, when France vehemently opposed canceling the delivery of the Mistral amphibious warship to Russia, its largest bank BNP was “unexpectedly” slapped with a record $9 billion fine by the US Department of Justice for money-laundering. The retaliatory measure was so obvious even Putin opined on the US action: “We know about the pressure which our U.S. partners are applying on France not to supply the Mistrals to Russia,” Putin said in July. “And we even know that they hinted that if the French don’t deliver the Mistrals, they would quietly get rid of the sanctions against the bank, or at least minimize them.”

Fast forward a few months later when the French banking lobby has clearly gotten not only the upper hand in its ongoing fight with Hollande’s imploding socialist leadership, now facing a record low approval rating, but realizes it once again has all the leverage, not only is the Mistral shipment on the verge of being scrapped, but it is time to make sure that another “BNP” never happens again: after all there are banker bonuses to think of.

As a result, the French administration is scrambling to demonstrate its faithful commitment to whatever warmongering cause the US may unleash on the world, in this case using the ISIS terrorist threat as a pretext to imminently bomb and crush Assad’s Syrian regime, just so the Qatar natgas pipeline to Europe – which as a reminder was the underlying reason for the failed 2013 false flag campaign to eradicate Assad – can finally cross the country unopposed, and deliver the much needed alternative to Gazprom’s product, eliminating the major leverage Putin has over Europe, which also explains why Russia is suddenly so vocal in its demands that the US halt its bombing of the Syrian regime. Follows a succinct situation summary on the Syrian situation from Al-Arabiya:

Russia was the third country to criticize the U.S. decision to bomb ISIS terrorists on Syrian territory, after the Syrian and Iranian governments. It’s not the best company to keep when opposing Obama’s decision in terms of international prestige and perception, however, it was to be expected.

 

The criticism came both from Russia’s leader Vladimir Putin and from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Alexander Lukashevich.

 

The criticism is based on one key point: without the Syrian government’s agreement and a UNSC mandate, the U.S. strikes in Syria would be a gross violation of international law and should be considered an act of aggression. Moreover, Moscow didn’t pass over in silence the double standard approach of Washington, as while helping Iraq to fight the terrorists on its territory, the U.S. president called for approval for more funding of the so-called armed opposition in Syria. Also, recent revelations by fighters in the pages of the Western press purport that the moderates in Syria are absolutely demoralized, weak and their ranks thinned out as the fighters join ISIS. In light of such reports, it is not clear which party Obama is going assist in this case and how his calls correspond to the real situation on the ground.

 

there are deep concerns that the U.S. will bomb not only ISIS positions in Syria, but also the Syrian government forces. These concerns can be explained by the fact that evidently the strikes against ISIS could play into hands of Damascus and this doesn’t correspond with the U.S. interests. Taking into account that during all these years of the Syrian war the U.S. could have been trying to realize its plans to bomb Syria, they could take advantage of this situation.

 

If the U.S. bombs the positions of government forces, by mistake or with malicious intent, this would have doubly unpredictable consequences, both at the international and regional levels.

 

For sure, this will trigger a new crisis with Russia. The crisis of credibility in bilateral relations will reach the highest point. Russia will ultimately respond to the possible aggression. But how? It’s a big question with a difficult to predict answer. Moreover, possible strikes against Damascus’ forces will blow up the remains of credibility of international law, international systems and institutions. After the meeting over Iraq in Paris on Monday, Russia’s foreign minister stressed that the international community should build common action “on a solid foundation of the United Nations Charter and U.N. counter-terrorist instrument and mechanisms.”  The call to respect the U.N. Charter is clear and logical, however its solidness, as well as that of the U.N. system in general, is already in doubt. Any further violations of international law and U.N. principles will definitely be the last straw, leading to international chaos.

But back to France, which in order to do prove its undying commitment to the US, moments ago the French Defense Ministry took a page right out of the Pentagon/CNN playbook, and released footage of French warplanes striking targets belonging to the Islamic State after taking off from an airbase.  Paris announced earlier this week it was taking part in military air strikes against the militant group in Iraq.

The video shows a pilot inspecting his aircraft, a French Rafale, before takeoff. The footage also shows several craft being refueled in mid-flight as well as infrared shots of the targets being bombed.

The statement released by the French Defense Ministry:

During the flight lasting about five hours, the two Rafales were refueled three times by the tanker aircraft C135-FR.

 

The French jets, delivered strikes between 9:40 and 9:58 with four laser-guided bombs GBU 12.

 

The maritime patrol aircraft Atlantique 2 conducted a ten-hour mission, coordinated with that of Rafale. Its sensors ensured the intelligence portion of the mission and performed a battle damage assessment (BDA) immediately transmitted to central planning headquarters in Paris.

 

During this mission, the recovery staff component, that is to say the ability to rescue pilots in hostile area, was insured by American military means.

 

In accordance with the will of the President of the Republic, new strikes will take place in the coming days to support the Iraqi armed forces in their fight against ISIS. These strikes will again be carried out in close coordination with the Iraqi as well as with our allies

And just like that, no more French banks will be sanctioned by the DOJ for as long as France understands just where its allegiances should lie.




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1wStD8k Tyler Durden

From the Archives: The Best of Reason on Youths

Millennials! Reason-Rupe
recently ran a much-talked-about poll on millennials’ views on
politics and government, and the October issue of Reason magazine
focuses on the generation defined loosely as those born between the
mid-80s and late-90s. But Reason has a long history of focusing on
young people and youth issues. The magazine was launched by student
Lanny Friedlander in 1968 at Boston University and has always had a
focus on student issues.

Long before the student loan bubble became almost impossible to
ignore, Reason’s been exploring better ideas. Reason’s been at the
forefront in spotlighting the generational warfare entitlement
programs represent.

View this article.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1mr6gQ6
via IFTTT