Archive for May, 2012

America … Is this how “God shed His grace” ?

Wednesday, May 30th, 2012

Thanks to Brasscheck TV, you and I can’t claim we didn’t know the truth about what  “we the people”  were allowing our Government to do in our names by delivering our youth to carry out the murders of innocent men, women and children throughout the world.


War is a racket:


‘Free’ Libya shamed by new torture claims (1:32)

‘NATO bombed Libya back into Stone Age’ (4:19)

A brief history of America’s dumb policies towards Iran (5:27)

A very profitable war (4:36)

Afghan “War” reality check (2:37)

Afghanistan a mineral treasure trove (6:14)

Afghanistan and Vietnam (18:22)

Al Qaeda in Libya (10:51)

Al-Qaeda and Washington war hawks call for arming Syrian rebels (2:38)

America’s Growth Industry (3:17)

American war veterans renounce the wars and throw their medals at NATO Summit (5:53)

Amigo (2011) trailer (2:08)

Anti-war protest occupies Washington DC (9:02)

Attack of the Drones – USA (26:30)

Banks, drugs and US-sponsored terrorism (10:00)

Bio warfare lab in Boston? (26:33)

Cameron & Sarkozy Pledge Continued Support (6:26)

CNN airheads cheer the latest war (6:42)

Creator explains message behind “Bomb Iran” billboard (2:48)

Disposable heroes (11:54)

Don’t Buy War! Freeze Flash Mob & Police Brutality in Austin, TX (9:26)

“Drowning people in fear is the key to power” (7:51)

Foreign policy and war profiteering (7:06)

Fox News sounding like Brasscheck TV (5:00)

Freedom at Gun Point (4:36)

Going on Patrol (22:00)

Has Israel been given access to Azerbaijan bases near Iran border (5:00)

Heroin Inc. (10:00)

How the media manipulates the world into war (14:17)

How the news media sells war (5:24)

How the world works (2:03)

In Libya, chaos reigns as militias run wild (6:56)

“Iran far stronger than US would like to admit” (6:47)

Iran Is NOT Our Enemy (3:32)

Iran: a war based on hunches (3:49)

Iraq for sale (1:15:40)

Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers (3:07)

Is this what we’re fighting for? (7:59)

Israel and the Upcoming Nuclear War! (13:56)

Israel’s nuclear weapons extend their reach (4:06)

Just how corrupt are these guys? (7:00)

Lawrence Livermore Lab & the continued Nuclear Arms Race (8:18)

Leon Panetta cites UN & NATO, not Congress, as ‘legal basis’ for military action (7:31)

Libya destroyed: next stop Syria and then Iran (8:14)

Libya, The Real Story (22:17)

Libya: Land of the Lost (1:23)

Loose Cannon: Will Israel attack Iran? (5:04)

Marines pose with Nazi SS flag (2:38)

Media fuels conflict and pushes for intervention (3:56)

Mexican drug cartels trained by US (3:06)

Money for war, no money for you (9:27)

More soldiers lost to suicide than battle (4:32)

Nonstop U.S. backed bombardment of Southern Yemen (1:13)

NY Times caught lying about Iran & IAEA Report on Civilian Nuclear Program (3:01)

Obama To Deploy Troops In Australia (1:46)

Obama’s new war (5:22)

Obama: the most pro-war president in history (5:26)

Panetta disarms Marines in Afghanistan amid fears of possible rogue Marine (2:39)

Phil Donahue on the foreign policy of a warrior nation (6:19)

Preparation and plans to evacuate Chicago (2:14)

Release Bradley Manning (3:50)

Remembering Panama (60:00)

Russia warns of pre-emptive strike against NATO missile defences (1:54)

Some truth about Afghanistan (9:00)

Telling it like it is (1:00)

The Freedom and Democracy the US and NATO brought Libya (18:12)

The Military-Entertainment Complex (6:51)

The modern history of Iran (9:48)

“The Pathology of Power” (30:00)

The Reality of War – Part One (14:32) NEW!

The Reality of War – Part Two (10:04) NEW!

The revolution continues (4:00)

The root of all war (2:00)

The Scramble For Africa (9:49)

“The sledgehammer of reality” (7:19)

The US armed Saddam Hussein with chemical and biological weapons (9:56)

The US is no democracy (5:00)

The war on terror fraud reaches its logical conclusion (1:14)

There’s nothing ‘natural’ about war (8:49)

“They love war” (9:54)

U.S. Coast Guard Patrolling Persian Gulf (2:07)

U.S. Senate backs military force on Iran (7:33)

U.S. To Arm United Arab Emirates With Bunker Buster Bombs (2:17)

US drone lost over Iran was on CIA operation (4:09)

US sells 3.5 billion dollars worth of missiles to the United Arab Emeriates (1:03)

US, Israel plan ‘largest’ military exercise in history (6:23)

USS Enterprise, possible false flag? (2:37)

War and finance (53:33)

War from inside the belly of the beast (8:27)

War Inc. (3:02)

War Industry Vs. Jobs (3:08)

War is a racket (updated for the 21st century) (9:23)

“War is a racket” (8:50)

War is theft (9:40)

“We’re going to war” (2:13)

Where Blackwater comes from (10:56)

Where is Bill Hicks when we need him? (10:06)

Who are the real terrorists? (4:37)

Who do you serve when you go to war (3:30)

Why They Fought (2:19)

Widow Confronts Rumsfeld (7:45)

As a leech sucks blood, they suck money !

Tuesday, May 29th, 2012



By Darol Dickinson

May 27, 2012

It doesn’t take but a few miles on an interstate to see the “courtesy patrol” in action presenting a traffic violation ticket.  Some people chuckle while watching others slapped by the strong hand of law enforcement.

Once in her life, my wife received a speeding ticket in New Mexico — I got out and took a photo of the officer wrapping up the deal.  That was a mistake on my part, which accompanied more emotional pain to me than the price of the fine.

Personally, I hurt seeing a trucker getting ticketed.  I know that he has a great responsibility, is a trained professional, and about 3 tickets will remove his license, end his job, and he goes without the benefits of employment.  I hurt seeing a highway patrolman circling a truck like a hungry buzzard on road kill. Enforcers know trucks are a real plumb to capture.  They are instant cash — it is all about the money.  If for instance, a bunje cord is broken and a small tarp corner is not attached a ticket can be written for “unsecured load” or “oversized load” both can remove points from the driver’s license plus a hefty fine.  If one light is not working, its a ticket, a fine and points — “an unsafe vehicle.”

Patrolmen watch for truckers and salivate over the possibility of instant cash — fast money.  In order not to hold up a shipment with a critical delivery date drivers carry bank draft cash checks. They can provide a patrolman an instant bank draft and drive away. It is all about the money, and the cost of collection.

Continually fine-tuning the harvest methods, truck stings are planned to weigh and check every truck on the road at well designed points of busy travel.  On these staged attacks to facilitate fast cash transactions often vans loaded with a judge, clerk and notary make the payments rapid and lucrative. No driver wants to be held up by an enforcement dispute, so they pay and go.  This, of course is passed on to all consumers — that would be me and you.

Lawmaker, Bill Friend, of Indiana, understands the potential budget enhancements of inflated “work zone enforcement.”  His House Bill 1289 is designed to create a program where no construction exists and yet a 65 mph speed could be quickly dropped to 45.  The “fines double in work zones” signs make inflated income for the state. Out-of-state motorists fall right into the trap.  HB 1289 outlines that fines can be up to $1000 and no construction need actually be taking place in the trap zone.  Welcome to Indiana!

In Washington state a trooper disguised as a surveyor, with hard hat and reflective vest, looks like he is a legitimate construction worker.  He is not looking for level land, but actually has a tripod and laser speed gun clocking speeds just past a “fines double in construction zones” sign.  A little ways down the road nearly a dozen patrol cars are taking turns snatching the victims.  This planned attack on private citizens recorded more than one ticket per two minutes — averaging $210 each.  That is better than $8000 per hour.  Welcome to Washington!

Signs cleverly posted entering the city limits around Colorado Springs subtly serve notice to drivers that “CITY SPEED LIMIT 25 UNLESS OTHERWISE POSTED.”  It forces a driver to remember when they saw the last sign and to guess how far the authority of the last sign goes — which is impossible.  Therefore, local patrol cars can pick their spot and nail anyone without a photographic memory once they enter an unposted zone.  That is crass — enjoy your visit to Colorado Springs.

To reduce fuel and man hours the intersection mounted cameras allow a wholesale ticketing to increase revenue at minimal costs.  The city of Dallas found that by shortening the yellow signal from a standard 4.3 seconds to 1.3, one intersection alone generated photos of drivers slipping into a red light to the tune of 9407 tickets worth $705,525 from a period of 8 months.  Now that is some real coins — welcome to Dallas.

To keep the revenue rolling the red light camera industry’s latest move has been to ticket drivers who are actually stopped — the photo doesn’t record the speed.  Photos don’t lie, right?

Out of state travelers are less aware of local speed traps.  In fact, out-of-staters receive the highest percentage of all tickets.  Like myself, if I get too many points I would rather turn it over to a competent attorney to fight a legal battle than have my license lost and or my auto insurance go through the roof.  It just makes sense.  Interestingly, an out-of-stater will normally just send in the payment for a simple surrender, right or wrong, rather than go across several states to fight the damage.  More local people will show up for traffic court which causes the patrolman to have to leave his lucrative ticketing job and appear as a witness.  In the business of enforcements, a trucker from out of state is a double-plumb — a sweet tender treat — cash money — bully fun!

Professional people who drive over a hundred thousand miles per year are at increased risk.  They have more chances to be trapped by the clever patrol scams.  These are the people who are employed, people working, paying taxes and building businesses.  To the opposite, people who hang around home are minimally exposed.

You fly into Denver, Colorado, rent a car and hit the road — there is an important meeting to make.  The National Speed Trap Exchange reported there was a fake construction zone set up at the exit of Denver International Airport.  The posted speed is 45 mph and around a quick curve it drops to 25 mph.  Thanks to the “Fines double in construction zone” tickets average $300 each. No one has ever seen any construction, but a line of patrol cars are ready to serve the public like cab drivers waiting on a fare.  Welcome to the Mile High City — you be careful out there!

As tax money dwindles, governments of all sizes are being forced to tightening their belts — but they hate it.  They love to spend lots of money, increase taxes and give the mayor and sheriff a needed raise. (Check out  Traffic enforcements are the profitable solution and it’s working.  The little town of Bluff City, Tennessee, despite a lawsuit and temporary shutdown, have netted nearly $1.6 million from their speed cameras.  Welcome to Bluff City — notice those shiny new patrol cars?

If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable!

© 2012 – Darol Dickinson – All Rights Reserved

Darol is a serious advocate of down sizing all governments. His opposition of NAIS and ADT to protect livestock producers from bureaucratic inspired psychopathic enforcements has been his main challenge for the past few years.

He has written and or illustrated several books involving livestock and marketing including PHOTOGRAPHING LIVESTOCK, COLOR OF HORSES, FILLET OF HORN and the new eBook promoted by Amazon, FILLET OF HORN II.


How Obama intended to overthrow Russia !

Thursday, May 24th, 2012

Sunday, May 6, 2012

Russian Opposition Caught Filing into US Embassy in Moscow

Tony Cartalucci, Contributor
Activist Post

In mid-January 2012, just days after Michael McFaul arrived in Moscow to begin his stint as US Ambassador to Russia, Russian opposition leaders lined up outside the US Embassy (Russian) to meet him in a bizarre confab that reeked of both treason and duplicity.

Images: Caught red-handed – Russia’s opposition, long accused by the Kremlin of being foreign-funded, and who have well-documented ties to the US State Department, are caught filing into the US Embassy in Moscow in January of 2012, just days after agitator Michael McFaul began his stint as US Ambassador to Russia. (click on image to enlarge)

Approached by journalists inquiring as to why they had all come to greet the US Ambassador, their responses ranged from silence to dismissive gibes.
Later, the group of opposition leaders emerged responding only with “Вы сурковская_ пропаганда,” or “you’re Surkov’s propaganda,” meaning the journalists represented government efforts to undermine their work and legitimacy. It is a common response given by Russia’s opposition members when media attempts to question them about their increasingly overt ties to Wall Street and London.

Video: This video captured outside the US Embassy in Moscow, Russia, shows prominent leaders of Russia’s US-funded, backed, and directed opposition attending a confab with newly appointed US Ambassador Michael McFaul. Both the opposition leaders and McFaul himself are directly connected to the US State Department’s National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

Present at the US Embassy confab were regular mainstays of the Western media’s coverage of anti-Vladimir Putin protests, including Boris Nemtsov, Yevgeniya Chirikova of the US State Department’s National Endowment for Democracy (NED) funded “Strategy 31,” Lev Ponomarev of the NED, Ford Foundation, Open Society, and USAID-funded Moscow Helsinki Group, and Liliya Shibanova of NED-funded GOLOS, an allegedly “independent” election monitoring group that served as the primary source of accusations of voting fraud against Putin’s United Russia party. Clearly, this wasn’t the first time both words and cash had been exchanged between the Russian opposition and the US State Department, but is perhaps the most overt example of such flagrant conspiring yet.

Image: A screenshot from NED’s official website, listing GOLOS as a recipient of NED funding, which in turn is provided by the US State Department. (click image to enlarge)

Image: A screen shot from the “Moscow Helsink Group” clearly subsidized from abroad. The significance of this group & its affiliates leading protests, indicates nothing less than foreign-funded sedition unfolding in the streets of Russia. (click image to enlarge)

US Ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul himself is a card carrying member of both Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), two organizations notorious for extraterritorial meddling in the foreign affairs of sovereign nations and demonstratively funding, supporting, and directing Russia’s so-called opposition. It was accurately predicted in October 2011’s, “Agitator Nominated for Next US “Ambassador” to Russia,” that McFaul’s primary goal would be to continue with America’s “disingenuous front of “resetting” with Russia, while simultaneously subverting the Russian government with US-funded political unrest.” It appears that McFaul has begun his work in earnest.

Despite damning exposure of the Russian opposition’s ties to Wall Street and London, the Western media, even as recently as this weekend during protests against Russian President Vladimir Putin’s inauguration, insists that such connections are the creation of Kremlin-controlled propaganda. The Associated Press in their article titled, “Putin Returns to Presidency in a Changed Russia,” accuses Putin of portraying the protesters as “in the pay of the Americans and intent on bringing about a revolution that would take Russia back to the instability and humiliations of the 1990s.” AP adds, “with Kremlin-controlled television still the main source of information for most Russians, many believed him.”

In reality, Putin’s assessment of the opposition is verified by the National Endowment for Democracy’s own website, the “About Us” pages of the opposition’s various websites, and confirmed by confabs conducted by the opposition themselves with foreign interests in foreign embassies on Russian soil.

And indeed, many of those leading Russia’s opposition are members and representatives of the corrupt oligarchies that plundered Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990s. The treason is so overt, it begs the question as to whether the United States has indeed become this recklessly brazen, this desperate, or is playing at a broader geopolitical gambit yet revealed.

With Russian opposition leaders on video climbing over themselves to get into the US Embassy to confer with regime-change specialist (Russian), US Ambassador Michael McFaul, and as their funding and affiliations become more widely known to the public, their work and legitimacy will be undermined by public awareness of the facts, not “Surkov’s propaganda.”

Tony Cartalucci’s articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at Land Destroyer Report. Read other contributed articles by Tony Cartalucci here.

Do “We hold these truths to be … ” ?

Wednesday, May 23rd, 2012

Why … We the People … should vote!

By  W J Anthony

The second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence says, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Then the paragraph continues,  “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

Did you ever wonder about those “certain unalienable Rightsthat are not mentioned but areamong these unalienable Rights”?   Do they include the following?

The right to be born

The right to breathe

The right to sneeze

The right to cough

The right to food

The right to shelter

The right to clothing

The right to eat

The right to love

The right to like

The right to accept

The right to refuse

The right of a man to be a man

The right of a woman to be a woman

The right of a woman to give birth

The right of a child to be born and pursue happiness

The right to father or mother a child and care for the child so that it can care for itself

The right to seek the truth

The right to speak the truth

The right to learn

The right to know

The right to think

The right to imagine

The right to remember

The right to wonder

The right to doubt

The right to believe

The right to talk

The right to agree

The right to disagree

The right to speak the truth

The right to hold an opinion

The right to fear

The right to pray

The right to forgive

The right to help

The right to ask

The right to listen

The right to warn

The right to try

The right to quit

The right to sleep

The right to relax

The right to work

The right to walk

The right to bathe

The right to taste

The right to touch

The right to smell

The right to feel

The right to hear

The right to smile

The right to frown

The right to share

The right to trust

The right to run

It may seem strange at first, but those are unalienable rights from our Creator.  Are there others?

Remember that the second paragraph states “To secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men.”

If you are a member of Congress or the President or a member of the Administration of Government or a member of a court of law or a member of a jury, the second paragraph of the Declaration tells that you should understand that your job description requires you to secure these unalienable Rights of the people of the United States that you have sworn to serve.

If you are a citizen, you have the obligation to realize that Government derives “its just powers from the consent of the governed” which includes you, because the laws and powers of Government govern you.  Remember when political candidates ask you to give them your vote, you are being asked by those candidates to give your consent to them to use just powers only.  That is the ONLY way by which elected office holders obtain the authority to use the powers of the office to which they were elected.

If an elected office holder – such as any elected member of Government, a President or a member of Congress or an elected official of State Government – violates the law or powers of the office he or she holds, then you have the authority to remove that official by demanding that your Congress or legislature impeach that office holder for violating your unalienable Rights as a citizen and by not voting for that person again.

This is your role as a citizen; your consent is what gives any Government its just powers.  Elected and appointed office holders at any level of Government have the authority to serve the people who are governed according to their legal authority.

We the People have instituted Government at various levels of authority to secure our unalienable Rights by “laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

A Trojan horse . . . is at our door!

Friday, May 11th, 2012

Dear Mr. President and members of Congress,

This news story:

on Patriot Newswire should catch your attention with its opening paragraph:

“69 members of the U.S. House of Representatives have sent Barack Obama a letter expressing their concern that a new international treaty currently being negotiated would essentially ban all “Buy American” laws. This new treaty is known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and it is going to be one of the biggest “free trade” agreements in history. Critics are referring to it as the “NAFTA of the Pacific”, and it would likely cost the U.S. economy even more jobs than NAFTA did.”

I don’t know if you read that paragraph or not, Mr. President, but I assume you are well aware of what it means and that it involves you and Congress and “would likely cost the U.S. economy even more jobs if the treaty is approved.

Sometime ago, I wrote an article for “To Dare the Future” web site, in which I addressed you, Barack as our newly elected President and suggested a dramatic solution that could support and protect and grow our American industry.  It explained that low wage employment costs enables companies that are based in foreign countries to produce goods and services at a significantly lower cost than is possible for US based companies.

US laws regulate the safety of workers, the safety of work places in which they work, the minimum wages of workers, and the limits on hours of work per day or week that can be required of workers.   All of these laws properly influence the production and distribution of goods and services in the US, and they add to the production costs for companies that are based in the US.

Companies that operate in many foreign countries are not required to meet the costs of any of the industry regulations, that US based companies are required to pay, because the countries in which they operate have few or even no laws that regulate the protection of workers in those countries.  Such companies have the advantage of a lower production cost, which they use to undercut the prices of goods and services that US based companies must charge to sell their goods and services, especially on the US consumer market.

To survive, many US companies have left their American origin and moved their operations to foreign countries in which they produce goods and services by lower wages with little or no regulations and then ship those products back into the US consumer market to be sold at a lower cost and eventually steal the entire US consumer market away from US based companies.

This condition is driving the US economy into an eventual economic and social collapse, leaving US workers with a condition and future of poverty and oppressive social discord.

Is there a solution?

In my earlier letter to you, Mr. President, I suggested how our US Government can participate in solving this dilemma.  I had contacted the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, and asked the statistician to tell me the annual total cost of wages that were paid to all workers who were employed in the US by US based employers for the year of 2009.  He said their records show that it was about 1.5 trillion dollars.

That cost seemed to be similar to the cost of our US military budget which paid the costs of funding hundreds of US foreign bases, our costs to wage several active wars, and the costs of our many foreign aids that we use to subsidize or keep rulers in foreign countries willing to comply with the many agreements they made with the US foreign policy.  We the people of the United States have committed ourselves to pay the outstanding national debt, caused by conducting US foreign policy ventures and the recent bailout of banks.

Could we save our country’s economic and social life if Congress passed a law to give the US Government the authority to pay the annual wages of all employees of US based privately owned employers who perform their production of products or services in the US?

It may be tough, but we would survive and ultimately prosper.

The Government could recover some of the cost of the plan by adding a tax on the wages of all employees and a tax on the profits of all US based employers.

Foreign-based companies would continue to produce goods and services with the cost advantage of low wages, but they could not escape the export cost of shipping their products to the US consumer market.

The low wage cost of foreign made products couldn’t equal the “no wage cost” advantage that US based producers would have in pricing US products for the US consumer market.

The prices of low wage cost foreign made products are bound with import costs and couldn’t undercut the price of similar US products that are made with “no wage costs”.

Companies that are based in foreign countries would have export shipping costs to the US consumer market but US based companies that supply the US consumer market would not have those export shipping costs.

US based industry would be saved and prosper and ‘own’ the US consumer market.

Eventually one or more countries of the Pacific region would eventually adopt a similar arrangement and pay the wages of employees of companies that are based in their country and produce products for their own consumer market.  That would be fine for them.

The realization that a protected domestic market is vital for the survival of a nation  would eventually lead country after country to design the pattern of production and distribution of goods and services in a manner that would serve the particular survival needs of each nation to safely pursue the potential personal Happiness of its People by producing for their own consumer market instead of purchasing imports.

Would that negatively affect Americans?  They have a responsibility to develop their national resources to serve their unalienable rights, as do all other People.

If we the People in the United States were to find that most other countries adopted a similar arrangement, Americans should remember the advice that is given to us in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they ( also ) are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

Just powers of Government are reasonable powers that secure the unalienable Rights of the People by organizing the production and distribution of goods and services on principles that satisfy the appropriate potential of each person to safely pursue happiness.

According to the Declaration of Independence, the American People have given Congress reasonable power to secure the unalienable Right of People to pursue Happiness, by passing a law that authorizes the US Government to secure the People’s pursuit of Safety and Happiness, by paying the annual wages of all employees of US based, privately owned employers, who produce products or services in the US.

The second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence says

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.  That whenever any Form of Government … the US consumer market … becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form,  … paying the wages of all employees of US based, privately owned employers who produce products or services in the US …. as to them … the American People … shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Congress has the authority – by the consent of the People – to pass such a bill and the President has the authority – by the consent of the People – to sign the bill into law.

A nation depends on the honest work of its People to benefit its People..

People depend on goods and services.

Congress depends on the consent of the People.

The President depends on the consent of the People.

People depend on the powers they give to Government and the President.

People depend on Government to secure their unalienable Rights.

The unalienable Rights include Safety in their pursuit of Happiness.

The happiness of People requires jobs and the service of Government.

Government can secure its citizens’ Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness.

It’s now up to you members of Congress to pass a bill that authorizes the US Government to pay the wages of all employees of US based privately owned employers who perform their production of products or services in the US,

And its now up to you President Obama to secure the economic and social survival of this nation by signing the bill into law.

The Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution authorize you to do this.

– Wilfred Mische

The sincerity . . . of our . . . cruelty!

Saturday, May 5th, 2012

The Anti-Empire Report

May 2nd, 2012
by William Blum

What you need to succeed is sincerity, and if you can fake sincerity you’ve got it made. (Old Hollywood axiom)

“A few months ago I told the American people that I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that is true, but the facts and evidence tell me it is not.” — President Ronald Reagan, 1987 1

On April 23, speaking at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC, President Barack Obama told his assembled audience that as president “I’ve done my utmost … to prevent and end atrocities”.

Do the facts and evidence tell him that his words are not true?

Well, let’s see … There’s the multiple atrocities carried out in Iraq by American forces under President Obama. There’s the multiple atrocities carried out in Afghanistan by American forces under Obama. There’s the multiple atrocities carried out in Pakistan by American forces under Obama. There’s the multiple atrocities carried out in Libya by American/NATO forces under Obama. There are also the hundreds of American drone attacks against people and homes in Somalia and in Yemen (including against American citizens in the latter). Might the friends and families of these victims regard the murder of their loved ones and the loss of their homes as atrocities?

Ronald Reagan was pre-Alzheimer’s when he uttered the above. What excuse can be made for Barack Obama?

The president then continued in the same fashion by saying: “We possess many tools … and using these tools over the past three years, I believe — I know — that we have saved countless lives.” Obama pointed out that this includes Libya, where the United States, in conjunction with NATO, took part in seven months of almost daily bombing missions. We may never learn from the new pro-NATO Libyan government how many the bombs killed, or the extent of the damage to homes and infrastructure. But the President of the United States assured his Holocaust Museum audience that “today, the Libyan people are forging their own future, and the world can take pride in the innocent lives that we saved.” (As I described in last month’s report, Libya could now qualify as a failed state.)

Language is an invention that makes it possible for a person to deny what he is doing even as he does it.

Mr. Obama closed with these stirring words; “It can be tempting to throw up our hands and resign ourselves to man’s endless capacity for cruelty. It’s tempting sometimes to believe that there is nothing we can do.” But Barack Obama is not one of those doubters. He knows there is something he can do about man’s endless capacity for cruelty. He can add to it. Greatly. And yet, I am certain that, with exceedingly few exceptions, those in his Holocaust audience left with no doubt that this was a man wholly deserving of his Nobel Peace Prize.

And future American history books may well certify the president’s words as factual, his motivation sincere, for his talk indeed possessed the quality needed for schoolbooks.

The Israeli-American-Iranian-Holocaust-NobelPeacePrize Circus

It’s a textbook case of how the American media is at its worst when it comes to US foreign policy and particularly when an Officially Designated Enemy (ODE) is involved. I’ve discussed this case several times in this report in recent years. The ODE is Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The accusation has been that he had threatened violence against Israel, based on his 2005 remark calling for “wiping Israel off the map”. Who can count the number of times this has been repeated in every kind of media, in every country of the world, without questioning the accuracy of what was reported? A Lexis-Nexis search of “All News (English)” for <Iran and Israel and “off the map”> for the past seven years produced the message: “This search has been interrupted because it will return more than 3000 results.”

As I’ve pointed out, Ahmadinejad’s “threat of violence” was a serious misinterpretation, one piece of evidence being that the following year he declared: “The Zionist regime will be wiped out soon, the same way the Soviet Union was, and humanity will achieve freedom.” 2 Obviously, he was not calling for any kind of violent attack upon Israel, for the dissolution of the Soviet Union took place remarkably peacefully. But the myth of course continued.

Now, finally, we have the following exchange from the radio-TV simulcast, Democracy Now!, of April 19:

A top Israeli official has acknowledged that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad never said that Iran seeks to “wipe Israel off the face of the map.” The falsely translated statement has been widely attributed to Ahmadinejad and used repeatedly by U.S. and Israeli government officials to back military action and sanctions against Iran. But speaking to Teymoor Nabili of the network Al Jazeera, Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor admitted Ahmadinejad had been misquoted.

Teymoor Nabili: “As we know, Ahmadinejad didn’t say that he plans to exterminate Israel, nor did he say that Iran policy is to exterminate Israel. Ahmadinejad’s position and Iran’s position always has been, and they’ve made this — they’ve said this as many times as Ahmadinejad has criticized Israel, he has said as many times that he has no plans to attack Israel. …”

Dan Meridor: “Well, I have to disagree, with all due respect. You speak of Ahmadinejad. I speak of Khamenei, Ahmadinejad, Rafsanjani, Shamkhani. I give the names of all these people. They all come, basically ideologically, religiously, with the statement that Israel is an unnatural creature, it will not survive. They didn’t say, ‘We’ll wipe it out,’ you’re right. But ‘It will not survive, it is a cancerous tumor that should be removed,’ was said just two weeks ago again.”

Teymoor Nabili: “Well, I’m glad you’ve acknowledged that they didn’t say they will wipe it out.”

So that’s that. Right? Of course not. Fox News, NPR, CNN, NBC, et al. will likely continue to claim that Ahmadinejad threatened violence against Israel, threatened to “wipe it off the map”.

And that’s only Ahmadinejad the Israeli Killer. There’s still Ahmadinejad the Holocaust Denier. So until a high Israeli official finally admits that that too is a lie, keep in mind that Ahmadinejad has never said simply, clearly, unambiguously, and unequivocally that he thinks that what we historically know as the Holocaust never happened. He has instead commented about the peculiarity and injustice of a Holocaust which took place in Europe resulting in a state for the Jews in the Middle East instead of in Europe. Why are the Palestinians paying a price for a German crime? he asks. And he has questioned the figure of six million Jews killed by Nazi Germany, as have many other people of various political stripes. In a speech at Columbia University on September 24, 2007, in reply to a question about the Holocaust, the Iranian president declared: “I’m not saying that it didn’t happen at all. This is not the judgment that I’m passing here.” 3

Let us now listen to Elie Wiesel, the simplistic, reactionary man who’s built a career around being a Holocaust survivor, introducing President Obama at the Holocaust Museum for the talk referred to above, some five days after the statement made by the Israeli Deputy Prime Minister:

“How is it that the Holocaust’s No. 1 denier, Ahmadinejad, is still a president? He who threatens to use nuclear weapons — to use nuclear weapons — to destroy the Jewish state. Have we not learned? We must. We must know that when evil has power, it is almost too late.”

“Nuclear weapons” is of course adding a new myth on the back of the old myth.

Wiesel, like Obama, is a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. As is Henry Kissinger and Menachim Begin. And several other such war-loving beauties. When will that monumental farce of a prize be put to sleep?

For the record, let it be noted that on March 4, speaking before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Obama said: “Let’s begin with a basic truth that you all understand: No Israeli government can tolerate a nuclear weapon in the hands of a regime that denies the Holocaust, threatens to wipe Israel off the map, and sponsors terrorist groups committed to Israel’s destruction.” 4

Postscript: Each time I strongly criticize Barack Obama a few of my readers ask to unsubscribe. I’m really sorry to lose them but it’s important that those on the left rid themselves of their attachment to the Democratic Party. I’m not certain how best to institute revolutionary change in the United States, but I do know that it will not happen through the Democratic Party, and the sooner those on the left cut their umbilical cord to the Democrats, the sooner we can start to get more serious about this thing called revolution.

Written on Earth Day, Sunday, April 22, 2012

Two simple suggestions as part of a plan to save the planet.

1. Population control: limit families to two children

All else being equal, a markedly reduced population count would have a markedly beneficial effect upon global warming, air pollution, and food and water availability; as well as finding a parking spot, getting a seat on the subway, getting on the flight you prefer, and much, much more. Some favor limiting families to one child. Still others, who spend a major part of each day digesting the awful news of the world, are calling for a limit of zero. (The Chinese government announced in 2008 that the country would have about 400 million more people if it wasn’t for its limit of one or two children per couple. 5

But, within the environmental movement, there is still significant opposition to this. Part of the reason is fear of ethnic criticism inasmuch as population programs have traditionally been aimed at — or seen to be aimed at — primarily the poor, the weak, and various “outsiders”. There is also the fear of the religious right and its medieval views on birth control.

2. Eliminate the greatest consumer of energy in the world: The United States military.

Here’s Michael Klare, professor of Peace and World Security Studies at Hampshire College, Mass. in 2007:

Sixteen gallons of oil. That’s how much the average American soldier in Iraq and Afghanistan consumes on a daily basis — either directly, through the use of Humvees, tanks, trucks, and helicopters, or indirectly, by calling in air strikes. Multiply this figure by 162,000 soldiers in Iraq, 24,000 in Afghanistan, and 30,000 in the surrounding region (including sailors aboard U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf) and you arrive at approximately 3.5 million gallons of oil: the daily petroleum tab for U.S. combat operations in the Middle East war zone. Multiply that daily tab by 365 and you get 1.3 billion gallons: the estimated annual oil expenditure for U.S. combat operations in Southwest Asia. That’s greater than the total annual oil usage of Bangladesh, population 150 million — and yet it’s a gross underestimate of the Pentagon’s wartime consumption. 6

The United States military, for decades, with its legion of bases and its numerous wars has also produced and left behind a deadly toxic legacy. From the use of Agent Orange in Vietnam in the 1960s to the open-air burn pits on US bases in Iraq and Afghanistan in the 21st century, countless local people have been sickened and killed; and in between those two periods we could read things such as this from a lengthy article on the subject in the Los Angeles Times in 1990:

U.S. military installations have polluted the drinking water of the Pacific island of Guam, poured tons of toxic chemicals into Subic Bay in the Philippines, leaked carcinogens into the water source of a German spa, spewed tons of sulfurous coal smoke into the skies of Central Europe and pumped millions of gallons of raw sewage into the oceans. 7

The military has caused similar harm to the environment in the United States at a number of its installations. (Do a Google search for <“U.S. military bases” toxic>)

When I suggest eliminating the military I am usually rebuked for leaving “a defenseless America open to foreign military invasion”. And I usually reply:

“Tell me who would invade us? Which country?”

“What do you mean which country? It could be any country.”

“So then it should be easy to name one.”

“Okay, any of the 200 members of the United Nations!”

“No, I’d like you to name a specific country that you think would invade the United States. Name just one.”

“Okay, Paraguay. You happy now?”

“No, you have to tell me why Paraguay would invade the United States.”

“How would I know?”

Etc., etc., and if this charming dialogue continues, I ask the person to tell me how many troops the invading country would have to have to occupy a country of more than 300 million people.

Yankee karma

The questions concerning immigration into the United States from south of the border go on year after year, with the same issues argued back and forth: What’s the best way to block the flow into the country? How shall we punish those caught here illegally? Should we separate families, which happens when parents are deported but their American-born children remain? Should the police and various other institutions have the right to ask for proof of legal residence from anyone they suspect of being here illegally? Should we punish employers who hire illegal immigrants? Should we grant amnesty to at least some of the immigrants already here for years? … on and on, round and round it goes, for decades. Every once in a while someone opposed to immigration will make it a point to declare that the United States does not have any moral obligation to take in these Latino immigrants.

But the counter-argument to the last is almost never mentioned: Yes, the United States does have a moral obligation because so many of the immigrants are escaping situations in their homelands made hopeless by American interventions and policy. In Guatemala and Nicaragua Washington overthrew progressive governments which were sincerely committed to fighting poverty. In El Salvador the US played a major role in suppressing a movement striving to install such a government, and to a lesser extent played such a role in Honduras. And in Mexico, although Washington has not intervened militarily in Mexico since 1919, over the years the US has been providing training, arms, and surveillance technology to Mexico’s police and armed forces to better their ability to suppress their own people’s aspirations, as in Chiapas, and this has added to the influx of the impoverished to the United States. Moreover, Washington’s North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), has brought a flood of cheap, subsidized US agricultural products into Mexico and driven many Mexican farmers off the land.

The end result of all these policies has been an army of migrants heading north in search of a better life. It’s not that these people prefer to live in the United States. They’d much rather remain with their families and friends, be able to speak their native language at all times, and avoid the hardships imposed on them by American police and right-wingers.


Several readers have asked me why Counterpunch, one of the most important progressive websites, no longer runs this report. It’s been going on for about six months. Awhile ago I wrote to the two gentlemen who run the site, asking what happened. Neither one answered. It’s a big mystery, particularly since I seemed to be on very friendly terms with them. Any reader who shares my concern can feel free to contact the editors; perhaps you’ll have more luck than I did.


  1. Washington Post, March 5, 1987
  2. Associated Press, December 12, 2006
  3. President Ahmadinejad Delivers Remarks at Columbia University, Transcript, Washington Post, September 24, 2007
  4. Remarks by the President at AIPAC Policy Conference, White House Office of the Press Secretary, March 4, 2012
  5. Washington Post, March 3, 2008
  6. The Pentagon v. Peak Oil,, June 14, 2007
  7. Los Angeles Times, June 18, 1990

William Blum is the author of:

  • Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War 2
  • Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower
  • West-Bloc Dissident: A Cold War Memoir
  • Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire

Portions of the books can be read, and signed copies purchased, at

Previous Anti-Empire Reports can be read at this website.

To add yourself to this mailing list simply send an email to bblum6 [at] with “add” in the subject line. I’d like your name and city in the message, but that’s optional. I ask for your city only in case I’ll be speaking in your area.

(Or put “remove” in the subject line to do the opposite.)

Any part of this report may be disseminated without permission. I’d appreciate it if the website were mentioned.