Russia Has Western Enemies, Not Partners – Paul Craig Roberts

The US House of Representatives has joined Hillary Clinton, Obama, the neoconservatives, Washington’s vassals, and the American and European presstitutes in demonizing Russia and President Putin. The House resolution against Russia is a packet of lies, but that did not stop the resolution from passing by a vote of 411 for and 10 against.
The entire world should take note that the American people are capable of electing only ten intelligent representatives. Ten people out of 435 is 2 percent. And yet Washington declares itself to be the ‘exceptional,’ ‘indispensable’ country empowered to exercise hegemony over the world!
No one should be surprised to see Washington, its presstitutes and European vassal states using the same propagandistic lies against Russia and Putin as were used against Iraq and Saddam Hussein, Libya and Gaddafi, Syria and Assad, Afghanistan and the Taliban, and Iran. Washington is fearful of the rise of Russia and China, of the leadership demonstrated by Vladimir Putin, of the formation of new organizations independent of Washington, such as the BRICS. While the George W. Bush regime was sidetracked by its ‘six week, $70 billion war,’ which turned out to be, so far, a multi-trillion dollar 13-year losing operation, Putin kicked out some of the American agents who were contaminating Russian sovereignty and rebuilt the country.
When Putin blocked the planned US invasions of Syria and Iran, Washington decided that something had to be done about Putin and Russia. Washington had spent $5 billion dollars buying Ukrainian politicians and funding fifth column NGOs. With Putin distracted with the Olympics, Washington struck, overthrew the elected Ukrainian government and installed its puppets.
The puppets set about antagonizing Ukraine’s Russian population in provinces that formerly were part of Russia but were attached to Ukraine by Soviet leaders when Russia and Ukraine were the same country. Russians threatened with death and the banning of their language naturally did not want to be victims of Washington’s puppet government in Kiev. Crimea voted to reunite with Russia from whence it came, and so did the eastern and southern provinces.
Washington and its the vassals and presstitutes lied and described these acts of self-determination as Russian invasion and annexation. Russia is falsely accused of having troops occupying the breakaway provinces.

This post was published at Paul Craig Roberts on December 5, 2014.

Politicians to Business Owners: Drop Dead

Senator Ted Stevens once explained that the Internet is a ‘series of tubes’ and ‘not a big truck.’ Steven’s comments made me a little sad, since I worried we’d never again hear such idiocy from a senior government official. Had we reached peak stupid on Capitol Hill?
There was a ray of hope a few years back when Congressman Hank Johnson shared, in Committee, his fears that if too many people move to Guam it might ‘tip over and capsize.’
Johnson is a well-known fool, though, so I was cautious yet. Maybe we just got lucky. Maybe stupid really was over.
So imagine my sheer joy when another well-known DC fixture, one Hillary Clinton, addressed her considerable analytic talents to the question of job creation during 2014′s election cycle.
Speaking at a Boston rally, Clinton opined, ‘Don’t let anybody tell you it’s corporations and businesses create jobs. You know that old theory, ‘trickle-down economics’. That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly.’
Strictly speaking, ‘trickle-down economics’ is a specific type of economic policy identified with Reaganomics in the 1980s. But given the context of her speech, it’s clear that Clinton was using the phrase to invoke the broad leftist assertion that any fiscal policy that is relatively kind toward business growth and private wealth accumulation is somehow putting wage earners and other non-business owners at some kind of disadvantage.

This post was published at Ludwig von Mises Institute on DECEMBER 4, 2014.

Washington Goes Nation-Building In Afghanistan – – Another Flaming Failure

As U. S. forces withdraw from parts of Afghanistan, the Taliban is making gains in several areas of the country. The Afghan police and army are slowly giving way, despite the United States spending 13 years and tens of billions of dollars training those forces. When the United States completes its withdrawal from ground combat at the end of this year, this unfavorable trend will undoubtedly accelerate – that is, if the Afghan security forces don’t collapse altogether, as did similarly U. S. trained Iraqi forces in that country. Thus, in the longest war in American history, the U. S. military has failed to pacify Afghanistan – as had the mighty British Empire three times in the 19th and early 20th centuries and the Soviet superpower more recently in the 1980s. In fact, an outside force has not pacified Afghanistan since Cyrus the Great of Persia did it in ancient times.
Why did the United States have the hubris to think it could succeed in taming Afghanistan, when all of these other strenuous efforts had failed? Because many in the American foreign policy elite, media, and citizenry believe in ‘American exceptionalism.’ As propounded by politicians of both parties – for example, Hillary Clinton and Madeleine Albright in the Democratic Party and people such as John McCain and his sidekick Lindsay Graham in the Republican Party – America is the ‘indispensable nation’ to a world that cannot do without its solving most major problems using military power. Yet despite the current public fawning over military personnel and veterans of American wars, the U. S. military has been fairly incompetent in most major engagements since World War II that required significant ground forces – with only Desert Storm in 1991 being an unvarnished success in recent years. The U. S. armed forces are probably more powerful than any other military in world history, both absolutely and relative to other countries, yet their battlefield performance has not been that great, especially against irregular guerrilla forces in the developing world.
In the post-World War II era, the U. S. military managed to fight the then-poor nation of China to only a draw in the Korean War (1950-1953); lost the Vietnam War (1965-1973) to rag tag Viet Cong guerrillas and North Vietnamese; and made the same mistakes of Vietnam in Iraq and Afghanistan – initially using excessive firepower and alienating the population, the allegiance of which is key to fighting guerrillas.

This post was published at David Stockmans Contra Corner on December 2, 2014.

Obama: Americans Want ‘New Car Smell’ in 2016 & Hillary Would Be a ‘Great President’

I think the president chose a bad day to stop sniffing glue. Or maybe a bad day to start.
In an interview with ABC’s ‘This Week,’ Obama spoke from Las Vegas the day after he announced his executive amnesty move on the 2016 presidential election.
Obama said voters want quote ‘a new car smell’ in the 2016 presidential race, because indeed, ‘They want to drive something off the lot that doesn’t have as much mileage as me.’
(Because Obama obviously knows what Americans want. Also, is it just me, or does it seem like the people in charge have, more and more, begun openly talking about the American public like they’re a bunch of simple-minded, adolescent morons?)
Continuing on with more lame puns than my grandfather for as long as possible without inducing horrible gastrointestinal symptoms, Fox reported that Obama acknowledged the ‘dings’ in his own political career (groan!), then talked about how the Democrats have so much to offer via ‘terrific’ presidential candidates two years from now…but he only mentioned Hillary Clinton specifically by name.
‘He said she would be a ‘formidable candidate’ and make ‘a great president’ if she decides to run a second time,’ Fox reported.

This post was published at The Daily Sheeple on November 24th, 2014.

The Next Presidential Election Will Move The World Closer To War – Paul Craig Roberts

Glenn Greenwald has revealed that Hillary Clinton is the presidential candidate of the banksters and warmongers. Pam and Russ Martens note that Elizabeth Warren is the populist alternative. I doubt that a politician who represents the people can acquire the campaign funds needed to run a campaign. If Warren becomes a threat, the Establishment will frame her with bogus charges and move her aside.
Hillary as president would mean war with Russia. With neocon nazis such as Robert Kagan and Max Boot running her war policy and with Hillary’s comparison of Russia’s president Putin to Adolf Hitler, war would be a certainty. As Michel Chossudovsky and Noam Chomsky have written, the war would be nuclear.
If Hillary is elected president, the financial gangsters and profiteering war criminals would complete their takeover of the country. It would be forever or until armageddon.
To understand what we would be getting with Hillary, recall the Clinton presidency. The Clinton presidency was transformative in ways not generally recognized. Clinton destroyed the Democratic Party with ‘free trade’ agreements, deregulated the financial system, launched Washington’s ongoing policy of ‘regime change’ with illegal military attacks on Yugoslavia and Iraq, and his regime used deadly force without cause against American civilians and covered up the murders with fake investigations. These were four big changes that set the country on its downward spiral into a militarized police state with massive income and wealth inequality.

This post was published at Paul Craig Roberts on November 16, 2014.

Glenn Greenwald on Hilary Clinton: ‘Soulless, Principle-Free, Power Hungry…’

One attribute I like most about Glenn Greenwald is that he never pulls punches. One of his most prescient and cutting political lines came earlier this year when he made some observations on the upcoming 2016 Presidential election, in which two status quo, corrupt, bloodthirsty con-artists will compete for the Oval Office. While we don’t yet know which crony the GOP will put up, Hilary is pretty much a foregone conclusion for the Democrats. Greenwald observed:
Hillary is banal, corrupted, drained of vibrancy and passion. I mean, she’s been around forever, the Clinton circle. She’s a fucking hawk and like a neocon, practically. She’s surrounded by all these sleazy money types who are just corrupting everything everywhere. But she’s going to be the first female president, and women in America are going to be completely invested in her candidacy. Opposition to her is going to be depicted as misogynistic, like opposition to Obama has been depicted as racist. It’s going to be this completely symbolic messaging that’s going to overshadow the fact that she’ll do nothing but continue everything in pursuit of her own power. They’ll probably have a gay person after Hillary who’s just going to do the same thing.
You can read that and more in the post: Glenn Greenwald on the 2016 Elections – ‘They’ll Probably Have a Gay Person After Hillary.’
Well Greenwald is back, and this time he outlines exactly who’s excited about Hilary’s forthcoming run for the Presidency. Here are some excerpts from the Intercept:
It’s easy to strike a pose of cynicism when contemplating Hillary Clinton’s inevitable (and terribly imminent) presidential campaign. As a drearily soulless, principle-free, power-hungry veteran of DC’s game of thrones, she’s about as banal of an American politician as it gets. One of the few unique aspects to her, perhaps the only one, is how the genuinely inspiring gender milestone of her election will (following the Obama model) be exploited to obscure her primary role as guardian of the status quo.

This post was published at Liberty Blitzkrieg on Friday Nov 14, 2014.

Hillary Clinton: “Don’t Let Anyone Tell You It’s Corporations and Businesses that Create Jobs”; Ten Spectacular Failures

On October 24, while campaigning for Martha Coakley for governor of Massachusetts, Hillary Clinton made one of the most absurd political statements in history “Don’t Let Anyone Tell You It’s Corporations and Businesses that Create Jobs.”
Clinton continued, “You know that old theory, trickledown economics. That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly. One of the things my husband says when people say, ‘What did you bring to Washington?’ He says, ‘I brought arithmetic.’”
Just in case you think that quote is out of context, here’s a video clip courtesy of Town Hall;

This post was published at Global Economic Analysis on October 27, 2014.

Hillary Clinton’s Continuity Government Versus Elizabeth Warren’s Voice for Change

The contrast between Wall Street’s continuity government in Washington under another Clinton in the White House and the charismatic populist voice of Senator Elizabeth Warren as she stumps for Democrats in the midterms, is awakening millions of Americans to the idea that there may be choices after all in the 2016 presidential election.
Columnist Eugene Robinson said it best last Monday in the Washington Post, writing that Senator Warren’s ‘swing through Colorado, Minnesota and Iowa to rally the faithful displayed something no other potential contender for the 2016 presidential nomination, including Hillary Clinton, seems able to present: a message.’
What Robinson really means is ‘a message of hope’ – that Wall Street’s wealth transfer system, institutionalized under a protection racket by members of Congress who keep their seats using Wall Street’s campaign dough, could come under serious challenge with Warren in the White House.
In a Wall Street Journal article last Friday, Peter Nicholas reports that Ben Cohen, co-founder of Ben and Jerry’s ice cream and a large donor to Democrats, summed up Hillary as follows: ‘I see Hillary as part of the middle-of-the-road mainstream government that is essentially in bed with these corporations.’
Where would such an idea come from? The Center for Responsive Politics reports thatfour of the top six donors to Hillary’s failed bid to capture the Democratic nod for the Presidency in 2008 were employees, family members or PACs of major Wall Street firms: JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley.

This post was published at Wall Street On Parade By Pam Martens and Russ Marte.

Ron Paul: Hillary would be a pro-war, pro-Fed president

Ron Paul says Hillary Clinton would be a pro-war, pro-military-industrial complex and pro-Federal Reserve president.
Paul, former Republican congressman and presidential candidate, made the remarks during an interview on Thursday night on a RT America program, Politicking with Larry King.
When King asked Paul what kind of president the former US secretary of state would be, he said, ‘I would think she’d be pretty average, pretty mediocre, pretty much for war, pretty much for welfare-ism, pretty much for deficits, pretty supportive of the Federal Reserve and loving the military-industrial complex.’
Paul, 79, has maintained strong positions against the military-industrial complex and the Federal Reserve, each of which he considers responsible for many of the ills afflicting the United States.

This post was published at The Common Sense Show on 18 Oct, 2014.

The Syrian Lie: What Happens When Liberals Go to War

21st Century Wire says…
The facade of the new US-led campaign to ‘degrade and destroy’ ISIS/ISIL in Syria is quickly shaping-up as a bad joke.
For nearly three years now, 21WIRE has been reporting on how Washington and London, along with the GCC feudal kings, have been busy plotting, planning, funding and doing destabilization in Syria (view our Syria Archives here). Instead, what the public have is a stead stream of tired lies regarding the real US-UK-Turkey-GCC axis motivations in Syria.
If you truly want to know how ISIS came to infest Syria (or Iraq for that matter) just ask Hillary Clinton about her little project called, ‘Friends of Syria’. Funny how she jumped ship from her Secretary of State position just months before the West nearly declared war against Damascus in September 2013. Under Hillary’s nurturing care, al-Qaeda, al-Nusra and ISIS – were somehow funded, manned, armed and encouraged to run wild through Syria because the Great and the Good thought they’d help to displace the regime of Syria’s maligned leader Bashar al-Assad.
Few in mainstream media or politics cared to listen – until now. Finally, they are beginning to catch up on the harsh reality of the global imperium’s latest Middle East Mongolian Barbecue.
Granted, both Right and Left will bomb away – no matter what the public think, but each wing of the Establishment has its own unique style of chaos. Sadly, they are still clinging to their 20th century political mythologies…
When Neoconservatives go to war, it’s ‘bomb now, ask questions later’. Fine, take it or leave, easy to follow, and does what it says on the can. But when liberals get the itch to bomb, things quickly get super-complicated with doublespeak and newspeak, because a liberal, or left-wing Administration in the US just can’t be perceived as as warmongers.

This post was published at 21st Century Wire on OCTOBER 11, 2014.

A Tale from Post-Constitutional America – This is What Happens if You Turn Your Back on Hilary Clinton

The name Ray McGovern should be familiar to longtime readers of Liberty Blitzkrieg. The former C. I. A. analyst has been a vocal critic of the oligarch cesspool of fraud and deception that these United States has decayed into. I highlighted some of his criticisms a year ago in the post, Ray McGovern: ‘Obama is Afraid of the C. I. A.’, in which he memorably stated:
I think he’s just afraid and he shouldn’t have run for president if he was going to be this much of a wuss.
Well, Mr. McGovern is back in the news. This time it’s for daring to turn his back on your royal highness, Hilary Rodham Clinton, in an act of non-violent public protest. We learn from Bill Moyers that:
McGovern is a changed man. He started out in the Army, then he worked for the CIA from the Kennedy administration up through the first Bush presidency, preparing the president’s daily intel brief. He was a hell of a spy. McGovern began to see the evil of much of the government’s work, and has since become an outspoken critic of the intelligence world and an advocate for free speech. He speaks on behalf of people like Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden.
Ray McGovern was put on the State Department’s diplomatic security BOLO list – Be On the Look Out – one of a series of proliferating government watch lists. What McGovern did to end up on diplomatic security’s dangerous persons list and how he got off the list are a tale of our era, post-constitutional America.
Offending the Queen
Ray’s offense was to turn his back on Hillary Clinton, literally.

This post was published at Liberty Blitzkrieg on Oct 1, 2014.

Anarchy In Washington: Is Anybody In Charge?

The President pledges “no combat troops” in Iraq.
The head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, says he may recommend combat ground troops in the battle against ISIS.
The President, in a speech, reiterates “no ground troops,” and “no combat troops.”
While Hillary Clinton, Obama’s presumptive heir, waits in the wings as her scheme to arm the Syrian rebels is implemented and the fuse is lit on the Levantine tinderbox. It isn’t a very long fuse….
So what is going on with the US government, and especially over at the Pentagon? Are they directly challenging the President – who is then acting to quickly quash them? Sure looks like it.

This post was published at Zero Hedge on 09/19/2014.

Hillary Clinton Bombshell: Whistle Blower Tells Investigators That State Department Shredded Benghazi Records

Democratic Presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton, who oversaw the State Department during the Benghazi attacks that led to the deaths of four Americans, may soon face Federal charges for tampering with and destroying evidence.
According to retired State Department whistle blower Raymond Maxwell, he caught Clinton’s Chief of Staff and Deputy Chief of Staff shredding documents in a State Department basement. When he asked the aids, who worked directly for then-Secretary Clinton, what they were doing he says they were told to remove any documents that could be politically damaging. The remaining documents were then turned over to an independent committee that was investigating the attacks.
Though Bill and Hillary Clinton have survived many a scandal, it seems that this one may be quite serious considering her direct subordinates were ordered to destroy, shred and/or remove key documents that could prove damaging to the Obama Administration or Clinton’s Presidential aspirations.
If Maxwell’s claims can be proven or verified by other witnesses or participants Clinton could potentially face federal charges for tampering with evidence and destruction of official documents.

This post was published at shtfplan on September 16th, 2014.

Breaking: Benghazi Documents Scrubbed in State Department Basement

A former State Department official has come forward with a shocking – and damning – allegation about the Benghazi scandal.
Sharyl Attkisson at The Daily Signal broke the story today.
From her report:
As the House Select Committee on Benghazi prepares for its first hearing this week, a former State Department diplomat is coming forward with a startling allegation: Hillary Clinton confidants were part of an operation to ‘separate’ damaging documents before they were turned over to the Accountability Review Board investigating security lapses surrounding the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attacks on the U. S. mission in Benghazi, Libya.
According to former Deputy Assistant Secretary Raymond Maxwell, the after-hours session took place over a weekend in a basement operations-type center at State Department headquarters in Washington, D. C. This is the first time Maxwell has publicly come forward with the story.
At the time, Maxwell was a leader in the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, which was charged with collecting emails and documents relevant to the Benghazi probe.
‘I was not invited to that after-hours endeavor, but I heard about it and decided to check it out on a Sunday afternoon,’ Maxwell says.

This post was published at The Daily Sheeple on September 15th, 2014.

Why Worry? The Two Scariest Charts In The World

There are plenty of things to worry about these days. A cursory look through today’s (13 Sep 14) sets the tone: the Pope says WWIII is underway; a senior Democrat accuses the Republicans of endangering civilization; drones are invading the privacy of citizens; militias are blocking traffic in the Mexican border; Feds run a US$589 billion budget deficit; the UK might fall apart; the Ebola epidemic is getting serious in Africa; a mystery virus spreads to NY and CT (and we could not resist adding this one: Hillary Clinton is doing yoga).
With all of this in our minds it is easy to forget, or at least put in proper context, the extraordinary progress that mankind has achieved over the centuries against remarkable odds. World population has steadily increased, proving Malthus wrong. Serious diseases like polio and smallpox, which affected even monarchs and presidents over the centuries, have been eradicated. We can crisscross the planet in less than 24 hours and put satellites in deep space. The baby boomers and their offspring are the most prosperous generations the world has ever seen.

This post was published at Zero Hedge on 09/15/2014.

Pepe Escobar: Obama’s ‘stupid stuff’ legacy

Looks like U.S. President Barack Obama made a royal mess of what his mentor Dr. Zbigniew "Grand Chessboard" Brzezinski taught him.
Dr. Zbig always quotes Sir Halford John Mackinder's three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy; to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals; to keep tributaries pliant and protected; and to keep the barbarians from coming together.
After dabbling briefly with "leading from behind" – a non-starter – Obama finally went Mackinderesque with his stellar "Don't Do Stupid Stuff" foreign policy doctrine.
Nevertheless, an always alert former secretary of state Hillary Clinton said "Don't do Stupid Stuff" isn't a "foreign policy organizing principle". Yet "Stupid Stuff" is all that the Obama foreign policy team knows how to do.

This post was published at Asia Times

Has Hillary Ever Been Right?

en. Rand Paul raises an interesting question:
When has Hillary Clinton ever been right on foreign policy?
The valkyrie of the Democratic Party says she urged President Obama to do more to aid Syrian rebels years ago. And last summer, she supported air strikes on Bashar Assad’s regime.
Had we followed her advice and crippled Assad’s army, ISIS might be in Damascus today, butchering Christians and Alawites and aiding the Islamic State in Iraq in overrunning Baghdad.
But if the folly of attacking Assad’s army and weakening its resistance to ISIS terrorists is apparent to everyone this summer, why were Clinton, Obama and Secretary of State Kerry oblivious to this reality just a year ago?
Consider the rest of Hillary’s record. Her most crucial decision as Senator came in 2002 when she voted to invade Iraq. She now concedes it was the greatest mistake of her Senate career.

This post was published at Lew Rockwell on August 30, 2014.

What Really Happened in Benghazi?

Why are officials in high places, from the former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, David Petraeus to the former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton (and now the current Secretary of State, John Kerry) either refusing to testify, or being blocked from testifying in a congressional hearing aimed at finding out what really happened on September 11, 2012, when 4 US diplomats, including US Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were killed during the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya? CBS news provides a comprehensive timeline of the events, as they unfolded and the US responses as officially reported. However, mounting evidence shows there’s much more at stake here, and those at the top have strong motives to keep it covered up. As CNBC reports in the clip below, “Benghazi is about the NSC directing an operation …. that takes arms and men and puts them into Syria in the guise of the Free Syrian Army.”

Read more …