thegente

Gym, I NEVER said there was anything of value in Syria, except the simple fact, it stands in the way of the Qatari-Turkey pipeline. Qatar is, and has been funding the insurrection against Syria/Assad for just that reason. Putin has the natural gas monopoly on Europe and Qatar doesn't like that. So, since they are our "allies" we are obliged to be the guy with the big stick to clear a path for them. ISIS is just the excuse to clear the path. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar-Turkey_pipeline Who's sponsoring rebels/ISIS and why: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-16/mystery-sponsor-weapons-and-money-syrian-rebels-revealed CIA training rebels: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-ramping-up-covert-training-program-for-moderate-syrian-rebels/2013/10/02/a0bba084-2af6-11e3-8ade-a1f23cda135e_story.html

Yep Razor, the "Weapons of mass destruction" tactic didn't work to get the American public behind it a year ago when the lies about Assad gassing his people didn't work, so they just created another Muslim boogeyman to scare the sheeple...amazing how short people's memorys are these days. They can't even remember that a year ago the US wanted a war in Syria for a gas pipeline and wanted to over throw Assad, so they could run it thru the country. And now with their ISIS monster, the same folks that were saying NO to a war in Syria, and now cheering the bombing on...all they needed was a "fear frenzy" and they got exactly what they wanted. Now back to "Dancing with The Stars" to be immediately followed by "The Kardashians play Monday Night Football"...

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-24/us-propaganda-enters-insane-irrational-overdrive-attempt-sell-war-syria US Propaganda Enters Into Insane, Irrational Overdrive In Attempt to "Sell" War In Syria Thanks to a dizzying barrage of lies, mainstream media fear-mongering and a couple of beheadings, the Obama Administration finally achieved its long sought after war in Syria. The tactic that proved most effective in mobilizing the American public back into a shivering, post-9/11 fetal position, was the same tactic used by elites in the UK to convince Scotland against voting for independence. That tactic, as I detailed in a recent post, is fear. However, fear in itself is not enough. It must be coupled with endless slogans and misdirection by the mainstream media and politicians. It must lead the public to subconsciously embrace a thought process that is completely irrational. Such tactics can be labeled propaganda, and it results in a public suddenly supporting a war it strongly opposed only a year ago. All it takes is a little repackaging. Propaganda allows those who profit from war to push the American public into a tizzy of trepidation based on a couple of beheadings from ISIS, while not batting an eye over the daily beheadings that were simultaneously occurring in Saudi Arabia. So the power structure and its impotent puppet, Barack Obama, intentionally pushed the American public into a frenzy of fear and finally got their little war. Nevertheless, serious people immediately began to call into question two very significant issues with respect to the aggression. First, it appeared clear to almost everyone without a biased penchant for overseas death and destruction, that the war is completely unconstitutional and illegal no matter how you slice it. As I highlighted in the post, Obama’s ISIS War is Not Only Illegal, it Makes George W. Bush Look Like a Constitutional Scholar: But the 2001 authorization for the use of military force does not apply here. That resolution — scaled back from what Mr. Bush initially wanted — extended only to nations and organizations that “planned, authorized, committed or aided” the 9/11 attacks. Not only was ISIS created long after 2001, but Al Qaeda publicly disavowed it earlier this year. It is Al Qaeda’s competitor, not its affiliate. Mr. Obama may rightly be frustrated by gridlock in Washington, but his assault on the rule of law is a devastating setback for our constitutional order. His refusal even to ask the Justice Department to provide a formal legal pretext for the war on ISIS is astonishing. Senators and representatives aren’t eager to step up to the plate in October when, however they decide, their votes will alienate some constituents in November’s midterm elections. They would prefer to let the president plunge ahead and blame him later if things go wrong. But this is precisely why the War Powers Resolution sets up its 60-day deadline: It rightly insists that unless Congress is willing to stand up and be counted, the war is not worth fighting in the name of the American people. So that’s glaring problem number one. The second problem, which I highlighted in the post, The American Public: A Tough Soldier or a Chicken Hawk Cowering in a Cubicle? Some Thoughts on ISIS Intervention, is that: Did you know that the US government’s counterterrorism chief Matthew Olson said last week that there’s no “there’s no credible information” that the Islamic State (Isis) is planning an attack on America and that there’s “no indication at this point of a cell of foreign fighters operating in the United States”? Or that, as the Associated Press reported, “The FBI and Homeland Security Department say there are no specific or credible terror threats to the US homeland from the Islamic State militant group”? So as quickly as it began, Obama’s little war had some serious PR issues. So what did the chicken-hawks do? They repackaged and resold the entire thing. Enter Khorosan. Yep, just as quickly as ISIS spontaneously generated like maggots on meat from the sands of Mesopotamia to open the door to another Middle East quagmire, another existential threat nobody had ever heard of suddenly emerged. Not only that, but this group supposedly posed an imminent threat to America. How incredibly convenient. Here’s ABC News compliantly pushing the latest propaganda to its lobotomized readership in the article, US Averts ‘Active Plotting Against Homeland’ By Hitting Al Qaeda Cell Khorasan in Syria: American airstrikes in Syria have taken out members of a shadowy al Qaeda unit known as the Khorasan Group who were planning “imminent” attacks against targets including the U.S., the Pentagon said today. Pentagon spokesperson Rear Admiral John Kirby declined to go into specifics, but told ABC News’ George Stephanopolous, “We had very good indications that this group, which is a very dangerous group, was plotting and planning imminent attacks against Western targets to include the U.S. homeland and it was on that basis that we struck targets, Khorasan targets inside Syria.” The Khorasan Group — consisting of about 50 or so hardened fighters of mixed past and current jihadi affiliations — has been holed up in Aleppo, Syria under the protection of al Qaeda’s official wing in the country, Jabhat al-Nusra, developing cutting edge weapons of terror with the help of al Qaeda’s Yemen affiliate to strike Western civilian aviation targets, according to a half-dozen officials with knowledge of the group who spoke to ABC News. So all of a sudden the Pentagon identifies and targets a group of 50 fighters in Syria, which happens to be conveniently tied to al-Qaeda (thus justifying strikes under the 2001 AUMF), planning an imminent attack on the “homeland.” There are two reasons I distrust this meme. First of all, the U.S. government employs an extremely bizarre definition when using the word imminent. As Trevor Timm noted earlier today in the Guardian: Take, for example, this definition from a Justice Department white paper, which was leaked last year, intended to justify the killing of Americans overseas: An “imminent” threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons will take place in the immediate future. To translate: “imminent” can mean a lot of things … including “not imminent”. Fascinating, and all this time I thought “imminent” meant “imminent.” Someone should let Merriam-Webster know they’ve got it all wrong. The employment of this new definition of imminent was further solidified in my mind after reading an article from the New York Times titled: In Airstrikes, U.S. Targets Militant Cell Said to Plot an Attack Against the West. In it, we learn that: American military and intelligence analysts were still studying damage reports from the initial air assault, but senior Obama administration officials expressed hope that they had killed Muhsin al-Fadhli, the leader of Khorasan and a onetime confidant of Osama bin Laden. The officials said they had been contemplating military action against Khorasan in recent months, but President Obama’s decision to hit the Islamic State’s forces inside Syria provided a chance to neutralize the other perceived threat. You’ve got to wonder what other unrelated opportunities the ISIS campaign might allow. But I digress. The air campaign against Khorasan and the Islamic State got underway even as Mr. Obama flew to New York to meet with world leaders gathering at the opening session of the United Nations General Assembly. Mr. Obama did not seek United Nations permission for the military campaign, but he presented the strikes as the collaboration of a multinational coalition that included five Arab nations: Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain. Yeah, well he didn’t seek approval from Congress either. Now here’s the money shot. Most officials speaking publicly on Tuesday characterized the Khorasan threat as imminent. Lt. Gen. William C. Mayville Jr., who is in charge of operations for the Pentagon’s Joint Staff, said the terrorist group was nearing “the execution phase of an attack either in Europe or the homeland.” But one senior counterterrorism official, who insisted on anonymity to discuss intelligence matters, said the group might not have chosen the target, method or even the timing for a strike. An intelligence official said separately that the group was “reaching a stage where they might be able to do something.” Wait, come again? An attack is imminent, yet you don’t know which gigantic continent with hundreds of millions of inhabitants straddling opposing sides of the Atlantic ocean they were going to hit? Furthermore, they “might not have chosen the target, method or even the timing for a strike,” and they are “reaching a stage where they might be able to do something.” Sure sounds imminent to me. Don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining. So with Americans back to shivering in corners filled with nightmares of Islamists under their beds, the military-industrial complex is set to do what it does best. Get paid. For some details on who will be raking in the big bucks, I turn to Tim Shorrock’s piece earlier today in Salon: A massive, $7.2 billion Army intelligence contract signed just 10 days ago underscores the central role to be played by the National Security Agency and its army of private contractors in the unfolding air war being carried out by the United States and its Gulf States allies against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Under its terms, 21 companies, led by Booz Allen Hamilton, BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, will compete over the next five years to provide “fully integrated intelligence, security and information operations” in Afghanistan and “future contingency operations” around the world. INSCOM announced the global intelligence contract two days after President Obama, in a speech to the nation, essentially declared war on ISIS in Iraq and Syria and outlined a campaign of airstrikes and combat actions to “degrade and ultimately destroy” the terrorist group. The top contractors on the INSCOM contract are already involved in the war. Lockheed Martin, for example, makes the Hellfire missiles that are used extensively in U.S. drone strikes (in 2013, it also won a three-year contract to train INSCOM’S “Army intelligence soldiers” in “analytical and operational disciplines”). Northrop Grumman makes the Global Hawk surveillance drone, one of the most formidable weapons in the U.S. arsenal. Both companies have large intelligence units. The role of contractors at the command is spelled out by BAE Systems, which has its own INSCOM website. “We enhance the U.S. Army’s ability to detect, decide, and act on vital intelligence in real-time,” BAE says. “From Intelligence Analysis to Persistent Surveillance, BAE Systems is proud to provide essential and sustainable end-to-end solutions and support to the warfighter.” As I first reported in Salon in 2007 and later chronicled in my book “Spies for Hire,” 70 percent of the U.S. intelligence budget is spent on private contractors. Much of this spending – estimated at around $70 billion a year – winds up at the NSA, where SIGINT operations, particularly for collection and analysis, were heavily outsourced at the turn of the century. “Hayden started the privatization, but it was really Alexander who built it,” said Drake. Alexander’s ties with INSCOM are extensive. One of the winning bidders on the new INSCOM contract is Sotera Defense Solutions. Russell Richardson, its former CEO and a former INSCOM commander, is now one of Alexander’s partners at IronNet and, under Alexander’s command of INSCOM, was its “chief architect.” Before that, Richardson was a vice president of NSA contractor SAIC, where he ran INSCOM’s so-called Information Dominance Center. INSCOM’s ties with Booz Allen, the company that employed Edward Snowden at its top secret site in Hawaii, are equally close. Robert Noonan, who directs the company’s “military intelligence account,” served for 35 years in the military, including a stint as INSCOM’s commanding general and the US Army’s deputy chief of staff for intelligence. Roberto Andujar, the INSCOM contract leader at Invertix Corp., another contract winner, once served as the command’s chief information officer (CIO). The revolving door between INSCOM and its contractors bothers Shaffer. “It’s a cash-and-carry program,” he said. “You go in there and get the knowledge, then you carry it out and get cash.” The Pentagon press office referred all calls on the contract to INSCOM. The command did not comment by press time. Wake up America. You will continue to be raped, pillaged and economically strip-mined until you stand up for yourselves, but for now, it appears the fetal position suits you just fine.

Hate to break it to ya 10years, but the current pinhead had nothing to do with bringing the troops home early. That was set up by the previous pinhead, Obummer was only follwing the SOFA timeline put in place by Baby Bush: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.%E2%80%93Iraq_Status_of_Forces_Agreement The U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (official name: Agreement Between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq On the Withdrawal of United States Forces from Iraq and the Organization of Their Activities during Their Temporary Presence in Iraq) was a status of forces agreement (SOFA) between Iraq and the United States, signed by President George W. Bush in 2008. It established that U.S. combat forces would withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011.[1] The pact required criminal charges for holding prisoners over 24 hours, and required a warrant for searches of homes and buildings that were not related to combat.[1] U.S. contractors working for U.S. forces would have been subject to Iraqi criminal law, while contractors working for the State Department and other U.S. agencies would retain their immunity. If U.S. forces committed still undecided "major premeditated felonies" while off-duty and off-base, they would have been subjected to an undecided procedures laid out by a joint U.S.-Iraq committee if the U.S. certified the forces were off-duty.[2][3][1][4]

Yep, Rat...the more debt we incur, the more power they have and the richer they get. I say starve the beast!!

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-04/martin-armstrong-asks-has-western-society-become-fascist Martin Armstrong Asks "Has Western Society Become Fascist?" 09/04/2014 16:33 -0400 Central Banks Corruption Italy Martin Armstrong MSNBC Nationalism Ukraine inShare Submitted by Martin Armstrong via Armstrong Economics, The entire problem we face going ahead stems from the very idea of Karl Marx that government is capable of managing the economy either through communism or autocratic-socialism where the state dictates to the economy under the pretense of caring for the people, that has truly become a derivative of fascism where the state comes first. This is even reflected in the conviction rate that has risen from 72% in the 1970s to virtually 99% today eliminating fair trials. We also see it taking shape in the militarization of the police that actually do not protect society, but the state from the people. Police have been converted to IRS agents on wheels to raise money by abusing the people for every possible type of traffic violation. In Princeton, New Jersey, they even have signs in a parking lot “park head in”. If you back into a parking spot you get a ticket. The actor Alec Baldwin was arrested for rising his bicycle against traffic. Who knew you could even be arrested for such a thing. This is autocratic-socialism where the state pretends its abuse of the people is for their benefit when in fact there is always a profit that falls to them like FATCA and the NSA really looking for money – not terrorists. Savers are being exploited by government under the pretense of managing the economy. You see many retired people back in the work force doing service jobs because they can no longer earn income on their savings for life. Savers receive no return presently on their life savings because Central banks punish savers and subsidize the debtors assuming that borrowing is required for economic growth. This core assumption that government even possesses the mental capabilities to manage the economy is extremely dangerous for it then creates a fascist state where society is supposed to worship the state as all-knowing and caring where its survival takes precedent over the individual. This is reflected in calling Snowden a traitor. How is it possible that someone who exposes illegal activity in government faces life in prison? Such legal positions are only possible in a fascist state where it is not We the People, it is the State Comes First. This is actually part of the political-economic cycle where the arrogance of the state officials leads them to assume it is their well-being and power that is important and must be defended against the people. The people become the great unwashed and the state rises confusing itself as the embodiment of the nation and country. Thomas Paine pointed this out in his Common Sense. Then too, like Snowden, he was an enemy of the state was to be hanged. Thomas Jefferson was also regarded as a traitor and the king sent an entire army to his house to capture Jefferson and hang him. He was warned and escaped watching the army surround his home from the woods on the hill. Even if we go back to the Roman Republic we find Cicero also addresses the “arrogance of officialdom”. This is simply a problem that has plagued human society since the dawn of time. It is the arrogance of government that forgets the PEOPLE are the nation, not politicians and bureaucrats. Consequently, in their blind arrogance, the political powers in Washington would kill Snowden for exposing their corruption. They would love to behead him, but restraint themselves only to pretend they are noble Obama has seen his polls collapse to 39% favorable. Within that, are simply the ignorant who would vote for a democrat simply because they hate republicans. Of course, there are republicans who also do not understand and just hate democrats just because they exist. TV stations like FOX and MSNBC should be banned and we need the old law returned where the press MUST present a fair and balance view instead of this war of propaganda. For those who do not know the history of the FCC, it was once called the Fairness Doctrine which was a policy of the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses to present controversial issues of public importance with both sides and to do so in a manner that was honest, equitable and balanced. The FCC eliminated the Doctrine in 1987, and in August 2011 the FCC formally removed the language that implemented the Doctrine. We have been subjected and bombarded with nothing but propaganda ever since. MSNBC and programs like the Ed Show would NEVER have a Republican on or EVER say a kind word about any Republican. This is not press – it is no different from the notorious Pravda (Truth) of the old Soviet Union. Obama actually had the arrogance to tell the American people as reported on January 17, 2014, that they must give up their civil liberties to secure the existence of the state – that is precisely fascism. Obama said the American NSA and military power worldwide was more important than individual civil rights. Whenever people must surrender rights to support the state that falls in the category of fascism. One common definition of fascism focuses on three basic concepts: anti-liberalism, anti-communism and anti-conservatism. Its basic tenet is a nationalist authoritarian state with goals of creating a regulated economic structure to transform social relations within a modern, self-determined culture. This is precisely what we have devolved into. We now have a form of political behavior that is marked by obsessive preoccupation with the state’s political power arguing the community is at risk because of terrorism so everyone must now prove who they are to travel right down to taking your shoes off and be exposed to accumulative dangerous radiation all because we are victims of unreasonable fanatic hatred groups and cults. But these hate-groups hate the political image of America created by the arrogance of officialdom. Our dominance by this new authoritarian-fascist state is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism that some believe only came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe. This concept of European fascism was influenced by national syndicalism that they only attribute to originating in Italy in the immediate aftermath of World War I. This combined more typically right-wing positions with elements of left-wing politics, in opposition to liberalism, Marxism, and traditional conservatism. Although fascism is usually placed on the far right on the traditional left–right spectrum, it is hard to really place it left or right because if your move to the extreme left or right you reach political agreement with minor differences. The goals of the fascists were not much different from those infecting our society today. The primary goal was to manage the economy and to direct it according to the benefit of the state. This is why savers are being punished today for the benefit of debtors, which includes the state. Keep interest rates suppressed and the state reduces its costs. That is the primary goal intermixed with pumping up the economy so that tax revenues rise. The fascists of Italy sought to unify their nation through an authoritarian state that promoted the mass mobilization of the national community and were characterized by having leadership that initiated a revolutionary political movement aiming to reorganize the nation along principles according to fascist ideology. Fascist movements shared certain common features, including the veneration of the state, a devotion to a strong leader, and an emphasis on ultranationalism and militarism. We are seeing the dominance of the NSA and the militarization of the police that was supposed to be civil. These are all traits that are highly dangerous historically and reflect the arrogance of officialdom. Fascism typically involves expansion of the state power on every level, which includes war and imperialism that serves as a means to achieve national rejuvenation and veneration. Right now in Ukraine, the people are told the state is at war and that comes first and they will have to wait for political reform. Fascism truly asserts that stronger nations have the right to expand their territory by displacing weaker nations. We are seeing this as a trait in both the USA and the EU not to forget Russia. Consequently, fascist ideology consistently invokes the primacy of the state. We see this both with Obama’s defense of the NSA and economically with the central banks attempting to “manage” the economy according to the theories of Marx and Keynes that the state possesses the right and capacity to manipulate the economy. They have been unable to prove that ability even once for they are far too corrupt to even manage anything in an unbiased manner. Unfortunately, governments routinely punish savers to support debtors all for the benefit of the state – not society and certainly not the savers. There are economists who disparage the spread between the rich and the poor without explanation. The “rich” are not getting “richer” from salaries – they make that money through investment. If you do not invest – you obviously cannot make more than a salary.

Americans are to blame? Wow, that's rich...the only people who benefitted by their "stimulus" actions were bankers and the 1%....Unbelievable how these scum can keep a straight face and make assinine statements like this after all the thievery the Fed has committed over the last century, along with the blatent asset stripping the middle-class in the last few decades with their bubble-bust model. All that money printed was "supposed" to be lent out to stimulate small business growth, yet went to bondholders and gambling on derivitaves....M#$%@r-F&%$(&s!! Can't wait till they go belly up for good, and we can rid ourselves of this parasite once and for all.

Oh boy...straight out of "Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit"...the propaganda is getting thick. This is just ***-for-tat because Russia is dumping the Federal Reserve Note aka "USD" and launching the BRICS bank...Russia didn't take the war-bait in Syria, or the Ukraine, so now they're "terrorist hackers"...God the BS coming out of DC would almost be comical if lives weren't being lost daily for their greed, and hunger for power. Thx ButifIdrm!!

The faster the fake Federal Reserve Notes masquerading as the USD implodes, the faster the Fed and it's parisitic hold on our financial system will go away. Asset backed currencies will stop of control govt spending, and endless MIC (Military Industrial Complex) benefitting corporate wars as well. Once the Fed is gone and govt downsized, US economy will take off....unless the morons in DC and elswhere start lobbing nukes.

If any of you folks here on DV haven't read "Brave New World" by Aldus Huxley, or "1984" by George Orwell, I would highly recommend both. The parrallels to the USA of the last 50 years, right up to the present, in both books are staggering, to say the least. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-27/chris-hedges-our-liberty-has-been-sacrificed-altar-national-security Chris Hedges: "Our Liberty Has Been Sacrificed On The Altar Of National Security" 08/27/2014 21:58 -0400 B+ Barack Obama Crude Foreclosures George Orwell Happy Talk Iraq national security Obama Administration Totalitarianism inShare Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog, The relationship between those who are constantly watched and tracked, and those who watch and track them, is the relationship between masters and slaves. - Chris Hedges Below you will find an extremely powerful and inspiring speech by Chris Hedges. The award winning journalist has been ahead of the curve on many issues of national and global importance, including being one of the earliest critics of the Iraq war. Chris has an unshakable moral compass and a passion to match it. He has been a shining light in a sea of darkness and cowardice when it comes to public figures speaking truth to power, including having led the charge to sue the Obama administration on the right to imprison American citizens without trial. Thank you for all you do, Chris. Here is Chris Hedges' infamous comparison of two frightening visions of the future... The two greatest visions of a future dystopia were George Orwell’s “1984” and Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World.” The debate, between those who watched our descent towards corporate totalitarianism, was who was right. Would we be, as Orwell wrote, dominated by a repressive surveillance and security state that used crude and violent forms of control? Or would we be, as Huxley envisioned, entranced by entertainment and spectacle, captivated by technology and seduced by profligate consumption to embrace our own oppression? It turns out Orwell and Huxley were both right. Huxley saw the first stage of our enslavement. Orwell saw the second. We have been gradually disempowered by a corporate state that, as Huxley foresaw, seduced and manipulated us through sensual gratification, cheap mass-produced goods, boundless credit, political theater and amusement. While we were entertained, the regulations that once kept predatory corporate power in check were dismantled, the laws that once protected us were rewritten and we were impoverished. Now that credit is drying up, good jobs for the working class are gone forever and mass-produced goods are unaffordable, we find ourselves transported from “Brave New World” to “1984.” The state, crippled by massive deficits, endless war and corporate malfeasance, is sliding toward bankruptcy. It is time for Big Brother to take over from Huxley’s feelies, the orgy-porgy and the centrifugal bumble-puppy. We are moving from a society where we are skillfully manipulated by lies and illusions to one where we are overtly controlled. ... The corporate state does not find its expression in a demagogue or charismatic leader. It is defined by the anonymity and facelessness of the corporation. Corporations, who hire attractive spokespeople like Barack Obama, control the uses of science, technology, education and mass communication. They control the messages in movies and television. And, as in “Brave New World,” they use these tools of communication to bolster tyranny. Our systems of mass communication, as Wolin writes, “block out, eliminate whatever might introduce qualification, ambiguity, or dialogue, anything that might weaken or complicate the holistic force of their creation, to its total impression.” The result is a monochromatic system of information. Celebrity courtiers, masquerading as journalists, experts and specialists, identify our problems and patiently explain the parameters. All those who argue outside the imposed parameters are dismissed as irrelevant cranks, extremists or members of a radical left. Prescient social critics, from Ralph Nader to Noam Chomsky, are banished. Acceptable opinions have a range of A to B. The culture, under the tutelage of these corporate courtiers, becomes, as Huxley noted, a world of cheerful conformity, as well as an endless and finally fatal optimism. We busy ourselves buying products that promise to change our lives, make us more beautiful, confident or successful as we are steadily stripped of rights, money and influence. All messages we receive through these systems of communication, whether on the nightly news or talk shows like “Oprah,” promise a brighter, happier tomorrow. And this, as Wolin points out, is “the same ideology that invites corporate executives to exaggerate profits and conceal losses, but always with a sunny face.” We have been entranced, as Wolin writes, by “continuous technological advances” that “encourage elaborate fantasies of individual prowess, eternal youthfulness, beauty through surgery, actions measured in nanoseconds: a dream-laden culture of ever-expanding control and possibility, whose denizens are prone to fantasies because the vast majority have imagination but little scientific knowledge.” Our manufacturing base has been dismantled. Speculators and swindlers have looted the U.S. Treasury and stolen billions from small shareholders who had set aside money for retirement or college. Civil liberties, including habeas corpus and protection from warrantless wiretapping, have been taken away. Basic services, including public education and health care, have been handed over to the corporations to exploit for profit. The few who raise voices of dissent, who refuse to engage in the corporate happy talk, are derided by the corporate establishment as freaks. ... The façade is crumbling. And as more and more people realize that they have been used and robbed, we will move swiftly from Huxley’s “Brave New World” to Orwell’s “1984.” The public, at some point, will have to face some very unpleasant truths. The good-paying jobs are not coming back. The largest deficits in human history mean that we are trapped in a debt peonage system that will be used by the corporate state to eradicate the last vestiges of social protection for citizens, including Social Security. The state has devolved from a capitalist democracy to neo-feudalism. And when these truths become apparent, anger will replace the corporate-imposed cheerful conformity. The bleakness of our post-industrial pockets, where some 40 million Americans live in a state of poverty and tens of millions in a category called “near poverty,” coupled with the lack of credit to save families from foreclosures, bank repossessions and bankruptcy from medical bills, means that inverted totalitarianism will no longer work. ... The noose is tightening. The era of amusement is being replaced by the era of repression. Tens of millions of citizens have had their e-mails and phone records turned over to the government. We are the most monitored and spied-on citizenry in human history. Many of us have our daily routine caught on dozens of security cameras. Our proclivities and habits are recorded on the Internet. Our profiles are electronically generated. Our bodies are patted down at airports and filmed by scanners. And public service announcements, car inspection stickers, and public transportation posters constantly urge us to report suspicious activity. The enemy is everywhere. ... “Do you begin to see, then, what kind of world we are creating?” Orwell wrote. “It is the exact opposite of the stupid hedonistic Utopias that the old reformers imagined. A world of fear and treachery and torment, a world of trampling and being trampled upon, a world which will grow not less but more merciless as it refines itself.” And while Hedges nails it, we leave it to Emmet Scott to sum up the present in relation to Huxley and Orwell's prophecies: The most striking parallel of course is that both men foresaw the future as totalitarian rather than democratic and free. Neither presumably believed their vision of the future to be inevitable, though it is equally clear that each saw aspects of mid-twentieth century life which clearly pointed in the totalitarian direction. Thus 1984 and Brave New World may be seen as warnings against what might be if the trends identified by the two authors persisted. What these trends were and why the authors saw them leading towards totalitarianism is an important question and one that will be addressed presently. The totalitarian states described by Orwell and Huxley differed in most details, though there were also many correspondences. Both Big Brother’s world and the Brave New World are ruled by authoritarian elites of a basically socialist/communist nature, whose only real purpose is the maintenance of their own power and privilege

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-21/congress-proposes-law-banning-body-armor-land-free Congress Proposes Law Banning Body Armor In The Land Of The Free on 08/21/2014 18:01 -0400 inShare Submitted by Simon Black via Sovereign Man blog, By the late 1920s, Joseph Stalin became the unchallenged leader of the Soviet Union after having eliminated his opposition. He topped it off in 1929 by serving a decisive blow to anyone that would dare to oppose him by outlawing private gun ownership in the country. From that year on until 1953 when Stalin died, it’s estimated that more than 20 million Soviet citizens that were seen as a threat to the country’s leadership. People were rounded up and either murdered outright, or sent to infamous gulag labor camps. Stalin is an extreme case. But history is ripe with examples of governments which disarm their citizens, only to engage in serious oppression afterwards. Communist China. Nazi Germany. Cambodia. Guatemala. Uganda. The list goes on and on. Pacification of the citizens is almost always a prerequisite to totalitarianism. There have been a lot of attempts to disarm, or at least partially disarm, people in the US throughout history as well. Each time there’s a major shooting somewhere, the chant to ban firearms grows louder. But the latest proposal is especially telling. H.R. 5344 is a bill currently going through Congress that would ban the purchase of body armor. Violation would carry CRIMINAL penalties, including up to ten years in prison. Many bullet-resistant items on the market now, such as bulletproof backpacks for school children, would be banned by this legislation. This is incredible given that the legislation is all about banning something that is purely defensive. Whatever your stance on firearms, I hope we can agree that it’s pretty damn difficult to hurt another human being with body armor. People buy body armor for protection. That’s the point. Duh. So why in the world would they want to ban it? The government claims that “criminals and rampaging madmen” can “wreak havoc” while wearing body armor, and it’s important to shield police from these nefarious individuals. Uh, wait a sec– you mean the same police that go around terrorizing ordinary citizens who aren’t breaking any laws whatsoever? The same police who beat homeless people to death? The same police who shoot and kill innocent animals in broad daylight in the middle of the street? The same police who scream “I will f***ing kill you!” with their weapons trained on crowds of protestors exercising their constitutional rights? Right. Those guys. This is such a disgusting, yet unfortunately predictable, turn of events in the Land of the Free. It’s enraging. It’s infuriating. And it’s so obvious: the country has become a giant police state. And the trend is not getting any better. It’s time to set aside emotion. It’s time to set aside a lifetime of propaganda and programming telling you that you live in a free country. It’s time to look at the objective evidence all around you. They spy. They steal. They wage illegal wars. They authorize military detention of civilians. They assassinate citizens. They intimidate. They terrorize. They torture. They suspend due process when it suits. They destroy anyone who challenges them. And now they want to take away a non-violent means of protecting yourself. This is our reality. And at a minimum, it’s time for rational, thinking people to come up with a Plan B. What’s yours? BILL AUTHOR AND CO-SPONSORS: LINK TO BILL: https://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/5344 LINK TO AUTHOR: https://beta.congress.gov/member/michael-honda/1634 CO-SPONSORS: Rep. Kelly, Robin L. [D-IL-2]* Rep. Hastings, Alcee L. [D-FL-20]* Rep. Pascrell, Bill, Jr. [D-NJ-9]*

Shocker....

www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-20/worst-recovery-ever-except-bankers "Worst. Recovery. Ever." Except For Bankers 08/20/2014 10:44 -0400 Goldman Sachs goldman sachs Morgan Stanley New York Post recovery inShare33 For most (practically all) Americans, this is officially the worst recovery ever. As we pointed out previously, wage growth has never been slower in a post World War II recovery. However, not everyone is hurting... *GOLDMAN SACHS SAID TO RAISE JUNIOR STAFF'S SALARIES ABOUT 20%This comes just weeks after Morgan Stanley announced it would raise junior banker salaries by 25%. Things are troubling... But not for the bankers... (as Bloomberg reports) Goldman Sachs Group Inc. will increase 2015 salaries for junior employees in the U.S. by about 20 percent, according to a person briefed on the decision. The raises will apply to employees with the title of analyst across all divisions, said the person, who asked not to be identified speaking on personnel matters. Analysts are typically recent college graduates. Morgan Stanley is raising salaries for junior bankers worldwide by about 25 percent, a person briefed on the matter said last month. That change only applied to associates and vice presidents in the investment banking and underwriting units. The New York Post reported on Goldman Sachs’s pay increases earlier today. * * * It appears President Obama's hopes for 'fair, livable' minimum wage is being heeded by the banking community - good patriots, they are.

Like I said, I don't need the police to protect me, never have. And the "serious firepower" was already there, since the 1970's, it's called SWAT, they are the ones that are supposed to deal with extreme cases, but ALL police are being geared that way, and it is entirely not neccessay. Regular beat police and patrolmen do not need MRAPs and AR-15s to respond to a "disturbance". If they get there and the situation is more than they can handle, THEN call SWAT, that's why they are there. Again, it's about the "us vs. them" mentality being drilled into their heads by a corrupt and fearful govt.

Some of my best friends are police officers, and they respect others and treat people like humans. I also personally know a few that are total scum. Not all cops are bad, but they are now being trained by the govt to see Americans as enemies, hence the unchecked violence. If I get a speeding ticket, I just pay it, I don't hold anything against the issuing officer. If I feel I wasn't speeding and it was a BS ticket, or a speed trap, I take it to court. Likewise, if the police come ask me to turn my stereo down, I will gladly comply. Not a big deal. You are oversimplifying the entire matter. It's not all black and white. The only people whoo see eveything in black and white, or us vs. them, are of a totalitarian mind set, and lack critical thinking. This country was founded on dissent and disagreement, and to try and stifle ANY opinion, no matter how much you or I may disagree, is completely un-American, and goes against the very principles we Americans are supposed to hold so dear.

The selling of record numbers of "assault rifles"...Yep, bought by law abiding Americans who fear and are disgusted by their government and unchecked police brutality and murder. Any govt that needs to arm it self to the teeth in fear of the people, has already failed. And as for "safegurding public safety", you're joking right? I've never needed the police to safeguard me, I can take care of that on my own. Usually when the police show up, it only exacerbates the situation, becuase of the mentality they are being taught. And on top of that, when do the police usually arrive to "safegurd" everyone? AFTER THE CRIME HAS ALREADY BEEN COMMITTED. It's like putting a stop-sign in after a fatal collision, they simply don't do that much to safeguard us. A band-aid at best Increasing Police Brutality: Americans Killed by Cops Now Outnumber Americans Killed in Iraq War http://www.globalresearch.ca/increasing-police-brutality-americans-killed-by-cops-now-outnumber-americans-killed-in-iraq-war/5361554 http://thefreethoughtproject.com/americans-killed-cops-outnumber-americans-killed-iraq-war/ It's not Police per se that I am against, it's the "them or us" mentality being drilled into the police that we are their enemies (and yes, there are dirtbags out there who are) when the major percentage of Americans are not. It's just more state control by a corrupt govt who knows their days are numbered. Google this phrase and you will see how out of hand this is: "innocent americans killed in no-knock warrant mistakes" I'll leave it at that...

More: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/capt-ron-johnson-marches-protesters-ferguson-article-1.1904210 Yep, it's nice to see them acting like they are on the people's side for once.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/captain-mike-brown-case-marches-protestors/ On Thursday afternoon Missouri State Highway Patrol Captain and 27 year veteran of the force, Ronald S. Johnson, was announced to be taking over security decisions in the outraged city of Ferguson.Local law enforcement intends to stay involved, but highway patrol is now directly on the ground. During the press conference held by Governor Nixon, Johnson stated, “We are going to have a different approach and have the approach that we’re in this together”, and so far, he wasn’t lying. As several thousand gathered to march Tuesday evening, the tone seemed entirely different. People online watched tweets with baited breath waiting for the tear gas, swat, and violence from police we have seen in recent days. Except that didn’t happen. What did happen was an amazing show of what happens when police remove their helmets and treat people with dignity, and it was beautiful. “When I see a young lady cry because of fear of this uniform, that’s a problem. We’ve got to solve that.” Johnson said. The new man in charge assured the crowd there would be no blocked streets, no more disproportionate force, and actually marched side by side with the protestors. I think this one statement shouted out over the megaphone is a glowing example of what the world would be like without militarized police treating us as an enemy- “They respect us, so let’s respect them. They’ve given us the sidewalk so lets stay out of their street.” Even if this is a PR stunt, it still makes a great case against militarized police. Put away your tanks and take off your helmets… and you no longer need them. If our police stopped killing unarmed people and treating every citizen as a criminal, there would be peace.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-14/us-and-israeli-military-tactics-used-against-american-citizens-%E2%80%A6-gazans-tweet-tips-h U.S. and Israeli Military Tactics Used Against American Citizens … Gazans Tweet Tips to Help AMERICANS On How to Handle Tear Gas Submitted by George Washington on 08/14/2014 15:10 -0400 inShare6 As you may have heard, police and Swat teams in Ferguson, Missouri have fired tear gas and rubber bullets at peaceful protesters, and outlawed peaceful assembly. Police are also using stun grenades and ear-damaging military sound cannons against peaceful protesters. Reporters are among those shot at with rubber bullets and tear gas, assaulted and arrested. Glenn Greenwald notes: Reporters have been told to turn off their cameras. And a no-fly zone was established above Ferguson in order to keep news helicopters away. Last night, two reporters, The Washington Post‘s Wesley Lowery and The Huffington Post‘s Ryan Reilly, were arrested and assaulted while working from a McDonald’s in Ferguson. The arrests were arbitrary and abusive, and received substantial attention — only because of their prominent platforms, not, as they both quickly pointed out upon being released, because there was anything unusual about this police behavior. Reilly, on Facebook, recounted how he was arrested by “a Saint Louis County police officer in full riot gear, who refused to identify himself despite my repeated requests, purposefully banged my head against the window on the way out and sarcastically apologized.” He wrote: ”I’m fine. But if this is the way these officers treat a white reporter working on a laptop who moved a little too slowly for their liking, I can’t imagine how horribly they treat others.” A state senator was teargassed along with protesters. Congressman Amash tweets: And: Images & reports out of #Ferguson are frightening. Is this a war zone or a US city? Gov’t escalates tensions w/military equipment & tactics. If you want to visually see how extreme the reaction of police is in Ferguson, compare what’s going on in Ferguson to what’s happening in the war zones of Iraq and Afghanistan (or scroll through this page of pictures.) Someone identifying himself as an 82nd Airborne Army veteran, observing the Ferguson police scene, comment[ed] that “We rolled lighter than that in an actual warzone” … What’s really going on? And how did we get here? We explained in 2011: Journalists from across the spectrum have documented the militarization of police forces in the United States, including, CNN, Huffington Post, the Cato Institute, Forbes, the New York Times, Daily Kos, Esquire, The Atlantic, Salon and many others. Many police departments laugh at and harass Americans who exercise their right to free speech. Here’s one example of police laughing at a civil rights lawyer after she was shot in the head with a rubber bullet: Indeed – especially since police brutality against protesters has been so blatant in recent months, while no top bank executives have been prosecuted – many Americans believe that the police are protecting the bankers whose fraud brought down the economy instead of the American people …. Some are comparing police brutality towards the Occupy protesters to that used by Israeli forces against Palestinian protesters. Indeed, numerous heads of U.S. police departments have traveled to Israel for “anti-terrorism training”, and received training from Israeli anti-terrorism experts visiting the U.S. See this, this, this, this, this. Indeed, the Ferguson police chief received training in crowd control in Israel in 2011. And Gaza residents are literally tweeting info on how to handle tear gas to help Ferguson citizens. Even the mainstream media is picking up on the militarized police. USA Today headlines, “Pentagon fueled Ferguson confrontation“. And Newsweek runs with, “How America’s Police Became an Army.” But they’re still blaming 9/11 as the reason for the militarization of the police. As we explained in 2011, that’s not accurate: Indeed: Most assume that the militarization of police started after 9/11. Certainly, **** Cheney initiated Continuity of Government Plans on September 11th that ended America’s constitutional form of government (at least for some undetermined period of time.) On that same day, a national state of emergency was declared … and that state of emergency has continuously been in effect up to today. But the militarization of police actually started long before 9/11 … in the 1980s. Radley Balko testified before the House Subcommittee on Crime in 2007: (And see this.) Militarization [of police forces is] a troubling trend that’s been on the rise in America’s police departments over the last 25 years. *** Since the late 1980s, Mr. Chairman, thanks to acts passed by the U.S. Congress, millions of pieces of surplus military equipment have been given to local police departments across the country. We’re not talking just about computers and office equipment. Military-grade semi-automatic weapons, armored personnel vehicles, tanks, helicopters, airplanes, and all manner of other equipment designed for use on the battlefield is now being used on American streets, against American citizens. Academic criminologists credit these transfers with the dramatic rise in paramilitary SWAT teams over the last quarter century. SWAT teams were originally designed to be used in violent, emergency situations like hostage takings, acts of terrorism, or bank robberies. From the late 1960s to the early 1980s, that’s primarily how they were used, and they performed marvelously. But beginning in the early 1980s, they’ve been increasingly used for routine warrant service in drug cases and other nonviolent crimes. And thanks to the Pentagon transfer programs, there are now a lot more of them. Huffington Post notes: And Jamie Douglas notes: Former Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper published an essay arguing that the current epidemic of police brutality is a reflection of the militarization (his word, not mine) of our urban police forces, the result of years of the “war on drugs” and the “war on terror. Stamper was chief of police during the World Trade Organization protests in Seattle in 1999, and is not a voice that can be easily dismissed. Ever since Ronald Reagan in 1981 helped draw up the Military Cooperation With Law Enforcement Act, quickly passed by a very cooperative congress, effectively circumventing the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 by codifying military cooperation with law enforcement, the military has been encouraged to give any and all law enforcement agencies unfettered access to all military resources, training and hardware included. The military equipment was designed to be used by American fighting forces in combat with “the enemy,” but since a law was passed in 1994, the Pentagon has been able to donate all surplus war materiel to America’s police departments. The National Journal has compiled a number of statistics showing that in the first three years after the 1994 law came into effect, the “Department of Offense” stocked police departments with 3800 M-16 assault rifles, 2185 M-14’s, 73 grenade launchers, and 112 armored personnel carriers, as well as untold number of bayonets, tanks, helicopters, and even some airplanes. Regardless who will be in power in the future, the militarization of the police will continue. After all, who wants to appear as being soft on crime? These days, a chief of police’s office is like a doctor’s office, but instead of getting swamped with drug salesmen, they have very congenial visits with the merchants of popular oppression, the salesmen of weapons, various chemical agents, Tasers, body armor, and all kinds of tracking software, surveillance gear, and anything else the department may need for crowd control and to infiltrate dissidents, which are no more than US citizens wanting to restore the republic to its rightful place. The government treats copyright infringers as terrorists, and swat teams have been deployed against them. See this, this, this and this. *** It’s not just intellectual property. The government is widely using anti-terror laws to help giant businesses … and to crush those who speak out against their abusive practices, labeling anyone who speaks out as a potential bad guy. Remember: Journalists are considered terrorists in modern America. Peaceful protest is considered terrorism. As one example, the FBI treated the peaceful protesters at the Occupy protests as terrorists. More here and here Americans have lost virtually all of our Constitutional rights The U.S. government considers the entire world – including American soil – to be a battlefield As Greenwald writes: Ultimately, police militarization is part of a broader and truly dangerous trend: the importation of War on Terror tactics from foreign war zones onto American soil. American surveillance drones went from Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia into American cities, and it’s impossible to imagine that they won’t be followed by weaponized ones. The inhumane and oppressive conditions that prevailed at Guantanamo are matched, or exceeded, by the super-max hellholes and “Communications Management Units” now in the American prison system. And the “collect-it-all” mentality that drives NSA domestic surveillance was pioneered by Gen. Keith Alexander in Baghdad and by other generals in Afghanistan, aimed at enemy war populations. *** As part of America’s posture of Endless War, Americans have been trained to believe that everything is justified on the “battlefield” (now defined to mean “the whole world”): imprisonment without charges, kidnapping, torture, even assassination of U.S. citizens without trials. It is not hard to predict the results of importing this battlefield mentality onto American soil, aimed at American citizens: “From Warfighter to Crimefighter.” The results have been clear for those who have looked – or those who have been subject to this – for years. The events in Ferguson are, finally, forcing all Americans to watch the outcome of this process.

http://time.com/3111474/rand-paul-ferguson-police/ I am posting this article becuase I do think our police have become way too militarized, and are being trained that we the people are the enemy. I do not know what the facts are about the initial shooting, and am not endorsing or condeming the article's content. We simply do not know what happened, but I am glad Rand has spoken up about this serious problem growing within our country. thx, Thegente Rand Paul: We Must Demilitarize the Police Sen. Rand Paul @SenRandPaul 12:26 PM ET Police in riot gear watch protesters in Ferguson, Mo. on Aug. 13, 2014. Jeff Roberson—AP Anyone who thinks race does not skew the application of criminal justice in this country is just not paying close enough attention, Sen. Rand Paul writes for TIME, amid violence in Ferguson, Mo. over the police shooting death of Michael Brown More Echoes of History Resound in Ferguson, Mo. Unrest Why Ferguson Was Ready to Explode If I had been told to get out of the street as a teenager, there would have been a distinct possibility that I might have smarted off. But, I wouldn’t have expected to be shot. The outrage in Ferguson is understandable—though there is never an excuse for rioting or looting. There is a legitimate role for the police to keep the peace, but there should be a difference between a police response and a military response. The images and scenes we continue to see in Ferguson resemble war more than traditional police action. Glenn Reynolds, in Popular Mechanics, recognized the increasing militarization of the police five years ago. In 2009 he wrote: Soldiers and police are supposed to be different. … Police look inward. They’re supposed to protect their fellow citizens from criminals, and to maintain order with a minimum of force. It’s the difference between Audie Murphy and Andy Griffith. But nowadays, police are looking, and acting, more like soldiers than cops, with bad consequences. And those who suffer the consequences are usually innocent civilians. The Cato Institute’s Walter Olson observed this week how the rising militarization of law enforcement is currently playing out in Ferguson: Why armored vehicles in a Midwestern inner suburb? Why would cops wear camouflage gear against a terrain patterned by convenience stores and beauty parlors? Why are the authorities in Ferguson, Mo. so given to quasi-martial crowd control methods (such as bans on walking on the street) and, per the reporting of Riverfront Times, the firing of tear gas at people in their own yards? (“‘This my property!’ he shouted, prompting police to fire a tear gas canister directly at his face.”) Why would someone identifying himself as an 82nd Airborne Army veteran, observing the Ferguson police scene, comment that “We rolled lighter than that in an actual warzone”? Olson added, “the dominant visual aspect of the story, however, has been the sight of overpowering police forces confronting unarmed protesters who are seen waving signs or just their hands.” How did this happen? Most police officers are good cops and good people. It is an unquestionably difficult job, especially in the current circumstances. There is a systemic problem with today’s law enforcement. Not surprisingly, big government has been at the heart of the problem. Washington has incentivized the militarization of local police precincts by using federal dollars to help municipal governments build what are essentially small armies—where police departments compete to acquire military gear that goes far beyond what most of Americans think of as law enforcement. This is usually done in the name of fighting the war on drugs or terrorism. The Heritage Foundation’s Evan Bernick wrote in 2013 that, “the Department of Homeland Security has handed out anti-terrorism grants to cities and towns across the country, enabling them to buy armored vehicles, guns, armor, aircraft, and other equipment.” Bernick continued, “federal agencies of all stripes, as well as local police departments in towns with populations less than 14,000, come equipped with SWAT teams and heavy artillery.” Bernick noted the cartoonish imbalance between the equipment some police departments possess and the constituents they serve, “today, Bossier Parish, Louisiana, has a .50 caliber gun mounted on an armored vehicle. The Pentagon gives away millions of pieces of military equipment to police departments across the country—tanks included.” When you couple this militarization of law enforcement with an erosion of civil liberties and due process that allows the police to become judge and jury—national security letters, no-knock searches, broad general warrants, pre-conviction forfeiture—we begin to have a very serious problem on our hands. Given these developments, it is almost impossible for many Americans not to feel like their government is targeting them. Given the racial disparities in our criminal justice system, it is impossible for African-Americans not to feel like their government is particularly targeting them. This is part of the anguish we are seeing in the tragic events outside of St. Louis, Missouri. It is what the citizens of Ferguson feel when there is an unfortunate and heartbreaking shooting like the incident with Michael Brown. Anyone who thinks that race does not still, even if inadvertently, skew the application of criminal justice in this country is just not paying close enough attention. Our prisons are full of black and brown men and women who are serving inappropriately long and harsh sentences for non-violent mistakes in their youth. The militarization of our law enforcement is due to an unprecedented expansion of government power in this realm. It is one thing for federal officials to work in conjunction with local authorities to reduce or solve crime. It is quite another for them to subsidize it. Americans must never sacrifice their liberty for an illusive and dangerous, or false, security. This has been a cause I have championed for years, and one that is at a near-crisis point in our country. Let us continue to pray for Michael Brown’s family, the people of Ferguson, police, and citizens alike. Paul is the junior U.S. Senator for Kentucky.

Did you even take the time to read any of the other links I posted George? ISIS is there to CLEAR A PATH FOR A SAUDI-QATARI PIPELINE for natural gas to Europe. The Saudis even tried to bribe Russia to back off on Syria and let Assad fall, so they could run the pipeline thru his country. When that failed, they switched to Western Iraq. The whole "caliphate" thing is to scare the sheeple into supporting another war for profit. The MSM has really done a number on the public, yet again instead of WMD's, it's ISIS....ISIS is just another boogey-man created by the CIA to have an excuse to go back to war. Rand Paul stated that the US is supporting ISIS, Reuters did an article, along several other sources stating we were arming the rebels in Jordan, which are now the same ones in Iraq. And as far as your "Jihad" fears, it was US/UK foreign policy which got us into this mess in the 1st place in 1953 when we overthrew Iran's democratically elected government and set up the Shah's dicatatoship. You think Arabs just woke up one day and wanted to kill Westerners? Wrong. If we hadn't been stealing their oil, and overthrowing their governments, and just traded like normal human beings instead of trying to steal it, we might have a few more friends than enemies. Crappy foreign policy and corporate greed got us to where we are at today, Iranian Coup: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/19/cia-admits-role-1953-iranian-coup So knowing that we did this kinda thing in the past, you are still going to sit there and deny this is happening by the US own hand? That's all I will say on it, either you are able to put the pieces of a puzzle together, or you remain in denial. Good day, and have a nice weekend George.

Here are some other links you might want to take a peek at D.R. http://rt.com/op-edge/168064-isis-terrorism-usa-cia-war/ Rand Paul telling Hannity US is supporting ISIS: http://www.infowars.com/rand-paul-schools-hannity-on-isis-and-iraq/ Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/10/us-syria-crisis-rebels-usa-idUSBRE9290FI20130310 More: http://kleinonline.wnd.com/2014/06/18/blowback-u-s-trained-isis-at-secret-jordan-base-described-as-covert-aid-to-insurgents-targeting-al-assad/ Some of the articles say that we were only training "moderate" rebels. How did they determine who was "moderate" and who wasn't? They knew all along what they were doing. Trying to clear a way for the Qatari-Saudi gas pipeline: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-16/mystery-sponsor-weapons-and-money-syrian-rebels-revealed http://oilprice.com/Geopolitics/Middle-East/Will-Saudi-and-Qatari-Involvement-in-the-Syrian-War-Impact-their-Economies.html Lastly, with the US being buddies with the Saudis and Qatar, I'd say that none of this is too far fetched. JMO Cheers, and good nite!!

From what I've read and researched, the destabilization was fomented so that the Saudis and Qatar could run a natural gas pipeline through Syria, to compete with Putins near monopoly on the gas market in Europe. When that didn't work out in Syria, they just switched to Western Iraq instead. Here are a few links abpout that TLH: Qatar and Saudis funding rebels for a gas pipeline: http://www.zerohedge...rebels-revealed http://www.telegraph...rops-Syria.html http://daily.bhaskar...360059-NOR.html The Saudis even tried to bribe Putin to back off on Syria...it's one of the links above. As for the Rothschilds, I'm sure they are funding a lot of this grief from an arm's length like they always do...Maliki is just a puppet like Obama or Bush. They don't poop without their masters allowing it.Here's a link to another post I made earlier with some more info if you're interested: http://dinarvets.com/forums/index.php?/topic/183882-alleged-snowden-document-says-usukisrael-are-behind-isis/ Agreed. thanks for posting 13markH....resource rape is definitely the key here.

Ahhhh the "conspiracy theory" card...was wondering when you would throw that out there, it's usually what someone with no logical retort falls back on, kinda like the "race" card. Labeling and minimalizing someone / a particular group is what people do when they either fear, or don't understand something. Oh well, I guess if it isn't from FOX or MSM, then it is a "conspiracy theory". Just keep following and spouting the same rhetoric you've been indoctrinated with the last 50 years, that'll get you to the truth. Myself, I'd rather step back, open my mind to differing scenarios, and take a look at the big picture, see who would benefit from such actions and connect the dots on my own, rather than be told by some talking MSM head which dots I should follow. And as for the "simplest explanation" this situation is anything but "simple"...but, if simple works for you, then stick with what you know. Good day.

Good luck with your "head in the sand" approach. Plenty of evidence out there to support this. They were funded by Qatar and Saudi Arabias to destablize Stria and Assad so that Qatar could run a natural gas pipeling though Syria, and when that didn't work, they opted for Western Iraq. Qatar and Saudis shenanagins funding rebels for a gas pipeline: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-16/mystery-sponsor-weapons-and-money-syrian-rebels-revealed http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/10266957/Saudis-offer-Russia-secret-oil-deal-if-it-drops-Syria.html http://daily.bhaskar.com/article/WOR-hacked-email-reveals-qatars-devious-plans-to-smuggle-chemical-weapons-in-syria-4360059-NOR.html And when that backfired, they funded ISIS to go into Iraq: http://rt.com/op-edge/168064-isis-terrorism-usa-cia-war/ http://daily.bhaskar.com/article/WOR-cia-behind-the-rise-of-isis-in-iraq-alleges-canadian-think-tank-4680029-NOR.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-ramping-up-covert-training-program-for-moderate-syrian-rebels/2013/10/02/a0bba084-2af6-11e3-8ade-a1f23cda135e_story.html http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/mi6-the-cia-and-turkeys-rogue-game-in-syria-9256551.html Whether you like it or not, Our government, the UK, and yes, even Israel have their mitts all over this fiasco. Ignoring the truth doesn't make it disappear.