Can America Survive Mideast War?

Gauging the response from the hawkish, neocon wing of the American populace along with some fence-sitters, it is apparent that the Nation’s handlers of disinformation are doing a spectacular job at steering public opinion in favor of an all-out international brawl in the Mideast.

Most recently, this has been demonstrated by the unbelievable narrative that transpired in Benghazi, Libya, and Egypt. Protesters have attacked American consulates and murdered the American ambassador to Libya and three other Americans.

American blood has been spilled in Libya, Egyptians have torn down the American flag at the embassy in their country and the anger and violent protests are spreading like wildfire across the Arab world. But, of course, there must be a reason. Could it be American freedom of speech?

The unrest is said to have been sparked by a film made in the United States that is extremely offensive to Muslim believers. There are many reasons which make the film an unlikely catalyst for the current anger in the Mideast; you can read about them in Bob Livingston’s “Freedom Watch” in today’s issue.

But to pretend that the film was what really sparked this unrest makes it much easier for America’s warmongers to validate what is about to come to a head in the Mideast region, while simultaneously covering more than 70 years of American hegemonic failure.

Less-informed Americans are led to believe some extremely nonsensical and historically contradictory things about the Nation’s ambitions in the Mideast. These ambitions were solidified with a 1944 State Department memo describing Mideast oil as “a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history.”

Over the course of the following decade, American foreign policy in the Mideast was quite simply to remove anyone who displeased the Nation’s puppet masters and to create a sense of celestial manifest destiny for Americans who might shun the idea of becoming involved in a region that had been embroiled in holy war for a large portion of recorded history.

President Harry Truman in 1946 ordered the Soviets to get out of Kurdistan and Azerbaijan in northern Iran under threat of a “super bomb.” This was an effort to ensure that Iran would remain friendly to the United States in the future, and not object to imperialist U.S. objectives in the meantime.

Two years later in 1948, the United States manufactured what is, to this day, one of the primary publically acceptable reasons for the Nation’s nearly perpetual war stance in a region worlds away even when the United States falters domestically under massive debts and economic woes.

U.S. and British interests worked with the United Nations to create the Zionist homeland of Israel by ceding 54 percent of Palestine to the Jews who made up roughly one-third of the population. This quickly prompted Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and Syria, who opposed the newly proclaimed state, to attack unsuccessfully. The war ended in the exodus of nearly 800,000 Palestinians into surrounding Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Gaza and the West Bank. Israel promptly took control of 77 percent of historic Palestine and was vindicated by American support.

To put it into vastly oversimplified terms, what followed involved a series of upheavals and U.S. interventionist money-pumping in Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Egypt. Beyond proxy war with other major world powers like Russia, the United States has interest only in Mideast oil reserves and the avoidance of nations in the region throwing out brutal regimes in favor of ones that would upset the global wishes of Western monied elite.

The cycle has been a vicious one, the latest reincarnation of which was witnessed in the Arab Spring of recent years. But the result will be the same as it has for decades. The United States supported the party that would soon empower Saddam Hussein in 1963, al-Qaida boogeyman Osama bin Laden years before the 9/11 attacks (because he irked the Russians in Afghanistan), and the revolution that created the current situation in Iran. The United States also destroyed bin Laden and Saddam, and it will likely soon do quite a number on Iran.

Does the Nation simply like playing God with the Mideast and reaping the rewards of oil control and continual busywork for the military industrial complex? Surely, the best and the brightest in American foreign policy know well that Arab people will likely never accept Western culture and values and will continue to revolt against them in horrific ways.

Whether they buy into celestial reasons for blind support of Israel and its imperialist ambitions or actually think American intervention in the Mideast has ever been about peace, Democracy or nuclear weapons (none of which have been found in large quantities in the region), there is something that Americans should be very worried about right now: The situation, regardless of the Nation’s arrogance, is very quickly becoming more unmanageable than before.

Israel continues to push the United States to aid in a strike against Iran, which has the backing of Russia and China. Meanwhile, Iran is gaining favor among the populations in Nations the United States has already gone to great lengths to destabilize in recent years: Libya, Egypt, Syria and Afghanistan. War with Iran could mean another 10 years of the past decade’s wars at best and, at worst, all-out war in the Mideast that will spread across the planet, the likes of which Americans haven’t seen in a long time.

Given the shape the Nation is in at home, one can only hope America could triumph in such a conflict. Then again, perhaps that isn’t the goal.

Fed Announces QE-Infinity

The Federal Reserve announced Thursday that the United States will definitely go into another round of quantitative easing, despite the economic failure of QE1 and QE2.

The central bank announced in a statement:

To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at the rate most consistent with its dual mandate, the Committee agreed today to increase policy accommodation by purchasing additional agency mortgage-backed securities at a pace of $40 billion per month. The Committee also will continue through the end of the year its program to extend the average maturity of its holdings of securities as announced in June, and it is maintaining its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its holdings of agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed securities. These actions, which together will increase the Committee’s holdings of longer-term securities by about $85 billion each month through the end of the year, should put downward pressure on longer-term interest rates, support mortgage markets, and help to make broader financial conditions more accommodative.

The difference between this round of quantitative easing and previous inflationary stimulus attempts made by the Fed is that this time the central bank announced an open-ended timeframe for bond buying. Essentially, the Fed has given itself the power to buy bonds for as long as it wants without announcing any more quantitative easing.

Gold stocks, as expected, skyrocketed after the announcement.

Mideast Imperialism: The Coming Collapses Of America, Israel

Following the horrific attack of the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that led to the death of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens (some accounts say by lynch mob) and rioting in Egypt, some lawmakers are calling for the United States to withdraw aid from the countries.

That’s a good idea, but certainly not good enough.

The House will vote today on a resolution that would extend Federal funding through March to prevent a government shutdown before the election. Some conservatives raised concerns about the inclusion of additional foreign aid funding in the bill.

“It would show a tremendous amount of leadership from this administration, in light of the recent developments, if the president were to come back and demand that the amount of money that is in the [continuing resolution] for Libya and Egypt be stripped. That would be tremendous leadership,” Representative Jeff Landry (R-La.) said yesterday.

Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said the inclusion of continued aid to the nations should be contingent upon agreement that those responsible for the attacks be brought to justice.

For a little more than a decade, the United States has been meddling in the Mideast in the name of “democracy.” Instead of stripping some aid, perhaps it is time for the United States to strip all Mideast aid and get out of the world’s sandbox once and for all. Simultaneously, the United States could devote more resources to developing domestic energy (so that destabilization in the area does not hurt the United States economically) and focusing its entire military might on defending the homeland rather than imperialism.

Could the results be any worse than what the current Mideast foreign policy has yielded?

The Muslim Brotherhood, with the aid of the United States, has taken control of Egypt and Libya.

Afghanistan is overrun by sectarian violence, and the very Afghans the United States is attempting to train are killing American soldiers.

Iran, capitalizing on the United States’ reckless deeds throughout the Mideast, is making inroads in further radicalizing Egypt, Libya and Afghanistan.

And Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is doing his best to guilt the United States into a war that will amount to at least a decade more of the very same type of Mideast fighting that has failed already.

Check back Friday for in-depth Mideast analysis from Personal Liberty on why things are heating up in the region and what it may mean for the future.

The Internet Spy Executive Order Exists

American Internet users will most likely soon be wholly governed in their online activities by the Department of Homeland Security due to an Executive Order that has reportedly already been drafted by the White House.

According to information from The Associated Press, the order uses the fear of cyber terror to implement a system whereby a committee made up of members of the departments of defense, justice, commerce and national intelligence, under the control of the Department of Homeland Security, will monitor America’s Internet use.

The AP claims the measure will provide “digital defenses for critical infrastructure while encouraging economic prosperity and promoting privacy and civil liberties.”

Critics of the idea of government control over the Internet have myriad concerns over what the passage of an executive order like the one proposed could mean for Internet freedom.

Will The Assault Weapon Ban Return?

Tomorrow marks the eighth anniversary of the expiration of the Federal assault weapons ban put into place in 1994 by the Administration of President Bill Clinton. And even after eight years, the fight from anti-gun lobbies to reinstate the ban is still full force.

Last week, the Democratic Party included in its platform — just as it has every four years since the ban expired — a commitment to reinstating the ban that disallowed Americans the right to legally own certain semi-automatic rifles and magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has promised to introduce legislation to reinstate the ban as early as next year. The success of her efforts will be determined largely by the outcome of the Presidential election. President Barack Obama has already made it remarkably clear that he strongly supports reinstatement of the ban, which will likely become a reality under a second term. Furthermore, some pundits expect at least three Supreme Court appointments to be made during the next Presidential Administration; Obama appointments could spell disaster for gun rights.

Though Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney is not often noted for his extreme devotion to the 2nd Amendment, he has been outspoken on the side of those who oppose reinstating the assault weapons ban.

Another key component of fighting legislation like what Feinstein has promised to introduce is the election of gun-friendly Senators in Senate battleground States.

Without paying attention to Senate races, making sure that Obama is not re-elected and that a Romney Administration would follow through with 2nd Amendment promises (instead of reverting to the candidate’s previous anti-gun stances), there is little hope in winning the battle against America’s gun grabbers.

Politicians Use 9/11 To Talk Defense Spending

Being sure not to let the anniversary of 9/11 go to waste, House Republicans spent Tuesday doing the bidding of the military-industrial complex and speaking out against any form of military spending cuts — even as the United States faces $16 trillion in deficits.

“The president should be called upon and asked, what is his plan?” House Majority leader Eric Cantor told reporters. “How is he going to lead and make sure that our military is not hollowed out?”

In addition to military spending cuts already under way, an additional $500 billion in military spending cuts will automatically go into effect at the end of the year as part of an agreement between President Barack Obama and Congress to avoid a debt default.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Tuesday of the automatic cuts: “The president didn’t want his re-election inconvenienced by another fight over a $1.2 trillion increase in the debt increase, and that’s why we have it.”

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta also spoke out against the cuts recently. During an interview with CBS, he said: “What’s irresponsible is the fact that…they put these cuts into place and they are failing to come up with the answer as to how to prevent this from happening…They said ‘Let’s put a gun to our head and if we don’t do the right thing, we’ll blow our heads off.’ Well, now they’ve cocked the gun. This thing’s supposed to take effect in January, but the whole purpose of it was both Republicans and Democrats to do the right thing and to prevent this from happening. That’s what’s irresponsible.”

Netanyahu Wants Iran War Now

While Americans were remembering the events of 9/11 that catapulted the United States into more than a decade of war, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused Americans of hindering Israel’s ability to defend itself on Tuesday.

Responding to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s recent statement that the United States “is not setting deadlines” relating to Iran’s alleged nuclear activities, Netanyahu said that no immediate military action against the Iranians means they will build an atomic bomb.

According to The Washington Post, Netanyahu said the following at a news conference with the visiting Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borisov:

The sanctions have hurt the Iranian economy, but they haven’t stopped the Iranian nuclear program. That’s a fact.

And the fact is that every day that passes, Iran gets closer and closer to nuclear bombs.

The world tells Israel: “Wait. There’s still time.” And I say: “Wait for what? Wait until when?” Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel.

Many defense American and Israeli defense experts alike disagree with Netanyahu’s hawkish assertion that now is the right time for either country to become entangled in war with Iran, arguing that sanctions could still work to further weaken the nation.

Liberty, Never Forget

Eleven years have passed since the fateful day terror struck the United States and New York City’s twin towers fell. In the wake of the horrific event, many Americans burst at the seams with patriotism and adopted the mantra “We will never forget.” For the most part, we haven’t forgotten the falling towers; but, in the grand scheme of things, we have managed to forget something that will prove far more detrimental to our way of life.

When the United States of America was envisioned more than two centuries ago, it was envisioned as a Nation where fear would never allow the populace to succumb to the tyranny of the few who are motivated by greed and desperate to protect themselves from the consequence of their malice.

America was to be first and foremost “the land of the free, the home of the brave.” But, we must remember, we cannot defend freedom without bravery just as we will not be able to act on bravery if we don’t preserve freedom.

Without a doubt, no matter which account of the events on 9/11 you believe, the shock and awe of the tragedy made it much easier for the few to lull the masses into accepting tyrannical and unConstitutional rule in the United States, the likes of which were unimaginable for the Nation’s Founding Fathers.

If the goal was to deliver what have been some of the most devastating blows in history to American liberty, the enemy — whether foreign or domestic — has prevailed in the years following 9/11.

Here’s why:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Just days after Sept. 11, 2001, Congress overwhelmingly passed the USA PATRIOT Act. It has since been reauthorized under President Barack Obama, and it was extended again in May 2011.

From the Bill of Rights Defense Committee:

Section 802 of the PATRIOT Act broadly defines domestic terrorism…

This broad definition allows for inconsistencies in the application of the law. For example, radical animal rights and environmental organizations (e.g., the American Liberation Front and the Environmental Liberation Front) have been targeted and labeled as domestic terrorist groups. These groups’ political acts are destructive to property, but have not caused a single death. However, individuals and groups motivated by political ideology to kill an innocent victim by flying a plane into an IRS building, assassinate a doctor during church services, or murder dozens of schoolchildren at a summer camp are not described or treated as terrorists. By using such a vague definition for “domestic terrorism,” the PATRIOT Act chills Americans’ freedom of speech and assembly, since it is entirely unclear whether First Amendment-protected activism may be categorized as terrorism.

Furthermore, other Patriot Act provisions permit government investigators to track book purchases, library checkouts and Internet information if they believe the material could be conducive to “terror” activities.

More recently, the National Defense Authorization Act, signed into law by Obama, has exactly the provisions the government needs to make certain that domestic journalists are unable to get any other version than the official government-provided narrative regarding foreign affairs.

The next assault on free speech is very close at hand. In the name of safety, Obama will certainly implement Internet censorship by executive order in the near future.

A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

In the years since 9/11, it seems the Federal government has been in a mad rush to brand as terrorists and whackos any individual or group who believes the 2nd Amendment is vital to the preservation of all others.

Because of anti-gun fervor and talk of terror over the past decade, American leaders are ready to willingly sell out the American populace to a U.N. arms treaty to keep weapons out of the hands of “non-state actors.”

The United Nations, by the way, has never defined terrorist. But the Federal government of the United States has — and in some surprising ways. Here are some possible indicators, as described by an 18-year law enforcement veteran, that the Department of Homeland Security may think you are a terrorist:

  • Expressions of libertarian philosophies (statements, bumper stickers).
  • Second Amendment-oriented views (National Rifle Association or gun club membership, holding a concealed carry permit).
  • Survivalist literature (fictional books such as Patriots and One Second After are mentioned by name).
  • Self-sufficiency (stockpiling food, ammo, hand tools, medical supplies).
  • Fear of economic collapse (buying gold and barter items).
  • Religious views concerning the book of Revelation (apocalypse, Antichrist).
  • Expressed fears of Big Brother or Big Government.
  • Homeschooling.
  • Declarations of Constitutional rights and civil liberties.
  • Belief in a New World Order conspiracy.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

If you walk, drive or fly anywhere in the United States or have been subject to criminal investigation in recent years, no explanation of how tyranny has prevailed with regard to the 4thAmendment is needed. The obvious violations aside, a vast majority of Americans aren’t even aware their 4th Amendment rights are being violated.

But in case you’ve been living under a rock for the past decade: Besides feeling you up and looking at your naked body, the Transportation Security Administration now also reserves the right to test food and beverages that you buy in the airport — even if you buy it in areas you had to be scanned to enter.

 


 
The TSA is no longer simply an airport hassle; agents can now be found violating your rights on highways, at public events and rallies.
 


 

If you believe staying home is a safe way to avoid 4th Amendment violations, consider that nearly everything you do online is capable of being tracked without your knowledge.

Also, you are not permitted to possess certain “dangerous” things in your home, such as raw milk. Doing so could lead to a government raid.

The partial or complete abrogation of the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th amendments (those dealing with the rights of the accused) has been facilitated by illegal wiretapping and spy measures implemented by the Patriot Act and completed in January when Obama signed into law NDAA and its indefinite-detention provision.

The 11 years following 9/11 isn’t the first period of American history during which fear, shock and awe or paranoia have been used by the Federal government to quash the liberties of the citizenry.

In 1798, during an undeclared naval war with France, President John Adams authorized agents of the government to target foreigners and dissidents. The Sedition Act, which forbade “any false, scandalous and malicious writing,” led to the arrest of 25 men — most of them editors of newspapers whose publications were then shut down. Fortunately, an enraged American populace drove the Federalists out of power and elected Thomas Jefferson to the Presidency. Jefferson pardoned those who had been arrested under the unConstitutional laws.

During the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and made it a crime to speak ill of the government.

Later, World War I brought forth a dark moment for Constitutional rights when Woodrow Wilson used the Espionage Act and the Sedition Act of 1918 to target political dissidents.

During World War II, the 1940 Smith Act made it criminal to speak of overthrowing the government and was applied to simply being a member of any organization affiliated with fascism or communism. The 1798 Alien Enemies was brought back to life and used to suppress Japanese, Italian and German Americans. They could not own guns, shortwave radios or cameras. The same law was used to imprison nearly 100,000 ethnic Japanese American citizens.

While many of these cases sound more extreme in hindsight than the gradual displacement of power from people to government we see today, they are not. You see, the aforementioned wars ended, and the laws were shelved until the next conflict. We’re now 11 years in to the post-9/11 world; but instead of seeing the Federal government lessen its stranglehold on liberty, the assault on the Constitution is becoming ever more rapid and its consequences more irreversible than ever before.

We should not forget what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, but we must not let those events undo the triumph of the event that occurred Dec. 15, 1791. If we do, tyranny has forever prevailed.

Maybe We Aren’t All Extremists After All

A new study indicates that one of the reasons many Americans consider extreme leftism or extreme right wing views the only options for political ideology is sensationalized news media.

It is noted often by American political commentators and scholars that politics in the United States have become more polarized than ever before, but a new study in Journalism & Mass Communications indicates that this may not be true.

The study concedes that, because of shock value, groups espousing far-left or far-right ideas receive much more airtime in American news media than political moderates or those with values that breach the political divide.

“Extremes are more intuitively novel, entertaining, and colorful, representing another common news value,” write the authors of the study, Michael McCluskey and Young Mie Kim. “Moderate voices may be more difficult to portray as exciting than extreme voices.”

The authors examined 208 political advocacy groups representing a range of political ideologies as they were described in 118 newspapers. They found that groups with more leftist or rightist extreme opinions on political issues got more mentions in larger newspapers, appeared closer to the top of articles and were mentioned more often.

The authors contend, “More people had the opportunity to note those groups, fueling perceptions of those groups as important or legitimate.”

The Silent Tax Obama Will Use To Win The Election

Dismal employment numbers released on Friday by the U.S. Department of Labor can mean only one thing for America’s Keynesian money managers: Future consequences be damned, it’s time for another round of inflationary quantitative easing (inflationary fiat money making).

On Friday, the Labor Department released a jobs report that showed nearly 40 percent of the Nation’s population is jobless. The percentage of the population as a whole that makes up the U.S. workforce was charted at only 63.5 percent, the lowest it has been since September 1981.

Despite mainstream economists’ collective assumption that the U.S. economy would show around 130,000 new jobs added for August, the actual figure was only about 96,000.

The report, released on the back end of President Barack Obama’s speech Thursday night at the Democratic National Convention, has given fuel to both his and challenger Mitt Romney’s campaigns.

“If last night was the party, this morning is the hangover,” Romney said in a written statement Friday morning. “For every net new job created, nearly four Americans gave up looking for work entirely. This is more of the same for middle-class families who are suffering through the worst economic recovery since the Great Depression. After 43 straight months of unemployment above 8%, it is clear that President Obama just hasn’t lived up to his promises and his policies haven’t worked.”

Obama claimed in his DNC address that despite the dismal current outlook he has “a real, achievable plan that will lead to new jobs, more opportunity and rebuild this economy on a stronger foundation” if Americans re-elect him.

Pundits have for the past couple of months been speculating that the Federal Reserve would implement another round of quantitative easing that would likely create a short-lived economic boon just before the Presidential election in November. Taking into consideration the latest job numbers, it appears that the Fed will most likely seize the opportunity to act this week at a previously scheduled Federal Open Markets Committee meeting.

The assumption is backed up by a statement released last week by top banksters at Goldman Sachs:

With today’s August employment report showing a nonfarm payroll gain of 96,000 and an unemployment rate of 8.1% because of a drop in the participation rate, we expect a return to unsterilized and probably open-ended asset purchases at the September 12-13 FOMC meeting.

We now anticipate that the FOMC will announce a return to unsterilized asset purchases (QE3), mainly agency mortgage-backed securities but potentially including Treasury securities, at its September 12-13 FOMC meeting. We previously forecasted QE3 in December or early 2013. We continue to expect a lengthening of the FOMC’s forward guidance for the first hike in the funds rate from “late 2014” to mid-2015 or beyond.

In other words: Fire up the presses, Ben Bernanke, we’ve got an election to win.

Another indicator of the high likelihood of Fed action that could lead to inflation was delivered via market data last week following the jobs report. Frenzied investors sent gold prices back to a six-month high at $1,740 an ounce.