Meet the U.S. Allies – Saudi Arabia Passes Draconian, Medieval Laws to Crush Dissent

One of the most significant geopolitical events of 2013 was the failed push for war in Syria by the Obama Administration. It didn’t merely fail as a result of a war weary public (although that played a key role), it also failed due to the fact our clownish “leaders” were attempting to offer military support to rebels with a large al-Qaeda element. So the pathetic “sell” by the U.S. establishment was to push the nation into a conflict allied with the very terrorist group against which we are fighting the “war on terror,” and have given up so many of our civil liberties to wage. Ridiculous, yet they tried anyway. That is how stupid they think the public is.

What that failed attempt at war mongering demonstrated to anyone paying attention is that our foreign policy is a complete joke and total sham. We publicly claim to support “democracy” and “freedom” around the world, yet in reality support some of the most oppressive regimes out there.

No relationship highlights this hypocrisy as clearly as our extremely close alliance with the Saudi regime, one of the last “absolute monarchies” on the planet. Not only that, but increasing evidence points to its direct involvement in the 9/11 attacks. But it gets worse. A lot worse. The regime has just passed a series of Medieval laws to crack down on all dissent. In a nutshell: Dissent = Terrorism.

From the New York Times:

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — Saudi Arabia put into effect a sweeping new counterterrorism law Sunday that human rights activists say allows the kingdom to prosecute as a terrorist anyone who demands reform, exposes corruption or otherwise engages in dissent.

The law states that any act that “undermines” the state or society, including calls for regime change in Saudi Arabia, can be tried as an act of terrorism. It also grants security services broad powers to raid homes and track phone calls and Internet activity.

Saudi Arabia is one of the world’s last absolute monarchies. All decisions are centered in the hands of 89-year-old King Abdullah. There is no parliament. There is little written law, and judges — implementing the country’s strict Wahhabi interpretation of Islam — have broad leeway to impose verdicts and sentences.

Continue reading

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 1LefuVV2eCnW9VKjJGJzgZWa9vHg7Rc3r1


 Follow me on Twitter.

Chris Christie is Backed by War Criminal Henry Kissinger for 2016 Presidential Run

In the seemingness endless sham that is the false choice between a crony, Wall Street owned Democrat and a crony, Wall Street owned Republican, political analysts are already desperately scrambling to guess who the GOP will run against establishment hack Hilary Clinton in 2016 (who was recently paid $400k by Goldman Sachs for two speeches).

In my opinion, it will be between the libertarian-leaning Rand Paul and the obese, neocon Chris Christie. Christie is already quite aware of this, and since he doesn’t really stand for anything, he recently decided to take a stand against something. That something is libertarianism, which he slammed in an irrational rant this summer in Aspen.

In case you had any doubt who the war mongering, establishment Republicans will stand with in 2016, you needn’t doubt any longer. PolicyMic just published an interesting article demonstrating that war criminal Henry Kissinger is solidly behind Chris Christie.

We learn that:

Christie has made no secret of his dislike of “this strain of libertarianism” in the GOP that, in his view, ignores the lessons that New Yorkers and New Jerseyans learned after 9/11. In fact, Kissinger himself encouraged Christie to run in 2012 and according to Dave Weigel of Slate, brushed away the governor’s thin foreign policy resume by saying, “We can work with you on that. Foreign policy is instinct, it’s character, that’s what foreign policy is.” (Say all this in a Kissinger accent and it either starts to sound super badass or super creepy, depending on your views.) Kissinger himself has gone on record saying he thinks Christie would be an ideal national candidate for the GOP.

Just makes you wonder why folks like Kissinger never go away and seem to live to 120, while folks like Gandhi, Martin Luther King and John Lennon are always assassinated?

Full article here.

In Liberty,
Mike

Follow me on Twitter!

A Thoughtful View on Boston: Empathize but Don’t be Terrorized

I have highlighted security expert Bruce Schneier’s writings in the past, including his recent excellent article: “The Internet is a Surveillance State.”  In his piece yesterday published in The Atlantic, he offers us some serious wisdom about how to think about the tragic event in Boston.  His key message is to “empathize, but not be terrorized.”  My favorite excerpts are below:

As the details about the bombings in Boston unfold, it’d be easy to be scared. It’d be easy to feel powerless and demand that our elected leaders do something — anything — to keep us safe. 
 
It’d be easy, but it’d be wrong. We need to be angry and empathize with the victims without being scared. Our fears would play right into the perpetrators’ hands — and magnify the power of their victory for whichever goals whatever group behind this, still to be uncovered, has. We don’t have to be scared, and we’re not powerless. We actually have all the power here, and there’s one thing we can do to render terrorism ineffective: Refuse to be terrorized. 
 
It’s hard to do, because terrorism is designed precisely to scare people — far out of proportion to its actual danger. A huge amount of research on fear and the brain teaches us that we exaggerate threats that are rare, spectacular, immediate, random — in this case involving an innocent child — senseless, horrific and graphic. Terrorism pushes all of our fear buttons, really hard, and we overreact.

There are things we can do to make us safer, mostly around investigation, intelligence, and emergency response, but we will never be 100-percent safe from terrorism; we need to accept that.
Continue reading

How to Spot a Hypocrite in the Gun Debate and Other Reflections on Newtown

Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.

- Justice Louis D. Brandeis

How to Spot a Hypocrite in the Gun Debate and Other Reflections on Newtown
For those of you that follow me on twitter, some of the statements and themes you will read in this article will sound familiar.  What happened on December 14, 2012 was obviously a horrific tragedy that my simple mind can’t possibly wrap itself around, but what I can do is send my deepest thoughts, prayers and sympathies to all of those affected.  I can’t imagine the level of pain and suffering you are all experiencing.  This article; however, isn’t directed at you.  There is nothing I can do to ease your pain.  This article is for the rest of us who weren’t directly affected by the incident, but may be indirectly affected by certain parties’ emotional response to it and by those that will exploit it to justify agendas.

One of the key lessons from all of human history is that the easy way to deal with any tragedy is to scapegoat.  In some cases, like in Nazi Germany, the scapegoat proved to be unpopular minorities, especially Jews.  These days, many Americans have fallen into the trap of scapegoasting Muslims and the Islamic religion for all the bad things that happen on the planet.  The key similarity I see in these sorts of situations is that the population affected by some trauma (hyperinflation and economic collapse in Germany and 9/11 in the United States) tends to resort to the knee-jerk reaction of scapegoating an easy target rather than diving into the complexities of the issue and engaging in societal self-reflection.  This is extraordinarily dangerous.

From what I can tell, some of the most ridiculous polices are the direct result of a trauma, people getting emotional, and then begging for a response.    In my own lifetime, 9/11 is the perfect example.  Our national response to a gruesome attack that killed thousands of innocent civilians was to tear up the Constitution, specifically the cherished Bill of Rights, with insane Big Brother type legislation like the “Patriot” Act.  We basically launched the war on terror by waving a white flag.  Truly defeating terrorists wouldn’t have consisted of running to the mall and shopping, as George W. Bush insisted, or giving up the freedoms that made America the most attractive country to move to for the last two hundred years.  The way to judge victory or defeat in the ”war on terror” eleven years later is not to check the statistics on terrorist attacks.  They way to judge victory or defeat is to look at the nation economically, socially and politically and ask yourself are we better off or worse off?  I think the verdict is clear on that front, and I do in large part blame our childish and emotionally reaction to the national tragedy of 9/11.

Well here we stand in mid-December 2012, just days from the Mayan end of the world and another national tragedy has been unleashed on the land.  Most of the victims were innocent, helpless six and seven year old children that never even had the chance to fulfill their potential on this planet.  Unfortunately, just as Ron Paul told us, key parts of the Patriot Act were written and desired by certain factions well before 9/11, there is a powerful faction in the highest echelons of the elite that have wanted and continue to want to remove guns from the hands of innocent American citizens.  These people are not interested in easing violence; these folks want to disarm the public before the mathematically inevitable economic collapse occurs (see my article “Slaves are Always Disarmed”).  While many of these folks claims publicly that there is an “economic recovery” and happy days are just over the horizon, they know better and privately want to get all their ducks in a row before the final and horrific collapse occurs.  This is why the surveillance state is making such aggressive strides at the moment.  It is also why there is a panic to remove firearms from the public.

The person who bothers me the most on this entire topic is Mayor Michael Bloomberg, of my hometown NYC.  You can tell when someone is disingenuous if they freak out over gun violence like it is the biggest issue in America today and at the same time protect the banksters and their “too big to fail” culture, which has and continues to systemically steal trillions of dollars from the poor.  This is Michael Bloomberg to a tee, so this man should have no credibility on any moral subject when he protects and coddles the most dangerous criminal organizations on this planet.  I guess there is something “liberal” about white collar crime.

Continue reading

Six Months Left…Can They Do It?

The study of money, above all other fields in economics, is one in which complexity is used to disguise truth or to evade truth, not to reveal it. The process by which banks create money is so simple the mind is repelled. With something so important, a deeper mystery seems only decent.

- John Kenneth Galbraith

Today what we are doing is modernizing the financial services industry, tearing down those antiquated laws and granting banks significant new authority.

-Bill Clinton at the signing of Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999 (which ended Glass-Steagall and gave banks full control of the United States of America)

Obama delivered heated rhetoric, but his actions signaled different priorities. Had Obama wanted to strike real fear in the hearts of bankers, he might have appointed former special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald or some other fire-breather as his attorney general. Instead, he chose Eric Holder, a former Clinton Justice official who, after a career in government, joined the Washington office of Covington & Burling, a top-tier law firm with an elite white-collar defense unit. The move to Covington, and back to Justice, is an example of Washington’s revolving-door ritual, which, for Holder, has been lucrative–he pulled in $2.1 million as a Covington partner in 2008, and $2.5 million (including deferred compensation) when he left the firm in 2009.

Putting a Covington partner–he spent nearly a decade at the firm–in charge of Justice may have sent a signal to the financial community, whose marquee names are Covington clients. Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Deutsche Bank are among the institutions that pay for Covington’s legal advice, some of it relating to matters before the Department of Justice. But Holder’s was not the only face at Justice familiar to Covington clients. Lanny Breuer, who had co-chaired the white-collar defense unit at Covington with Holder, was chosen to head the criminal division at Obama’s Justice. Two other Covington lawyers followed Holder into top positions, and Holder’s principal deputy, James Cole, was recruited from Bryan Cave LLP, another white-shoe firm with A-list finance clients.

- Peter J. Boyer in his excellent recent article “Why Can’t Obama Bring Wall Street to Justice?”

Six Months Left…Can They Do It?
I have to hand it to the Central Planners.  They are good.  Really, really good.  Of course, they are battling a crippled opponent considering so much of America consists of lobotomized sheeple, but nevertheless to be able to steal so much from many people with such blatant and simplistic methods and not be widely discovered is an act of devious brilliance.  The reason I say this now is because ever since last fall TPTB have changed tactics and totally taken over the markets and with it shoved many people into what is best described as a trance.  The people know something is very wrong.  They know they are getting poorer; that life is getting harder, yet the television and the markets have cloaked a blanket of sedation upon their minds.

Ever since roughly early October 2011 the markets have been fed line after line of carefully crafted bureaucratic garbage couple with tactical market interventions to create reality that they wish to sell.  I remember back to those last months of 2011; what it was like.  It was pure madness.  There would be a crisis and then TPTB would come out with some meeting in the next week or two that would solve everything.  Then the date would come and go and nothing would be solved and they would move the meeting to the following week.  Meeting after meeting that would be “decisive” and “bold” and would save us poor ignorant peasants from the ravages of the mean world by thrusting us into the parental arms of those who know best.  Big government and big financial institutions.  They are your new overlords, get used to it.  Subliminally that has been and continues to be the message that these guys are trying to hammer into your head.  It’s the Stockholm Syndrome.  You are being programmed to love your abuser.

In any event, the point is this. Since around fall of last year, if we tally up the score of government  vs. markets as Angela Merkel so candidly noted in 2010, the government has had seven months of pretty much victory after victory.  At least this is how it appears on the surface.  Under the surface believe me they are not so smug and they know they are losing.  You could see the fear and doubt in The Bernank at his latest press conference.  You can see the reality of the situation as it pops up through to the surface every now and again despite the media blackout of any “unfavorable” news.  These bureaucrats know full well this is all a hologram, an illusion, but it is one they are trying to sustain for as long as possible.  A line my friend said yesterday really sums it up.  So the news headline came out that “Fed Exit Should Start in 6 to 9 Months: Kocherlakota (current President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis). ”  My friend’s response was: “is that the Apache to Paraguay midnight print.“

Well the past is the past and the future lies right ahead, so how should we be thinking about things?  The assumption that is being made, and to some extent has to be made, is that if they have been able to pull off this total coup of the financial markets for the past seven months why can’t they keep it going until the election.  Well if we are to assume this, it means we must assume they can pull it off for six more months, which would bring the total to thirteen months.  This would be quite a feat.  They know how difficult it will be to keep things “together” in the markets amid a real world that is falling apart.  This is why the Fed is pretending there will be no more liquidity added to the system.  In their minds, the best strategy is to talk down QE while at the same time attacking commodity markets behind the scenes.  In their mind, this will give them the cover to create trillions more for their banker shareholders.  I have stated that this would be the plan and as we can see in the markets lately, it has been executed to precision.

There is a problem to this strategy; however, and that problem is reality.  The reality is that pretty much all of the engines of global growth in the emerging markets have economies that were similarly fueled by ponzi finance and money creation and they are rolling over hard.  I don’t even need to mention Europe.  Then there is the United States of Propaganda, which has held up relatively well due to the reserve currency status.  That said, relatively wellI does not equal good and recent indicators are pointing to a serious loss in momentum here as every unemployed EBT carrying subprime borrower in these 50 states has just purchased a car they can’t afford with free money from Ally Financial (74% owned by the U.S. government and the former GMAC, or General Motors’ financing arm).
Continue reading