Saudi Arabia Forces the United Nations to Remove it from a List of Child Killers

Screen Shot 2016-06-08 at 5.08.40 PM

The United Nations is not just worthless, it is downright dangerous. This is because it maintains an air of humanitarianism while its true purpose is to defend and shield the barbarism and war crimes of its most powerful sponsors.

The true farce of the U.N. was exposed in earnest last year when it named the terrorist state of Saudi Arabia to head up a human rights council. I covered this in several posts, but here’s an excerpt from one of them, Not a Joke – Saudi Arabia Chosen to Head UN Human Rights Panel:

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

Neocon Hillary Clinton Launches “Republicans Against Trump”

Screen Shot 2016-04-19 at 10.31.07 AM

I want to conclude with the most important reason of all not to vote for Hillary Clinton come November. If you do, you will be rubber-stamping everything the Democratic Party and the mainstream media has done during this election cycle. Voting for Hillary Clinton will send a message to the Democratic Party that change is unnecessary. That the status quo can kick you, spit on you and laugh in your face for months straight and get away with it.

Donald Trump is not your problem. Of course, Sanders supporters cannot actually consider voting for the man, but don’t let anyone tell you a vote for a third-party candidate or no vote at all is a “vote for Donald Trump.” The fault is not yours if Trump gets elected. The fault lies with the DNC and the media.

Most importantly, all Sanders supporters need to understand that if you sacrifice your principles and shift to Clinton just to defeat Trump, you have psychologically taken yourself out of the real fight to come. By supporting her to defeat someone who you think is worse you are harming yourself and your ability to think clearly and engage in activism going forward. The best advice I can give anyone is to vote third party or sit this charade out. As such you’ll remain engaged in the real fight, and fully prepared to act as much needed resistance to whichever authoritarian is elected, Trump or Clinton.

– From yesterday’s post: Journalistic Malpractice – How Hillary Clinton “Clinched” the Nomination on a Day Nobody Voted

Donald Trump may have won the Republican nomination, but the neocons still got one of their own in the Presidential contest.

Politico reports:

Hillary Clinton is wasting no time trying to woo Republicans turned off by Donald Trump now that she’s the presumptive Democratic nominee, as her campaign has launched a new website aimed at courting disaffected GOP voters.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

How California’s Primary was Rigged Against Independent Voters

Screen Shot 2016-06-08 at 9.54.02 AM

Rigging a primary can and does take many different forms. The most effective form of rigging actually takes place in subtle ways via long-exisiting Stalinist rules that normally don’t swing an election, but serve as an effective firewall against outsider candidates when they eventually do pose a threat. That was the establishment can claim “it’s always been this way,” as if that’s a justification for shadiness. This was the type of rigging we saw in New York, and the type we saw yesterday in California.

Many Bernie Sanders supporters held out a lot of hope for a strong performance by the insurgent candidate in yesterday’s California primary. This enthusiasm was based on the notion that California’s primary was “open,” i.e., non-affiliated voters could technically vote for Bernie in the Democratic primary. Recent polls pointed to a very close race due to the huge margin of support for Sanders amongst independents. For example, as NBC reported a few days before the primary:

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

How the IRS Used Civil Asset Forfeiture to Ruin the Lives of Two Connecticut Bakers

Screen Shot 2016-06-07 at 4.06.46 PM

At the beginning of this year, Attorney General Eric Holder attempted to close an exploitable loophole in asset forfeiture laws. State and local law enforcement agencies often sought federal “adoption” of seizures in order to route around statutes that dumped assets into general funds or otherwise limited them from directly profiting from these seizures. By partnering with federal agencies, local law enforcement often saw bigger payouts than with strictly local forfeitures.

The loophole closure still had its own loopholes (seizures for “public safety,” various criminal acts), but it did make a small attempt to straighten out some really perverted incentives. But deep down inside, it appears the DOJ isn’t really behind true forfeiture reform. In fact, it seems to be urging local law enforcement to fight these efforts by pointing out just how much money these agencies will “lose” if they can’t buddy up with Uncle Sam.

– From the post: How the Department of Justice is Actively Trying to Prevent Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform

It’s been a while since I’ve reported on the lawless and barbaric practice of civil asset forfeiture. However, just because it hasn’t been a focus doesn’t mean it isn’t happening. Indeed, it appears the same federal agencies that couldn’t find a bank executive they didn’t want to coddle, take particular pleasure in harassing and abusing average Americans generally, and small businesspeople in particular.

The following case highlighted by the Huffington Post is an extremely sad and sobering expose. Below are some excerpts, but you can read the whole thing here: IRS Returns Bakery’s Money After 3 Years. Now It Wants To Put The Owners In Prison.

In May 2013, David Vocatura watched $68,000 disappear.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

Journalistic Malpractice – How Hillary Clinton “Clinched” the Nomination on a Day Nobody Voted

Last night, Associated Press – on a day when nobody voted – surprised everyone by abruptly declaring the Democratic Party primary over and Hillary Clinton the victor. The decree, issued the night before the California primary in which polls show Clinton and Bernie Sanders in a very close race, was based on the media organization’s survey of “superdelegates”: the Democratic Party’s 720 insiders, corporate donors and officials whose votes for the presidential nominee count the same as the actually elected delegates. AP claims that superdelegates who had not previously announced their intentions privately told AP reporters that they intend to vote for Clinton, bringing her over the threshold. AP is concealing the identity of the decisive superdelegates who said this.

This is the perfect symbolic ending to the Democratic Party primary: The nomination is consecrated by a media organization, on a day when nobody voted, based on secret discussions with anonymous establishment insiders and donors whose identities the media organization – incredibly – conceals. The decisive edifice of superdelegates is itself anti-democratic and inherently corrupt: designed to prevent actual voters from making choices that the party establishment dislikes. But for a party run by insiders and funded by corporate interests, it’s only fitting that their nomination process ends with such an ignominious, awkward and undemocratic sputter.

That the Democratic Party nominating process is declared to be over in such an uninspiring, secretive, and elite-driven manner is perfectly symbolic of what the party, and its likely nominee, actually is. The one positive aspect, though significant, is symbolic, while the actual substance – rallying behind a Wall-Street-funded, status-quo-perpetuating, multi-millionaire militarist – is grim in the extreme. The Democratic Party got exactly the ending it deserved.

– Glenn Greenwald, writing at The Intercept

Last night, the American public witnessed the most egregious example of mainstream media malpractice of my lifetime. By declaring Hillary Clinton the Democratic nominee based on the pledges of superdelegates who have not voted, and will not vote until the convention on July 25th, the Associated Press performed a huge disservice to American democracy on the eve of a major primary day, in which voters from the most populous state in the union (amongst others) head to the polls. If you are a U.S. citizen and you aren’t outraged by this, there’s something seriously wrong with you.

In this post, I have three objectives. First, I will set the stage by explaining how incredibly sleazy the move by the AP was. Second, I will outline the preposterous and unjustifiable nature of having superdelegates in the first place. Third, I will attempt to convince all true Bernie Sanders supporters to commit themselves to never supporting Hillary Clinton. Let’s get started.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

Obama Administration Delays Release of Hillary Clinton TPP Emails Until After the Election

Screen Shot 2016-06-06 at 3.45.46 PM

And with Singapore and a growing list of other countries on both sides of the Pacific, we are making progress toward finalizing a far-reaching new trade agreement called the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The so-called TPP will lower barriers, raise standards, and drive long-term growth across the region. It will cover 40 percent of the world’s total trade and establish strong protections for workers and the environment. Better jobs with higher wages and safer working conditions, including for women, migrant workers and others too often in the past excluded from the formal economy will help build Asia’s middle class and rebalance the global economy. Canada and Mexico have already joined the original TPP partners. We continue to consult with Japan. And we are offering to assist with capacity building, so that every country in ASEAN can eventually join. We welcome the interest of any nation willing to meet 21st century standards as embodied in the TPP, including China.

– Hillary Clinton, November 2012

You’d think the American pubic deserves to have access to this information before the election.

Barack Obama disagrees.

From the International Business Times:

Trade is a hot issue in the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign. But correspondence from Hillary Clinton and her top State Department aides about a controversial 12-nation trade deal will not be available for public review — at least not until after the election. The Obama administration abruptly blocked the release of Clinton’s State Department correspondence about the so-called Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), after first saying it expected to produce the emails this spring.

If you want your TPP-related emails, you can have your TPP-related emails.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

Liberty Links 6/6/2016

22 links today. Enjoy. The South Carolina Police Files: Gunslinging Raids, Coverups and Magical Dog Sniffs (Very disturbing, must read, Washington Post) Appeals Court Rules Cell Tower Locations Not Protected Information (One of the most absurd court decisions I’ve ever seen, Wall Street Journal) Free Speech is Under Attack (The Economist) Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Microsoft Back … Read more

Jeffrey Sachs Destroys Hillary Clinton’s Foreign Policy Speech

Screen Shot 2016-03-31 at 11.44.10 AM

Hillary’s record includes supporting the barbaric “contras” against the Nicaraguan people in the 1980s, supporting the NATO bombing of the former Yugoslavia, supporting the ongoing Bush-Iraq War, the ongoing Afghan mess, and as Secretary of State the destruction of the secular state of Libya, the military coup in Honduras, and the present attempt at “regime change” in Syria. Every one of these situations has resulted in more extremism, more chaos in the world, and more danger to our country. Next will be the borders of Russia, China, and Iran. Look at the viciousness of her recent AIPAC speech (don’t say you haven’t been warned). Can we really bear to watch as Clinton “takes our alliance [with Israel] to the next level”? Where is our sense of proportion? Cannot the media, at the least, call her out on this extremism? The problem, I think, is this political miasma of “correctness” that dominates American thinking (i.e. Trump is extreme, therefore Hillary is not).

– From the post: “We’re Going to War” – Oliver Stone Opines on the Dangerous Extremism of Neocon Hillary Clinton

Jeffrey Sachs has been on a roll lately. His latest might be his best one yet.

Published at the Huffington PostClinton’s Speech Shows That Only Sanders Is Fit for the Presidency, is an absolute must read. Here it goes:

Hillary Clinton’s recent foreign policy speech was an attack on Donald Trump but was also a reminder that Clinton is a deeply flawed and worrisome candidate. Her record as Secretary of State was one of the worst in modern U.S. history; her policies have enmeshed America in new Middle East wars, rising terrorism and even a new Cold War with Russia. Of the three leading candidates, only Bernie Sanders has the sound judgment to avoid further war and to cooperate with the rest of the world. 

Clinton is intoxicated with American power. She has favored one war of choice after the next: bombing Belgrade (1999); invading Iraq (2003); toppling Qaddafi (2011); funding Jihadists in Syria (2011 till now). The result has been one bloodbath after another, with open wounds until today fostering ISIS, terrorism, and mass refugee flows. 

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

It Takes a Village to Maintain a Dangerous Financial System

Screen Shot 2016-06-06 at 10.42.11 AM

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.

We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.

The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.”

We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers.

– From the post: Martin Luther King: “Everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was Legal”

Last month, Anat R.Admati, the George G.C. Parker Professor of Finance and Economics at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business, published a very important working paper titled, It Takes a Village to Maintain a Dangerous Financial System. At 26 pages, it’s a bit longer than what you might leisurely read in the course of your daily activities, but I strongly suggest you take the time. Of course, if you don’t have the time, I’ve provided some key excerpts for you below.

Despite deconstructing an intentionally complicated subject, the paper was both an enjoyable read and easily understandable. Additionally, the range of issues she successfully covered in such an short piece was nothing short of heroic.

I knew it would be good after reading the abstract…

Abstract: I discuss the motivations and actions (or inaction) of individuals in the financial system, governments, central banks, academia and the media that collectively contribute to the persistence of a dangerous and distorted financial system and inadequate, poorly designed regulations. Reassurances that regulators are doing their best to protect the public are false. The underlying problem is a powerful mix of distorted incentives, ignorance, confusion, and lack of accountability. Willful blindness seems to play a role in flawed claims by the system’s enablers that obscure reality and muddle the policy debate. 

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

Deconstructing the Bitcoin Market Cap by Vinny Lingham

Screen Shot 2016-06-04 at 9.04.30 AM

A little over two years ago, I came across a fascinating piece by serial entrepreneur Vinny Lingham which predicted a flat-to-down bitcoin price in the medium term. I highlighted the piece in the post, Why is the Bitcoin Price So Weak? The reason I found the article so compelling was not just the well thought out thesis, but also because he remained a bitcoin bull. As someone who spent 10 years professionally observing the financial markets on Wall Street, I know how difficult it is to be bullish and at the same time admit the price won’t be going anywhere for a while.

Ever since that post was published, I waited anxiously for a followup signaling that the weakness was over. I had to wait two years, but in early May 2016 he publicly turned very bullish. I highlighted this shift in the piece, Vinny Lingham on the Bitcoin Price – Prepare for the “Mother of All Short Squeezes”. One month later, the price is +25%.

Seemingly inspired by the recent action, Vinny has been writing more frequently as of late and he just published another piece titled, Deconstructing the Bitcoin Market Cap.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.