Realizing that they needed to rely on others, these businessmen took a new tack: using generous financing to enlist sympathetic clergymen as their champions. After all, according to one tycoon, polls showed that, “of all the groups in America, ministers had more to do with molding public opinion” than any other.
Phi Beta Iota: The 1% actually believe in “survival of the fittest” and earnestly consider most humans to be less than human, mere animals to be exploited as is their God-given right. Religions that regard others as heathen–this includes the Catholic, Islamic, Jewish, and Mormon religions–that “do not count,” are as corrupt as the governments they join in serving the 1%. Sluts lack integrity. It's time we stop following sluts, be they securlar or sanctimonious.
European Intelligence & Security Informatics Conference (EISIC 2012)
The Premier European Conference on Counterterrorism and Criminology
Odense, Denmark August 22-24, 2012 http://www.eisic.org, http://www.eisic.eu
Co-sponsored by IEEE Computer Society
Since the drug war has become so unpopular with the electorate, instead of politicians actually changing the drug laws, the Department of Defense seeks to reduce and conceal the real costs by transferring the “dirty work” to private contractors to do what “U.S. military forces are not allowed or not encouraged to do.
The BBC (in Spanish) is reporting that the U.S. Department of Defense is delegating the war on drugs to private mercenary companies. Of those companies, the increasingly infamous organization previously known as Blackwater is said to have received several multimillion-dollar government contracts for “providing advice, training and conducting operations in drug producing countries and those with links to so-called “narco-terrorism” including Latin America.” The “no bid” contracts, issued under the Counter-Narcoterrorism Technology Program Office's $15 billion dollar budget, are described as “non-specific” and are said to be “juicy” for the private contractors. The Pentagon says “the details of each cost in very general contracts do not go through bidding processes.”
An unnamed analyst says “the responsibility of the public and national security changing from a state's duty to be a private business…has become the trend of the future.”
Although parts of the drug war have been privatized for years, the BBC reports this “transfer” of responsibilities is an attempt to placate those looking for Pentagon budget cuts in an election year.
The former director of U.S. programs for production of nuclear materials and components for nuclear weapons, Clinton Bastin, sent an open letter to President Obama the morning of January 13, explaining that there is no weapons threat from Iran's fully safeguarded nuclear power and research programs. A copy of the letter, which the nuclear scientist also sent to the Iranian Ambassador to the United Nations, was made available to 21st Century Science & Technology magazine yesterday. It is reproduced below in full.
Bastin, who has served in leading positions in government since the 1950s, laid out the case on Iran in greater detail in an interview with 21st Century Science Nov. 18, 2011. The interview, which devastates the arguments for an Iranian nuclear weapons threat, is available at the 21st Century Science and Technology website.
Phi Beta Iota: The Iranians certainly have nuclear weapons ambitions. Bearing in mind that Zbigniew Brzezinski personally approved the Pakistani (Sunni) nuclear weapons program, it hardly seems fair to deprive the Iranian (Shi'ite) community of their own nuclear weapons program–from where we sit, they fear the Saudis and Pakistanis vastly more than they fear the USA. The bottom line is that the White House is not making decisions based on intelligence with integrity.
UPDATE 22 March 2012. The Iran situation appears to be theater:
1. To meet oil futures bets made by Israel, Iran, and Wall Street [the high end — some sources say that oil futures were also bought at the low end such that the oil producing countries are not receiving any kick from the higher prices]
2. To distract everyone from Israel pressing forward with more settlements and more atrocities against the Palestinians.
The only serious opposition to this arrogant Ruling Party is coming not from feckless Republicans but from what might be called the Country Party — and its vision is revolutionary. Our special Summer Issue cover story.
When Codevilla’s article appeared I stated that it was the most important essay I had ever read. I still believe this because it is a superb synthesis of class analysis with keen insights on contemporary power elite relationships regarding today’s rulers and the ruled.
This class division of present-day America into two factions, Court and Country, has absolutely nothing to do with any Marxian view or analysis. It is a reaffirmation of the seminal insights of Bernard Bailyn’s Pulitzer Prize winning volume, The Ideological Origins of the AmericanRevolution, and Murray N. Rothbard’s Conceived in Liberty.
These books demonstrate that the Founders’ world-view saw the crucial struggle of the Revolution as a battle of liberty versus power. Codevilla posits today’s battle in the same dramatic terms.
Every political movement needs a manifesto. The Tea Party surely needs one. So do other grassroots political resistance organizations. They don’t have it yet, but they now have its preliminary foundation, Angelo Codevilla’s essay, “America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution.”
. . . . . . .
I regard this essay as the finest statement on the two-fold division in American political life written in my lifetime — more than this, in the last hundred years. He has laid it out clearly, accurately, and eloquently.
. . . . . . .
Codevilla correctly identifies the source of legitimacy for the ruling class: Darwinism. Darwinism removed God from the vocabulary of self-accredited academia. Once liberated from the doctrine of original sin, the Progressives regarded as illegitimate the Constitutional limits placed on the Federal government.
Sign the Pledge! Volunteer to “Die Off” for the Good of Humanity
Eagle: Ron Paul an Intellectual Revolution? Who Cares? said: “The way we live, work and play–all soon to be extinct, buried in the ground never to be seen again unless humans die off and just a few of us are left to start over.”
That's about the most idiotic argument I've ever heard. Humanity can only survive if most of us die? That's literal nihilism. Anyone who could make that kind of statement has completely run out of ideas and has no business telling anyone how to make the world a better place—–because they've already given up. It makes the kind of “doublethink” in the novel 1984 seem like profound wisdom by comparison. If humanity wants to survive we all need to die? Even the brainwashed citizens of Oceania wouldn't fall for that one; which makes me wonder why Eagle seems to have accepted it as a self-evident truth.
That argument not only accepts a dismal prophecy as an absolute certainty—–based on nothing more than an assertion—–it implies that we shouldn't even try to avoid our own extinction. We should embrace it! I wonder if the poster realizes what that statement reveals about his/her psychology? First, since most people want to keep living, Eagle is either suicidal or a blatant misanthrope who sees his fellow human beings as obstacles to a brighter future.
This is an irrational notion that many people subscribe to, at least subconsciously, in one way or another, but usually not to such an absurd degree. Democrats dream of that “great day” when Republicans magically disappear. Republicans dream of that “great day” when Democrats magically disappear. The Nazis dreamed of that “great day” when Jews would magically disappear. But just in case it didn't happen naturally, they though they would help it along a little.
I would like to know if Eagle is planning to sacrifice his/her life so that the remaining “few” can live? Of course it doesn't really matter. If humankind has gotten to the point where we would be happier if most of us died, then humanity is already doomed. If that's the extent to which we care about out fellow human beings, then perhaps we don't deserve to survive as a species.
Wishing that the majority of humanity would just die off, to me, is genocide by default. It's like saying to our fellow human inhabitants of the earth: “We don't care where you go, but you can't stay here.” If we all had that mindset, saving humanity would be impossible. It's what is known as a self-fulfilling prophecy. And since the prophecy is human extinction, forgive me if I don't bow down and worship the prophet.
I have a sneaky suspicion that this absurd mindset is somehow related to anarchy. If so, anarchists are not only bereft of workable solutions, they've mentally excluded them as even remote possibilities! If the best they can offer humanity is extinction, who needs them? I would be the first to stand aside and allow them to sign the pledge to commit suicide for the sake of the rest of humanity.
The people pushing for war against Iran are the same neocons who pushed for war against Iraq. See thisand this. (They planned both wars at least 20 years ago.)
The IAEA report being trumpted as a casus belli contains no new information, but is based on a re-hashing of old, debunked claims stemming from “laptop documents”.
3) Slightly less sensational, the book reveals for the first time that a CIA “bait” operation actually delivered to Iran completely useful plans for creating a nuclear bomb…the CIA “flaws” intended to render the plans unworkable were detected in one glance by a Russian courier scientist, and easily correctable by the Iranians.
