The following is a condensed version of the very excellent information contained on jimstonefreelance.com based on official records and evidence which cannot be silenced. The fact that even a large proportion of the truth movement has shunned this report proves how deep the conspiracy goes.
1. Photographs of Fukushima show Reactor 3 is completely missing, which means the press and anyone who has claimed anything about pressures, temperatures, containment, etc., at reactor 3 after March 14 is lying. Pictures of the destroyed facility of the vanished reactor prove that there was no actual quake damage to Japan and the original Japanese seismic charts prove there was no 9.0. The linked public records prove that the very real tsunami which destroyed everything in it's path could not have been natural.
[note: a shorter version of this essay also appeared in Counterpunch here]
In the summer of 2002, during the lead up to the Iraq War, a White House official expressed displeasure about with article written by journalist Ron Suskind in Esquire. He asserted people like Suskind were trapped “in what we call the reality-based community,” which the official defined as people who ”believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.”
President Bush announces the invasion of Iraq from the Oval Office, Mar. 19, 2003.
Suskind murmured something about enlightenment principles grounded in scientific empiricism, but the official cut him off, saying,
“We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”
This is a revealing statement about the mentality in the Bush White House prior to the Iraq War.
Think about it: in effect, the official is claiming the mind of a decider, who is tasked with making decisions to cope with the constraints of the real world, has the power to create a new reality over and over again. Therefore the decider need not be worried about matching his actions against those constraints, or even observing those constraints, before making his decisions.
Arrogant? To be sure.
Unusual inside the Beltway? Not really, based on my experience in the Pentagon.
But this outlook also reflects an incredibly stupid and dangerous way to orient one’s decision cycle to events in the real world.
China-North Korea: China did not export any crude oil to North Korea in February, Reuters reported, citing customs data. It marks the first time since early 2007 that no deliveries were made.
Comment: China exports crude by means of a pipeline to North Korea's west coast refinery at Sinuiju. The pipeline has a throughput capacity of 1 million tons per year, but in the past few years it has carried about 500,000 tons, or just under 42,000 tons per month.
No other steady source of crude has been reported since before the end of the Warsaw Pact. Russian Far East companies send some crude to North Korea to have it refined at the east coast refinery and shipped back to the Far East, usually paying the North Koreans in kind.
The lack of Chinese crude supplies in February implies that North Korea has had to draw on fuel stocks to sustain the nationwide training. This is a chronic, strategic and systemic vulnerability of North Korea. China can make North Korea stop.
If China exports no crude in March, North Korean national readiness will have been degraded significantly because of the extra demands on supplies of food and fuel that are not being replaced. Whatever provocation North Korea plans must take place before the fuel runs low and the civilians begin to rebel or desert their mobilization stations. Contacts along the China border say the exercises will last until the US and South Korean exercises end.
China-North Korea: President Xi Jinping has sent a message to North Korean leader Kim Jong Un stressing that the two countries are “friendly neighbors,” according to the Korean Central News Agency on 21 March.
Cyprus: For the record. Cypriot lawmakers 19 March overwhelmingly rejected an EU bailout proposal that would have required a tax on deposits in the country's banks. Thousands of demonstrators burst into cheers and applause as their MPs on Tuesday voted down the EU bailout plan aimed at rescuing Cyprus from bankruptcy.
The Finance Minister flew to Moscow to seek Russian assistance to prevent insolvency by Cypriot banks. EU officials reportedly are stunned that the EU bailout scheme was rejected because it would have been paid mainly by Russian depositors in Cypriot banks.
Comment: The action of parliament averted widespread street disorders, at least for now. The Russians or Russian firms have several options for recapitalizing Cyprus as a banking center. If they decline, however, Cypriot banks would not be able to cover deposits, according to analysis in the Financial Times. Cyprus might eventually become the first EU member to be ejected, but for now Nicosia is not burning.
Meanwhile leaders in other European states with weak economies reassured bank depositors that they deposits were “sacred.”
From LIGNET (Langley Intelligence Group Network), a local commercial intel firm that trades on the perception, valid or otherwise, that it has ties to CIA.
After just over one year in power, North Korea’s novice leader, 30-year old Kim Jong Un, has dashed hopes that he will change course from the brinkmanship-style policies pursued by his late father, Kim Jong Il. For the first time in decades, U.S. intelligence and defense analysts believe the threat of an outbreak of significant hostilities on the Korean peninsula is a distinct possibility. How would a potential conflict play out? While there is little doubt that North Korea would lose, the consequences for the region would be dire, with casualties potentially in the hundreds of thousands, if not more.
Tensions and the risk of conflict have escalated precipitously on the Korean peninsula over the last year. In addition to conducting a successful long-range ballistic missile and a third nuclear test, North Korea has ramped up, even by its own standards, its bellicose rhetoric.
March 19, 2013. Ten years ago today the Bush regime invaded Iraq. It is known that the justification for the invasion was a packet of lies orchestrated by the neoconservative Bush regime in order to deceive the United Nations and the American people.
The US Secretary of State at that time, General Colin Powell, has expressed his regrets that he was used by the Bush regime to deceive the United Nations with fake intelligence that the Bush and Blair regimes knew to be fake. But the despicable presstitute media has not apologized to the American people for serving the corrupt Bush regime as its Ministry of Propaganda and Lies.
It is difficult to discern which is the most despicable, the corrupt Bush regime, the presstitutes that enabled it, or the corrupt Obama regime that refuses to prosecute the Bush regime for its unambiguous war crimes, crimes against the US Constitution, crimes against US statutory law, and crimes against humanity.
In his book, Cultures Of War, the distinguished historian John W. Dower observes that the concrete acts of war unleashed by the Japanese in the 20th century and the Bush imperial presidency in the 21st century “invite comparative analysis of outright war crimes like torture and other transgressions. Imperial Japan’s black deeds have left an indelible stain on the nation’s honor and good name, and it remains to be seen how lasting the damage to America’s reputation will be. In this regard, the Bush administration’s war planners are fortunate in having been able to evade formal and serious investigation remotely comparable to what the Allied powers pursued vis-a-vis Japan and Germany after World War II.”
The media is doing its usual vapid tour of the 10th “anniversary” of the American invasion of Iraq. Far better to consider how the nation permitted the disgrace to happen. Mike Lofgren cites three important lessons to learn.
For myself, I believe it most important to consider the domestic politics and careerist posturing that drives civilian (and military) leaders to beat the drums of war in order to manipulate political (and budgetary) decisions, or worse to simply advocate war.
Consider Mike's lessons below as you read in the morning news articles of the current US B-52 exercises over the Korean peninsula and the hysteria of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in reacting to a historically minor budget correction. Given the nature of the North Korean regime, is this the time to bait them? Have the Joint Chiefs shown they are capable to dealing with budget events they have only had a year and a half to prepare for? Is there an American domestic political (and budgetary) content to the US escalation of events in Korea?
As you read Mike's important column below, it is useful to think about such questions.
On the decennial of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the persons responsible have shown remarkably little guilt over launching an unprovoked war of aggression, even when the lamentable results might be expected to give one pause to rethink the enterprise. Marveling at the complacency about Iraq of America's foreign policy elite as they are fawningly interviewed on the Sunday talk shows, columnist Alex Pareene says that “[p]eople who were integral in the decision to wage that war sat there and opined on what the United States should do about Iran and China and North Korea and no one laughed them out of the room. It was disgusting.” Disgusting, but hardly surprising here in the United States of Amnesia.
Are there any lessons to be drawn from the debacle? Here are three tentative conclusions:
