Mini-Me: Iran Is NOT a Nuclear Threat — Cover for Other Actions

05 Iran, Corruption, Government, IO Deeds of War, Military, Peace Intelligence
0Shares
Who, Mini-Me?

Huh?   We, we, we've been lied to?  How can this be?

Top US Nuclear Expert Tells Obama: There Is No Weapons Threat From Iran

January 16, 2012 • 1:29AM

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.

Read letter.

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.

See Also:

935 Documented Lies Enabling War on Iraq

Iran oil futures at Phi Beta Iota

Chuck Spinney: No War with Iran, Settlements Open Game?

Iran at Phi Beta Iota

Angelo Codevilla: Who Rules America?

07 Other Atrocities, 09 Justice, 10 Transnational Crime, 11 Society, Blog Wisdom, Civil Society, Commerce, Corruption, Counter-Oppression/Counter-Dictatorship Practices, Cultural Intelligence, Government, IO Impotency, Officers Call
0Shares
Angelo Codevilla

America's Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution

Angelo M. Codevilla

American Spectator, July-August 2010

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.

Read full article.

Integral to the above piece:

Who Rules America: Power Elite Analysis and American History

by Charles A. Burris

Lou Rockwell.com, 18 January 2012

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 American Revolution, 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.

Read full article.

Codevilla’s Not-Quite Manifesto

Gary North

American Vision, 8-15 January 2012

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.

Read full article.

Printable Paginated Safety Copies:

» 2012-01-18 Gary North on Angelo Codevilla,
Download file: 2012-01-18 Gary North on Angelo Codevilla.doc
» 2012-01-18 Charles Burris on Who Rules America,
Download file: 2012-01-18 Charles Burris on Who Rules America.doc
» 2012-01-18 Codevilla America's Ruling Class,
Download file: 2012-01-18 Codevilla Americas Ruling Class.doc

Mini-Me: Al Jazeera on Stephen Colbert for President

Uncategorized
0Shares
Who? Mini-Me?

Colbert for President

Danny Schechter

Al Jazeera, 17 January 2012

Steven Colbert announced he will form “an exploratory committee for president of the United States of South Carolina”.

New York, NY – The New York Times, in its wisdom, remains irony-challenged and doesn't know what to think about satirist and Comedy Channel host Stephen Colbert's decision to run – for something.

The newspaper of record asks, “Is it a run or [a] comedy riff?”

I guess in Timesland, it can't be both.

It is as if an entertainer running for president or becoming a politician is beyond the pale.

Click on Image to Enlarge

Ronald Reagan anyone? And what about Arnie Schwarzenegger? Remember him?

In Israel, a popular TV commentator has organised his own party. In Senegal, singer Youssou N'dour has announced his candidacy for the presidency. Years ago in Nigeria, the late Afro-beat king Fela Kuti was being touted as the next black president – until the military cracked down on his ambitions.

So what about Colbert?

. . . . . . .

A political freak show

This has become a spectacle of candidates bouncing back and forth on their principles, and singing patriotic songs when they run out of ideas. You can't even compare with to a circus without demeaning circuses.

Politics has become a joke that someone should tell the New York Times about – with only seven per cent of people having any confidence in Congress, and most politicians lacking respect even if they do draw support in the absence of any credible alternative.

At the same time, there is resentment among some, who feel Colbert is most interested in promoting himself and his show. When I asked well-known South Carolina black activist Kevin Gray about his “campaign”, he sneered and called on him to donate to grassroots organising.

The rest of the world is laughing not only at the politicians, but at a US electorate that seems to be taking the farce seriously.

Read full article.

Phi Beta Iota:  A very serious useful article.  Strongly recommend it be read in its entirety.

See Also:

Mini-Me: USA Repressive Farce vs. Stephen Colbert Comedy + We the People Reform Coalition

2008 ELECTION 2008: Lipstick on the Pig

Mini-Me: USA Repressive Farce vs. Stephen Colbert Comedy + We the People Reform Coalition

Uncategorized
0Shares
Who? Mini-Me?

We don't make this stuff up. The good news first — if Stephen Colberg decides to run for President, he will win if he has We the People Reform Coalition as a foundation.

2012-01-17  Third-Party Colbert Would Get 13%: Poll

If Stephen Colbert decided to run for president as a third-party candidate, his performance might not be too shabby: He’d pull in 13% of the vote, Public Policy Polling finds.

And now for the really ugly bad news.

How Does America Compare to China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Other Repressive Regimes?

Top constitutional law expert Jon Turley notes in a must-read Washington Post article called “We are no longer the land of the free” (I have edited slightly to remove parentheses in several places):

Read full article.

Phi Beta Iota:  We list the ten below.

01  Assasination of US Citizens

02  Indefinite Detention

03  Arbitrary Justice

04  Warrantless Searches

05  War Crimes

06  Secret Court

07  Immunity from Judicial Review

08  Continual Monitoring of Citizens

09  Extraordinary Renditions

10  SOPA/PIPA….

Theophillis Goodyear: Sign the Pledge – Die Off for Humanity

Cultural Intelligence, Earth Intelligence
0Shares
Theophillis Goodyear

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.

Review: Thinking, Fast and Slow

4 Star, Decision-Making & Decision-Support
0Shares
Amazon Page

Daniel Kahneman

4.0 out of 5 stars Mixed Feelings About This Book,January 17, 2012

As one who was brought up with Herbert Simon and”satisficing,” I have mixed feelings about this book. As an intelligence professional I know for a fact that corrupt politicians have zero interest in the facts, only in what will profit them personally in the short-term. As much as I would like to see integrity restored as the core value of government, economy, and society, in the larger context in which we live this book is a curiosity.

There are gems and it is certainly worth reading, but as one other reviewer points out, it is not the easiest reading nor the most delightful. Here is what I got out of it (my summary notes, I donate all books right after I read them, to a nearby university).

For those instances when BOTH intelligence (decision-support) officers and their clients (politicians, policy makers, acquisition managers, operational commanders) have integrity–a condition that does not exist today, this book is very useful as a training aid.

Continue reading “Review: Thinking, Fast and Slow”