Friday, September 26, 2014

Hong Kong’s Pro-Democracy Movement: Growing Youth-led Civil Disobedience?

RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical issues and contemporary developments. The views of the authors are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced electronically or in print with prior permission from RSIS and due recognition to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email: RSISPublications@ntu.edu.sg for feedback to the Editor RSIS Commentary, Yang Razali Kassim. 


No. 189/2014 dated 25 September 2014
Hong Kong’s Pro-Democracy Movement:
Growing Youth-led Civil Disobedience?
By Dylan Loh Ming Hui

Synopsis


A recent groundswell of protests, sit-ins and boycotts agitating for greater democracy and freedom in Hong Kong have been led by youths and students. They highlight the difference in perceptions of ‘democracy’ between Beijing and pro-democracy groups in Hong Kong.

Commentary


HONG KONG’S college and school students began a week-long boycott of classes on 22 September 2014 in protest against Beijing’s position on electoral reforms. This classroom boycott gained the support of over 400 academic and non-academic staff. College staff have promised leniency for students who skipped classes and Hong Kong's largest teachers’ union circulated a petition calling for strong support for the classroom boycott.

More significant were the youths behind the mobilisation and organisation of the classroom boycott. This latest public protest is just one instance in a series of civil disobedience movements initiated by the youths of Hong Kong – many whom are not even old enough to drive or drink.

Seed of fire
In an interview with CNN, Chinese dissident, Hu Jian, (himself a student activist during the 1989 Tiananmen protests) noted that “Mainland China is a tinderbox that's been physically suppressed by the authorities, and Hong Kong is a seed of fire”. That fire has been sparked by the comparatively more liberal press, academe and political field in Hong Kong, with the emergence of highly motivated and zealous youths.

One prominent example is student activist leader – Joshua Wong, who was just 15 in 2011 when he started a movement called ‘Scholarism’ in opposition  to a bid to introduce pro-China and pro-communist education materials in Hong Kong’s public schools. In 2012, ‘Scholarism’ successfully rallied an estimated 120,000 people into ‘occupying’ the Hong Kong government’s headquarters and generated enough pressure for the proposal to be withdrawn.

Wong is at the forefront of the classroom boycott movement. Indeed, at a time when the ‘Occupy Central’ movement group seems to have waned in support and been subjected to criticism for failing to act after Beijing refused to grant Hong Kong universal suffrage in August this year, the students have stepped up and taken over the mantle.

One of the co-founders of the Occupy Central campaign, Chan Kinman, lauded the student activists, saying he believed the student strike would be successful because young people were particularly annoyed by the blatant gesture of Beijing.
Youth-fuelled civil disobedience

There are several implications from the savvy student-led civil disobedience movements in Hong Kong. Firstly, Beijing is going to find it increasingly harder to use strong-armed tactics against protesters as the general pro-democracy movement evolves into a student-led and student-centred movement. Global Times, a nationalist Chinese newspaper, referred to the students as a radical pan-democratic group that “wants to take advantage of society's tolerance of students, making use of them to illegally confront the central government”.

While the government in China will try to target individual leaders (Joshua Wong was identified in China's Blue Paper on National Security), it does not have the unfettered autonomy to manoeuvre as it does in the mainland.

Secondly, just as students in Hong Kong drew inspiration from the student protests in Tiananmen Square, there is a fear, from the Chinese Government’s perspective, that youths in Macau and the mainland would similarly draw inspiration from the student’s political movement in Hong Kong.

Thirdly, the continuing endurance and success of student-led civil disobedience will disenchant the people of Hong Kong towards Beijing and vice versa. In fact, the students have already achieved one target of what they set out to do – global media coverage sympathetic to their cause. These student protest leaders (and their campaign) have been given extensive coverage by international media such as CNN, Forbes, Bloomberg and The Guardian. This has, in turn, raised the image of the youths as the vanguard of the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong.

Ball in Beijing’s court

Finally, the political savviness and mobilisation ability of protest politics is going to prove extremely problematic for Beijing. They have already proven their mettle with the successful staging of several civil disobedience movements and have displayed their organisational capabilities. More worrying for Beijing is the proactive diffusion of protest politics to other locales.

For instance, Scholarism’s founder Joshua Wong travelled to Taiwan to meet student leaders earlier this year in an effort to oppose a trade deal with China. The same group also hosted young activists from Macau in a proactive exchange of ideas and strategies.

Beijing has already stated its stand very clearly: that it has “comprehensive jurisdiction” over Hong Kong and it will not make concessions over universal suffrage. How Beijing deals with Hong Kong’s student activism, and more crucially, how China successfully (or unsuccessfully) controls and manages political consciousness of youths in the mainland would be a major factor in determining its own domestic stability.
 

Dylan Loh Ming Hui is a research analyst with the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University.
Click HERE to read this commentary online.

Turkey Must Tread Carefully Against Islamic State

Turkey Must Tread Carefully Against Islamic State

Print Text Size

Summary

As the United States begins its full assault against the Islamic State in Syria, backed by Arab allies, the absence of NATO ally Turkey is drawing attention and comment. Just days before the Sept. 22 beginning of U.S. airstrikes, Turkey managed to broker a deal with the Islamic State to return 49 diplomats held in Iraq for 101 days. Contrary to diplomatic and media speculation, however, Turkey is not supporting the transnational, Syria- and Iraq-based jihadist movement known as the Islamic State.
While the details of just how Ankara retrieved its diplomats are sketchy, Ankara likely negotiated their release through its contacts among the Iraqi Sunni community and its ally, Qatar. This influence, especially among Sunni locals in not just Iraq but also Syria, will be critical if Turkey is going to be able to manage the jihadist threat long after the United States declares mission accomplished and moves on.

Analysis

Rumors have long circulated that Turkey has been aiding Islamic State fighters. A New York Times article suggesting Turkey was tolerating an Islamic State recruiting center went viral, as did the subsequent war of words between the government and New York Times management. Another argument heard is that Ankara sees the Syrian Kurds gaining their own autonomous enclave in northeastern Syria as an intolerable security threat for the Turks — making the Islamic State the lesser evil. More recently, Turkey's unwillingness to join the U.S.-led international effort against the Islamic State was also seen as being driven by Turkey's dealings with the jihadist group.
Such perceptions have been reinforced now that the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) government has secured the release of 49 diplomats abducted by the group from the Turkish consulate in the northern Iraqi town of Mosul after the militants seized control of the city. Turkey's dealings with the Islamic State are much more nuanced than has generally been understood. Last year in July, Stratfor shed light on this dynamic, analyzing how the Turks were caught between two very threatening realities — both demanding simultaneous management — on their southern flank: jihadists of various stripes and Syrian Kurdish separatists.
Managing the very difficult geopolitical battle space that is Syria required Ankara to develop relations within both the jihadist and Kurdish landscapes south of their border. Turkey also understands that it cannot allow itself to be a launchpad for an international effort against the Islamic State, the outcome of which is extremely uncertain. Turkey is all too aware of how Pakistan even today, nearly two generations after it agreed to serve as the staging ground for the U.S.-led effort to counter Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan, continues to deal with the fallout of that war, which has not yet ended.

From the Turks' viewpoint, the Americans and their Western and regional allies (with the exception of Jordan) all have the option of walking away from the conflict in Syria. Not only does Turkey feel that it will have to deal with the mess in Syria long after other stakeholders have moved on, it also knows that the United States expects Turkey to manage the Syrians as well as other regional matters. Turkey has not forgotten how, during the days of President Turgut Ozal, Ankara cut Iraq's export pipeline in 1990 at the behest of the United States in the run-up to the 1991 Gulf War but was later left with the aftermath as promises of aid disappeared with the subsequent change of U.S. administrations. This bitter experience informed Turkey's 2003 decision to refuse Washington access to Turkish territory for a northern invasion of Iraq. At the same time Turkey is deeply worried about being caught between Saudi Arabia and Iran, who are engaged in a vicious proxy sectarian war.
It is against this geopolitical backdrop that the Turkish move to negotiate the release of its diplomats must be considered. In an ideal world, one in which the Islamic State does not exist, Turkey would be the lead player with influence among the Sunnis in both Syria and Iraq and in much better shape to dominate Syria and give considerable competition to Iran in Iraq. But in the real world, not only does the Islamic State exist, it is actually in competition with Turkey for influence among the Sunni Arabs to the south of the Turkish Republic.
While the Sunni majority in Syria is much more fragmented than its sectarian kinsmen in Iraq, the neighboring Sunni minority has sought to empower itself by leveraging the Islamic State. This means that the Turks will have to delicately handle weeding out the Islamic State from within the Iraqi Sunni community. But that is a long-term work in progress, while the immediate task has been to secure the release of their diplomats.
The Turks knew that the way in which they dealt with this hostage crisis would greatly determine their ability to shape the behavior of Iraqi Sunnis. Building upon their existing links with Sunni tribes, former Baathists and other political players, they likely negotiated with the Islamic State. It should be noted that Turkey has had close ties with former Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, who was sentenced to death by Nouri al-Maliki's administration in 2012 for alleged links to terrorism. Al-Hashimi, who has been spending a great deal of time in Turkey, openly supported the Sunni insurrection that began in June.
Al-Hashimi is also very close to Turkey's main Arab partner, Qatar. Al-Hashimi periodically frequents Doha, which has significant influence among a range of jihadist groups and very likely played a key role in the release of the diplomats, which happened just days after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan visited Qatar. While there is no evidence of a ransom payment, and Turkish officials deny such, it cannot be ruled out that money changed hands. Meanwhile, reports are surfacing that there may have been a prisoner swap in which Ankara secured the release of some Islamic State members. Hurriyet Daily News reported Sept. 23 that the Turkish government was able to convince Syrian rebel group Liwa Al Tawhid to release 50 Islamic State prisoners being held by the Salafist-jihadist organization, which is a joint Turkish-Qatari proxy. And Erdogan obliquely hinted on Sept. 21 at the possibility of a prisoner exchange when he remarked, in response to a journalist's question, "Whether there was or wasn't a swap — [the consulate] personnel were returned to Turkey."
Clearly Erdogan is not worried about any fallout from a prisoner exchange, especially since the United States recently released five high-profile Afghan Taliban detainees from the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay in exchange for an American soldier, a deal also mediated by Qatar. This experience allows the Turkish spy service to enhance its influence among the Sunnis and develop intelligence on the Islamic State. Between this release of the diplomats from Iraq and the buffer zone that the Turkish military is working to create on the border with Syria, the Turks are looking beyond the U.S.-led airstrikes against the Islamic State and the arming of Syrian rebels on the ground.

Read more: Turkey Must Tread Carefully Against Islamic State | Stratfor
Follow us: @stratfor on Twitter | Stratfor on Facebook

Making war on the world

Making
war
on
the world

is
a war against ourselves!

ORDINARY
PEOPLE HAVE NO IDEA
ABOUT
WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON


By
John Kaminski


Is peaceful
coexistence impossible? Or are human beings really predators who must dominate
and exploit their neighbors in order to survive and prosper? The dried blood on
the pages of human history would indicate the latter.

One thing is
certain. Americans have to pretend they're reasonable people, as their
government marches around the world killing people, provoking revolutions, and
lying to their citizens at home as to why they're doing it. How else could the
U.S. fund homicidal maniac rebels known as ISIL and then send American jets to
bomb them?

Americans seem
unable to grasp the obvious fact that their prosperity is based on the sale of
weaponry and the creation of political realities that necessitate the use of
these weapons in order to maintain their financial viability as they rob other
countries of their valuables. They also are unable to grasp that all these wars
don't benefit American citizens, but only the behind-the-scenes financiers
[Rothschild Moneychangers] who invent them.

Throughout its
history has America careened from one war to another, to the point where now
America has troops stationed in 150 countries around the world and armored
vehicles patrolling all its own major cities? At the same time, America's
infrastructure is disintegrating, its people can't find jobs, and judging by its HUGE
purchase of hollow point bullets, the U.S. government plans on shooting a lot of
people really soon.

Before the U.S.
ever began its Jewish-driven World Wars of the 20th century, it had ravaged the
undeveloped parts of the Western Hemisphere and East Asia, capturing Spain's
possessions around the world, and supplanting Britain as the empire on which the
Sun never set.

Happy idiot
Americans have no clue about this history, or about the century that followed,
in which a foreign coterie of kosher wheeler-dealers claiming persecution abroad
were to take control of the American war machine, and produce weapons and
carnage unequalled in the annals of human history.

Fast forward to
today and you realize that throughout the past century there has been a seamless
progression of constant wars with virtually no period of peace that we can see
in either our recent history or our calculable future.

Will we ever stop
fighting and making war on people whose resources we want to steal before
everyone is dead? Probably not, and this will be our epitaph, as it has been the
sorry signature of all the empires of recorded history. The wars eventually come
home to the people who are conducting them, and that's what's happening now.

They spin
catastrophes these days faster than you can process them. The latest Israeli
slaughter in Gaza was quickly erased from the news cycle by the neocon coup in
Ukraine, the shootdown of the Malaysian jet, and now the sudden creation of a
new bunch of rebels in order to renew the attack on Syria, all crafted to a
background beat of one false move starts World War 3 if the Russians take the
bait, which apparently they will not. Or at least they haven't yet.

Who benefits from
all these insanely aggressive maneuvers, all precipitated by American forces
doing the bidding of Israeli Jews [Rothschild proxies]?

The real reality is
obscured by these and other crises, most of them transitory, though some are
profound. But all too often, if not constantly, when we ask ourselves what we
really know about a certain crisis, we are forced to shrug our shoulders and
wonder what is really real.

We know our votes
don't count, and we know that even to run for any powerful office candidates
must be vetted and approved by the Jewish overlords who have taken control of
both our country and our reality.

Was Fukushima the
end of life in the Northern Hemisphere? Are all those dead animals on the
California coast the result of radioactive garbage that floated in from
Japan?

Does the bubbling
methane in the Arctic Ocean foreshadow the imminent of end of all life on Earth?
Does the promotion and distribution of bioengineered food augur the impending
deaths of billions of people on Earth whose reproductive abilities have been
stunted by medications they have been forced to ingest during childhood? Will
Ebola overcome us when our mouths start bubbling blood?

The world did not
believe the words of American leaders who insisted Russia caused the problems in
Ukraine, when the whole world knows it was another case of the U.S. doing the
bidding of its Jewish masters.

The same is true of
the 9/11 tragedy — for 13 years the U.S. has blamed mysterious Muslim terrorists
for airliner attacks on New York City that never happened, but which enabled
America to begin its Jewish-sponsored wars on the world in earnest.

Fake news,
perverted ideas, false reports, fictional quotes, planted witnesses, posturing
politicians, bogus pretenses, urban legends, malicious propaganda — who runs the
world?

Those who really
pay attention know it is a worldwide cabal of financial manipulators, who are
almost exclusively Jewish. But most Americans, locked in their fabricated
fantasies provided by Jewish media, surely don't know. They still think Hillary
Clinton vs. Jeb Bush will be an interesting debate, when in fact it is
irrelevant to everything, as they are merely the poseurs of the day posturing on
how to steal your money.

Do you still think
that your vote counts, or that you can petition your betters in Congress to
redress the unjust condition that diminish your life? Guess again.

We
must all stop thinking of this “thing” in Washington, DC as “our” government. It
is not and it never has been. It is a criminally self-interested, foreign,
for-profit, mostly foreign-owned corporation hired to provide 19 governmental
services, and it is seriously run amok.

As
a corporation there is nothing sacrosanct about the “federal government”. It has
exactly the same standing and status as any other commercial corporation on
Earth. We need to deal with it the same way we would deal with Ford Motor
Company or General Electric or Monsanto.

Would
you “petition” the corporate officers of these companies and ask them to play
nice? That’s what you are doing with all these senseless petitions to Congress.
If they wanted to play nice and were willing to play nice, they would already be
doing so. There would be no need for petitions seeking redress for
grievances.

This and other
trenchant observations derive from the essay "Impersonating a public officer. It
might be a good time to put your affairs in order." <http://scannedretina.com/2014/09/19/impersonating-a-public-officer-it-might-be-a-good-time-to-put-your-personal-affairs-in-order/>

It would behoove
everyone to read and understand this whole document and realize our so-called
government is not legally legitimate and that a method exists to decommission
and return control of our spending to the people to whom it rightfully belongs,
us, and not some foreign corporation [N.M. Rothschild & Sons, Inc.].

Other essential
nuggets from this essay that will make your realize your perception of your own
government is totally erroneous include:

The
UNITED STATES, INC. is owned and operated by the INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND
(IMF) and the IMF is owned and operated by the UNITED NATIONS, CORPORATION. Our
real beef, therefore, is with the IMF and the UN. [Our beef
is with the OWNERS of all these corporations!]

IB Puppet

If
we have a beef with the way the UNITED STATES, INC. is being run— and we
do—-then the obvious things to be done are the same as with any other
corporation. You put the bite on them and their owners and operators via bad
publicity, commercial liens, law suits in appropriate venues, and
boycotts.

That’s
why commercial liens against the UNITED STATES, INC. need to be filed
simultaneously against the IMF and UN. They are responsible for what the UNITED
STATES, INC. is doing or failing to do, so the mismanagement of the operation
comes home to them and they are then motivated to make sure that the contracts
owed by the UNITED STATES, INC. are honored and the limitations of those
contracts observed.

The
members of Congress are rubber stamps and window dressing, there to entertain
and reassure the public. Any real power the Congress had was given away during
the Roosevelt Administration to the Office of the President. As mid-level
managers, members of Congress now spend most of their days trying to figure out
how they can more effectively lick the boots of their foreign masters, still
bring home enough bacon to satisfy the folks back home, and better feather their
own nests.

Instead
of wasting time and money and heartfelt effort on any aspect of the current
political system or supporting candidates that at the end of the day have
neither the power nor the will to truly represent anyone but themselves and
their own group of cronies, use your resources to address the root of the
problem: the UN, the IMF, the UNITED STATES, INC. and their “federal”
STATES.
[Easier
yet is to address the private corporate ownership of the entire planet by the
Moneychangers of The City of London.]

Rothschild city of london2

Expose
them. Expose what they have done and are doing here. Expose their motives and
deal with those motives effectively. Realize that they are in the business of
selling you “governmental services” and that you are in charge of what you buy
or don’t buy —including “Obummercare”. Don’t let anyone “represent” you or your
estate in these matters. The cretins in Congress are not there to represent you.
They are there to represent the UNITED STATES, INC. They will always vote and
act to enrich the corporation at your expense.

Quit fooling
yourself. You're on your own. There is no governmental structure in place to
protect you. When you know that, will you start killing things like all the rest
of the manic lemmings controlled by a monster government, just following orders
from the moneymaking man? Is this why soldiers, fresh off the boat from
following orders, so often come home and kill themselves?

What is it that
they can't stand? Is it you and your destructive ignorance?

Or is it just
because they realize they are murderers, which is something the American
populace needs to realize — that we are accessories to mass murder practically
everywhere on the planet.

Do you think you
still live in a free country when your government knows every single thing about
your entire life and you don't know a single fact about the thoughtless actor
who has been declared to be your president?

Hold your breath.
I'm about to take you under.

The following
revelations come from a handy little document titled "40 Outrageous Facts Most
People Don't Know." 


It is not the duty of the police to protect you. Their job is to protect
the Corporation and arrest code breakers. The FCC, CIA, FBI, NASA and all of the
other alphabet gangs were never part of the United States government.


The IRS is not a U.S. government agency. It is an agency of the IMF. A
1040 form is for tribute paid to Britain. The IMF is an agency of the UN. The
U.S. Treasury is now the IMF. The UN has financed the operations of the United
States government for over 50 years and now owns every man, women and child in
America. We are slaves and own absolutely nothing not even what we think are our
children. You own no property, slaves can’t own property. Read the Deed to the
property that you think is yours. You are listed as a Tenant.


We have One World Government, One World Law and a One World Monetary
System. The UN is a One World Super Government. No one on this planet has ever
been free. This planet is a Slave Colony. There has always been a One World
Government. It is just that now it is much better organized and has changed its
name as of 1945 to the United Nations.


America is a British Colony. Britain is owned by the Vatican [The
small-time Vatican is owned by the Rothschild Moneychangers.]. The Pope can
abolish any law in the United States. The Pope [taking orders from London]
claims to own the entire planet through the laws of conquest and discovery.

Read the rest at
http://worldtruth.tv/40-outrageous-facts-most-people-dont-know/
and join the growing force massing to dismantle this criminal agency under the
control of foreign psychopaths that we have previously called our government.
Each and every corrupt government functionary deserves the harshest of
penalties, because in killing the people they're robbing, they're also killing
the futures of the people they have sworn to protect, namely, us.

Rothschild MoneychangersTake Your Money1


John Kaminski is a
writer who lives on the Gulf Coast of Florida, constantly trying to figure out
why we are destroying ourselves, and pinpointing a corrupt belief system as the
engine of our demise. Solely dependent on contributions from readers, please
support his work by mail: 6871 Willow Creek Circle #103, North Port FL 34287
USA.
#

Death March of the Boobeiosie

- Infowars - http://www.infowars.com -
Death March of the Boobeiosie
Posted By Butler Shaffer | LewRockwell.com On September 25, 2014 @ 6:57 am In Tile,U.S. News | No Comments
It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. – Mark Twain.
The political establishment – masquerading as the sock puppet du jour – continues to find new “enemies” with which to terrorize Boobus Americanus into surrendering their lives, liberty, wealth, and intelligence in a “fight” that is intended to go on forever. The latest concocted foe is ISIS, successor to the Al Qaeda “threat” that was so useful in bamboozling Americans into the war-whooping that continues in Iraq and Afghanistan. Using the anniversary of the 9/11 attack to work the mob into a frenzy, President Obama introduced what the establishment hopes will be a new wrinkle in its efforts to overcome popular resistance to the “perpetual war for perpetual peace” that has become America’s epitaph. America will only resort to using machines – e.g., bombers, missiles, drones, etc. – for the killing of people the government has been so anxious to begin killing: Syrians. The practice will give a whole new meaning to “Syrial killers!”

How easy it has been to find a fungible supply of popular “enemies.” War-whooping was aided, during World War I, by allegations that members of the German army were cutting off the arms of babies and small children in Belgium, a lie soon revealed – after the war – not only by the allied admission of this having been propaganda, but by the obvious absence of disarmed youngsters. The current Bushobama war in the Middle East was advanced with the lie that Taliban/Al Qaeda forces were killing babies in hospital nurseries and incubators. We now have the beheading of two American journalists, allegedly by ISIS people, as the cause celebre for yet another round of carefully calculated barbarism. America has created a breeding ground for its endless enemies by its foreign policies. If you attack, torture, bomb, kill, and otherwise mistreat other human beings long enough, they might have a tendency to resent the practice. The American Indians were labeled as “savages” – in earlier political rhetoric as well as movies – by the fact that, when the 7th Cavalry came to slaughter them, the Indians fought back! Renaming the enemy created by the United States in order to keep the profitable war-machine well-lubricated with the blood of innocents does not change the causative factors underlying our collective insanity. As long as the moral lepers are able to continue getting otherwise intelligent men and women to invest their children in the racket, the depraved game will continue, with the mainstream media maintaining the drumbeat.
You will doubtless see more of this celebration of murder at weekend sporting events. As Laurence Vance has so well documented, academia is committing its forces to the slaughter. College football games will feature players dressed in American flag uniforms, Air Force flyovers, soldiers dressed in camouflage, patriotic music, and other symbols of warfare to keep tens of thousands of enthusiasts in stadiums wildly cheering. All of this should remind the few who have bothered to study history of the final days of the Roman Empire: as the Roman legions carried their violence throughout the rest of Europe, the hometown boobeoisie was whooping it up for the local athletes performing at the coliseum!

Article printed from Infowars: http://www.infowars.com
URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/death-march-of-the-boobeiosie/
Copyright © 2013 Infowars. All rights reserved.

The Real Network of Death

- Infowars - http://www.infowars.com -
The Real Network of Death
Posted By Kurt Nimmo | Infowars.com On September 25, 2014 @ 9:23 am In Featured Stories,Infowars Exclusives,Tile | No Comments
On Wednesday Obama went before the United Nations.
He promised the United States will destroy the Islamic State, which he called the “network of death.” He said its brutal activity “forces us to look into the heart of darkness,” a line his speechwriters lifted from novelist Joseph Conrad.
Obama’s speech before the globalist forum officially signals the ISIS War, the third invasion of the Middle East since the reign of Bush Senior.
Global Elite Excel at Organized Mass Murder
The New York Times, as usual, put Obama’s speech into the proper context for the masses, or rather those bothering to read newspapers and corporate media propaganda websites:
Mr. Obama on Wednesday spoke more like a wartime leader, reaffirming his determination to work with other countries but leaving little doubt that the United States would act as the ultimate guarantor of an international order that he said was under acute stress.
In fact, the United States, that is to say its ruling plutocracy, is the ultimate guarantor of mass destruction and death.
As Tom Engelhardt notes, “Washington is a war capital” and “the United States is a war state.” It is the “norm for us is to be at war somewhere at any moment.” War has been a constant since World War II. It feeds the beast, the military-industrial complex, as exiting president Dwight Eisenhower so presciently warned.

ISIS, forged out of the remnants of al-Qaeda in Iraq, armed and trained by the United States and its “partners,” the fossilized Wahhabi monarchies of the Persian Gulf, poses nowhere near the deadly threat of the United States. The United States has excelled as the Master of War. It has fine tuned military interventions, covert operations, coups and attempted coups, regime change and, most recently, color revolutions.
It has intervened, directly and indirectly, in dozens of countries, including the Philippines, South Korea, Lebanon, Iran, Guatemala, Cuba, Rep. Congo (Zaire), Brazil, Greece, Russia, Poland, Turkey, Dominican Republic, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, Chile, Angola, East Timor, Nicaragua, Grenada, Panama, Kyrgyzstan, Haiti, Yugoslavia, Georgia, Ukraine, Argentina, Ghana, Venezuela, Bolivia, Honduras, Paraguay, Mexico, El Salvador, Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan, Yemen, Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, and elsewhere.
The CIA, the enforcer of the financial class, has assassinated or attempted to assassinate 50 or more political leaders.
Genocidal Death Toll in the Millions
“Coming to grips with these U.S./CIA activities in broad numbers and figuring out how many people have been killed in the jungles of Laos or the hills of Nicaragua is very difficult,” former CIA official John Stockwell wrote in the 1980s. “But, adding them up as best we can, we come up with a figure of six million people killed – and this is a minimum figure. Included are: one million killed in the Korean War, two million killed in the Vietnam War, 800,000 killed in Indonesia, one million in Cambodia, 20,000 killed in Angola… and 22,000 killed in Nicaragua. These people would not have died if U.S. tax dollars had not been spent by the CIA to inflame tensions, finance covert political and military activities and destabilize societies.”
Since Stockwell’s estimation, an additional 1.5 million Iraqis have died, 500,000 of them children, in two invasions and a medieval sanctions regime lasting over a decade. Countless thousands more, apparently unworthy of tally, have died in the war on terror in Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, and elsewhere in the Middle East and Africa.
The ISIS War, predicted to last decades, if not indefinitely, will add thousands more to the ever growing death toll.
Almost as stunning as the death toll is how easy it is to brainwash the American public to either cheerlead mass destruction and murder, or sit on the sidelines, effectively mute (George W. Bush called the antiwar movement during the second invasion of Iraq a “focus group,” and, in essence, it was).
Propaganda Victory: Brainwashed Masses Support Mass Murder
Thanks to corporatized mass media propaganda, polls consistently show high numbers in favor of perpetual war against ISIS, the latest prefabricated enemy.
A Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll “found indications that more people were coming to believe the U.S. should play a more active role on the world stage, a shift from Journal/NBC surveys earlier this year that found war-weary Americans wanting to step back from foreign engagements.”
Nearly half of polled Americans support airstrikes – the most recent killing children, not ISIS militants – and 34 percent favor sending ground troops into Iraq and Syria. As staged non-beheadings continue, this number is likely to rise.
“The crimes of the U.S. throughout the world have been systematic, constant, clinical, remorseless, and fully documented but nobody talks about them,” remarked dramatist Harold Pinter.
Increasingly, thanks to the internet, currently more or less unmolested and free, these crimes have seen the light of day. Infowars.com and the alternative media have exposed ISIS, al-Qaeda, al-Nusra and, most recently, Khorasan, as covert intelligence and military operations, but despite this, if we can believe corporate polls, the American people favor going to war, forever.
“The American public contains a large number of misinformed people who think they know everything,” Paul Craig Roberts wrote prior to the onslaught of ISIS war propaganda. “These people have been programmed by US and Israeli propaganda to equate Islam with political ideology. They believe that Islam, a religion, is instead a militarist doctrine that calls for the overthrow of Western civilization, as if anything remains of Western civilization… Western civilization is a skeleton.”
Coup de Grâce: Endless War Designed to Destroy America
Financially speaking, the United States is picked to the bone, a skeleton as Roberts suggests. The American people now shoulder an astounding debt, much of it directly attributable to the endless wars of the global elite. The Iraq invasion alone cost outright $1.7 trillion with an additional $6 trillion owed (with interest, of course, due to bankers) over the next four decades, according to the Costs of War Project by the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University.
At the start of Obama’s ISIS War earlier this month, it was estimated the United States would spend a $100 million per week bombing civilians in order to take out a handful of Islamic State fighters. In late August, the figure was pegged at $7.5 million a day in Iraq alone. Analysts at the Pentagon estimate it will eventually cost the American people $15 billion to $20 billion a year to conduct the ISIS War.
Back in 2004, a video supposedly released by arch nemesis Osama bin Laden said the war on terror is a policy of “bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy.” The Saudi Wahhabist said the CIA’s mujahideen did the same thing to the Soviet Union. “We, alongside the mujahedeen, bled Russia for 10 years until it went bankrupt and was forced to withdraw in defeat,” bin Laden, or somebody claiming to be bin Laden, said.
Because Osama bin Laden died in late 2001, we can only assume the plan to bleed America was engineered by his known and well-docuemnted benefactor – the CIA, the intelligence agency designed by Wall Street lawyers and directed by “deputy directors… drawn from the Wall Street financial aristocracy,” as Mark Gaffney notes.

Article printed from Infowars: http://www.infowars.com
URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/the-real-network-of-death/
Copyright © 2013 Infowars. All rights reserved.

ISIS: The Case for Skepticism


ISIS: The Case for Skepticism

Jack Kerwick

9/26/2014 12:01:00 AM - Jack Kerwick
There is much talk about “the Islamic State,” or “ISIS,” or “ISIL,” or whatever we are calling it. To listen to the talking heads, both Democrats and Republicans, one could be forgiven for thinking that these 15,000 or so Muslim butchers are the biggest threat that the Western world has ever faced.
Of course, as is almost always the case, there is all of the difference in the world between the conventional wisdom and reality.
By now, no one who’s been alive for more than a few years, and certainly no one who has acquired affection for liberty, needs to be told that the government and its apologists in the media are not infrequently less than fully honest. So, when a bipartisan consensus emerges over any issue of the day, those of us who have long ago tired of cheerleading for one team or the other shouldn’t respond with anything other than skepticism.
And when politicians and polemicists of both national parties would have us believe that this issue is greater than any other, those who have been deceived one too many times can’t but meet such assurances with anything less than incredulity.
This lover of liberty is saying it: The notion that ISIS is an imminent danger that America must either face or be destroyed is a lie of epic proportions. It is also the offspring of the union of the same two factors—political opportunism and alarmism—that beget every national “crisis.”
There are two decisive considerations that bear this out.
First, if we are really all that interested in protecting ourselves against threats to our national security, and if we really believe that Islamic terrorists constitute the gravest danger, then one of the most rudimentary things that we need to do is to identify the enemy for what it is. It’s a cliché, but it’s true, that the first step toward defeating a problem is to acknowledge that there is one. This, in turn, requires that the problem be properly diagnosed.
However, this is something that Democrats and Republicans resolutely refuse to do.
Democrats can scarcely, if ever, bring themselves to even utter the word “Islamic” in connection with terrorism, and President Obama, even while addressing the nation with respect to ISIS, goes so far as to insist that this is not an Islamic organization!
Republicans, though, are hardly any better. While they (rightly) criticized Obama for making such a wildly preposterous statement, Republicans regularly imply that “World War IV,” as neoconservative writer Norman Podhoretz characterizes “the War on Terror,” has nothing to do with Muslims or Islam.
Rather, the fight to which Republicans want for Americans to commit their collective heart and soul is a fight against “radical Islam,” “Islamism,” “Islamo-fascism,” “Islamo-nazism,” “Islamic extremism,” and whatever other names they can invent to conceal the nature and identity of the enemy.
Since they are so fond of drawing parallels between the so-called “War on Terror”—notice, even here they can’t bring themselves to say Islamic terror—and World War II, we can ask Republicans: What would have happened if the Allied forces during WWII distinguished between “radical Nazis” and “moderate Nazis,” or “fascist extremists” and “moderate fascists?”
Muhammad, the founder of Islam, set the precedent for violence generally, and beheadings specifically, when, upon conquering his enemies, he decapitated, en masse, 700 of them. Those against whom we are now being urged to fight aren’t “radicals” or “extremists,” and they certainly aren’t “Islamists.”
They are Mohammedans.
But Republicans exhibit as much illiteracy—or dishonesty—when it comes to talk of Islam and Islamic terror as do the Democrats.
Secondly, anyone who carries on ad infinitum over the threat of ISIS while doing anything less than demanding an immediate moratorium on all immigration—both illegal and legal—to the United States is either a fool, a liar, or both.
As Brietbart reported last week, in just 2014 alone, a little under 500 illegal immigrants from terrorist-sponsoring countries have been apprehended sneaking across our southern border. To put this number in perspective, it should be remembered that it took only 19 terrorists to bring about the fateful events of September 11, 2001.
And, lest it bears saying, it takes only one terrorist to detonate a bomb and slaughter thousands.
Yet not only hasn’t a single one of the politicians or media sensationalists who are now breaking out into cold sweats over ISIS come even close to calling for an abrupt halt on all immigration; they aren’t even calling to take the most rudimentary of steps in sealing our infamously porous borders.
Recall as well that many of these same people have advocated on behalf of amnesty (“comprehensive immigration reform”).
If Islamic terrorists compose the single most terrible danger with which Western civilization has to reckon, then those who believe this should invest a fraction of the energy they spend fretting over the borders of Middle Eastern countries into displaying some concern for our own borders.
Unless and until this happens—and I’m not holding my breath—no one with a modicum of intelligence should fail to recognize the buzz over ISIS for the hyperbole that it is.

Pentagon Press Secretary: ISIS Fight will be 'Long Struggle'

 Thu, September 25, 2014