Saturday, April 19, 2014

The Aggressive Feminine Face Of U.S. Diplomacy

Unqualified, prone to hysterics:  Obama cynically employs hatchet-women to take the heat for him thinking they will get a "break" for simply being shrieking, lying, psychotic harpies

STRATEGIC CULTURE FOUNDATION
By Nikolai Bobkin
04/18/2014

The United States is represented in the UN by Samantha Power, who recently has been shocking diplomats with her hysterical retorts, unpredictable behavior and invective from the podium of the world's main international organization. The lady who has been nicknamed Obama's "humanitarian hawk" is in such a rage over the impotence of the U.S. in Ukraine that occasionally she spouts total nonsense: that Russia has no right to forget that it is the loser, not the winner, that Moscow's behavior is outrageous because by blackmailing the U.S. with nuclear weapons, Moscow is humiliating America, etc.


Clinton
In general, one of the most outstanding drama queens of recent years in the American establishment is Hillary Clinton. Under Obama, she ran America, and not the president; Obama just echoed her.


That was how it was when they killed Gadhafi, and when they started the war in Syria, and when they introduced paralyzing sanctions against Iran. There's no denying that Hillary is a strong-willed woman who admits that she does not want to "stay home and bake cookies and have teas".


But could Obama not have known that during the presidency of her husband Bill, many matters were decided by his frenetic wife? Hillary never concealed this: "If I didn’t kick his (Bill's) ass every morning, he’d never amount to anything". Now no one would say that President Clinton achieved much for America in foreign policy. In the end, Hillary's kicks only led to President Clinton being best known for the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal.


Obama hiding behind Susan "Butch" Rice on Benghazigate
During the 2006 presidential primaries, Samantha Power called Hillary Clinton a "monster", after which she was forced to leave Obama's election staff.


Not for long, however; she soon returned as a Special Assistant to the president and a member of the National Security Council. Obama's passion for working on military issues in meetings with women is surprising.



Power went from supporting General Wesley Clark's presidential campaign in 2004 to participating as a volunteer in the Washington office of U.S. Senator Barack Obama. 
Why he gave her the job of reviewing the U.S. Army/Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual, associated with the name of General David Petraeus, is still a mystery to American military personnel. There is not now and never has been any hint that she is competent in military questions. There is an implacable hatred toward everything which does not coincide with her "journalistic" conception of American ideals. "The United States must also be prepared to risk the lives of its soldiers" to stop the threat of genocide, Power wrote. It is one thing to write, but another to represent the U.S. at the UN.


U.S. Embarrassment to UN:  Samantha Power
Power started as an independent journalist during the Bosnian War when she was just over twenty. She ardently welcomed American intervention and the air war which followed. Even then Power advocated the dispatch of American troops to fight against the Serbs, while fiercely attacking Russia. Having become a staunch supporter of American and NATO military interventions, she began to see war as the best means for achieving the ends of U.S. foreign policy.


The blood and suffering of civilians do not disturb her. Power is a politician with the delusional idea of upholding human rights and democracy using bombs and missiles. This ideology has no geographical boundaries: that's how it was in Yugoslavia, that is how the Americans are behaving in the Middle East, and that is how they are planning to act in Ukraine. Samantha Power is prepared to go to war with the people of Ukraine.


Liar extraordinaire, uber-narcissist Marie Harf
If there was ever a time when the United States should have been concerned about human rights violations in Ukraine, it is now. The head of Russia's Foreign Ministry, Sergei Lavrov, warned U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry that if Kiev uses force against the residents of southeast Ukraine, the prospects for further cooperation with Washington on Ukraine will be undermined.


The U.S. must immediately cease making insulting remarks about Russia and subdue its unruly UN representative, who during the Security Council discussion on Ukraine and the Crimea could not sit still and was literally running around the room. The diplomat ran up to the Russian UN ambassador and began to shout at him. Vitaly Churkin took the lady by the arm and asked her to step away from him and not spit. The hysterical Power had to be calmed by support personnel. Such excesses are the reason for Vitaly Churkin's statement that Russia does not intend to tolerate the rude behavior of the American administration any longer.


Prone to hysterics:  Jen Psaki
The fact that the tone in the anti-Russian campaign is being set by American women bureaucrats does not reduce the responsibility of the U.S. leadership.For example, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki cannot be considered a political figure; her job is merely to make public the official position of the foreign policy agency. 

However, she takes the liberty of drawing personal inferences and conclusions which, like Samantha Power's behavior in the UN, are simply shocking.


The official State Department representative does not bother with proof. Psaki's answers to journalists' questions sometimes cause indignation. Female logic is no excuse in this case.

If spokeswoman Psaki shapes U.S. foreign policy, then what is Secretary of State John Kerry there for? After all, she often contradicts his statements, making her boss a laughing stock.


Victoria Nuland:  "Fuck the EU"
Kerry's assistant Victoria Nuland does not care much about his authority either. Judging by her latest statements on Ukraine, she has her own position which differs from the official position of Washington. "Next week during the four-party talks on the situation in Ukraine, the United States will support the sovereignty of Ukraine, as well as its right to make its own choice. We will push the Russian Federation to demonstrate in word and deed that they are a good neighbor», said Victoria Nuland.


She has already decided for both Obama and Kerry that «the involvement of the Russian Federation in the process of amending the Constitution of Ukraine is impermissible". In such cases one usually inquires into the mental state of the patient; here there are clear signs that Ms. Nuland is out of touch with reality.


John Kerry:  Shrill, deluded, menopausal, loose
Moscow has not announced any of the concessions to which Victoria Nuland intends to "push" Moscow. The Kremlin does not intend to recognize those who carried out the coup in Kiev as the lawful government of Ukraine, and it has not withdrawn its proposal to discuss the issue of federalizing Ukraine.


Russia still retains the diplomatic initiative in Ukrainian affairs, and Washington, having accepted the fact that Sevastopol will never be a U.S. military base, has taken the Crimean question off its international agenda once and for all.



This news bureau contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

 

Political Lying : It’s Legal - Obama’s First-Amendment Defense of Political Liars

In today's America the truth is now classified as hate speech

GLOBAL RESEARCH
By Eric Zuesse
04/18/2014

President Obama, through his U.S. Solicitor General, arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court, has now stated that lying in political campaigns isn’t merely protected by the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech, but that it is an especially protected form of speech, which must not be hindered by any state government, such as by the state of Ohio. 
 
 
Ohio has outlawed such intentional deception of voters, and has established heavy criminal penalties against it, when it can be proven.
 
The idea behind this law is that any democracy in which lying in political campaigns isn’t penalized by severe penalties, won’t remain a democracy much longer, but will instead descend into a kleptocracy: theft of elections themselves (via lies), so that they become just nominal “elections,” which are controlled by whatever aristocrats can put up the most money, to lie the most effectively, to the biggest number of voters: lying-contests. 
 


It’s an important Supreme Court case. As Constitutional lawyer Lyle Denniston has noted, in his “Argument preview: Attack ads and the First Amendment“: “In all of the history of the First Amendment, the Court has never ruled that false statements are totally without protection under the Constitution.” However, this Supreme Court will have an opportunity to do that here, in the case SBA List v. Dreihaus; or else, to do the exact opposite — to open wide (even wider than they now are) the floodgates to political lies. 
 
 
Public opinion (e.g., this), and the President of the United States (via his Solicitor General, to be discussed here below), seem to favor opening the floodgates. If that were to happen, then the recently unleashed outpouring of sheer corporate and billionaire cash (via the Citizens United decision, and the more recent McCutcheon decision) into political contests, will become even more unrestrained by (and disconnected from) any consideration of the truthfulness (or not) of this “free speech,” so that the U.S. public will naturally be inundated by torrents, not only of aristocratic money pouring over public opinions, but of outright and provable lies financed by the richest aristocrats, polluting and poisoning those torrents, which will drench voters’ minds, and will thus poison political outcomes (which is why that money is spent — to do precisely this).

U.S. Solicitor General Donald B. Verilli Jr., in this case, SBA List v. Dreihaus, wrote to the U.S. Supreme Court, defending political liars’ rights:


This case does not require the Court to determine precisely when an alleged chilling of speech [by the threat of being prosecuted for lying in a political campaign] constitutes hardship [being suffered by that liar], because it presents that issue in a unique election-related context that makes the hardship to petitioners [the liars] particularly clear. Petitioners [the liars] have sufficiently alleged that a credible threat of prosecution will chill them from engaging in [deceptive] speech relating to elections for public office, the very type of speech to which the First Amendment ‘has its fullest and most urgent application.’ Eu v. San Francisco Cnty. Democratic Cent. Comm., 489 U.S. 214, 223 (1989) (quoting Monitor Patriot Co. v. Roy, 401 U.S. 265, 272 (1971)). As petitioners explain (Br. 40), under Ohio law, candidates who are the subject of such [lying] speech can try to silence it by complaining to the [Electoral] Commission and thereby tying up the speaker [the liar] in administrative litigation during the short window of time in which the electoral speech [that person’s lie] would be most effective [at deceiving voters].4

The court of appeals largely disregarded these considerations in favor of focusing on evidence suggesting that the Commission proceedings [the investigation into the lie] did not actually deter [the liar] SBA List from disseminating its message [its lie]. Pet. App. 17a-18a. The court correctly recognized that evidence of how agency action [the investigation into that alleged lie] has affected a plaintiff’s conduct is an important factor in the hardship analysis. In this case, however, SBA List’s particular reaction to the Commission proceedings during the 2010 election cycle does not eliminate the objectively credible threat of prosecution that petitioners [SBA List] face if they engage in similar [lying] speech in future election cycles.


When Obama’s mouthpiece there, Verilli, quoted the phrase that’s quoted in “the First Amendment ‘has its fullest and most urgent application’,” in relation to this particular case and context, he was actually quoting from a case in which the court was saying in regard to “California’s prohibition on primary [party] endorsements by the official governing bodies of political parties,” that (as that ruling said), “Indeed, the First Amendment ‘has its fullest and most urgent application’ to speech uttered during a campaign for political office.” That statement didn’t refer at all to lying in political campaigns. However, this is the type of cheap shot that the President’s lawyer must take, in order to argue that lying is “the very type of speech to which the First Amendment ‘has its fullest and most urgent application.’’” He must lie in order to defend political lying as being protected by the U.S. Constitution. 
 
 
 

I have earlier argued that President Obama lied with exceptional skill in order to win the White House – and I say this as a Democrat who is opposed to conservatives (supporters of lies) of all parties, including the Democratic Party. So: Obama is really defending here his own practices, which won him the White House. This conservative “Democrat” is so gifted a politician that he could probably have won it with no lies at all, but he took the easy path, and now he is defending it as a matter of alleged Constitutional principle.

He’s on the same side in this as the overt Republicans are. For example, the friend-of-court brief on behalf of the Koch brothers’ Cato Institute and their comedian P.J. O’Rourke, argued in this case that, “No one should be concerned that false political statements won’t be subjected to careful examination” (perhaps by historians, after the liar has been elected and long-since collected his reward, and the honest politician has sunk into obscurity). 
 
 
It’s a race to the bottom they want, and conservative Democrats want it just as much as Republicans do. 
 
Cato/O’Rourke then went on to say: “A prohibition on lying devalues the truth. ‘How can you develop a reputation as a straight shooter if lying is not an option?’” In other words: We must allow deception of voters, because otherwise all politics would be honest — and that would be bad (for crooks like them, because politics then wouldn’t continue to be a lying-contest: the type where any real ‘straight shooter’ can’t have even any realistic chance at all of winning). Champion liars want to continue maintaining their advantage, not to yield it; and any law that’s enforced against political liars will remove their existing huge political advantage. Conservatives would still have most aristocratic money on their side, but no longer an unrestrained freedom to spread lies financed by that cash-advantage that they naturally enjoy. 
 
 
 

With Obama arguing on the Republican side, and the Republicans arguing on the Republican side, how will the Republican U.S. Supreme Court rule on this matter? Let’s guess.

It could be the final nail in the coffin of democracy in America: the official full implementation of aristocracy, plutocracy, oligarchy, crony capitalism, or whatever else one would call it. Maybe “fake democracy”? Oh, I forgot: we’re already there. But this would take us much farther there.

If the reader wants to know how deeply the public has already been duped, just check out, for starters (besides that piece where I earlier argued that President Obama lied with exceptional skill in order to win the White House), these:

Ukraine: Is Obama Channeling Cheney?

The Nazis Even Hitler Was Afraid Of

Ukrainian Neo-Nazis Declare that Power Comes Out of the Barrels of their Guns

Privatization Is A Ramp For Corruption, and Insouciance Is a Ramp for War

And the Ukraine matter is just the tip of the lying iceberg here, several other portions of which I’ve covered extensively at Huffington Post and elsewhere.

Lying in politics is toxic to democracy. It’s destroying not only this country, but the entire world. Obama wants to protect it, just like he protected the banksters from prosecution.
 


This news bureau contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

 

New MRSA -Type Superbug Identified In Brazil : Spread By Skin Contact, Affects The Healthy And Sick

These methicillin-resistant bacteria do not magically appear in nature; given big pharma's history of experimenting on the poor in South America this could well be an "escaped" superbug

MEDICAL DAILY
By Susan Scutti
04/18/2014

Scientists have identified a new superbug in a Brazilian patient that falls within the methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) class and is thought to spread by skin contact. 
 
 
MRSA
The team of scientists led by Dr. Cesar A. Arias of the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston warned the new MRSA superbug has the ability to invade the bloodstream and might affect healthy people as well as those who are sick or have compromised immune systems. 
 
“This is the first-ever reported bloodstream infection caused by a highly vancomycin-resistant MRSA bacteria,” Arias said. His report appears in The New England Journal of Medicine.

Bacterial Infections

Generally, infection with S. aureus bacteria (a staph infection) causes no problems or results in relatively minor skin irritations. But a simple staph infection can turn deadly if the bacteria enter your bloodstream, joints, bones, lungs, or heart. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), one in three people carry staph in their nose, usually without any illness, while two in 100 people carry MRSA. Anyone can get MRSA through direct contact with an infected wound or by sharing personal items, such as towels or razors, that have touched infected skin. 
 
 
MRSA is a class of highly-resistant bacteria and a major cause of hospital and community-associated infections. The newly identified superbug has already acquired high levels of resistance to vancomycin, the most common and least expensive antibiotic prescribed when treating severe MRSA infections.
 
 
 The team and Arias, an associate professor of medicine, microbiology, and molecular genetics, say there’s even worse news: Their analyses revealed that the new superbug belongs to a genetic line commonly found outside hospitals. Such community-associated MRSA can disseminate rapidly within a population, spreading from person to person through skin contact alone, scientists believe.

In fact, community-associated MRSA is responsible for the majority of skin and soft tissue infections (sores) in patients of all ages. Although some are not serious, some of these infections can become fatal. Add to that the fact that the new superbug may affect healthy individuals as well as sick, with the ability to invade the bloodstream and may become a serious threat. “This is the first-ever reported bloodstream infection caused by a highly vancomycin-resistant MRSA bacteria,” Arias said in a press release.

Arias and his colleagues recovered the MRSA superbug from the blood of a 35-year-old Brazilian man. Through a microbiological and genetic analysis, the scientists identified a unique transferable element carrying the genes necessary for vancomycin resistance (vanA gene cluster). However, the team cautioned, it is too early to tell what this specific superbug might lead to since this is the single documented case of this type of infection.

“There will have to be increased surveillance in South America and worldwide in the future,” concluded Dr. Barbara E. Murray, co-author and director of the Division of Infectious Diseases at the UTHealth Medical School.

Source: Rossi F, Diaz L, Arias CA, et al. Transferable Vancomycin Resistance in a Community-Associated MRSA Lineage. New England Journal of Medicine. 2014.
 
 
This news bureau contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Watch A Congressional Candidate Shoot Down A "Government Drone" - VIDEO

And it is about time; U.S. patriots can utilize State Deadly Force laws to shoot down drones now said to number over 30,000 in America - operating illegally and in violation of the 4th Amendment:  FAA lies concerning "illegality" of shooting down drones that could be armed and sent to spy on, kill citizens

NATIONAL JOURNAL
By Alex Brown
04/16/2014

As a "government drone" hovers over Matt Rosendale, the Republican House candidate from Montana tells the camera what he thinks of government overreach, regulation, and "spying on our citizens."


In a first, The 5th Estate endorses Matt Rosendale
Then, standing in front of an ATV, Rosendale coolly puts a rifle to his shoulder, looks up through the sight and "downs" the drone with a single shot.

"The federal government is too big and too powerful," Rosendale says. "I'm ready to stand tall for freedom and get Washington out of our lives," he says.

Rosendale is trying to stand out in a five-way primary for Montana's at-large seat in the House.



Sporting a barn jacket and a flattop buzz cut, the state senator lowers the rifle and pledges to get the feds off his constituents' backs—or at least not hovering over their heads.

Montana is among the states that prohibit law enforcement from using drones without a warrant. On the federal level, U.S. Customs and Border Protection runs surveillance operations with its nine-drone fleet.


Citizens can't possibly know origin of illegal drones
Customs also loaned its drones to other agencies for surveillance missions 700 times over a three-year period, including to state and local departments.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation and other advocacy groups have expressed concern that these missions have strayed from the government's border-security directive.


Though it's unlikely the government has sent drones buzzing over Rosendale's property, which is in a small town not particularly close to the Canadian border, he's tapping into the sentiment that helped fuel Sen. Rand Paul's drone filibuster last year.

Paul envisioned a scenario in which the government could use a drone to take out an American "in a cafe in San Francisco" so long as the target was suspected of being a terrorist. The Obama administration responded that Americans not engaged in combat would not be the target of drone strikes on U.S. soil.


Drone manufacturers will be held personally accountable
Still, some—and not just Republicans—are concerned that the government's growing use of drones could lead to privacy overreaches if not kept in check. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said earlier this year a drone spied into her house and called for guidelines for law-enforcement use of the technology.



The ACLU and Electronic Frontier Foundation are among groups who hope to set strict boundaries for drone use by the government.

Shooting down a drone, however, is illegal, according to the Federal Aviation Administration.

Here's how the agency responded when a small town in Colorado made it legal to hunt drones: "A [drone] hit by gunfire could crash, causing damage to persons or property on the ground, or it could collide with other objects in the air. Shooting at an unmanned aircraft could result in criminal or civil liability, just as would firing at a manned airplane."

Rosendale isn't the first candidate to send a bullet at a chosen specter of big government. Obamacare and cap-and-trade have previously found themselves in candidates' crosshairs.






This news bureau contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.  We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANDREW KREIG: EXPERTS REJECT FIRE AS CAUSE FOR 9/11 WTC COLLAPSES

The real truth on 9/11 slowly continues to bleed out

 photo
Technical experts are mounting major challenges to official U.S. government accounts of how three World Trade Center skyscrapers collapsed in near-freefall after the 9/11 attacks 15 years ago.

Many researchers are focusing especially on the little-known collapse of

READ MORE >>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Geopolitics Of The United States, Part 1: The Inevitable Empire

The Empire and the inevitable fall of the Obama criminal regime

 photo
STRATFOR Editor’s Note: This installment on the United States, presented in two parts, is the 16th in a series of STRATFOR monographs on the geopolitics of countries influential in world affairs.

Like nearly all of the peoples of North and South America, most Americans are not originally from the territory that became the United States.

READ MORE >>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Geopolitics Of The United States Part 2: American Identity And The Threats of Tomorrow

A look back at 2011 predictions for the future in order to put events of today into perspective

 photo capitalism_zpsah78uy5p.jpg
We have already discussed in the first part of this analysis how the American geography dooms whoever controls the territory to being a global power, but there are a number of other outcomes that shape what that power will be like. The first and most critical is the impact of that geography on the American mindset.

READ MORE >>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


By Robert S. Finnegan

This e-mail outlines and confirms the acts of espionage against Indonesia and Indonesians by Akiko Makino and the others involved both in Kobe University and in AI Lab at University of Airlangga, Surabaya; Bahasa Indonesia original follows English translation...

READ MORE >>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATED 01/07/2015 : New Analysis Challenges Tamiflu Efficacy; Hong Kong Corona Virus Outbreak

UPDATED 01/07/2015 : FOX NEWS CORPORATE PHARMA SHILL MEGAN KELLY AND FOX NEWS QUACK DOCTOR NOW PUSHING TAMIFLU FOR PREGNANT WOMEN AND CHILDREN;

 photo TAMIFLU_small_zpssojx6okt.jpg
THE 5TH ESTATE UNEQUIVOCALLY WARNS THE PUBLIC NOT TO TAKE OR GIVE THIS PROVEN DANGEROUS, INEFFECTIVE DRUG TO ANYONE

Obama criminals now resulting to biowarfare in quest to destroy Chinese and ASEAN economy; "novel virus substrain" points directly to a Kawaoka / Fouchier / Ernala-Ginting Kobe lab virus weaponized and genetically altered to specifically target and infect the Asian population: Ribavirin...

READ MORE >>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


 photo WHO02_zpsplmhtlpr.jpg
The 5th Estate has just purchased a library on H5N1 "Novel" virus pandemics, there are dozens of PDF and Exel documents we feel will assist you in saving lives following intentional releases of the H5N1 and now MERS viruses; we will begin by printing those that appear to be extremely relevant here: H5N1 Kobe-Kawaoka-Ernala series continues soon with more "Smoking Gun" e-mails from Teridah Ernala to The 5th Estate . . .

READ MORE >>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


By Robert S. Finnegan

On October 12, 2002 the Indonesian island of Bali experienced a terrorist attack that rocked the world. It was unquestionably well-coordinated and executed, the largest in the country's history.

READ MORE >>