Wednesday, April 15, 2015

Hillary Clinton – Elitist Trojan Horse Puppet For War

An elitist stab at the continuation of the bogus "war on terror" at all costs  

By Finian Cunningham

Hillary Clinton this week launched her bid for the US presidential elections in 2016. Among the copious coverage in Western media was the small but highly significant detail: her presidential campaign will have a war chest of $2.5 billion. 

Clinton: Evil personified
The former US Senator and Secretary of State is said to have a personal net worth of between $50-100 million. However, if she is selected by the Democratic party to make a run for the White House most of her presidential campaign will be bankrolled by corporations and super-wealthy backers like financier George Soros through his Democracy Alliance foundation. That alone tells where her political loyalties and priorities lie. 

It is an indication of how warped US politics has become when Hillary Rodham Clinton is lambasted by Republicans as a "liberal." 

Clinton voted for both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars in 2001 and 2003 under George W Bush during her time in the Senate – wars that killed more than one million people and whose nefarious legacy persists for the Central Asia and Middle East regions. 

Later as Secretary of State in the Obama administration, Clinton pushed for the US-NATO destabilisation of Syria through covert support of terrorist proxies – a dirty war that still rages on. And she earnestly advocated the US-NATO bombing of Libya, also in 2011, which resulted in the overthrow and murder of Muammar Gaddafi and turned that once stable prosperous country into an ongoing cesspit of internecine violence. Publicly, she gloated about the horrific video-lynching of Gaddafi with the sickening joke: "We came, we conquered, he died." 

It was Clinton who also takes responsibility for ratcheting up the current US aggression towards Russia. Back in March 2009, she was photographed jokingly presenting Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov with a mock "reset button." That was supposed to herald a new era of partnership between Washington and Moscow. The reset button was quickly jettisoned by the US. Nearly three years later in December 2012, Clinton changed course sharply when she denounced the incipient Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) between Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan as "the re-Sovietisation" of the region. 

Clinton said back in 2012 of the EEU: "There is a move to re-Sovietise the region. It won’t be called that but make no mistake about it. We know what the goal is and we are trying to figure out effective ways to slow it or prevent it."

By the end of 2013, Washington had figured out a way to thwart Vladimir Putin pursuing neighbourly relations, by instigating an illegal coup in Ukraine to usher in a Neo-Nazi regime. That regime has waged a war of aggression on Russia’s western border for the past year that has resulted in thousands of civilian deaths and more than one million refugees, invoking memories of the Ukrainian-assisted Nazi holocaust of the Second World War. 

Therefore the only thing "liberal" about Clinton’s political record is liberal use of naked American state violence and lawlessness in pursuit of policy objectives. 

On launching her presidential credentials at the weekend, Clinton’s Republican rivals or would-be rivals immediately fired the brickbats, accusing the 67-year-old former First Lady of being a "Washington insider" and the "embodiment of all that is wrong" in US politics. It’s a charge that easily sticks. Clinton has become a household name ever since her husband, Bill, became president for two terms back in 1993. The couple may have been «dead broke» when they left the White House, but they have made up for it ever since through their corporate-funded Clinton Foundation, thus joining the wealthy elite that resides and operates in the Washington Beltway. 

Among the donors to the Clinton Foundation, a supposedly humanitarian concern, are foreign governments, including the despotic royal rulers of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who between them have donated over $20 million even while she was working at the State Department between 2009-2012. Only the wilfully gullible could believe that such largesse did not influence Clinton’s decision-making as Secretary of State, or in the future if she becomes president of the US. 

The unintended irony of Clinton’s Republican detractors, who include rabid rightwing Senators Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, as well as the maverick Senator Rand Paul, is that every single one of them will have to spend similar amounts of cash in their anticipated presidential campaigns. 

Indeed, any other contender for the race to the White House will likewise have to find billions of dollars to fund their campaign. That is a paramount necessity. All of them will have to court the favours of corporate donors and wealthy individuals. In that regard, all American presidential candidates are by definition "Washington insiders." They are all beholden to Wall Street banks, the mega corporations of the military-industrial complex, the oil companies, the Israeli and Saudi lobby and the financial aristocracy personified by Soros and others.

So, in substance, there is no difference between any of the American presidential candidates, whether they are Democrat or Republican. All are bought-and-paid-for by the top one per cent of super-rich in American society. 

What will emerge is a contest over perception and image-making. Already Clinton’s campaign-launch shows that she has has invested in slick advertising techniques to sell her image. Her campaign video features a diverse collection of "ordinary Americans" who tell of their hopes for success in personal and work matters. Clinton appears in the two-minute video for only half the allotted time. She is seen standing outside a suburban home (rather than her own two palatial mansions) and she tells viewers: "Everyday Americans need a champion, and I want to be that champion."

Clinton’s campaign over the next year is expected to focus on improving the economic benefits to working families and on the issue of income inequality, which has exploded in the US. How Clinton proposes to address those problems remains to be seen. She is said to be an advocate of increasing the minimum wage and for helping working mothers with childcare financial aid.

Such policy measures are tokenism given the scale of chronic wealth inequality that has been building over past decades across the US. It is reckoned that the top richest 400 individuals now possess wealth equivalent to the bottom half of the entire US population – or some 155 million Americans. 

Nobel winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has called the US a "failed economy" in which inequality has become a structural condition. 

But any politician in Washington who puts forward structural remedies for a structural problem will have no chance of entering the presidential campaign, never mind winning it. One such remedy to systematic inequality in the US is to introduce a thorough progressive tax system that comprehensively redistributes wealth from the financial oligarchy to the wider population. Decades of policy favouritism to the rich – under both Republicans and Democratic administrations alike – must be reversed.

However, such a campaign ticket would simply not happen. It is not so much that the wider American public would not rally to such a call. They most likely would. But in the anti-democratic, plutocratic system that is the US, it is simply the case that any potential contender with a structural remedy would be excluded from even getting near the race starting line by the corporate funding machine.

The financial oligarchy that pays for all presidential candidates is not a turkey that votes for Christmas. It will make sure that all the candidates – who need to raise billions of dollars to have any chance of entering the contest – do not in anyway threaten the privileges of the one per cent.

Incumbent president, Barack Obama, is a case in point. He cynically used the emotional plea of "Yes, we can make a change" when he ran for election in 2008 as the first African-American. Since then Obama has emerged as a dutiful servant of Wall Street and big business, as well as the Pentagon corporations, «earning» in the process a personal net worth of $ 5-10 million. 

Clinton is likewise playing on the emotional appeal to Americans to vote for the "first female president." In other words, the "hope and change" nostrum is reprised all over again. 

However, if American voters fall for that chimera, they will inevitably end up bitterly disappointed – again. America’s social, political and economic collapse is structural. The disease is a symptom of the historical demise of capitalism into a parasitic speculative, moribund system. No one in Washington can offer an effective solution because of the ring-fencing through Big Money. Hillary Clinton and all her rivals from America’s two main parties are hermetically sealed-in to ensure the one per cent are not in any way threatened with radical overhaul. That’s why the system is in terminal collapse. It has no way of correcting itself. 

Americans will see no change under a Hillary Clinton presidency except for further deterioration in their social conditions. The rest of the world, and Russia in particular, can be sure that Clinton will pursue more of the same militaristic aggression that characterised her four-year stint as Washington’s top diplomat. 

Whether described as "liberal," "conservative" or "hawk" – all American presidential candidates are the same in practice. Puppets for sale.

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.

Japan Court Halts Restart Of Two Reactors In Blow To Nuclear Sector

Japanese judiciary finally steps in to halt restart insanity    

By Kentaro Hamada

A Japanese court on Tuesday issued an injunction to prevent the restart of two reactors citing safety concerns, in a blow to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's push to return to atomic energy four years after the Fukushima crisis.

It is the second court ruling in less than a year against reactors operated by Kansai Electric Power, the country's most nuclear-reliant utility before Fukushima.

The ruling is a snub to Japan's beefed up nuclear safety after Fukushima and threatens to set back government plans to restart reactors deemed safe by the atomic regulator.

Kansai's reactors, located on the coast of Fukui prefecture in western Japan, have met basic safety regulations set by Japan's Nuclear Regulatory Agency (NRA) and were expected to be restarted some time this year.

"Don't worry men and remember, all you have to do is
"The fact that the court ruled in favor of the injunction after regulators had already given the go-ahead carries weight and will have an impact," said Hiroshi Segi, a former judge who is now critical of the judicial system because he feels it is often reluctant to challenge government policy. Local residents had sought an injunction against the No. 3 and 4 reactors at Takahama, arguing that restart plans underestimated earthquake risks, failed to meet tougher safety standards and lacked credible evacuation measures.

Safety at the Takahama plant west of Tokyo cannot be assured and the regulator's standards "lack rationality," according to a copy of the ruling obtained by Reuters.

"This is a decision that has a decisive impact on nuclear restarts," Yuichi Kaido, a lawyer for the plaintiffs told a group of supporters outside the court, who cheered and waved banners including one saying, "The judiciary is still alive".

Fukushima reactor smokes and burns after meltdown
Kansai Electric said it would appeal the decision, but it could mean months, even years of delays and hundreds of millions of dollars in losses for the utility, which is about to report a fourth annual loss since Fukushima.

Japan's top government spokesman said their would be no change in policy.

"There is no change to the government position to respect the NRA's decision and continue restarting plants," Yoshihide Suga told reporters.


The head of the Fukui court panel, Hideaki Higuchi, is regarded as a maverick in the conservative judiciary. He ruled against the restart of another Kansai Electric plant in May last year, delivering a scathing critique of the risk management of Japan's nuclear industry.

Legal efforts by Kansai Electric to have Higuchi and the two other judges on the panel removed failed last week.

Judges are now considering injunctions that could halt the restarts and indefinitely extend the countrywide shutdown of Japan's 43 operable reactors.

Millions of gallons of highly radioactive water not discharged directly into the Pacific now building up in leaking containment tanks at Fukushima

A ruling on a similar injunction against a Kyushu Electric Power Co plant in southern Japanis scheduled for April 22. Kyushu Electric's Sendai station is "very close" to being approved for restart, an official at the regulator told Reuters last week.

Legacy of Fukushima
For Abe, resuming nuclear power - which supplied nearly one-third of Japan's electricity pre-Fukushima - is key to lifting the economy out of two decades of anemic growth.

Kansai Electric forecasts an annual loss of 161 billion yen ($1.33 billion) because of the cost of burning fossil fuels for power generation, bringing losses since Fukushima to 744 billion yen. It said it could not quantify the losses it may incur because of the court decision.

The company serves Japan's second most important economic region, where companies including Panasonic Corp and Sharp Corp are headquartered.

Additional reporting by Mari Saito in TOKYO; Writing by Aaron Sheldrick; Editing by Ed Davies.

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.

TSA Agents Fired Over System To Fondle Male Genitals In Denver

Americans simply need to postpone non-essential air travel until TSA along with their crew of criminals and pedophiles are terminated once and for all; airlines facing bankruptcy guaranteed to solve the problem immediately


Two Transportation Security Administration officials at Denver International Airport (DIA) have been fired for conducting a scam on male passengers. A male and female agent collaborated so the male could fondle the genitals of men he found attractive.

From day one TSA has been a happy hunting ground
for pedophiles, homosexual deviants and felons
At some point in 2014, the male TSA agent told a female coworker that he “gropes” male passengers he finds attractive, and he asked her for help manipulating the system, according to law enforcement documents obtained by KCNC. “He related that when a male he finds attractive comes to be screened by the scanning machine he will alert another TSA screener to indicate to the scanning computer that the party being screened is a female. When the screener does this, the scanning machine will indicate an anomaly in the genital area and this allows [the male TSA screener] to conduct a pat-down search of that area,” the documents said.

Enhanced pat-downs were introduced by the TSA in 2010, and are “primarily used to resolve alarms that occur at a walk-through metal detector, if an anomaly is detected during screening with advanced imaging technology (AIT), or during random screening,” according to the agency’s blog. Pat-downs are conducted by same gender officers.

Pat-downs are conducted by same gender officers.

A TSA official turned in the two employees in November, but it took three months before the agency took action.

On February 9, in response to the anonymous tip, TSA security supervisor Chris Higgins watched the DIA screening area, observing the employees.

“At about 0925 he observed [the male TSA screener] appear to give a signal to another screener… [the second, female screener] was responsible for the touchscreen system that controls whether or not the scanning machine alerts to gender-specific anomalies,” the law enforcement documents said.

Higgins then watched a male passenger enter the scanner at DIA “and observed [the female TSA agent] press the screening button for a female. The scanner alerted to an anomaly, and Higgins observed [the male TSA screener] conduct a pat down of the passenger’s front groin and buttocks area with the palm of his hands, which is contradictory to TSA searching policy.”

Americans not only allowing TSA pedophiles to freely
molest their children, they stand in submission watching
as they do it
Then Higgins interviewed the female agent he saw participating in the manipulation, according to KCNC.

She “admitted that she has done this for [the male TSA officer] at least 10 other times. She knew that doing so would allow [the male TSA officer] to perform a pat down on a male passenger that [the male TSA screener] found attractive,” Higgins wrote in the report.

“These alleged acts are egregious and intolerable,” a spokesperson for TSA said in a brief written statement to KCNC. “TSA has removed the two officers from the agency. All allegations of misconduct are thoroughly investigated by the agency. And when substantiated, employees are held accountable.”

Earlier in April, KCNC asked a prosecutor from the Denver District Attorney’s Office to review the case, but she declined to press charges because there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction and no victim had been identified.

Previously, the TSA denied that its agents abuse their authority by targeting attractive people.

TSA pedophiles have a field day molesting children - every 
In a blog post responding to allegations made by a Texas woman that TSA agents at Dallas International Airport subjected her to a full body imaging scan three times and told her that her figure was “cute,” the agency wrote, “First, I want to reassure all passengers that TSA does not profile passengers.” The post, titled ‘TSA Officers Focus on Security, not Good Looks’, noted that the imaging system software only shows the outline of a generic person. 

However, the blog did not address whether agents could manipulate the alert system to re-scan whomever they want, as the two fired Denver officials were found to have done.

The TSA switched away from previous software in 2011 and completely removed the backscatter machines that were nicknamed “naked scanners” by June 2013, after years of complaints and following serious concerns over their inability toprotect the privacy of passengers. 

"Nice package there…fella…"
A 2014 study found that those types of scanners were ineffectiveat finding smuggled weapons, especially the explosive C-4. It’s not the first time that TSA agents at DIA have been accused of inappropriate touching.

In December 2013, Jamelyn Steenhoek, 39, accompanied her 13-year-old daughter to a departure gate at DIA when she was stopped for a pat-down. 

Although Steenhoek was not boarding a flight that day, she set off a security alarm at an airport checkpoint and attracted the attention of TSA officials.

After what she described as a “pretty invasive search” by a female TSA agent, Steenhoek filed a complaint with the Denver Police Department, which in turn opened an investigation into the incident. Criminal charges were not filed against the official.

According to district attorney spokesperson Lynn Kimbrough, two deputy district attorneys looked over the details of the 2013 incident, and both concluded that the case should be dropped along with any charges. She added the attorneys did not think they could prove the TSA’s pat-down had elements of abuse or gratification.

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.

Maybe You’ll Have Your Day in Court Again : Supreme Court's Dreadful Decisions

Lifetime appointments may not be such a good idea after all  


Hopefully you've never had a serious dispute with any of your credit card companies, or your bank, your investment broker, your mortgage lender, your cell phone service, your cable television provider, or increasingly just about everyone you contract with, even local merchants such as a gym or a tanning salon. 

Because deep in the legalese behind the checkbox that you clicked on the Internet labeled “Accept”, or in the text you never read before you signed a paper contract, is a policy that over half of U.S. businesses have adopted that says you can't take them to court if you have a disagreement. You can only submit to "arbitration."

Arbitration clauses began their proliferation in corporate contracts when the business-friendly Supreme Court in 2011 approved companies mandating it as the only option for settling a dispute. Of the 50 largest banks, by the following year 28 had already limited their checking account holders to arbitration. 

In a survey of 350 companies, the percent that allow only arbitration to 43% last year from 16% in 2012. In some categories, there is virtually no exception: 99.9% of cell phone users have — unwittingly, no doubt — agreed to arbitration as have 92% of prepaid cards and 86% of private student loan borrowers.

In a 2013 case, the Court then doubled down, allowing corporations to add a rule that forbids us from joining a class action to seek relief in a dispute. The Court said that we should not expect a "guarantee of an affordable procedural path."

The result, of course, is that consumers are left on their own to pursue a complaint — even though it may be a problem shared by hundreds or even thousands of others — because they are barred from joing the others to form a class by the rules the company forced upon them. The cost of a lawyer to battle as an individual a battalion of attorneys at giant corporations is prohibitive. Consumers are forced to leave the money on the table and surrender. "Forget it. It's impossible. Not even worth trying", says a lawyer with Public Justice, a D.C. non-profit. [3]

The effect of the Supreme Court's decision is to hand victory over consumers to corporations without a fight. The number of arbitration claims for amounts under $1,000 have been driven almost to extinction. 


The Consumer Finance Protection Bureau was created by the Dodd-Frank reform law, and it required that the new agency study the arbitration question. It took three-years to produce a just-issued 728-page report that concluded what anyone who has been subjected to arbitration could have come up with over a lunch break, namely, that arbitration lets businesses act against customers with impunity and customers regularly lose. If the CFPB does what it was created for, we could at least see a bitterly fought battle against business interests and their lobbying organization, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. At least the practice is finally being contested in the open, or so it should be hoped.

But for the years any improvement will take, the deck is stacked in favor of business. Companies are now even making acceptance of arbitration for dispute resolution a condition of employment, stifling employees who may at some pint have claims of wage theft, discrimination or other labor law matters. 

The suppression of their complaints serves to make illegal conduct by businesses invisible.

Under arbitration the complainant and the corporation's representative go before usually a single individual from a firm that specializes in judging disputes. The arbitrator hears both sides and renders a binding decision. So much simpler and economical than a court trial. Problem is, the arbitration firm chosen and hired by the corporation. If that firm decides against the corporation more than a token number of times, they lose the corporation as a client. A 2011 “Frontline” documentary on PBS showed the example of First USA, a company that handles credit card transactions. It had won 19,618 cases in arbitration. How many cases did card users win? 87.


When a bank or corporation demands that we agree not to join a class action should we ever have a dispute, we cannot exactly go down the street to another bank, or search out another credit card company because they have developed what could be called a monopoly of policy that shuts us out if we don't submit. 

Best protection consumers have now is the FCRA (Fair
As an example of what is lost in the Supreme Court's several decisions that chip away at class action, consider the case brought against a major bank a few years back. 

Say you pay several bills at once online which in total will accidentally lead to an overdraft. 

The bank's computer algorithms were written to process the biggest payments first so as to reach overdraft quickest, and then charge an overdraft penalty such as $35 for each of the smaller payments that were deliberately processed last. In a class action against Wells Fargo in 2010 the bank's clients were awarded $203 million for such practices. By its 2013 ruling the Supreme Court is effectively saying to consumers, atop whining. Just pay the multiple fines to the bank and move on.

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.



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

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



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

The Empire and the inevitable fall of the Obama criminal regime

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.



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.



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...



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


 photo TAMIFLU_small_zpssojx6okt.jpg

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...



 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 . . .



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.