Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Government-Sponsored Corporatism Leading to Rise of Populism

As we’ve often pointed out, there are three areas where judicial force has been applied, swelling corporations to titanic sizes.

The first is intellectual property rights.

If corporations had to protect their own trade secrets rather than relying on government to do it for them, it is very probable that many corporations would be a good deal smaller.

The second is corporate personhood.

Corporate personhood makes it a good deal easier for individuals to avoid culpability for corporate acts.

Those lodged within a corporation can often avoid penalties that would otherwise expose them to significant personal jeopardy. Because they stay in charge, continuity isn’t disrupted and exceptionally aggressive corporate strategies can be maintained.

The third area is monopoly central banking.

Monopoly fiat money benefits the world’s largest corporations inordinately. The money coming out of central banks, especially Western central banks, often finds its way to the largest multinationals first, providing significant liquidity to these massive entities.

Read the entire article

Friday, April 22, 2016

Dishonoring General Jackson

In Samuel Eliot Morison’s “The Oxford History of the American People,” there is a single sentence about Harriet Tubman.

“An illiterate field hand, (Tubman) not only escaped herself but returned repeatedly and guided more than 300 slaves to freedom.”

Morison, however, devotes most of five chapters to the greatest soldier-statesman in American history, save Washington, that pivotal figure between the Founding Fathers and the Civil War — Andrew Jackson.

Slashed by a British officer in the Revolution, and a POW at 14, the orphaned Jackson went west, rose to head up the Tennessee militia, crushed an Indian uprising at Horseshoe Bend, Alabama, in the War of 1812, then was ordered to New Orleans to defend the threatened city.

In one of the greatest victories in American history, memorialized in song, Jackson routed a British army and aborted a British scheme to seize New Orleans, close the Mississippi, and split the Union.

Read the entire article

Wednesday, April 20, 2016

THERE'S ONLY FREE SPEECH ON CAMPUS FOR ONE POINT OF VIEW

Every time one thinks American campus culture can't get any more ridiculous, a new standard in absurdity is set. 

Just last week we had three separate examples from different universities in different parts of America. The common theme through all of them, though, is that campus leftists claim to be offended by some speech or activity they don't like and demand that others be banned from saying or doing whatever they don't want them to say or do. 

It almost always follows this basic formula:


  • Someone on campus does or says something that leftist students claim is "offensive" to them;
  • Some sort of protest breaks out by said leftists, which may or may not include violence or property damage;
  • The protesters take their hurt feelings to campus administrators and demand the speech or activity be silenced or banned;
  • Administrators either cave to the demands of the leftists in an attempt to appease them or join forces with them in feigned outrage and twist logic and torture words trying to justify their banning of the speech or activity the leftists are protesting. It's quite pitiful.


Read the entire article

Monday, April 18, 2016

Obama Appeases Saudi Head-Choppers

Do we have a more unattractive “ally” than the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia? In order to find one, we have to go all the way back to World War II, when the US was allied with the Soviet Union while “Uncle” Joe Stalin was murdering millions in the gulag.

The big difference, however, is that the national security propaganda machine isn’t trying to glorify the head-chopping barbarians of Riyadh as they prettified the Soviets: Hollywood isn’t cranking out pro-Saudi movies as they did with the “workers’ paradise” in Song of Russia. Imagine a screenwriter scratching his head over Song of the Saudis! Op ed writers employed by the Saudi lobby aren’t excusing the execution of “heretics” as Popular Front propagandists once praised the Moscow Trials. Not even the Washington “experts” would fall for it. Saudi lobbying is more subtle, with pressure exerted on lawmakers and lots of cash being handed out – e.g. the Saudi “donations” to the Clinton Foundation.

This stealth strategy has been largely successful. Ever since Franklin Roosevelt met with King Abdul Aziz and cemented the US-Saudi relationship as the linchpin of our Middle Eastern policy, our government’s collusion with one of the worst tyrannies on earth has gone largely unexamined – until now.

The New York Times reports that the Kingdom is telling the Obama administration that they would be “forced” to sell some $750 billion in US assets if Congress passes a bill that would give a green light to lawsuits alleging that the Saudis played a key role in facilitating the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The families of the 9/11 victims have been pursuing the Kingdom in the courts for years, with judges routinely dismissing financial claims by the families on the grounds of “sovereign immunity,” i.e. the “legal” doctrine that governments cannot be held accountable for their actions. However, a little noticed Supreme Court decision reinstated the Saudis as defendants. The bill, sponsored by Senators John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Chuck Schumer (D-New York), has broad support: if passed, it would pave the way for a close examination of the evidence that the Saudi government had a hand in 9/11.

Read the entire article

Thursday, April 14, 2016

‘America First’ – The Trump Slogan the Establishment Hates

Why has the Establishment pulled out all the stops in an effort to smear him, stop him, and crush him underfoot? Every single day the “mainstream” media unleashes a foam-flecked fusillade of fury at the GOP front-runner: he’s a “racist,” he’s “corrupt,” his campaign manager is a “bully,” he “incites violence,” etc. etc. ad nauseam.

Of course, the media is going to attack any Republican candidate. However, this time, the GOP elite is joining in, and the level of ferocity is something we haven’t seen since 1964. That was the year Barry Goldwater’s trip to Germany provoked a report by Daniel Schorr on the CBS Evening News that falsely linked the GOP candidate to German neo-Nazis – while Nelson Rockefeller denounced Goldwater’s delegates as “extremists” who “feed on fear, hate, and terror.”

Yes, “terror”!

The same violence-baiting hysteria is being deployed against Trump, but one has to wonder what’s behind it. I was watching Bill O’Reilly the other day, and he was saying that it has to do with the elite’s visceral dislike of Trump as a personality. They think he’s a “vulgarian” who appeals to the rubes in flyover country. Well, there’s something to that: these consumers of arugula and “artisan” cheese no doubt disdain the hamburgers-and-beer crowd embodied by Trump’s persona, but there’s more to it than that. And I can sum it up in two words: foreign policy.

Yes, yes, I know: foreign policy isn’t supposed to figure in presidential elections. Dan Drezner keeps telling us that. And yet I couldn’t help but notice that the anti-Trump hysteria hit a high note (or is that a new low?) when he came out with a series of foreign policy pronouncements and started attacking NATO. The hairs on the back of the necks of the foreign policy wonks must’ve stood at attention when he adopted “America first” as his campaign slogan.

Read the entire article

Tuesday, April 12, 2016

Trump Explains How To Make Mexico Pay For Wall. MSM, Conservatism Inc. Don’t Want To Hear. Does Cruz?

It’s a rare occasion when the Daily Wire’s Ben Shapiro can say something nice about Donald Trump. But in response to Trump’s recent explanation of how he would force Mexico pay for the Trump Wall (by using the remittance weapon, like Israel), the fiercely anti-Trump pundit offered praise as well as the usual insults:

This idea is actually decent. If you wish to halt illegal immigration, preventing those who come illegally from sending money back home accomplishes this purpose. If you wish to pressure the Mexican government, preventing people from sending money back to Mexico accomplishes this purpose.

[Trump Trots Out His Plan To Force Mexico To Build A Wall. Surprise! It’s Not Bad, Daily Wire, April 5, 2016]

Of course, VDARE.com proposed this idea twelve years ago and has been monitoring the remittance issue ever since.

Read the entire article

Friday, April 08, 2016

The Revolt Against NATO

A recent report published in Foreign Policy magazine, a bastion of the internationalist Establishment, illustrates quite neatly how the anti-interventionist cause is making big gains – and how to effect real change in American foreign policy. The headline reads: “Senators Slam NATO ‘Free Riders’ in Closed Door Session With Secretary General,” and the story went on to relate how GOP Senators are suddenly complaining about how and why the burden of NATO falls largely on Uncle Sam’s sagging shoulders:

“For under an hour, senators grilled [NATO Secretary General Jens] Stoltenberg, a former prime minister of Norway, about why only five members of the 28-nation club spend at least 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense, the official amount NATO recommends each nation to set aside. Some expressed particular dissatisfaction with Germany, the fourth largest economy in the world, which does not meet the 2 percent threshold.”

Although the article claimed that Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tennessee) “and other US officials” have “blasted” our feckless allies for years over this imbalance, this is the first time we’ve heard about it. Why is that? Well, it’s because the Republican frontrunner, one Donald J. Trump, is making an issue of it, and even suggesting that NATO, which he says is “obsolete,” is a relic of the cold war that ought to be entirely abandoned.

This has the foreign policy Establishment in a panic, with legions of  “experts” rising up to denounce Trump’s heresy as misguided, absurd, and – of course! – “isolationist.” Yet the politicians can’t afford to be so dismissive: after all, they have to listen to their constituents, at least to some extent. And it’s quite telling what Sen. Corker – who has warned the “Never Trump” crowd to back off – had to say to Stoltenberg:

Read the entire article

Wednesday, April 06, 2016

Managed ‘leak’ targets Western foes, soft peddles right-wingers and American lackeys

The world has experienced leaks like the so-called “Panama Papers” before. A consortium of global corporate media entities are cherry-picking information from a purported leak of 11 million documents from the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca. The list was obtained by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), an NGO financially supported by George Soros’s Open Society Foundations and the Central Intelligence Agency-directed U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

The corporate media is playing up the connections of various off-shore tax-dodging contrivances and money laundering vehicles to a collection of world leaders. Instead of focusing on leaders who have direct connections to money laundering and tax evasion, the ICIJ, as is their usual method, is drawing “guilt by association” links to specific leaders. Not surprisingly, the chief target is Soros’s and the CIA’s number one foe—Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Rather than concentrate on direct links to such neoconservative darlings as Argentina’s new fascist-friendly president and Barack Obama’s best new friend Mauricio Macri, the ICIJ and its corporate journalists pals are claiming that the Panama Papers actually indict Putin because one of his old friends from St. Petersburg, cellist Sergei Rodulgin, is named in the leaked documents as a client of Mossack Fonseca. CBS News, the BBC, Newsweek, and other outlets led their reports on the Panama Papers by naming the culprits as “Putin and other world leaders.” No mention was made of Rodulgin because, as Russian government spokesman Dmitry Peskov maintained, the chief target of the “Putinophobic” ICIJ, Soros, and USAID was Putin and not friends from his past. Peskov also rightly stated that ICIJ has links to the U.S. government.

And, of course, the ICIJ, Soros, and USAID could not help themselves from linking, again indirectly, Mossack Fonseca to the impeachment charges against Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff and the investigation of her predecessor Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Also hyped by ICIJ and their co-conspirators Soros and USAID are fuzzy indirect links to Syrian President Bashar al Assad and the late Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi in the Panama Papers.

Read the entire article

Monday, April 04, 2016

UN Seeks “Unprecedented” Amount of Data to Impose Agenda 2030

The United Nations wants governments to provide more data — about everything. Apologists for tyranny and the widespread death it produces have long claimed that, if central planners only had more and better data with which to make decisions about your life, central planning might be less disastrous. Under the guidance of a senior Chinese Communist operative at the UN, humanity may be about to find out if that dubious claim is true — at least if there is not concerted action to stop the establishment's UN Agenda 2030 to “transform” the world.  

In its ongoing crusade to shackle the planet under the draconian UN vision, essentially an undisguised recipe for global socialism/fascism under the guise of “sustainable development,” the UN is demanding an “unprecedented” amount of data from every corner of the planet. Everything from the prevalence of UN indoctrination in schools to the subservience of national governments to the UN's immigration demands will be tracked, measured, and analyzed as part of the “indicators” used to more effectively impose the UN's sought-after transformation.

However, despite calling the data-gathering and -mining component the “final piece of the architecture for implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,” the Communist Chinese agent leading the relevant UN bureaucracy that oversees it all said much work still remained. “Completing the indicator framework is of course not the end of the story — on the contrary, it is the beginning,” said UN Under-Secretary-General for the Department of Economic and Social Affairs Wu Hongbo (shown), a key player in the emerging global system being imposed under UN Agenda 2030.    

“The SDG [Sustainable Development Goals] indicators will require an unprecedented amount of data to be produced and analyzed,” continued Wu, a high-level Communist Chinese operative who served as the brutal regime's “assistant foreign minister” prior to taking over the powerful post at the UN from another anti-American Chinese Communist named Sha Zakung. “And it is evident that this will pose a significant challenge for national statistical systems, in developing as well as developed countries.” Not to worry, though, the UN and its wealthier member governments have already promised to help those regimes ruling “developing” country to build up the necessary data-gathering tools.

Read the entire article

Thursday, March 31, 2016

President Trump? Who’s Who in Trump’s Foreign Policy Inner Circle? US War Machine Rolls On

Who’s Who in Trump’s Foreign Policy Inner Circle?

If, as the old adage goes, you are known by the company you keep, then we already know what to expect from a Trump presidency. While The Donald did not provide a complete list of his advisers, just the small sampling should give pause to anyone who has become enamored of the idea that Trump would tone down US foreign policy.

First up for scrutiny is Walid Phares, perhaps the most well known of Trump’s foreign policy team. Phares is a regular commentator on FOX News where he generally espouses more or less the same policies as any typical Washington neoconservative. Indeed, his pedigree and history place him squarely in the aggressive neocon camp, including as one of the main advisers (along with notable neocons Robert Kagan, Eliot Cohen, Eric Edelman, et al) to Mitt Romney in his failed 2012 presidential campaign.

Phares spent a decade as a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), a well known neoconservative think tank long since understood as pro-Israel, and widely regarded as part of the influential Israel Lobby. In fact, FDD president and founder Clifford May described the group’s mission as being “to enhance Israel’s image in North America and the public’s understanding of issues affecting Israeli-Arab relations.”


To that end, Phares has long-standing ties, both professionally and ideologically, with Israel and the hardliner policies of Tel Aviv. As Professor As`ad AbuKhalil of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at the University of California, Berkeley wrote in 2011:

Read the entire article