A personal note. My comments below reflect a commitment to rule of law principles, not support or rejection of Trump as America’s 45th president. Judge him based on how he serves once in office, no other way.
Deplorable treatment he got while campaigning and continuing post-election as president-elect is unprecedented in US political history - one of many examples of a rogue state off-the-rails, bipartisan corruption too entrenched to fix.
Change.org is part of an outrageous campaign to impeach Trump straightaway once inaugurated. A previous article explained is a for-profit enterprise, not an NGO - deceiving supporters by using the .org domain suffix, not .com as it should.
Its business is getting people to sign petitions, along with selling advertising and personal data for added profits.
Its campaign to make war goddess, racketeer, perjurer Hillary president by getting enough GOP electors to vote for her on December 19 fizzled.
It’s at it again, petitioning to get Trump impeached “immediate(ly)” on entering office, “removing all opportunity for his control of the executive branch of our government” - even though no impeachable justification exists.
Joel S. Hirschhorn
What will become the backbone of a new United States world leadership role? Whether the Trump administration strongly addresses illegal immigration and immigrants.
More Americans must internalize the lesson that our country, our land is our collective home. Think homeland. Those who come here or stay here illegally are no different than villains busting down our house door, violating our private space, stealing our possessions or threatening our lives.
If I face a home invasion I do not care whether the intruders have suffered in poverty, come from terrible circumstance or are homeless. All I know is that they do not have any right whatsoever to invade my home. Nor my country.
I fervently hope that President Trump as disrupter-in-chief pursues, as promised, an aggressive set of policies and actions to battle illegal immigration. Not merely stopping new illegal immigrants crossing our borders, but also putting a stop to misuse of student, worker, travel and other visas. In addition to ejecting criminals who are illegal immigrants he should establish programs to find and eject those who have overstayed their visas, regardless of how well they have succeeded as fake Americans.
Here (with my explanations added in brackets “[ ]" where I think it might be helpful), is the January 3rd original report by the brilliant blogger ‘bernhard” at his “Moon of Alabama” blog (including his links to the sources):
January 03, 2017
U.S./UK Paid "White Helmets” [See this excellent backgrounder on them, employing the juicy but accurate phrase for them, “the notorious mop-up wing of Nusra” — Nusra being, of course, Al Qaeda in Syria] Help Blocking Water To 5 Million Thirsty Syrians
The blockade of water from Wadi Barada to 5 million people in Damascus is taking an interesting turn. The U.S. and UK financed White Helmet organization seems to be directly involved in it. This increases the suspicion that the illegal blockade of water to civilians in Damascus is part of a organized campaign under U.S. command. The campaign is designed to block utilities to government held areas as revenge for the liberation of east Aleppo.
On more than one occasion, U.S. President Barack Obama overrode agreements that his Secretary of State John Kerry had reached with Russia. Unlike Obama’s consistent support of his prior Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s, initiatives (such as her backing of the coup that on 28 June 2009 had overthrown the progressive democratically elected President of Honduras and replaced him with a fascist regime), Secretary of State Kerry has repeatedly suffered humiliations from his boss’s (Obama’s) reversals of agreements that Kerry had reached with Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
The latest such incident was headlined at the “Moon of Alabama” blog on December 21st, "How The Military Excluded The White House From International Syria Negotiations”, where the anonymous blogger arbitrarily blamed “the military” (instead of Kerry’s boss, Obama) for having sabotaged “the White House” (instead of sabotaged the Kerry-Lavrov agreement) — the agreement that Secretary of State Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov had reached on 17 May 2016 for a “comprehensive ceasefire” between the U.S. and Russia regarding Syria (and which the White House then sabotaged).
The U.S. government’s plan to conquer Russia is based upon a belief in, and the fundamental plan to establish, “Nuclear Primacy” against Russia — an American ability to win a nuclear war against, and so conquer, Russia.
This concept became respectable in U.S. academic and governmental policymaking circles when virtually simultaneously in 2006 a short-form and a long-form version of an article endorsing the concept, which the article’s two co-authors there named “nuclear primacy," were published respectively in the world’s two most influential journals of international affairs, Foreign Affairs from the Council on Foreign Relations, and International Security from Harvard. (CFR got the more popular short version, titled “The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy”, and Harvard got the more scholarly long version, which was titled “The End of MAD?”.)
This article claimed that the central geostrategic concept during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, Mutually Assured Destruction or “MAD” — in which there is no such thing as the U.S. or the U.S.S.R. conquering the other, because the first of the two to attack will itself also be destroyed by the surviving nuclear forces of the one responding to that attack — will soon be merely past history (like the Soviet Union itself already is); and, so, as the short form of the article said, "nuclear primacy remains a goal of the United States”; and, as the long form said, "the United States now stands on the cusp of nuclear primacy.” In other words: arms-control or no, the U.S. should, and soon will, be able to grab Russia (the largest land-mass of any country, and also the one richest in natural resources).
In recent times, and probably since the establishment of universal voting, presidents- elect have systematically violated or broken their promises to their supporters.
This essay begins with the campaign promises of the outgoing President Barack Obama and the President-Elect Donald Trump. We will then examine the reasons why rhetorical populist, peaceful and democratic promises always accompany campaigns and are immediately followed by the victor appointing cabinet members who are committed to elite-driven, militarist and authoritarian policies – so far from the expectations of the voters.
Obama: Style and Substance
Barack Obama, like all demagogues, promised American voters that he would end the US military occupation of Iraq, close the Guantanamo Bay concentration camp, end torture and secrecy, defend civil liberties, protect mortgage holders swindled by Wall Street bankers, introduce a real health care reform and develop a path to citizenship for undocumented migrant workers and their families.
In response to Obama’s new sanctions on Russia, illegal by any standard, Trump praised how Putin handled his action, tweeting “(g)reat move on delay (by V. Putin) - I always knew he was very smart.”
A follow-up related tweet said “Russians are playing #CNN and @NBCNews for such fools…they don’t have a clue! @FoxNews totally gets it.”
Senior Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway called Obama’s new sanctions “a political response” at the behest of “Team Hillary,” aiming to “box in…Trump” because he favors improved relations with Russia, getting along with Putin, both leaders cooperating in combating terrorism - anathema to neocon infested Washington.
Obama’s 11th hour action in the waning days of his deplorable presidency was based on fabricated claims of Russian US election hacking.
: James Petras
“The secret of great fortunes without apparent cause is a crime forgotten, for it was properly done.” H. Balzac
Among the current crop of Wall Street financiers, Laurence “Larry” Fink has received the greatest number of awards and plaudits. He is the CEO and Chairman of Black Rock (BR), the world’s largest multinational investment management corporation. By 2016, BR had over $5 trillion dollars under management with over 12,000 employees in 70 offices in 30 countries serving clients in 100 countries.
Fink has dominated Wall Street. He holds more assets than his biggest established competitors, because he had the political power to direct the enormous Washington bailout of Wall Street in 2009. He helped shape Hillary Clinton’s emerging Treasury Department team and policies, anticipating her presidential victory. Under a President Hillary Clinton, Fink’s political control would have matched his global economic empire. According to the Economist, Aladdin, the BlackRock electronic subsidiary, monitors 7% of the world’s 225 trillion dollar financial assets.
In the mass media and among the economic elite, Fink is a genius, a self-made empire builder, who has succeeded because he picks the winners and dumps the losers. He is a life-long Democratic Party contributor, although he works with and through both parties and a variety of high ranking government officials and financial CEO’s.
As head of the most influential financial institution in the world, with institutional investors comprising over 65% of its assets, Laurence Fink controls the economic lives of many millions of pensioners, workers, employees and managers. Having risen to the pinnacle of financial power, he wields enormous political influence in shaping fundamental economic decisions. Fink’s economic empire is well-known: the financial elite and business publications are awed by his successes.
Imposition of sanctions is illegal without Security Council authorization. Countries imposing them unilaterally or complicit with other nations do so illegitimately.
Multiple rounds of US and EU sanctions on Russia have no legal standing. On December 20, a Treasury Department press release announced new ones on “seven individuals and eight entities under two Executive Orders…related to Russia and Ukraine, and identified two vessels as blocked property.”
The Treasury falsely accused Russia of occupying Crimea and continuing aggression in Ukraine, lied about US meeting its obligations under Minsk agreements, and absurdly claimed it acted to support Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
A December 19 Reuters “Off the Charts” report said “examination of lead testing results across the country found almost 3,000 areas with poisoning rates far higher than in” Flint, MI.
“Yet many of these lead hotspots are receiving little attention or funding” - showing shocking contempt for the health and welfare of millions of Americans.
Lead poisoning isn’t confined to Flint. It’s not even one of the most dangerous US hot spots. According to information obtained by Reuters, “nearly 3,000 areas with recently recorded lead poisoning rates (have) at least double those in Flint during the peak of that city’s contamination crisis.”
Your donation helps provide a place for people to speak out.
Not tax deductible. firstname.lastname@example.org
|Search the Site||Search the Web|
|<< <||> >>|