John Kozy: The US Supreme Court and "The Rule of Flaw"

The Supreme Court's only armor is the cloak of public trust, its sole ammunition, the collective hupes of our society. Irving R Kaufman. The Supreme Court of the United States is an institution that has failed in every possible way. It is notorious for having issued iniquitous opinions. It has not only failed to resolve, but has exacerbated conflicts, and it has consistently negated the ideals the founding fathers wrote in the Preamble of the Constitution. The ultimate consequence is that any American is deluded, who believes that America can be changed substantively by using the electoral process. Identifying failed institutions is not difficult, changing them is. The Supreme Court of the United States, often referred to by the acronym SCOTUS in a veiled attempt to to personify it, is an institution that has failed in every possible way. It is notorious for having issued iniquitous opinions. It has not only failed to resolve but has exacerbated conflicts, and it has consistently negated the ideals the founding fathers wrote into the Preamble of the Constitution. SCOTUS, as far back as 1803, usurped the Constitution and converted the incipient enlightenment nation into an endarkened reactionary one. Some, of course, will disagree, who believe that SCOTUS is not a failed institution, but the American people are slowly but surely coming to the conclusion that it is: "Just 44 percent of Americans approve of the job the Supreme Court is doing, and three quarters say the justices' decisions are sometimes influenced by their personal or political views, according to a poll conducted by The New York Times and CBS News. Those findings are a fresh indication that the Court's standing with the public has slipped significantly in the past quarter century, according to surveys conducted by several polling organizations. Approval was as high as 66 percent in the late 1980s, and by 2000 approached 50 percent." 

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya: Divide Syria, Divide the Rest!

What is happening in Syria is a sign of things to come for the region. Regime change is not the sole goal of the US and its allies in Syria. Dividing the Syrian Arab Republic is the end goal of Washington in Syria. Britain's Maple-croft, which specializes in consulting on strategic risk, has said that we are witnessing the balkanization of the Syrian state: Kurds in the north, Druze in the southern hills, Alawites in the coastal northwestern mountainous region, and the Sunni majority elsewhere. We are already people like White House adviser Vali Nasr talking about all this. The religious and ethnic cleavages in Syria are not demarcated in purely geographic terms, and the balkanization process could play out as a lebonization process, which means that Syria will be divided along violent sectarian fault lines, and face political deadlock like Lebanon during its civil war, without formally breaking up. Lebonization, a soft form of balkanization, has already taken place in Iraq under federalism. The events in the Middle East and North Africa are seeing the animation of mass movements against local tyrants, like Bahrain, Jordan, Morocco, and Saudi Arabia, but there is also a vicious script from Israel's Yinon Plan and its offshoots. The Yinon Plan and similar schemes want a contrived Shiite Sunni war among the Muslims as the central piece of the sectarian divisions, or fitna in Arabic, that are to include Christian Muslim, Arab Berber, Arab Turkish, and Iranian Turkish animosity. What this process intends to do is create sectarian hatred, ethnic divisions, racism, and religious wars. All the countries that the US and its allies are destabilizing have natural dividing lines, and when tribal, ethic, confessional, and religious animosity is ignited in one country, it will spill over into other countries.

Paul Craig Roberts: Is Washington Deaf As Well as Criminal?

The morons who rule the American sheeple are not only dumb and blind, they are deaf as well. The ears of the American superpower only work when the Israeli prime minister, the crazed Netanyahu, speaks. Then Washington hears everything and rushes to comply. Israel is a tiny insignificant state, created by the careless British and the stupid Americans. It has no power except what its American Protector provides. Yet, despite Israels insignificance, it rules Washington. When a resolution introduced by the Israeli Lobby is delivered to Congress, it passes unanimously. If Israel wants war, Israel gets its wish. When Israel commits war crimes against Palestinians and Lebanon, and is damned by the hundred plus UN resolutions passed against Israels criminal actions, the US bails Israel out of trouble with its veto. The power that tiny Israel exercises over the worlds only superpower is unique in history. Tens of millions of Christians bow down to this power, reinforcing it, moved by the exhortations of their Christian ministers. Netanyahu lusts for war against Iran. He strikes out against all who oppose his war lust. Recently, he called Israels top generals "pussies" for warning against a war with Iran. He regards former Israeli prime ministers and former heads of the Israeli intelligence service as traitors for opposing his determination to attack Iran. He has denounced Americas servile President Obama and America's top military leader for being soft on Iran. The latest poll in Israel shows that a solid majority of the Israelis are opposed to an Israeli attack on Iran, but Netanyahu is uninterested in the opinion of Israeli citizens. He has Washington watching his back, so he is war mad. It is a mystery why Israelis put Netanyahu in public office, instead of an insane asylum. Netanyahu is not alone: He has the American neoconservatives in his corner. The American neoconservatives are as crazed as Natanyahu. 

Uri Avnery: Binyamin Netanyahu: Mad or Crazy?

Binyamin Netanyahu may be crazy, but he is not mad. Ehud Barak may be mad, but he is not crazy. Ergo: Israel will not attack Iran. I have said so before, and I shall say so again, even after the endless talk about it. Indeed no war has been talked about so much before it happened. To quote the classic movie line: "If you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk!" In all Netanyahu's bluster about the inevitable war, one sentence stands out: "In the Committee of Inquiry after the war, I shall take upon myself the sole responsibility, I and I alone!" A very revealing statement. First of all, committees of inquiry are appointed only after a military failure. There was no such committee after the 1948 War of Independence, nor after the 1956 Sinai War or the 1967 Six Day War. There were, however, committees of inquiry after the 1974 Yom Kippur war and the 1982 and 2006 Lebanon Wars. By conjuring up the specter of another such committee, Netanyahu unconsciously treats this war as an inevitable failure. Second, under Israeli law, the entire Government of Israel is the Commander in Chief of the armed forces. Under another law, all ministers bear "collective responsibility", TIME magazine, which is becoming more ridiculous by the week, may crown "King Bibi", but we still have no monarchy. Netanyahu is no more than primus inter pares. Third, in his statement Netanyahu expresses boundless contempt for his fellow ministers. They don't count. Netanyahu considers himself a modern day Winston Churchill. I don't seem to remember Churchill announcing, upon assuming office, "I take responsibility for the coming defeat." Even in the desperate situation of that moment, he trusted in victory, and the word "I" did not figure large in his speech. In the daily brainwashing, the problem is presented in military terms. The debate, such as it is, concerns military capabilities and dangers. Israelis are especially, and understandably worried by the rain of tens of thousands of missiles expected to fall on all parts of Israel, not only from Iran, but also from Lebanon and Gaza.

Prof. James F. Tracy: False Flag Terror and Conspiracies!

The news media's readiness to accept official pronouncements and failure to more vigorously analyze and question government authorities in the wake of "domestic terrorist" incidents contributes to the American public's already acute case of collective historical amnesia, while it further rationalizes the twenty first century police state and continued demise of civil society. Some may recall "Bugs Raplin" (Giancarlo Esposito), the resolute investigative journalist depicted in Tim Robbins' 1992 "mockumentary" Bob Roberts. After being framed as the culprit in a false flag assassination attempt by corrupt political huckster Bob Roberts, Raplin delivers a perceptive soliloquy that among other things effectively describes the American public's moribund civic condition and short circuited democracy. "The reason Iran-Contra happened," Raplin begins, is because no one did anything substantial about Watergate, and the reason Watergate happened is because there were no consequences from the Bay of Pigs. They're all the same operatives, the foot soldiers at the Bay of Pigs, the plumbers that got busted at Watergate, the gunrunners in Iran Contra, all the same people, same faces. Now it doesn't take a genius to figure out the connection here: A secret government beyond the control of the people and accountable to no one, and the closer we are to discovering the connection, the more Congress turns a blind eye to it. "We can't talk about that in open session," they say. "National security reasons." The truth lies dormant in their laps, and they stay blind out of choice: A conspiracy of silence. 

Julie Levesque: The Foot Soldiers of the American Empire!

Since the end of World War II, the Anglo-American Empire has covertly supported the deployment of foreign and domestic "foot soldiers", including terrorists and paramilitary brigades to bring about regime change, and further the agenda of World domination. One of the earlier examples of such a modus operandi, still widely ignored, is Gladio, "NATO's European stay behind army", active during the Cold War. Controlled by the CIA and Britain's MI6, Gladio members orchestrated terrorist attacks in Western Europe, which were blamed on Communist entities. Gladio was falsely presented to key European state officials as a stand by secret army, ready to counter a possible communist take over. The ultimate goal of Gladio was to demonize the Communist and Socialist parties, and encourage European citizens to endorse their governments' commitment to "National security". American citizens were not exempt from such scheming. As Prof. James F Tracy explains: "The string of still unresolved US political assassinations throughout the 1960s suggest how such practices were not restricted to foreign countries, nor were they solely the terrain of intelligence agencies. Along lines similar to Gladio, in the early 1960's the US Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed Operation Northwoods, where terrorist attacks would be initiated against US civilians in American cities, and the violence blamed on Cuban combatants to justify war against the island nation. The Kennedy administration rejected the proposal. While Northwoods exhibited the capacity for government to conceive and propose such plans, Gladio was demonstrably carried out against Western civilian populations in multiple locations over many years." The recruitment of paramilitary armies and death squads played a key role in the conduct of US foreign policy. 

Michael C. Ruppert: 9/11 Attacks. Criminal Foreknowledge!

As September approaches, we are reminded that the anniversary of the tragic events of 9/11 will soon be upon us again. 11 years later, are we any closer to the truth about what really happened on that fateful day? For the next month, until September 11, 2012, we will be posting on a daily basis important articles from our early archives pertaining to the tragic events of 9/11. The following text by Michael C Ruppert published in October 2001, brings to the forefront the issue of foreknowledge and insider trading pertaining to airline listings on the Chicago Board Options Exchange, including United Airlines and American Airlines. Although uniformly ignored by the mainstream US media, there is abundant and clear evidence that a number of transactions in financial markets indicated specific criminal foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. That evidence also demonstrates that, in the case of at least one of these trades, which has left a $2.5 million prize unclaimed, the firm used to place the "put options" on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelligence Agency. Until 1997, AB "Buzzy" Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank AB Brown. AB Brown was acquired by Banker's Trust in 1997. Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker's Trust in 1997. Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker's Trust-AB Brown, one of 20 major US banks named by Senator Carl Levin this year as being connected to money laundering. Krongard's last position at Banker's Trust (BT) was to oversee "private client relations." In this capacity he had direct hands on relations with some of the wealthiest people in the world, in a kind of specialized banking operation that has been identified by the US Senate and other investigators as being closely connected to the laundering of drug money.