Sartre Batr: A $14 Trillion Extortion for a Global Warning Scam:

Rube Goldberg meets Carbon Caps L-W Climate Security Act, S.2191. A $14 Trillion Extortion for a Global Warming Scam. Veterans megalomania cal threat from the financial globalists wants to saddle the world economy with a cost of trillions of dollars, that benefits favorite corporatist's. The phony global warming cult has a core purpose. Their objective is to drive down the standard of living for non elites, and prevent the use of fossil fuel energy. The fallacious science used to create a disinformation scare for politically unsophisticated "True Believers" is a direct result of transnational money manipulators. The Davos crowd sponsors the educational and media institutions that trump up junk research, and manufacture idealistic solutions. Make no mistake about it, the Davos Elites Enjoy the Global Depression, and love corporate welfare. They greatly profit from government subsidized "Green" ventures, which drive up energy costs and line the pockets of compadre companies, under the control of the financial barons. As the rest of us struggle to survive, pronouncements declare an ever greater burden to bear. Note the ominous future in Davos Report Calls For Additional $14 Trillion To Restrain Global Warming. "The world must spend an additional $14 Trillion To Restrain Global Warming. "The world must spend an additional $14 trillion on clean energy infra-stracture, low carbon transport, and energy efficiency to meet the United Nations' goal for capping the rise in average global temperatures, according to a World Economic Forum report released on Monday." Former Mexican President Felipe Calderon states the globalist viewpoint. "Economic growth and sustainability are inter dependent, you cannot have one without the other, and greening investment is the prerequisite to realizing both goals." What can be expected from these "greening investment" projects? In order to anticipate future plans, a comprehensive understanding of the past and present, shady business practices is crucial. Examine the industrial wind and solar model in detail. The Washington Post reports in, Sting operations reveal Mafia involvement in renewable energy, is just the tip of the iceberg.      

Steven Rosenfeld: How the NRA Went From Best Friend

of the Nation's Police to harsh enemy of law enforcement. As it became more unwilling to compromise over even minor gun controls, the NRA is now on the bad side of the police. For years, the National Rifle Association cultivated a reputation as an unbeatable political powerhouse, a legacy that was challenged on Thursday, with the introduction of major new gun control legislation in the US Senate, banning more than 100 military style guns, but the NRA's tough reputation unwinds, if one delves into the history behind its harshest rhetoric, which began in the 1970s and escalated as former allies, notably America's police, rejected its increasingly militant demands. What today's NRA would like to forget, is how its unbending extremism led to a losing streak in Congress two decades ago, a period whose gun politics echo today, but gun controls nevertheless passed. Perhaps the best way to understand how the NRA is not the all powerful lobby it seeks to portray itself, as is to look at how the organization went from being a "best friend" of the nation's police, to a political enemy of law enforcement, from federal agents at the top of the ladder, to local police chiefs and police unions below. As it became more outspoken and unwilling to compromise over insignificant gun controls, it became the group it remains today, vainly claiming to be the last line against impending government tyranny. "Once you go down that road, how do you walk that rhetoric back?" said Robert Spitzer, a gun rights historian and SUNY Cortland's political science department chairman. "Obama wants to turn the idea of absolutism into a dirty word," NRA executive director Wayne LaPierre said in a speech to Nevada hunters on Tuesday, responding to Monday's inaugural address, in which the president chastised groups like the NRA for their unending hyperbole and vitriol. "He wants to put every private, personal firearms transaction right under the thumb of the federal government, and anyone who says that's excessive, President Obama says that's an absolutist." In the heat of today's political fights, where excessive emotion, exaggerated threats and hyperbole are routine, it's easily forgotten that the NRA once stood with government. For much of its 143 year history, the NRA's survival depended on a cozy relationship with the government. It relied on state subsidies at its founding, and then federal subsidies for marksmanship contests for generations. The US military provided free guns, or sold them at cost to NRA members for decades. Thousands of soldiers helped run annual shooting contests. Local police departments turned to the NRA for training.   

Francis A. Boyle: The United States Promotes Israeli Genocide

Against the Palestinians: In direct reaction to Israel provoking the Al Aqsa Intifada, on October 19, 2000, the then United Nations Human Rights Commission condemned Israel for inflicting war crimes and crimes against humanity upon the Palestinian people, some of whom are Christians, but most of whom are Muslims. This Special Session of the UN Commission on Human Rights, adopted the Resolution set forth in UN Document E/CN.4/S-5L. 2/Rev.1, Condemning the provocative visit to Al Haram Al Shariff on 28 September 2000 by Ariel Sharon, the Likud party leader, which triggered the tragic events, that followed in occupied East Jerusalem, and the other occupied Palestinian territories, resulting in a high number of deaths and injuries among Palestinian civilians. The UN Human Rights Commission said it was gravely concerned about several different types of atrocities inflicted by Israel upon the Palestinian civilians. The UN Human Rights Commission said it was gravely concerned about several different types of atrocities inflicted by Israel upon the Palestinian people, which it denominated war crimes, flagrant violations of international humanitarian law, and crimes against humanity. In operative paragraph 1 of its 19 October 2000 Resolution, the UN Human Rights Commission then: Strongly condemns the disproportionate and indiscriminate use of force, in violation of international humanitarian law by the Israeli occupying Power against innocent and unarmed Palestinian civilians, including many children, in the occupied territories, which constitutes a war crime, and a crime against humanity. In paragraph 5 of its 19 October 2000 Resolution, the UN Human Rights Commission Also affirms that the deliberate and systematic killing of civilians and children, by the Israeli occupying authorities constitutes a flagrant and grave violation of the right to life, and also constitutes a crime against humanity. Article 68 of the United Nations Charter had expressly required the UN's Economic and Social Council to set up this UN Commission for the promotion of human rights. This was its UN Charter mandated job. The reader has a general idea of what a war crime is, so I am not going to elaborate upon that term here, but there are different degrees of heinousness for war crimes. In particular are the more serious war crimes denominated grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Since the outbreak of the first Intifada in 1987, the world has seen those heinous war crimes inflicted every day by Israel, against the Palestinian people living in occupied Palestine: including willful killing of Palestinians by the Israeli army, and by Israels criminal paramilitary terrorist settlers.     

Jonas E. Alexis: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop

Worrying and Love the Israeli Bomb! "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets". Matthew 7:12. In the summer of 2012, Netanyahu declared in the Jerusalem Post, that Iran "must cease all uranium enrichment in the country, that it transfer all enriched uranium out of the country, and that it disassemble its underground nuclear facilities." Two years earlier, when talks began to circulate that the Middle East must be free of nuclear weapons, Benjamin Netanyahu tried to block any practical measures on Israel's nuclear programs. Of course, as usual, the US yielded to Israel's command: "The US administration announced after the conference ended late last week, that it would not support an international conference on a nuclear weapon free Middle East, without coordinating with Israel. Israel said Saturday that it has no intention to fulfill the decision of the Review Conference to the NPT (Non Proliferation Treaty), which calls on it to allow international inspection at its nuclear installations." A statement from the Prime Minister's bureau declared in part: "The real problem with weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East does not relate to Israel, but to those countries that have signed the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and brazenly violated it: Iraq under Saddam, Libya, Syria and Iran." Even by December 2012, the UN asked Israel for just an inspection of its nuclear weapons, which is consistent with the Non Proliferation Treaty, but Israel again refused to do so. In other words, every country in the Middle East should be free of weapons of mass destruction, but Israel, because of course, they have no bad intentions. What was even more hilarious, was that neither Bush nor Obama "foresaw" that this would create problems with the Muslims in the Middle East. Israeli philosopher and historian Avner Cohen bluntly stated, "Were we to believe in mutual nuclear deterrence, we would be able to see that a nuclear Iran is something that can be lived with." Despite all this, the United States continues to offer blind support to Israel. One hour after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with President Obama, in the middle of a series of conflicts between US and Israel, the Obama administration released a message defending Israel's nuclear installations, and saying that "only Israel can determine its security needs."   

Juan Cole: Top Ten Republican Myths on Benghazi

that justify Hillary Clinton's Anger: 1. Republican senators keep saying that it should have been "easy" to find out what happened on September 11, 2012, by simply debriefing US personnel who had been there. John McCain, Ron Johnson and the others, who make this charge, are the most cynical and manipulative people in the world. The Benghazi US mission was very clearly an operation of the Central Intelligence Agency, and that is the reason that the Obama administration officials have never been able to speak frankly and publicly about it. McCain and the others know this quite well, and they know that their public carping cannot be "simply" answered, because the answers would endanger sources and methods. The consulate was amazingly well guarded by some 40 CIA operatives, many of them ex special forces, in a nearby safe house. These were viewed by consular officials as "the cavalry." It is still not clear what Ambassador Chris Stevens and the CIA were doing in Benghazi, and unless we know that, we can't know why they were attacked. They were not overseeing the shipping of weapons to Syria. The Syrian revolutionaries complain bitterly that the US "prevents" them from getting medium and heavy weapons. Republicans keep posturing that their questions about Benghazi are intended to bolster US security. In fact, they are harming it. Republican hearings in the House of Representatives have disgracefully revealed the names if Libyans talking to the US consulate, thus endangering their lives, and harming US efforts to understand the situation in the country, since who would risk talking to the embassy, if they know about Darrell Issa's big mouth? The GOP figures keep saying, that it was obvious that there was no demonstration at the Benghazi consulate against the so called "film," the 'Innocence of Muslims' that attacked the Prophet Muhammad, but in fact Libyan security officials repeatedly told wire services on September 12, that there was such a demonstration, and that the attack issued from those quarters. An American resident in Benghazi at that time confirms that there were such demonstrations that day. The secular minded revolutionary militia that guarded the US consulate gates, that they would not have shown up in security videos. Benghazi, a city of over a million, is not dominated by "al Qaeda," contrary to what Senator Graham of South Carolina has repeatedly said or implied. The city had successful municipal elections in May, just before I got there. The number one vote getter was a woman professor of statistics at the university.   

Johnny Punish: Tina Turner: America Loses Another

High Profile Citizen. Should you leave the US and renounce your citizenship? Many Americans ponder this question, as the benefits begin to outweigh the costs. Some of those benefits are lower taxes, lower administrative costs, and even getting away from bad governance and cultural stresses. But what about patriotism? How far would you go? Or is Nationalism just for the modern day peasant populations to adhere to, while the rich just do what's in their best interest? Take the case of Tina Turner, the 73 year old American born singer, whose career has spanned more than half a century. She has lived in Switzerland since the mid 1990s, and was officially granted citizenship by the Swiss government on Friday. The Tennessee native, who was born Anna Mae Bullock, plans to surrender her US passport, once she receives her Swiss one. The local Swiss council's decision still requires formal approval from cantonal and federal authorities. Turner resides in the Zurich suburb of Kuesnacht, where she has lived in a lake house called Chateau Algonquin since 1995. She has been in a relationship with German music executive Erwin Bach, since 1986, and moved to the Zurich suburb to be with him, after his job sent him to Switzerland. Although the eight time Grammy Awards winner has other residences in London, Cologne, Germany and the French Riviera, she chose to live in Switzerland for 20 years, and applied for citizenship in early 2013. "I'm very happy in Switzerland, and feel at home here. I cannot imagine a better place to live," she told the Swiss newspaper Blick. The pop star has been learning German for years, and told the local paper that loves the country's cleanliness, the countryside, and its people. She said she also enjoys the privacy she experiences while living in Switzerland, but her home state in the US appears less enthusiastic about the decision. The mayor of Brownsville, Tenn., said she was "surprised" to hear about Turner's decision to give up her US citizenship, and said it might be time to think about why someone would do that: "I think anytime a person, whether they're world renowned or the most meek and mild, makes a decision to change their citizenship, we need to step back and think what causes that decision, " Mayor Jo Matherne told FOX411. But even though the mayor expressed concern about the singer's US abandonment, she said Turner still keeps in contact with her hometown.

Alan Hart: You Must Not Tell The Truth!

Chutzpah defined! Some of us do not believe what our politicians say, especially when the subject is Isreal's behavior, its ongoing colonization of the occupied West Bank, for the purpose of making peace impossible, except perhaps, on terms which require the Palestinians to surrender to Zionism's will. The responses of some Jewish supporters of Israel, right or wrong, to one British MP, who did dare to tell the truth, illustrate why most politicians throughout the Western world won't. That's yesterday's story, but I am driven to comment by the hypocrisy on display, hypocrisy which takes chutzpah to wild extremes. For those readers who might not be fully familiar with chutzpah, let's begin with a definition of it. Chutzpah is a Talmudic word that means many similar things, chief among them being shameless audacity, impudence and arrogance, each and all laced with incredible self righteousness. In the context of the conflict in and over Palestine, that became Israel, chutzpah represents an Israeli way of saying to the world, without actually saying it something like: "We know we shouldn't have done this. We know it's wrong. But we've done it because we also know there's nothing you can do about it." As I say in my book on Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, if there is one single word that sums up the whole Zionist enterprise, it is chutzpah. Sunday 27 January is Holocaust Memorial Day, and this year marks the 68th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz concentration camp, where more than one million people, mostly Jews, died. As this day approached, the Holocaust Educational Trust placed a Book of Commitment in the House of Commons, to give MP's the chance to sign it, and honor those who were slaughtered during the Nazi holocaust and subsequent other genocides, and commit themselves to encouraging constituents "to work together to combat prejudice and racism today." Among those who signed the book, and pledged his commitment - I'd be somewhat surprised if there were a single available MP who didn't sign, was David Ward, the Liberal Democratic member for Bradford East, a 59 year old new comer to the House, elected in 2010. On his web site he then said this: Having visited Auschwitz twice, once with my family, and once with local schools, I am saddened that the Jews, who suffered unbelievably levels of persecution during the Holocaust, could, within a few years of liberation from the death camps, be inflicting atrocities on Palestinians in the new State of Israel, and continue to do so on a daily basis in the West Bank and Gaza.