Featured post

Latest Articles

Pentagon Threat: US Will Shoot Down Syrian, Russian Planes – Eric Zuesse

Dangerous Crossroads: U.S. Invades Syria, And Warns Russia / By Eric Zuesse Global Research / August 23, 2016 / Conclusion by Karl Pomeroy / Quemado Institute /

Russian Air Force in Syria: Su-27 Sukhois (--Senior Airman James Richardson)

Russian Su-27 Sukhois (–Senior Airman James Richardson)

On Monday, August 22nd, the United States government—which demands the overthrow of the internationally-recognized-as-legal government of Syria—officially announced that America’s military forces in Syria will continue to occupy Syrian land, no matter what the Syrian government says, and will shoot down any Syrian planes that fly over U.S. forces there. As reported on Monday by Al-Masdar News: The Pentagon has announced that the USA is ready to down Syrian and Russian planes that they claim threaten American advisers who by international law are illegally operating in northern Syria. On Friday, Pentagon spokesman Captain Jeff Davis claimed that US jets attempted to intercept Syrian planes to protect the American advisers operating illegally with Kurdish forces in Syria after Syrian government jets bombed areas of Hasakah when Kurdish police began an aggression against the National Defense Force. On  . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Ruling Elite Seeks One World Government, Hillary a Puppet – Joachim Hagopian

Introduction: Why Does America Massacre Foreign People? / By Karl Pomeroy / Quemado Institute / August 19, 2016 / slavaug19-16vYesterday the Ron Paul Institute posted the following quote: “Bin Laden Speaks…Should We Listen? Osama bin Laden’s youngest son, Hamza, purportedly released an audio recording earlier this week in which he called for young Saudis to get involved with al-Qaeda in Yemen and in which he called for retaliation against ongoing US military operations in several countries in the greater Middle East. Said the younger bin Laden: ‘We will continue striking you and targeting you in your country and abroad in response to your oppression of the people of Palestine, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia and the rest of the Muslim lands that did not survive your oppression.’ Should we listen to him and start thinking about removing his recruiting tools, or do we keep doing  . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Trump Does Not Want War With Russia – Fred Reed

Hillary, Trump, and War With Russia / By Fred Reed / Information Clearing House / Posted by Quemado Institute / August 18, 2016 / slavaug18-16zThe Goddamdest Stupid Idea I Have Ever Heard, and I Have Lived in Washington. Don’t look for a walk-over. The T14 Armata, Russia’s latest tank. You don’t want to fight this monster if you can think of a better idea, such as not fighting it. Russia once made large numbers of second-rate tanks. That worm has turned. This thing is way advanced and outguns the American M1A2, having a 125mm smoothbore firing APFSDS long-rods to the Abrams 120mm. (As Hillary would know, that’s Armor-piercing, fin-stabilized, discarding-sabot. You did know, didn’t you, Hill?) This isn’t the place for a disquisition on armor, but the above beast is a very advanced design with unmanned turret and, well, a T34 it isn’t. (I was once an aficionado of tanks. If interested, here and here.) A good reason to vote for Trump, a very good reason whatever his other intentions, is that he does not want a war with Russia. Hillary and her . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Full Transcripts: Trump Speeches on ISIS; Law and Order

Two Speech Transcripts with Concluding Comments by Karl Pomeroy / Quemado Institute / August 17, 2016 / Full Transcript – Donald Trump’s ISIS and Foreign Policy Speech / Heavy.com / August 15, 2016 /slavaug17-16z Here is the full transcript of Donald Trump’s August 15th speech, via the campaign’s website: / Thank you. It is great to be with you this afternoon. Today we begin a conversation about how to Make America Safe Again. In the 20th Century, the United States defeated Fascism, Nazism, and Communism. Now, a different threat challenges our world: Radical Islamic Terrorism. This summer, there has been an ISIS attack launched outside the war zones of the Middle East every 84 hours. Here, in America, we have seen one brutal attack after another. 13 were murdered, and 38 wounded, in the assault on Ft. Hood. The Boston Marathon Bombing wounded and maimed 264 people, and ultimately left five dead – including 2 police officers. In Chattanooga, Tennessee . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Outrageous Rubbish of the Anti-Trump Elite: Analysts Defend Republican Candidate

Momentum Builds For Donald Trump As Authors Expose Media Deception / Introduction by Karl Pomeroy / Quemado Institute / August 12, 2016 / slavaug12-16yAttempts by the neoconservative American establishment to derail the campaign of Donald Trump are backfiring, as prominent geopolitical analysts cut through the media hyperole and expose the rigged system for what it is: a political machine designed to perpetuate the power and perks of the global elite while destroying the foundations of American democracy. James Petras, Stephen Lendman, and Patrick Buchanan argue in the following commentaries for a rapid turnaround of political trends in favor of Donald Trump: /  Obama Versus Trump, Putin and Erdogan: Can Coups Defeat Elected Governments? / By James Petras / Information Clearing House / Never in the history of the United States, has a President and Supreme Court Judge openly advocated the overthrow of a Presidential candidate. Never has the entire mass media engaged in a round-the-clock one-sided, propaganda war to discredit a Presidential candidate by systematically ignoring or distorting the central socio-economic issues of their opposition. “Many of our interlocutors have been purged or arrested”. — James Clapper, US Director of Intelligence . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Political Assassination The American Way: Trump Enters Elite Kill Zone – Finian Cunningham

Political Assassination – The American Way / By Finian Cunningham / Sputnik News / Reposted at Quemado Institute / August 11, 2016 / Donald Trump And Mike Pence Hold Town Hall In Scranton, PADonald Trump has entered a political kill zone. And the American establishment is lining up to take him out. We are talking here in virtual terms – at least thus far. Nowadays, political assassination by US powers-that-be does not necessarily involve physical liquidation of the individual deemed to be an enemy of the state. Who needs all that blood and controversy? Especially when character assassination achieves the same desired end result — that is, elimination of target from the public domain. The fierce media crossfire that the Republican presidential contender is being subjected to leaves little doubt that this is a concerted effort to destroy this politician. In the past week, we have seen a fusillade of vilification fired at the New York property. . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Hillary Exemplar of Neo-Fascism; Trump An Anathema To Pentagon-CIA – Finian Cunningham

Introduction by Kennedy Applebaum / The Campaign Circus / Quemado Institute / August 8, 2016 / slavaug8-16xFormer director of the Central Intelligence Agency Michael J Morell vilifies Republican candidate Donald Trump for minor personality traits while hailing Democratic rival Hillary Clinton for her drive to wage illegal wars, an irony elucidated in the first article below by geopolitical analyst Finian Cunningham. Starkly contrasting Morell’s hawkish viewpoint, former Georgia Senator and Assistant Secretary General for Defense Support at NATO Mack Mattingly argues that Trump’s support for normalized relations with Russia is really the most reasonable stance, especially in view of the fact that NATO’s mandate evaporated at the end of the Cold War. If the US 2016 elections appear to be a media circus, this is not the fault of Donald Trump, who advocates reason in world affairs. The neocon warmongers and their corporate-owned news agencies have . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Controversial Lugansk Republic Leader Igor Plotnitsky Survives Assassin Bomb Attack

/ Assassination Attempt on East Ukrainian Leader Raises Tensions and Provokes Questions / By Alexander Mercouris / NewColdWar.org / Posted Quemado Institute Aug 7, 2016 / slavaug7-16zAttempted assassination of Igor Plotnitsky, leader of the breakaway Lugansk People’s Republic, provokes fears of infighting and of a possible Ukrainian summer offensive. News of the assassination attempt on Igor Plotnitsky, the head of the breakaway Lugansk People’s Republic, will come as no surprise to close observers of the Ukrainian conflict. Whilst there is a strong possibility that the assassination attempt was the work of the Ukrainian secret service the SBU, it is by no means impossible that it is the result of factional infighting within the Lugansk People’s Republic. Whereas the political situation in the neighbouring Donetsk People’s Republic has stabilised with its leader Alexander Zakharchenko apparently both effective and popular, the same has not been true of the Lugansk People’s Republic where Igor . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Hillary Clinton and the Neo-Cold Warriors

The Democrats: Party of Joe McCarthy and Lyndon Johnson / By Wayne Madsen / Strategic Culture Foundation / August 3, 2016 / Posted at Quemado Institute / August 3, 2016 slavaug3-16x/ The rhetoric emanating from the podium of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia sounded eerily familiar. Democrat after Democrat waxed on about the «dangers» posed by Russia and the inability of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump to deal with them. Chief among these neo-Cold Warriors was former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, the second-worst Secretary of State in American history. Meanwhile, the Democrats’ spin machine was turning out propaganda memes calling Trump «Kremlin Don», «Don the Red», and even dredging up references to the Soviet Union and Joseph Stalin. Of course, this rhetoric was directly borrowed from the chief «Red baiting» politician of the dark days of Communist «witch hunting» in the United States, the infamous Republican senator from Wisconsin Joseph McCarthy. Like McCarthy, the Democrats, once again under  . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

The Corrosive Psychological Effect of “Nyet” on the American Hegemonic Psyche

/ The Power of “Nyet” / By Dmitry Orlov / Club Orlov / Posted Quemado Institute / July 29, 2016 / slavjul29-16tThe way things are supposed to work on this planet is like this: in the United States, the power structures (public and private) decide what they want the rest of the world to do. They communicate their wishes through official and unofficial channels, expecting automatic cooperation. If cooperation is not immediately forthcoming, they apply political, financial and economic pressure. If that still doesn’t produce the intended effect, they attempt regime change through a color revolution or a military coup, or organize and finance an insurgency leading to terrorist attacks and civil war in the recalcitrant nation. If that still doesn’t work, they bomb the country back to the stone age. This is the way it worked in the 1990s and the 2000s, but as of late a new dynamic has emerged. In the beginning it was centered on Russia, but the phenomenon has since spread around the world and is about to engulf the United States itself. It works like this: the  . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Nuclear War vs. Global Peace: Trump and Putin Poised to Solve Crisis

Though Hysteria Mounts, the Future is Peace / By Karl Pomeroy / Quemado Institute / July 26, 2016 / U.S. property mogul Trump gestures during a media event on the sand dunes of the Menie estateGeopolitical analysts are right to be alarmed about Bush-Obama-Clinton neoconservative policy. This arrogant agenda of reckless aggression has pushed NATO troops to the doorway of Russia, destabilized the Islamic belt of the Middle East and North Africa, created a fertile breeding ground for human revenge by terrorists like ISIS, and nudged Russian President Vladimir Putin to warn of retaliation. Yet as hysteria mounts in the anti-establishment media about nuclear world war, the answer escapes many analysts. This curious phenomenon seems suspect. If these authors are sincere about preventing nuclear war, why don’t they acknowledge our best hope for peace? Why Vilify Peace? Recent articles abound on the threat of nuclear war. Paul Craig Roberts is one of the leading  . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Alexander Dugin: Realist Trump to End Contradictions Between US and Russia

The US Establishment Plans War to Stop Trump / By Alexander Dugin, Russia’s number one geopolitical thinker / Information Clearing House / Conclusion by Karl Pomeroy, Quemado Institute / slavjul11-16z  July 11, 2016 / VIDEO transcript: Greetings, you’re watching Dugin’s Guideline. The situation around Russia at the international level is gradually worsening. Even the most attentive international analysts have observed this. Recently, the Stratfor Think Tank published an article with an expressive title: The U.S. and Russia Plan for Conflict. Why are they drawing attention to this conflict now? The opposition between the Land (Russia) and the Sea (the USA and NATO members) is something constant and unchangeable. If one loses something, the other gains something, and vice versa. Only naïve people and the direct agents of influence can believe in the “reset” of the “friendship” with the West. But why has the duel between these civilizations become more intensive only recently? There are many explanations for it. But let’s regard the internal . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Israeli Violence in Gaza and the Plight of Palestine

Sott.net / Conclusion by Kennedy Applebaum / Quemado Institute / July 2, 2016 / Insatiable thirst for violence: Israeli warplanes launch several airstrikes on Gaza Strip slavjul2-16x / Israeli warplanes have launched several airstrikes on the Gaza Strip in yet another act of aggression against the besieged Palestinian coastal territory. No casualties have yet been reported in the Saturday morning attacks that followed reports of an alleged rocket launch from Gaza on a vacant kindergarten in the town of Sderot in the occupied Palestinian territories. The Israeli warplanes reportedly hit the Zeitoun district of Gaza City and a site belonging to the Palestinian resistance movement, Hamas. The Israeli bombardment of Gaza came hours after Tel Aviv imposed a closure on the occupied West Bank city of al-Khalil (Hebron) and its surrounding areas following the killing of an Israeli man in a drive-by . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Orlando Shooting: Investigative Report on Motive and Coverup

Introduction by Kennedy Applebaum / Quemado Institute / June 29, 2016 / slavjun29-16yOne of the oddest things about media reports of the Orlando shooting is that they continue to announce, more than two weeks after the incident, that 49 to 50 people were killed. This is the same number stated on June 12, 2016, the morning of the tragedy. Yet the Orlando Regional Medical Center reported via Twitter on June 16 that nine additional people had died in the hospital, while six were still in critical condition. This means 58 or more have perished as a result of the shooting. Why is this figure not reported? Another strange fact we’ve discussed at Quemado Institute, and which political analyst Paul Craig Roberts has pointed out, is that not one single eye-witness on-site photo or video of the event or victims has appeared on Twitter or the Internet, a seemingly impossible omission. Roberts concludes the event might never have happened . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Two Nuclear Superpowers at Worst Confrontation Since 1962 – Stephen F. Cohen

/ Is the US Pursuing a Rogue Policy by Waging Undeclared War Against Russia? (VIDEO) / By Stephen F. Cohen / The Nation / June 22, 2016 / Quemado Institute repost / June 26, 2016 / slavjun26-16sWashington’s NATO buildup on Russia’s borders, its refusal to cooperate with Moscow in Syria and Ukraine, and its anti-Putin propaganda form an ominous pattern. Nation contributing editor Stephen F. Cohen and John Batchelor continue their weekly discussions of the new US-Russian Cold War. (Previous installments are at TheNation.com.) Cohen raises three “hypothetical” and heretical questions for discussion. Does the recent escalation of anti-Russian behavior by Washington, from its growing NATO military buildup on Russia’s western borders and refusal to cooperate with Moscow against the Islamic State in Syria to the Obama administration’s refusal to compel its government in Kiev to implement . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Nuclear World War: The Mounting Threat

By Karl Pomeroy / Quemado Institute / June 24, 2016 /slavjun24-16y Vladimir Putin, Paul Craig Roberts, Donald Trump and other world observers continue to warn about the growing threat of major nuclear war. NATO’s escalation at Russia’s borders has created a volatile arms imbalance, contrived by Western leaders under the pretext of defending Europe against Russian or Iranian aggression. Let’s be clear. Putin’s Russia poses no threat to Europe, nor has there been any recent Russian aggression. Ukraine was destabilized by an American-sponsored coup. After Crimea voted to join Russia, Putin . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Beltway Imperial Arrogance, The Kiev Coup, and Trump’s Challenge to the Ruling Class – David Stockman

In Praise Of Ignorant Politicians … Unschooled In Beltway Delusions / by David Stockman / June 21, 2016 / Quemado Institute repost June 22, 2015 / slavjun22-16yThe Imperial City deserves to be sacked by insurgent politicians of the very ignorant kind. That is, outsiders unschooled in its specious groupthink and destructive delusions of grandeur. That’s why Donald Trump’s challenge to the beltway’s permanent bipartisan ruling class is so welcome. He is largely ignorant of the neocon and war hawk catechisms and sophistries propounded by joints like the Council on Foreign Relations. But owing to his overweening self-confidence, he doesn’t hesitate to lob foreign policy audibles, as it were, from the Presidential campaign’s line of scrimmage. It is these unpredictable outbursts of truth and common sense, not his bombast, bad manners and bigotry, that has the Acela Corridor in high dudgeon. The Donald’s establishment bettors are deathly afraid that he might confirm to the unwashed . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Orlando Shooting: Gun Rights and the American Police State – Paul Craig Roberts

Introduction by Karl Pomeroy / Quemado Institute / June 20, 2016 /  Paul Craig Roberts, political analyst, blogger and former United States Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy, proposes in the article below that the Orlando mass shooting, which allegedly left some 50 victims dead, may not have actually happened—or at least, there is reason to doubt its occurrence due to a suspicious lack of evidence. Where were all the videos and photos taken by eye-witness observers? …. / Orlando Wrap-up / By Paul Craig Roberts / A few of my readers are still trying to help me to prove the official Orlando shooting story line. Unable to find videos of the massive presence of ambulances and Emergency Medical Technicians (EMT) that the presence of 50 dead people and 53 wounded people would require, readers are reduced to supplying me . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Bring The US Death Machine Home! – Jacob Hornberger

Interventionism Is a Rotten Tree with Rotten Fruit / By Jacob G. Hornberger / Hornberger’s Blog / Ron Paul Institute / June 17, 2016 / Residents and a Free Syrian Army fighter walk along a street lined with damaged buildings in Deir al-ZorFifty-one State Department officials are calling on President Obama to expand U.S. interventionism in Syria by initiating a bombing campaign against the Syrian government. Apparently they’re not satisfied with the great “success” that their philosophy of interventionism has brought to Iraq, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, Yemen and the rest of the Middle East. They want the U.S. national-security state’s death machine to bring even more death and destruction than it has already brought to that part of the world for the past 25 years. It would be difficult to find anything more incredible and audacious than that. The Pentagon, the CIA, the NSA, and the rest of the military-industrial complex . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

War on Assad Spells Naked US Aggression – Daniel McAdams

Ron Paul Institute / June 17, 2016 / Conclusion by Karl Pomeroy: Sanders vs. Trump / Quemado Institute / State Department ‘Diplomats’ Demand War on Assad (and Russia) / By Daniel McAdams / slavjun17-16zIn a move that the New York Times reports is nearly unprecedented, some 51 mid-level State Department employees have signed a letter calling for the Obama Administration to begin bombing the Assad government in Syria immediately. Demonstrating the reality that the “soft power” of diplomacy is in fact just a front for the “hard power” of bombs, these “diplomats” demanded the administration immediately initiate: “[A] judicious use of stand-off and air weapons, which would undergird and drive a more focused and hard-nosed US-led diplomatic process.” Yes, to these supposed trained “diplomats,” the “diplomatic process” consists of making final demands after the military has bombed . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Hillary Okays Drone Strikes VIA Blackberry, Kills 2192 People

Clinton Discussed Top Secret CIA Drone Info, Approved Drone Strikes, Via Her Blackberry / By Peter Van Buren / Ron Paul Institute / Quemado Institute / June 16, 2016 / slavjun16-16zA new report in the Wall Street Journal reveals emails in which then-Secretary of State Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations in Pakistan from her unsecured Blackberry. Top Secret/SAP Messages: The timing and location of these strikes are considered Top Secret/SAP [special access program], in that revealing such data could allow the targeted humans to escape, and embarrass U.S. ally Pakistan, whom many believe is tacitly allowing the United States to conduct such military operations inside its sovereign territory. At specific issue are 22 emails that were on Clinton’s private server. These messages were not publicly released, withheld entirely. However, the broad contents were leaked to the Journal by anonymous. . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Hillary Led US into Wars of Chaos — Diana Johnstone

Introduction by Karl Pomeroy / Quemado Institute / June 6, 2016 / slavjun6xPolitical analyst Diana Johnstone, in the article posted below, warns of the dangers of a Hillary Clinton presidency and constrasts her hawkish Korean policy with Donald Trump’s more reasonable stance. The commentary is brilliant, with the exception of two statements. The author contends: “Trump is groping clumsily, at times idiotically, toward a major shift in US foreign policy. He is ill-prepared for the task. If ever elected, he would have to fire the neocons and take on a whole new team of experts to educate and guide him. That would be something of a miracle.” Trump may seem clumsy to those who overlook the opposition he faces among corrupt globalists and entrenched transnational powers. To have any impact on that morass of self-serving oligarchs, the billionaire. . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Clinton, Unqualified for President, Plunged America into Foreign Policy Morass — Buchanan

Hillary Rejects ‘America First’ / By Patrick J. Buchanan / Patrick Buchanan website / June 2, 2016 / Quemado Institute / June 6, 2016 / slavjun6z“Clinton to Paint Trump as a Risk to World Order.” Thus did page one of Thursday’s New York Times tee up Hillary Clinton’s big San Diego speech on foreign policy. Inside the Times, the headline was edited to underline the point: “Clinton to Portray Trump as Risk to the World.” The Times promoted the speech as “scorching,” a “sweeping and fearsome portrayal of Mr. Trump, one that the Clinton campaign will deliver like a drumbeat to voters in the coming months.” What is happening here? As Donald Trump is splitting off blue-collar Democrats on issues like America’s broken borders and Bill Clinton’s trade debacles like NAFTA, Hillary Clinton is trying to peel off independents and Republicans by painting Trump as “temperamentally unfit” to be commander . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Hillary Anti-Trump Ad Backfires: Wall Street Bankers to Blame – Rolling Stone

Hillary Clinton’s New Anti-Trump Ad Misses the Mark / By Matt Taibbi / Rolling Stone / May 25, 2016 / Conclusion by Kennedy Applebaum / Quemado Institute / Clinton accuses Trump of “rooting” for a crash caused by her own donors. / slavmay26zA new attack ad put out by the Hillary Clinton campaign this week achieves the near-impossible, making Donald Trump look wronged and (almost) like a victim. More believably, it makes the Democrats look sleazy and disingenuous in comparison. The ad begins with a picture of a grinning Trump and the words, “In 2006, Donald Trump was hoping for a real estate crash.” It proceeds to a series of grim scenes from the financial crisis. Against a Roger and Me-esque montage of blighted neighborhoods, it reads off stats: “9 million Americans lost their jobs. 5 million people lost their homes.” . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

A Neocon Creation: Russia-China Alliance Too Strong For Washington – Paul Craig Roberts

Introduction by Karl Pomeroy / Quemado Institute / April 17, 2016 / slavapr17uPaul Craig Roberts, former Reagan administration insider and member of a “secret presidential committee” to investigate the CIA in connection with its perpetuation of the Cold War, is one of the world’s top experts on strategic threats to the United States. Top among these, Roberts notes, is the ever-growing Russian-Chinese alliance. In the following perceptive analysis, Roberts urges Americans to vote out the neocon puppets. Quemado Institute’s foremost . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

How CIA Controls the Media: Special Report

Introduction by Karl Pomeroy / Quemado Institute / March 31, 2016
AP WATERGATE DEEP THROATThat the Western mainstream media is a factory for lies, propaganda and fabrication has never been more evident than in the current presidential elections. The lies pile up by the day: Hillary hasn’t committed any crime (despite sending classified data over an unclassified network, a federal offense); Trump’s four bankruptcies make him unfit to lead (even though his other 96 businesses were successful); Cruz is eligible for President despite being born in Canada (although Obama had to “prove” he was born in the US) … the list is endless. In three revealing editorials below, political analysts Paul Craig Roberts, Arjun Walia of Global Research, and James F. Tracy also of Global Research, expose shocking facts about CIA and government direct manipulation . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Trump a Game Changer in US Foreign Policy – Andrei Akulov

Donald Trump’s Foreign Policy Views Reflect Sentiments of People / By Andrei Akulov for SCF / Strategic Culture Foundation / Posted at Quemado Institute / March 30, 2016
slavmar30zOn March 22, Donald Trump carried delegate-rich Arizona by a wide margin. He easily defeated his opponent (Ted Cruz), taking all 58 of its Republican delegates and adding to his delegate lead despite Mr Cruz’s easy victory in Utah. Those Republicans who hoped to stop Mr Trump suffered another blow. If not defeated in Wisconsin in two weeks, he is unlikely to be stopped from clinching the Republican nomination in June. Fully three-quarters of Republican primary voters expect Mr Trump to be their party’s nominee. Having won in eighteen states, the candidate is close to nearly forty-eight percent of the delegates. It brings into focus Mr. Trump’s stance on key foreign policy issues. In his interview with CNN ahead of March 22 Western Tuesday vote (Arizona, Idaho and Utah), Donald Trump said the US should rethink . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Trump Right About NATO, Washington Catalyzed Kiev’s Crypto-Nazi Government – David Stockman

Introduction by Karl Pomeroy / Quemado Institute / March 24, 2016
Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump InterviewDavid Stockman, in the article presented below, praises Republican US Presidential candidate Donald Trump for his sound noninterventionist policies. As Trump stated in a recent interview with the Washington Post, the US should end its involvement with NATO and stop interfering in the defense of other countries, a policy endorsed whole-heartedly by Quemado Institute. Indeed, Trump as President could put our website out of business. What would we have to complain about? Considering the horrendous cost in human terms of US interference in the Middle East and Ukraine, which has resulted in thousands of civilian deaths, nonintervention is certainly a start. The moral implications of these astrocities . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Donald Trump Speaks Against US Foreign Intervention – Washington Post

Trump Questions Need for NATO, Outlines Noninterventionist Foreign Policy / By Philip Rucker and Robert Costa / Washington Post / Posted at Quemado Institute / March 21, 2016
slavmar21vDonald Trump outlined an unabashedly noninterventionist approach to world affairs Monday, telling The Washington Post’s editorial board that he questions the need for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which has formed the backbone of Western security policies since the Cold War. The meeting at The Post covered a range of issues, including media libel laws, violence at his rallies, climate change, NATO and the U.S. presence in Asia. Speaking ahead of a major address on foreign policy later Monday in front of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, Trump said he advocates a light footprint in the world. In spite of unrest . . . MORE>>>

______________________________________________________________________

Russia as Ally, China as Foe: A Unique Dichotomy in US Relations

Introduction by Karl Pomeroy / Quemado Institute / March 16, 2016
Russia and China present two vastly different pictures in the US foreign relations arena. While geopolitical analysts, such as Brian Cloughley in the article below, lump them together as identical nonexistent threats, claiming tensions with the US stem entirely from errant Washington policy, the two countries could not be more different with regard to their potential as ally or foe. For those who followed events at the time, rather than projecting back a revisionist agenda, China in the 1950’s seized by force two vast adjacent territories: sovereign Tibet and Xinjiang. These brutal invasions, in which hundreds of thousands of foreign citizens were massacred, increased China’s land area by some 40%, adding . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

Trump Compassionate, Hillary Arch Racist – John V. Walsh

Who is the Arch Racist: Hillary or the Donald? / By John V. Walsh for Counterpunch / Information Clearing House / Posted at Quemado Institute / March 10, 2016
slavmar10pWho is the arch racist, Hillary or Trump? To answer that, let us ask another question, a simple one. Which is worse: to denigrate some members of a group or religion or race – or to kill them by the millions? And maim more millions and displace even more millions? Which is more “racist”? With that in mind, who is the arch racist, Hillary or The Donald? Do the liberals who criticize Trump, but not Hillary, as racist forget the slogan of the anti-Vietnam War movement, “Stop the Racist Bombing.” And which causes more blowback, more revenge attacks by the victims – the denigration with words or the killing with bombs and sanctions? . . . MORE>>

______________________________________________________________________

For more latest reports see our LATEST ARTICLES page.

______________________________________________________________________

Pentagon Threat: US Will Shoot Down Syrian, Russian Planes – Eric Zuesse

Dangerous Crossroads:
U.S. Invades Syria, And Warns Russia
By Eric Zuesse

Global Research
August 23, 2016
Conclusion by Karl Pomeroy
Quemado Institute

Russian Air Force in Syria: Su-27 Sukhois (--Senior Airman James Richardson)

Russian Air Force increases operations in Syria: Su-27 Sukhois (–Senior Airman James Richardson)

On Monday, August 22nd, the United States government—which demands the overthrow of the internationally-recognized-as-legal government of Syria—officially announced that America’s military forces in Syria will continue to occupy Syrian land, no matter what the Syrian government says, and will shoot down any Syrian planes that fly over U.S. forces there.

As reported on Monday by Al-Masdar News: The Pentagon has announced that the USA is ready to down Syrian and Russian planes that they claim threaten American advisers who by international law are illegally operating in northern Syria. On Friday, Pentagon spokesman Captain Jeff Davis claimed that US jets attempted to intercept Syrian planes to protect the American advisers operating illegally with Kurdish forces in Syria after Syrian government jets bombed areas of Hasakah when Kurdish police began an aggression against the National Defense Force.

On Monday, another Pentagon spokesman, Peter Cook, said, “We would continue to advise the Syrian regime to steer clear of those areas.”

“We are going to defend our people on the ground, and do what we need to defend them,” Cook told reporters.

This means that the U.S. government will not allow the Syrian government to expel or otherwise eliminate U.S. forces in Syria. The Syrian government never invited U.S. forces into Syria, but the U.S. now officially dares the Syrian government to assert its sovereignty over the areas where America’s troops are located.

Al-Masdar continued: When pushed further about Russia, Cook made it clear that the US would make the same aggression against Russian jets who are operating legally with the Syrian government’s approval and coordination. “If they threaten US forces, we always have the right to defend our forces,” Cook said.

This means that the U.S. not only is at war against the legitimate government of Syria, but that the U.S. government will also be at war against Russia if Russian forces (which the Syrian government did invite into Syria) defends Syrian forces from attacks in Syria by U.S. forces—forces that are illegally there.

These U.S. forces number only 300, of whom 250 were sent to Syria on April 24th to serve as advisors to other illegal military forces in Syria.

The vast majority of the illegal military forces in Syria are jihadists who had been hired by the Saudi government and the Qatari government, and supplied with U.S. weapons, to overthrow the Syrian government. Most of the other illegal forces in Syria are Kurdish forces, supported by the U.S. government to break Syria apart so as to create a separate Kurdish state in the majority-Kurdish far north-eastern tip of Syria.

The primary U.S. goal in Syria is to overthrow the Syrian government, which is led by the Baath Party, Syria’s secular Party.

Many Arabs insist upon Sharia, or Islamic law, but Syria’s Arabs are an exception; the Baath Party is and has always been supported by the majority of the Syrian people, including by most of Syria’s Arabs. Most Syrians are strongly opposed to Sharia law. Syria is the most secular nation in the Middle East.

For example, when Western-sponsored polls were taken in Syria, after the start in 2011 of the importation of jihadists into Syria, those polls showed that 55% of Syrians want Bashar al-Assad (the current leader of the Baath Party) to remain as Syria’s President, and “82% agree ‘IS [Islamic State] is US and foreign made group’.” Furthermore, only “22% agree ‘IS is a positive influence’,” and that 22% was the lowest level of support shown by Syrians for any of the presented statements, except for, “21% agree ‘Prefer life now than under Assad’”—meaning that Syrians believe that things were better before the U.S.-sponsored jihadists entered Syria to overthrow Assad.

Clearly, when ”82% agree ‘IS [Islamic State] is US and foreign made group’,” very few people in Syria support the 300 U.S. forces there. Not only is the U.S. an invader, but it (and especially the forces that the U.S. supports in Syria—most especially the jihadists, who are the vast majority of these forces) made life far worse (and far shorter) for virtually all Syrians.

Furthermore, that same poll found: “70% agree ‘Oppose division of country’.” Consequently, the Kurdish separatists are likewise opposed by the vast majority of Syrians.

The Syrian government, from now on, is in the uncomfortable position of having invaders on its territory, and of being warned that one of them—the U.S.—will be fully at war against Syria if Syria tries to expel them.

Russia too is now under warning from the United States, that, if Russia, an ally of Syria, takes any action to expel or kill any of the U.S. invaders in Syria, then the U.S. will also be at war against Russia.

The U.S. government is now also daring the Russian government. Perhaps the U.S. strategy here is to force Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin, either to back down, and abandon its Syrian ally, or else to launch a nuclear strike against the United States. If Putin backs down, that would greatly diminish his support from the Russian people, which is above 80% in all polls, including Western-sponsored ones. Perhaps this is the strategy of U.S. President Barack Obama, to drive Vladimir Putin out of office—something that might occur if the U.S. drives Bashar al-Assad out of office.

As Seymour Hersh reported, on 7 January 2016, “the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, then [in the summer of 2013] led by General Martin Dempsey, forecast that the fall of the Assad regime would lead to chaos and, potentially, to Syria’s takeover by jihadi extremists, much as was then happening in Libya,” And so Dempsey quit, and Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, director of the DIA between 2012 and 2014, was fired over the matter.

“The DIA’s reporting, he [Flynn] said, ‘got enormous pushback’ from the Obama administration. ‘I felt that they did not want to hear the truth.’”

Flynn is now a foreign-affairs advisor to the Republican Presidential candidate, Donald Trump, who is being criticized by the Democratic Presidential candidate, for being soft on Russia and insufficiently devoted to the U.S. goal of overthrowing Assad.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

The original source of this article is Global Research.

Quemado Institute Conclusion
By Karl Pomeroy

Many analysts believe the Russian military is stronger than that of the US. In addition, were there a military confrontation between the US and Russia, China would likely come to Russia’s defence. The US could never win such a war.

So why would the Pentagon seem to provoke direct conflict?

The Western financial elite, most of whom operate in Europe, control the American government. This group of bankers, rich corporate executives and corrupt diplomatic officials continues to intimidate Moscow because it stands in the way of total world domination. The elite of course realize that nuclear conflagration would mar their lavish lifestyles. They can’t be seeking the endgame of war.

It is probable the Western establishment believes Russia will not fight back—and for good reason. Vladimir Putin, too gentile for his job, has cowered on every conflict since the adoption of Crimea. He did not defend Donbass militarily, nor even diplomatically. If he fails to defend his own people, his threats of retaliation are empty.

There is an added benefit to the seeming imminence of war. Obama could declare a state of emergency and cancel the elections, should Trump be poised for a landslide victory after chair-bound Hillary loses the debates, and after Julian Assange releases more emails proving the ex-Secretary of State provided arms to ISIS.

____

slavaug23-16z
Click to enlarge.

“Hillary Clinton has serious health problems.
She needs stools and pillows at hand constantly.
She wants to debate Trump sitting down.” —Ben Garrison

Ruling Elite Seeks One World Government, Hillary a Puppet – Joachim Hagopian

Introduction
Why Does America Massacre Foreign People?
By Karl Pomeroy

Quemado Institute
August 19, 2016
Updated August 20, 2016
[Also see Conclusion by Karl Pomeroy.]

Council on Foreign Relations (--Theantimedia.org)

Council on Foreign Relations meeting (–theantimedia.org)

Yesterday the Ron Paul Institute posted the following quote:

Bin Laden Speaks…Should We Listen? Osama bin Laden’s youngest son, Hamza, purportedly released an audio recording earlier this week in which he called for young Saudis to get involved with al-Qaeda in Yemen and in which he called for retaliation against ongoing US military operations in several countries in the greater Middle East. Said the younger bin Laden: ‘We will continue striking you and targeting you in your country and abroad in response to your oppression of the people of Palestine, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia and the rest of the Muslim lands that did not survive your oppression.’ Should we listen to him and start thinking about removing his recruiting tools, or do we keep doing that which helps him and others like him recruit more terrorists?”   —Ron Paul Institute (VIDEO available at source.)

The younger bin Laden is right to complain of Western atrocities in Palestine, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia and other lands. The murder and oppression of these people is immoral, illegal, and violates the ten commandments—a cornerstone of the supposed religion of the perpetrators.

On the oppression of Palestine, Paul Craig Roberts posted a quote on August 19 from guest article Palestine, a Stolen and Oppressed Land: “Back in 1956, David Ben-Gurion, possibly struggling with his conscience, confessed: ‘If I were an Arab leader, I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural, we have taken their country. Sure God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We came from Israel, it’s true, but that was two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?’”

So why does Ron Paul mention just two options: removing bin Laden’s recruiting tools, or helping him recruit more terrorists. Why instead does the United States not end Western oppression of foreign populations? Even the Ron Paul Institute seems reluctant to ask this question—perhaps because it implies there might be a moral justification for the anger of our self-created enemies, a consideration clearly taboo. We are not allowed to honestly discuss the issue of terrorist motives, a curtailment of freedom of speech that interferes with solutions.

The answer? America does not lead a movement toward peace because the Western elite seeks the destruction of all sovereign nations. They pursue even the destruction of the sovereignty of the United States, a policy that manifests in the form of borders the Border Patrol are not allowed to defend, mounting debt and poverty, erosion of constitutional rights, invitations to terrorism and internal violence, radical violations of US law through undeclared immoral wars, and chaos-oriented media indoctrination.

The global elite, embodied in the Council of Foreign Relations and the New World Order, seeks one main goal: totalitarian rule by a single World Government. Geopolitical analyst Joachim Hagopian explains this in the following article:

.

One World Governance and the Council on Foreign Relations
“We Shall have World Government… by Conquest or Consent.”
By Joachim Hagopian

Global Research
August 18, 2016

New World Order propaganda rules and shapes the world. And there’s no more powerful propagator of propaganda that rules and shapes US global hegemony, world events and major geopolitical developments than the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). On its own website, the CFR describes itself as “an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher. ”Two weeks ago the powerful organization celebrated its 95th anniversary since it’s been the most influential force dictating US foreign policy throughout the 20th century chauvinistically called “the American century” right into the present 21st aptly called the New World Order century. The CFR is financed by highly endowed, tax exempt Rockefeller, Ford and Carnegie foundations.

 Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at Council on Foreign Relations January 31, 2013 Washington, DC (--cbsnews)


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at Council on Foreign Relations January 31, 2013 Washington, DC (–cbsnews)

The Bilderberg and CFR’s chosen member to become America’s next presidential puppet – Hillary Clinton – made no bones about whom she takes her NW Orders from:

“I [Hillary Clinton] am delighted to be here in these new headquarters. I have been often to, I guess, the mother ship in New York City, but it’s good to have an outpost of the Council right here down the street from the State Department. We get a lot of advice from the Council, so this will mean I won’t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future. (emphasis added)”

In 1950 the son of one of the Council on Foreign Relations’ founders, James Warburg emphatically decreed to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, “We shall have world government whether or not you like it – by conquest or consent.”

From its very outset the CFR as the US elite’s most public face subversively promoting New World Order has always maintained one explicit purpose – to bring about a one world government. In 1975 powerful CFR insider and former Judge Advocate General of the US Navy Admiral Chester Ward wrote in his book entitled Kissinger on the Couch about the ultimate aim of the Council on Foreign Relations:

“[The CFR has as a goal] submergence of US sovereignty and national independence into an all-powerful one-world government… this lust to surrender the sovereignty and independence of the United States is pervasive throughout most of the membership… In the entire CFR lexicon, there is no term of revulsion carrying a meaning so deep as ‘America First.’”

Nearly all the top military generals (two active members were my West Point roommates) and admirals, major corporate CEO’s and numerous government leaders in all three branches have been circulating through the revolving turnstile in and out of the public sector as prominent Council on Foreign Relations members. They represent the shadowy government where secrecy rules from behind the scenes. That said, it’s a matter of public record that virtually every Secretary of Defense has been a CFR lifer.

Since 1940 every Secretary of State but one has been on the CFR and/or Trilateral Commission, and a majority of Secretaries of Treasury as well. Multiple CIA directors have been in the CFR. For eight decades nearly every key National Security and Foreign Policy Advisor are/were members. And of course a significant number of US presidents and VP’s have been CFR members.

Regardless of what party happens to occupy the White House, an intransigent fixture operating at the highest echelons of power in Washington over the last century has been strategically assigned CFR plants.The CFR’s interlocking marriage between the private corporate sector and the public government sector is largely responsible for today’s lopsided world of harsh gross disparities.

As cases in point, the 62 richest people on earth possess more wealth than the majority of the 7.3 billion humans currently inhabiting the planet. The wealthiest 1% own more than the rest of the world combined and the global inequality gap between the rich and poor is widening at the fastest rate seen since the 19th century.

These alarming facts bear the result that the ruling elite owns and controls all the Fortune 500 transnational corporations, through backroom bribery deals owns and controls virtually every national government on earth, and only six oligarchs own the six top mega-media corporations controlling the outflow of over 90% of the world’s news and information.

Through monopolizing a centralized banking system of debt-based theft and global enslavement while plundering the Third World for its precious natural resources, consolidation of power into fewer and fewer hands has eliminated competition in a closed, thoroughly insulated, anything but free, now stagnating global market. As an example, over the last two decades alone the number of publicly traded companies listed on the US stock exchange has been decimated in half, from7,300 to 3,700. With the globalists wielding more power than ever before in human history, their centuries old, long sought after scheme of a one world government has never been closer at hand.

The means by which our planetary rulers plan to attain their long prized agenda is through such Rockefeller-Rothschild created entities as the Council on Foreign Relations. Indeed CFR members calling themselves the Informal Agenda Group drafted the UN proposal that FDR signed the next day establishing the UN as a world governance precursor in 1945. CFR PR Video

slavaug19-16wAssembling a diverse all-star cast of CFR members, the Council on Foreign Relations just released a self-serving infomercial video touting how significant and valuable its expertise role is in solving the complex challenges and problems facing humanity in the twenty-first century. In under three and a half minutes multiple sound bites delivered in rapid fire by strategically anointed elitists hailing from various walks of life are seen pontificating the need for CFR architects to masterfully craft such sound US foreign policy recommendations that promote peace, prosperity and New World Order wisdom.

To view: click https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytZpgPgKiDY

In order of appearance are CFR president Richard Haass, CNN national security analyst Juliette Kayyem, former Treasury Secretary and CFR co-chair Robert Rubin, ABC news anchor Juju Chang, global head of Impact Investing at Goldman Sachs Dina Habib Powell, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Oscar winning actress Angelina Jolie, the world’s largest book publisher Random House CEO Jon Meacham, Interfaith Center of New York Rev. Chloe Breyer, Park Avenue Synagogue Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove, HBO CEO Richard Plepler, President of Jigsaw (formerly Google Ideas) Jared Cohen, actor-producer Kalpen Modi, Time Magazine assistant managing editor Rana Foroohar, CNN GPS host Fareed Zakaria and Yahoo news anchor Bianna Golodryga.

An A-team of 16 dynamos are perfectly divided evenly along every demographic – from gender to racial ethnicity to represented industry to religion. This over-the-top, “feel good” commercial showcasing the elite is obviously designed to make us all feel safer trusting their benevolent wisdom. A neatly, fine-tuned grooming of elitism at its public face best, expounding propaganda that reassures us lowly, uninformed regular folks that the world’s in very skilled, capable hands with such intelligent, gifted, well-spoken movers and shakers when these elitists are in control at the helm solving all the world’s biggest problems and most pressing issues. The sample of represented powerhouse industries showcased in the video underscores the CFR’s sheer far-reaching tentacles of elitist dominance and power.

The PR video attempts to pass the CFR off as a benign humanitarian group out to both enlighten and save the world. Its featured CFR cheerleaders claim the organization is unbiased having no political ideology nor any agenda, which again is fiction as ever since 1921 its actions speak louder than their favorably biased words. The fact is the Council on Foreign Relations has been controlling US foreign policy for almost a century, and chief among its most obvious agendas has been building and maintaining US Empire’s global unipolar hegemony and military strength at all cost.

This refusal to share power with Russia and China in a bipolar world has humanity today teetering on the brink of WWIII and self-annihilation. History has also proven that the CFR has long carried an aggressive war agenda responsible for virtually unending US military conflict. As the most warring nation on earth, 93% of its time in existence America’s been at war killing fellow humans somewhere on the planet. A Gallup poll several years ago showed that the rest of the world views the US as the greatest threat to world peace in no small measure due to CFR’s role shaping foreign policy. Of course part and parcel of this war agenda is the unprecedented buildup of the arms industry and military industrial complex that Eisenhower gravely warned us against in vain largely due to CFR’s misguided influence. Enormous defense contractor giants like Lockheed, Raytheon, Boeing and General Electric have been direct fat cat beneficiaries of the CFR war agenda making trillions in profit over the years thanks to the mutually self-serving Council on Foreign Relations.

And finally, the most glaring treasonous agenda of all that the Council on Foreign Relations has consistently maintained for near an entire century is the destruction of the United States as an independent, sovereign nation. The CFR has always envisioned and been working persistently towards a totalitarian one world government. Like so much corporate sponsored advertising, this CFR ad features powerful liars once again promising one thing and then betraying their promise by doing another. They clearly state that CFR has no agenda, yet the historical facts prove that the Council on Foreign Relations has always maintained the New World Order agenda of a one world government.

The elitist propaganda machine is obviously working overtime, engaged in a thinly veiled political ad campaign, a sleek glossy facelift designed to upgrade its Mr. Burns-David Rockefeller, rule-the-world image by appeasing and trying to win over a riled up American public ready to turn on its elite masters. After all, this year US citizens are fast realizing that everything we’ve been taught to believe is fiction, and that in reality a full blown oligarchy has been masquerading as a propped up fake democracy.

Americans are just now starting to realize that the glorious US history taught in our whitewashed schoolbooks has brainwashed multiple generations into wrongly believing America’s always been God’s gift and savior to humanity and the rest of the world. Tell that to all the darker skinned peoples around the globe who’ve been bombed, raped and murdered, starting on US soil with the Native Americans and kidnapped African slaves and their descendants.

The public is just now finally coming to terms with recognizing that the system’s been rigged against them for a long time. With Hillary’s criminal exposure, presidential elections are blatantly rigged, the two-tiered justice system is horrendously in-our-face rigged, the stock market’s rigged, gold prices are rigged.

The dumbed down education system that extends even to higher learning is rigged, having turned generations of college grads intolifetime indentured servants now unemployed or working minimum wage jobs. While college grad wages increased only 1.6% in the last quarter century, the student debt burden has skyrocketed 163.8%. The US meritocracy work ethic that preaches working hard all your life eventually pays off is rigged because the entire Ponzi schemed economy’s been rigged ever since the 1913 Federal Reserve Act. Placing privatized central banksters in charge of the nation’s money supply manufacturing paper fiat out of thin air while charging interests off invisible reserves that don’t even exist has given the elite unlimited power to infiltrate and hijack our government through organizations like the Federal Reserve and CFR that have systematically degenerated our once vibrant democratic republic into a fascist totalitarian police state on the verge of utter collapse.

The fact is that in this highly polarized, explosive culture of growing violence, fear, hate, distrust has favored Donald Trump, one angry, “politically incorrect”, racist billionaire-showman promising delusions of grandeur to bring back America’s long lost “greatness”. This is upsetting the elite’s apple cart, threatening to throw a monkey wrench into the status quo of the rigged power structure.

This unpredictable, recklessly volatile dynamic currently gripping America has the divided populace ever more agitated, unstable and angry over facing the cold hard reality that the nation so many of us grew up loving has been thoroughly fleeced and destroyed by the treasonous Clinton-Bush-Obama international crime cabal that governs the world employing the same bloody, lawless thuggery as organized crime. Their ruthlessly violent, demonically motivated tactics are one and the same, only the ruling elite and their political and corporate puppets have historically enjoyed a deceptive, undeserved legitimacy not afforded the mafia.

Despite what the CFR infomercial claims, history explicitly exposes the Council on Foreign Relations’ relentless real agenda of one world governance that from behind the scenes is already informally operating, and how its promotion of global warming, global scarcity, global overpopulation, global terrorism, global refugee crises, global war and global economic collapse, all have been covertly contrived, manipulated and engineered by the ruling elite.

The elite’s not so secret, final objective is to finalize a cashless, RFID microchipped society under the absolute tyranny and control of an entrenched one world government. As a war machine maker, the Council on Foreign Relations should remain an enemy to every citizen of the world who values and desires peace and freedom.

Joachim Hagopian (--Veteranstoday.com)

Joachim Hagopian (–Veteranstoday.com)

Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate and former US Army officer. He has written a manuscript based on his unique military experience entitled “Don’t Let The Bastards Getcha Down.” It examines and focuses on US international relations, leadership and national security issues. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field with abused youth and adolescents for more than a quarter century. In recent years he has focused on his writing, becoming an alternative media journalist. His blog site is at:

http://empireexposed.blogspot.co.

The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Joachim Hagopian, Global Research, 2016

.

Quemado Institute Conclusion
By Karl Pomeroy

For more on the composition of the ruling elite, a list of executive committee members of the Trilateral Commission, a faction of the New World Order, is presented in our commentary Europe-Dominated Ruling Elite: US Dictatorship and the Anti-Russian Campaign. Contrary to the usual belief, 53% of the Executive Board are European, while only 21% operate in the US.

I regret that author Joachim Hagopian has been offended by Donald Trump, whom he describes as “one angry, ‘politically incorrect’, racist billionaire-showman promising delusions of grandeur to bring back America’s long lost ‘greatness’.” Trump may be rightfully angry, and indeed politically incorrect. But he has simply never made a racist comment in his entire election campaign. This allegation is based on misquotes taken out of context and misinterpreted by the media, by resentful foreigners, or by those who have friends and relatives among the illegal immigrant population. It is also true that people with certain areas of low self-esteem can mistakenly react to perceived slights, as we all know from our own experience.

Trump never meant to slight any person of any race. He is simply firm about immigration. The US does not owe immigration privileges to anyone. That is the baseline. What we offer to immigrants is generous. But the process must be above-board, and safe for those who live here. This is not racism. It applies to all immigrants.

The “delusions of grandeur” accusation may also stem from a deeper psychological weakness, in which people who do not feel particularly grand resent others who do. We all have the right to feel grand. This is the basis of positive thinking, as taught by author and minister Norman Vincent Peale, close friend and mentor of Donald Trump throughout his young adulthood. People unfamiliar with the techniques of positive thinking often mistake self-praise for ego. Self-praise is actuallly an affirmational process designed to build confidence and effectiveness. Trump has practiced this philosphy successfully, evidencing grandness in many of his world-class buildings and resorts.

Other than this one statement, Hagopian’s article seems right in every detail.

 

Trump Does Not Want War With Russia – Fred Reed

Hillary, Trump, and War With Russia
By Fred Reed

Information Clearing House
August 17, 2016
Posted by Quemado Institute
August 18, 2016

The Goddamdest Stupid Idea I Have Ever Heard, and I Have Lived in Washington.

Russian T14 armata (--Pavel Golovkin/AP/Army Times)

Russian T14 Armata (–Pavel Golovkin/AP/Army Times)

Don’t look for a walk-over. The T14 Armata, Russia’s latest tank. You don’t want to fight this monster if you can think of a better idea, such as not fighting it. Russia once made large numbers of second-rate tanks. That worm has turned. This thing is way advanced and outguns the American M1A2, having a 125mm smoothbore firing APFSDS long-rods to the Abrams 120mm. (As Hillary would know, that’s Armor-piercing, fin-stabilized, discarding-sabot. You did know, didn’t you, Hill?) This isn’t the place for a disquisition on armor, but the above beast is a very advanced design with unmanned turret and, well, a T34 it isn’t. (I was once an aficionado of tanks. If interested, here and here.)

A good reason to vote for Trump, a very good reason whatever his other intentions, is that he does not want a war with Russia. Hillary and her elite ventriloquists threaten just that. Note the anti-Russian hysteria coming from her and her remoras.

Such a war would be yet another example of the utter control of America by rich insiders. No normal American has anything at all to gain by such a war. And no normal American has the slightest influence over whether such a war takes place, except by voting for Trump. The military has become entirely the plaything of unaccountable elites.

A martial principle of great wisdom says that military stupidity comes in three grades: Ordinarily stupid; really, really, really stupid; and fighting Russia. Think Charles XII at Poltava, Napoleon after Borodino, Adolf, and Kursk.

Letting dilettantes, grifters, con men, pasty Neocons, bottle-blonde ruins, and corporations decide on war is insane. We have pseudo-masculine dwarves playing with things they do not understand. So far as I am aware, none of these fern-bar Clausewitzes has worn boots, been in a war, seen a war, or faces any chance of being in a war started by themselves. They brought us Iraq, Afghanistan, and ISIS, and can’t win wars against goatherds with AKs. They are going to fight…Russia?

A point that the tofu ferocities of New York might bear in mind is that wars seldom turn out as expected, usually with godawful results. We do not know what would happen in a war with Russia. Permit me a tedious catalog to make this point. It is very worth making.

When Washington pushed the South into the Civil War, it expected a conflict that might be over in twenty-four hours, not four years with as least 650,000 dead. When Germany began WWI, it expected a swift lunge into Paris, not four years of hideously bloody static war followed by unconditional surrender. When the Japanese Army pushed for attacking Pearl, it did not foresee GIs marching in Tokyo and a couple of cities glowing at night. When Hitler invaded Poland, utter defeat and occupation of Germany was not among his war aims. When the US invaded Vietnam, it did not expect to be outfought and outsmarted by a bush-world country. When Russia invaded Afghanistan it did not expect…nor when America invaded Afghanistan, nor when it attacked Iraq, nor….

Is there a pattern here?

The standard American approach to war is to underestimate the enemy, overestimate American capacities, and misunderstand the kind of war it enters. This is particularly true when the war is a manhood ritual for masculine inadequates – think Kristol, Podhoretz, Sanders, the whole Neocon milk bar, and that mendacious wreck, Hillary, who has the military grasp of a Shetland pony. If you don’t think weak egos and perpetual adolescence have a part in deciding policy, read up on Kaiser Wilhelm.

Now, if Washington accidentally or otherwise provoked a war with Russia in, say, the Baltics or the Ukraine, and actually used its own forces, where might this lead, given the Pentagon’s customary delusional optimism? A very serious possibility is a humiliating American defeat. The US has not faced a real enemy in a long time. In that time the armed forces have been feminized and social-justice warriorified, with countless officials having been appointed by Obama for reasons of race and sex. Training has been watered down to benefit girl soldiers, physical standards lowered, and the ranks of general officers filled with perfumed political princes. Russia is right there at the Baltic borders: location, location, location. Somebody said, “Amateurs think strategy, professionals think logistics.” Uh-huh. The Russians are not pansies and they are not primitive.

What would Washington do, what would New York make Washington do, having been handed its ass in a very public defeat? Huge egos would be in play, the credibility of the whole American empire. Could little Hillary Dillary Pumpkin Pie force NATO into a general war with Russia, or would the Neocons try to go it alone – with other people’s lives? (Russia also has borders with Eastern Europe, which connects to Western Europe. Do you suppose the Europeans would think of this?) Would Washington undertake, or try to undertake, the national mobilization that would be necessary to fight Russia in its backyard? Naval war? Nukes in desperation?

And, since Russia is not going to invade anybody unprovoked, Washington would have to attack. See above, the three forms of military stupidity.

The same danger exists incidentally with regard to a war with China in the South China Sea. The American Navy hasn’t fought a war in seventy years. It doesn’t know how well its armament works. The Chinese, who are not fools, have invested in weaponry specifically designed to defeat carrier battle groups. A carrier in smoking ruins would force Washington to start a wider war to save face, with unpredictable results. Can you name one American, other than the elites, who has anything to gain from war with China?

What has any normal American, as distinct from the elites and various lobbies, gained from any of our wars post Nine-Eleven? Hillary and her Neocon pack have backed all of them.

It is easy to regard countries as suprahuman beings that think and take decisions and do things. Practically speaking, countries consist of a small number of people, usually men, who make decisions for reasons often selfish, pathologically aggressive, pecuniary, delusional, misinformed, or actually psychopathic in the psychiatric sense. For example, the invasion of Iraq, a disaster, was pushed by the petroleum lobbies to get the oil, the arms lobbies to get contracts, the Jewish lobbies to get bombs dropped on Israel’s enemies, the imperialists for empire, and the congenitally combative because that is how they think. Do you see anything in the foregoing that would matter to a normal American? These do not add up to a well-conceived policy. Considerations no better drive the desire to fight Russia or to force it to back down.

I note, pointlessly, that probably none of America’s recent martial catastrophes would have occurred if we still had constitutional government. How many congressmen do you think would vote for a declaration of war if they had to tell their voters that they had just launched, for no reason of importance to Americans, an attack on the homeland of a nuclear power?

There are lots of reasons not to vote for Clinton and the suppurating corruption she represents. Not letting her owners play with matches rates high among them.

Fred’s Biography, As He Tells It: Fred, a keyboard mercenary with a disorganized past, has worked on staff for Army Times, The Washingtonian, Soldier of Fortune, Federal Computer Week, and The Washington Times. http://fredoneverything.org/

Full Transcripts: Trump Speeches on ISIS; Law and Order

Two Speech Transcripts with Concluding Comments by Karl Pomeroy

Quemado Institute
August 17, 2016

Full Transcript
Donald Trump’s ISIS and Foreign Policy Speech

Heavy.com
August 15, 2016

Donald Trump speaks at rally in Green Bay, Wisconsin (--Getty)

Donald Trump at rally in Green Bay, Wisconsin (–Getty)

Here is the full transcript of Donald Trump’s August 15th speech, via the campaign’s website:

Thank you. It is great to be with you this afternoon. Today we begin a conversation about how to Make America Safe Again.

In the 20th Century, the United States defeated Fascism, Nazism, and Communism. Now, a different threat challenges our world: Radical Islamic Terrorism. This summer, there has been an ISIS attack launched outside the war zones of the Middle East every 84 hours. Here, in America, we have seen one brutal attack after another. 13 were murdered, and 38 wounded, in the assault on Ft. Hood. The Boston Marathon Bombing wounded and maimed 264 people, and ultimately left five dead – including 2 police officers.

In Chattanooga, Tennessee, five unarmed marines were shot and killed at a military recruiting center. Last December, 14 innocent Americans were gunned down at an office party in San Bernardino, another 22 were injured. In June, 49 Americans were executed at the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, and another 53 were injured. It was the worst mass shooting in our history, and the worst attack on the LGTBQ community in our history.

In Europe, we have seen the same carnage and bloodshed inflicted upon our closest allies. In January of 2015, a French satirical newspaper, Charlie Hebdo, was attacked for publishing cartoons of the prophet Mohammed. Twelve were killed, including two police officers, and 11 were wounded. Two days later, four were murdered in a Jewish Deli.

In November of 2015, terrorists went on a shooting rampage in Paris that slaughtered 130 people, and wounded another 368. France is suffering gravely, and the tourism industry is being massively affected in a most negative way.

In March of this year, terrorists detonated a bomb in the Brussels airport, killing 32 and injuring 340. This July, in the South of France, an Islamic terrorist turned his truck into an instrument of mass murder, plowing down and killing 85 men, women and children – and wounding another 308. Among the dead were 2 Americans – a Texas father, and his 11-year-old son.

A few weeks ago, in Germany, a refugee armed with an axe wounded five people in a gruesome train attack. Only days ago, an ISIS killer invaded a Christian church in Normandy France, forced an 85-year-old priest to his knees, and slit his throat before his congregation.

Overseas, ISIS has carried out one unthinkable atrocity after another. Children slaughtered, girls sold into slavery, men and women burned alive.

Crucifixions, beheadings and drownings. Ethnic minorities targeted for mass execution. Holy sites desecrated. Christians driven from their homes and hunted for extermination. ISIS rounding-up what it calls the “nation of the cross” in a campaign of genocide. We cannot let this evil continue.

Nor can we let the hateful ideology of Radical Islam—its oppression of women, gays, children, and nonbelievers—be allowed to reside or spread within our own countries.

We will defeat Radical Islamic Terrorism, just as we have defeated every threat we have faced in every age before. But we will not defeat it with closed eyes, or silenced voices.

Anyone who cannot name our enemy, is not fit to lead this country. Anyone who cannot condemn the hatred, oppression and violence of Radical Islam lacks the moral clarity to serve as our President.

The rise of ISIS is the direct result of policy decisions made by President Obama and Secretary Clinton.

Let’s look back at the Middle East at the very beginning of 2009, before the Obama-Clinton Administration took over. Libya was stable. Syria was under control. Egypt was ruled by a secular President and an ally of the United States. Iraq was experiencing a reduction in violence. The group that would become what we now call ISIS was close to being extinguished. Iran was being choked off by economic sanctions.

Fast-forward to today. What have the decisions of Obama-Clinton produced?

Libya is in ruins, our ambassador and three other brave Americans are dead, and ISIS has gained a new base of operations. Syria is in the midst of a disastrous civil war. ISIS controls large portions of territory. A refugee crisis now threatens Europe and the United States.

In Egypt, terrorists have gained a foothold in the Sinai desert, near the Suez Canal, one of the most essential waterways in the world. Iraq is in chaos, and ISIS is on the loose. ISIS has spread across the Middle East, and into the West. In 2014, ISIS was operating in some 7 nations. Today they are fully operational in 18 countries with aspiring branches in 6 more, for a total of 24 – and many believe it is even more than that. The situation is likely worse than the public knows: a new Congressional report reveals that the Administration has downplayed the growth of ISIS, with 40% of analysts saying they had experienced efforts to manipulate their findings.

At the same time, ISIS is trying to infiltrate refugee flows into Europeand the United States.

Iran, the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism, is now flush with $150 billion in cash released by the United States – plus another $400 million in ransom. Worst of all, the Nuclear deal puts Iran, the number one state sponsor of Radical Islamic Terrorism, on a path to nuclear weapons.

In short, the Obama-Clinton foreign policy has unleashed ISIS, destabilized the Middle East, and put the nation of Iran—which chants ‘Death to America’—in a dominant position of regional power and, in fact, aspiring to be a dominant world power.

It all began in 2009 with what has become known as President Obama’s global ‘Apology Tour.’ In a series of speeches, President Obama described America as “arrogant,” “dismissive” “derisive” and a “colonial power.” He informed other countries that he would be speaking up about America’s “past errors.” He pledged that we would no longer be a “senior partner,” that “sought to dictate our terms.” He lectured CIA officers of the need to acknowledge their mistakes, and described Guantanamo Bay as a “rallying cry for our enemies.”

Perhaps no speech was more misguided than President Obama’s speech to the Muslim World delivered in Cairo, Egypt, in 2009.

In winning the Cold War, President Ronald Reagan repeatedly touted the superiority of freedom over communism, and called the USSR the Evil Empire.

Yet, when President Obama delivered his address in Cairo, no such moral courage could be found. Instead of condemning the oppression of women and gays in many Muslim nations, and the systematic violations of human rights, or the financing of global terrorism, President Obama tried to draw an equivalency between our human rights record and theirs.

His naïve words were followed by even more naïve actions.

The failure to establish a new Status of Forces Agreement in Iraq, and the election-driven timetable for withdrawal, surrendered our gains in that country and led directly to the rise of ISIS. The failures in Iraq were compounded by Hillary Clinton’s disaster in Libya. President Obama has since said he regards Libya as his worst mistake. According to then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, the invasion of Libya was nearly a split decision, but Hillary Clinton’s forceful advocacy for the intervention was the deciding factor.

With one episode of bad judgment after another, Hillary Clinton’s policies launched ISIS onto the world. Yet, as she threw the Middle East into violent turmoil, things turned out well for her. The Clintons made almost $60 million in gross income while she was Secretary of State.

Incident after incident proves again and again: Hillary Clinton lacks the judgement, the temperament and the moral character to lead this nation. Importantly, she also lacks the mental and physical stamina to take on ISIS, and all the many adversaries we face – not only in terrorism, but in trade and every other challenge we must confront to turn this country around.

It is time for a new approach.

Our current strategy of nation-building and regime change is a proven failure. We have created the vacuums that allow terrorists to grow and thrive.

I was an opponent of the Iraq war from the beginning—a major difference between me and my opponent. Though I was a private citizen, whose personal opinions on such matters was not sought, I nonetheless publicly expressed my private doubts about the invasion. Three months before the invasion I said, in an interview with Neil Cavuto, to whom I offer my best wishes for a speedy recovery, that “perhaps [we] shouldn’t be doing it yet,” and that “the economy is a much bigger problem.”

In August of 2004, very early in the conflict, I made a detailed statement to Esquire magazine. Here is the quote in full:

“Look at the war in Iraq and the mess that we’re in. I would never have handled it that way. Does anybody really believe that Iraq is going to be a wonderful democracy where people are going to run down to the voting box and gently put in their ballot and the winner is happily going to step up to lead the country? C’mon. Two minutes after we leave, there’s going to be a revolution, and the meanest, toughest, smartest, most vicious guy will take over. And he’ll have weapons of mass destruction, which Saddam didn’t have.

“What was the purpose of this whole thing? Hundreds and hundreds of young people killed. And what about the people coming back with no arms and legs? Not to mention the other side. All those Iraqi kids who’ve been blown to pieces. And it turns out that all of the reasons for the war were blatantly wrong. All this for nothing.”

So I have been clear for a long time that we should not have gone in. But I have been just as clear in saying what a catastrophic mistake Hillary Clinton and President Obama made with the reckless way in which they pulled out.

After we had made those hard-fought sacrifices and gains, we should never have made such a sudden withdrawal—on a timetable advertised to our enemies. Al Qaeda in Iraq had been decimated, and Obama and Clinton gave it new life and allowed it to spread across the world.

By that same token, President Obama and Hillary Clinton should never have attempted to build a Democracy in Libya, to push for immediate regime change in Syria or to support the overthrow of Mubarak in Egypt.

One more point on this: I have long said that we should have kept the oil in Iraq—another area where my judgement has been proven correct. According to CNN, ISIS made as much $500 million in oil sales in 2014 alone, fueling and funding its reign of terror. If we had controlled the oil, we could have prevented the rise of ISIS in Iraq—both by cutting off a major source of funding, and through the presence of U.S. forces necessary to safeguard the oil and other vital infrastructure. I was saying this constantly and to whoever would listen: keep the oil, keep the oil, keep the oil, I said—don’t let someone else get it.

If they had listened to me then, we would have had the economic benefits of the oil, which I wanted to use to help take care of the wounded soldiers and families of those who died—and thousands of lives would have been saved. This proposal, by its very nature, would have left soldiers in place to guard our assets. In the old days, when we won a war, to the victor belonged the spoils. Instead, all we got from Iraq – and our adventures in the Middle East—was death, destruction and tremendous financial loss.

But it is time to put the mistakes of the past behind us, and chart a new course.

If I become President, the era of nation-building will be ended. Our new approach, which must be shared by both parties in America, by our allies overseas, and by our friends in the Middle East, must be to halt the spread of Radical Islam. All actions should be oriented around this goal, and any country which shares this goal will be our ally. We cannot always choose our friends, but we can never fail to recognize our enemies.

As President, I will call for an international conference focused on this goal. We will work side-by-side with our friends in the Middle East, including our greatest ally, Israel. We will partner with King Abdullah of Jordan, and President Sisi of Egypt, and all others who recognize this ideology of death that must be extinguished.

We will also work closely with NATO on this new mission. I had previously said that NATO was obsolete because it failed to deal adequately with terrorism; since my comments they have changed their policy and now have a new division focused on terror threats.

I also believe that we could find common ground with Russia in the fight against ISIS. They too have much at stake in the outcome in Syria, and have had their own battles with Islamic terrorism.

My Administration will aggressively pursue joint and coalition military operations to crush and destroy ISIS, international cooperation to cutoff their funding, expanded intelligence sharing, and cyberwarfare to disrupt and disable their propaganda and recruiting. We cannot allow the internet to be used as a recruiting tool, and for other purposes, by our enemy—we must shut down their access to this form of communication, and we must do so immediately.

Unlike Hillary Clinton, who has risked so many lives with her careless handling of sensitive information, my Administration will not telegraph exact military plans to the enemy. I have often said that General MacArthur and General Patton would be in a state of shock if they were alive today to see the way President Obama and Hillary Clinton try to recklessly announce their every move before it happens—like they did in Iraq—so that the enemy can prepare and adapt.

The fight will not be limited to ISIS. We will decimate Al Qaeda, and we will seek to starve funding for Iran-backed Hamas and Hezbollah. We can use existing UN Security Council resolutions to apply new sanctions.

Military, cyber and financial warfare will all be essential in dismantling Islamic terrorism. But we must use ideological warfare as well.

Just as we won the Cold War, in part, by exposing the evils of communism and the virtues of free markets, so too must we take on the ideology of Radical Islam.

While my opponent accepted millions of dollars in Foundation donations from countries where being gay is an offense punishable by prison or death, my Administration will speak out against the oppression of women, gays and people of different faith.

Our Administration will be a friend to all moderate Muslim reformers in the Middle East, and will amplify their voices. This includes speaking out against the horrible practice of honor killings, where women are murdered by their relatives for dressing, marrying or acting in a way that violates fundamentalist teachings.

Over 1,000 Pakistani girls are estimated to be the victims of honor killings by their relatives each year. Recently, a prominent Pakistani social media star was strangled to death by her brother on the charge of dishonoring the family. In his confession, the brother took pride in the murder and said: “Girls are born to stay home and follow traditions.”

Shockingly, this is a practice that has reached our own shores. One such case involves an Iraqi immigrant who was sentenced to 34 years in jail for running over his own daughter claiming she had become “too Westernized.”

To defeat Islamic terrorism, we must also speak out forcefully against a hateful ideology that provides the breeding ground for violence and terrorism to grow.

A new immigration policy is needed as well.

The common thread linking the major Islamic terrorist attacks that have recently occurred on our soil – 9/11, the Ft. Hood shooting, the Boston Bombing, the San Bernardino attack, the Orlando attack—is that they have involved immigrants or the children of immigrants. Clearly, new screening procedures are needed.

A review by the U.S. Senate Immigration Subcommittee has identified 380 foreign-born individuals charged with terrorism or terrorismrelated offenses between 9/11 and 2014, and many more since then.

We also know that ISIS recruits refugees after their entrance into the country – as we have seen with the Somali refugee population in Minnesota.

Beyond terrorism, as we have seen in France, foreign populations have brought their anti-Semitic attitudes with them.

Pew polling shows that in many of the countries from which we draw large numbers of immigrants, extreme views about religion—such as the death penalty for those who leave the faith—are commonplace.

A Trump Administration will establish a clear principle that will govern all decisions pertaining to immigration: we should only admit into this country those who share our values and respect our people.

In the Cold War, we had an ideological screening test. The time is overdue to develop a new screening test for the threats we face today.

In addition to screening out all members or sympathizers of terrorist groups, we must also screen out any who have hostile attitudes towards our country or its principles – or who believe that Sharia law should supplant American law.

Those who do not believe in our Constitution, or who support bigotry and hatred, will not be admitted for immigration into the country.

Only those who we expect to flourish in our country—and to embrace a tolerant American society—should be issued visas.

To put these new procedures in place, we will have to temporarily suspend immigration from some of the most dangerous and volatile regions of the world that have a history of exporting terrorism.

As soon as I take office, I will ask the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security to identify a list of regions where adequate screening cannot take place. We will stop processing visas from those areas until such time as it is deemed safe to resume based on new circumstances or new procedures.

The size of current immigration flows are simply too large to perform adequate screening. We admit about 100,000 permanent immigrants from the Middle East every year. Beyond that, we admit hundreds of thousands of temporary workers and visitors from the same regions. If we don’t control the numbers, we can’t perform adequate screening.

By contrast, my opponent wants to increase the flow of Syrian refugees by 550% percent. The United States Senate Subcommittee on Immigration estimates that Hillary Clinton’s plan would mean roughly 620,000 refugees from all current refugee-sending nations in her first term, assuming no cuts to other refugee programs. This would be additional to all other nonrefugee immigration.

The Subcommittee estimates her plan would impose a lifetime cost of roughly $400 billion when you include the costs of healthcare, welfare, housing, schooling, and all other entitlement benefits that are excluded from the State Department’s placement figures.

In short, Hillary Clinton wants to be America’s Angela Merkel, and you know what a disaster this massive immigration has been to Germany and the people of Germany—crime has risen to levels that no one thought would they would ever see. We have enough problems in our country, we don’t need another one.

Finally, we will need to restore common sense to our security procedures.

Another common feature of the past attacks that have occurred on our soil is that warning signs were ignored. The 9/11 hijackers had fraud all over their visa applications. The Russians warned us about the Boston Bombers, here on political asylum, and the attackers were even twice interviewed by the FBI. The female San Bernardino shooter, here on a fiancé visa from Saudi Arabia, wrote of her support for Jihad online. A neighbor saw suspicious behavior but didn’t warn authorities, because said they didn’t want to be accused of racially profiling—-now many are dead and gravely wounded.

The shooter in Orlando reportedly celebrated in his classroom after 9/11.  He too was interviewed by the FBI. His father, a native of Afghanistan, supported the oppressive Taliban regime, and expressed anti-American views—and by the way, was just seen sitting behind Hillary Clinton with a big smile on his face all the way through her speech. He obviously liked what she had to say.

The Ft. Hood Shooter delivered a presentation to a room full of mental health experts before the attacks in which he threw out one red flag after another. He even proclaimed that “we love death more than you love life!”

These warnings signs were ignored because political correctness has replaced common sense in our society. That is why one of my first acts as President will be to establish a Commission on Radical Islam—which will include reformist voices in the Muslim community who will hopefully work with us. We want to build bridges and erase divisions.

The goal of the commission will be to identify and explain to the American public the core convictions and beliefs of Radical Islam, to identify the warning signs of radicalization, and to expose the networks in our society that support radicalization. This commission will be used to develop new protocols for local police officers, federal investigators, and immigration screeners.

We will also keep open Guantanamo Bay, and place a renewed emphasis on human intelligence. Drone strikes will remain part of our strategy, but we will also seek to capture high-value targets to gain needed information to dismantle their organizations. Foreign combatants will be tried in military commissions.

Finally, we will pursue aggressive criminal or immigration charges against anyone who lends material support to terrorism. Similar to the effort to take down the mafia, this will be the understood mission of every federal investigator and prosecutor in the country.

To accomplish a goal, you must state a mission: the support networks for Radical Islam in this country will be stripped out and removed one by one.

Immigration officers will also have their powers restored: those who are guests in our country that are preaching hate will be asked to return home.

To Make America Safe Again, We Must Work Together Again.

Our victory in the Cold War relied on a bipartisan and international consensus. That is what we must have to defeat Radical Islamic terrorism.

But just like we couldn’t defeat communism without acknowledging that communism exists—or explaining its evils—we can’t defeat Radical Islamic Terrorism unless we do the same.

This also means we have to promote the exceptional virtues of our own way of life—and expecting that newcomers to our society do the same.

Pride in our institutions, our history and our values should be taught by parents and teachers, and impressed upon all who join our society.

Assimilation is not an act of hostility, but an expression of compassion. Our system of government, and our American culture, is the best in the world and will produce the best outcomes for all who adopt it. This approach will not only make us safer, but bring us closer together as a country.

Renewing this spirit of Americanism will help heal the divisions in our country. It will do so by emphasizing what we have in common—not what pulls us apart.

This is my pledge to the American people: as your President I will be your greatest champion. I will fight to ensure that every American is treated equally, protected equally, and honored equally. We will reject bigotry and oppression in all its forms, and seek a new future built on our common culture and values as one American people.

Only this way, will we make America Great Again and Safe Again – For Everyone.

Thank you.

Quemado Institute Comments
By Karl Pomeroy

Unlike most politicians, Donald Trump has the courage to speak his mind. This is worthy of praise. One undeserved consequence of this however is, his policies are scrutinized and often unjustly vilified. I disagree with certain details, but the billionaire executive has basically the right idea: no more regime change, and no more “nation building”.

These immoral policies, honed by the neoconservatives of the George W. Bush adminisistration then expanded by Barrack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, have brought immeasurable suffering to the human race, for example to the Eastern Orthodox Christians of Donbass after the US overthrow of Ukrainian President Yanukovich, to the people of Iraq after the shock-and-awe invasion of that modern peaceful country and the assassination of its secular leader Saddam Hussein, and to the people of Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, and many more.

Foreign aggression is just plain wrong. Killing innocent people is just plain wrong. Yet Western political discourse seldom mentions foreign victims—a taboo subject that might raise public outcry, as it did in the Vietnam war days when the press was still relatively free.

Trump at least had the heart to speak of the slaughtered kids in Iraq. But it isn’t just the kids, it’s everyone—indeed their entire culture. America and Europe are reaping their karma, whether or not the global elite acknowledge cause and effect.

But cause and effect can be reversed, and Trump seems intent on doing so.

I was confused for a moment by Trump’s condemnation of Iran for harboring terrorists. Not an Iran expert, my first thought was, “What terrorists?” Then he clarified: Hamas and Hezbollah. Aha! I thought. Yet to me, this seems a distortion. My superficial impression was that these controversial organizations were in some cases rightfully defending Palestine, whose residents have been unfairly oppressed by the world-approved Israeli invaders. Then I had to remind myself that Trump is posing as pro-Israel, hence the designation.

Trump criticized Obama’s apology speech, but he did so for the wrong reasons. Obama was right to apologize for inhumane US actions. What was wrong with his speech was that it was insincere. Not only has Obama failed to end neocon aggression, he let that aggression escalate, most tragically in Ukraine, Syria and Libya.

Overall I agree with Trump. To put it in perspective, imagine Paul Craig Roberts, The Saker, David Stockman or even Ron Paul running for US president. They too have basically the right idea, though I disagree with them on many details.

In contrast,I disagree with Hillary on just about everything.

____

Full Transcript
Donald Trump’s Law and Order Speech

Heavy.com
August 16, 2016

Here is the full transcript of Donald Trump’s speech via the campaign’s website. (Note: Because Trump is known to improvise, his prepared remarks do not match up precisely with what was actually broadcast).

It’s so great to be here tonight. I am honored to also be joined this evening by Governor Scott Walker, Chairman Reince Priebus, and Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

We are at a decisive moment in this election.

Last week, I laid out my plan to bring jobs back to our country. Yesterday, I laid out my plan to defeat Radical Islamic Terrorism. Tonight, I am going to talk about how to make our communities safe again from crime and lawlessness.

Let me begin by thanking the law enforcement officers here in this city, and across this country, for their service and sacrifice in difficult times.

The violence, riots and destruction that have taken place in Milwaukee is an assault on the right of all citizens to live in security and peace. Law and order must be restored. It must be restored for the sake of all, but most especially the sake of those living in the affected communities.

The main victims of these riots are law-abiding African-American citizens living in these neighborhoods. It is their jobs, their homes, their schools and communities which will suffer as a result.

There is no compassion in tolerating lawless conduct. Crime and violence is an attack on the poor, and will never be accepted in a Trump Administration.

The narrative that has been pushed aggressively for years now by our current Administration, and pushed by my opponent Hillary Clinton, is a false one. The problem in our poorest communities is not that there are too many police, the problem is that there are not enough police. More law enforcement, more community engagement, more effective policing is what our country needs.

Just like Hillary Clinton is against the miners, she is against the police. You know it, and I know it.

Those peddling the narrative of cops as a racist force in our society—a narrative supported with a nod by my opponent—share directly in the responsibility for the unrest in Milwaukee, and many other places within our country. They have fostered the dangerous anti-police atmosphere in America.

Everytime we rush to judgment with false facts and narratives—whether in Ferguson or in Baltimore—and foment further unrest, we do a direct disservice to poor African-American residents who are hurt by the high crime in their communities.

During the last 72 hours, while protestors have raged against the police here in Milwaukee, another 9 were killed in Chicago and another 46 were wounded. More than 2,600 people have been shot in Chicago since the beginning of the year, and almost 4,000 killed in President Obama’s hometown area since his presidency began.

How are we serving these American victims by attacking law enforcement officers? The war on our police must end. It must end now.

The war on our police is a war on all peaceful citizens who want to be able to work and live and send their kids to school in safety. Our job is not to make life more comfortable for the rioter, the looter, the violent disruptor. Our job is to make life more comfortable for the African-American parent who wants their kids to be able to safely walk the streets. Or the senior citizen waiting for a bus. Or the young child walking home from school.

For every one violent protestor, there are a hundred moms and dads and kids on that same city block who just want to be able to sleep safely at night. My opponent would rather protect the offender than the victim.

Hillary Clinton-backed policies are responsible for the problems in the inner cities today, and a vote for her is a vote for another generation of poverty, high crime, and lost opportunities.

I care too much about my country to let that happen. We all care too much about our country to let that happen.

Good policing saves lives. My dear friend, Rudy Giuliani, knows a thing or two about this. The policies put into place by Rudy ultimately brought down crime by 76 percent and murder by 84 percent. Think of how many families were saved, how much heartache was prevented, when police were put into communities and criminals were removed.

Imagine how many lives could have been saved, all across this country, if Democratic politicians hadn’t blocked in their cities what Rudy did in New York City? I’ll make sure we deliver safe neighborhoods here in Milwaukee, and all across this country.

It’s easy for Hillary Clinton to turn a blind eye to crime when she has her own private security force. I believe all Americans, not just the powerful, are entitled to security. Hillary Clinton has had her chance. She failed. Now it’s time for new leadership.

The Hillary Clinton agenda hurts poor people the most. There is no compassion in allowing drug dealers, gang members, and felons to prey on innocent people. It is the first duty of government to keep the innocent safe, and when I am President I will fight for the safety of every American–and especially those Americans who have not known safety for a very, very long time.

I am asking for the vote of every African-American citizen struggling in our country today who wants a different future.

It is time for our society to address some honest and very difficult truths.

The Democratic Party has failed and betrayed the African-American community. Democratic crime policies, education policies, and economic policies have produced only more crime, more broken homes, and more poverty. Let us look at the situation right here in Milwaukee, a city run by Democrats for decade after decade. Last year, killings in this city increased by 69 percent, plus another 634 victims of non-fatal shootings. 18-29-year-olds accounted for nearly half of the homicide victims. The poverty rate here is nearly double the national average. Almost 4 in 10 African-American men in Milwaukee between the ages of 25-54 do not have a job. Nearly four in 10 single mother households are living in poverty. 55 public schools in this city have been rated as failing to meet expectations, despite ten thousand dollars in funding per-pupil. There is only a 60% graduation rate, and it’s one of the worst public school systems in the country.

1 in 5 manufacturing jobs has disappeared in Milwaukee since we fully opened our markets to China, and many African-American neighborhoods have borne the brunt of this hit.

To every voter in Milwaukee, to every voter living in every inner city, or every forgotten stretch of our society, I am running to offer you a better future.

The Democratic Party has taken the votes of African-Americans for granted. They’ve just assumed they’ll get your support and done nothing in return for it. It’s time to give the Democrats some competition for these votes, and it’s time to rebuild the inner cities of America—and to reject the failed leadership of a rigged political system.

I’m not part of the corrupt system. In fact, the corrupt system is trying to stop me. I’ve been paying my own way. The voters in the Republican Party this year defied the donors, the consultants, the power brokers, and choose a nominee from outside our failed and corrupt and broken system.

The other party—the Democratic Party—nominated the personification of special interest corruption. The Democratic Party rigged the nomination to give it to Hillary Clinton, thus giving the soul of their party this year to the special interests.

I am running to listen to your voice, to hear your cries for help. The quiet voices in our society, not the loudest demonstrators, need to have their demands heard.

Jobs. Safety. Opportunity. Fair and equal representation.

We reject the bigotry of Hillary Clinton which panders to and talks down to communities of color and sees them only as votes, not as individual human beings worthy of a better future. She doesn’t care at all about the hurting people of this country, or the suffering she has caused them.

The African-American community has been taken for granted for decades by the Democratic Party. It’s time to break with the failures of the past—I want to offer Americans a new future.

It is time for rule by the people, not rule by special interests.

Every insider, getting rich off of our broken system, is throwing money at Hillary Clinton. The hedge fund managers, the Wall Street investors, the professional political class. It’s the powerful protecting the powerful. Insiders fighting for insiders.

I am fighting for you.

When we talk about the insider, who are we talking about? It’s the comfortable politicians looking out for their own interests. It’s the lobbyists who know how to insert that perfect loophole into every bill. It’s the financial industry that knows how to regulate their competition out of existence. The insiders also include the media executives, anchors and journalists in Washington, Los Angeles, and New York City, who are part of the same failed status quo and want nothing to change.

Every day you pick up a newspaper, or turn on the nightly news, and you hear about some self-interest banker or some discredited Washington insider says they oppose our campaign. Or some encrusted old politician says they oppose our campaign. Or some big time lobbyist says they oppose our campaign.

I wear their opposition as a badge of honor. Because it means I am fighting for REAL change, not just partisan change. I am fighting—all of us across the country are fighting—for peaceful regime change in our own country. The media-donor-political complex that’s bled this country dry has to be replaced with a new government of, by and for the people.

The leadership class in Washington D.C., of which Hillary Clinton has been a member for thirty years, has abandoned the people of this country. I am going to give the people their voice back.

Think about it. The people opposing our campaign are the same people who have left our border open and let innocent people suffer as a result. The people opposing our campaign are the same people who have led us into one disastrous foreign war after another. The people opposing our campaign are the same people who lied to us about one trade deal after another.

Aren’t you tired of a system that gets rich at your expense? Aren’t you tired of big media, big businesses, and big donors rigging the system to keep your voice from being heard? Are you ready for change?

Are you ready for leadership that puts you, the American people, first? That puts your country first? That puts your family first?

Let’s talk about what this means for the inner cities of America. It’s time to break through the television noise, the entrenched interests. I understand that a lot of powerful people in our political system – a lot of people who’ve created our problems—will lose a lot of their contracts, and their special gigs, if African-American voters, and all minority voters, support my campaign.

It’s time to stop making the special interests rich. It’s time to make the American people rich.

I am going to Make America Wealthy Again.

The Democratic Party has run nearly every inner city in this country for 50 years, and run them into financial ruin. They’ve ruined the schools. They’ve driven out the jobs. They’ve tolerated a level of crime no American should consider acceptable.

Violent crime has risen 17% in America’s 50 largest cities last year. Killings of police officers this year is up nearly percent. Homicides are up more than 60% in Baltimore. They are up more than 50% in Washington, D.C. This is the future offered by Hillary Clinton. More poverty, more crime, and more of the same. The future she offers is the most pessimistic thing I can possibly imagine.

It is time for a different future.

Here is what I am proposing.

First, on immigration. No community in this country has been hurt worse by Hillary Clinton’s immigration policies than the African-American community. Now she is proposing to print instant work permits for millions of illegal immigrants, taking jobs directly from low-income Americans. I will secure our border, protect our workers, and improve jobs and wages in your community. We will only invite people to join our country who share our tolerant values, who support our Constitution, andwho love all of our people.

On trade, I am going to renegotiate NAFTA, stand up to China, withdraw from the TPP, and protect every last American job.

On taxes, I am going to give a massive tax cut to every worker and small business in this country, bring thousands of new companies and millions of new jobs onto our shores – and make it very difficult for our businesses to leave. I am going to reform our regulations so jobs stay in America, and new businesses come to America to hire workers right here in Milwaukee. Every policy my opponent has sends jobs overseas. I am going to bring trillions in new wealth back to the United States.

On education, it is time to have school choice, merit pay for teachers, and to end the tenure policies that hurt good teachers and reward bad teachers. We are going to put students and parents first.

Hillary Clinton would rather deny opportunities to millions of young African-American children, just so she can curry favor with the education bureaucracy.

I am going to allow charter schools to thrive, and help young kids get on the American ladder of success: a good education, and a good-paying job.

On crime, I am going to support more police in our communities, appoint the best prosecutors and judges in the country, pursue strong enforcement of federal laws, and I am going to break up the gangs, the cartels and criminal syndicates terrorizing our neighborhoods. To every lawbreaker hurting innocent people in this country, I say: your free reign will soon come crashing to an end.

On healthcare, we are going to get rid of Obamacare—which has caused soaring double-digit premium increases—and give choice to patients and consumers. Aetna, just today, announced they are dropping out—as are many of the major insurance companies.

On government corruption, I am going to restore honor to our government. We’ve seen the corruption of Hillary Clinton, the mass email deletions, the pay-for-play at the State Department, the profiteering, the favors given to foreign corporations and governments at your expense. We’ve seen a former Secretary of State lie to Congress about her illegal email scheme, risk innocent American lives, and bring dishonor onto our government.

In my Administration, I am going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information. No one will be above the law.

I am going to forbid senior officials from trading favors for cash by preventing them from collecting lavish speaking fees through their spouses when they serve.

I am going to ask my senior officials to sign an agreement not to accept speaking fees from corporations with a registered lobbyist for five years after leaving office, or from any entity tied to a foreign government. This is all just the beginning.

We are going to make this a government of the people once again. This is our chance to take back power from all the people who’ve taken it from you. The reason you see the establishment media lining up behind my opponent is because they are scared that you, with your vote, can take away their power and return it to your family and community.

These are tough times. But I know we can make American Greater Than Ever Before.

To do this, we are going to need a fighter in the White House.

I will be your fighter.

To defeat crime and Radical Islamic Terrorism in our country, to win trade in our country, you need tremendous physical and mental strength and stamina. Hillary Clinton doesn’t have that strength and stamina. She cannot win for you.

Most importantly, she has bad judgment. Bad judgment on terrorism, bad judgement on foreign policy, bad judgment on trade.

The only individuals she’s ever delivered for is her donors—not the people.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. My opponent asks her supporters to repeat a three-word pledge. Her pledge reads: “I’m With Her”

I choose to recite a different pledge. My pledge reads: “I’m With You—the American people.”

I will fight to ensure that every American is treated equally, protected equally, and honored equally. We will reject bigotry and hatred and oppression in all of its forms, and seek a new future of security, prosperity and opportunity—a future built on our common culture and values as one American people.

I am asking for your vote so I can be your champion in the White House. We will once again be a country of law and order, and a country of great success.

To every parent who dreams for their children, and to every child who dreams for their future, I say these words to you tonight: I’m with you, I will fight for you, and I will win for you.

Together, We Will Make America Strong Again.

We Will Make American Safe Again.

And We Will Make America Great Again.

Thank you, and God Bless.

Quemado Institute Comments
By Karl Pomeroy

Domestic peace and order are the foundation of civilization. I say “peace and order” rather than “law and order” to avoid the totalitarian implications of the latter.

Without peace and order, the physically and economically weaker members of society are arbitrarily restricted in their actions, regardless of their mental and spiritual abilities. Only with peace and order can enlightened individual expression emerge.

Most would agree. Where controversy arises is in the implementation.

Here Trump ignores essential facts. We may need more police. But first the police must be better trained. They need intensive education in psychology, diplomacy, and the meaning of constitutional rights, so suspected lawbreakers are handled respectfully and nonviolently. Our justice system also needs an overhaul, so that only the guilty are sentenced, sentences are fair, the health of prisoners is guaranteed, and most cases go to trial, rather than the current 3% due to plea bargains extorted under pressure.

With few exceptions, people will respect the law if the law respects them.

Trump seems to harbor the naive notion that police protect law-abiding citizens. Actually in many places, the police are a bigger threat to law-abiding citizens than are the criminals. Police can arrest you for anything or nothing. They wield unchecked power. Trump needs to see that this must change. Then we can talk about law and order.

Given that our justice system is addressed and our law enforcers adequately trained, then yes, the police need our whole-hearted support. Their jobs are scary. No human being should have to endure the dangers these officers face.

Broadly speaking, I agree the police deserve support and respect. There are many cases that make big news in which an injured suspect flagrantly defied the police. This puzzles me. What made them think they could get away with defiance? It puts an officer at risk, and he will react instinctively. One must respect the police, whether or not they deserve it. This is a matter of survival.

Despite this point of disagreement, Trump’s views on immigration and corruption are boldly spoken and sensible.

 

Outrageous Rubbish of the Anti-Trump Elite: Analysts Defend Republican Candidate

Momentum Builds For Donald Trump As Authors
Expose Media Deception

Introduction by Karl Pomeroy

Quemado Institute
August 12, 2016

slavaug12-16y.

Attempts by the neoconservative American establishment to derail the campaign of Donald Trump are backfiring, as prominent geopolitical analysts cut through the media hyperole and expose the rigged system for what it is: a political machine designed to perpetuate the power and perks of the global elite while destroying the foundations of American democracy.

.

.

James Petras, Stephen Lendman, and Patrick Buchanan argue in the following commentaries for a rapid turnaround of political trends in favor of Donald Trump:

.

Obama Versus Trump, Putin and Erdogan:
Can Coups Defeat Elected Governments?

By James Petras

Information Clearing House
August 11, 2016

Never in the history of the United States, has a President and Supreme Court Judge openly advocated the overthrow of a Presidential candidate. Never has the entire mass media engaged in a round-the-clock one-sided, propaganda war to discredit a Presidential candidate by systematically ignoring or distorting the central socio-economic issues of their opposition.

“Many of our interlocutors have been purged or arrested”. — James Clapper, US Director of Intelligence on Turkish Coup (Financial Times 8/3/16, p. 4)

Introduction

Washington has organized a systematic, global, no holds barred campaign to oust Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump from the electoral process. The virulent anti-Trump animus, the methods, goals and mass media resemble authoritarian regimes preparing to overthrow political adversaries.

Comparable propaganda efforts led to political coups in Chile in 1973, Brazil 1964, ad Venezuela in 2002. The anti-Trump forces include both political parties, a Supreme Court judge, Wall Street bankers, journalists and editorialist of all the major media outlets and the leading military and intelligence spokespeople.

Washington’s forcible and illegal ouster of Trump is part and parcel of a world-wide campaign to overthrow leaders and regimes which raise questions about aspects of the imperial policies of the US and EU.

We will proceed to analyze the politics of the anti-Trump elite, the points of confrontation and propaganda, as a prelude to the drive to oust opposition in Latin America, Europe, the Middle East and Asia.

The Anti-Trump Coup

Never in the history of the United States, has a President and Supreme Court Judge openly advocated the overthrow of a Presidential candidate. Never has the entire mass media engaged in a round-the-clock one-sided, propaganda war to discredit a Presidential candidate by systematically ignoring or distorting the central socio-economic issues of their opposition.

The call for the ouster of a freely elected candidate is nothing more or less than a coup d’état.

Leading television networks and columnists demand that the elections be annulled, following the lead of the President and prominent Republican and Democratic Congressional and Party leaders. In other words, the political elite openly rejects democratic electoral processes in favor of authoritarian manipulation and deception. The authoritarian elite relies on magnifying tertiary, questionable personal judgement calls to mobilize coup backers. They systematically avoid the core economic and political issues which candidate Trump has raised – and attracted mass support—which challenge fundamental policies backed by the two Party elites.

The Roots of the Anti-Trump Coup

Trump has raised several key issues which challenge the Democratic and Republican elite. Trump has drawn mass support and won elections and public opinion polls by:

(1) rejecting the free trade agreements which has led major multinationals to relocate abroad and disinvest in well-paying industrial jobs in the US.

(2) calling for large scale public investment projects to rebuild the US industrial economy, challenging the primacy of financial capital.

(3) opposing the revival of a Cold War with Russia and China and promoting greater economic co-operation and negotiations.

(4) rejecting US support for NATO’s military build-up in Europe and intervention in Syria, North Africa and Afghanistan.

(5) questioning the importation of immigrant labor which lowers job opportunities and wages for local citizens.

The anti-Trump elite systematically avoid debating these issues; instead they distort the substance of the policies. Instead of discussing the job benefits which will result from ending sanctions with Russia, the coupsters screech that ‘Trump supports Putin, the terrorist’. Instead of discussing the need to redirect investment inward to create US jobs, the anti-Trump junta mouth clichés that claim his critique of globalization would ‘undermine’ the US economy.

To denigrate Trump, the Clinton/Obama junta resorts to political scandals to cover-up mass political crimes. To distract public attention, Clinton-Obama falsely claim that Trump is a ‘racist’, backed by David Duke, a racist advocate of “Islamophobia”. The anti-Trump junta promoted the US- Pakistani parents of a military war casualty as victims of Trump’s slanders even as they rooted for Hillary Clinton, promotor of wars against Muslim countries and author of military policies that sent thousands of US soldiers to their grave.

Obama and Clinton are the imperial racists who bombed Libya and Somalia and killed, wounded and displaced over 2 million sub-Saharan Black-Africans. Obama and Clinton are the Islamaphobes who bombed and killed and evicted five million Muslims in Syria and one million Muslims in Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq.

In other words, Trump’s mistaken policy to restrict Muslim immigration is a reaction to the hatred and hostility engendered by the Obama- Clinton million-person Muslim genocide.

Trump’s “America First” policy is a rejection of overseas imperial wars – seven wars under Obama-Clinton. Their militarist policies have inflated budget deficits and degraded US living standards.

Trump’s criticism of capital and job flight has threatened Wall Street’s billion-dollar profiteering – the most important reason behind the bi-partisan junta’s effort to oust Trump and the working class’s support for Trump.

By not following the bi-partisan Wall Street, war agenda, Trump has outlined another business agenda which is incompatible with the current structure of capitalism. In other words’ the US authoritarian elite does not tolerate the democratic rules of the game even when the opposition accepts the capitalist system.

Likewise, Washington’s quest for ‘mono-power’ extends across the globe. Capitalist governments which decide to pursue independent foreign policies are targeted for coups.

Obama-Clinton’s Junta Runs Amok

Washington’s proposed coup against Trump follows similar policies directed against political leaders in Russia, Turkey, China, Venezuela, Brazil and Syria.

Russian President Putin has been demonized by the US propaganda media on an hourly basis for the better part of a decade. The US has backed oligarchs and promoted economic sanctions; financed a coup in the Ukraine; established nuclear missiles on Russia’s frontier; and launched an arms race to undermine President Putin’s economic policies in order to provoke a coup.

The US backed its proxy Gulenist ‘invisible government’ in its failed coup to oust President Erdogan, for failing to totally embrace the US Middle East agenda.

Likewise, Obama-Clinton have backed successful coups in Latin America. Coups were orchestrated in Honduras, Paraguay and more recently in Brazil to undermine independent Presidents and to secure satellite neo-liberal regimes. Washington presses forward to forcibly oust the national-populist government of President Maduro in Venezuela.

Washington has escalated efforts to erode, undermine and overthrow the government of China’s President Xi-Jinping through several combined strategies. A military build-up of an air and sea armada in the South China Sea and military bases in Japan,

Australia and the Philippines; separatist agitation in Hong Kong, Taiwan and among the Uyghurs; a US- Latin American- Asia free trade agreements which excludes China.

Conclusion

Washington’s strategy of illegal, violent coups to retain the delusion of empire stretches across the globe, ranging from Trump in the US to Putin in Russia, from Erdogan in Turkey to Maduro in Venezuela to Xi Jinping in China. The conflict is between US-EU imperialism backed by their local clients against endogenous regimes rooted in nationalist alliances. The struggle is ongoing and sustained and threatens to undermine the political and social fabric of the US and the European Union.

The top priority for the US Empire is to undermine and destroy Trump by any means necessary. Trump already has raised the question of ‘rigged elections’. But each elite media attack of Trump seems to add to and strengthen his mass support and polarize the electorate.

As the elections approach, will the elite confine themselves to verbal hysteria or will they turn from verbal assassinations to the ‘other kind’?

Obama’s global coup strategy shows mixed results: they succeeded in Brazil but were defeated in Turkey; they seized power in the Ukraine but were defeated in Russia; they gained propaganda allies in Hong Kong and Taiwan but suffered severe strategic economic defeats in the region as China’s Asian trade policies advanced.

As the US elections approach, and Obama’s pursuit of his imperial legacy collapses, we can expect greater deception and manipulation and perhaps even frequent resort to elite-designed ‘terrorist’ assassinations.

James Petras is a Bartle Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York.

__

NYT Insinuates Trump Wants Hillary Assassinated

By Stephen Lendman

Global Research
August 11, 2016

Times anti-Trump propaganda reached a new low with an August 9 article, editorial and commentary.

Its propaganda turned truth on its head, suggesting Trump wants “gun rights supporters…tak(ing) matters into their own hands” by assassinating Clinton if she prevails in November.

What prompted such outrageous rubbish? At an August 9 North Carolina rally, he said “Hillary wants to abolish the Second Amendment…If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks.”

Later on Fox News, he called gun owner rights “a strong powerful movement, the Second Amendment.”

“Hillary wants to take your guns away. She wants to leave you unprotected in your home. This is a tremendous political movement. The NRA, as you know, endorsed me. They’re terrific people…They agree 100% with what I said. And there can be no other interpretation. Even reporters have told me. I mean, give me a break.”

In no way did his remarks suggest wanting Hillary assassinated—nothing indicating he wants her harmed in any way. Led by deplorable NYT reporting, the insinuation blasted across the media suggested otherwise.

Times editors disgraced themselves headlining “Further Into the Muck With Mr. Trump,” willfully lying, saying “Americans find themselves asking whether Donald Trump has called for the assassination of Hillary Clinton.”

Only easily manipulated ones, carpet-bombed by Times and similar rot insinuating it, blasting him round-the-clock on cable television, waging war by other means, willfully mischaracterizing everything he says, expressing one-sided support for Hillary.

Times editors ended their anti-Trump rant, calling on “Republicans … to repudiate Mr. Trump once and for all.”

Journalism Professor Robert Jensen once called Times columnist Tom Friedman “scary (featuring) underinflated insights, twisted metaphors, second-rate thinking, third-rate writing (and) hack journalis(m).”

On August 9, he disgracefully bashed Trump, calling him “illegitimate … a threat to the nation … the equivalent of a Nazi war criminal,” saying his “ambiguous wink wink to Second Amendment people” is the stuff that got former “Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin … assassinated.”

Jensen should have added he’s paid big bucks to lie, supporting war goddess Hillary while calling Trump “a disgusting human being … The likes of (him) should never come this way again.”

The disturbing irony of accusing Trump of wanting Hillary assassinated is unsupported by anything violent in his background.

Whereas her orchestrated Libya and Syria wars, along with support for all other US ones since the 1990s slaughtered millions of defenseless human beings with the same right to life as herself.

Of all presidential aspirants in US history, she’s by far the most despicable, ruthless and dangerous, crucial to keep from succeeding Obama—politically, not violently.

I’ll repeat what I’ve said before about The Times. All the news it calls fit to print isn’t fit to read!!

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.” http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

___

Yes, the System Is Rigged

By Pat Buchanan

Pat Buchanan Website
August 11, 2016

“I’m afraid the election is going to be rigged,” Donald Trump told voters in Ohio and Sean Hannity on Fox News. And that hit a nerve.

“Dangerous,” “toxic,” came the recoil from the media.

Trump is threatening to “delegitimize” the election results of 2016.

Well, if that is what Trump is trying to do, he has no small point. For consider what 2016 promised and what it appears about to deliver.

This longest of election cycles has rightly been called the Year of the Outsider. It was a year that saw a mighty surge of economic populism and patriotism, a year when a 74-year-old Socialist senator set primaries ablaze with mammoth crowds that dwarfed those of Hillary Clinton.

It was the year that a non-politician, Donald Trump, swept Republican primaries in an historic turnout, with his nearest rival an ostracized maverick in his own Republican caucus, Senator Ted Cruz.

More than a dozen Republican rivals, described as the strongest GOP field since 1980, were sent packing. This was the year Americans rose up to pull down the establishment in a peaceful storming of the American Bastille.

But if it ends with a Clintonite restoration and a ratification of the same old Beltway policies, would that not suggest there is something fraudulent about American democracy, something rotten in the state?

If 2016 taught us anything, it is that if the establishment’s hegemony is imperiled, it will come together in ferocious solidarity—for the preservation of their perks, privileges and power.

All the elements of that establishment—corporate, cultural, political, media—are today issuing an ultimatum to Middle America: Trump is unacceptable.

Instructions are going out to Republican leaders that either they dump Trump, or they will cease to be seen as morally fit partners in power.

It testifies to the character of Republican elites that some are seeking ways to carry out these instructions, though this would mean invalidating and aborting the democratic process that produced Trump.

But what is a repudiated establishment doing issuing orders to anyone?

Why is it not Middle America issuing the demands, rather than the other way around?

Specifically, the Republican electorate should tell its discredited and rejected ruling class: If we cannot get rid of you at the ballot box, then tell us how, peacefully and democratically, we can be rid of you?

You want Trump out? How do we get you out?

The Czechs had their Prague Spring. The Tunisians and Egyptians their Arab Spring. When do we have our American Spring?

The Brits had their “Brexit,” and declared independence of an arrogant superstate in Brussels. How do we liberate ourselves from a Beltway superstate that is more powerful and resistant to democratic change?

Our CIA, NGOs and National Endowment for Democracy all beaver away for “regime change” in faraway lands whose rulers displease us.

How do we effect “regime change” here at home?

Donald Trump’s success, despite the near-universal hostility of the media, even much of the conservative media, was due in large part to the public’s response to the issues he raised.

He called for sending illegal immigrants back home, for securing America’s borders, for no amnesty. He called for an America First foreign policy to keep us out of wars that have done little but bleed and bankrupt us.

He called for an economic policy where the Americanism of the people replaces the globalism of the transnational elites and their K Street lobbyists and congressional water carriers.

He denounced NAFTA, and the trade deals and trade deficits with China, and called for rejection of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

By campaign’s end, he had won the argument on trade, as Hillary Clinton was agreeing on TPP and confessing to second thoughts on NAFTA.

But if TPP is revived at the insistence of the oligarchs of Wall Street, the Business Roundtable, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce—backed by conscript editorial writers for newspapers that rely on ad dollars—what do elections really mean anymore?

And if, as the polls show we might, we get Clinton—and TPP, and amnesty, and endless migrations of Third World peoples who consume more tax dollars than they generate, and who will soon swamp the Republicans’ coalition—what was 2016 all about?

Would this really be what a majority of Americans voted for in this most exciting of presidential races?

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable,” said John F. Kennedy.

The 1960s and early 1970s were a time of social revolution in America, and President Nixon, by ending the draft and ending the Vietnam war, presided over what one columnist called the “cooling of America.”

But if Hillary Clinton takes power, and continues America on her present course, which a majority of Americans rejected in the primaries, there is going to a bad moon rising.

And the new protesters in the streets will not be overprivileged children from Ivy League campuses.

 

Political Assassination The American Way: Trump Enters Elite Kill Zone – Finian Cunningham

Political Assassination – The American Way
By Finian Cunningham

Sputnik News
Reposted at Quemado Institute
August 11, 2016

SCRANTON, PA - JULY 27: Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump, July 27, 2016 (--John Moore/Getty Images)

Donald Trump, July 27, 2016 (–John Moore/Getty Images)

Donald Trump has entered a political kill zone. And the American establishment is lining up to take him out. We are talking here in virtual terms – at least thus far.

Nowadays, political assassination by US powers-that-be does not necessarily involve physical liquidation of the individual deemed to be an enemy of the state. Who needs all that blood and controversy? Especially when character assassination achieves the same desired end result — that is, elimination of target from the public domain.

The fierce media crossfire that the Republican presidential contender is being subjected to leaves little doubt that this is a concerted effort to destroy this politician.

In the past week, we have seen a fusillade of vilification fired at the New York property tycoon-turned presidential hopeful. Everything, it seems, has been thrown at him, from his Slovenian-born wife’s alleged US visa violations, to his bullying of crying babies at rallies, to his serving as an unwitting agent for Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

It’s so transparent and preposterous, it is almost hilarious.

Evidently, the US corporate news media are out to bring Trump down in spite of his stubborn support among ordinary Republican voters. It is obvious that the Washington establishment has determined that Democrat rival Hillary Clinton is the preferred choice to protect their privileged interests as the next occupant of the White House.

And the US media — as a pillar of the establishment — is doing its bit to eliminate Trump from the supposedly free presidential election due in November by aiding and abetting in assassinating his character in the eyes of the public.

It is ironic really given that there is so much more sordid stories to be reported on Clinton, given her involvement in warmongering, clandestine regime-change operations and abuse of state secrecy for her own self-aggrandizement with foreign sources of money.

The latest sign that the secretive US Deep State — Pentagon, CIA, FBI, Wall Street financiers — is moving to install their White House candidate is the letter published this week by some 50 senior Republican “national security experts” who endorsed Clinton while eviscerating Trump.

Yes, that’s right, Republicans backing a Democrat. Which just goes to show the uniformity of interests.

The signatories included former CIA director Michael Hayden, ex-chief of homeland security Michael Chertoff, both of whom served in the George W Bush administration, as well as John Negroponte who was a former director of national intelligence and alleged purveyor of death squads in Central America during the 1980s.

The joint anti-Trump letter followed the publication only days ago of an oped piece in the New York Times by another ex-CIA head, Michael Morell in which he lambasted Trump as a Russian stooge.

All of these figures are intimately connected to the US Deep State and all are unanimously pillorying Trump as a “dangerous threat to American national security”.

For his part, Trump rebuffed the latest volley of vilification by saying that the list of national security “experts” are responsible for creating the Iraq war, the loss of American troops’ lives and the rise of terrorism across the Middle East.

Cheekily, he thanked them for all going public with their names so that the American people can hold them to account for foreign policy disasters.

However, the point here is that the campaign to discredit Trump is not just some haphazard run of bad luck on the candidate’s part for mis-steps and mis-speaks that he may have issued on the hustings trail.

The intense, concerted nature of the campaign to destroy Trump demonstrates how the Washington power structure, including the corporate media, is setting him up for character assassination. This is the kind of political liquidation that the American plutocracy excels at.

A few decades ago, American “executive action” — or “termination with extreme prejudice — involved, more often than not, literally murdering the individual target.

The most notorious case is that of President John F Kennedy who was assassinated on November 22, 1963, in Dallas. Around that time, several other foreign political leaders were also killed by American state agents, including Patrice Lumumba of Congo, Rafael Trujillo of Dominican Republic and Ngo Dinh Diem of South Vietnam. Political murder was, still is, par for the American course.

The late New Orleans attorney, Jim Garrison, who probed the JFK assassination, said that the primary reason for his murder was that the president was working to end the Cold War with Russia. Kennedy was quietly using backchannels with Russian counterpart Nikita Krushchev to implement ambitious plans for nuclear weapons disarmament. JFK had also flatly rejected secret proposals presented by the Pentagon for a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the Soviet Union. He was in addition closing down CIA-sponsored terrorist operations in Cuba and he had declared a withdrawal of US troops from the nascent Vietnam war.

In this way, Kennedy had entered the political kill zone, as far as the powerful, unelected Deep State was concerned. His policies were threatening huge vested interests of military manufacturers, Big Oil and Wall Street financiers. Hence, the CIA and its contract killers were deployed to eliminate the “problem”.

Donald Trump shares two aspects with JFK. Like Kennedy, the business magnate is independently wealthy, which allows him to speak his mind without apparently having to ingratiate himself with powerful sponsors.

Secondly, and more importantly, Trump has repeatedly pitched his election platform against the relentless build up of the US-led NATO military alliance in Eastern Europe, as well as overseas deployment of American forces, and, in particular, Washington’s policy of hostility towards Russia.

Trump has called for the normalization of relations with Russia. His foreign policy position is anathema to the Washington establishment which requires — as an absolute necessity — the demonization of foreign countries as “national security threats” in order to maintain the gargantuan US militarized economy. In short, the American Deep State thrives on continual war-making. War is a permanent function of bankrupt American capitalism.

This systemic dysfunction is what the Cold War with Russia was and continues to be about — the pumping of trillions of dollars into corporate and financial elites, who get away with the scam because of their lackeys among the political and media channels.

Anyone who defies these powerful American interests is liable for termination. They have entered the kill zone. In former times, the American methods of termination with extreme prejudice routinely involved physical elimination.

Five decades after JFK, the US methods of political assassination have evolved to become more sophisticated. Character assassination may suffice most of the time. No need for contract hitmen or messy public enquiries. Media hitmen will do. The target just needs to be placed in the crossfire of a media barrage, with no let up in negative shots.

Any foreign leader who likewise becomes a “problem” for US power interests is also targeted similarly. Russia’s President Putin being perhaps the best example of this.

As the US presidential election approaches over the next three months, just watch how the shadowy powers in Washington mobilize to take Trump out of the race.

For taking out political enemies with extreme prejudice is the American way.

Hillary Exemplar of Neo-Fascism; Trump An Anathema To Pentagon-CIA – Finian Cunningham

Introduction by Kennedy Applebaum
The Campaign Circus

Quemado Institute
August 8, 2016

Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton (--ABC News)

Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton (–ABC News)

Former director of the Central Intelligence Agency Michael J Morell vilifies Republican candidate Donald Trump for minor personality traits while hailing Democratic rival Hillary Clinton for her drive to wage illegal wars, an irony elucidated in the first article below by geopolitical analyst Finian Cunningham.

Starkly contrasting Morell’s hawkish viewpoint, former Georgia Senator and Assistant Secretary General for Defense Support at NATO Mack Mattingly argues that Trump’s support for normalized relations with Russia is really the most reasonable stance, especially in view of the fact that NATO’s mandate evaporated at the end of the Cold War.

If the US 2016 elections appear to be a media circus, this is not the fault of Donald Trump, who advocates reason in world affairs. The neocon warmongers and their corporate-owned news agencies have made the election a circus by slandering Trump’s every word and deed. These champions of the global elite then falsely blame the Republican candidate for the diversionary spectacle they themselves have created.

Don’t fall for their nonsense. Look at what Trump actually says. A comparision of statements by Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin on US foreign policy, presented at the end of this post, shows both men share a truthful world picture. This is the road to peace.

.

Pentagon, CIA Form Praetorian Guard for Clinton
as Warmonger President
By Finian Cunningham

Strategic Culture Foundation
August 8, 2016

Michael J. Morell (--Washington Times)

Michael J. Morell (–Washington Times)

Former director of the Central Intelligence Agency Michael J Morell is the latest in a phalanx of senior US military-intelligence figures who are shedding any pretense of political neutrality and giving their full-throated endorsement to Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

In a New York Times opinion piece, Morell starkly backed Clinton as the most «highly qualified to be commander-in-chief… keeping our nation safe».

The ex-CIA chief’s op-ed piece also served as a blunt hatchet job on Republican presidential rival Donald J Trump. Morell said the New York billionaire-turned politician is «not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security».

The hoary, old scare-theme of «national security» is being rehabilitated as the criterion for electing Clinton. It also has the disturbing connotation of an increasingly militarized totalitarian regime that the United States is becoming.

While showering Clinton with glowing praise, the former CIA spymaster trounced Trump with a litany of flaws, including «self-aggrandizement, his overreaction to perceived slights, his tendency to make decisions based on intuition, his refusal to change his views based on new information, his routine carelessness with the facts, his unwillingness to listen to others and his lack of respect for the rule of law».

Morell’s «coup de grace» for Trump was that he was a «national security danger» owing to his alleged indifference towards the US-led NATO military alliance and European security, and unwillingness to confront Russia.

After accusing Trump of being «careless with facts», Morell makes this reckless, sensationalist claim: «In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr Putin had recruited Mr Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation».

This is a breath-taking interference in the nominally civilian sphere of US politics by unelected military-paramilitary elements, whereby a candidate for presidency is accused of being a foreign puppet. It is a throwback to the Cold War witch-hunting days of McCarthy and «Un-American activities».

This very public intervention by a top CIA figure in the US presidential election is an extraordinarily brazen affront to constitutional norms. Traditionally, the American military and intelligence apparatus has always been careful to assume a neutral relation with regard to Washington politics – at least in public.

In the 2016 election, however, the boundaries between civilian politics and the military powers are being flagrantly jettisoned. The military and the Deep State cabal are, in effect, moving to preordain the White House occupant. This situation has barely perceptible difference from a military coup appointing a civilian junta to administer.

John Allen at DNC (--Paul Hennessy/Polaris/Newscom)

John Allen at DNC (–Paul Hennessy/Polaris/Newscom)

At the Democrat National Convention in Philadelphia last week, the endorsement of Hillary Clinton by military top brass was conspicuous. One of the main Pentagon cheerleaders was Four-Star Marine General John Allen, who gave a bloodcurdling and ranting speech declaring how «our enemies will fear» an America led by Clinton.

This rush to partisan politics by the US military has even led to unease among certain Pentagon quarters. Only days after the DNC’s militaristic rally, General Martin Dempsey, who was formerly Chairman of the Joint Staffs, took the unprecedented step of publishing a cautionary article warning: «Keep Your Politics Private, My Fellow Generals and Admirals».

Dempsey did not mention General Allen or others by name, but it was clear to whom he was referring and the jingoistic display in support of Clinton. And it was also clear that Dempsey saw the open embrace of partisan politics by the Pentagon as a worrying development undermining democracy in the US. He feared «the erosion of civil-military relations».

What is that qualifies Hillary Clinton for such support? Former CIA boss Morell listed these «attributes» as «her belief that America is an exceptional nation that must lead in the world for the country to remain secure and prosperous; her understanding that diplomacy can be effective only if the country is perceived as willing and able to use force if necessary; and, most important, her capacity to make the most difficult decision of all – whether to put young American women and men in harm’s way».

In other words, what is most appreciated is how Clinton is prepared and willing to take America into ever more wars. Despite the horrific legacy that she is already responsible as Secretary of State in the Obama administration (2009-2013) when she prosecuted wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and, covertly, in Syria and Ukraine.

And yet, ex-CIA chief Morell, who served alongside Clinton in these disastrous wars, has the gall to censure Trump for «his lack of respect for the rule of law».

By contrast, Trump, for all his flaws and awry views on immigration and race relations, has not espoused warmongering zeal to any comparable extent. Indeed, the Republican candidate has called for normalization of relations with Russia in particular and has notified that he would order a withdrawal of US forces from Asia, Europe and other regions in order to «rebuild America first». His views on not rushing into a hypothetical war to defend NATO Baltic nations from a far-fetched Russian invasion are seen by many ordinary Americans as a common sense position. For the Pentagon-CIA nexus, however, Trump’s views are anathema.

Hillary Clinton (--Ron Paul Institute)

Hillary Clinton (–Ron Paul Institute)

This is what it gets down to. Clinton is the candidate of choice for the US military-industrial complex because she will enhance corporate profits and a $600-billion annual budget that feeds the Pentagon-CIA leviathan.

Crucial to this role is reinforcing a belligerent foreign policy towards the world in general and towards Russia in particular. Or, as Morell puts it, Clinton’s «belief that America is an exceptional nation that must lead in the world for the country to remain secure and prosperous».

It is this exceptional, supremacist Washington ideology that has brought the world to such a dangerous precipice.

Hillary Clinton, ironically, far more than the maverick Donald Trump, is proving to be an exemplar of what can only be called the Neo-fascist ideology that is becoming increasingly extant in Washington.

The Pentagon-CIA Praetorian Guard that is being formed around Clinton is not only a harbinger of the militarized totalitarian state administered from Washington; it is also a signal that the United States is moving openly to a policy of unabashed, unrestrained permanent war against any foreign country it so deems.

.

Trump Is Right Again On NATO

Trump Official Website
(from Daily Caller)
August 8, 2016

Former Georgia Senator Mack Mattingly, wrote the piece below, published in the Daily Caller, “Trump is Right Again on NATO”

Mack Mattingly (--youtube.com)

Mack Mattingly (–youtube.com)

“In 1998, fifteen former colleagues and I — eight Republican and eight Democrat former U.S. Senators — co-authored a letter to the Senate, that was intended to dissuade what appeared at the time to be a post Cold War zeal to expand the NATO alliance, even as we were building new relationships with Russia. Along with the others who signed, I knew the subject well after serving from 1987-1990 as Assistant Secretary General for Defense Support at NATO.

To put that letter in perspective, both then and now, it should be noted that when the Cold War ended, the mission of NATO—a 16 nation alliance formed at the end of WWII specifically to provide collective security against the Soviet Union (Warsaw Pact)—was both successful and complete. NATO was no longer justified under its original mandate. The proper path would have been to create a new treaty outlining a new purpose for the alliance, not just to keep the club together. The EU, including its U.S. Ambassador, was already present in Europe, and some in the EU also had a military alliance created by the Treaty of Rome. Multiple layers of government doing the same tasks is nothing more than bureaucracy.

….

When Mr. Trump suggested earlier that he thought he “could get along well with Vladimir Putin,” many in the establishment media and even a number of our fellow Republicans took issue with the statement—as if it is an imperative that any presumptive president should reflexively denounce the Russian president, even when he could very well end up as a necessary partner in regional conflicts. As an email scandal has erupted at the opening of the Democratic National Convention, the official Democrat response has been to place the blame directly on Moscow.

Mr. Trump’s notably more diplomatic response reminded me of one of the 1998 letter’s more prescient lines: “we seem to take rather cavalierly the opportunity at long last to build a friendship with Russia.” There was a brief window after 1991 when the former Soviet Union opened up to the West. William Perry, who was President Clinton’s Defense Secretary from 1994 to 1997, recently recounted this opening during a speech in London: “In the last few years, most of the blame can be pointed at the actions that Putin has taken. But in the early years I have to say that the United States deserves much of the blame. Our first action that really set us off in a bad direction was when Nato started to expand, bringing in eastern European nations, some of them bordering Russia.”

When my former colleagues and I came together to write that bipartisan letter back in 1998, we could see that NATO had the potential to become less of a bulwark than a tripwire if it continued its trajectory of ill-advised expansion. Our question was, “How can we admit some and exclude others without creating instability and tensions?” If the goal was stability in Europe, how, we asked, “can there be stability if Russia is destabilized by expansion?”

Today, I find that the reluctance to question the role of NATO in its current form is far more dangerous and short-sighted than a pragmatic proposal to reevaluate its efficacy in light of changing conditions. In his autobiographical “Waging Peace, 1956-1961: The White House Years,” President Eisenhower, noting his own concerns, expressed to JFK during his transition that, “America is carrying far more than her share of free world defense.” Mr. Trump’s suggestions that NATO’s members share its costs more equitably and that its doctrine be adjusted to focus more on terrorism, where the U.S. and Russia’s threat horizons converge, seems more realistic and wise in the light of history.”

.

Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin
Shared Views on US Foreign Policy

What Trump Says About American Foreign Policy

Foreign Policy Speech
April 27, 2016

slavjul26-16w“Unfortunately, after the Cold War our foreign policy veered badly off course…. Logic was replaced with foolishness and arrogance, which led to one foreign policy disaster after another.

“We went from mistakes in Iraq to Egypt to Libya, to President Obama’s line in the sand in Syria. Each of these actions have helped to throw the region into chaos and gave ISIS the space it needs to grow and prosper…. It all began with a dangerous idea that we could make western democracies out of countries that had no experience or interests in becoming a western democracy. We tore up what institutions they had and then were surprised at what we unleashed. Civil war, religious fanaticism, thousands of Americans just killed [and] lives, lives, lives wasted…. The vacuum was created that ISIS would fill.

“[T]he legacy of the Obama-Clinton interventions will be weakness, confusion and disarray, a mess. We’ve made the Middle East more unstable and chaotic than ever before. We left Christians subject to intense persecution and even genocide…. Our actions in Iraq, Libya and Syria have helped unleash ISIS, and we’re in a war against radical Islam, but President Obama won’t even name the enemy, and unless you name the enemy, you will never ever solve the problem.

“After Secretary Clinton’s failed intervention in Libya, Islamic terrorists in Benghazi took down our consulate and killed our ambassador and three brave Americans. Then, instead of taking charge that night, Hillary Clinton decided to go home and sleep…. Clinton blames it all on a video, an excuse that was … proven to be absolutely a total lie. Our ambassador was murdered and our secretary of state misled the nation.

“We desire to live peacefully and in friendship with Russia and China.”

What Putin Says about American Foreign Policy

Address to eighth meeting of Russian Federation ambassadors
June 30, 2016

slavjul26-16x“I therefore say again that cooperation, a common will, and willingness to seek compromises are the key to resolving the greatest and most complex problems, no matter where in the world they arise.

“However, we see how some of our partners continue stubborn attempts to retain their monopoly on geopolitical domination. They put to use centuries of experience in suppressing, weakening, and setting opponents against each other, and turn to their advantage enhanced political, economic, financial and now information levers as well.

“By this, I mean, for example, the practice of intervening in other countries’ internal affairs, provoking regional conflicts, exporting so-called ‘colour revolutions’ and so on. In pursuing this policy, they sometimes take on as accomplices terrorists, fundamentalists, ultra-right nationalists, and even outright neo-fascists. […]

“The military intervention in Iraq and Libya are the most vivid examples of this irresponsible and mistaken policy that has led to a rise in terrorism and extremism. It is clear to everyone today that this policy has contributed to the emergence of menacing organisations such as the Islamic State (DAISH). Terrorists have tried to turn to their advantage, and not without success, the breakdown in state systems and the results of, frankly speaking, clumsy experiments in exporting democracy to parts of the Middle East and North Africa. Every man and his dog talks about this now. It would be funny if it were not so sad, and if it were not the cause of so many tragedies.”

Nuclear War vs. Global Peace: Trump and Putin Poised to Solve Crisis