Archive | November 12th, 2016

Trump Is Picking His Cabinet: Here’s a Short List

Secretary of State

Whether Mr. Trump picks an ideologue or a seasoned foreign policy hand from past Republican administrations, his challenge will be that the State Department is the centerpiece of the post-1945 experiment of alliance-building and globalism, which Mr. Trump said he would dismantle.

John R. Bolton Former United States ambassador to the United Nations under George W. Bush

Bob Corker Senator from Tennessee and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Newt Gingrich Former House speaker

Zalmay Khalilzad Former United States ambassador to Afghanistan

Stanley A. McChrystal Former senior military commander in Afghanistan

Treasury Secretary

The secretary will be responsible for government borrowing in financial markets, assisting in any rewrite of the tax code and overseeing the Internal Revenue Service. The Treasury Department also carries out or lifts financial sanctions against foreign enemies — which are key to President Obama’s Iran deal and rapprochement with Cuba.

Thomas Barrack Jr. Founder, chairman and executive chairman of Colony Capital; private equity and real estate investor

Jeb Hensarling Representative from Texas and chairman of the House Financial Services Committee

Steven Mnuchin Former Goldman Sachs executive and Mr. Trump’s campaign finance chairman

Tim Pawlenty Former Minnesota governor

Defense Secretary

The incoming secretary will shape the fight against the Islamic State while overseeing a military that is struggling to put in place two Obama-era initiatives: integrating women into combat roles and allowing transgender people to serve openly. Both could be rolled back.

Kelly Ayotte Departing senator from New Hampshire and member of the Senate Armed Services Committee

Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn Former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (he would need a waiver from Congress because of a seven-year rule for retired officers)

Stephen J. Hadley National security adviser under George W. Bush

Jon Kyl Former senator from Arizona

Jeff Sessions Senator from Alabama who is a prominent immigration opponent

Attorney General

The nation’s top law enforcement official will have the authority for carrying out Mr. Trump’s “law and order” platform, including his threat to “jail” Hillary Clinton. The nominee can change how civil rights laws are enforced.

Chris Christie New Jersey governor

Rudolph W. Giuliani Former New York mayor

Jeff Sessions Senator from Alabama

Interior Secretary

The Interior Department manages the nation’s public lands and waters. The next secretary will decide the fate of Obama-era rules that stop public land development; curb the exploration of oil, coal and gas; and promote wind and solar power on public lands.

Jan Brewer Former Arizona governor

Robert E. Grady Gryphon Investors partner

Harold G. Hamm Chief executive of Continental Resources, an oil and gas company

Forrest Lucas President of Lucas Oil Products, which manufactures automotive lubricants, additives and greases

Sarah Palin Former Alaska governor

Agriculture Secretary

The agriculture secretary oversees America’s farming industry, inspects food quality and provides income-based food assistance. The department also helps develop international markets for American products, giving the next secretary partial responsibility to carry out Mr. Trump’s positions on trade.

Sam Brownback Kansas governor

Chuck Conner Chief executive officer of the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives

Sid Miller Texas agricultural commissioner

Sonny Perdue Former Georgia governor

Commerce Secretary

The Commerce Department has been a perennial target for budget cuts, but the secretary oversees a diverse portfolio, including the Census, the Bureau of Economic Analysis and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Chris Christie New Jersey governor

Dan DiMicco Former chief executive of Nucor Corporation, a steel production company

Lewis M. Eisenberg Private equity chief for Granite Capital International Group

Labor Secretary

The Labor Department enforces rules that protect the nation’s workers, distributes benefits to the unemployed and publishes economic data like the monthly jobs report. The new secretary will be in charge of keeping Mr. Trump’s promise to dismantle many Obama-era rules covering the vast work force of federal contractors.

Victoria A. Lipnic Equal Employment Opportunity commissioner and work force policy counsel to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce

Health and Human Services Secretary

The secretary will help Mr. Trump achieve one of his central campaign promises: to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. The department approves new drugs, regulates the food supply, operates biomedical research, and runs Medicare and Medicaid, which insure more than 100 million people.

Dr. Ben Carson Former neurosurgeon and 2016 presidential candidate

Mike Huckabee Former Arkansas governor and 2016 presidential candidate

Bobby Jindal Former Louisiana governor who served as secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals

Rick Scott Florida governor and former chief executive of a large hospital chain

Energy Secretary

Despite its name, the primary purview of the Energy Department is to protect and manage the nation’s arsenal of nuclear weapons.

James L. Connaughton Chief executive of Nautilus Data Technologies and former environmental adviser to President George W. Bush

Robert E. Grady Gryphon Investors partner

Harold G. Hamm Chief executive of Continental Resources, an oil and gas company

Education Secretary

Mr. Trump has said he wants to drastically shrink the Education Department and shift responsibilities for curriculum research, development and education aid to state and local governments.

Dr. Ben Carson Former neurosurgeon and 2016 presidential candidate

Williamson M. Evers Education expert at the Hoover Institution, a think tank

Secretary of Veterans Affairs

The secretary will face the task of improving the image of a department Mr. Trump has widely criticized. Mr. Trump repeatedly argued that the Obama administration neglected the country’s veterans, and he said that improving their care was one of his top priorities.

Jeff Miller Retired chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee

Homeland Security Secretary

The hodgepodge agency, formed after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, has one key role in the Trump administration: guarding the United States’ borders. If Mr. Trump makes good on his promises of widespread deportations and building walls, this secretary will have to carry them out.

Joe Arpaio Departing sheriff of Maricopa County, Ariz.

David A. Clarke Jr. Milwaukee County sheriff

Michael McCaul Representative from Texas and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee

Jeff Sessions Senator from Alabama

White House Chief of Staff

The chief of staff manages the work and personnel of the West Wing, steering the president’s agenda and tending to important relationships. The role will take on outsize importance in a White House run by Mr. Trump, who has no experience in policy making and little in the way of connections to key players in Washington.

Stephen K. Bannon Editor of Breitbart News and chairman of Mr. Trump’s campaign

Reince Priebus Chairman of the Republican National Committee

E.P.A. Administrator

The Environmental Protection Agency, which issues and oversees environmental regulations, is under threat from the president-elect, who has vowed to dismantle the agency “in almost every form.”

Myron Ebell A director at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and a prominent climate change skeptic

Robert E. Grady Gryphon Investors partner who was involved in drafting the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990

Jeffrey R. Holmstead Lawyer with Bracewell L.L.P. and former deputy E.P.A. administrator in the George W. Bush administration

U.S. Trade Representative

The president’s chief trade negotiator will have the odd role of opposing new trade deals, trying to rewrite old ones and bolstering the enforcement of what Mr. Trump sees as unfair trade, especially with China.

Dan DiMicco Former chief executive of Nucor Corporation, a steel production company, and a critic of Chinese trade practices

U.N. Ambassador

Second to the secretary of state, the United States ambassador to the United Nations will be the primary face of America to the world, representing the country’s interests at the Security Council on a host of issues, from Middle East peace to nuclear proliferation.

Kelly Ayotte Departing senator from New Hampshire and member of the Senate Armed Services Committee

Richard Grenell Former spokesman for the United States ambassador to the United Nations during the George W. Bush administration

C.I.A. Director / Director of National Intelligence

Mr. Trump takes over at a time of diverse and complex threats to American security. The new C.I.A. director will have to decide whether to undo a C.I.A. “modernization” plan put in place this year by Director John O. Brennan, and how to proceed if the president-elect orders a resumption of harsh interrogation tactics — which critics have described as torture — for terrorism suspects.

Michael T. Flynn Former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency

Peter Hoekstra Former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee

Mike Rogers Former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee

Frances Townsend Former homeland security adviser under George W. Bush

National Security Adviser

The national security adviser, although not a member of the cabinet, is a critical gatekeeper for policy proposals from the State Department, the Pentagon and other agencies, a function that takes on more importance given Mr. Trump’s lack of experience in elective office.

Michael T. Flynn Former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency

Posted in USAComments Off on Trump Is Picking His Cabinet: Here’s a Short List

Palestinian village strangled by Nazi Jewish settlements 

NOVANEWS

Image result for JEWISH ARM settlers CARTOON

  • A pogrom shakes a Palestinian village strangled by Nazi Jewish settlements – A dozen masked Nazi settlers wielding knives and clubs and yelling ’death to Arabs’ attacked five Palestinian farmers who were harvesting olives; ’They came to kill,’ one victim says.

    Gideon Levy and Alex Levac Nov 11, 2016
    read more: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.752387

    It was a pogrom. The survivors are five congenial Palestinian farmers who speak broken Hebrew and work in construction with valid entry permits. On weekends they cultivate what is left of their lands, most of which were plundered for the benefit of the illegal Nazi Jewish settlements that choke their village, Janiya, outside Ramallah.

    They are convinced that they survived last Saturday’s attack only by a miracle. “Pogrom” really is the only word that describes what they endured. “We will kill you!” the assailants shouted, as they beat the men over the head and on their bodies with clubs and iron pipes, and brandished serrated knives.

    The only “crime” of the Palestinians, who were in the midst of harvesting their olives when Nazi Jewish settlers swooped down on them, was that they were Palestinians who had the temerity to work their land.

    Olive harvest time is a traditional season for pogroms in the West Bank, but this was one of the most violent. No Nazi official condemned the assault, no one got upset. One victim needed 20 stitches in his head, another suffered a broken arm and shoulder, a third is limping, a fourth lost his front teeth.

    Only one managed to get away from the attackers, but he was also hobbled, when he injured his leg on the rocky terrain as he fled.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Palestinian village strangled by Nazi Jewish settlements 

Trump’s Victory Should Not Obfuscate Election Fraud

NOVANEWS
Image result for Trump CARTOON
By Doug Steil

As luck would have it Hillary Clinton’s landslide loss was so big that massive election fraud by Democratic Party operatives in various cities could not overcome her deficit.

The “shock” by insiders of having lost obviously reflects their earlier certainty of prevailing, which hints at the extent of their vote rigging schemes. The unverifiable system of voting in America is so flawed that foreign observers are now being blocked from monitoring US elections. The topic of fraud can no longer be swept under the rug.

Surely Clinton and the media will try to make a big deal of having “received more votes” than Trump in the popular vote total, which according to the current tabulation has already occurred, with an even higher differential to come once West Coast state results are all counted.

Those inside the DC Beltway and within elite campuses will claim that this is “unfair” and that Hillary really “should have won”.

However, this assertion should be vociferously challenged. Surely this surplus is artificial. Is it really possible that so many Americans would have ignored the prospect of going to war with Russia?

The question needs to be raised publicly: How many hundreds of thousand votes were switched from Trump to Clinton altogether and how many invalid (illegal) votes were registered for her?

Aside from that — assuming all the votes were legitimate — the electoral college system is intended to prevent, say, a concentration of votes in urban centers to the detriment of rural voters across the country. As is the case in Maine and Nebraska, voters in individual states can decide how to allocate their electoral votes, so it doesn’t have to be a winner-take-all system.

It is a tribute to the designers of the US Constitution that the Electoral College mechanism still exists. It’s almost as if though they might also have already suspected long ago that there could be illicit efforts in the future to change an election outcome simply by stuffing the ballots in a few locations. The indirect US electoral system has saved the country from a big crisis brought on by election fraud. Instead of changing the Constitution future election reforms should focus on making vote fraud impossible or extremely difficult to carry out.

Posted in USAComments Off on Trump’s Victory Should Not Obfuscate Election Fraud

What Happened In This Election?

NOVANEWS
Image result for Trump CARTOON
By John Chuckman

Brushing away the extreme claims and rhetoric of much election analysis, there are some observations which deserve attention. These unfortunately mostly provide hard lessons and not a lot of encouragement for people who hold to principles of democracy, enlightenment, and progressivity.

The election demonstrated perhaps better than ever, and better than has generally been recognized, that American is, indeed, a plutocracy. It took a genuine American Oligarch, a multi-billionaire, a man with a lifetime’s economic empire-building, to defeat a family which could provide the very definition of being politically well-connected, a family which had laboriously constructed and carefully maintained a kind of deep well ever-flowing with money for their ambitions.

It was the ever-flowing well of money, drilled by Bill Clinton with help from some extremely shady friends, such as Jeffrey Epstein, that made the Clintons keystone establishment figures in the Democratic Party. It was not personal charm or exceptional political generalship – although Bill, in his heyday, displayed some of both of those – that earned the Clintons their place, it was the money, the “mother’s milk of politics.” In what is euphemistically called “fund raising,” many hundreds of millions of dollars were provided for the party over the last couple of decades by Bill Clinton’s efforts.

Hillary fully appreciated the fact that money buys power and influence. She lacked Bill’s superficial charm, but she certainly more than shared his ambition. On the charm front, when she was ready to move into running for office, she adopted, perhaps under Bill’s tutelage, a kind of forced clown face with arched eyebrows, bugged-out eyes, and a smile as big as her lips would allow, and these expressions were accompanied by little gestures such as briefly pointing to various on-lookers or waving helter-skelter whenever she campaigned.

Her gestures reminded me of something you might see atop a float in a Christmas Parade or of the late Harpo Marx at his most exuberant. These were not natural for her. They were never in evidence years ago when she spent years as a kind of bizarre executive housewife, both in a governor’s mansion and later in the White House, bizarre because she indulged her husband’s non-stop predatory sexual behavior in exchange for the immense power it conferred on her behind the scenes over her far more out-going and successful politician-husband.

Anyway, Hillary knew that gestures and simulated charm do not get you far in American politics. She determined to build a political war chest long ago, and there are many indications over the years of her working towards this end of making this or that change in expressed view, as when running for the Senate, when sources of big money suggested another view would be more acceptable. She was anything but constant in the views she embraced because when she ran for the Senate she spent record amounts of money, embarrassingly large amounts.

In her years of speaking engagements, she aimed at special interests who could supply potentially far more money than just exorbitant speaking fees. Later, in the influential, appointed post of Secretary of State – coming, as it does, into personal contact with every head of government or moneyed, big-time international schemer – she unquestionably played an aggressive “pay for play” with them all. Covering up that embarrassing and illegal fact is what the private servers and unauthorized smart phones were all about.

A second big fact of the election is that both major American political parties are rather sick and fading. The Republican Party has been broken for a very long time. It hobbled along for some decades with the help of various gimmicks, hoping to expand its constituency with rubbish like “family values,” public prayer and catering to the Christian Right, and anti-flag burning Constitutional amendments, and now it is truly out of gas. That is precisely why a political outsider like Oligarch Trump could manage to hi-jack the party.

He was opposed by tired, boring men like Jeb Bush, seeking to secure an almost inherited presidency, and a dark, intensely unlikable, phony Christian fundamentalist like Ted Cruz, and it proved to be no contest. It was a remarkable political achievement, but I think it was only possible given the sorry state of the party.

The Republican Party had been given a breather, some new life, by Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. He had an extremely mixed record as President, but he was popular, held in some affection, and did have a clear vision, but his effect on the party was not lasting. Trump could be seen as another Reagan, but I think the comparison is superficial. Trump literally hi-jacked the party, and he was not deliriously crowned by its establishment.

The Republican Party itself was formed not long before Abraham Lincoln’s candidacy out of the remains of worn out and collapsed predecessors, including the Whigs and Free-Soil Democrats. Parties do not last forever, and here was Trump creating something of a minor political revolution inside a tired and fairly directionless old party, a phenomenon which I do not think was sufficiently noticed.

The press was too busy attacking him from the start to take notice or do any intelligent analysis, and he was attacked precisely for the potential damage to the establishment he represented. His most promising quality is his potential for creating a new coalition of interests and one excluding the continuation of the Neocon Wars Hillary vigorously embraced and would expand.

But the Democratic Party is in serious trouble, too. It has a great deal of internal rot, as the Wiki-Leaks material from the DNC clearly shows us. Arrogance, lack of direction, ignorance of the people it has always claimed to serve, bad decision-making, and the absolute prostrate worship of money are the major symptoms.

It would have been impossible for the party to have so made up its mind and committed its resources to Hillary Clinton without serious rot. She has always had strong negatives in polling, always been (rightly) suspected concerning her honesty.

The Wiki-Leaks material tells us about many internal conflicts, including harsh high-level judgments of Hillary’s decision-making, resentment over the back-stabbing character of daughter Chelsea who is said to resemble Hillary in her behavior and attitudes, and the belief of some that Hillary just should not have run. And, frankly, she had become for many a rather tiresome, used-up figure from whom absolutely nothing spectacular in politics or policy could possibly be expected. But they not only blindly supported her, they broke all their own party rules by internally and secretly working to defeat a legitimate and viable contender, Bernie Sanders.

Sanders might well have been able to win the election for the Democrats, but their establishment was blind to the possibility and rejected his candidacy out-of-hand. After all, there were Bill and Hillary beckoning to their running well of money. In hindsight, it might be just as well that Sanders was cheated out of the nomination. He proved a weak individual in the end, giving in to just the forces he had claimed to oppose and leaving his enthusiastic followers completely let down. There he was, out on the hustings, supporting everything he ever opposed personified in Hillary Clinton. Men of that nature do not stand up well to Generals and Admirals and the heads of massive corporations, a quality which I do think we have some right to expect Trump to display.

Another important fact about the election is that it was less the triumph of Trump than the avoidance of Hillary that caused the defeat. The numbers are unmistakable. Yes, Trump did well for a political newcomer and a very controversial figure, but Hillary simply did badly, not approaching the support Obama achieved in key states, again something reflecting the documented fact that she is not a well-liked figure and the Party blundered badly in running her. But again, money talks, and the Clintons, particularly Bill, are the biggest fundraisers they have had in our lifetime. No one was ready to say no to the source of all that money.

Now, to many Americans, the election result must seem a bit like having experienced something of a revolution, although a revolution conducted through ballots, any other kind being literally impossible by design in this massive military-security state. In a way, it does represent something of a revolutionary event, owing to the fact that Trump the Oligarch is in his political views a bit of a revolutionary or at least a dissenter from the prevailing establishment views. And, as in any revolution, even a small one, there are going to be some unpleasant outcomes.

The historical truth of politics is that you never know from just what surprising source change may come. Lyndon Johnson, life-long crooked politician and the main author of the horrifying and pointless Vietnam War, did more for the rights of black Americans than any other modern president. Franklin Roosevelt, son of wealthy establishment figures, provided remarkable leadership in the Great Depression, restoring hopes and dreams for millions. Change, important change, never comes from establishments or institutions like political parties. It always comes from unusual people who seem to step out of their accustomed roles in life with some good or inspired ideas and have the drive and toughness to make them a reality.

I have some limited but important hopes for Trump. I am not blind or delirious expecting miracles from this unusual person, and after the experience of Obama, who fairly quickly proved a crushing, bloody disappointment, I can never build up substantial hopes for any politician. And what was the choice anyway? Hillary Clinton was a bought-and-paid one-way ticket to hell.

Trump offers two areas of some hope, and these both represent real change. The first is in reducing America’s close to out-of-control military aggressiveness abroad. This aggressiveness, reflecting momentum from what can only be called the Cheney-Rumsfeld Presidency, continued and grew under the weak and ineffectual leadership of Obama and was boosted and encouraged by Hillary as Secretary of State. Hillary, the feminists who weep for her should be reminded, did a lot of killing during her tenure. She along with Obama are literally responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of women and their families, many of them literally torn apart by bombs.

The other area of some hope is for the welfare of ordinary American people themselves who have been completely ignored by national leaders for decades. By welfare, I do not mean the kind of state assistance that Bill Clinton himself worked to end.

George Bush’s lame reaction to Hurricane Katrina (before he was internationally shamed into some action) has become the normal pattern for America’s national government when it comes to ordinary Americans. The truth is that the legacy of FDR has withered to nothing and no longer plays any role in the Democratic Party, and of course never did in the Republican Party.

Nothing can impress someone not familiar with America’s dark corners more than a visit to places like Detroit or Gary or Chicago’s South Side, parts of New Orleans, or Newark or dozens of other places where Americans live in conditions in every way comparable to Third World hellholes. No, I mean the people’s general well-being. Trump’s approach will be through jobs and creating incentives for jobs. I don’t know whether he can succeed, but, just as he asked people in some of his speeches, “What do you have to lose?” Just having someone in power who pays any attention to the “deplorables” is a small gain.

People should never think of the Clintons as liberal or progressive, and that was just as much true for Bill as it is for Hillary. His record as President – apart from his embarrassing behavior in the Oval Office with a young female intern and his recruitment of Secret Service guards as procurers for women he found attractive on his morning runs – was actually pretty appalling. He, in his own words, “ended welfare as we know it.” He signed legislation which would send large numbers of young black men to prison. He also signed legislation which contributed to the country’s later financial collapse under George Bush. He often would appoint someone decent and then quickly back off, leaving them dangling, when it looked like approval for the appointment would not be coming. His FBI conducted the assault on Waco, killing about eighty people needlessly. A pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was destroyed by cruise missiles for no good reason. There were a number of scandals, including the suicide of Vince Foster and the so-called Travelgate affair, which were never fully explained to the public. It was his Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, who answered, unblinkingly, a television interviewer’s question about tens of thousands of Iraqi children who died owing to America’s embargo, “We think it’s worth it.” He committed the war crime of bombing Belgrade. When news of the horrors of the Rwanda genocide were first detected by his government, the order secretly went out to shut up about it. No effort was made to intervene.

No, any real change in America could never come from people like the Clintons, either one of them.

Posted in USAComments Off on What Happened In This Election?

Poor Liberals: You have Nobody to Blame but Yourselves

NOVANEWS

hqdefault

By David Penner 

Poor liberals – for years you have toiled in vain for the betterment of humanity. Martyring yourselves for the greater good, you have attained a new level of sophistication and moral superiority, the likes of which we may never see again. It makes me weep such tears of bitterest woe, seeing your saintly queen of benevolence, fail to be anointed Queen Mass Murderer of The Earth.

Every four years you come out of hibernation, and run about the country like so many chickens with their heads cut off, ranting and raving about how we all have to vote for the Democratic presidential candidate, or else the world will come to an end. We will be enslaved to a redneck, who dropped out of high school and works in a gas station, or a KKK guy – or worse!

In actuality, the real problem is that when you look in the mirror, you see an educated person, a literate person, an articulate person. You see someone who is wise, cultured, unequivocally left wing, logical, and above all rational.  This person you are looking at does not exist. This person does not exist, any more than if I were to look in the mirror, and believe I was looking at a hippopotamus or a water buffalo.

In certain circles, this is often referred to as insanity. You might want to talk to your therapist about that.

And this person might have existed in 1963. But that person, who had ideals, who may have genuinely stood against imperialism and militarism, and who may have once cared about education and unions, is no more. For you have degenerated into such a mindless piece of degenerate insouciant flotsam, that I cannot help but look upon thy face with horror.

Let’s take a brief look at some of the wondrous things American liberals, led by Hillary and Obama, these two magnificent whoring knaves of oligarchy, have accomplished over the past eight years.

You bombed Libya off the face of the earth, thereby destroying not only a country which boasted the highest standard of living in Africa, but which also led to the destabilization of the entire region, when your beloved freedom fighter barbarians raided the government military stockpiles.

You overthrew the democratically elected government of Viktor Yanukovych, putting a gang of Banderite ultranationalists and Neo-Nazis in power, who immediately moved to strip the Russian language of its official status, and who let loose a horrific orgy of violence against the people of the Donbass. Victoria Nuland, a neocon gal pal of Saint Hillary, and one of the principal architects of this monstrous illegal coup, is known to all Russians, yet you probably never heard of her. (Perhaps this is because the only thing that matters to you is getting a Democrat into the Oval Office.  What they actually do, once they get there, is apparently of no interest to you whatsoever.)

You sent thousands of troops to Afghanistan, and are no closer to defeating the Taliban, than you were at the beginning of Obama’s first term in office.

And just a few months ago, Saints Obama and Hillary signed off on an arms deal worth more than 115 billion dollars with Saudi Arabia, one of the most authoritarian and reactionary regimes on earth. Undoubtedly, they will use these weapons to arm jihadist barbarians in other countries, as well as genocide the people of Yemen – yet another liberal slaughterhouse you have insouciantly and mindlessly slept through. Undoubtedly, women’s rights have improved dramatically there, as you can’t marry an underage girl after her village was relentlessly bombed with American weapons, and she is presently dead.

And then there are the countless drone massacres in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen. Perhaps blowing up soccer games and wedding parties has helped these people to embrace the wonders of multiculturalism and diversity? And let’s not forget the fascist coup in Honduras, and a far right coup in Brazil: these acts of barbarism also bear the mark of the liberal, the Imaginary Leftist, the most incorrigible knave in human history.

And this brings us to perhaps your most glorious humanitarian intervention of all: arming and funding bloodthirsty jihadi criminal gangs, assigned with the task of  overthrowing the Assad regime. And with the blessing of the American liberal, they have embarked on a crusade to also exterminate Syrian civilization in the process. Please, liberals, do not make me vomit onto my computer, by talking about all the suffering children in Aleppo. The real barbarians who have made these children suffer, have been running the White House for the past eight years, and it was you who put them there in the first place.

Poor liberals – you have done nothing in thirty years, except burn all your own books, outsource and offshore jobs, while supporting all the most reactionary possible foreign policies. I’m sure you must be in tears, now that Hillary won’t be imposing a no-fly zone over Syria any time soon; but there are actually billions of people in the world that would greatly appreciate it, if the ICBMs stay just right where they are.

(And speaking of Russia: what are we to make of the shocking Neo-McCarthyism and Russophobia, which formed the bedrock of Saint Hillary’s campaign? Is this yet another example of her irrefutable leftist credentials? Of her tolerance and ideals?)

And is it not indubitable and ironic, that while you support these barbaric and insane wars of aggression – which cost trillions and trillions of dollars – your own kids increasingly graduate from college and cannot find jobs?

You are so divorced from reality, so drugged with the narcotic of identity politics, and indifferent to the sufferings of your fellow Americans, as well as the sufferings of those whose countries are destroyed by your wars of aggression, that you are simply no longer living in the reality based world; and sadly, haven’t been for a very long time.

Perhaps there is a place where American liberals fight racism, sexism, and carry out humanitarian interventions, which bring an end to genocide, persecution of minorities, and authoritarian regimes: in your mind.

Where are your patronizing airs now? Your smugness?

You will blame this ignominious defeat on the evil white guys, the racists, the Russians, the perverts, the sexists, and those wishing to restore patriarchy, but alas, dear liberals: you have nobody to blame but yourselves.

Posted in USAComments Off on Poor Liberals: You have Nobody to Blame but Yourselves

Putin on Trump victory: Russia is ready to restore relations with US

NOVANEWS

5822e1cfc3618883258b4578

© Aleksey Nikolskyi / Sputnik
RT 

Russia is ready and looks forward to restoring bilateral relations with the United States, Russian President Vladimir Putin said, commenting on the news of Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election.

“We heard [Trump’s] campaign rhetoric while still a candidate for the US presidency, which was focused on restoring the relations between Russia and the United States,” President Putin said, speaking at the presentation ceremony of foreign ambassadors’ letters of credentials in Moscow.

“We understand and are aware that it will be a difficult path in the light of the degradation in which, unfortunately, the relationship between Russia and the US are at the moment,” he added.

Speaking about the degraded state of relations between the countries, the president once again stressed that “it is not our fault that Russia-US relations are as you see them.”

Earlier today, in a message to Donald Trump the Russian President expressed confidence that the dialogue between Moscow and Washington, in keeping with each other’s views, meets the interests of both Russia and the US.

The Russian leader noted in the message that he hopes to address some “burning issues that are currently on the international agenda, and search for effective responses to the challenges of the global security,” RIA Novosti reported.

On top of it, Putin has expressed confidence that “building a constructive dialogue between Moscow and Washington, based on principles of equality, mutual respect and each other’s positions, meets the interests of the peoples of our countries and of the entire international community.”

Russian State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin has also expressed hope that Trump’s victory in the presidential election will help pave the way for a more constructive dialogue between Moscow and Washington.

“The current US-Russian relations cannot be called friendly. Hopefully, with the new US president a more constructive dialogue will be possible between our countries,” he said.

“The Russian Parliament will welcome and support any steps in this direction,” Volodin added on Wednesday.

Commenting on Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Russia will judge the new US administration by its actions and take appropriate steps in response.

“We are ready to work with any US leader elected by the US people,” the minister said on Wednesday.

“I can’t say that all the previous US leaders were always predictable. This is life, this is politics. I have heard many words but we will judge by actions.”

According to many observers, US-Russia relations are now at their lowest point since the Cold War. Putin has repeatedly noted that the worsening of Russia’s relations with the US “was not our choice,” however.

For things to improve between Moscow and Washington, the US should first and foremost start acting like an equal partner and respect Russia’s interests rather than try to dictate terms, Putin said last month.

The US will have to negotiate with Russia on finding solutions to international issues as no state is now able to act alone, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said last week, adding that problems in bilateral relations began to mount long before the Ukrainian crisis broke out in 2014.

Posted in USA, RussiaComments Off on Putin on Trump victory: Russia is ready to restore relations with US

Nazi Jewish settlements not obstacle to peace

NOVANEWS
Image result for ZIONIST TRUMP CARTOON

US President-elect Zionist Donald Trump does not think the illegal Nazi Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories should be condemned because they don’t pose “an obstacle to peace,” according to a top Trump adviser.

The comments were made on Thursday by Zionist Jason Greenblatt, the chief legal officer and executive vice president at the Trump Organization. He has been tapped by Trump as his top adviser on the Nazi regime of ‘Israel’.

Zionist Greenblatt’s comments would mark a stark departure from the long-time Washington stance that Nazi Jewish settlement construction in occupied Palestinian lands makes it more difficult to reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians.

Nazi minister called for renewed settlement expansions after Zionist Greenblatt’s comments. Nazi Science Minister Ofir Akunis said Tel Aviv thinks it’s time to move forward with more settlements now that Trump has won the US presidency.

The administration of US President Barack Obama has repeatedly criticized the Nazi regime over the settlement expansions, saying they make it difficult for the Nazi regime to reach peace with Palestinians.

The US and ‘Israel’ are close allies but relations were often tense between Obama and Prime Minister Naziyahu over the Nazi Jewish settlements and the nuclear agreement with Iran last year.

Analysts say a Trump presidency may be profoundly negative for Palestinian aspirations while buoying Nazi confidence.

Under the Zionist Trump presidency, analysts expect there to be less pressure from Washington to halt illegal Nazi Jewish settlement building, meaning the settler population will grow unchecked.

“The Palestinian people hold no hope that the change of American president will mean a change in policy towards the Palestinian cause,” said Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri. “That policy is constant and biased in favor of Israel’s occupation.”

Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of US foreign assistance since World War II. America’s military assistance to Israel has amounted to $124.3 billion since it began in 1962, according to a recent congressional report.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, USA, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Nazi Jewish settlements not obstacle to peace

‘Thousands of Syrians, Iraqis Killed in US Airstrikes Over Past Year’

NOVANEWS
Image result for US Airstrikes CARTOON
Sputnik 

Thousands of Syrian and Iraqi civilians have been killed in US airstrikes over the past year, a source in the Russian Defense Ministry said Thursday.

The statement was made in response to the statement by US Central Command spokesman Col. John Thomas that 64 people were killed and eight wounded in US airstrikes in Syria and Iraq in November 2015 — September 2016.

“Listening to such statements from the US Central Command spokesman, we have an impression that the Pentagon does not consider the remaining thousands of Syrian and Iraqi civilians killed in US Air Force strikes to be humans. But even such an advanced stage of dishonesty and cynicism of US colleagues should have its limits,” the Russian source said.

The statement noted that US Air Force has been conducting up to 20 strikes per day in Syria and Iraq, or about 7300 strikes in the past year.

“Moreover, a significant part of this ‘work’ has been assigned to the B-1B to the B-52H bombers, while the ‘humanity’ and ‘accuracy’ of their carpet bombings are well known since the days of the Vietnam War,” the statement added.

The US-led coalition of more than 60 nations has been conducting its anti-terror aerial campaign in Syria and Iraq since 2014. The strikes in Syria have not been authorized by Damascus or the UN Security Council.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on ‘Thousands of Syrians, Iraqis Killed in US Airstrikes Over Past Year’

How Come Washington’s Humanitarian Concerns Always Result in Population Control

NOVANEWS
Image result for Population Control CARTOON
By Jean Perier 

Alleged humanitarian efforts have always been a rather important aspect of the state propaganda campaign carried out by the White House and its media. We’ve seen Washington using its pocket NGOs to fight against the alleged “humanitarian crimes” of the Syrian government, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba and other states that Washington declared its enemies.

This large-scale campaign that is said to be driven by “common human values” has been supported by a number of modern American oligarchs.

Among those “humanitarian champions” one may find the founder of Microsoft and, perhaps, one the richest businessmen in the world, Bill Gates, who likes to be represented as a benevolent philanthropist of some sort. By using the so-called “Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation,” this richest man on earth is trying to put on a mask of the official representative of the US political elites that is carrying on the fight against poverty, food shortages and diseases in Africa and other poor regions of the world.

However, in reality such “activities” of Bill Gates and the White House are focused on the use of progress to reverse the effect of humanitarian projects, namely to reduce the population of the planet, or, in other words – to pursue eugenics.

This statement is confirmed by Gates’ remarks to the invitation-only Long Beach, California TED2010 Conference, in a speech titled, “Innovating to Zero!” Along with the scientifically absurd proposition of reducing manmade CO2 emissions worldwide to zero by 2050, approximately four and a half minutes into the talk, Gates declares, “First we got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.” (emphasis added).

Thus, one of the most powerful men in the world has openly declared that he expects vaccines to reduce the world population. Mind you, that when Bill Gates speaks about vaccines, he knows what he is talking about. In January 2010 at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Gates announced that over the next decade his foundation would allocate 10 billion dollars to develop and deliver new vaccines to developing countries.

We’ve heard this position on the control over the world population by pursuing the “reduction of the number of third-world inhabitants” before. Australian microbiologist and Nobel Price laureate Macfarlane Burnet in 1947 urged the Australian government to develop and unleash biological weapons against “over-populated countries of Southeast Asia.” In particular, during a closed meeting in 1947 with The New Weapons and Equipment Development Committee microbiologist recommended to create a group with a mandate to create secret biological weapons components that could affect food in such a way that it would allow Canberra to control the population of Indonesia and other Asian countries.

A similar objective was pursued by the secret program code-named Project Coast, during which US intelligence agencies started testing such viruses as Ebola and Marburg fevers on the South African black population. The US Centers for Disease Control was delivering those viruses from its secret laboratories to Africa in a bid to create biological and chemical weapons, which were aimed at sterilizing and even exterminating the black population of this African country, while murdering political opponents of the apartheid.

Today, in the age of high-tech novelties, Bill Gates has pioneered the electronic direction of eugenics, offering to implant the “undesired” part of the population with an electronic remotely controlled chip that would deprive women of reproductive capacity for a total of 16 years.

However, this is hardly the whole truth about the “humanitarian concerns” of the White House and its “humanitarian patrons”, who, under the guise of fighting for the greater good, continue searching ways to control the population of the planet, using both the advances of modern science and armed conflicts, like those that we’ve witnessed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and other countries.

Posted in USAComments Off on How Come Washington’s Humanitarian Concerns Always Result in Population Control

Trump Is President: Now What?

NOVANEWS

Image result for Trump CARTOON

By Brandon Turbeville 

On November 9, Americans woke up to the announcement that they have narrowly avoided the apparent worst-case scenario, i.e. a Hillary Clinton presidency. Most researchers and activists of good will were happy if not outright ecstatic that the wicked witch of the West was finally gone, hopefully for good. Others simply acknowledged that a change in power would take place in January, 2017 but argue that there will be no discernible difference between a Trump administration and the Obama administration just as the Bush-Obama years were those of a seamless transition.

But while we may take some temporary relief in knowing that we avoided the absolute worst-case scenario, it is time to ask, “what now?” We are faced with Donald Trump as President in 2017. So what do we do? Join the Trump team and become a cult follower? Support him until he does something terrible or commits a series of terrible decisions? Start attacking him immediately?

Certainly, complacency should not be an option. Simply sitting back because the outcome was “not as bad as it could have been” is entirely useless and counterproductive.

First, it is imperative that activists and people of good will must recognize that a Trump victory is not necessarily a victory for the American people. A Hillary defeat, although positive, does not equal a win for America, at least not in those simplistic terms.

Now is a time for organization and action.

Activists, activist organizations, and all people of good will must immediately begin to prepare themselves for a new phase in a battle that they have been (or at least should have been) fighting all along. They must begin to put aside petty differences with one another and begin looking at areas of common concern. They must continue their individual battles but must form alliances with one another in order to fight in a united front under a common umbrella. Whether the cause is related to guns, the drug war, war, GMOs, or some other issue, these individuals and organizations must come to understand the concept of enlightened mutual self interest.

Many of these groups currently do not work together over petty squabbles or simple laziness. We need individuals who are willing to establish connections with these groups and act as a uniting factor between them. This, of course, includes individual activists as well as groups. Essentially, we need someone who will be the unifying factor by establishing contacts, finding policies that unify these groups, and helping unite them (acting as the central figure) in current fights for (or against) legislation and for strategically offensive legislative action. These individuals will need to be active and willing to engage in dialogue with widely varying groups, remaining respectful of their perspectives and personal agreements/disagreements with some of their policies. Eventually, these coalitions can be brought together across the barriers of their issues for demands of interest to all.

As for the demands, any movement that seeks to bring about positive change must have a list of requirements in the form of demands or else the movement itself is dead from the start. A list of demands and a set of steady principles are absolutely necessary to the success and the continued life of any movement. For those struggling with the idea of what demands should be central to any resistance movement going forward, please see my article, A Real New Deal For America – 43 Points.”

Where Trump and his administration are willing to forward any points of our agenda, we should be there to push him along. Where he is willing to forward the agenda of the Anglo-American system, we must be willing to fight him tooth and nail.

We must also remember that the magnitude of what we face as a people is much bigger than a President, as should be clear to anyone who is even slightly informed should be aware. Regardless, it is time that the American people become active and engaged and that activists no longer sit idly by, navel gazing and castrated by egos and selfish interests, but that they immediately begin to join forces and fight for the change they want to see.

Posted in USAComments Off on Trump Is President: Now What?

Shoah’s pages

www.shoah.org.uk

KEEP SHOAH UP AND RUNNING

November 2016
M T W T F S S
« Oct   Dec »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930