Google Search

Showing posts with label Obamas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obamas. Show all posts

Thursday, September 12, 2013

Syrians Scramble to Hide From Obama's Humanitarian Love Bombs


?Every neighborhood has some government target. Where do we hide??
Paul Joseph Watson


Despite the US and Britain justifying an imminent attack on Syria in the name of ?protecting civilians,? Syrians themselves are scrambling to hide from Obama?s humanitarian love bombs, with one Damascus resident telling Reuters, ?We live in the capital. Every turn, every street, every neighborhood has some government target. Where do we hide??

Although a torrent of criticism has forced both Washington and London to move towards some kind of symbolic gesture involving the United Nations, a senior US official told?NBC News?today ?we?re past the point of return? and that US air strikes against Syrian targets would inevitably occur ?within days.?

That leaves thousands of Syrians living in major cities already ravaged by nearly two years of civil war and western-backed Al-Qaeda terrorist attacks looking up to the skies in anticipation of a fresh delivery of cruise missiles ? all in the name of ?protecting civilians? of course.

As?Reuters reports, ?dozens of military sites are mixed in among the civilian population,? meaning that western attacks will almost inevitably mean more loss of life, not to mention the wider?threat of a new war in the Middle East.

Syrians have now begun hoarding supplies, including water, batteries, and food, with ?the fear in people?s eyes? all too visible, while banks have been inundated with customers attempting to withdraw all their money.

People are fleeing in an effort to rent houses away from military sites, but many cannot afford skyrocketing prices in safer areas.

?What about my friend?? asked a woman whose family was lucky enough to be lent a house in a safe area. ?Her whole family lives in this neighborhood. There is no place for them to go.?

With Syria about to become the 7th country to be on the receiving end of the Peace Prize winner?s humanitarian lovefest, let us not forget the fantastic success that this policy of taking a complex political problem and bombing it had in Libya.

Just as it did in Libya, the US is about to become??Al-Qaeda?s air force,??paving the way for extremist jihadists to seize power and turn Syria into their personal thug-rule thiefdom.

Two years after Obama?s love bombs rained down in Tripoli,?Libya is now plagued by violence and chaos, has seen its economy collapse, is controlled by?brutal tribes who imprison and torture?their alleged political adversaries, and has become ?the main base for Al-Qaeda in the Maghreb.?

Now it?s Syria?s turn to experience what happens to countries who dare assert their sovereignty by attempting to fight back against an invasion of NATO and Gulf state-supplied terrorists.

Those Syrians who do manage to hide from Obama and Cameron?s humanitarian love bombs may escape death but the future of their country might not be much worth living for.
_
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for?Infowars.com?and?Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News. Facebook @?https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71 FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @?https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Geopolitics
- Syria: Nobel Peace Laureate Tells Her Account of What She Witnessed
- Residents Forced to Show Papers at Bilderberg
- WeAreChange Vlog: Watford Residents and Police on Bilderberg
- Bilderberg Ring of Steel
- Mexico to Rein In US Agencies in Drug War
- Political Assassination Prevented In Rome As Unemployed Man Tries To "Shoot Politicians"
- Singapore Death Row Drug Defendants Can Now Seek Review
- John McAfee Detained in Guatemala, Denied Asylum

And like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, our Government invents another lie to put our military at risk in a war that we have nothing to do with, except that we initiated their conflict. 9/11, government conspiracy, Boston bombing, government conspiracy, murder of Michael Hastings, government assassination, Benghazi cover-up, data processing center invading your Constitution, and I can keep going, but is anyone getting the point yet? if your point is: "government lies," then, I'm pretty sure you've made that point.
perhaps, you should audit the Declaration of Independence, along with America's Constitution - those lies are hiding plain-sight.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Saturday, August 11, 2012

Obama's Business Comment...

By Randall Holcombe

Many readers will be aware that last week in a speech President Obama said "If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen." There have been many comments on this already ? most of them I?ve seen have been negative ? but I?m still going to add a few words, because I find the comment so troubling.

If the credit for a business person?s success belongs to ?somebody else,? who is that somebody else?

In the same speech the president said "If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges." That statement is true. But in no way does it imply that if a person has a successful business, ?Somebody else made it happen.?

Everybody?s well-being in a modern society depends on cooperation with other members of the society. Through specialization and gains from trade, we all are more productive, and we all benefit. First, consider the way that social cooperation works in the market sector.

People engage in exchange when they find it mutually advantageous. Both buyer and seller are better off because they have specialized, become more productive at some activity, and produced value for those with whom they trade. The only way a business person can succeed in a market environment is by purchasing inputs and combining them to produce output that is more valuable than the inputs they purchased. This is a creative activity that adds value to the economy, and the credit for that accomplishment belongs entirely to the business person.

Many people start businesses that lose money. The implication of President Obama?s comment is that those people aren?t responsible for their failures either. Other people are. No, he didn?t say that. Perhaps this is something the president should clarify. If you don?t deserve credit for your successes, perhaps you?re not responsible for your failures either. In the real world, people make choices, and they are responsible for the consequences of those choices. Both the good consequences and the bad.

How about the businesses that make money? They do that by creating value for their customers. Doing so is not trivial. It is a creative activity, and it also requires hard work. Just because the success comes from trading with others does not take away from that fact that successful business people were able to make those exchanges because their entrepreneurial activities added value to the economy.

Consider a spectacular example. President Obama? statement implies that Steve Jobs didn?t build Apple Computer, and the credit for the iPhone, the iPad, and all the other products the company has introduced goes to somebody else. ?Somebody else made that happen.? Who? The same applies to less spectacular examples. The person who owns a restaurant, or an auto repair business obviously depends on customers, but those customers patronize the business because the people who work there create value, which enables mutually advantageous exchange.

I would think it is so obvious that what President Obama said is fundamentally wrong that it almost goes without saying, except that the statement was made by the President of the United States.

Now, consider the president?s other comment. ?If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help.? We already considered market exchange, where both parties help each other. How about that great teacher? Lots of people had the same teachers as Steve Jobs and other successful business people. I can assure you (as a teacher myself) that some students put more work into their studies, some students are more perceptive, and some students get more out of instruction than others who had the exact same instruction. Ultimately the teacher-student relationship is an exchange relationship like many others. Teachers are paid to teach, just like auto mechanics are paid to fix cars. Yes, some teachers are better than others, but some students are better than others too. I get paid to teach; students (and taxpayers) pay to get my lessons, and the students themselves deserve full credit for any successes they have after they leave my classroom. I hope I give them something valuable, just like customers value the auto repairs they pay for, or the iPhones they buy. But they put in the effort, take the risk, and think creatively to add value to the economy and benefit from gains from trade.

How about the bridges? The president said ?Somebody invested in roads and bridges.? This is an exchange relationship too. Taxpayers are the ones who sacrificed their incomes to invest in roads and bridges. The difference here is that they were forced into the exchange. We are compelled to pay taxes, and some of that money goes to build roads and bridges. If we are giving credit to anyone, it should be to the people who were forced to part with their earnings to pay for the roads and bridges everyone uses. The top 1% of taxpayers pay more than 36% of total federal income taxes, and the top 5% pay well over half of total federal income taxes. So if someone else deserves the credit for those roads and bridges, it is the very individuals President Obama wants to burden more by raising their taxes. But as with market exchange, just because some people produce what other people pay for does not mean ?somebody else? is responsible for people?s successes.

Every one of us owes our prosperity to the social cooperation that occurs in a market economy. We rely on our customers, our suppliers, and all of the many businesses that provide us with the goods and services that make our standard of living so high. But this is far different from asserting, "If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen." No, if you?ve got a business, you built it and you made it happen, by creating value for your customers. The business people, the entrepreneurs, and the business employees in an economy chart their own path and make their own successes. Success is not guaranteed and it does not come easy. When people are successful in business, we should recognize their accomplishments and applaud them, for in the process of succeeding themselves, they also have created value for others in the economy.

Over the past four years I have found myself in disagreement with some of President Obama?s statements and policies. But I don?t recall him making a statement before that shows such a profound misunderstanding of the economic forces that have produced the material prosperity that too many people take for granted.


View the original article here

Friday, October 14, 2011

Obama's Very Real Death Panel

by Anthony Gregory

It?s official. The American dystopia is here. Obama administration officials admit that the CIA assassination program that snuffed out Anwar al-Awlaki last Friday is guided by a secret panel that decides who lives and dies. According to Reuters:

American militants like Anwar al-Awlaki are placed on a kill or capture list by a secretive panel of senior government officials, which then informs the president of its decisions, according to officials.

There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House's National Security Council, several current and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.

Let that sink in. The U.S. presidency, supposed leader of the free world, has a clandestine committee that chooses American citizens to assassinate. This from the administration that promised unprecedented transparency and a ratcheting back of Bush-era civil liberties abuses. This from the president who vowed to restore habeas corpus and subject executive war powers to judicial scrutiny. This from the Nobel Peace Prize laureate.

What?s more striking, however, is the deafening silence. Sure, the ACLU opposes all this, as do a smattering of public voices. Yet it seems for everyone expressing proportional concern about this, there are a thousand leftist protesters whining about the top one percent, and a thousand conservatives whining about the leftist protesters.

How fitting that the presidency that Tea Partiers accused of planning to convene death panels to handle health care rationing has openly admitted to having created such a panel whose declared purpose is not simply to withhold socialized medical resources, but to direct the cold-blooded murder of citizens who are sufficiently bothersome enemies of the regime. Yet in a majestic irony, many of the conservatives who feared Obama?s life-and-death bureaucracies are cheering on his most explicit and frightening seizure of dictatorial power in all his presidency, and perhaps one of the greatest of all presidential power grabs in the sweep of U.S. history.

Meanwhile, Obama?s millions of supporters still think the idea that this man is a fascist, a tyrant, a threat to liberty, is hysterical hate speech and itself a danger to American democracy. Yet Barack Obama appears dedicated to out-Bushing Bush when it comes to shredding the Bill of Rights and sticking his middle finger at the very idea that he ought to be accountable to anything but his own power.

Make no mistake. We are witnessing a defining moment in America?s transformation into a totalitarian nation. Not because the murder of al-Alwaki, or even the death panel that sealed his fate, is some sort of anomaly in terms of morality or even presidential power. The U.S. presidency has already sentenced millions to death with its wars, its sanctions, its bombings, its terrorism, its covert ops, its torture chambers. The nukings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, to take a couple of famous examples, long ago revealed the awesome and murderous power of the Oval Office, whether or not these bombings were as "illegal" as the offing of al-Alwaki. And the families of thousands of innocent Afghans and Pakistanis killed in drone strikes had no doubts about Obama?s imperial touch, even before this latest atrocity.

But the circumstances surrounding this particular hit job, and the death panel behind it, deserve more than a footnote. There is the brazenness of it all ? the audacity, as a younger Obama might say ? of the administration just coming clean about its mysterious council that serves as judge and jury behind closed doors. There is the frank admission of its existence with all else being kept secret. There is also the precision ? the fact that this program is one focused on offing political enemies, rather than just bombing neighborhoods in an ad hoc attempt to weaken another government in a war. There is also the open-ended nature of this conflict, a war on terrorism that can last even longer than the clash with the USSR, a war whose immortality seems even more possible now that Barack the law professor is in charge, rather than George the rancher.

Taken together, this is just the kind of creepy atmosphere befitting of a total state, a Communist or fascist government or a nightmarish bureaucracy contrived in the mind of a Cold War-era novelist imagining what America would look like in the 21st century after taking one too many wrong turns. It is almost as if the administration is trying to preempt the conspiracy-minded by giving them something that would be unbelievable only fifteen years ago, but is today easily taken for granted because of course the president has a secret death panel that deliberates on the secret, unchecked executions of American citizens, to be conducted by robots flying in the sky.

Needless to say, anyone who defends this, especially if given the opportunity to think through the implications, is surely no friend of liberty, whether they be fair-weather "civil libertarian" liberals who would rather cheer for their president than wake up and smell the fascism, or conservatives who claim to distrust government except when it exercises the most lethal powers in the most lawless way imaginable. We must recognize that the movement for freedom and against true oppression is clearly no majority, regardless of what Tea Party Republicans and Wall Street occupiers might say.

There is a more fundamental lesson to be learned, however, and one to remember for the ages: This is the nature of the state. It is, by its institutional nature, always and everywhere seeking to expand power in any way it can. To claim and practice the power to kill on its own unreviewable prerogative is simply the fulfillment of its very design. At times of crisis, especially concerning national security, states almost always tend toward aggrandizement toward their realization as totalitarian entities.

For all who find Obama?s death panel frightening ? and all of us should ? let us remember that this is simply what governments do when they can get away with it. We are only now seeing the American state achieving its maturity. At the founding of the Federal Government, the Framers unleashed a monster that could never easily be restrained, even creating a presidency with all too much power over military affairs. Then came Jackson, Polk, Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, LBJ, Nixon, Bush and Obama, each one building on the horrible precedents of past American despots, each reaching further toward the ideal of a completely unencumbered presidential hand, one that could snap its fingers and order death to anyone anywhere on the globe.

There is a silver lining, however, albeit one circumscribing a large and dark cloud indeed. A government can develop and come of age, but it is a mortal institution. As it grows it puts strain on the public ideology it requires to live, wrecks the economy it feeds on, and alienates the allies that allow it to be a global empire. To be a total state is the dream of all regimes, but it is an unsustainable reality, and certainly so at the size the U.S. government has become. The more the U.S. presidency and American nation-state morph into an Orwellian version of themselves, the closer they will come to finally expose themselves as being no different from the tyrannies that have enslaved mankind for millennia. For generations much of the world has been under the spell of the lie of American democracy, the propaganda that the brutality of power politics can be tempered through elections and an eloquent piece of parchment. We can hope that the day this great lie is universally seen as a tragic joke, the true significance of Obama?s CIA death panel will be remembered.
__
Anthony Gregory [send him mail] is research editor at the Independent Institute. He lives in Oakland, California. See his webpage for more articles and personal information.

Copyright ? 2011 by LewRockwell.com


Latest Tyranny/Police State
- Woman Photographs Cop Kicking Handcuffed Man Lying On Ground, Cop Seizes Her Camera, Deletes Evidence, Arrests Her & Files Charges Against Her: Lawsuit
- Secret panel can put Americans on "kill list'
- Ron Paul: US could target journalists for killing
- Feds order California pot dispensaries to shut down - despite being legal under state laws
- Houston police accused of eating suspect's pot brownies turn in less marijuana than they claimed to have seized
- Student says he was assaulted by his principle for wearing a gay rights T-shirt
- Police ticket 11-year-old boy hit by car
- Goldman Protesters Are Almost Outnumbered by Security Guards in New Jersey

Is is become official. The US government has just declared WAR on American citizens. The time is come folks. The time to "throw off such a government and provide new guards for our future security".

Jonathan Turley wisely noted, "Anyone who believes there are two parties in Washington DC is a fool. "

reuters, they want you to know.

government is a declaration of war, division of people.

tony blair was openly introducing star chambers, you set up a judicial system but to put in big fast turns one needs to usurp that process. sometimes it is done in circular loops eg asbos, since 1984 it was written into the judical process (PACE 1984) and it became the normal judicial process visible to me early this century, ie the british courts are star chambers.
http://www.williambowles.info/ini/ini-0356.html

dictatorships, ie police states are not someting you can sell as in 'do you want some'. there is something called due process, it is a blind alley for the lifecyle of the dictatorship, due process is what is due to the dictatorship which is everything and what is done maintains that line and march or the dictatorship becomes subject to reality and potentially the division of people collapses. sometimes they say 'due process of law', same game of cheat, the laws are the scribblings or mutterings of the dictatorship.

what is being shown is though not new except that is being shown and largely as a simulation. at the same time as this the overt war machine is being deconstructed.

nonsense isn't it?

what often happens, to maintain power they have a revolution, change of the guard. it used to be public programming for british people, tourists still watch the changing of the guard at buck house. when people watch presentations of history they can be distracted into not noticing they are living it, passive in their own lives.

if i asked people if they could do better than obama, that is a question some would perhaps regard as stupid. to step from public to state is to cross over a mirror, everything now reversed. there is a lot more than that if one is an 'actor of history', everything changes, everyone pulling you in different directions and the scripts you are given in this ceremonial role are protected by guards that keep you and people seperated, you and the script joined.

then of course there are the terrible things that are done to you that you are deemed ready to fool people on the world stage, public interference is typically minor by comparison.

likely the more people see the less they would want the task, the less they would even believe in the role. there is though behind that role a man who is in prison.

imagine what it is like having as part of your forced agenda, hurting tens of millions of people in your own country. people have someone to hate, that feeds to security, everyone loses.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here

Thursday, October 13, 2011

Obama's "Millionaire Tax" Collected Over Next Ten Years Will Plug 4 Months Worth Of Deficit

by Tyler Durden

In order to keep the ongoing class warfare waged by the administration in perspective, today the CBO was kind enough to score the revenue impact of the proposed and much debated Buffett Tax, now appearing in non-populist literature as "Surtax on Millionaires." According to the Budget Office, said tax which is the source of substantial consternation among the population, would generate, over the next decade, a grand total of... drum roll... $453 billion. Why the drum roll? Because as we pointed out a few days ago, the US closed the 2011 fiscal year having added $1.23 trillion in debt (a number which would have been $1.4 trillion absent some year end settlement gimmickry). In other words, last year the US government had on average a $100+ billion deficit each month. In yet more other words, the great populist gimmick that is the Buffett Tax will have the great benefit of generating, between 2011 and 2021 enough money to plug a debt hole, at the rate America currently spends money, of 4 months.

From the CBO:

Dear Mr. Leader:

As you requested, CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) have estimated the budget impact of S. 1660, the American Jobs Act of 2011, as introduced in the Senate on October 5, 2011. CBO and JCT estimate that, in total, enacting S. 1660 would decrease deficits by about $6 billion over the 2012-2021 period (see enclosed table). That estimated deficit reduction of $6 billion over the coming decade is the net effect of $447 billion in additional spending and tax cuts in titles II through III and $453 billion in additional tax revenue from the surtax specified in title IV.

S. 1660 is similar to S. 1549, the American Jobs Act of 2011, as introduced in the Senate on September 13, 2011. Provisions in title I, II, and III related to both federal revenues and spending are identical for the two bills. The only difference between the bills is that S. 1660 replaces the provisions in title IV (Offsets) of S. 1549 with a surtax of 5.6 percent, starting in 2013, on a taxpayer's modified adjusted gross income in excess of $1 million (or $500,000 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return), indexed for inflation. JCT estimates that title IV of S. 1660 would increase revenues by $453 billion over the 2012-2021 period, whereas title IV of S. 1549 would increase revenues by $450 billion over that period.

Latest Economy
- Marc Faber's October Outlook: Forget EU Debt Crisis, A China Meltdown Is The Real Threat
- Peter Schiff On New 5.6% Millionaire Surcharge Tax
- Wrong Medicine for a Sick Economy
- Hiding Gold in All the Unusual Places
- The Top 100 Statistics About The Collapse Of The Economy That Every American Voter Should Know
- Property, Freedom and Society | Jeffrey Tucker Interviews Hans-Hermann Hoppe
- Colorado Farmers Hire Locals for Farm Labor, They Quit After Six Hours
- EU calls for global tax, Canada says can block it

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Elementary Economics: Is Obama's Econ Agenda Stolen from 2nd Graders?

Did Obama steal his economic agenda from second graders?

Latest Economy
- Marc Faber's October Outlook: Forget EU Debt Crisis, A China Meltdown Is The Real Threat
- Obama's "Millionaire Tax" Collected Over Next Ten Years Will Plug 4 Months Worth Of Deficit
- Peter Schiff On New 5.6% Millionaire Surcharge Tax
- Wrong Medicine for a Sick Economy
- Hiding Gold in All the Unusual Places
- The Top 100 Statistics About The Collapse Of The Economy That Every American Voter Should Know
- Property, Freedom and Society | Jeffrey Tucker Interviews Hans-Hermann Hoppe
- Colorado Farmers Hire Locals for Farm Labor, They Quit After Six Hours

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here