MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

The Tragedy of America’s Entry into World War I | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on November 26, 2019

Hence there were fervent supporters of American entry into the war from American industrial and financial quarters, as well as some voices in the political class, including former President Theodore Roosevelt, the “John McCain of his day” regarding his “all war, everywhere” bellicosity

https://mises.org/wire/tragedy-americas-entry-world-war-i

11/10/2018

This week some 80 world dignitaries including Presidents Putin, Trump, and Chancellor Merkel are gathering in France to mark the culmination of year-long remembrances of the centenary of the end of “the Great War” on November 11, 1918 – later labeled and known to every American high school history student as World War I. While at least 17 million people, including more than 116,000 Americans, died in this war — and millions more were wounded, gassed, or maimed — it’s a conflict widely misunderstood today. Indeed, because of World War II’s size and scope, cultural influence, and greater media coverage and capture, the First World War is often called “the forgotten war.”

Yet it was a cataclysmic event in its own right that both foreshadowed more intense and violent warfare in the 20th century, and fueled the growth of gargantuan central government in the United States. Most crucially, however, it was a war that should never have been fought — its causal origins and assignment of guilt for same are still a hot topic of debate a century later, a fact that alone attests to its superfluity — and one that, in any case, the United States should never have entered. These are disturbing theses about the war that will not be remembered by any of the global elites in Paris this weekend, but given the lessons for today, Americans should learn about them so as to demand of their Beltway solons wiser policy choices in the future. What follows is a short summary of America’s involvement in the war and lessons for today.

Origins of the Conflict in 1914

When the United States declared war on Germany following strong majority votes in both houses of Congress and the impassioned speech of President Woodrow Wilson to a joint session on April 2, 1917, he asserted that America must fight in the European war “to make the world safe for democracy.” This was a mere five months after Wilson had won re-election in 1916 via a slogan of “He kept us out of war.” 100 years later, though, there’s still no clearly-enunciated explanation of what it means to create safety for democracy. Later history would prove, however, that this goal — whatever it meant — was most certainly not achieved by the victorious Entente or their associated power and late entrant, the United States.

Nonetheless, when Count von Metternich convened the Congress of Vienna in November 1814 to settle long-simmering disputes in Europe following the  Napoleonic wars, little could he have guessed that precisely a century later his august project would crash forever upon the shoals of boiling Balkan nationalism. Metternich’s Concert of Europe had, in fact, been durable and substantial: after 1815 there had been only minor-but-contained skirmishes across Europe in the 19th century: the formation of the Second French Republic after the liberal revolution of 1848, the Franco-German War of 1871 that flipped Alsace-Lorraine, and the consolidation of German and Italian nation-states. The British, meanwhile, were extending their empire into the far reaches of Asia and Africa. But after victory over Napoleon at Waterloo in 1815, there would be no sizable war in the heart of Europe for another century.

Across the continent as a whole, then, the 19th century was one of general peace and ever-increasing material wealth for the masses, thanks to increasing economic integration and its attendant gains from trade.  The rule of law, protection of property rights, a sound monetary framework, and the unleashing of entrepreneurial energies, thanks to patient capital, had spread across the continent and built a civilized order. It was, said the Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises later, the Age of Liberalism , and marked by the broad cessation of warfare and its attendant impoverishing taxation and destruction.

The First World War that ended this widespread peace and prosperity was, therefore, an appalling tragedy. In the end, some 65 million troops were mobilized (including 4.7 million Americans), there were more than 20 million casualties including civilians, and the Austro-Hungarian, German, Ottoman, and Russian empires were destroyed. Meanwhile the victorious British and French empires peaked and were effectively bankrupted. The British needed a century to pay off its war loans. Many national boundaries were redrawn, and activist high-tax/interventionist governments replaced laissez-faire regimes everywhere.

American Entry into the War in 1917

However, initially with the advent of hostilities in 1914, President Wilson attempted to steer a neutral course. There was no discernible reason for America ever to become involved in a European land war, and the United States traded with — and had immigrants from — all countries in the conflict. Following a longstanding foreign policy that had first been enunciated by Wilson’s foremost predecessor, George Washington, the American position on the Great War remained, as always, “Friend of Liberty everywhere, Guarantor only of our own.” Critics called it “isolationist,” but the American people in near-unanimity sought to steer clear of the massive conflict across the Atlantic Ocean.

Tensions rose in May of 1915 with the sinking of the merchant cruiser Lusitania by a German U-boat, killing 128 Americans, among others. While there was an outcry against Germany over such unrestricted submarine warfare, the German government had in fact taken pains to warn American passengers via advertisements in major east coast media, and indeed the Lusitania was carrying contraband, and hence was a legitimate target of war. In any case Mr. Wilson was able to get the German government to restrict its operations and let a specified number and type of American ships pass through to England, and in spite of a few other minor incidents, the President cruised to re-election in November 2016 via the campaign war-cry of “He kept us out of war.”

By the end of 1916, however, things looked bleak for the Triple Entente (the alliance between Britain, France, and Russia). Russia was in trouble in the east and riddled with revolutionary fervor. The western front, while stabilized, would be bled by increased and more powerful German thrusts should Russia quit the war, as increasingly looked likely. The French and British, racked by losses in Turkey and higher casualties on their German front than the Germans, were beginning to fear an inability to continue to finance the war effort. The Italians were stalemated. The Allies increasingly saw one big solution to their plight, and it lay across the Atlantic.

Pressures thus were mounting on Mr. Wilson to join the fray. The British, as they were to do again after 1939, mounted a broad effort to entice America into their war via propaganda such as alleged German battlefront atrocities in Belgium. Further, tens of billions of (2018-equivalent) dollars had been loaned to Britain and France by New York banks such as Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan (which had major European offices in London and Paris, and thus led American capital raising efforts for these belligerents), in at least five times the amount lent to the Central Powers (Germany and Austria-Hungary): should Germany win the war, these loans to the western powers could not be recouped. American armaments makers and industrial producers such as Bethlehem Steel or DuPont, many of which had suffered during the 1913-14 recession in the United States, loved the advent of war. Exports to Britain and France quadrupled between 1914 and 1917.1

Hence there were fervent supporters of American entry into the war from American industrial and financial quarters, as well as some voices in the political class, including former President Theodore Roosevelt, the “John McCain of his day” regarding his “all war, everywhere” bellicosity….

Wartime Conduct of the Wilson Administration and the Advent of Big Government and Central Planning

Although most Americans were inflamed with a sense of patriotic fervor when reminded of the Lusitania (from 23 months earlier!) and then became enraged at news of the Zimmermann Telegram, U.S. entry into the war was not uncontroversial. Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan had already resigned his cabinet position in the aftermath of the Lusitania sinking, fearing a tilt toward the British via war finance. Bryan had recommended to Wilson right away in 1914 that American loans or exports to belligerents be forbidden as a way to shorten the war. This counsel was ignored. Well-known Leftist and progressive Randolph Bourne publicly broke with Wilson over the war. He was one of many who did so. And there were also critics from what would today be called small-government libertarian types, most prominently H.L. Mencken of the Baltimore Sun.

This is of interest today because while the war effort went well enough once American soldiers and Marines were on the ground fighting in France, there were pockets of protesters in the United States. The protestors saw no logic to our fighting wars on behalf of European belligerents, with all of whom we had friendly commercial relations before the war, and none of whom represented any threat to us. It is an historical parallel to current era American wars in the Muslim world, and earlier wars in east Asia.

Domestically, historian Ralph Raico reports that the war ushered in central planning on a massive scale not seen since the Civil War, whose controls and federal dictates were easily surpassed in 1917. Congress passed the National Defense Act, for example. It gave the president the authority, in a time of war “or when war is imminent,” to place orders with private firms which would “take precedence over all other orders and contracts.” If the manufacturer refused to fill the order at a “reasonable price as determined by the Secretary of War,” the government was “authorized to take immediate possession of any such plant and to manufacture therein such product or material as may be required” for the war effort. The private business owner, meanwhile, would be “deemed guilty of a felony.”

Once war was declared, the power of the federal government grew at a dizzying pace in all sorts of directions. The Lever Act, for example, passed on August 10, 1917, was a law that, among other things, created the United States Food Administration and the Federal Fuel Administration: this put the federal government in charge of the production and distribution of all food and fuel in the United States. President Wilson reached into all corners of American life for the sake of the war effort via price controls and monetary manipulation, as well as such direct actions as banning beer sales (and this right before Prohibition).

Some of the Wilson Administration’s conduct was shameful. For example, in an effort at control of public opinion that would make Josef Goebbels proud, some 850 citizens were prosecuted under the Espionage and Sedition Acts between 1917 and 1919, with many jailed for having the temerity to question the logic behind the war. Most famous of these was the former Socialist candidate for President Eugene V. Debs, who was fined and given a 10-year jail sentence – at age 63 – after a June 1918 speech in Canton, Ohio wherein he decried American involvement in a war that was of no consequence to us or our national security; Debs further criticized the use of a conscript/slave labor army to prosecute the war. He was given early release by President Harding at Christmas 1921 and met at the White House the next day. But in a cold, damp, dark federal penitentiary in Atlanta, Debs had contracted tuberculosis, sending him to perhaps an early death in 1926.

Further, Wilson set up a propaganda office immediately after the declaration of war, called the Committee on Public Information. This was a government-staffed propaganda agency charged with message control of the media (viz. putting “spin” on war news) to sustain morale in the U.S., to administer voluntary press censorship, and to develop propaganda abroad. This entity eventually comprised 37 distinct divisions. These included the Division of Pictorial Publicity which employed hundreds of artists to create graphics with patriotic themes, or to incite fear and hatred of Germans.

Mr. Wilson also had one of his cronies, Albert M. Briggs, set up the American Protective League (APL), an organization of 250,000 private citizens that worked with federal law enforcement agencies during World War I to identify suspected German sympathizers. Its mission was to “counteract the activities of radicals, anarchists, anti-war activists, and left-wing labor and political organizations.” In other words, it was a giant “army” of snitches, sort of a benign Gestapo. One victim was a man named Taubert in New Hampshire who received a sentence of three years in prison for saying out loud and in public that World War I was a war “for J.P. Morgan, and not for the people.” He meant the was was being fought to recoup Morgan’s war loans to the British and French, and pad the bottom line of the capitalist class…

Let us be starkly clear in our closing thought: America went to war 100 years ago for no good reason, and certainly not for the “general interest” of national security. Instead, President Wilson wanted war for the sake of narrow special interests contained in what President Eisenhower was to later call the “military-industrial- congressional complex.” This panoply of overlapping Beltway groups or individuals, coupled with the “ruling class elite” who toil in Manhattan boardrooms, is still alive and well today. These groups can all do great things on their own, legitimately on behalf of the American people, as the case may be. But never again should an American soldier or Marine be asked to die, face down in the mud, thousands of miles away from the borders he is paid to defend, for anything less than a lethal threat to our national security. Nor should hard-pressed American taxpayers foot the bill for the wars of others. THAT is the primordial lesson of World War I, which reverberates through time and still resonates today.

On the occasion of the centennial of the second most brutal human conflict of all time, we salute all who died on all sides, and as Americans express our respect to the American war-dead. Yet at the same time, knowing the history of this and similar conflicts, one feels nothing but contempt for Woodrow Wilson and his fellow politicians. The foreign policy of a free and great commercial republic should anywhere and everywhere be: champion of liberty for all; vindicator only of our own.

Be seeing you

The Christmas Truce | Jacobin

The Christmas Truce. Never to be repeated.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Resistance Digs Their Hole Deeper – Kunstler

Posted by M. C. on November 26, 2019

This was another obvious attempt to deflect attention from the actual story, which is how the company named Crowdstrike, owned by Ukrainian oligarch Dmitri Alperovitch, cooked up the Russian hacking story in the first place. Crowdstrike, you see, had been hired by the Democratic National Committee, and their nominee, Hillary Clinton, to interfere in the 2016 election.

https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/the-resistance-digs-their-hole-deeper/

James Howard Kunstler

“No, you don’t understand. It was the Russians, I tell you, the Russians!” And so, with a holiday recess for Adam Schiff’s impeachment soap opera, and news that DOJ Inspector General Horowitz will unload in early December, the media vassals of the Deep State are giving you their own turkey gristle to chew on: “The Russians did it! Yes, really, they did! Believe us!”

Perhaps The New York Times has hooked up to a direct line of Burisma’s product as they flood the darkened arena with eerie blue gaslight. Friday, they featured a story — Russia Inquiry Review Is Said to Criticize F.B.I. but Rebuff Claims of Biased Acts — geared to make readers think that the entire FBI FISA warrant hair-ball came down to one lowly lawyer chump named Kevin Clinesmith messing with an email. Later, Times reporter Adam Goldman, posted this howler on Twitter.

These truthless assertions are meant to let both the CIA and the FBI off-the-hook for opening the “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation on bogus evidence they furnished to the FISA judges. Both Goldman’s news story and his tweet omit the name of the company that packaged and retailed the Russia Collusion narrative: Fusion GPS — the company that Robert Mueller testified to having no knowledge of in his July House appearance.

That oafish attempt to get out ahead of the IG’s report was followed by, whaddaya know, a Times op-ed penned by none other than Glenn Simpson, the impresario of Fusion GPS (and his partner Peter Fritsch), The Double-Barreled Dream World of Trump and His Enablers, aimed at re-selling their shopworn Russia collusion story to distract from any attention that voters might be paying to Ukraine’s collusion in the scheme to overthrow the 2016 US election and the Bidens’ grifting operation following the 2014 CIA / State Department sponsored overthrow of Ukraine’s government.

CBS 60-Minutes joined the gaslighting rotation Sunday night with a reality-optional Russia Hacked Our Election story. This was another obvious attempt to deflect attention from the actual story, which is how the company named Crowdstrike, owned by Ukrainian oligarch Dmitri Alperovitch, cooked up the Russian hacking story in the first place. Crowdstrike, you see, had been hired by the Democratic National Committee, and their nominee, Hillary Clinton, to interfere in the 2016 election. Crowdstrike later became the sole entity that was allowed to perform a forensic inquiry on the DNC’s server. Somehow, they persuaded the FBI to not look into the matter. In other words, the DNC’s contractor investigated its own mischief. Does anyone wonder how that worked?

NBC joined the gaslighting brigade Sunday, hauling Fusion GPS’s Simpson & Fritsch on Meet the Press, with talking cockatoo Chuck Todd, to pimp their new “book” extolling the most excellent British spy Christopher Steele, the designated patsy for the notorious dossier composed by Simpson himself, with help from others, including Fusion GPS contractor Nellie Ohr, wife of former associate deputy attorney general Bruce Ohr, who funneled all the Fusion GPS “product” into the RussiaGate coup-stream. Two notes here: 1) the dauntless Mr. Steele has by now fessed up to federal attorney John Durham and flipped on his former associates, who made him the bag-holder for their deeds. And 2) during the Meet the Press interview, no one on-screen (Todd, Simpson, Fritsch) mentioned that Fusion GPS had been hired by Hillary Clinton and the DNC to compile said dossier, a curious omission.

Yes, I know this sounds complex and convoluted. Part of the media campaign this week is to absolutely confound the American public as to what happened the past three years. Obfuscation has also been, in part, the mission of Mr. Schiff in his impeachment hearings…

The CIA, the FBI, the State Department have all been players in the coup to overthrow Mr. Trump and the news media played along the whole way. They doubled, tripled, and quadrupled down on their dishonest narrative and now they are trapped in it…

Be seeing you

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

I Endorse ‘OK, Boomer,’ And So Should You – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on November 26, 2019

If you want to be right-wing, knock yourself out. But don’t be dumb-guy right-wing, speaking and thinking in slogans that sound like they were hammered out in the boardroom of a D.C. marketing firm.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/11/thomas-woods/i-endorse-ok-boomer-and-so-should-you/

By

Tom Woods Show

From the Tom Woods Letter:

So the youngsters are using “OK, boomer” as a dismissive retort these days.

The reference is to the generation born roughly between 1946 and 1965 — though the set of beliefs I personally associate with the phrase is not confined to people from that age group.

I’ve seen some libertarians (and of course conservatives) object to this.

Why, these youngsters should respect authority!

But you know what?

No matter how the expression is being used in practice, in principle it’s a great idea that I wholeheartedly endorse.

And yes, I will of course lose subscribers today. (I’ll live.)

Boomers should be exercising some kind of leadership role today, as our elders. They should be giving us something to look up to.

Instead, even the Boomers who consider themselves cheeky and anti-Establishment just repeat slogans and talking points handed to them by talk radio or the Heritage Foundation.

(Boomerism as I conceive of it is more a set of ideas than it is an age range.)

With every possible resource available to them online at the push of a button they’re still thinking in 1980s Republican Party platitudes?

They’re still portraying presidents they like as heroic defenders of Jesus?

They’re still worked up when people object to the Pledge of Allegiance? They still haven’t encountered anyone or anything that makes them wonder about “one nation, indivisible” as an American principle?

They’re still comparing American soldiers to Jesus Christ?

They still use the expression “my president”?

They’re still saying, “If you won’t stand behind the troops, feel free to stand in front of them”?

After all the police abuse, which takes a multitude of forms, they’re still repeating slogans with all the sophistication of a third-grade book report?

So no, I won’t be shedding any tears if we have a dismissive response to this contemptible intellectual laziness.

If you want to be right-wing, knock yourself out. But don’t be dumb-guy right-wing, speaking and thinking in slogans that sound like they were hammered out in the boardroom of a D.C. marketing firm.

Be seeing you

A Baby Boomer's Belated Blog to George Will | HuffPost

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

“Decarbonize” means DEPOPULATION, because humans are carbon-based organisms… AOC, Bernie Sanders are actually promoting extermination of humans – NaturalNews.com

Posted by M. C. on November 26, 2019

It may sound extreme, but that is what eugenics is…extreme.

It is all about (population) control.

Just ask Bernie.

It is just for third world countries until it isn’t.

https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-11-24-decarbonize-means-depopulation-aoc-bernie-sanders-exterminating-humans.html

(Natural News) Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) and failed presidential candidate Bernie Sanders have together unveiled a new piece of legislation that they claim will help to “decarbonize” America’s public housing stock – which is just code for depopulation.

The “Green New Deal for Public Housing Act,” as they’re calling it, would require $180 billion in taxpayer dollars to “decarbonize the entire public housing stock in the United States of America,” according to AOC and Sanders.

“And in the process of decarbonizing the public housing stock we are going to put hundreds of thousands of people to work in good paying jobs and giving that preference to public housing residents,” AOC further explained during a public unveiling event for the bill.

“The planet is in crisis,” Sanders added, to cheers from a group of public housing residents that was bussed in from New York City to Washington, DC. “The truth is that five out of the last six years have been the warmest on record,” Sanders further contended, offering no evidence to back this claim.

All major cities will be under water in 50 years, claims Bernie Sanders

Part of the impetus behind this first of many Green New Deal initiatives is the fear that AOC and Sanders both have about our planet warming to the point that ocean levels rise and flood our major cities.

“Major cities around the world – cities like Miami, New York City, London, Shanghai, and Hong Kong will likely be under water in the next 50 years,” Sanders claims, again without any evidence to back it.

According to Sanders, the United Nations is correct in its speculation that “climate change” will soon create “over a hundred million climate refugees in search of food, water, and a minimal standard of living.”

By retrofitting America’s public housing stock with “decarbonization” in mind, not only will a climate crisis like this be averted, according to Sanders, but it will also “reduce carbon emissions equivalent to taking off of the road over one million cars,” while also supposedly creating 250,000 “good paying union jobs.”

“This will pay for itself,” claims Sanders about this Green New Deal proposal. “This is a win, win, win piece of legislation.”

“Sustainability,” “decarbonization,” and other “progressive” language all translates as fewer humans

How “decarbonizing” public housing will magically create 250,000 high-paying union jobs is anyone’s guess, as the socialist duo failed to reveal any details about how the Green New Deal for Public Housing Act will actually work. But one thing is for sure: It will most certainly involve reducing the number of human beings that are allowed to stay alive.

As Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, continues to warn, the climate change hoax is primarily about one thing: reducing the world’s population to “sustainable” levels, making the planet easier to control for eugenicists like Bernie Sanders and AOC that are promising the world to people dumb enough to vote for their ideas.

If you don’t believe us, check out a new paper, entitled, “World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency,” that was recently published in the journal BioScience. In this paper, more than 11,000 “scientists” call on governments of the world to take action by eliminating billions of people from the face of the earth – all to stop “global warming,” of course.

“In the last century or so, governments of the world have already mass murdered 262 million people,” Adams warns. “Apparently, that’s not nearly enough, according to genocidal climate scientists.”

To keep up with the latest news about how climate armies around the world are pushing for massive population reductions in the name of stopping “global warming,” be sure to check out Depopulation.news.

Be seeing you

American eugenics movement archives / Boing Boing

Progressive Eugenics

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Truth of Why LBJ Wanted the USS Liberty To Sink – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on November 26, 2019

It’s Israel First.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/11/phillip-f-nelson/the-truth-of-why-lbj-wanted-the-uss-liberty-to-sink-getting-israel-to-help-ensure-his-reelection/

By

LBJ: Master of Deceit

A Look Behind the Scenes, showing how LBJ Moved his Pawns – including the men aboard the USS Liberty – on a Global Chessboard as he Schemed to Win Reelection in 1968. And the Four Faces of Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas – Simultaneously counseling LBJ, liaising with Israel, and member pro tempore of the National Security Council.

(Excerpted / reedited for context, from Remember the Liberty!)

LBJ Proclaims Himself “King of the World”

One instance of how Lyndon B. Johnson’s delusions surfaced occurred in 1965, while flying high on Air Force One, when he proclaimed to several reporters on board that he had become the most powerful man in the world, as he announced to them that he was basically now the “King of the World.” Johnson had invited four reporters from the press pool into his suite to share cocktails with him in his quarters. They were flying high above his domain, which was now the entire world. He was in an ebullient mood, and this phase of his mania was strengthened with each drink from his glass of Cutty Sark scotch.

As he sat in his huge, elevated, custom-designed leather chair (the crew called it “The Throne,”) with the reporters arrayed around him in their smaller cloth seats, he decided to remind this select group of reporters about how fortune had smiled on them that day, to be in the presence of the single most important person in the world. Suddenly, Johnson declared, “Look around the world: Khrushchev’s gone. Macmillan’s gone. Adenauer’s gone. Segni’s gone. Nehru’s gone. Who’s left – de Gaulle?’’ AP reporter Frank Cormier said that Johnson sneered as he uttered the French president’s name:

“Then, leaning back in his massive ‘throne chair,’ LBJ thumped his chest in Tarzan fashion and loudly bellowed, ‘I am the King!”[1]

Lyndon Johnson was known, arguably more so than any other president, as one who moved his subordinates — like a King moved pawns — into other positions as it suited his future needs. This was illustrated by such examples as Arthur Goldberg, who in 1965 had been happy to have a safe and secure position on the Supreme Court, until LBJ decided he needed to have him become the ambassador to the U.N. That was because of Johnson’s awareness of Goldberg’s strong attachment to Israel, and its Zionist leadership, which would become a great need when an operation — that would become known as the 1967 “Six Day War” — was then being planned, and would suddenly materialize two years later.

Questions Posed by Nicholas deB. Katzenbach 40 Years After-the-Fact

Nicholas Katzenbach, who was moved by President Johnson from the Justice Department and appointed as an assistant secretary of state a few months before the Liberty attack, may have inadvertently exposed revealing clues as to what was really going on behind the scenes during the Six Day War and the USS Liberty attack on June 8, 1967.  Within his 2008 memoir, Some of It Was Fun: Working with RFK and LBJ, he cited a number of points that still concerned him, over forty years later, which had never made sense to him.

There is no indication that Katzenbach had any foreknowledge of the attack, in fact, there are numerous indications that he was nowhere near being “in the loop.”  He stated that most administration officials, including Navy personnel, did not believe the Israeli explanation that it was “a case of mistaken identity.” And he acknowledged that Johnson accepted the apology for political reasons, but felt that Israel should have offered the families “generous compensation,” with an implicit understanding that they would be reimbursed. Moreover, Katzenbach admitted that the State Department had angered many in the Jewish community through its issuance of a statement of neutrality, which was considered in retrospect as unwise.[2]

That “neutrality statement” began during a State Department briefing when some of the officials became giddy over Israel’s successes. As described by Grace Halsell in her article, “How LBJ’s Vietnam War Paralyzed His Mideast Policymakers”: “With a wide smile, Eugene Rostow said, ‘Gentlemen, gentlemen, do not forget that we are neutral in word, thought and deed’.”[3]

Shortly thereafter, press spokesman Robert J. McCloskey repeated those words for reporters. This statement caused much consternation among the Israeli leadership and within the White House. According to the memoirs of Joseph Califano, the reason it was such a “political problem [that] reached white heat” was because it could be interpreted as an invocation of the Neutrality Act, which meant that Israelis would be constrained from raising money in the United States and that might prevent the United States from shipping supplies to Israel. Califano said that Abe Fortas was among those who expressed concern to him about that issue, however it was in the context of his having “deep reservations” that it applied.[4]

Behind the Scenes at the “303 Committee” – April, 1967

Abe Fortas, a sitting Supreme Court justice, was also simultaneously serving in three other unofficial positions: as one of Johnson’s primary advisers, as a liaison between Johnson and Israeli leaders, and attending meetings of the National Security Council, thereby becoming directly involved in the planning of the Six-Day War. The paradox created by Justice Fortas, in facilitating President Johnson’s efforts to subvert constitutional, legal, moral and ethical rules of conduct, and assisting the president to commit U.S. military might to support a war of aggression by a U.S. ally on its neighbors, should not go unnoticed, as it has inherently proven to have been the case for some five decades.

Even as he played these multiple roles, he seemed oblivious to the innate conflict of interests they invoked. Fortas had previously been Johnson’s personal lawyer for over twenty years, including having played a primary role in Johnson’s theft of the 1948 senatorial election and being his chief collaborator in the months after JFK’s assassination – to squelch the multiple Senate investigations into Johnson’s criminal past. Throughout all of it, he was a personal witness to Johnson’s long history of criminal activity, clearly becoming one of Johnson’s primary enablers/sycophants.

The Nascent Plot to Sink the USS Liberty

As detailed in my book Remember the Liberty, preparations for the attack on the USS Liberty were delegated by Johnson to the “303 Committee,” – a sub-group of the National Security Council named for the elegant corner office of the Executive Office Building where it met. It was located physically next door to the White House, but figuratively an extension of it, reserved as a second office assigned to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff [JCS]. According to Richard Helms, that committee was “… simply a device for examining covert operations of any kind, and making a judgment on behalf of the president, so he wouldn’t be ‘nailed’ with the thing if it failed.”[5]  But under Johnson, the function of the group was much more proactive in creating plans than merely reviewing the products of others.

In 1967, the “303 committee” was composed of the under secretary of state for political affairs (Foy D. Kohler, formerly the ambassador to the Soviet Union), the deputy secretary of defense (Cyrus Vance), the CIA director (Richard Helms), the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (General Earle Wheeler) and the President’s national security adviser (Walt Rostow). This committee controlled all covert CIA operations.[6]

Regardless of its name, or the president, the committee was always directly under the control of the president to whom it served, and was, therefore, as James Reston, the New York Times columnist observed, “above even the Joint Chiefs of Staff … charged with approving intelligence missions all over the world.”[7] Clearly, and implicitly it should be noted as well, it was also above the CIA and its director, who also served on it as merely one of its members.

More here

Be seeing you

USS Liberty

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : The Real Bombshell of the Impeachment Hearings

Posted by M. C. on November 26, 2019

Let that sink in for a moment: Vindman did not witness any crimes, he just didn’t think the elected President of the United States had any right to change US policy toward Ukraine or Russia!

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman immigrated from Ukraine,

Let that sink in…

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/november/25/the-real-bombshell-of-the-impeachment-hearings/

Written by Ron Paul

The most shocking thing about the House impeachment hearings to this point is not a “smoking gun” witness providing irrefutable evidence of quid pro quo. It’s not that President Trump may or may not have asked the Ukrainians to look into business deals between then-Vice President Biden’s son and a Ukrainian oligarch.

The most shocking thing to come out of the hearings thus far is confirmation that no matter who is elected President of the United States, the permanent government will not allow a change in our aggressive interventionist foreign policy, particularly when it comes to Russia.

Even more shocking is that neither Republicans nor Democrats are bothered in the slightest!

Take Lt. Colonel Vindman, who earned high praise in the mainstream media. He did not come forth with first-hand evidence that President Trump had committed any “high crimes” or “misdemeanors.” He brought a complaint against the President because he was worried that Trump was shifting US policy away from providing offensive weapons to the Ukrainian government!

He didn’t think the US president had the right to suspend aid to Ukraine because he supported providing aid to Ukraine.

According to his testimony, Vindman’s was concerned over “influencers promoting a false narrative of Ukraine inconsistent with the consensus views of the interagency.”

“Consensus views of the interagency” is another word for “deep state.”

Vindman continued, “While my interagency colleagues and I were becoming increasingly optimistic on Ukraine’s prospects, this alternative narrative undermined US government efforts to expand cooperation with Ukraine.”

Let that sink in for a moment: Vindman did not witness any crimes, he just didn’t think the elected President of the United States had any right to change US policy toward Ukraine or Russia!

Likewise, his boss on the National Security Council Staff, Fiona Hill, sounded more like she had just stepped out of the 1950s with her heated Cold War rhetoric. Citing the controversial 2017 “Intelligence Community Assessment” put together by then-CIA director John Brennan’s “hand-picked” analysts, she asserted that, “President Putin and the Russian security services aim to counter US foreign policy objectives in Europe, including in Ukraine.”

And who gets to decide US foreign policy objectives in Europe? Not the US President, according to government bureaucrat Fiona Hill. In fact, Hill told Congress that, “If the President, or anyone else, impedes or subverts the national security of the United States in order to further domestic political or personal interests, that is more than worthy of your attention.”

Who was Fiona Hill’s boss? Former National Security Advisor John Bolton, who no doubt agreed that the president has no right to change US foreign policy. Bolton’s the one who “explained” that when Trump said US troops would come home it actually meant troops would stay put.

One by one, the parade of “witnesses” before House Intelligence Committee Chairman Schiff sang from the same songbook. As US Ambassador to the EU, Gordon Sondland put it, “in July and August 2019, we learned that the White House had also suspended security aid to Ukraine. I was adamantly opposed to any suspension of aid, as the Ukrainians needed those funds to fight against Russian aggression.”

Meanwhile, both Democrats and Republicans in large majority voted to continue spying on the rest of us by extending the unpatriotic Patriot Act. Authoritarianism is the real bipartisan philosophy in Washington.


Copyright © 2019 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Woke-a-Cola – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on November 26, 2019

I suspect this is what the globalists want: The rainbow flag of a hyper-sexualized culture displacing the national flag; the intensely individualist lifestyle supplanting any connection to the nuclear family tradition, and Western society becoming a bubbling cauldron of dreams and desires so multitudinous that nothing short of martial law will be able to control it.

It is hard to tell what Coca Cola is thinking and if they are just pandering to snowflakes to increase sales. but…The destruction of Western values and culture will be the outcome.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/11/24/coca-cola-transgender-ad-proves-there-is-a-war-on-for-childrens-hearts-minds-and-bodies/

Robert Bridge

How many people remember the days when the purpose of television commercials was to sell audiences some newfangled product they didn’t even realize they needed as opposed to some dangerous agenda? It seems we’re losing those memories fast.

The world of corporate advertising has finally crossed the cultural Rubicon. In a newly released advertisement, yet another major corporation has idolized a lifestyle choice, which, naturally, has absolutely no connection to the traditional nuclear family that has guided Western civilization through thick and thin over two millennia. The controversial ad in question focuses all of its fervid attention not on the product, but rather on promoting transgender attitudes among the impressionable pubescent teen population.

This latest creation borne out of the Cultural Marxist laboratory, which just happens to be a commercial for Sprite, a beverage produced by the Coca-Cola Company, features several adolescents preparing for their attendance at some rainbow-festooned event on the streets of a soulless urban jungle. If the ad feels more like a documentary than a promotional for carbonated sugar water that’s because no actor is ever seen quenching their thirst with the drink. Instead, the product has become a vehicle – a veritable Trojan horse – for driving home a hugely controversial issue into the living rooms of millions of Americans.

Note: Anyone confused by what is meant by the term ‘Cultural Marxism’ may want to watch a brief segment of an interview (below) with the late journalist Andrew Breitbart, who provides a compelling argument as to how and why the Western world is now plagued with stultifying political correctness and the social justice mindset.

In the Sprite TV ad, an apparent mother [the word ‘apparent’ is necessary since the term ‘gender’ has become an entirely fluid concept defined solely by a person’s feelings, which may change at a whim] opens the action to the sound of melodramatic melodies as she applies eyeliner on her apparent biological son. Cut away to scene two. Yet another apparent mother helps her apparent daughter wrap herself into a corset to conceal the fact that ‘she’ has breasts. Heaven forbid! Whether a mastectomy is on the horizon for the ‘girl’, together with a lifetime commitment to testosterone injections, the audience is none the wiser.

Next, an apparent grandmother dotes over her apparent cross-dressing grandson…

In these controversial commercials, it usually starts with a mirror. An individual staring back at the reflection of someone they think they know, but in all likelihood do not. The ancient command ‘Know thyself’ was believed by the wise Greeks to be so crucial to the full development of the person that the motto was engraved on the famed Temple of Apollo. Much of Western society, however, the inheritors of Greco-Roman political and cultural traditions, has abandoned that sound counsel, becoming more alienated from their true selves than ever before.

I suspect this is what the globalists want: The rainbow flag of a hyper-sexualized culture displacing the national flag; the intensely individualist lifestyle supplanting any connection to the nuclear family tradition, and Western society becoming a bubbling cauldron of dreams and desires so multitudinous that nothing short of martial law will be able to control it.

Now enjoy that Sprite.

Be seeing you

Hipster: The Dead End of Western Civilization | new ...

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Next Curse – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on November 26, 2019

Rather, it is Austrian economics and the Austrian Business Cycle theory that shows how sustained artificially low interest rates are a precondition for both record setting skyscrapers and the Skyscraper Curse

Easy money funds projects that shouldn’t happen and we don’t need.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/11/mark-thornton/the-next-curse/

By

Zero Hedge reports “China’s Skyscraper Boom Comes Crashing Down Amid Developer Default,” noting reports that construction work was recently halted on the nation’s potentially tallest skyscraper, after the developer defaulted on a payment to the construction company.

They then invoked the Skyscraper Index which they describe: “The index is simple; the world’s tallest buildings are often constructed or completed at economic turning points, right before or just as the downturn gets underway.” The Skyscraper Curse is the economic crises that ensues with every new world record.

As I describe in my book, The Skyscraper Curse: And How Austrian Economists Predicted Every Major Economic Crisis of the Last Century, the Skyscraper Index has a remarkably accurate record dating back to the late 19th century.

The book is actually two short books, the first one on the Skyscraper Curse, which explains the theory and history of the Skyscraper Index. The second half demonstrates that Austrian economists also have a remarkable record of predicting economic crises, but one that is not based on the Skyscraper Index. Rather, it is Austrian economics and the Austrian Business Cycle theory that shows how sustained artificially low interest rates are a precondition for both record setting skyscrapers and the Skyscraper Curse

The theory is that artificially low interest rates induce more borrowing for longer term investment projects such as research and development on new technologies, pharmaceutical drug projects, and of course long-term real estate projects, like skyscrapers. My book provides a detailed analysis of how low rates impact skyscrapers, but the most important point is that skyscrapers are just a good example of what is going on throughout much of the economy.

The article is correct that there is a great deal of building super tall skyscrapers in China, but is unclear if the stalled construction would have set a new record in China and certainly it would not set a world record. If it would have set a new Chinese record, then it would still indicate an economic crisis is coming to China soon.

No matter, the stalled Jeddah Tower in Saudi Arabia was set to become a new world record skyscraper, originally expected to be completed in 2020, which is when we can expect the next Curse to begin.

The fundamental case for an economic crisis in the near future should be obvious. Central banks around the world have implemented ultra-low interest rate policies.  In fact, a large portion of government bonds are now being financed at negative nominal rates, which is unprecedented. Many people manning Wall Street, hedge funds, and banks have never experienced a Federal Funds rate of 3%, which was the norm the previous half century.

Debt levels are at historic highs whether it is government debt, business debt, or individual debt. Debt levels tend to rise with low interest rates and expending economies, i.e. the artificial boom phase of the economy, only to become the most painful aspect in the economic crisis, i.e. government austerity budgets, corporate restructuring and bankruptcy, and bankruptcy, foreclosure, and unemployment for individuals.

Anecdotally, I am seeing buildings built taller, more spending on research and development, and newer companies poaching employees and customers from older companies.

The crisis usually begins when we see more stories about unexpected higher costs and lower revenues. While nothing about the next crisis is obvious to all—it never is–the stock markets will render their judgements.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Of Two Minds – The Hollowing Out of America

Posted by M. C. on November 25, 2019

In other words, the official statistics are gamed to appear positive even as the nation is being hollowed out.

https://oftwominds.cloudhostedresources.com/?ref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lewrockwell.com%2F&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.oftwominds.com%2Fblognov19%2Fhollowed-outUSA11-19.html

Charles Hugh Smith

Here is hollowed-out America, an economy of ever-greater financial wealth piling up in the hands of the few while tens of millions of wage-earners can’t afford what was available to everyone, even the working class, in previous eras.

America is being hollowed out, but since we don’t measure what actually matters, the decline has been deep-sixed by the government and media. As I explain in my new book Will You Be Richer or Poorer? , there are a number of reasons why what’s important –social capital, for example–doesn’t get measured.

The most obvious reason is that it’s politically inconvenient for those in power for the hollowing out of America to be quantified. To conceal the decline, institutions only measure what can be massaged to appear positive . These statistics include inflation (Consumer Price Index, CPI),the unemployment rate, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and hundreds of financial numbers: net wealth, bank loans and so on.

Everyone knows from experience that big-ticket expenses such as healthcare (see chart below), childcare, rent, college tuition, etc. have been rising at double-digit rates, while shrinkflation has reduced the quantity and quality of goods even as price has remained unchanged.

In other words, the official statistics are gamed to appear positive even as the nation is being hollowed out. People sense the disconnect but since what actually matters isn’t measured, there are few objective indicators of the decline we all experience in everyday life.

The second reason is that it’s difficult to measure intangible forms of capital such as social mobility and shared purpose. People are feeling increasingly insecure financially, but how do we measure this with any accuracy? We can track the number of people working second jobs in the gig economy, those with uncertain work schedules, etc., but even households with above-average incomes and conventional white-collar jobs are financially precarious in ways that don’t lend themselves to easy quantification.

And so while we’re constantly told the American consumer is in good shape, with manageable debt and rising incomes, in the real world auto loan defaults are soaring, 40% of those suffering from cancer are wiped out by the co-pays, and superficially middle-class households are one layoff away from default and insolvency.

As a result, we’re like the blind men touching different parts of the elephant and drawing completely erroneous conclusions about the size and nature of the animal. Much of what we measure is misleading (i.e. cheerleading), and what can’t be easily measured is dismissed as unimportant. Even worse, we conclude that since we can’t measure it easily, it doesn’t exist.

America is being hollowed out even as we’re constantly hectored that all is well. We’re told saving $10 on a pair of poorly made shoes is a tremendous benefit of globalization and neoliberal policies, but does a couple hundred dollars in savings on poorly made stuff (which is itself offset by an unmeasured decline in quality and durability) offset the fact that a huge swath of American households can no longer afford to rent their own apartment or house, much less buy a house?

Does this modest reduction in the cost of consumer goods offset the upward-spiraling cost of healthcare that is bankrupting small business and households? Does it offset the stagnation of wages for the majority of wage-earners? Does it offset the insecurity of work and benefits? Does it offset the decline of competition and the subsequent domination of profiteering monopolies and cartels in the American economy?

The U.S. Only Pretends to Have Free Markets From plane tickets to cellphone bills, monopoly power costs American consumers billions of dollars a year.

These are the forces hollowing out America: the relentless rise of the cost of big-ticket essentials while wages stagnate for the bottom 80%; the normalization of profiteering monopolies and cartels who buy tax breaks and regulatory capture in our pay-to-play political system; the decline of social mobility; the erosion of shared purpose and social capital; the silencing of dissent and independent thought; the erosion of financial security as everyone is forced into risky casinos of speculative financialization; the erosion of the rule of law as the super-wealthy are more equal than everyone else ; the criminalization of poverty; the decline of small business formation; the erosion of well-being and health; and so on in a long list of landslides in everything that matters that we don’t dare measure.

Be seeing you
Lies

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Comments Off on Of Two Minds – The Hollowing Out of America

MoA – Why The Hong Kong Riots Are Coming To An End

Posted by M. C. on November 25, 2019

The plan failed because China was too smart to give the U.S. what it wanted. Now it is Trump who is under pressure. He needs the trade deal with China because the current trade war is doing harm to the U.S. economy and endangers his reelection.

Which is probably the real reason why the protests have died down.

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/11/why-the-hong-kong-riots-are-coming-to-an-end.html

Moon of Alabama

The U.S. sponsored riots in Hong Kong are mostly over. They were sustained much longer than we had expected.

The “marginal violence” campaign of the “pro-democratic” students has failed to win more support for them. Regular Hongkongers are increasingly willing to take a stand against further provocations:

Demonstrators gathered at about 12.30pm on a bridge outside Exchange Square, which houses Hong Kong’s stock exchange in the city’s financial heartland, in another round of lunchtime protests that have been staged most days over the past two weeks.Scuffles broke out after a pro-police group of about 50 people showed up about an hour later, but police arrived soon after to clear the area.

During at least two altercations between some members of each group, an anti-government contingent yelled “go back to China” at their adversaries, and one of their number kicked a woman walking towards the smaller group.

Ten days ago the core of the black clad rioters began to paralyze Hong Kong’s traffic during regular workdays. They ransacked nearly every metro stations and barricaded large thoroughfares and tunnels. Schools were closed, businesses and workers were severely harmed.

One 70 year old street cleaner was killed when he was hit by a stone thrown by the rioters against civilians who tried to remove a barricade. A 57 year old man was drenched with gasoline and set alight after he verbally disagreed with the rioter’s ransacking of a metro station. A policeman was shot with an arrow.

The rioters occupied the Chinese University and the Polytechnic University (PolyU) which are next to large streets and the important Cross-Harbor-Tunnel. Using the universities as logistic bases and fortifications they managed to keep many roads closed throughout day and night. After some negotiations with the president of the Chinese University the rioters evacuated from there while leaving some 8,000 petrol bombs behind. They concentrated in the PolyU next to the Cross-Harbor-Tunnel.

That was a mistake.

Last Sunday the police surrounded the PolyU and let no one leave. Those who wanted out were either arrested or, when under 18, identified and handed to their parents. There were several violent battles when the rioters attempted to break through the police cordon but only a few escaped.


biggerAfter a few days most of those inside PolyU surrendered to the police.

Today there are still some 30 rioter holed up in a PolyU building. The police are waiting them out. They said that they had made more than a thousand arrests. The university is ransacked and there was significant battle damage. The rioters again left thousands of Molotov cocktails and other weapons behind.

The blockage of the city traffic and the increasing damage caused by rioter vandalism has alienated even those who earlier supported them. As the police now have most of the core rioters under arrest there is little chance that such violent protests will continue.

On Sunday there will be citywide district council elections in Hong Kong. China had pushed for the elections to go forward under all circumstances. Riot police will guard all polling stations.

Weeks ago the “pro-dem” candidates, who supported the rioters, were still poised to win more seats than they had held before the protests. But they now fear that the general public will punish them for the mayhem they have caused and will choose establishment candidates:

Chinese University political scientist Ivan Choy Chi-keung said while the turnout could set another record, the overall situation was more unpredictable than before.“The pan-democrats could have won a landslide victory if the elections had been held in the summer, when the protests erupted,” Choy said. “But after the recent clashes at two universities, undecided voters may be worried about public order and be discouraged from voting.

He was referring to fiery battles protesters fought with police outside Chinese University on November 12, followed by more confrontations outside Polytechnic University last week.

“It will be difficult for the camp to win more than half of the seats, as some originally envisaged,” Choy said.

The Hong Kong government has conceded none of the protesters’ “five demands”. The only thing that the protesters have won is the passing of legislation by the U.S. Congress:

The House of Representatives on Wednesday followed the lead of the Senate in overwhelmingly approving two pieces of legislation: The Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act, which requires the president to annually review the favourable trading status that the US gives to Hong Kong, threatening to revoke it and impose penalties against officials if freedoms are determined to have been quashed; and the Protect Hong Kong Act, which will block the sale of tear gas and other policing items.The former, although largely symbolic, could alter Washington’s relationship with Hong Kong and Beijing.

US President Donald Trump has a straightforward choice on legislation passed on to him by the United States Congress supporting the protests that have engulfed Hong Kong – approve or veto. Coming amid tough bargaining on his trade war with China, he may be tempted to make his decision part of the negotiations.
…
But Beijing sees such measures as striking at the heart of Chinese sovereignty. Radical protesters could be spurred to greater violence. Unspecified countermeasures are promised should Trump give his approval.
…
But the trade war, violence and legislation have damaged business sentiment in Hong Kong. Approval or not, pessimism and uncertainty have already been deepened. There can be no winners.

Trump wants the trade deal with China and will therefore likely veto the bill:

Speaking on the “Fox & Friends” morning program, the president said that he was balancing competing priorities in the U.S.-China relationship.“We have to stand with Hong Kong, but I’m also standing with President Xi [Jinping], he’s a friend of mine. He’s an incredible guy, but we have to stand … I’d like to see them work it out, okay?” the president said. “I stand with freedom, I stand with all of the things that I want to do, but we are also in the process of making one of the largest trade deals in history. And if we could do that, it would be great.”

A veto would only have a temporary impact as the law has passed the House and Senate by veto proof majorities.

The idea behind the protests and the rioters In Hong Kong was all along to provoke another Tian An Men incident. This has been quite obvious since the start of the protest. It now gets publicly acknowledged:

BBC Newsnight @BBCNewsnight – 11:00 UTC · Nov 19, 2019“Some of the protesters seem to have an objective to provoke a military confrontation with China. They seem to want a Tiananmen Square outcome as success.”

Fmr Foreign Sec @Jeremy_Hunt says he is “concerned with the tactics” with some of #HongKong’s protesters

Had China moved troops to Hong Kong, or allowed more force to be used against the protesters, the U.S. would have used that to press its allies to put strong sanctions on China. The protesters’ violence was designed to achieve that outcome. The plan was part of the larger U.S. strategy of decoupling from China.

The plan failed because China was too smart to give the U.S. what it wanted. Now it is Trump who is under pressure. He needs the trade deal with China because the current trade war is doing harm to the U.S. economy and endangers his reelection.

Which is probably the real reason why the protests have died down.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »