
Be seeing you
Posted by M. C. on February 12, 2022
Be seeing you
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Hypocrisy | Leave a Comment »
Posted by M. C. on February 10, 2022
It’s probably worth mentioning that after Kansi was executed, four American citizens were assassinated in Pakistan in retaliation.
What we need in America is a great awakening, one that involves a revival of individual conscience. When that day comes, Americans will put a stop to the evil within our midst by converting America back to a limited-government republic and putting an end to state-sponsored murder. It will also make Americans traveling overseas a lot safer.
Four years later, FBI agents arrested Kansi in Pakistan – Another problem, a US domestic enforcement organization on the other side of the planet.
On the morning of January 25, 1993, a man named Mir Amal Kansi appeared outside CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, where he began assassinating people who were driving their cars into the facility. He ended up killing two CIA employees and wounding three others.
Four years later, FBI agents arrested Kansi in Pakistan and brought him back to the United States.
Kansi was prosecuted in a Virginia state court for murder, where he was convicted and sentenced to die. On November 14, 2002, the state of Virginia executed him.
What I find fascinating in this episode is that under U.S national-security law, when the CIA assassinates people, it isn’t considered murder. But as Kansi’s case shows, when people assassinate CIA officials, it is considered murder.
Kansi gave the reason for his assassinations. No, he didn’t say that he hated America for its “freedom and values.” He said that the reason he was assassinating CIA officials was to retaliate for the fact that the U.S. government was killing people in Iraq and for its role in helping Israel kill Palestinians.
Under U.S. national-security law, U.S. officials can assassinate anyone they want — “communists,” “terrorists,” “bad guys,” “adversaries,” “opponents,” “rivals,” or “enemies.” When they do that, it’s to be called an “assassination” or a “targeted killing.”
Moreover, under the law, U.S. officials can kill whoever they want with economic sanctions, as they were doing with the Iraqi people at the time that Kansi was retaliating. I am reminded of U.S. Ambassador Madeleine Albright’s infamous statement that the deaths of half-a-million Iraqi children from the sanctions were “worth it.” Those killings weren’t called “murder” of course. They were called unfortunate deaths arising from the sanctions.
U.S. officials also wield the authority to kill whoever they want with invasions of Third-World countries. The people of Afghanistan and Iraq can attest to that. Again, those killings are not considered to be murder. They are considered to be casualties of war.
If, however, anyone retaliates against the national-security establishment by assassinating officials within the national-security establishment, it’s called “murder,” in which case the assassin will be put to death after being accorded a trial.
Of course, this was the law prior to the 9/11 attacks. After those attacks, the law was implicitly amended to provide that the national-security establishment had the option of taking “bad guys” like Kansi to Gitmo, where they could be tortured, held indefinitely without trial, or executed after a kangaroo trial before a military tribunal.
All this hypocrisy goes to show what the conversion from a limited-government republic to a national-security state has done to the consciences of the American people. Most everyone has come to accept the state-sponsored assassinations and deaths arising from sanctions, embargoes, invasions, occupations, and wars of aggression as just part and parcel of the U.S. government’s “foreign policy tools.”
As I pointed out in a recent blog post, however, the Pentagon’s and the CIA’s assassinations do constitute murder, just as Kansi’s assassinations do. Why, even Lyndon Johnson referred to the CIA’s assassination program as a “Murder, Inc.,” which is precisely what it is. The same goes for deaths arising from sanctions, embargoes, wars of aggression, invasions, and occupations. It’s just plain murder.
Referring to Kansi, Virginia prosecutor Robert F. Horne stated, “I’ve tried an awful lot of killers in my life, and I think he’s the only one I’ve run into that is absolutely proud of what he did. You get a lot of killers who don’t feel all that bad about what they did, but he’s proud of it.”
Apparently Horne has never met any CIA assassins or other federal officials who kill people. Like Kansi, they feel really good about their killings and are absolutely proud of what they do, especially when they’re killing people through assassination, sanctions, embargoes, invasions, occupations, and illegal wars of aggression.. What Horne fails to realize is that even though Kansi is a “bad guy” for assassinating people, that doesn’t convert CIA assassins and other U.S. officials who kill people into “good guys.”
It’s probably worth mentioning that after Kansi was executed, four American citizens were assassinated in Pakistan in retaliation.
What we need in America is a great awakening, one that involves a revival of individual conscience. When that day comes, Americans will put a stop to the evil within our midst by converting America back to a limited-government republic and putting an end to state-sponsored murder. It will also make Americans traveling overseas a lot safer.
This post was written by: Jacob G. Hornberger
Be seeing you
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: assassination, CIA, FBI, Hypocrisy, Mir Amal Kansi | Leave a Comment »
Posted by M. C. on January 9, 2022
This is an excerpt from Thomas Sowell’s classic ‘Dismantling America’ — https://amzn.to/3Ewkbhl
Be seeing you
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Dismantling America, Hypocrisy, Progressives | Leave a Comment »
Posted by M. C. on August 9, 2021
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/pictures-surface-obamas-maskless-birthday-bash
by Tyler Durden
A performer at President Obama’s Martha’s Vineyard “scaled-down” birthday party allegedly uploaded pictures of the event and was immediately forced to delete them.
Rapper Trap Beckham and manager TJ Chapman snapped pictures of the ‘epic’ birthday party with hundreds of maskless liberal elites partying like royalties while the ordinary folks, under the new health guidelines, are forced to wear masks and social distance at bars and restaurants.
Before the pictures were deleted, fans of Beckham saved them that show there’s a two-tier society of liberal elites drinking top-shelf liquor, smoking expensive cigars, and eating fancy food in a maskless environment. The recording artist and his manager took pictures of themselves smoking weed behind the scenes.
The pictures are troubling because this exposes the hypocrisy of the liberals who promote mask-wearing but don’t follow their own rules. No wonder there were rules about picture taking at the event because if the general public ever got a glimpse of the two-tier society, this would infuriate them. Here are the images below:
The NYPost reported that Beckham performed “Birthday B—h” for the former president.
Beckham later explained he “had to delete everything [pictures] due to the rules. It was epic for sure. If any videos surface it’s going viral. He danced the whole time. Nobody ever seen Obama like this before.”
Video of Obama’s maskless Martha’s Vineyard birthday party before Erykah Badu deleted it pic.twitter.com/ge0k23XioV — Jewish Deplorable (@TrumpJew2) August 8, 2021
The birthday party was reportedly scaled back late last week amid critics bashing the Obamas for preparing to host up to 475 guests, served by at least 200 staff despite new warnings about a worsening pandemic.
Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks, George Clooney, Jennifer Hudson, Jay-Z, Beyoncé, Bradley Cooper, Don Cheadle, Gabrielle Union, Dwyane Wade, Bruce Springsteen, Erykah Badu, Steven Colbert, and John Kerry were some of the A-list celebs in attendance.
The party wound down around 0100 ET Sunday, and guests’ departures created massive traffic jams on the roads of small-town Oak Bluffs.
Be seeing you
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: birthday party, Hypocrisy, liberal elites, maskless, Obama | 2 Comments »
Posted by M. C. on September 9, 2020
Summers argued it was “entirely unfair” to add what were in law new and separate criminal allegations, at short notice and “entirely without warning and not giving the defense time to respond to it. What is happening here is abnormal, unfair and liable to create real injustice if allowed to continue.”
https://original.antiwar.com/?p=2012340900
I went to the Old Bailey today expecting to be awed by the majesty of the law, and left revolted by the sordid administration of injustice.
There is a romance which attaches to the Old Bailey. The name of course means fortified enclosure and it occupies a millennia old footprint on the edge of London’s ancient city wall. It is the site of the medieval Newgate Prison, and formal trials have taken place at the Old Bailey for at least 500 years, numbering in the hundreds of thousands. For the majority of that time, those convicted even of minor offenses of theft were taken out and executed in the alleyway outside. It is believed that hundreds, perhaps thousands, lie buried under the pavements.
The hefty Gothic architecture of the current grand building dates back no further than 1905, and round the back and sides of that is wrapped some horrible cheap utility building from the 1930’s. It was through a tunneled entrance into this portion that five of us, Julian’s nominated family and friends, made our nervous way this morning. We were shown to Court 10 up many stairs that seemed like the back entrance to a particularly unloved works canteen. Tiles were chipped, walls were filthy and flakes of paint hung down from crumbling ceilings. Only the security cameras watching us were new – so new, in fact, that little piles of plaster and brick dust lay under each.
Court 10 appeared to be a fairly bright and open modern box, with pleasant light woodwork, jammed as a mezzanine inside a great vault of the old building. A massive arch intruded incongruously into the space and was obviously damp, sheets of delaminating white paint drooping down from it like flags of forlorn surrender. The dock in which Julian would be held still had a bulletproof glass screen in front, like Belmarsh, but it was not boxed in. There was no top to the screen, no low ceiling, so sound could flow freely over and Julian seemed much more in the court. It also had many more and wider slits than the notorious Belmarsh Box, and Julian was able to communicate quite readily and freely through them with his lawyers, which this time he was not prevented from doing.
Rather to our surprise, nobody else was allowed into the public gallery of court 10 but us five. Others like John Pilger and Kristin Hrafnsson, editor in chief of WikiLeaks, were shunted into the adjacent court 9 where a very small number were permitted to squint at a tiny screen, on which the sound was so inaudible John Pilger simply left. Many others who had expected to attend, such as Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders, were simply excluded, as were MPs from the German federal parliament (both the German MPs and Reporters Without Borders at least later got access to the inadequate video following strong representations from the German Embassy).
The reason given that only five of us were allowed in the public gallery of some 40 seats was social distancing; except we were allowed to all sit together in consecutive seats in the front row. The two rows behind us remained completely empty.
To finish scene setting, Julian himself looked tidy and well groomed and dressed, and appeared to have regained a little lost weight, but with a definite unhealthy puffiness about his features. In the morning he appeared disengaged and disoriented rather as he had at Belmarsh, but in the afternoon he perked up and was very much engaged with his defense team, interacting as normally as could be expected in these circumstances. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Belmarsh, Extradition Hearing, Hypocrisy, Julian Assange | Leave a Comment »
Posted by M. C. on September 3, 2020
Rectenwald says big business treats some of the very fundamentals of nationhood—borders, citizenship, cohesion, and historical ties—as impediments to the free flow of capital and labor. He says these are considered “obstacles to global corporate dominance” generally. The corporations’ far-left allies, he says, simply see borders and distinctions between peoples as discriminatory.
Other notable BLM allies include Nike, Pepsi, and Proctor & Gamble. For years, each has faced serious accusations over the use of slave labor in Southeast Asia. The big four accounting firms, Deloitte, KPMG, PwC, and Ernst & Young, have all mouthed BLM platitudes, yet all have failed to challenge Beijing’s actions in Hong Kong.
https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/blog/the-right-versus-the-axis-of-wokeness-/
In response to the recent riots and protests, America’s biggest companies have committed hundreds of millions of dollars to so-called racial justice organizations such as Black Lives Matter (BLM) and denounced political speech on the right as hate. The conservative establishment has greeted this rise in corporate “wokeness” with a mixture of surprise, fury, and a sense of betrayal.
In reality, it’s just the chickens coming home to roost for the establishment right. For years, National Review, the Heritage Foundation, and the rest of the mainstream right have been silent about the growth of corporate power and its influence on the U.S. political and social landscape. They have finally woken up to the fact that big business has never been their friend. There has been no “change in values” within the executive suites.
In fact, multinational corporations and the far left are natural bedfellows. Both factions are staunch supporters of globalism, including mass immigration, according to former NYU professor Michael Rectenwald. Pushing for open borders provides cheap labor and an expanded consumer base for corporations, while satisfying the left’s political demands for multiculturalism.
Rectenwald says big business treats some of the very fundamentals of nationhood—borders, citizenship, cohesion, and historical ties—as impediments to the free flow of capital and labor. He says these are considered “obstacles to global corporate dominance” generally. The corporations’ far-left allies, he says, simply see borders and distinctions between peoples as discriminatory.
What corporations actually gain from the hard left is legitimacy. French novelist Renaud Camus once likened this relationship to an old, rich woman with an execrable reputation introduced to an ambitious young man with good credentials but no money. The apparent odd couple soon find that they have a lot to offer one another: the former has money and media access; the latter embodies seeming virtue and can provide a good image-boost. It’s the combination of these two forces that makes the axis of wokeness between corporations and the left so strong today.
Americans need to understand that corporations are essentially psychopathic entities. The 2003 documentary The Corporation contains a memorable scene in which a psychologist is asked whether a corporation, if treated like a person, would be considered a “psychopath.” Running down the list of symptoms including deceitfulness, incapacity to experience guilt, and reckless disregard for its effects on others, the doctor concludes corporations fit the profile.
A typical corporate chief executive commits his focus and energies to one thing only: meeting the quarterly profit expectations set by the equity analysts at the major investment banks. Any campaign that claims corporate values are social values is either phony brand activism or what Rectenwald calls a “rhetorical placebo” designed to divert attention from things like stagnant working-class wages. The profit motive tends to overshadow even the personal politics of chief executives.
The stunning hypocrisy of some of the recent corporate grant-givers bears this out. H&M, North Face, Amazon, and Apple, for instance, all announced tens of millions of dollars toward ending “institutional racism,” yet each face serious accusations of exploiting slave labor sourced from China’s Xinjiang province. Since 2017, Chinese president Xi Jinping has placed more than 1 million people from that country’s Muslim Turkic region into detention centers where they’re banned from praying and taught to hate their culture. Many are forcibly sterilized. Nearly every company advertising their commitment to BLM has direct business ties with China and not one has expressed concern about the literal institutional racism going on in that country.
Other notable BLM allies include Nike, Pepsi, and Proctor & Gamble. For years, each has faced serious accusations over the use of slave labor in Southeast Asia. The big four accounting firms, Deloitte, KPMG, PwC, and Ernst & Young, have all mouthed BLM platitudes, yet all have failed to challenge Beijing’s actions in Hong Kong.
By now, the American right should understand that it has zero influence over corporate institutions, and no reason not to commit to a nation-first position on immigration. This position worked well for anti-establishmentarian candidate Donald Trump in 2016. However, after many years serving as useful idiots for corporate elites, a change in strategy might be yet outside the grasp of the establishment right.
Bradley Betters is an attorney who previously worked in politics. He has written for The Federalist as well as other outlets.
Be seeing you
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: anti-establishmentarian, Axis of Wokeness, BLM, Hypocrisy, multinational corporations | Leave a Comment »
Posted by M. C. on August 19, 2020
This doesn’t mean that refusing to admit or serve someone would be practical or prudent, and having prejudice can exact a heavy price. But in a free society, no one has the right to be admitted to or served in any restaurant or business establishment.
If a business owner discriminated against anyone for any other reason than for the lack of a face mask, he would face a federal civil rights lawsuit and picketing, boycotts, and violence by leftists. It is only government-approved discrimination that is lawful—like discriminating against Asians in college admissions.
The hypocrisy of the left on discrimination is appalling.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/08/laurence-m-vance/so-do-we-now-have-the-right-to-refuse-service/
To comply with the letter of the non-law issued by the fascist mayor of Orange County, Florida, Jerry Demings, most restaurants in the county want their patrons to (1) Wear a mask upon entering the restaurant, (2) Wear a mask while waiting for a table, (3) Wear a mask while walking to your table, (4) Wear a mask when going to the restroom, and (5) Wear a mask upon leaving the restaurant. At least we don’t have to wear a mask while eating (although I have seen at least one person at a restaurant pull their mask down to insert a bite of food in their mouth and then put their mask right back over their mouth to chew their food).
Most of the restaurants I have been to in Orange County aren’t enforcing the mayor’s dictate. They don’t have to. Because compliance is nearly 100 percent, the restaurants either don’t notice or don’t care to make an issue of the 1 percent or so who enter their establishments without a mask. Never thought I would be a member of the 1 percent.
Yet, I was refused service twice last week at fast-food restaurants: Five Guys and Smashburger. Why? Although I wore a shirt and shoes, I had no face mask. Instead of complying with the mask requirement, I went and got a hamburger elsewhere (not McDonalds: it is total mask nazi).
I was discriminated against and refused service. And I fully support the right of businesses to do both.
I have made it clear in my many articles on discrimination that all businesses should have the right to discriminate against anyone on basis and for any reason: race, religion, color, creed, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, facial hair, hair style, political preference, clothing style, age, height, weight, head covering, disability, familial status, martial status, odor, socioeconomic status, religious piety.
Any business should have the right to refuse service to anyone with or without a red shirt, black pants, a bald head, a mustache, a Rolex on the wrist, a gold chain around the neck, leather shoes, or a face mask.
Discrimination means freedom. It is a crime in search of victim. Anti-discrimination laws are an attack on property rights, freedom of association, and freedom of thought.
This doesn’t mean that refusing to admit or serve someone would be practical or prudent, and having prejudice can exact a heavy price. But in a free society, no one has the right to be admitted to or served in any restaurant or business establishment.
So, in regard to my being discriminated against and refused service, here is the $64,000 question: Do we now have the right to refuse service?
Of course we don’t.
If a business owner discriminated against anyone for any other reason than for the lack of a face mask, he would face a federal civil rights lawsuit and picketing, boycotts, and violence by leftists. It is only government-approved discrimination that is lawful—like discriminating against Asians in college admissions.
The hypocrisy of the left on discrimination is appalling.
Since discrimination is not aggression, force, coercion, threat, or violence, the government should never prohibit it, seek to prevent it, or prosecute anyone for doing it.
So, to those restaurants in Orange County that want me to wear a mask when inside your establishment when I am entering, waiting, and walking (even though many who are finished eating and drinking are still sitting at tables and booths talking without wearing masks), I will take my appetite and my money elsewhere.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: discrimination, Hypocrisy, mask, the left | Leave a Comment »
Posted by M. C. on January 28, 2020
The bottom line is this: the US Administration cites Iran’s restricting of outside
media as evidence of the evil nature of the Iranian government, all the while
scrambling to restrict American citizens’ access to Iranian media outlets.
Pot. Kettle. Black. Hypocrisy.
Sanctions: killing innocent civilians by design.
On November 22nd of last year, the US government announced it would impose sanctions on Iran’s information minister for his alleged role in limiting domestic Internet access while protests raged in that country over increases in gas prices.
At the time, US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin condemned the Iranian government for censuring information that Iranian citizens could view online, stating that, “Iran’s leaders know that a free and open internet exposes their illegitimacy, so they seek to censor Internet access to quell anti-regime protests.”
The Iranians were evil, said the US government official in charge of economic sanctions, because it restricted what its citizens could read in the international press.
Our government would never do that…right?
Wrong. Yesterday, the US government knocked Iran’s state news agency, FARS, off of the Internet entirely, citing US sanctions against the country.
What that means is the Iranian news service is being censored by the United States government and that Americans will therefore no longer be able to see anything from this foreign media outlet.
Exactly what Mnuchin accused Iran of doing back in November.
Zerohedge writes, “as Iran’s PressTV describes further“:
The news agency said that it had received an email from the server company, which explicitly said that the blockage is due to an order by the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and its inclusion in the list of Specially Designated Nationals (SDN).
The agency attached to its post a screenshot of its website with the message “www.farsnews.com’s server IP address could not be found.”
This latest US censorship of Iranian media is nothing new. Iran’s PressTV has been removed from YouTube and other US social media with “US sanctions on Iran” being given as the reason.
Americans are not allowed to see the Iranian perspective on the Middle East because the Beltway bombardiers and their bosses in the military-industrial complex depend on successfully demonizing all Persians so that Americans will accept their annihilation in another neocon war. If Americans are allowed to see the Iranian perspective they might not be so supportive of the slaughter the neocons are cooking up.
The bottom line is this: the US Administration cites Iran’s restricting of outside media as evidence of the evil nature of the Iranian government, all the while scrambling to restrict American citizens’ access to Iranian media outlets.
Pot. Kettle. Black. Hypocrisy.
Be seeing you
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Hypocrisy, Internet access, Iran, Steven Mnuchin, US sanctions | Leave a Comment »