US President Barack Obama did not wait for Binyamin Netanyahu to finish building his new government coalition by its deadline at midnight Wednesday, May 6, before going into action to pay him back for forming a right-wing cabinet minus any moderate figure for resuming negotiations with the Palestinians.
Banking on Netanyahu’s assertion while campaigning for re-election that there would be no Palestinian state during his term in office, Obama is reported exclusively by our sources to have given the hitherto withheld green light to European governments to file a UN Security Council motion proclaiming an independent Palestinian state.
Although Netanyahu left the foreign affairs portfolio in his charge and available to be filled by a suitably moderate figure as per the White House’s expectations did not satisfy the US President.
The White House is confident that, with the US voting in favor, the motion will be passed by an overwhelming majority and therefore be binding on the Israeli government.
To show the administration was in earnest, senior US officials sat down with their French counterparts in Paris last week to sketch out the general outline of this motion. According to our sources, they began addressing such questions as the area of the Palestinian state, its borders, security arrangements between Israel and the Palestinians and whether or not to set a hard-and-fast timeline for implementation, or phrase the resolution as a general declaration of intent.
Incorporating a target date in the language would expose Israel to Security Council sanctions for non-compliance.
American and French diplomats are already using the club they propose to hang over the Netanyahu government’s head for gains in other spheres.
French President Francois Hollande, for instance, the first foreign leader ever to attend a Gulf Council of Cooperation summit, which opened in Riyadh Tuesday to discuss Iran and the Yemen war, used the opportunity to brief Gulf Arab rulers on Washington’s turnaround on the Israeli-Palestinian issue.
And US Secretary of State John Kerry plans to present the Obama administration’s new plans for Palestinian statehood to Saudi leaders during his visit to Riyadh Wednesday and Thursday, May 6-7. Kerry will use Washington’s willingness to meet Palestinian aspirations as currency for procuring Saudi and Gulf support for a Yemen ceasefire and their acceptance of the nuclear deal shaping up with Iran.
America’s military and foreign policy failures are countless and stacking up every day. There is little question anymore that excessive dependence on private contractors, the influence of the Israel and other powerful lobbies and a bifurcated command structure with rogue elements running private “ops” has left America defenseless.
We see it today while the city of Baltimore burns, we see it in NATO drumbeating against Russia, we see it in America’s new partnership with Japan and the belligerence it represents.
We also see it in Turkey and the Ukraine, in Yemen and the bizarre naval and air blockade of humanitarian aid to a nation ravaged by a neighbor with 5th century values and 21st century weapons.
Two months ago the US Department of Defense announced an exercise to take place across much of the United States. The wording of the document sent reverberations around the world as conspiracy theorists began announcing “the end of the world as we know it.” The real import of Jade Helm isn’t the conspiracy theories but the truth of it, what it really tells us is that the world we think we know ended a long time ago. Many of us simply missed it.
On April 27, the organizers of Jade Helm held a meeting in a small Texas town describing their plans. Those of us with some sympathy for the military groaned as the army spokesman failed epically during attempts to woo the audience through flag waving and pulling on patriotic heartstrings. No one was buying any of it.
Whatever the great fear of Jade Helm may be with some, the sad reality of what Jade Helm really is may be worse. After a careful analysis of the Army statements, cleaning away the fog and cobwebs, the doublespeak, this is what the world was told in that small Texas town:
•Jade Helm is a simulation to teach the Army to not kill every civilian they see like they did in Iraq and Afghanistan.
•Jade Helm will teach, they hope, a totally failed military to operate using human intelligence they might get by not alienating everyone in the world by acting like total fools and incompetents.
•Jade Helm is supposed to teach special operations troops how to survive without Playstations, 6000 calorie lunches and “mama army” 24/7.
•Jade Helm units are going to learn to move undetected, pretend and we mean “pretend” to earn the trust of civilians who will be role players. I hope the cooperating locals are getting paid for this.
•Jade Helm is an attempt to sell a narrative that the defeats in Iraq and Afghanistan and the horrific failures that have left both nations a total disaster can be fixed. This, of course, is delusional.
•Jade Helm is based on the hypothesis that if troops are trained to work around people better, they can get intelligence, get help from locals the way the Viet Cong and Taliban have done. This is unrealistic.
•Jade Helm may well be training to fight in America under a Red Dawn scenario or even a civil war.
•Jade Helm may be a prequel to American involvement in Ukraine.
•Jade Helm, however, seems to be a “busywork fix” for a number of problems that have plagued the military that are not being addressed, like fighting the wrong wars against the wrong people for the wrong reasons.
•Jade Helm, in the most direct terms, is an attempt to train in the art of the “Charm Offensive.”
In an attempt to dispel rumors of gun confiscations and mass arrests, those capable of reading between the lines could catch, from through the spin, the smell of fear and the look of panic and desperation.
If more Americans clearly understood what Jade Helm is telling them, they would soon realize that there is no Army protecting America, certainly not one worth $1 trillion per year or more.
Jade Helm is attempting to teach a broken and dispirited American military how to “get along with people” while that same military is actively supporting enemies of the United States. Money spent to teach soldiers to “make friends and influence people” might better be spent on catching whoever it is inside Washington that is misdirecting millions in American weapons to America’s enemies.
While the mainstream media sides with the savages of Islam, following an Islamic jihad attack in Garland, Texas on Sunday, Pamela Geller takes them head on (As opposed to head off, like Islamic jihadists do). Now, Geller has reported that the Islamic State is specifically targeting her, stating "We will send all our lions to achieve her slaughter."
From the looks of things, it looks like the Islamic State are sending cubs rather than lions. Honestly, the two guys that showed up at the event on Sunday were fully armed, in body armor and managed to wound one policeman before being put where they deserve, in Hell.
As for the threat, Geller posted it to her website. Here it is in full as posted:
Islam is not a religion of peace, despite its talking head pundits and taqiyyah spewers. It is a religion of submission to a demon god and the non-prophet Muhammad is his messenger.
Geller points out, "This threat illustrates the savagery and barbarism of the Islamic State. They want me dead for violating Sharia blasphemy laws. What remains to be seen is whether the free world will finally wake up and stand for the freedom of speech, or instead kowtow to this evil and continue to denounce me."
"What's really frightening and astonishing about this threat is that the media in denouncing me is essentially allying with and even cheering on the Islamic State," Geller added. "I expected this from jihadists. I never expected it from my fellow Americans in the mainstream media."
This is the exact argument that says “Hey, don’t wear that slutty outfit if you don’t want to get raped. You know people in this neighborhood can’t control themselves.”
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews was speaking with Evan Kohlmann when he distilled this concept perfectly - claiming that “An anti-Islamic event caused, well, it caused this probably.”
Kohlmann responded with the standard “we love free speech but” line, and then launched into this nugget:
....They are intentionally trying to provoke a response from the Muslim community and unfortunately, this was predictable. And you know that because the police told them in order to hold this event, they would have to have $10,000 worth of security on hand. They had a SWAT Team outfitted like it was Baghdad. So obviously someone knew that there was a likelihood that some some stupid person would do this.
And again, I don’t think it’s any great revelation if you shout fire in a crowded theater and you incite people and you say nasty invective about people’s ancestors and their religious symbols, that there are a couple of crazy nutcases that are going to come out of the woodwork and are going to try to take action over that.
There are a couple of problems here.
Why is the 1st Amendment the problem, but mass-murdering ISIS thugs aren’t?
First, I could have sworn that - for decades - artists and the liberal left told us that art existed precisely to “provoke a response.” The painter, sculptor, writer, or musician creates his message, and you respond to it as you will. Art that fails to create any response is ridiculed as banal and uninspired.
Isn’t that why we were all supposed to fawn over a crucifix submerged in urine or the Virgin Mary smeared with feces? We didn’t hear a whole lot of “tone it down” in response to the Christian outrage those pieces generated.
There are hundreds of similar examples all over the web, and I won’t bother listing them all here. We saw the same thing happen when Time magazine criticized the “Islamophobic” cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo, and we’ll probably see it the next time a jihadist kills in the name of “The Prophet.” ...But it’s worth noting that these claims all have one thing in common. Not one of the people blaming free speech have managed to answer a very simple question: If these deeply-offended people are murderers, terrorists, radicals, extremists, and “crazy nutcases,” why are we supposed to cater to them? Whether or not you find the cartoons offensive, shouldn’t we be placing the rights of the non-violent above an effort to coddle the worst humanity has to offer?
The left’s desire to “blame the victim” is disgusting, and it’s astonishing that they won’t admit the inherent bigotry of their “Muslims can’t control themselves” claim.
Why is the 1st Amendment the problem, but mass-murdering ISIS thugs aren’t?
Some are saying I provoked this attack. But to kowtow to violent intimidation will only encourage more of it.
Sunday in Garland, Texas, a police officer was wounded in a battle that is part of a longstanding war: the war against the freedom of speech. Some people are blaming me for the Garland shooting — so I want to address that here.
The shooting happened at my American Freedom Defense Initiative Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest, when two Islamic jihadists armed with rifles and explosives drove up to the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland and attempted to gain entry to our event, which was just ending. We were aware of the risk and spent thousands of dollars on security — and it paid off. The jihadis at our free speech event were not able to achieve their objective of replicating the massacre at the offices of the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine last January — and to go it one better in carnage. They were not able to kill anyone. We provided enormous security, in concert with the superb Garland police department. The men who took the aspiring killers down may have saved hundreds of lives.
And make no mistake: If it weren't for the free-speech conference, these jihadis would have struck somewhere else — a place where there was less security, like the Lindt cafe in Australia or the Hyper Cacher Kosher supermarket in Paris.
So, why are some people blaming me? They're saying: "Well, she provoked them! She got what she deserved!" They don't remember, or care to remember, that as the jihadis were killing the Muhammad cartoonists in Paris, their friend and accomplice was murdering Jews in a nearby kosher supermarket. Were the Jews asking for it? Did they "bait" the jihadis? Were they "provoking" them?
Islamic law as it's interpreted by extremists forbids criticism of Islam, the Quran, and Muhammad. If they cannot be criticized in the United States, we are, in effect, accepting Islamic law as overriding the freedom of speech. This would establish Muslims as a protected class and prevent honest discussion of how Islamic jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence.
You can try to avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. The shootings in Garland, Paris, and Copenhagen targeting defenders of free speech, and the raging jihad across the Middle East, Africa, and Europe, are the disastrous consequences of avoiding reality.
To learn who rules over you, simply find out whom you cannot criticize. If the international media had run the Danish cartoons back in 2005, none of this could have happened. The jihadis wouldn't have been able to kill everyone. But by self-censoring, the media gave the jihadis the power they have today.
We must take back our freedom.
Today, we have bad news and good news. The good news is that there will be no 25-year recession. Nor will there be a depression that will last the rest of our lifetimes.
The bad news: It will be much worse than that. On Monday, the Dow rose another 43 points. Gold seems to be working its way back to the $1,200 level, where it feels most comfortable.
“A long depression” has been much discussed in the financial press. Several economists are predicting many years of sluggish or negative growth. It is the obvious consequence of several overlapping trends and existing conditions.
Paperwork. Expenses. Regulation. High taxes. High labor rates. Entrenched competition with aging, loyal customers. All are endemic from Boston to Berlin to Beijing.
Leading industries – heavily controlled and regulated, including defense, education, health and finance – are practically arms of the government. All are protected with high barriers to entry and low expectations. Competition is barely tolerated. Innovation is discouraged. Mistakes are forgiven and reimbursed.
Meanwhile, the masses are encouraged to become zombies too, with generous rewards for those who 1) do nothing, 2) pretend to work or 3) prevent other people from doing anything. After all the zombies, cronies and connivers get their money, there is little left for the productive economy.
Typically, these problems – too much debt, too many zombies, and too many old people – lead to financial crises. Then, they are “solved” by either inflation or depression. And the solution begins when markets crack.
Markets never go up forever. Instead, they go up, down and even sideways. They breathe in and out. And after sucking in air for the last 30 years, US financial assets are ready to exhale. Legendary asset manager Bill Gross comments:
“When does our credit-based financial system sputter/break down? When investable assets pose too much risk for too little return. Not immediately, but at the margin, credit and stocks begin to be exchanged for figurative and sometimes literal money in a mattress.”
When that happens, problems begin to take care of themselves, in one of two ways…
A quick, sharp depression wipes out the value of credit claims. Borrowers go broke. Bonds expire worthless. Companies declare bankruptcy. The whole capital structure tends to get marked down as debts are written off and financial assets of all kinds lose their value.
Or, under pressure, the feds print money. Debts are diminished as the currency loses its value. The zombies still get money, but it is worth less. Inflation adjustments cannot keep up with high rates of inflation. Pensions, prices and promises fade. Either way, the slate is wiped clean and a new cycle can begin. But what rag will clean the slate now? Stay tuned…