- How Crack Funded A CIA War: Gary Webb Interview On The Contras And Ronald Reagan
Investigative journalist Robert Parry credits Gary Webb for being responsible for the following government investigations into the Reagan-Bush administration’s conduct of the Contra war:
On December 10, 1996, Los Angeles County Sheriff Sherman Block announced the conclusion of his investigation into the issue, publishing a summary of the investigation at a press conference. He announced at the press conference that “We have found no evidence that the government was involved in drug trafficking in South-Central.” Nevertheless, the report included information that supported some of the charges. Charles Rappleye reported in the L.A. Weekly that Block’s “unequivocal statement is not backed up by the report itself, which raises many questions.” Much of the LAPD investigation centered on allegations made in a postscript article to the newspaper’s “Dark Alliance” series.
On January 29, 1998, Hitz published Volume One of his internal investigation. This was the first of two CIA reports that eventually substantiated many of Webb’s claims about cocaine smugglers, the Nicaraguan contra movement, and their ability to freely operate without the threat of law enforcement.
On March 16, 1998, Hitz admitted that the CIA had maintained relationships with companies and individuals the CIA knew were involved in the drug business. Hitz told the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that “there are instances where CIA did not, in an expeditious or consistent fashion, cut off relationships with individuals supporting the Contra program who were alleged to have engaged in drug-trafficking activity or take action to resolve the allegations.” Senator John Kerry reached similar conclusions a decade earlier in 1987.
On May 7, 1998, Rep. Maxine Waters, revealed a memorandum of understanding – item 24 between the CIA and the Justice Department from 1982, which was entered into the Congressional Record. This letter had freed the CIA from legally reporting drug smuggling by CIA assets, a provision that covered the Nicaraguan Contras and the Afghan rebels.
On July 23, 1998, the Justice Department released a report by its Inspector General, Michael R. Bromwich. The Bromwich report claimed that the Reagan-Bush administration was aware of cocaine traffickers in the Contra movement and did nothing to stop the criminal activity. The report also alleged a pattern of discarded leads and witnesses, sabotaged investigations, instances of the CIA working with drug traffickers, and the discouragement of DEA investigations into Contra-cocaine shipments. The CIA’s refusal to share information about Contra drug trafficking with law-enforcement agencies was also documented. The Bromwich report corroborated Webb’s investigation into Norwin Meneses, a Nicaraguan drug smuggler.
On October 8, 1998, CIA I.G. Hitz published Volume Two of his internal investigation. The report described how the Reagan-Bush administration had protected more than 50 Contras and other drug traffickers, and by so doing thwarted federal investigations into drug crimes. Hitz published evidence that drug trafficking and money laundering had made its way into Reagan’s National Security Council where Oliver North oversaw the operations of the Contras.
According to the report, the Contra war took precedence over law enforcement. To that end, the internal investigation revealed that the CIA routinely withheld evidence of Contra crimes from the Justice Department, Congress and even the analytical division of the CIA itself. Further, the report confirmed Webb’s claims regarding the origins and the relationship of Contra fundraising and drug trafficking. The report also included information about CIA ties to other drug traffickers not discussed in the Webb series, including Moises Nunez and Ivan Gomez. More importantly, the internal CIA report documented a cover-up of evidence which had led to false intelligence assessments.
Webb was widely smeared by the MSM shortly after this interview…
He was eventually vindicated, but not before his career was destroyed.
He was found dead of an apparent suicide in 2004.
The price of being a whistleblower?
Source: The Strategic Culture Foundation
- Appeals Court: Police Don't Need A Reason To Place Americans On 'Suspicious Person' List
Day by day, year by year our justice system proves the Constitution has essentially become worthless…
Yesterday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California ruled that police do not need a reason to place a person on the Suspicious Person List.
The ruling explains how President George W. Bush created fusion centers whose primary mission was to identify “suspicious Americans.”
In October 2007, President George W. Bush issued a National Strategy for Information Sharing concerning terrorism-related information. The Strategy created fusion centers that would ensure Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) were disseminated to and evaluated by appropriate government authorities, and identify requirements to support a unified process for reporting, tracking, and accessing SARs. The nationwide effort to standardize this information sharing was called the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative.
According to the ruling, Americans can be considered suspicious for doing things like taking pictures of public art, buying a computer, practicing their religion, etc.
Private guards prevented Prigoff, a professional photographer, from taking photographs of a work of public art near Boston, an incident that resulted in the creation of multiple SARs. The FBI then visited Prigoff’s home and questioned a neighbor about him.
Being put on an SAR list is similar to the FDA’s drug manufacturing list
The Ninth Circuit claimed that being placed on an SAR list is similar to determining whether a pharmacy is manufacturing drugs!
The Functional Standard is similar to the Food & Drug Administration’s policy guide at issue in Professionals and Patients for Customized Care. The FDA promulgated a policy utilizing nine factors to help the agency determine whether to initiate an enforcement action against a pharmacy engaged in drug manufacturing.
“The Fifth Circuit noted that although the nine factors assisted the FDA in identifying pharmacies engaged in the manufacture of drugs, the ultimate decision whether to bring an enforcement action remained with the agency. Likewise, the Functional Standard aids agencies in determining whether an individual is engaged in suspicious activity, but the final decision to disseminate an SAR rests in the analyst’s discretion.
Credit: Government Accountability Office
What does that mean to the average American?
It means that you, your family, friends or neighbors could be labeled a “suspicious person” based on the whims of local police and a DHS officer.
No one know really knows what factors law enforcement uses in determining if a person should be put on an SAR list. But we do know that the Ninth Circuit ruled that law enforcement does not need to have “reasonable suspicion” to put Americans on a Suspicious Person List.
“Tips and leads required only ‘mere suspicion,’ a lower standard than the reasonable suspicion required for criminal intelligence data,” U.S. Circuit Judge Milan Smith said.
“We will . . . uphold a decision of less than ideal clarity if the agency’s path may reasonably be discerned.” Motor Vehicle, 463 U.S. at 43. From the outset, the ISE has consistently pronounced that an ISE-SAR need not meet the reasonable suspicion standard in order to expand the base of information gathered.
Welcome to America, a nation of paranoid police ready to brand you and your family suspicious for any reason.
- Maduro Rejects Election "Ultimatums", Warns Trump Will Leave White House "Stained With Blood" If Venezuela Invaded
Less than twenty-four hours after telling thousands of supporters that he “agreed” and was “committed to holding parliamentary elections this year,” as demanded by the National Assembly…
“They (the opposition) want to bring forward elections, let’s have elections,” he said defiantly just ahead of the Sunday deadline set by European nations to hold fresh presidential elections, though he stopped short of any reference to fresh presidential elections.
…embattled Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has flip-flopped rather aggressively, warning Donald Trump he will leave the White House “stained with blood” if he insists on pursuing what he called a “dirty” imperialist conspiracy to overthrow him.
Perhaps Maduro’s newfound resistance was sparked by support he witnessed yesterday (as John Bolton continued his interventionist threats)…
While millions of #Venezuelan people are protesting against #Maduro in support of Juan #Guaido in tens of cities and towns, a few thousand supporters of #Maduro are gathered in Avenue Bolivar at #Caracas as a part of a propaganda counter protest. pic.twitter.com/ZnLYOx92XI
— Babak Taghvaee (@BabakTaghvaee) February 2, 2019
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The Guardian reports that Maduro warned, during a combative interview with the Spanish journalist Jordi Évole,
“Stop. Stop, Trump! Hold it right there! You are making mistakes that will leave your hands covered in blood and you will leave the presidency stained with blood,”
“Why would you want a repeat of Vietnam?”
Maduro clearly signalled that he had no plans to go anywhere…
“If the north American empire attacks us, we will have to defend ourselves… We aren’t going to hand Venezuela over…”
However, Maduro admitted he was facing a “tough” fight against powerful opponents, but was not backing down…
“They use sledgehammers instead of boxing gloves,” Maduro said of the US, which he claimed was seeking to topple him to seize Venezuela’s oil.
“But it’s like David against Goliath,” Maduro went on. “We have our secrets too – and we have our sling. David’s sling is in our hands.”
Maduro also sent a message to his opposition challenger Guaidó:
“Think carefully about what you are doing,” he said, urging Guaidó “to abandon his coup-mongering strategy”.
The democratically-elected Venezuelan president also rejected European calls for elections, saying:
“We don’t accept ultimatums from anyone. I refuse to call for elections now – there will be elections in 2024. We don’t care what Europe says.”
Adding, “you can’t base international politics on ultimatums. That’s the stuff of the empire, of colonial times.”
Speaking to CBS on Sunday, Trump said he had rejected talks with Maduro “because so many really horrible things have been happening in Venezuela”.
Asked if military action was possible, he replied: “Well I don’t want to say that. But certainly it’s something that’s on the – it’s an option.”
Seems like it is time for Trump to unleash a “fire and fury” tweet to get things back on the diplomatic track.
- Washington Resurrected The Arms Race: PCR
Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,
The meetings in Beijing during January 30-31 between Washington, Russia, China, France and the UK apparently failed to preserve the commitment to prohibit intermediate range nuclear weapons. Washington stuck to its determination to withdraw from the historic agreement of Reagan and Gorbachev to destroy all land-based intermediate range nuclear missiles. This US withdrawal from a nuclear weapons reduction agreement follows the George W. Bush/Cheney regime’s withdrawal from the anti-ballistic missile treaty. Indeed, since the Clinton regime, every US president has produced worsening trust between the two major nuclear powers.
No good can come of this as Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said at the Beijing meeting.
The intermediate range nuclear missile treaty (INF) does not involve US security. It protects Europe from Russian missiles and Russia from US missiles stationed in Europe. Trump’s announcement that he is breaking free of the treaty tells the Russians that they are going to have missiles on their borders that allow them no response time. The Europeans are crazy to go along with this as they will be targeted by Russia in turn, but the Europeans are Washington’s vassals.
Ever since Clinton broke Washington’s promise not to move NATO eastward, Russia has known that Washington seeks military advantage over Russia. By leaving the ABM treaty, the George W. Bush regime told Russia that Washington intended to gain superiority by constructing an anti-ballistic missile shield that would negate Russia’s retaliatory capability, thus subjecting Russia to nuclear blackmail.
Russia responded with new hypersonic ICBMs that cannot be intercepted and now holds nuclear superiority over the US, but does not exploit it. The US response is to tear up the INF treaty and put its missiles back on Russia’s borders.
Another way to look at the INF treaty’s demise is that the Obama regime committed one trillion dollars of taxpayers’ money (in addition to the annual one trillion dollar budget of the military/security complex) to build more nuclear weapons, none of which are needed as the US alone has enough to blow up the world several times. Breaking the INF treaty is a sure-fire way to initiate a new arms race which would provide justification for the trillion dollars of taxpayers’ money that Washington is handing over to the military/security complex for more nuclear weapons.
Yet another way to look at the demise of the treaty is that Washington wants out of the treaty so that it can deploy intermediate range missiles against China. Washington has actually drawn up plans for war against Russia and China and has conducted simulations of what the outcome would be. America wins, of course.
The dangerous idea that a nuclear war can be won has been pushed for some years by the neoconservatives who are committed to US hegemony over the world. This idea definitely serves the material interest of the military/security complex and is very popular among the power brokers in Washington.
Washington’s excuse for breaking the INF treaty is that Russia is cheating and has violated the treaty. But Russia has no interest in violating a treaty that protects Russia. Russia’s intermediate range missiles cannot reach the US, and the only reason Russia would target Europe would be to retaliate for Europe hosting US missiles on Russia’s borders.
The beneficiaries of a renewed nuclear arms race are the stockholders of the military/security complex. Washington is feeding their profits by placing humanity at greater risk of nuclear Armageddon. Weapons are piling up, the use of which would destroy all life on the planet. This makes the weapons the very opposite of security. Trump whose goal was to normalize relations with Russia is now under the thumb of the military/security complex and has announced US intentions to withdraw from the last remaining arms control agreement—the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START).
The situation is serious. Very little is reported in US media of the resurrection of the nuclear arms race, and what is reported is blamed on Russia and China. Americans hear that it is China, not the US, that is militarizing the South China Sea and Russia that intends to restore the Soviet empire and that these intentions are threats to American national security. The evidence consists of assertion. The Russians have offered proof that they have not violated the INF treaty, but Washington doesn’t care because Washington is not leaving the treaty because of Russian violations.
Washington is leaving the treaty because Washington wants military hegemony over Russia and China and a good excuse to hand over another trillion dollars to the military/security complex. In the end capitalism does more than exploit labor. It ends life on earth
Traditionally, an aggressor paves the way to war with constant propaganda against the country to be attacked. The propaganda creates public support and justifies the attack. The constant stream of provocative accusations out of Washington against Russia and China (and Iran) in order to justify treaty breaking and higher armaments spending sounds to Russia and China like they are being set up for attack. It is reckless and irresponsible to convince nuclear powers that they are going to be attacked. There is no more certain way of producing war. Russia and China are hearing what Saddam Hussein heard, what Gaddafi heard, what Assad heard, what Iran hears. Unlike these victims of Washington, Russia and China have substantial offensive capability. When a country is convinced it is targeted for attack, does the country just sit there and await the attack?
Washington might be setting up America for a first strike with the extraordinary stream of accusations and provocations issuing from people too stupid to be in possession of nuclear weapons. In the nuclear era, it is reckless for a government to replace diplomacy with threats and coercion. Washington’s recklessness is the most dangerous threat that the world faces.
- ICE Snags Hundreds Of Illegals With "Pay To Stay" Scheme
Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) netted hundreds of illegal immigrants after setting up a fake university, according to the The Detroit News.
The University of Farmington had no staff, no instructors, no curriculum and no classes but was utilized by undercover Homeland Security agents to identify people involved in immigration fraud, according to federal grand jury indictments unsealed Wednesday.
Eight student recruiters were charged with participating in a conspiracy to help at least 600 foreign citizens stay in the U.S. illegally, according to the indictments, which describe a novel investigation that dates to 2015 but intensified one month into President Donald Trump’s tenure as part of a broader crackdown on illegal immigration. –The Detroit News
Dubbed operation “Paper Chase,” the scheme used undercover Homeland Security agents to identify recruiters and entities engaged in immigration fraud – which collectively received $250,000 in cash and kickbacks to located students to attend the university, according to the indictment.
“… the university was being used by foreign citizens as a ‘pay to stay’ scheme which allowed these individuals to stay in the United States as a result of of foreign citizens falsely asserting that they were enrolled as full-time students in an approved educational program and that they were making normal progress toward completion of the course of study,” reads the indictment.
Fraudulent immigration papers were compiled by the recruiters, who would use them to help foreign citizens create fake records, including transcripts, according to prosecutors.
“We are all aware that international students can be a valuable asset to our country, but as this case shows, the well-intended international student visa program can also be exploited and abused,” said US Attorney Matthew Schneider.
Federal agents arrested dozens of University of Farmington students last Wednesday in a nationwide sweep connected to the arrest of the recruiters. “Students” were brought in on immigration violations and face deportation, according to ICE.
“It’s creative and it’s not entrapment,” said Wayne State University law professor and former federal prosecutor, Peter Henning. “The government can put out the bait, but it’s up to the defendants to fall for it.”
Those charged include:
• Bharath Kakireddy, 29, of Lake Mary, Florida.
• Aswanth Nune, 26, of Atlanta.
• Suresh Reddy Kandala, 31, of Culpeper, Virginia.
• Phanideep Karnati, 35, of Louisville, Kentucky.
• Prem Kumar Rampeesa, 26, of Charlotte, North Carolina.
• Santosh Reddy Sama, 28, of Fremont, California.
• Avinash Thakkallapally, 28, of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
• Naveen Prathipati, 29, of Dallas.Starting in 2015, the university was part of an undercover operation dubbed “Paper Chase” and designed to identify recruiters and entities engaged in immigration fraud, according to the indictment. Homeland Security agents started posing as university officials in February 2017.
Immigration crimes alleged in the indictment continued until this month and involved Homeland Security agents posing as owners and employees of the university. The university had a professional website, a red-and-blue coat of arms, a Latin slogan meaning “knowledge and work” and a physical location at a commercial building on Northwestern Highway. –The Detroit News
The University of Farmington was based in the basement of a Detroit office complex across from the building’s café. According to Matt Friedman, co-founder of the Tanner Friedman strategic communications firm located next door, the university was highly suspect.
“I was like ‘what is this?” Freeman said last Wednesday. “I’d never heard of it before and never saw anybody there. The whole thing was just odd.“
Of course- if Homeland Security is looking for illegals going to school in the US, maybe ICE should also check out the undocumented student services center at UCSD, UCLA, UC Santa Cruz, UC Berkeley or any other similar offices across the country.
- Bottom 5 "Sinkhole" Cities: New York, Chicago Lead The Way
Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk,
63 out of America’s largest 75 cities can’t pay their bills, acquired $330 billion in unfunded debt.
Via a report on Watchdog, analysis of the 75 most populous cities in the U.S., shows that 63 of them can’t pay their bills. The total amount of unfunded debt among them is nearly $330 billion. Most of the debt is due to unfunded retiree benefits such as pension and health care costs.
Financial State of Cities
“This year, pension debt accounts for $189.1 billion, and other post-employment benefits (OPEB) – mainly retiree health care liabilities – totaled $139.2 billion,” the third annual “Financial State of the Cities” report produced by the Chicago-based research organization, Truth in Accounting (TIA), states.
Bottom 35
Top 5 Cities
Grading the Cities
-
A grade: Taxpayer Surplus greater than $10,000 (0 cities)
-
B grade: Taxpayer Surplus between $100 and $10,000 (12 cities)
-
C grade: Taxpayer Burden between $0 and $4,900 (24 cities)
-
D grade: Taxpayer Burden between $5,000 and $20,000 (31 cities)
-
F grade: Taxpayer Burden greater than $20,000 (8 cities)
Truth in Accounting’s grading system for the 75 cities gives greater meaning to each city’s Taxpayer Burden or Taxpayer Surplus. A municipal government receives a “C,” or passing grade, if it comes close to meeting its balanced budget requirement, which is reflected by a small Taxpayer Burden. An “A” or “B” grade is given to governments that have met their balanced budget requirements and have a Taxpayer Surplus. “D” and “F” grades apply to governments that have not balanced their budgets and have significant Taxpayer Burdens.
What a miserable report.
The most shocking thing is not how bad the worst cities are, but rather some cities in California actually appear to be solvent.
By State
The above analysis is by city. Also consider State Level Liabilities.
Bottom Five
-
New Jersey: -64,000
-
Connecticut: -53,400
-
Illinois: -50,800
-
Kentucky -39,200
-
Massachusetts: -33,500
Congratulations Chicago!
On a combined liability basis, Chicago is the winner. Each Chicagoan owes the state $50,800 and the city an additional $36,000 for a total of $86,800 per capita.
New York City residents “only” owe $21,500 to the state plus $64,100 to the city for a grand total $85,600 per capita.
Second City No More!
-
- Winter Is Wreaking Havoc On Electric Vehicles
If there’s one thing electric vehicle owners are learning, it is that extremely cold temperatures are likely going to lead to frustration if they don’t take extra special care of their battery powered vehicles. Look at it as just another added benefit to “saving the world”.
As we push through the cold that automakers are using as an excuse for poor sales this winter, customers of some companies – notably Tesla – are starting to realize that things are a little bit different with electric vehicles in the winter. Disgruntled owners of Model 3s have been widespread on social media and online forums, talking about numerous issues they’ve had with cold weather on their vehicles. People have complained about battery range draining and Model 3 door handles freezing up.
A new report by Fortune highlights several Tesla owners pointing out their issues: “My biggest concern is the cold weather drained my battery 20 to 25 miles overnight and an extra five to ten miles on my drive to work. I paid $60,000 to not drain my battery so quickly,” said New Jersey based Model 3 owner Ronak Patel.
The pro-EV lot over at InsideEVs stated frankly back in December, “Cold weather demands a long range battery” before also encouraging people to shell out more money: “…if you reside in a colder region and can afford to spring for the long-range Model 3, then come winter, you’ll be glad you made that choice.”
Salim Morsy, an analyst with Bloomberg, stated: “It’s Panasonic that manufactures Tesla batteries. It’s not something specific to Tesla. It happens to Chevy with the Bolt and Nissan with the Leaf.”
Additionally, the door design that Tesla used for the Model 3 as part of its appeal to be “different” continues to come back and bite owners during the winter. As we previously had noted during a cold spell in Quebec late last year, owners were having difficulty getting their handles out from their recessed spots in order to open the doors to their car. This has left some owners complaining and others writing to Tesla (or even Elon Musk on Twitter) looking for a fix.
Pro-Tesla blogger Frederic Lambert was himself unable to get into his vehicle back in November when he documented his own issues in this hilarious video in which he couldn’t get into his own car:
“Jesus Christ!” Lambert exclaimed about 53 seconds into the video, hands shaking from the cold, upon finally getting his door handle to pop out.
“What’s specific to Tesla,” Morsy continued, “is the quality of manufacturing.”
Meanwhile, Andrea Falcone from Boston, who bought a Model 3 about two months ago, stated on Twitter: “I can’t wait all day for this silly car.”
As with everything, Elon Musk tweeted that there would be an over the air software update that would address how cars are holding up in cold weather. Given that the company can’t physically readjust door handles over the air, we’re guessing the fix will wind up being something that puts further pressure on an already drained battery. And recall, back in November, we had already reported that Tesla was going to “fix” these issues with a vague software update.
In terms of that “fix”, it looks as though the only thing that was addressed was the window not always coming down after the door opened. Since there are no door frames on the Model 3 doors, the window rolling down is semi-necessary to help open the door once the handle has popped out.
In the release notes of its new software improvement in late 2018, Tesla said very little:
“Window position and charge connector locking behaviors have been optimized for cold weather.”
As we stated back in November, we’re still waiting for Elon Musk’s software update that’ll stop cold weather altogether.
- 25 Things Beyond "The Wall Or No Wall" Question
Authored by Laurence Vance via Target Liberty,
One would have to have had his head in the sand for the past two years not to know that Donald Trump is committed to the idea of building a wall between the United States and Mexico.
Trump famously said during his official announcement that he was a Republican candidate for president,
“I would build a great wall, and nobody builds walls better than me, believe me, and I’ll build them very inexpensively. I will build a great, great wall on our southern border and I’ll have Mexico pay for that wall.”
It has been two years now since Trump was inaugurated and still no wall.
According to the “Immigration” section on the White House website,
The United States must adopt an immigration system that serves the national interest. To restore the rule of law and secure our border, President Trump is committed to constructing a border wall and ensuring the swift removal of unlawful entrants. To protect American workers, the President supports ending chain migration, eliminating the Visa Lottery, and moving the country to a merit-based entry system. These reforms will advance the safety and prosperity of all Americans while helping new citizens assimilate and flourish.
Some of Trump’s more conservative supporters are furious that he agreed to reopen the government without first obtaining funding from Congress for a border wall. For many of them, the issue of a border wall seems to be the only issue they care about. It doesn’t matter what Trump says, what he believes, or what he does, as long as he gets the wall built before the end of his term.
Trump is not the only one preoccupied with building a border wall. An Air Force veteran and Purple Heart recipient who lost three of his limbs while deployed to Iraq started a GoFundMe page late last year to raise money to help build Trump’s wall. Said the page’s initial description,
Like a majority of those American citizens who voted to elect President Donald J. Trump, we voted for him to Make America Great Again. President Trump’s main campaign promise was to BUILD THE WALL. And as he’s followed through on just about every promise so far, this wall project needs to be completed still.
It’s up to Americans to help out and pitch in to get this project rolling. “If the 63 million people who voted for Trump each pledge $80, we can build the wall.” That equates to roughly 5 Billion Dollars; even if we get half, that’s half the wall. We can do this.
If we can fund a large portion of this wall, it will jumpstart things and will be less money Trump has to secure from our politicians. This won’t be easy, but it’s our duty as citizens. This needs to be shared every single day by each of you on social media. We can do it, and we can help President Trump make America safe again!
More than $20 million has been raised so far.
But wall or no wall, there are many things that will still be true about life in “the land of the free.” Here are twenty-five of them.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have an income tax that robs them of the fruits of their labor.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a government that subsidizes some Americans at the expense of other Americans.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a national debt of more than $22 trillion.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have civil asset-forfeiture laws that allow police to seize and sell any property they allege to have been involved in a crime even if the property owner is never arrested or convicted of a crime.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a military that bombs, maims, and kills foreigners who are no threat to the United States.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have socialist programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have occupational-licensing laws that make them get permission from the government to work or engage in commerce.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a national government with a budget of more than $4 trillion a year.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a war on drugs that is a monstrous evil and has ruined more lives than drugs themselves.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a U.S. global empire of troops and bases that occupy the world.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have laws that forbid legal adults younger than 21 years old from purchasing alcohol even though they can get married, serve in the military, and enter into contracts.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still be subject to laws that forbid them from engaging in certain kinds of commerce on Sundays.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have anti-discrimination laws that restrict freedom of thought, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, and property rights.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a government with a foreign policy that is reckless, belligerent, interventionist, and meddling.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have federal gun-control laws that violate the Second Amendment.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a government that owns millions of acres of land, including more than half of the land in some states.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a welfare state that transfers wealth from some Americans to other Americans.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a TSA that treats the traveling public as potential terrorists.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a police state where government spying, surveillance, and searches continue unabated.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still be restricted from freely traveling to Cuba.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have laws that criminalize the commission of victimless crimes.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a government that forces some Americans to pay for the health care of other Americans.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a Patriot Act that endangers civil liberties.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a deep state and a military-industrial complex.
-
Wall or no wall, Americans will still have a Constitution that is violated every day that Congress is in session.
If the wall is ever built, America will merely go from being a welfare/warfare/police state to a walled-in welfare/warfare/police state. The United States has deep systemic problems that building a wall will never solve.
-
- Death Knell For Syria Pullout: "We Have To Protect Israel" Says Trump
After approaching two months of talk of a “full” and “immediate” US troop withdrawal from Syria, first ordered by President Trump on December 19 — which was predictably met with swift and fierce pushback from beltway hawks including in some cases his own advisers — it now appears the death knell has sounded on the prior “complete” and “rapid” draw down order.
Trump said in a CBS “Face the Nation” interview this weekend that some unspecified number of US troops will remain in the region, mostly in Iraq, with possibly some still in Syria, in order “to protect Israel” in what appears a significant backtrack from his prior insistence on an absolute withdrawal.
“We’re going to be there and we’re going to be staying. We have to protect Israel,” he replied when pressed by CBS reporter Margaret Brennan. “We have to protect other things that we have. But we’re – yeah, they’ll be coming back in a matter of time.” He did note that “ultimately some will be coming home.”
“Look, we’re protecting the world,” he added. “We’re spending more money than anybody’s ever spent in history, by a lot.” Trump’s slow drift and change in tune on the subject of a promised “rapid” exit comes after Israeli officials led by Prime Minister Netanyahu alongside neocon allies in Washington argued that some 200 US troops in Syria’s southeast desert along the Iraqi border and its 55-kilometer “deconfliction zone” at al-Tanf are the last line of defense against Iranian expansion in Syria, and therefore must stay indefinitely.
“I want to be able to watch Iran,” Trump said further during the CBS interview. “Iran is a real problem.” He explained that “99%” of ISIS’s territory had been liberated but that a contingency of US troops must remain to prevent a resurgent Islamic State as well as to counter Iranian influence, for which American forces must remain in Iraq as well.
“When I took over, Syria was infested with ISIS. It was all over the place. And now you have very little ISIS, and you have the caliphate almost knocked out,” the president said. “We will be announcing in the not too distant future 100% of the caliphate, which is the area – the land – the area – 100. We’re at 99% right now. We’ll be at 100.”
However Trump’s invoking Iranian influence as a rationale for staying further contradicts his prior December statement that the defeat of ISIS was “the only reason” he was in Syria in the first place.
MARGARET BRENNAN: How many troops are still in Syria? When are they coming home?
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: 2,000 troops.
MARGARET BRENNAN: When are they coming home?
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: They’re starting to, as we gain the remainder, the final remainder of the caliphate of the area, they’ll be going to our base in Iraq, and ultimately some will be coming home. But we’re going to be there and we’re going to be staying—
MARGARET BRENNAN: So that’s a matter of months?
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We have to protect Israel. We have to protect other things that we have. But we’re- yeah, they’ll be coming back in a matter of time. Look, we’re protecting the world. We’re spending more money than anybody’s ever spent in history, by a lot. We spent, over the last five years, close to 50 billion dollars a year in Afghanistan. That’s more than most countries spend for everything including education, medical, and everything else, other than a few countries. — CBS “Face the Nation” Feb.3 interview transcript
The Pentagon in recent weeks has reportedly been putting logistics in place for a troop draw down from northern and eastern Syria.
Though it remains unclear just how many troops could remain as the majority possibly begin to pullout toward US bases in Iraq, the Tanf base could remain Washington’s last remote outpost disrupting what US defense officials see as a strategic Baghdad-Damascus corridor and highway, and potential key “link” in the Tehran-to-Beirut so-called Shia land bridge.
Foreign Policy magazine has identified this argument as the final card the hawks opposing Trump’s draw down had to play in order to hinder to an actual complete US exit:
“Al-Tanf is a critical element in the effort to prevent Iran from establishing a ground line of communications from Iran through Iraq through Syria to southern Lebanon in support of Lebanese Hezbollah,” an unnamed senior US military source told the magazine.
The Israeli prime minister has pushed hard against the White House pullout plan, and “has repeatedly urged the U.S. to keep troops at Al-Tanf, according to several senior Israeli officials, who also asked not to be identified discussing private talks,” per Bloomberg. The Israelis have reportedly argued “the mere presence of American troops will act as a deterrent to Iran” even if in small numbers as a kind of symbolic threat.
The internal administration debate, following incredible push back against Trump’s withdrawal decision, has made entirely visible the national security deep state’s attempt to check the Commander-in-Chief’s power. And now US presence at al-Tanf represents the last hope of salvaging the hawks’ desire for permanent proxy war against Iran inside Syria.
It appears the deep state has won out over Trump’s initial policy decision once again; but it remains to be seen if, however slowly on what’s clearly a delayed timetable departing from his original plans, all US troops ultimately exit Syria. Until then there’ll be more time and perhaps more provocations the hawks can rely on to effectively ensure full circle return to indefinite occupation in Syria.
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...