What's going on in East Ghouta? One of the last jihadist-held parts of Syria is being liberated, but you wouldn't know it from US and UN reporting. Why is the UN taking sides, issuing provocative statements blaming the Syrian government while ignoring the other side?
Turkey, US, Kurds, and Israel are all carving out parts of Syria to control at the expense of the Syrian authorities. Have we gone back to Obama's 2013, where partition of Syria was to be achieved by force? And what will Iran and Russia do?
By Ron Paul
Another terrible school shooting took place in Parkland, Florida last week and unfortunately many politicians and pundits have used the tragedy – as they often do – to push their own agenda. Many will use the tragedy to argue that Americans should be prohibited from owning guns. As if anti-gun laws would dissuade a disturbed or violent individual intent on causing harm. Those intent on mass murder don’t obey gun laws.
It’s unfortunate that while many are quick to demand that guns be taken away from peaceful Americans, they don’t seem to have much to say about guns when they’re in the hands of government authorities shooting innocent people. If we need any gun control, it is to get control of the guns in the hands of thousands of government employees who use them against innocent people with impunity.
For example, why do those calling for more gun control remain silent when armed federal agents raid Amish farms to stop them from selling raw milk? This shows the hypocrisy of those who call for restrictions on private firearms ownership while supporting the use of government violence as a means of controlling our lives.
Unfortunately there are many key questions lost in the race to score political points from the shooting.
Why does it always seem that the shooter in these mass killings has been on some kind of psychotropic drugs? As the New American magazine pointed out this week, at least ten high profile mass shootings have been committed by individuals who “were either on — or just recently coming off of — psychiatric medications.” The young killer in Florida was no different. According to his aunt, he had been on these medications to treat mental problems.
Why is no one questioning these medications – all of which come with labels warning of horrific side effects? Perhaps one reason they are ignored is that the pharmaceutical industry spends billions of dollars lobbying Congress.
Also, how is it possible that the FBI once again missed so many obvious clues that a violent person intent on causing massive harm to others was about to strike? Is the FBI actually this incompetent, or perhaps its focus was in other areas -- like meddling in our own elections by presenting “evidence” they knew was flawed to the FISA court to get permission to spy on the Trump campaign?
We’ve heard many stories of how alert FBI field agents tried to alert their bosses before 9/11 that foreigners were taking flight lessons but were not interested in learning how to land the planes.
Is giving the federal government more power to spy on us – as they demand – the answer to stop these terrible crimes? Hardly!
Those who think that giving federal authorities greater surveillance powers might prevent mass shootings should consider that the FBI has been alerted that the latest school shooter had made Facebook posts and YouTube comments talking about his intention to be, as he put it, “a professional school shooter.” But the Bureau failed to properly investigate the tips. If the FBI fails to stop someone who openly boasts about their intentions on social media why should we believe that giving them the power to snoop on every American would increase our safety?
We cannot stop tragedies like this by banning guns. We need to look seriously into the psychotropic drugs that more and more Americans are being prescribed. We need to demand that our elected Representatives demand a real day of reckoning at the FBI. We need to keep focused and ignore those who politicize such events.
Suddenly "Russian meddling" is back in the headlines and no one is talking about FBI collusion to present false information to FISA for permission to spy on the Trump campaign. No one is talking about a foreign agent (Christopher Steele) who actually did produce a document that influenced the election. It's back to the Russians. Why?
By Tyler Durden
Former CIA chief James Woolsey appeared on Fox News to push the narrative of how dastardly 'dem Russkies' are in their meddling with the sacred soul of America's democracy.
Woolsey did his patriotic deep-state-duty and proclaimed the evils of "expansionist Russia" and dropped 'facts' like "Russia has a larger cyber-army than its standing army," before he moved on to China and its existential threats.
But then, beginning at around 4:30, the real debacle of the conversation begins as Ingraham asks Woolsey,
"Have we ever tried to meddle in other countries' elections?"
Hes responds, surprisingly frankly...
"Oh probably... but it was for the good of the system..."
To which Ingraham follows up...
"We don't do that now though? We don't mess around in other people's elections?"
Prompting this extraordinary sentence from a former CIA chief...
"Well...hhhmmm, numm numm numm numm... only for a very good cause...in the interests of democracy"
So just to clarify - yes, the CIA chief admitted that Democracy-spreading 'Murica meddled in the Democratic elections of other nations "in the interests of democracy."
In case you wondered which ones he was referring to, here's a brief selection since 1948...
2016: UK (verbal intervention against Brexit)
2014: Afghanistan (effectively re-writing Afghan constitution)
2014: UK (verbal intervention against Scottish independence)
2011: Libya (providing support to overthrow Colonel Gaddafi)
2009: Honduras (ousting President Zelaya)
2006: Palestine (providing support to oust Prime Minister Haniyeh)
2005: Syria (providing support against President al-Assad)
2003: Iran (providing support against President Khatami)-
2003: Iraq (ousting of President Hussein)
2002: Venezuela (providing support to attempt an overthrow of President Chavez)
1999: Yugoslavia (removing Yugoslav forces from Kosovo)
1994: Iraq (attempted overthrow of President Hussein)
1991: Haiti (ousting President Aristide)
1991: Kuwait (removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait)
1989: Panama (ousting General Noriega)
1983: Grenada (ousting General Austin's Marxist forces)
1982: Nicaragua (providing support
1971: Chile (ousting President Allende)
1967: Indonesia (ousting President Sukarno)
1964: Brazil (ousting President Goulart)
1964: Chile (providing support against Salvador Allende)
1961: Congo (assassination of leader Lumumba)
1958: Lebanon (providing support to Christian political parties)
1954: Guatemala (ousting President Arbenz)
1953: Iran (ousting Prime Minister Mossadegh)
1953: Philippines (providing support to the President Magsaysay campaign)
1948: Italy (providing support to the Christian Democrats campaign)
This article was originally published at ZeroHedge.
If the creation of new money affected everyone evenly, there would be no point in government granting monopoly privileges to a central bank. It's precisely because some benefit at the expense of others, that monetary inflation is so intoxicating. The Federal Reserve is the beating heart of big government, military empire, and the welfare state. Ron Paul talks about the tough economic times that lie ahead.
President Trump is reportedly in favor of a big 25 cent per gallon federal gasoline tax increase to help pay for his infrastructure plan. Does it make any sense? Who will pay the most?
By Mac Slavo
People are fleeing the socialism forced on them in Venezuela by the hundreds of thousands. Starving, and facing violence over crumbs of food, many have no choice but to flee the wasteland which used the authority of government to destroy the lives of its citizens.
Thousands of Venezuelans are attempting to flee the socialist dystopia their nation has become. They are attempting to make it to Colombia. In a desperate bid to escape the hunger and soaring crime rate caused by the spiraling economic crisis, fueled by socialist policies, incredible pictures have surfaced showing the mass exodus of refugees crossing the Simon Bolivar international bridge trying to flee the ongoing political crisis threatening to engulf Venezuela.
Colombia and its neighbor Brazil have both sent extra soldiers to patrol their porous borders with Venezuela after officially taking in more than half a million migrants over the last six months of 2017. The country is also tightening its border controls in a bid to stem the flow of starving people. The situation in Venezuela has reached SHTF levels.
Truck drivers are subjected to horrific violence as looters target heavy goods vehicles carrying food in a desperate attempt to feed their families. The truckers are banned by the government from carrying guns to protect themselves, so have resorted to forming convoys to protect each other. They text each other warnings about potential trouble spots and keep moving as fast as possible.
According to Reuters, there were 162 lootings across Venezuela in January, including 42 robberies of trucks. That is compared to just eight lootings, including one truck robbery, 12 months ago. Last month, eight people were killed in lootings alone. Venezuela has one of the world’s highest murder rates and the attacks are pushing up food and transport costs.
Massive numbers of Venezuelans have been driven from their homes by the dire financial crisis spurred by the disease that is socialism. Many are struggling to feed themselves and their only hope may be an exodus to Colombia. “Colombia has never lived a situation like the one we are encountering today,” said Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos. On Thursday, Santos announced new measures that would make it much more difficult for Venezuelan migrants to cross into the country illegally or remain there without any official status.
Colombia believes that there are currently around 600,000 Venezuelans illegally residing in the country. That number is expected to rise, as Venezuela continues to crumble.
This article was originally published at SHTFplan.com
This week President Trump delivered his 2019 military spending budget request. He vowed to rebuild the "depleted" military with a massive increase in spending. Will we be more economically secure with a trillion dollars dumped into military spending? How about our national security, with many more foreign military adventures newly funded?