Friday, April 18, 2014

‘Letter to Jews’, Kerry cited, appears to be fake

There are similar letters not only addressed to Jews, but also to businessmen, foreign students, people of certain other occupations,” he told RT. “This is actually a fake, and not a good one. There’s a sign “People’s Governor”. First of all, no one calls me by that title, no one elected me. Secondly, the stamp is the former mayor’s. Everything’s photoshopped.”... Kolesnikov specifically referred to a video which earlier appeared online. In it a man in a military uniform told police officers, who switched sides in the city of Gorlovka and joined protesters, that he was Russian lieutenant-colonel from Simpheropol, Crimea. The man was later identified by Gorlovka residents as the former director of a local cemetery.

False news coming out of Ukraine making the Russians look bad? Impossible I say. Impossible!!!

Tuesday, April 15, 2014

Ukraine's Use of "Terrorism" and The Rush To War

I pointed out the other day that it was very odd that Ukraine "officials" were using the term "terrorism" to describe the secessionist movements in the east of the country. It was a very strange term to use in a conflict that is clearly developing into a civil war, but also does not have any of the hallmark "terrorist" actions such random bombings, suicide or non-suicide at places that are not government property. Recent events show that this use of "terrorism" is not accidental at all.
The CIA director was sent to Kiev to launch a military suppression of the Russian separatists in the eastern and southern portions of Ukraine,
Why is the director of the CIA going to Ukraine? Seriously. Why?
The CIA director instructed Washington’s hand-picked stooge government in Kiev to apply to the United Nations for help in repelling “terrorists” who with alleged Russian help are allegedly attacking Ukraine. In Washington’s vocabulary, self-determination is a sign of Russian interference. As the UN is essentially a Washington-financed organization, Washington will get what it wants.
This was also reported in RT.com and The Guardian UK. Why would the UN involve itself in what is currently a peaceful civil war? Furthermore why would the UN take the side of an coup government? Does Ban Ki Moon have any self respect whatsoever?

It is clear here that there are parties who wish to have war with Russia. Perhaps there is a wish to give the new Railgun a go. Perhaps there is intelligence telling US military commanders that they could prevail in a war with Russia. I don't know, but it is clear that there are enough people pushing for a war and that Obama currently is incapable or unwilling to to put a stop to those actors. Mike Whitney pointed his readership to the Wolfowitz doctrine:

The U.S. must show the leadership necessary to establish and protect a new order that holds the promise of convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests. In non-defense areas, we must account sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership or seeking to overturn the established political and economic order. We must maintain the mechanism for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role.
You know what we call someone who attempts to keep another person from protecting their legitimate interests? Bullies. And depending on what they do, we call them criminals.

It is clear what NATO is for and what it is trying to do in Ukraine. The question is whether or not the so called anti-war left has the guts to stand up to Obama and the Democrats and let them know that they are out of office should it happen. From the e-mail I get from the usual suspects, that is not going to happen.

Thursday, April 10, 2014

US Blames Russia For Own Incompetence

Today the US is essentially blaming Russia for the Boston Marathon bombing:
WASHINGTON — The Russian government declined to provide the F.B.I. with information about one of the Boston Marathon bombing suspects that would most likely have led to more extensive scrutiny of him at least two years before the attack, according to an inspector general’s report
Really? Well what did the Russians say?

Russian officials had told the F.B.I. in 2011 that the suspect, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, “was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer” and that Mr. Tsarnaev “had changed drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the United States for travel to the country’s region to join unspecified underground groups.”
Oh I see. Post 9-11 officials saw a report that said Tsarnaev was a follower of "radical Islam" just like the fellows that flew a few airplanes into buildings in NY. and that he had plans to "join unspecified underground groups". And what did the FBI do with this information? Nothing. You would think an alien applying for or having requested asylum would, after having been named as a "strong believer" in "radial Islam" would be sent to the nearest international airport and deported.

Nope. The US authorities, so stuck on fucking with Russia does the following:

At the time, American law enforcement officials believed that Mr. Tsarnaev posed a far greater threat to Russia.
Ohh! I see. So the US authorities are OK with persons with "strong beliefs" in "radical Islam", like the fellows who flew planes into buildings in NYC, freely roaming around the US so long as they present a "far greater threat to Russia".

Seriously. Read that again! Nobody thought to put that fellow on the earliest available flight back to Russia or Chechnya on the hypothesis that this "strong believer" in "radical Islam" wouldn't even think about doing anything in the United States.

Seriously.

And now the US authorities want to blame Russia for not doing the Job that the US authorities were supposed to do themselves. This same report "exonerates" the FBI, because their failure, as well as DHS and INS to deport an alien reported to be a "strong believer" in "radical Islam", like the fellows who flew planes into buildings in NYC, because Russia didn't do their jobs for them.

This is passing the buck of the worst kind and an insult to the victims.

Tuesday, April 08, 2014

Cry Babies in The US Senate

However senior US lawmakers who accuse Aboutalebi of involvement in the siege are rallying around legislation to prevent him access to the UN headquarters. On Tuesday, in the wake of the Senate's endorsement of a bill that effectively targeted Aboutalebi, and as a new round of nuclear negotiations was getting underway in Vienna, Iran stood by its nomination...

Legislation authored by Republican senator Ted Cruz easily passed the Senate on Monday, after it received the backing of Democratic hawks such as Chuck Schumer. Cruz, a standard bearer of the rightwing of the GOP, called Iran’s nomination a “deliberate and unambiguous insult to the United States”.

“Given the larger strategic threats to the United States and our allies, represented by Iran’s nuclear ambitions, this is not the moment for diplomatic niceties,” he said. If put to the vote in the House, the bill is likely be supported by in the second chamber, however any visa ban on Aboutalebi would require the executive branch.
Yet another reason the UN should simply pack up and leave the US. Seriously. We have little cry babies running the US government.

Ukraine Setting Up Russia?

Reading The Guardian UK I saw the following:
The fight erupted hours after Ukraine launched an "anti-terrorist" operation against pro-Russian separatists occupying government buildings in several of its eastern cities.
This is an interesting choice of words, "anti-terrorism" because by calling the civil unrest "terrorism" Ukraine is laying groundwork for calling Russia a state sponsor of terrorism. Of course we know that what is going on in Ukraine is not terrorism. We know that the use of the word is meant to further malign Russia in the public eye. I have no doubt that some persons in the US government would be quite happy to run with this idea. On a side note:
The US secretary of state, John Kerry, is reported to have told the Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, in a phone call that Washington was watching events in eastern Ukraine with great concern and any further moves by Moscow to destabilise Ukraine would "incur further costs for Russia".
Lavrov has far more patience and diplomatic skills than I do, 'cause I would have hung up on Kerry while he was speaking. In fact, I probably wouldn't even bother taking his phone calls as there really isn't any point in doing so. Or maybe I'd interrupt with the comment that I'm "concerned" about shit going on next door to my country that threatens our national security. How about you shut up and have a seat about something going on thousands of miles away from your borders.

How long before the world sees John Kerry for the clown he is?

Monday, April 07, 2014

Manny Pacquiao, Chik-Fil-A and Brendan Eich

The firing resignation of Brendan Eich from Mozilla is just another example of a growing string of the growing, and I really hate to use the word, fascism that is growing like a cancer on the left. I warned people in 2012 that the state needed to step in on the increasing and blatant violations of the 1964 Civil Rights Act by those calling themselves 'gay rights activists" and those disposed to be sympathetic to such groups and persons.
Earlier this year Manny Pacquiao expressed his religion based position on homosexuality by quoting a verse in the Bible that generally states that such persons should be stoned. Not that I personally agree with such a position but it's supposed to be "America" where two things are supposedly sacrosanct: speech and religion. The owners of The Grove in LA said that due to Pacquiao's comments he would be banned from the LA mall. While many people went on and on about Manny's statement, nobody, not a single person from the "gay rights" crowd or the so called "equal protection" crowd expressed alarm over a place of public accommodation blatantly violating the law and in particular the Civil Rights Act of 1964. You know, the one people like to beat over your head when there are threats of racial discrimination.
When this news broke the Department of Justice [sic] and the EEOC should have come down hard on The Grove's owners. You would think that business owners would know better than to announce such an action publicly. But no, There was no announcement by the Justice Department [sic] and apparently Pacquiao decided that he didn't want to file a discrimination suit.

Anyone who has been bullied knows that a bully usually tests the will of his or her potential victim. They do a small but obvious action in order to see if the potential victim will be compliant (and provide entertainment) or if they will put up resistance. And if they do put up resistance how much resistance they will give. Usually the way to effectively stop a bully is to make a large show of resistance so that the bully has to consider whether it is worth the risk to his reputation to attempt (and fail) to get submission from the mark or to move onto easier targets. Children who are bullied long term usually fail badly at resisting the initial test. The way I see it when The Grove got away with openly discriminating against Manny Pacquiao, the bullies knew they could continue.

Then came the Chik-Fil-A issue.

Anyone who has been paying attention (apparently that would be few of us) knows that Chik-Fil-A was founded by what we would call conservative Christians. The stores are not open on Sundays in order to observe the Protestant/Catholic Sabbath. In light of this to be surprised about the founder's position on marriage amounts to a whole lot of wishful thinking on the part of those so disposed. But in reality the position of the founder is of little relevance because the constitution, that pesky piece of paper, protects his right to his position as well as his right to open up any legal enterprise that meets all municipal codes and adheres to the rules laid out by the 1964 Civil Rights Act as it pertains to public accommodation... What was conspicuously absent from the threats agains Chik Fil-A was any charge of discriminatory practices in it's corporate HQ or at any one of it's local franchises. Not one of the talking bobble heads could point to any case where a homosexual, black, Hindu, Muslim or disabled person was discriminated against in any of the franchise locations. Not. A. One. Think about that. A store being threatened with denial of service by local governments for not discriminating against its customers. That's some bullshit. You may think that this is preposterous but it isn't. By threatening local franchisees with an illegal and unconstitutional denial of permits and the like based on some third party's opinion is exactly what is being proposed. That these mayors have to be reminded of this rather than they (except Bloomberg) didn't brush such idiocy aside from the beginning shows exactly what these people are about.
Again we ask: Where was the Department Of Justice [sic] when these clearly discriminatory actions were being proposed by the agents of the state? There should have been a swift and hard response from the federal government when this happened. There was not. So the lesson to the bullies here was clear not only will the state not pursue us when we discriminate in public accommodations held by private parties, but the state will not even police it's own. Therefore anyone can be targeted.

Enter Eich. I don't have to explain what happened to Eich. Essentially, under the law, Eich was subject to a hostile work environment by other employees at Mozilla. That is an actionable discrimination claim. The management at Mozilla (meaning HR) did nothing to make it clear to the employees of Mozilla that their actions constituted discrimination and harassment under employment law. I'm not saying that the employees with issues with Eich don't have a right to hold and discuss their positions on Eich's donation. They do. They even have the right to complain. They also can (and should have been) subject to firing(for cause) and whatever else that would constitute civil disobedience.

DISCRIMINATION BECAUSE OF RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN SEC. 703. (a) It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer--

(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; or

(2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
If Eich supported Prop 208 because of his religious convictions then he was discriminated against by his employer, Mozilla, and was wrongfully discharged. Now I'm certain that by pressuring Eich to resign, Mozilla's lawyers were and are looking to get around this provision by saying Eich decided to leave. This puts the ball squarely in Eich's court. In my opinion Eich should not have agreed to resign. Eich should have stated that his support was an expression of his religious faith (which he may or may not have changed) and the Department of Justice[sic] should have immediately put Mozilla on notice about the apparent discrimination investigation that would be forthcoming.

While thinking of this situation I think of the one person who managed to beat off the bully: Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty.

See, what Phil did, whether you like or agree with him or not, was not back down from the bully. He said what he said. He didn't apologize AND his people came to his defense in a very vocal and visible manner. How many more Mannys and Brendans will there be before you figure it out?

Thursday, April 03, 2014

White House denies 'Cuban Twitter' ZunZuneo programme was covert

The White House is claiming that a secret programme to build a carefully-disguised “Cuban Twitter”, in order to foment political opposition to the Castro regime, was “not covert” but rather a “discreet” form of humanitarian assistance.
The kind that is afflicting Venzuela, Egypt, Ukraine, etc.
The AP revealed how the programme, engineered by the US Agency for International Development (USAid), was intended to encourage “flash mobs” in Cuba, emulating social media-based protests that had been occurring organically in countries such as Iran, the Philippines and Moldova.[my underline]
You know that Maidan was a "flash mob gone wrong", right?
Extensive efforts were undertaken to conceal the true nature of the social-media network, using offshore banks accounts, front companies and overseas servers.
Front companies. Offshore accounts! Nothing to see here folks. What's that folks say about the NSA? If you have nothing to hide....
White House press secretary Jay Carney said on Thursday that while in "non-permissive environments" it was necessary for USAid to be "discreet", the secret social-media initiative was “not a covert programme”.

“It was a development-assistance programme,” he said, adding: "I am not aware of individuals here in the White House who were involved.” He also said the programme was subject to congressional oversight.
Yes, a development program. Kinda like the blockade only, you know, on the internet. And yes, we in the White House have no clue, because, you know, we don't actually run anything. Serious question: with all the illegal and "not covert" things going on, does anyone at the White House actually know what any of the agencies that report to it ARE, doing?
Carney denied suggestions the programme was “under the table” or had “roped in” unsuspecting Cubans.
Never mind the offshore accounts and front companies!
He said "discretion" was necessary "not because it is an intelligence programme, but to protect individuals”.
What individuals?
Other countries, including some European allies, may have unknowingly become involved in the programme, which was run on foreign soil to avoid associations with the US. Spain, Ireland, the UK, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and the Cayman Islands hosted either servers, bank accounts or companies working on ZunZuneo, and it is not known if they were aware of the true nature of the company. Use of servers in Europe may constitute a breach of data protection law, according to a legal expert quoted by the AP.
Question: How many of these countries voted for the UN "resolution" in regards to Ukraine and Crimea?
The idea appears to have quickly evolved into a more interactive messaging network, in which users could also interact with one another and organise politically.
Yes, like Maidan.
Once sufficient numbers of Cubans had signed-up, ZunZeneo would become more political, inciting protest or, as one USAid document quoted by the AP put it, seeking to influence “the balance of power between the state and society".[my underline]
Like Ukraine?

I hope Putin and Lavrov have seen this report. I'll need to check the RT to see if they have run with this story. Don't expect the UN to do anything of value, if at all, with this evidence of fomenting political unrest and likely violence by the US.

Adventures in One Drop Rule Land

Today's post is an illustration of what would happen if we applied the One Drop Rule to everything.

1)This is a red rose.



This is a white rose.



This is a red rose. You thought it was pink? Sorry. In One Drop Rule land this is a red rose.



2)This is a Labrador Retriever.



This is a German Shepherd.





This is a Labrador Retriever. Or is it a German Shepherd. I don't know which would be the equivalent of "black" but for the sake of this post we'll say the Lab is the negro and therefore this is a Lab. Never mind the differences. It's a Lab because the One Drop Rule says so.

3)This is a black cow.



This is a white cow.





This is a black cow. Never mind the white on it. It's a black cow.

Wednesday, April 02, 2014

Recent Election Decision from SCOTUS is Good Sign For Hobby Lobby

I recently wrote about the Hobby Lobby case currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. In it I said that the fact that Hobby Lobby has an enumerated right to not have it's religious practices interfered with by the government means that it should get the benefit of the doubt and a higher consideration than the ACA contraception mandate. Today's decision is supporting of such thinking:
The line between quid pro quo corruption and general influence must be respected in order to safeguard basic First Amendment rights, and the Court must "err on the side of protecting political speech rather than suppressing it[My underlines]
One could easily see a similar line written for Hobby Lobby.