Obama, Cameron and The Game

The British are here! The British are here!

Last night Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron attended a basketball game...and then today the games continued.

While many in the mainstream media keep playing up the discord between British and American philosophies for the American public, these two gentlemen are about as alike as two peas in a pod.

Both with alliances to world government and British style dominion.

Although the governmental structure of the two countries are worlds apart, you wouldn't know it or at least most in this country have been progressively "re-educated" to the British mindset.

Continue the wars for dominion. That was the battle cry of Mr. Cameron during his address with Mr. Obama this afternoon, which of course in most respects Mr. Obama seconded.

Even after recent events in Afghanistan.

Mr. Obama protected BP after the Gulf Oil spill, for the most part, acting as lawyer on behalf of those U.S. businesses and lives taken in setting up that fund in order to "recompensate" the victims. Wiping out their ability to have their day in court, as it were.

Our alliances with Britain have progressively cost this country much both economically, and in lives lost in the foreign wars we have been involved in since World War II, and the establishment of the British/American alliance thereafter, the U.N.

The sun never sets on Britain, to this day, whether in fact or fealty.

Israel...a British creation...and U.S. unconditional support has also taken its toll on our national sovereignty and security.

To this day.

Our founders would be appalled.

Our country was founded on defensive wars only.

Britain, on offensive ones from its inception for dominion in the Roman-Anglo-Saxon vein.

Mr. Cameron was here to push for continued support for military involvement in Afghanistan and as a PR move, apparently, after the latest news from the front. Stretching out U.S. and British troop withdrawal into 2014, for goodness sake!

And continued with more terrorism threats with respect to Syria.

Britain has had more wars, bar none, than any country of its size throughout history. Both civil and foreign.

American interest and government is diametrically opposed to fighting wars for dominion.

Would 9-11 have ever even occurred had it not been for our continual presence in the Middle East, and support of the fears of Western Europe?

Would our country be in the economic quagmire it is now in, if not for our continued support for these "allied" causes?

We are providing military training to Canadian troops on American bases, for heaven sake. Training foreign troops on U.S. soil for the first time ever.

I think Washington just may need to take a long, hard look at who the real enemy to the American economy and our domestic security actually is.

While sitting down for those post game cups of tea.

And just why is it that almost immediately after another war horror story is reported, the British come to tea?

The Weiner Waggers, Palin's Revere and More

This week the mainstream news media is at it again, dominating the airwaves with sensationalized news stories, and propaganda geared more toward ratings, than anything that truly might interest the American public, in this writer's opinion.

First there are what I like to call the "Weiner Waggers" and their subversive journalism.

I'm sure this week's "Saturday Night Live" will be a hoot, and have a field day with this one.

Mr. Weiner is a American of the Jewish faith, married to a Middle Eastern young woman that just so happens to also work for Hillary Clinton, Bill's wife.

I'm sure there is some real bonding going on there between those two women on those taxpayer paid trips to all those foreign ports of call on behalf of the State Department.

Mr. Weiner was, of course, recently married.

I find it strange that this brouhaha occurred just as the public was in the midst of continuing to question and address the bin Laden "burial at sea" and details surrounding that heroic event.

In fact, seems almost to have been concocted so fast - this "news breaking story."

And the pronunciation of Mr. Weiner's name certainly seems to be either intentionally mispronounced also to flesh out this story, since I've yet to meet another whose name is spelled in such a way, especially of the Jewish faith, and pronounced "Weiner" (as in Oscar Mayer) rather than "Whiner" (as in childrens' tales of woe, or rhyming with beer stein-er).

The fact that it seems politician's infidelity is become the norm and seems to be used as a segway after or during horrific Constitutional violations, press reports out of Washington, or whatever to an increasingly outraged public with the goings on in Washington lo these many years also seems rather odd.

Maybe he just simply irritated the Jewish population with the selection of his bride, who is not Jewish from all reports and is of a different religious and ethnic persuasion.

Or maybe he is in on this latest hoax and diversion.

I mean, also from all reports he has sponsored bills for increasing visas also for foreign models to this country (as if we don't have enough American models, most on Fox it seems promoted to "political analysts" or "lawyer"), although who knows if that one is true, either.

And then there was Ms. Palin's version of the Paul Revere tale, with a lot of "shucks" and "by gollies" thrown in for good measure.

Darn those British for even thinking about "takin' away our guns," hence Mr. Revere's warning.

Nothing about that Declaration of Independence and just what the true "grievances" of those patriots were, or the fact that America had already pretty much declared their intent to break free of Britain due to also its history of governmental abuse, increasing taxation, and its partnering with its "favored subjects" in order to rob from the poor, and give to the rich to make them much, much richer with titles and baronies, giving away or demanding both their homes and land, and then even the fruits of their own labors as that 16th Amendment and the increasing eminent domain abuses for purely increased tax revenues demonstrate now in this country.

Not that simple little "indirect" tea tax.

Mimicing the Britain of the 18th century once again.

But, gosh, America it was simply those guns and arms the British wished to confiscate.

Thrown in to all of this was also the release of a report that indicated that Americans at the present time have the lowest taxes since the 1950's.

Federal, state, local or statutory?

No breakdown was provided.

I guess we are forgetting all the literally tens of thousands of laws that have been implemented since the 1950's that now mandate (such as ObamaCare intends to do) the purchase of its "favored subjects" products BY LAW OR ELSE you can simply pay a fine to the government, or be arrested if you do not now also budget whatever income you have left according to the U.S. Congress's will and edicts (or your own state, who gave the federal government back in 1913 power it was never, ever intended to have - at least without the consent of the governed in those "passed" amendments).

Those, by any stretch of the imagination, also count as "taxes" too.

But Ms. Palin's version is more exploitive, and inflammatory (and incorrect).

Gotta love the Washington press corp, cable news and those other "waggers."

Obama Hawks British War Strategy

It appears the hawk has replaced the dove during Mr. Obama's less than three year run as our nation's president.

During the British tour announced and undertaken post the "capture" and "death" of Osama bin Laden, Mr. Obama has been meeting with the British leaders and hawking his new conversion from his election positions and statements in 2008. Remember, at that time he was challenged as "soft" on war with his stances to end the War in Iraq as soon as "safely" possible, and get our troops back home and end this unconstitutional Middle East takeover in the name of fighting "terrorism" and also tracking down bin Laden.

The "new" British initiative which America and American troops are also expected to support?

Establishing "democracies" throughout the Middle East. Of course, the United States is not a democracy, nor was ever intended to be, but a Constitutional Republic honoring freedom of religion most of all, although with Christian-Judeo roots in its original intent and form. Not extremism in either of those two faiths either in supporting interventionist or even precipitated wars in order to "take over" other countries and their established forms of government, whatever they may be, but affording those people living within those sovereign countries to also stage their own revolutionary wars if "change" is truly needed there, with U.S. diplomatic and arms support if need be, of course if absolutely needed or necessary.

Not direct troop involvement, at any rate.

But no matter, it is clear that the "change" which occurs under a change in leadership in this country has no effect, and instead of abiding by the Constitution it appears a race to see which party can desecrate it even faster.

While all this was being announced, of course, the U.S. Congress and House of "Misrepresentatives" again passed the extension of the Patriot Act, that Act of Congress that was passed post 9-11 in order to fight "terrorism," once again ten long years after 9-11, and also after this recent "capture" and "death at sea" of the purported mastermind.

Where is the outraged citizenry who continue to be marginalized also under this unconstitutional provision and "in your face" violation of America's Bill of Rights?

Most likely on the unemployment line, or now without television sets in order to continue keeping tabs and watching the destruction of the late, great U.S. those founders fought so hard and shed their blood to watch our modern day political machines in bed with the unconstitutional agendas of World War II allies destroy.

Hail, Britainnia. Britainnia rules the Hill.

Nine Years Later: Whitewashing 9-11

This past week our mainstream print and television media dedicated much of their programming once again to 9-11 and its aftermath, and using it in order to garner ratings and place their subjective spins on this black mark in American history.

One major news magazine has an article devoted to how America "over-reacted" to 9-11, and the threat of al-Qaeda (although originally it was the Taliban and Osama bin Laden which was the focus of those first weeks and months post 9-11, not al Qaeda at all). Another article in the same magazine written by a former President's daughter lambasts how the liberals are disappointed with the reaction of Mr. Obama to the Deepwater Horizon disaster and the weeks and months this Administration stood by while tens of thousands of barrels of oil were spewing into the Gulf, without a mention of the continuing war also whose candidate had pledged to end the war, one of their major concerns at election time.

To this American, it has been nine long years of betrayal and using 9-11 also for their agendas by both political parties which has resulted in the increased discontent of the American people with their leadership.

I would not state that the reactions of the general citizenry were "over-reactions," but that the actions of the Bush/Obama Administration have been "under-reactions."

Our borders, for the most part, and ports of entry are even less secure than they were pre-9-11. Our infrastructure and many of our vital industries and public utility companies are traded on the global exchange, and for all intents and purposes even our nuclear reactors could be "owned" through stock purchases, by foreigners.

There has also been two other attempts under even stranger circumstances, originating from Great Britain since that time used to justify then increasing security measures domestically, although the Bush Administration during his last 90 days in office expanded the Visa waiver program for foreign citizens wishing entry, requiring simply 48 hour security checks, to citizens from over 45 nations.

Our southern and northern borders still remain relatively unsecured, and there are once again even since 2006 attempts being made to "legalize" individuals who are in this country who had absolutely no security checks at all as having entered illegally, and also who have overstayed their work, student or visitor visas.

While instead, Americans are being asked to submit themselves to full body scanners, and other invasive security measures at domestic airports.

In this same magazine, an article also appeared that harkened back to how "united" the American people were post 9-11, pulling together for a "common good," due to all the donations and volunteers that did what they could in the aftermath of the tragedy. As a nation, however, I would not say that this country was "united" except for the fact that it was united in its outrage that such an event, in this modern day and era and with all the monies spent for national defense in technology during the Reagan era, especially, could occur.

We were united in our wish to have the perpetrators of this heinous act brought to justice, which has alluded this nation still even nine long years later.

We wanted our leaders to abide by our Constitution, and close our borders and our country to "foreigners" until those individuals responsible for the act were brought to justice, and order any and all here illegally out until such time.

We wanted our president not to direct us to "go shop," or this president to expand the war without having any real hard intelligence indicating that the perpetrators were within our grasp, and not send any more of our young men and women to die on foreign sand to add to the losses.

We simply wanted our leadership to abide by their oaths of office, and their duties to Americans and protect this nation and its borders and legal and lawful citizenry, rather than their commercial interests and those domestic and foreign privateers.

Attempts are now also being made in order to "whitewash" 9-11 and its impact in declaring this day a "National Day of Service," rather than a memorial day as with Pearl Harbor. And the profiteers who wish to now see a Muslim mosque built in close proximity over the objections of most of the American people, promoting such an act as a demonstration of "tolerance," rather than the real agenda - a multi-million dollar redevelopment project for the city and state coffers of New York.

There is much in this puzzle still missing as those that viewed that attack for over seven full days replayed and replayed can attest.

And attempts to marginalize the Americans who still are not satisfied with the official explanations will not change that, nor cloaking 9-11 in patriotism and the flag, or minimizing the impact this massive attack and its scars have left on this nation and a new generation of Americans who didn't live through Pearl Harbor.

Interesting this mosque and its ramifications has reared its head just a short year before the 10th anniversary, and push toward this "National Day of Service" spin focusing on those that responded (although their acts of bravery are not to be discounted by any means), rather than the victims and tragedy itself? I wonder what incentives the City of New York, since it has the support of its Mayor, is extending for this massive, expansive project in order to feed the "jobs and the economy" on the memories of that day, and of the 9-11 victims?

I'm no "conspiracy" nut or theorist, but I still wonder how the mainstream media was able to get full camera crews to the site of the Trade Center within 20 minutes of the first crash since the financial district of New York is quite a distance away from where most of those media centers are located, and this was rush hour at that....even the date selected, an emergency code used throughout the U.S. and not the Middle East, bears scrutiny. If this was a religious attack as has been claimed of jihadists, just why wasn't a Muslim holy day selected, which would certainly make more sense if extremism within the Muslim faith was the origins of this heinous attack on our civilian population primarily and nation's economy and military headquarters.

And I have seen enough controlled demolitions during my years in Phoenix, Arizona when tearing down old buildings in order to redevelop and put in new was an ongoing annual process, since Phoenix and its metro area has exploded in the last two decades, to its detriment also, as a former longer term "almost native" Arizonan. I've been to New York, and it's population and traffic are well-known. Although after the events which occurred, such a decision could be understandable given the extent of the damage and "collateral" damage which also was an eminent threat, but this entire scenario cannot be dismissed by the mere "scientific" theories and explanations which were then subsequently published in an auto mechanics magazine.

To even use such a source by many in our leadershp and print and television media goes to show the utter contempt it does appear that some of those that survived have for their fellow countrymen and victims, in one manner or another all Americans have been progressively impacted, since that horrendous day.

And the ramifications and impact on the American people post 9-11 has been far greater in having their continued rights violated and victimized nine years later, while instead our leadership in the name of "commerce" above true national security, continues to open our doors and shores to all comers.

Troop Surge In Afghanistan: More War, More Debt, Less Accountability

It was announced by Barack Obama that in accordance with his campaign statements that he is deploying 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Iraq in order to seek out Osama bin Laden and the members of al Qaeda per the original Resolution passed by Congress in the wake of 9-11 (after, of course, at first promising to end the engagement in the Middle East altogether after so many lives, and so many American dollars have been lost in the over eight years since 9-11).

The question is, with the guarantee of support from the Afghan government with respect to this redress for the deaths and lives lost on that fateful September day, why the need for 30,000 troops rather than a limited deployment of intelligence and career military officers?

Not to second guess the commanders on the ground as a mere citizen, but is it really necessary to risk an additional 30,000 U.S. lives in order to capture one leader and those that were DIRECTLY responsible for giving those that participated "aid and comfort" in the planning of 9-11 which is the exact wording of the original Resolution?

The original pilots, after all, were Saudi citizens. It was only days after the attacks that it was revealed that bin Laden had claimed reponsibility for the attacks - and with the assistance of the Taliban, as I recall, not al Qaeda, although the two have been merged now in this loosely defined "War on Terror" which evolved under the Bush Administration.

So far, the body count in Iraq is minimal compared to prior full scale declared wars but still staggering for the U.S. given that these individuals are actually using rudimentary weapons most of all, including themselves.

And the amount of money now which has been poured into the rebuilding efforts actually has resulted in the U.S. deficit soaring to unprecedented levels even before all the other "funny money" was printed in order to then "salvage" the U.S. economy in the domestic loss of jobs and the foreclosure mess which occurred in large part due to the inflationary costs and those taxes for the war itself, actually in conjunction with some rather questionably legal loans sold throughout the West and Southwest based on the "global" London bank rates, and not U.S. rates at all and then repackaged and resold to foreign investors who were protected, not the U.S. homeowners even to date that were in essence defrauded or forced into some of those loans due to rising costs and refinances.

As funds were appropriated for the war, less funds were appropriated for domestic needs and costs and the budget for an entire new Department (DHS) and its expensive toys burst the "true" inflation (not the published spin) in rising costs for fuel, groceries and local taxes now for eight years - and then even with the stimulus, states are announcing college tuition cost increases, added taxes and a host of other new ways to bankrupt Americans, of course, after Washington then went so far as to tax the air Americans now breathe, for the "global good" at that, and bail out a London based global insurer on the backs of Americans.

It was interesting and outrageous to note that one of the Congressional members is proposing a new "tax" on Americans labeled the SOS tax (Congress and the media whom it appears they consult more and more for PR purposes love the acronyms for new legislation, unlike days gone by with bills less than 50 pages tops. The size of the average mortgage loan these days, which has also increased from less than five pages to 50 or more, with all the riders and caveats).

I wonder how much destruction we can now wreck in Afghanistan in order to bulk up the revenue, jobs and coffers of the U.S. military contractors once again in order to further plunge this country into a full out depression, since the global economy may be seeing signs of improving, but thus far the U.S. economy continues to tank in order to feed all those other nations and European investors.

By the time this war ends, it appears that what will truly have transpired is that there will eventually have been a leveraged buyout of most of America's infrastructure and assets by foreigner investors.

We will lose our country to foreigners while fighting a foreign enemy and without a shot fired on domestic soil.

In order to capture simply one man who has somehow alluded capture now for over eight years by the finest military in the entire world.

Just when are some of those other promises going to be kept, Mr. Obama, such as making Iraq start picking up the tab actually for this rebuilding effort in which it seems the U.S. funds and builds government buildings only to then have them blown up once again?

While Ms. Clinton then attempts to switch hats, as it were, as ambassador for Iraq and urge what is left of corporate America unrelated to those military contractors to invest in Iraq?

It appears maybe that it would be only the global insurance companies that would profit on businesses that wish to now outsource American production to that country post the rebuilding effort, in hiring then cheaper Iraqi labor in order to then pay those stratospheric insurance rates.

Just how, again, can Congress and the President justify risking 30,000 additional U.S. lives in order to supposedly redress the loss of 2,500 - after, of course, having lost at least three times that many to date?

Is this now the mentality of those on the Hill in defending America, while of course leaving our borders open and affording foreign investors in our nuclear reactors throughout the country for those global markets?

Isn't it the U.S. economy, security and safety and not the global one, that is supposed to be the focus of our elected representatives, since it would appear that fighting a foreign enemy on their own home turf gives us a one down no matter what the engagement, and we've got plenty of risk now due to continued negligence and promoting "foreign investment" in American assets on our own shores at this point?

Isn't the risk of attack by foreign terrorists much greater from within at this point, than without with such skewered logic?

Just how many more lives will be risked in order to secure the Middle East as a permanent source of income for War, Inc. in the name of "jobs and the economy" for the telecom, networks, media, and thousands of military contractors?

Are these again some of the "new jobs" created in addition to those which were primarily taxpayer paid additional government jobs under the non-stimulus (rather than the red-lining promised)?

Do you think after these past two administrations particularly, the American public trusts either the Republicans or Democratic Globalists in any manner whatsoever, except to keep the balls spinning and give public appearances that belie the collusion now involved between both parties in continuing this fiasco?

Is this a war in providing for the common defense of America? Or expansion of a global agenda and result of pemanent alliances with differing interests at the cost of America and Americans?

The proposed timeline and ending of this war really says it all. 2011. Coincidentally, just prior to the next presidential campaign election cycle in order to be rehashed for the consumption of America and spun and spun some more by the Global Socialist Party now residing on the Hill. It will, of course, end as "politically" as it appears that it began.

And an enemy for which this country would never, ever have if it had practiced the "defensive war" measures provided in America's founding documents per the "intent" of the founders.

These were trained terrorists, trained by the U.S. government in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, from all reports. So trying these individuals in America's federal courts once again also seems to be a political move in order to again rachet up the temperature in America for the continuing war when the details are rehashed on CNN and FOX of the "evidence" for the accused for all America.

Of course, since it will be a world audience involved the Middle Eastern countries will get the impression that the United States citizens are still out for revenge and blood after eight years since actual combat footage of what truly is occurring in Iraq has been suspiciously absent, unlike Viet Nam, so the blood lust will be reignited for the New York trial and the American people the convictors hearing the "evidence," from foreigners that speak little, if any, English at all.

A military target was involved, and these were "soldiers" trained in covert activities. And the mastermind still remains at large, so once captured what type of "plea bargain" will be available for any of these now to be tried, one of whom at least it is claimed was an active participant, in order to convict Mr. bin Laden?

And since our military did train them initially, would they also not be more familiar with their history and an "open" military trial, per the Nuremburg Trials, more along the lines of what is called for here?

The timing of these trials, and now announcement of the surge in conjunction, seems War, Inc. is not about to end before this country is brought to its knees both economically, and in the theft of thousands more of America's youth.