Tag Archives: Foreign Policy

Hugo Chavez Cartoon: Leader Animated In Heaven With Simón Bolívar, Che Guevara, Other Pals (VIDEO)

By The Huffington Post News Editors

“Hugo Chavez, Che Guevara, Simón Bolívar, and Salvador Allende all meet in Heaven.” You’d be forgiven for thinking that was the opening line of a mediocre joke, but it’s actually an animated TV spot, put together by Venezuela‘s state-run TV station, ViVe.

According to Foreign Policy, the spot, titled “Goodbye Forever Commander,” features the late Venezuelan leader, who died on March 5 after an extended battle with cancer, passing expressionless through a field of peaceful trees and green grasses.

As mysterious piano music plays in the background, Chavez — wearing his signature Venezuelan-flag tracksuit — stumbles across his idols waiting for him by a thatched hut. His mouth falls open in surprise, then turns to a smile as he walks to the group, taking his place among them.

Read More…
More on Video

…read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Huffington Post

US Fed Up With Drunk Diplomats at UN Meetings

By Rob Quinn Some diplomats consider a few stiff drinks to be essential before United Nations budget negotiations but the US ambassador for management and reform is sick of dealing with intoxicated counterparts, Foreign Policy reports. “There has always been a good and responsible tradition of a bit of alcohol improving a negotiation,… …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Newser – Home

Dick Cheney: Condoleezza Rice Was ‘Wrong’ For Not Handling Syria Like Iraq

By The Huffington Post News Editors

Former Vice President Dick Cheney revives a dispute with former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in an upcoming documentary, criticizing his former President George W. Bush administration colleague for rebuffing him on a decision that Cheney said believed have returned the nation to Iraq War-era levels of greatness.

In an interview given for the Showtime documentary, “The World According to Dick Cheney,” which is set to air on March 15, Cheney spoke about the administration’s deliberations over how to handle reports that Syria was developing a nuclear reactor in 2007.

Cheney wanted to bomb the site. Rice opted for a diplomatic route that involved taking the issue before the United Nations. The reactor was eventually destroyed by an Israeli air strike. Here’s what Cheney said of the incident in the film, via Foreign Policy.

Read More…
More on Dick Cheney

…read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Huffington Post

The Looming Battle For Iran

By Breaking News

Map Iran SC The Looming Battle for Iran

Iran’s politicians are engaged in an epic squabble that threatens to turn the country upside down just a couple weeks before national elections. Over at Foreign Policy, Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar does a great job summarizing what’s happening:

During an unprecedented debate at the parliament, which ended in mayhem and the dismissal of the labor minister, Ahmadinejad played a video that implicated the powerful Larijani brothers, two of whom head the judiciary and legislative bodies, of corruption and nepotism. Sunday’s impeachment put Ahmadinejad’s remaining presidency in danger since many of his allies in the cabinet have had similar fates. At this fiery session that was being broadcast live on state radio, he threatened and eventually played the video to prove a backroom deal that involved the Larijani family. In response, the speaker of the parliament accused Ahmadinejad of mafia type activities and did not allow him to continue. Ahmadinejad angrily left the parliament and moments later 192 out of 272 members of parliament voted in favor of the impeachment. […]

Ahmadinejad told the parliament that he came to “tell the people that the president you have selected is under the power of the speaker of the parliament [Ali Larijani].” A few months ago, in another showdown with the establishment, he attacked Larijani for claiming that international sanctions have had no effect on Iran’s shamble of an economy (Iran’s currency has plummeted by about 50 percent in the past year), condemned the security and military apparatus for “entering the political arena,” and slammed the state-controlled TV for blaming him for the all country’s problems. […]

Read More at The American Interest .

…read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Western Journalism

Video: Obama Accused Of Staging A Chemical Weapons Attack

By Kris Zane

Foreign Policy magazine did an amazing bit of investigative reporting two weeks ago. They got the Obama administration to leak a classified cable—marked as “secret”—describing how Syrian dictator Bashar Assad had lobbed a chemical weapon on his own people in the city of Homs—murdering five and sickening dozens. They got the Obama administration to “anonymously” comment on the cable, giving extensive details about how the information was gathered, what group put together the information, and even pried from the mouth of the beast that the information came from a State Department-funded group called BASMA, which oddly doesn’t seem to exist. Also oddly, the mysterious chemical weapon canister that was lobbed into the city doesn’t seem to exist either.

The article also has an amazing video compilation of Syrians supposedly choking on poison gas, choking on their vomit, breathing into respirators, and cursing that evil dictator Bashar Assad.

Foreign Policy magazine even despatched an army of reporters to Homs, interviewing victims and the doctors who treated the victims and were especially interested in a neurologist by the name of Dr. Nashwan Abu Abdo.

The good doctor did an extensive examination of the dead victims, especially taking body samples for evidence. Per the article:

The doctors on the scene said they were not able to pinpoint the poison because they lacked the advanced laboratory equipment needed. They took blood, hair, saliva, and urine samples, but those samples are no longer viable for testing because too much time has passed, they said.

Now, the attack is stated to have taken place on December 23, 2012. Twenty-three days later, on January 15, the Foreign Policy article was written. Anyone who has even a modicum of forensic knowledge knows that blood and urine will retain traces of poison for months if not years; and hair, when poison is ingested through the lungs, absorbed by the blood stream, and then passed into the hair, will retain the poison for literally centuries, assuming full decomposition hasn’t occurred. Many will remember Napoleon Bonaparte’s hair being tested for arsenic poisoning in 2008. So Foreign Policy’s quote that “samples are no longer viable for testing” is ludicrous.

Lo and behold, on January 28, it was revealed through a huge document dump from a hacker based in Malaysia that the UK-based mega defense contractor Britam was approached about lobbing a chemical weapon in Homs, blaming it on Assad, and scapegoating the Russians for delivering the canister.

The plan was “approved by Washington.” Yes, that means Barack Obama was in on it.

Among the hacked Britam documents were copies of passports of the mercenaries who planned on carrying out the proposed attack; but the key document is an email between Britam director David Goulding and the company’s founder, Philip Doughty.

Phil, We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington. We’ll have to deliver a CW [chemical weapon] to Homs [city in western Syria], a Soviet origin g-shell [gas shell] from Libya similar to those that Assad should have. They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record. Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion? Kind regards-David.

It appears that the idiocy of lobbing an Obama-approved chemical weapon on the Syrian people was too much even for our Commander-in-Chief; and a pseudo false flag was instead devised, as evidenced by the ludicrous statement in the Foreign Policy article that urine, blood, and hair samples couldn’t be tested for poison days after they were taken.

The so-called “civil war” in Syria, the alleged chemical attack, is nothing more than a globalist push led by Barack Obama, using al-Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood-linked terrorists posing as Syrian rebels so that Obama and NATO’s illegal war in Libya can have a repeat performance in Syria.

Before NATO, with Obama at the helm leading the Charge of the Light Brigade into Syria occurs, let a forensic lab in the United States analyze the body samples from the chemical weapon victims to see if in fact there was a chemical attack.

I doubt, however, that any samples were taken because the chemical attack was a sham in order to justify a U.S./NATO invasion of Syria.

America, if Obama is in fact involved in this, impeachment would be only the beginning…

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Western Journalism

Video: Did Obama Stage A Chemical Weapons Attack In Syria?

By Kris Zane

We know that Obama, under Fast and Furious, ran guns to Mexican drug cartels in order to curtail the Second Amendment.

We know that Barack Obama was running weapons to Syria, using Benghazi as a base of operation and Ambassador Chris Stevens as his point man.

But what if there was a new scandal, something so horrendous that it would make Obama’s gunrunning escapades look like child’s play?

Obama has made no secret of the fact that he wants to depose Syrian dictator Bashar Assad. He would have ridden on the shoulders of NATO long ago, spurning Congress like he did when he conducted an illegal and unconstitutional war in toppling Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi.

But in Gaddafi’s case, Obama had the UN and NATO supporting him. In Syria’s case, Obama lacks global support.

There is only one way Obama has vowed he would get involved in the toppling of Assad: that is, if the so-called “red line” is passed, whereby there is evidence Assad used chemical weapons against his own people.

There is every indication that Assad would never deploy chemical weapons against his own people. And in fact, Syria has long feared that the Obama administration would manufacture a false flag chemical weapons attack perpetrated by the Syrian rebels and then blame it on Assad.

And that is what apparently has happened.

With a twist.

On January 26, Cyber War News reported on a huge cache of emails and documents hacked from the defense contractor giant Britam. The key document is an email between Britam director David Goulding and the company’s founder, Philip Doughty. They engage in a shocking discussion: a proposal is made whereby a chemical weapon would be launched on Syria, the blame would be placed on Assad, and delivery of the weapon would be blamed on the Russians. The proposal, per the email, was “approved by Washington”—that is, by Barack Hussein Obama. The email is as follows:

Phil, We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington. We’ll have to deliver a CW [chemical weapon] to Homs [city in western Syria], a Soviet origin g-shell [gas shell] from Libya similar to those that Assad should have. They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record. Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion? Kind regards-David.

Along with this email, there is a huge cache of downloadable documents, including passports of the Ukrainian mercenaries whom it is presumed would be posing as the scapegoated Russians delivering the chemical weapons.

Lo and behold on January 15, the leftist magazine Foreign Policy comes out with an “exclusive” article on a secret cable showing that Assad used chemical weapons against his own people. According to the article:

An Obama administration official who reviewed the document, which was classified at the “secret” level, detailed its contents to The Cable. “We can’t definitely say 100 percent, but Syrian contacts made a compelling case that Agent 15 was used in Homs on Dec. 23,” the official said.

Exactly how Foreign Policy got access to a secret cable is unknown. What is known is that Barack Hussein Obama is probably gearing up to lead another invasion of an Arab country, leading to another Libya or another Egypt, where al-Qaeda-linked and Muslim Brotherhood Islamists take over the country.

But isn’t that what Barack Obama wants?

If Obama did in fact take part in the murder of the Libyan people with chemical weapons, impeachment would be just the beginning.

A global trial for war crimes would be in order.

America, however, would get first dibs on him. Then the world could do with him as they wished.

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Western Journalism

Compromise… Another Alinsky Tactic

By Joanne M. Saldiveri

alinskysmall Compromise... Another Alinsky Tactic

In a recent Fox News article, the President is suggesting yet again that the Republicans and Conservatives in the House will not “compromise”, this time on the gun control debate. But theoretically, you can insert any issue here.

You can read the full article here.

Compromise. This President and the Democrat Party throw this word around constantly in order to persuade the American people that they do try to meet their opposition in the middle, but those “conservatives” are the ones who will not budge.

What does “compromise” really mean to these people, though? I think we can look to Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals” for the answer to that. In fact, he has described it pretty clearly in his chapter, A Word About Words.

He writes:

Compromise is another word that carries shades of weakness, vacillation, betrayal of ideals, surrender of moral principles… But to the organizer, compromise is a key and beautiful word… If you start with nothing, demand 100 percent, then compromise for 30 percent, you are 30 percent ahead.

Could this be why our country is in the shape it is today? Have Republicans and Conservatives been “compromising for too long? I will argue yes. Our principles, our values, and our freedoms have been compromised away. Roe v. Wade, Immigration, Gun Rights, Debt, Education, National Security and Foreign Policy. You name it; Republicans have compromised.

He goes on to say…

Control of power is based on compromise in our Congress and among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. A society devoid of compromise is totalitarian. If I had to define a free and open society in one word, the word would be “compromise”.

Republicans and Conservatives alike cannot compromise on our principles anymore. They cannot compromise on our values, and they certainly cannot compromise with this President or his party any longer if we want to protect and preserve the founding principles of our country.  So the next time you hear the word “compromise”, please remember Saul Alinsky and his tactics. Compromise is not a good word for conservatives, as he has said so himself.

Source: FULL ARTICLE at Western Journalism

Is 2013 the New 1913?

By hnn

BEIJING — It’s a provocative idea — and a disturbing one. The world in 2013 looks “eerily” like the world in 1913, writes Charles Emmerson, a senior research fellow at Chatham House.

Substitute the United States for the United Kingdom, and China for Germany, and the parallels are fairly clear.

“The leading power of the age is in relative decline, beset by political crisis at home and by steadily eroding economic prowess,” Mr. Emmerson writes in “Eve of Disaster,” a piece in Foreign Policy magazine.

“Rising powers are jostling for position in the four corners of the world, some seeking a new place for themselves within the current global order, others questioning its very legitimacy. Democracy and despotism are locked in uneasy competition.

In his essay, Mr. Emmerson notes that “the United States in 2013 may not be a perfect analogue for Britain in 1913 (nor China in 2013 a perfect analogue for Germany in 1913).” But, he says, “The world of 1913 — brilliant, dynamic, interdependent — offers a warning.”…

Source:
NYT

Source URL:
http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/21/is-2013-the-new-1913/

Date:
1-21-13

Source: FULL ARTICLE at History News Network – George Mason University