You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘law’ category.
At least in terms of scale. Of course, in terms of widespread lack of character, it’s like all of the worse offenders in history, current and past.
Reuters: The United States Army’s finances are so jumbled it had to make trillions of dollars of improper accounting adjustments to create an illusion that its books are balanced.
The Defense Department’s Inspector General, in a June report, said the Army made $2.8 trillion in wrongful adjustments to accounting entries in one quarter alone in 2015, and $6.5 trillion for the year. Yet the Army lacked receipts and invoices to support those numbers or simply made them up.
As a result, the Army’s financial statements for 2015 were “materially misstated,” the report concluded. The “forced” adjustments rendered the statements useless because “DoD and Army managers could not rely on the data in their accounting systems when making management and resource decisions.”
And did you notice how this information was worded?
The United States Army’s finances are so jumbled…
Jumbled? The proper word is corrupt. To the core. And what would “materially misstated” really mean in ‘As a result, the Army’s financial statements for 2015 were “materially misstated,” the report concluded’? Perjury?
The abject failure that is this co-called democracy and its capitalist system.
Wikileaks had published two short CIA manuals for guidance on committing crimes of false identity intended for its operatives traveling through Europe.
In other words, below is a crime manual. And as I have been pointing out in recent posts, the US, France, and the UK are just organized mafias where people wear suits.
There is no rule of law – just the rule of power without oversight. Which means we live in democracies with no rule of law. How’s that for a system? As long as material wealth trickles down to certain sectors of society, people support it.
CIA Advice for Operatives Infiltrating Schengen
It’s always the innocent who are killed in these “terrorist” attacks that pay the price for the horrible wars and killings the French are doing abroad.
The French, stupid and corrupt as they are, are not focusing on killing less innocent people abroad, nor destroying less other countries, nor bringing to justice their grotesque military and politicians who enable these wars and horrors. No – they want to stop the “terrorist attacks” – which are a reaction to all the killing the French are doing to other innocent people abroad, notably in Africa and the Middle East.
Every time I hear one of these people who were there on the Promenade saying, “Oh my god, it was like a war zone, with bodies all over it, so horrible,” I feel like telling them, “See? That’s what the French, the Americans, and the British are doing to poor people in Africa and the ME every single week.”
You have to agree that a lone wolf attack like this – with something that is not a standard weapon – is a brilliant attack from a tactical perspective, because it is very easy to carry out (relatively speaking), it requires basically only one person, it’s incredibly cheap, it raises no suspicions if carried out in a minimally smart way (and this guy was really smart about how he went about it), and it causes a huge impact. The damage and the media attention is just berserk. I mean, he alone killed about as many people as the November attacks which were much, much more complicated. Lastly, this kind of attack, as some authorities already underscored, is basically impossible to prevent.
I was extremely impressed by an account of an “action guy” who died tried to get on the truck to stop the driver. From the little information that was given, the guy was on a motorcycle, and he cuts in front of the truck (?), then tries to grab onto the door near the driver, but the driver shoots at him, and he falls and dies overrun (?) by the truck. It was an eyewitness account and there wasn’t a lot of detail. But just with this little bit of information, I was just stunned at this guy’s capacity to just dive into action, like a scene from one of those action movies – except this was real life. Just incredible. Just amazing how someone could think about all this in a split second and just go into serious action, risking their life and all. I mean, just running out of the way of the truck is one thing, but this? Wow.
Updated on July 23: OK, so now the media has identified this guy (Franck) who told in more detail what happened. It’s still very amazing. His wife was with him on the motorcycle. His son was at the square the truck was heading to. He made a decision right then to try to save his son’s life even if he got killed in the process. He tells his wife to get off the motorcycle. He then nears the truck and ditches the motorcycle. He continues on foot, manages to jump and cling to the truck’s door with one arm and starts punching the driver with his free arm. He says the “terrorist” didn’t even flinch! Terrorist grabs his gun and points at his face but gun doesn’t fire. Finally terrorist hits guy on his head with the gun and the guy falls off. Another guy who was also on a bike (Alexandre Migues) tried to do something similar. And he obviously wasn’t shot in the head so we have to ask: did the terrorist actually have bullets? Or just a malfunctioning gun? However, the description of what took place from grainy footage in the news report describes things a bit differently.
What was the response from the Nazi French regarding this attack? They’ve just announced they are going to bomb more people in the Middle East. They are going to kill more innocent people – hence there will be more “terrorist” attacks.
We live in a world where there are big terrorist governments (e.g., the US, UK, and France) and small terrorist groups. The scale of horrors from the terrorist governments is much bigger than from the terrorist groups – although you’d never ever know this from Western media. And the so-called terrorist groups are often covertly funded by the terrorist governments in the West to fight their proxy wars. You have to say, it’s a horrible world.
I commented on the images in the media on my previous post about the attacks. I am just dumbfounded that we never see pictures of people dying and being blown up in the wars in African and the Middle East. They are being killed and killed and the Western media basically never show their bodies, their faces, their identities, they never interview the survivors, they never tell of their suffering…
You have to say, it’s very Nazi. It’s like the Jews just disappearing and disappearing and no one cared to know who they were.
Not a good time for the Olympics right now – not only because of the terrorism threat. This is not a new thought for me – I had already really felt disgusted at the Winter Olympics last time and at other games before that. This is how I saw the last Winter Olympics: mostly just a huge expensive party for privileged kids from rich countries who promote a way of life that is totally disconnected from the horrible reality of many people around the world, including that brought about by poverty, oppression, and wars which their governments are profoundly enmeshed in producing. I was often disgusted while watching the Games because of this context.
Added July 20:
“Nice est la ville la plus vidéosurveillée de France avec 1400 caméras visionnées par différents agents 24h/24 au CSU (Centre de supervision urbain). ”
So what do we find out now? Nice is the most camera-monitored city in France with 1,400 cameras! And yet the guy went ahead right under their noses. I saw an article describing the terrorist saying “he wasn’t very intelligent.” Maybe not, in the intellectual sense – but the guy outsmarted 60 million French idiots without much effort! The article above in francebleu also talks about the fact that France has two laws prohibiting these big trucks from circulating at certain times. And yet nobody told the truck not to circulate. Why not? Because the city needs to give out exceptions to trucks making deliveries, etc., to all the restaurants and bars, for example. You know the French can’t be deprived of drinking their wine and having their cheese while their military is murdering masses of innocent people in Africa and the ME.
So I see that we are full steam ahead in the post-attack “find the people to be blamed!” stage.
The police, the city council, the prefecture, Hollande and Valls, everyone is now the target of blame, criticism, and seething anger coming from everyone else in a big huffing and puffing circus.
The police has defended itself saying that while they have this enormous quantity of cameras, they can’t assign an agent simply to watch one little screen 24/7 – this would mean 1,400 agents just sitting there for each 8 hour shift, or 4,200 agents just sitting on their stupid French behinds for a round-the-clock coverage – not counting weekends, because you know the French don’t work on weekends. LOL! In other words, most of the their camera system is ineffective, not to say useless. Now what I’d be really curious about is just how many agents they currently employ to watch these 1,400.cameras. Like three? I would not be surprised.
The French president has also put a call out to French citizens to join their reservists. Oh, a militia! Here it is, folks. You’re watching it right before your eyes. The Milice française, or French Militia, is growing again.
What a disgusting world.
July 23, 2016:
Heh! New act in the Nice attack circus: the French government wants all video evidence of the attack destroyed. Unbelievable. Told ya – the French are corrupt to the core. I was surprised that the city of Nice stood firm and refused – but maybe they are afraid their heads will roll as scapegoats if the government has them destroy the footage – given all the compensation lawsuits that lie ahead.
Not only that, now my curiosity is extremely peaked at what that footage actually contains in this regard. I mean, it must be something quite damning about the police.
And I have found part of my answer: an interview with the policewoman (Sandra Bertin) that heads the police video surveillance center in Nice. She says that less than 24 hours after the attack, she was harassed by someone from the government to lie about the presence of French national police at the attack site – contrary to what appeared in the screens/videos she was watching at the time. She has refused to lie and she has told the media about it! Hah! And that’s one answer as to why the French government wanted to have them erase the security videos. They are going to be creamed with lawsuits – which are going to claim the government failed in its duty to provide the proper police security for such an event. The corrupt-to-the-core French are at it again! They lost this round however. Her full interview will be published tomorrow – it should make for an interesting reaction. 🙂
It’s simple. People, once conditioned to follow a system, have an incredibly difficult time in re-thinking the system, especially its premises.
Why did people in so many European cultures, decade after decade, generation after generation, century after century, think of no alternative to the autocratic, violent, and undemocratic systems they had? Why did no one think of an alternative system to the strong-man rule cemented by a notion of “royalty”?
Likewise, Americans are on display for being incapable of thinking of any alternatives to their sham of a system, including the most important lies they have developed and hang on to.
For example, one of my favorites is the lie that you can separate government from religion, that it is possible not to have a state-sponsored religion. Americans love this lie. They have hung on to it fiercely. Part of this lie is the notion that Americans concretely separated religion from government and were able to create a satisfactory society.
As I have been saying, one must understand that an ideological system, whether it includes a notion of god (or gods) is irrelevant. Therefore, liberal ideology and Protestantism are both ideological systems – since every religion is an ideological system. At the same time, all ideological systems function as a religion does. What’s the main difference? Liberalism merely does not include the notion of a god.
When liberals say they have a government that has set religion apart, it merely means they have increasingly instituted their godless religion as the state-sponsored and enforced ideology, i.e., the state-sponsored religion.
But, given the stupidity and hypocrisy of liberals, they will refuse to admit that all they are doing is playing with labels, pretending that their liberal ideological system doesn’t function the very same way as any state-enforced religion.
Why this hasn’t been particularly obvious to most Americans, especially the religious ones, I cannot understand. I find it so obvious. But I rarely hear religious folks mention the above. Everyone remains so hung up on the label “religion” that they don’t look at the dynamics of both political ideologies and religion – wisely forgetting the labels.
That’s why I was very happy to see one comment, lone as it was, on The American Conservative, from a conservative, who seems is getting closer to seeing the light:
Dommerdog says July 2, 2016 at 4:28 am:
I’m no lawyer, and I’m certainly no constitutional scholar; but it seems to me that this ruling and all the other laws requiring people who run businesses to violate their own religious principles in order to accommodate consumers runs dangerously close to state establishment of religion.
I’m a layman myself, but you don’t have to be a scholar to see what is taking place. People are not blind. The pagan sex cult of the rainbow has just finished wrapping up its holy month with parades, politicians in tow, celebrating genitals and orgasms. It is the civic religion, the very thing that the founding fathers sought to avoid. Consolidation will be incremental but inexorable, and once the first amendment has been nullified (as advocated by Harvard law professor Mark Tushnet) the established state religion of sex and power will seek to ruthlessly crush its rivals, as has been broadcast in the NY Times and elsewhere.
Indeed, the now dominant US liberals are saying, “Convert or be damned (and damned in this case means: suffer the state-enforced punishments for not following our liberal ideology-religion).”
As an aside, you also have to wonder about the American higher ed system. While it can be the world’s best in its most elite establishments, it fails completely to form a minimally intelligent populace. Or maybe this is because the percentage of people who finish college is dismal in the US (only 20%, and I speak from memory). And I don’t even know the percentage for those who go through grad school, obviously much tinier. And when I say “elite establishments”, I’m not speaking of fame (such as the myth of the superiority of Ivy League schools, or expensive private colleges), but of actual quality of teaching and learning.
And then, there is little a school can do if a person has firmly decided to cling on to a lie.
Which leads us to this other wonderful comment, also on TAC:
David Olm says:
July 2, 2016 at 12:46 pm
I think it was Jonathan Swift that said you cannot reason a man out of what he was not reasoned into in the first place, and that is what is scary about the society we are devolving into. You can demonstrate the patent nonsense of the left all day long (sexuality is as fluid as the ocean in transgenders but as fixed as Mt. Everest in homosexuals; the Bible actually condones homosexuality with the proper gnostic understanding of Hebrew and Greek translation) but it doesn’t matter with them at all. Because it is propaganda, not reason. And, as always, THE enemy of the Left is Christianity.
And since the enemy of Christians is big, bad Russia and Putin – which everybody knows is just like Stalin; totally exaggerated threats from terrorists and ISIS; “communists”; or whatever 1950’s Cold War notions the commanders of the Right manage to twist around to manipulate the populace’s fears with in 2016, you could say that the stupid Right deserves the stupid Left in America – if it all didn’t have horrifying consequences for the world.
I feel like I’m living in a sort of twilight zone this election year. Never have I felt this way. I keep asking myself, is it me or is the world? Why do these elections scream corruption, lawlessness, stupidity of the masses at its apex?
Then I depressingly think that it’s been that way for decades. That is the American system – it just seemed more normal before. The entire world seemed more normal before. Now I have this weird sense of living in a world where most people lie most of the time. They flood society with lies about history, about society, about themselves. I keep thinking that I had never realized before how much older generations lie to new ones. They continuously transmit their false view of the world. That’s how it happened in my family.
Now, the American system has become an atrocity before my eyes. The United States is just so grotesque – so evil, so murderous, so destructive – and so corrupt. It’s not just a few people – it’s the overwhelming majority who all go along with the military industrial complex – not to mention the ever growing percentage of people on their destructive liberal sexuality crusades (the porn, the homosexuality, the promiscuity – which brings the sexual violence, harassment, degradation, diseases, etc.).
And, everyone is saying they were not surprised by the fact that Hillary succeeded once again in being above the law – she’s too big even for the FBI.
I was surprised. It’s so in your face now. I alternate between a feeling of schadenfreude and dread of what she and people like her will still do to destroy the lives of so many innocent people around the world. That is exactly what Americans will continue to do, with their greed and their corrupt-to-the-core military industrial complex.
No wonder when she lost to Obama, she demanded to be Secretary of State. Just so she could fly around the world, meeting with the most corrupt characters out there, to sell them access to the US government, get the arms deals, seal the corrupt business deals – the bribes flowing through her mafiosi straw “foundation”. Only someone equally murderous could go up against the Clintons.
And more or less the only crowd around like that is at the CIA and Pentagon – and they don’t need to go up against Crooked Hillary because she works in tandem with their wars and mass murders, torture, and assassination.
By the way, I have thought for some time that someone has something on Obama – and that he is being controlled by them. It could be the Clintons. I saw a telling interview of him where he hinted at being controlled – for the wise observer. Or is it just plain old threats to his family? Somehow I don’t think he is what he is doing as the President. He never struck me as a center neo-con. And much less as a supporter of the Clintons, especially Hillary. Who knows who could be twisting his arm? Then again, I can’t completely rule out that he would be a political Bill Cosby, the world stinks so much, anything could be possible. But my gut feeling says no.
p.s. I’ve been watching Lionel Media on youtube – he’s a lot of fun. Nice commentary most of the time – unless he opens his mouth about homosexuality – he’s an ignorant liberal in that respect.
Michael Hudson is a Distinguished Research Professor of Economics at the University of Missouri, Kansas City. He is the author of The Bubble and Beyond and Finance Capitalism and its Discontents. His most recent book is titled Killing the Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Bondage Destroy the Global Economy.
Brief history of the corrupt worldwide tax evasion system instituted by the United States at Therealnews.com.
HUDSON: Well, Panama was basically carved off from Colombia in order to have a canal. And it was created very much like Liberia. Its not really a country in the sense that a country has its own currency, its own tax system. Panama uses U.S. dollars. So does Liberia. And the real story that didn’t come out in the Panama papers, which naturally focused just on criminal people laundering money, Panama wasn’t designed to launder money. It was designed to launder earnings. Mainly by the oil and the gas industries, and the mining industry.
And Panama and Liberia were long noted as having flags of convenience. That meant that oil tankers and mineral ships would register themselves under the corporate flags of Panama or Liberia, or some other country that used the U.S. dollar, not its own currency.
Well, I first found out about this about 40 years ago, when I was doing a study of the balance of payments for the oil industry. And I went to Standard Oil, whose treasurer met with me to walk me through their balance sheet. And I said, I cant figure out whether Standard Oil and the other oil companies make their money at the producing end of oil, or at the distributing end of refining and selling it. And he said, well, we make our earnings right here in New York, in the Treasurers office. I said, what do you mean? He said, we sell the oil that we buy from Saudi Arabia or the near East at very low prices to the tanker company thats registered in Panama or Liberia. And they don’t have an income tax in their country, because they’re not a real country. And we sell then the oil to the downstream distributors in the United States or Europe. We sell that crude oil at a very, very high price. So high that there’s no profit to be made at all in refineries or selling the oil. So we don’t pay the tax collector in Europe anything. We don’t pay the American government anything. All of our earnings are reported as being made in the tankers.
And I said, well, I’ve looked at the balance of payments reports here from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Bulletin. I see here’s Europe, here’s Latin America, here’s Africa and Asia. I can’t find where these profits are. And he said, ah, look at the very last line. And it’s international. And I said, international, aren’t all these countries, Europe, international? He said, no. International means they’re really part of the United States abroad. They’re the offshore banking centers. Panama, Liberia, etc. So I found out that basically Panama, Panamanian companies, were set up initially to register oil tankers and mineral ships in order to make the appearance of taking all of their profits on the transporting the oil, or the copper, or the minerals, from third world countries to the United States and Europe.
Interviewer: Michael, you have indicated in one of your articles that you were actually approached by a State Department operative in 1967. Tell us more about that experience.
HUDSON: Yeah. From a State Department person who’d gone to work for Chase. The problem that America had in the 1960s was the Vietnam war. The entire balance of payments deficit of the United States in the 1950s and the 60s, right down to the early 70s, was military spending abroad. And the problem was that the dollar was either going down or the United States had to sell gold, and that’s what led to Nixon finally taking the dollar off gold in 1971. Well, the United–it’s tried to fight against that. So the State Department came to Chase, and they said, we’ve got to figure out some way of getting enough dollars to balance the military deficit. And we found out the way to do it. We want to make the United States the new Switzerland of the world.
Michael, can you make a calculation of how much criminal capital there is in the world? How much do the drug dealers make, the criminals all over, the dictators. How much goes to Switzerland, and how can we get this criminal money in the United States?
Well, the end result was that the U.S. government went to Chase and other banks and asked them to be good American citizens, and make America safe for the criminals of the world to keep their money so that we would support the dollar.
And Chase had already, when Chase had been asked to have a bank in Saigon so that the Army and other people wouldn’t put their money in French banks that would end up with General de Gaulle cashing it in for gold, Chase said, okay, we will help set up banks. And other banks really did this not to evade the law, not to break the law initially, but to be good citizens and attract crooked capital from all over the world. Now, the same thing happened with the British West Indies. They had declared their independence, but in order not to be a real country, in order to attract flight capital to England, they rejoined the empire as a colony so that they could serve as money laundering. And the idea was to have all of this money come to the United States.
Well, all of this context can easily be traced. If you look at the money that goes into Panama and other offshore banking centers in the Caribbean, none of this money stays in Panama.
The inevitable and most plain fact about the Panama Papers leak is starting to be grasped by a few folks. Contrary to what the leak seems to confirm at first glance “it’s those horribly corrupt third world countries that are at their shenanigans again”, the fact is the richest countries in the world are the greatest offenders – since they were the ones who set up this corrupt financial and fiscal system in the first place.
Their legislators and politicians are the ones who crafted it, at the behest of the elites which they serve, often through various kinds of disguised bribes and political quid pro quos.
Their militaries are the ones who move in and murder and plot and bomb any time anyone in a developing country tries to elect into power someone with ethics who is intent on really fighting the destructive, corrupt, crony capitalism that is imposed by the sword on their suffering populations.
And so, among the greatest offenders of fiscal and financial corruption, who do we find? Why, surprise, surprise, the US and Europe (which has a particular nefarious member, the UK).
Thus RT’s article: Britain is the heart and soul of tax evasion by Dan Glazebrook.
The British government’s claim to be tackling tax evasion is about as credible as Al Capone claiming to be leading the fight against organized crime. In fact, Britain is at the heart of the global tax haven network, and continues to lead the fight against its regulation.
For whilst corruption exists in every country, what enables that corruption to flourish and become institutionalized is the network of secretive financial regimes that allow the world’s biggest criminals and fraudsters to escape taxation, regulation and oversight of their activities. And this network is a conscious creation of the British state.
Of the 215,000 companies identified in the Mossack Fonseca documents, over half were incorporated in the British Virgin Islands, one single territory in what tax haven expert Nicholas Shaxson calls a “spider’s web” of well over a dozen separate UK-controlled dens of financial chicanery.
In addition, the UK was ranked number two of those jurisdictions where the banks, law firms and other middlemen associated with the Panama Papers operate, only topped by Hong Kong, whose institutional environment is itself a creation of the UK. And of the ten banks who most frequently asked Mossack Fonseca to set up paper companies to hide their client’s finances, four were British: HSBC, Coutts, Rothschild and UBS.
HSBC, recently fined $1.9bn for laundering the money of Mexico’s most violent drug cartels, used the Panamanian firm to create 2,300 offshore companies, whilst Coutts – the family bank of the Windsors – set up just under 500.
That Britain should emerge as central to this scandal is no surprise. For as Nicholas Shaxson, a leading authority on tax havens put it when I interviewed him in 2011, “The City of London is effectively the grand-daddy of the global offshore system.” Whilst there are various different lists of tax havens in existence, depending on how exactly they are defined, on any one of them explains Shaxson, “you will see that about half of the tax havens on there, of the ones that matter, are in some way British or partly British.” Firstly, are “Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man: the crown dependencies. They’re very fundamentally controlled by Britain.” Then there are the Overseas Territories, such as the Caymans, Bermuda, and the Virgin Islands, in which “all the things that matter are effectively controlled by Great Britain.”
Of course, it suits the British government to portray all these territories as ‘autonomous’ or ‘self-governing’ in order to provide itself with plausible deniability about what they are doing. But the reality is they are run by a governor appointed by the Queen on the British government’s advice.
Obviously the British government, as well as American and European Union financial and fiscal authorities all know how this system works. They know it perfectly well because they were the ones who crafted it down to every detail:
Casey Gill, one of the earliest lawyers specializing in offshore operations explained how legislation was devised in the Caymans: tax experts and accountants would fly in from all over the world “and say ‘these are the loopholes in our system’. And Caymans legislation would be designed accordingly,” often by a conglomerate run by Gill, before being sent to the British Foreign Office for approval. Shaxson asked Gill if Britain, who had the power to veto such legislation, ever raised any objections. “No,” he said, “Not ever. Never.”
The entire UK-controlled web is home to offshore deposits estimated in 2009 to be worth $3.2 trillion, 55 percent of the global total: equivalent to roughly $500 for every man, woman and child on the planet.
Another point underscoring what a failure our so-called modern democracies are. A democratic system cannot work if both its people and its respective authorities are corrupt to the core, which is what we see in the US, the UK, and France, just to name three of the greatest offenders.
What we have is corruption run amok, backed by state or private repression, whenever necessary.
Not only that, this system, as Glazebrook explains so clearly, is the same old, same old colonialism of the past now disguised in a shameless fraudulent cover of independence.
This web emerged In the 1960s. Whilst ostensibly involved in a process of ‘decolonization’, in fact the UK hung on to a large global network of small, sparsely-populated islands: “The British empire”, Shaxson wrote, “had faked its own death.” These islands were to serve the same imperial purpose the empire had always had: the projection of British power and the channeling of African, Asian and Latin American wealth into Britain.
Nicholas Shaxson is a leading authority on tax havens, interviewed by Glazebrook. And:
In Shaxson’s words, the role of these tax havens is to “capture passing foreign business and channel it to London just as a spider’s web catches insects” whilst also acting as a “money laundering filter that lets the City get involved in dirty business while providing it with enough distance to maintain plausible deniability.”
When you see pictures of millions suffering starvation and misery, lack of health care and education in African and Latin America, this system provides a part of the key.
In 2008, Global Financial Integrity estimated that flows of illicit money out of developing countries into tax havens were running at about $1.25 trillion per year, roughly ten times the total value of aid given to developing countries by the rich world. Whilst those such as Cameron are more interested in handwringing about ‘corrupt African governments’ than in examining the system that enabled and promoted this corruption, tax havens are facilitating the plunder, by the London banks, of African wealth. And they are doing so because this is what they were designed to do – to continue the extortion of colonialism, just at the moment Britain was forced to give up the bulk of its formal empire.
Notice that UK and American MSM papers and news producers are not admitting any of this, and continue to spin the story in a way that serves to hide the big picture of Western plunder and corruption.
Let us hope, however, that with the Internet there is a bit of a chance for more people to understand that the root causes for global corruption lie in the West, those with the greatest power. Local corrupt governments in other parts of the world, while also guilty, are only dancing to their masters’ tune. Merely putting a few corrupt third world leaders in prison or carrying out assassinations, as the West is so fond of doing now and then, won’t change a thing in the overall scheme.
A lucid comment – in French – left regarding a presentation in France, by a lawyer called Damien Viguier, on the subject of the French government’s responsibility in the chaos in the Middle East. (Damien Viguier : « Chaos au Proche-Orient : les responsabilités du gouvernement français »). The clip from the presentation posted, although quite short, is quite good as well.
Conférence donnée samedi 19 mars 2016 au colloque de CIVITAS : « De la guerre au Proche-Orient à l’immigration et au terrorisme en Europe » (more clips from the conference here)
As Mr. Viguier underscores, the problem we have in the world today is that we have terrorist governments. I would add that the so-called terrorist groups like ISIS are like mosquitoes compared to the horror and the scale of crimes that terrorist governments are carrying out. Three of the most barbaric terrorist governments are the US, the UK, and France.
From a legal perspective, another of his points is very interesting – he says we must judge Laurent Fabius for murder, the murder of countless innocent people in the Middle East. (Fabius was France’s Minister of Foreign Affairs until recently). And we must avoid trying to frame the crimes of France in these wars as “war crimes”. He advocates trying them within the standard legal and internal apparatus of each country, in this case, France.
To which, a commenter added this little manual:
Petit manuel de déstabilisation d’un régime hostile
1°) Être une puissance impériale
2°) Financer tout mouvement d’opposition, aussi minuscule soit-il, revendiquant une démocratie à l’occidentale.
3°) Repérer les futurs possibles leaders et organiser des stages de formation à l’agitation à leur intention
4°) Donner un retentissement international à toute manifestation de l’opposition grâce aux médiats aux ordres.
5°) Mettre en exergue la répression brutale que ne manquera pas de commettre le régime en place.
6°) Placer quelques snipers sur les parcours des manifestants, et tirer à la fois sur la foule et les forces de l’ordre en place.
7°) Dénoncer la barbarie de la répression.
8°) Armer clandestinement des groupuscules étrangers extrémistes animés par une idéologie suicidaire, les appeler rebelles et combattants de la liberté.
9°) Présenter ces groupuscules comme un mouvement populaire.
10°) Organiser aux frontières du pays des bases d’entrainement à la guérilla qui seront présentées comme des camps de réfugiés.
11°) Organiser le blocus de toute voix dissidente par une censure de fait.
12°) Organiser des coordinations d’opposants dans une capitale étrangère, et n’accepter que les informations provenant de cette source.
13°) Bombarder, si le contexte international le permet, l’armée régulière, tout en affirmant qu’il s’agit de protéger la population de la répression du dictateur qui menaçait de massacrer son peuple.
Logiquement, le pouvoir en place tombe à plus ou moins court terme, le chaos s’installe pour de longues années, vous avez atteint votre objectif : vous n’avez plus de pouvoir fort face à vous, vous pouvez piller sans vergogne les richesses du pays, il vous suffira d’entretenir les conflits internes (ethniques, religieux…) en organisant un attentat suicide de temps en temps. Toute couverture médiatique est maintenant superflue.
Toute ressemblance avec une quelconque situation actuelle est évidemment fortuite.
La première victime d’une guerre, c’est la vérité.
Read more at http://www.medias-presse.info/damien-viguier-chaos-au-proche-orient-les-responsabilites-du-gouvernement-francais/51479#KDryuwvycpr9UMkw.99
Look at this case (Gay parents fight for custody with surrogate in Thailand – – The Telegraph UK). Not only at the case, but also how it’s framed by Western media.
It’s about two grotesque homosexual pigs who wanted to use a Thai woman as a mule for carrying a baby that they were then going to take away from the mother at the end – that is, surrogacy:
“The gay couple went to court today in a high-profile custody battle in Thailand with a surrogate mother who is trying to keep the child after discovering their sexual orientation.
Gordan Lake, an American and Manuel Valero, his Spanish husband – both 41 – have been unable to leave the country with Carmen, the baby girl, for over a year because the surrogate has refused to sign the documents that allow the infant to obtain a passport.”
She claims she was never told the baby was to be given to two homosexual pigs. Quite possible if you ask me. What’s my position on surrogacy? There may be some very unusual case of surrogacy where I may even consider it perhaps acceptable. But anything involving homosexual pigs is not it.
So, without more info, here’s my guess. Since all of this surrogacy business is about money, I can well imagine the “agency” lied to the Thai woman (or never told her, which amounts to the same) about who the baby was for.
Then that mother, who does not have the mind of a pig, discovers to her horror that her beautiful baby girl is to be given to two deformed and perverted men, who hate having a healthy relationship with a woman, and who would deprive the girl of her real mother and of a step-mother as well.
The Telegraph then reports that the Thai mother gave birth, but now thinking of the well-being and the human rights of the baby, refused to sign off the baby.
So the homosexual pigs stole the baby from the surrogate mother and went into “hiding” – whatever that means. An underground Thai network of baby smugglers?
The couple has been living in hiding with Carmen and Alvaro, their two-year-old surrogate child for 14 months fearing the baby will be taken from them.
They criminally stole the baby from its real mother. Who did not want to part with the baby. But the case is even more complicated, because this Thai woman just carried the baby, since the egg for the baby came from an anonymous woman!
All because these turds of homosexuals refuse to go deal with their profoundly deformed psychologies and treat their sexuality problems.
But there’s more:
The case is complicated by the fact that Thai law does not recognise same-sex marriages and also by a new law that bans commercial surrogacy, which took effect after baby Carmen’s birth.
Thailand had been a popular destination for foreign couples seeking surrogacy services, partly because of loose regulations and low costs compared with some other countries.
In other words, as other people have remarked, the rich West has now gone beyond treating third world people like dogs merely for cheap labor, they must now colonize the wombs of these unfortunate women, and make them into mules for carrying the babies that they are too perverted to conceive through a healthy man-woman relationship.
Lastly, look at the framing by the wealthy Western media – who’s portrayed as the victim? The two privileged homosexual pigs.
The paper reports Gordan Lake alleges they never lied to the surrogate mother. Lake said:
…he and his husband were always the “intended parents”.
“We’re the people that wanted to have a child,” he said. “We just want to go home and we just want to be a family. A normal boring family.”
Well, we have news for the homosexual pig. A normal, boring family doesn’t use poor women in Thailand as mules to carry their fabricated babies. A normal, boring family doesn’t rip off a baby girl from the woman who carried her. It doesn’t engage in criminal activity in a third world country to steal babies.
And look at the argument they are presenting:
The couple’s lawyer, Rachapol Sirikulchit, said he was confident they will be awarded custody and take the baby with them to Spain, where they live.
“Baby Carmen has the right to be with her biological father, who supports her financially and has cared for her since she was born,” Mr Sirikulchit said. “The priority is to consider the benefit for children and that they have the right to live with their biological parent.”
In other words, money. Come buy children from the wombs of poor women and take them away to do whatever your perverted mind decides.
I hope the Thai government will not be bought by these two gay turds. Alas, as we all know, money does speak loudly in a poor country. And women and children have no fundamental human rights if there’s a gay or lesbian pig wailing about something they want. In Western liberalism, is there a right for a baby girl to have a mother? Never if homosexual pigs are involved. All that matters is that she be given things (money), which the two homosexual pigs have.
A new chapter of how nasty neo-colonization is: now at the level of a poor woman’s womb.