Neo-Cons Hypocritically Leverage "Human Rights" Against China

Propaganda accommodated to "the comprehension of the least intelligent."
an editorial by Tony Cartalucci

May 1, 2012 - A man who has championed every war America has fought in recent history, as well as desperately pleading to start a wide array of wars yet fought, including against Syria and Iran, and who has played a part in devising and supporting military campaigns that have cost millions of lives, millions more maimed, displaced or otherwise affected, would be the last person one would expect to peddle "human rights." And especially, one would not suspect such a man to make the bold claim that the United States, whose enforced sanctions against Iraq alone killed over a million women and children through starvation, is the "the greatest champion of human rights in the world."

Yet that is exactly what Max Boot, a Council on Foreign Relations member, as well as a contributor to a myriad of Neo-Conservative, pro-war corporate-financier funded think-tanks, has done.

Image: Congressman Christopher Smith poses with Reggie Littlejohn of the Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting (CUSIB), donning sunglasses in "solidarity" with the "blind activist" Chen Guangcheng. CUSIB is entwined with US government, corporate-financier-backed propaganda including Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Asia (RFA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Radio and TV Marti, Radio Sawa, Alhurra TV - all US taxpayer funded and overseen by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) chaired by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. 

It illustrates once again the unified agenda of both Neo-Cons like Max Boot and "liberals" like Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration. It also represents but one bizarre facet of an unfolding charade the US is attempting to use against China ahead of talks aimed at exacting concessions on everything from economic policy to yielding to the West over Syria. 

Max Boot makes his astounding comments regarding the recent row between the United States, their long-cultivated "activist," Chen Guangcheng (also known as the "blind activist"), and the government of China whom the United States is preparing to meet with for talks. Clearly Max Boot represents a cadre of individuals who have been in reality the greatest violators of human rights in the world, and thus, his column in "Commentary" titled, "Standing Up for Human Rights in China," is an astounding and transparent example of the exploitation of otherwise noble principles.

Boot of course never mentions the fact that Chen has been built up over the years through a US State Department marketing campaign involving their National Endowment for Democracy (NED) front and various Chinese "NGOs" directly funded by and reporting to NED. These include ChinaAid and China Digital Times who were admitted as NED grantees in NED's own publication, "Democracy Digest."

It should be mentioned that NED's board of directors, like Boot, are card-carrying Neo-Conservatives, pro-war, and represent some of the largest corporate-financier interests on Earth - whose policies and actions directly contradict NED's alleged mission of "supporting freedom around the world."  

Boot also fails to mention the fact that China's "forced sterilization and abortion policies" are funded and supported, even whitewashed by the UN Population Fund - which is itself directly funded by the US. The UN also coincidentally served as a vehicle for Boot and his colleagues' crimes against humanity, most recently in Libya. China's policies were also designed, pioneered, and carried out globally by predominantly American and British eugenicists - including the Carnegie Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and even USAID who was caught forcibly sterilizing hundreds of thousands of Peruvian women in the late 1990's. It was in fact the Anglo-Americans who laid the ground work, and even literally the German programs that Hilter's genocidal eugenics cult rose from.

So then one is left asking whether Boot's column is satire or if he truly believes his readership is so poorly informed, so intellectually stunted, and so emotionally compromised that they will believe his rhetoric at face value. Or perhaps Boot's column is simply a template for the compromised corporate media to copy and paste from, as we see Reuters already doing here - echoing Boot's talking point a day later, regarding Chen's humiliating China's internal security apparatus. 

Indeed, a long-cultivated US State Department asset making a "miraculous escape" on the eve of a high profile meeting between US and Chinese representatives, after China has repeatedly blocked US ambitions to ravage Syria - a war Boot is an ecstatic proponent of  - is yet another example of how the West's most ghoulish mechanization are propelled with facades constructed of the most noble intentions for the expressed purpose of putting pressure on those resisting them. Undoubtedly the corporate-media will spread to the four corners of the globe Boot's talking points, preying on anyone unwilling to spend the five minutes it takes to look behind the curtain and see what is truly at work.

US Using Staged "Blind Activist" Stunt For Leverage Ahead of Talks

Reuters Cites US-Funded Front in Chinese "Blind Activist" Case.  
 by Tony Cartalucci 

April 30, 2012 - Reuters has recently reported in their article, "U.S. eyes testy China talks, Chen backer expects Chinese decision," that "religious and political rights advocacy group ChinaAid is the chief source of information about Chen," referring to Chen Guangcheng, the "blind activist" who has allegedly escaped from house arrest recently and who "activists" claim is being harbored by the United States in their embassy in Beijing

Image: ChinaAid is funded by the US State Department through its National Endowment for Democracy front, and has become the primary source regarding the "blind activist" case - providing yet another example of how compromised Western media and its sources are. 

While Reuters alludes to the fact that ChinaAid is "US-based," it fails to mention that it is in fact funded by the US State Department through its National Endowment for Democracy (NED) front. Democracy Digest, NED's own publication reported in 2011 in their article titled, "‘Extraordinary’ campaign for barefoot lawyer Chen Guangcheng," that: 

 "Chen Guangcheng was a recipient in absentia of the National Endowment for Democracy‘s 2008 Democracy Award. ChinaAid and China Digitial Times are NED grantees."

Both ChinaAid and China Digital Times have been leading the propaganda efforts to grow attention and interest around the Chen Guangcheng "blind activist" case for years and is part of the West's grander strategy of undermining the Chinese government by disingenuously leveraging "human rights" issues, even as they serially violate, and support the violation of, human rights around the world, most recently in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Iran, and Syria. 

Image: A visual representation of the National Endowment for Democracy's corporate-financier ties found across their Board of Directors. Far from "human rights advocates," they are instead simply leveraging such issues to disguise what is in reality corporate-financier hegemonic expansion.

In addition to a general strategy of encircling, containing, and undermining China, this most recent high profile stunt is meant to give the US an advantage ahead of upcoming talks, mentioned in the above Reuters article. China along with Russia has been blocking Western efforts to use the UN as a vehicle to legitimize a war of aggression against Syria and to further isolate Iran. China's economic policies have also been a source of contention for the West's ruling banking oligarchs.

It must also be remembered that US policy toward China must be considered within the context of the US State Department's declared "America's Pacific Century" policy, where Secretary of State Hillary Clinton openly announced ambitions to reassert American hegemony across Asia and lining up a coalition of Southeast Asian nations against China.

Foreign-backed Protest Rocks Malaysia

Bersih 3.0: Politicizing the Apolitical in Malaysia

Nile Bowie
April 29, 2012 

Protests rocked the streets of the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur on Saturday, April 28, as an estimated 25,000 people took to the streets in support of Bersih [1], an organization fighting to reform the nation’s electoral system. The organization refers to itself as ‘The Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections’, comprised of 84 Malaysian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that form a ‘coalition of like minded civil society organizations unaffiliated to any political party’ [2]. The recent rally follows two previous mass demonstrations in November 2007 and July 2011, as organizers renew their demands for the Malaysian Election Commission to resign before the 13th General Elections scheduled for June 2012 [3]. Although the coalition claims to be devoid of political affiliation, the movement is fully endorsed by Malaysia’s main opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim and the Pakatan Rakyat political coalition he oversees.

Following documented cases of United States-based organizations funding pro-opposition civil society groups associated with civil unrest in Russia [4] and the Middle East [5], Chairperson Ambiga Sreenevasan acknowledged that the Bersih coalition received financial support from the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and George Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI) [6]. An article published in the New York Times entitled "U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings" reveals organizations such as the National Democratic Institute receive funding from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a recipient of funds directly from the US Congress [7]. The Bersih Coalition has also received support from the US-based Freedom House [8], an NGO that receives direct funding from the US State Department [9]. While concern over electoral corruption and the various legitimate grievances of Bersih supporters may be entirely justified, the coalition’s association with opposition Political parties and groups financed by the United States government suggests subversion.

Malaysia’s former Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohammed has warned that the ruling Barisan Nasional party is targeted for regime change due to its stance on Israel and criticism of US policy, while condemning Anwar Ibrahim for his close ties to Paul Wolfowitz and other adherents of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) [10]. Furthermore, Mahathir has accused the United States of using currency manipulation and US-funded NGOs to orchestrate the kind of destabilization needed to install a compliant proxy government [11]. Dr. William Robinson explains the subversive methods of conducting regime change through “democracy promotion” in his book, ‘Promoting Polyarhcy,’ “In Latin America, in Eastern Europe with the Velvet Revolutions, in Africa, in the Middle East, really all over the world, the U.S. set up these different mechanisms now for penetrating these civil societies in the political systems of countries that are going to be intervened and to assure the outcome is going to be pleasing to Washington's foreign policy objectives” [12].

Continue reading Nile Bowie's report and view his firsthand photography of the weekend protest on his blog,

Wall Street Fills Malaysian Streets With Unrest

"Bersih" movement run by Soros-funded frauds seek to restore IMF functionary Anwar Ibrahim to power.
by Tony Cartalucci

April 29, 2012 - In a repeat of last summer's protests, yellow-shirted mobs calling themselves "Bersih" have taken once again to the streets in Malaysia demanding "clean elections." Their tactics and demands mirror similar movements that have come out into the streets in Russia and across the Middle East, and just like in Russia and across the Middle East, they are entirely funded, directed by, and working for the interests of Wall Street and London.

Bersih's rank and file are responding to legitimate concerns regarding inequities that exist across Malaysia's diverse population. Ethnic Malaysians are perceived to be receiving more benefits and upward social mobility than Malaysia's large groups of ethnic minorities. Likewise it is perceived that Malaysia's ruling government has an unfair advantage come election time. However, the movement's demands and tactics seek simply to destabilize Malaysia politically and return known Western collaborators, and in particular Wall Street proxy and International Monetary Fund (IMF) functionary Anwar Ibrahim, back into power.

Video/Image: NED and Soros organized mobs clamor around Malaysia's embassy in Bangkok, Thailand - with SEAPA executive director Gayathry Venkiteswaran explaining to a crowd why Western proxy Anwar Ibrahim and his opposition's involvement in Bersih should not be condemned and for Bersih supporters to vigorously deny that the movement is "opposition run." SEAPA is funded by convicted criminal George Soros, and the US State Department's warmongering, corporate financier-lined National Endowment for Democracy and Freedom House. Both within Malaysia and beyond, the Bersih mobs are demonstratively led by Western proxies insidiously manipulating impressionable, youthful crowds.

To understand why, it helps to understand just who is financially and politically supporting Bersih's leadership in the first place. The Malaysian Insider reported on June 27, 2011 that Bersih leader Ambiga Sreenevassan "admitted to Bersih receiving some money from two US organisations — the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and Open Society Institute (OSI) — for other projects, which she stressed were unrelated to the July 9 [2011] march."

A visit to the NDI website revealed indeed that funding and training had been provided by the US organization - before NDI took down the information and replaced it with a more benign version purged entirely of any mention of Bersih. For funding Ambiga claims is innocuous, the NDI's rushed obfuscation of any ties to her organization suggests something more sinister at play.

Image: NDI's website in 2011 before taking down any mention to Malaysia's Bersih movement. (click image to enlarge)

Bersih is indisputably serving as a political vehicle for Anwar Ibrahim and Malaysia's opposition front "Pakatan Rakyat," to return to power. That Anwar Ibrahim himself was Chairman of the Development Committee of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) in 1998, held lecturing positions at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, was a consultant to the World Bank, and a panelist at the Neo-Con lined National Endowment for Democracy's "Democracy Award" and a panelist at a NED donation ceremony - the very same US organization whose subsidiaries are funding and supporting Bersih - casts irrefutable doubt on their official agenda for "clean and fair elections." Claims by Bersih members that Anwar Ibrahim is "hijacking" their movement ring especially hollow when looking at both his and Bersih's entwined foreign financial and political backers.

Image: Taken from the US National Endowment for Democracy's 2007 Democracy Award event held in Washington D.C., Anwar Ibrahim can be seen to the far left and participated as a "panelist." It is no surprise that NED is now subsidizing his bid to worm his way back into power in Malaysia. (click image to enlarge)

Unlike during their 2011 protests, Bersih is now taking to the streets with the full knowledge of what "pro-democracy" protests have yielded in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, and Syria - chaos, destabilization, violence, and the inevitable installation of overt client regimes bent in service to Wall Street and London. They are now openly the recipients of convicted criminal George Soros' Open Society Institute, which is quickly losing its luster as its vast global ties are exposed by an ever-expanding alternative media. 

In Tunsia we see the rise of one of Anwar Ibrahim's National Endowment for Democracy contemporaries, Moncef Marzouki who was declared "president" after US-backed mobs took to Tunisia's streets in early 2011 and overthrew the government there. Since Marzouki's installation into power, he has promptly backed Western policy in regards to Libya and now Syria, most recently severing ties with Damascus to help bolster the West's campaign of isolating and eventually topping Syria's government. 

Moncef Marzouki

Photo: Tunisia's new "president," Moncef Marzouki, a veteran Western collaborator whose last two decades of political activity, much like Anwar Ibrahim of Malaysia, have been supported and subsidized by the US government and US corporate-financier funded foundations.


In Libya, promises of a democratic utopia have been lost amidst perpetual infighting, genocidal death squads roving the country committing widespread atrocities, entire regions of Libya peeling away from the government based in Tripoli, which itself is nothing more than a Western client regime. Led by long-time US resident Abdurrahim el-Keib, formally of the Petroleum Institute, sponsored by British Petroleum (BP), Shell, France's Total, the Japan Oil Development Company, and the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, it has done nothing to restore order or to preserve Libya's territorial integrity, and has instead spent its time brokering deals to sell Libya's once nationalized resources to foreign contractors. 

Images: Screenshots from the Petroleum Institute's "Partners and Sponsors" page, as well as el-Keib's profile page (inset). Western-backed unrest in Libya has not yielded a democratic utopia as promised, but rather a ravaged nation now run by el-Keib, a long-time Western collaborator whose only activities have been selling out his nation's natural resources and supporting the West's wars of aggression worldwide.  (click image to enlarge)

Clearly it is not "democracy" that the US through its National Endowment for Democracy and criminal Wall Street speculator George Soros' Open Society are spreading - but rather corporate-financier hegemony by destabilizing nationalist regimes and replacing them with client proxies. The recent wave of "pro-democracy" uprisings worldwide are a carefully orchestrated geopolitical gambit - neo-imperialism through 4th generation warfare

That the leaders of Bersih are demonstratively recipients of both the US State Department's National Endowment for Democracy and Soros' Open Society, and with opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim being a functionary of the IMF, it is certain that no matter how genuine Bershi's rank and file may be, the fruits of their efforts will be the destabilization and neo-recolonization of of their nation - a nation that has fought long and hard to work its way out from under Western imperialism in the past.

How to End the Healthcare Debate - Forever

Rationing and policy didn't give us the healthcare we have today, it will not provide us proper healthcare tomorrow. 
an editorial by Tony Cartalucci 

April 28, 2012 - In the modern political arena, we are provided a myriad of false choices from which to choose, while our supposedly elected representatives skillfully and purposefully obfuscate and maneuver around real, permanent solutions. This is because the vast majority of the power and influence today's ruling elite enjoy across the Western world is derived precisely because of perpetual, seemingly unsolvable problems. In many cases, these "problems" are manufactured by the very people proposing solutions to solve them. 

The fraudulent "War on Terror" is one such manufactured problem, perpetually both fueled and fought by the monied elite to keep their rackets, and the power, wealth, and influence derived from them going perpetually. The healthcare debate is another problem capable of being permanently solved, but allowed to purposefully drag on to maintain an entire industry built upon exploiting the desperation of the sick and injured.

An otherwise unsavory politician, US Representative Mike Rogers of Michigan, who has introduced the Hitlerian CISPA bill and himself entirely disingenuous about solving the healthcare problem, did manage to accurately diagnose both the problem and the real solution facing America and how it treats its sick and injured. Rogers correctly states that the solution is innovation, private enterprise, and individuals. However, when Rogers says this, he means the very multinationals that drafted "Obamacare" in the first place and is simply peppering the false left-right paradigm to make it more palatable for an increasingly astute public.

Innovation to Increase Supply Beyond Demand

The basic principle behind supply and demand is that the more readily available any given good or service is, the lower the price to purchase it. There are different strategies that can be used to lower the price, but essentially it requires making a good or service cheaper to produce or perform and increasing its supply versus a particular level of demand.

In the case of meat, early human beings were subject to the natural populations of game animals. Like many other species, establishing and defending territory to hunt and gather in was a matter of life and death. Should a local human population's demand increase beyond the natural population of game animals, people would either starve or be forced to expand their territory, risking conflict with neighboring tribes or large predators. The game changer was technology, and in this particular case, agriculture. Now more food could be produced in the same amount of territory, so much so that many members of the tribe could occupy themselves with activities other than hunting and gathering - there was a surplus.

Agriculture, however, is dependent on weather and climate, and in response to these variables, additional methods and technologies have been devised, including irrigation and greenhouses. Today, under normal circumstances, human beings fighting over food is unheard of - our mastery of agriculture has produced vast surpluses. People starve today because of greed, conflict, financial manipulation, and archaic distribution models - not an inability to produce enough food.

Access to information has perhaps exceeded even our ancient mastery of agriculture, and approaches what is known as "post-scarcity" or in other words it has become so abundant and easily accessible that it not only costs nothing to obtain, but the more in-demand it is, the easier it is to come by. It is predicted that computer-controlled manufacturing methods and sub-atomic material science will eventually translate this "information post-scarcity" to the physical world where digital bits are replaced by atoms.

So how then does this apply to healthcare and how exactly does it end the healthcare debate "forever?"


The solution, in the context of supply and demand, is very simple. Increase the number of people involved in both providing healthcare services as well as designing, developing, and manufacturing biomedical technology. America's sabotaged education system would be the first place to start. Healthcare is currently expensive because of a limited number of qualified students that can study medicine, fewer who can afford to study it, and similar exclusivity in regards to enterprises developing modern medical technology.

Raising the overall competence of students increases the number of potential eligible medical students. This demand forces medical schools to expand their capacity and perhaps even developing new curriculum to allow such expansion to move vertically as well as horizontally. Smaller medical colleges and schools could be set up beyond main campuses, and as the pool of qualified medical practitioners and instructors increases, the price required for their services would drop - along with tuition.

Video: Dr. Jack Choi's virtual dissection table is just one example of how technology makes it possible to teach the demanding study of medicine to a larger number of students when previous restrictions on resources would have made it impossible.

Additionally the curriculum itself must be continuously updated, covering not only the latest developments in medical research, but leveraging the latest developments in technology to effectively teach more students, faster and more efficiently. One example of this comes to us from a recent TED Talk featuring Dr. Jack Choi of Anatomage and his virtual dissection table - giving medical students without access to actual human bodies the chance to simulate real autopsies. Before the advent of such technology, medical students would either do without this valuable learning experience, thus restricting their education and preparedness when entering a practice.

Leveraging the ever-expanding library of university-level lectures available through "Open Course Ware" could be another way to disseminate the knowledge of the world's best instructors to a greater number of willing students - even if only as a supplement to their regular studies. Already universities like MIT and Berkley provide an immense amount of lectures for free on both their own websites and on YouTube for anyone in the world to use.


When one walks into a modern intensive care unit, they will most likely notice a variety of advanced biomedical technology monitoring vital signs, administering medication, and assisting doctors and nurses in a large variety of tasks. This equipment is incredibly expensive, and is so precisely because only a handful of companies have a competent research and development team to develop this equipment and a qualified workforce to manufacture it.

Again, increasing the number of people qualified in the fields of design, development, and manufacturing, in any capacity will inevitably expand the number of entrepreneurs involved in biomedical technology, expanding supply and reducing costs. Again this leads us back to improving education to produce the human resources needed.

However, there is another factor that is incredibly important - and that is raising public awareness to just how far we've come and what the possibilities are that await us in the near future. Every great scientist, engineer, explorer, or doctor can cite who or what inspired them to take up their chosen trade. Inspiring people to become researchers, designers, doctors, and scientists is just as important as being able to train them to reach their full potential.

Additionally, being fully informed as to what the current state of medical research is, allows us to make more informed decisions regarding public funding and policy. Raising awareness for cutting edge research also builds enthusiasm throughout both the pubic, their representatives in government, and across industry, making available more support and funds for areas of interest we can all agree upon as being beneficial for society.

Bio-printing at Wake Forest

Imagine instead of spending the rest of your life on medication to correct imbalances caused by faulty, failing, or injured organs and instead having a replacement grown, even "printed" for you in the matter of weeks? Applied "regenerative medicine" was once solely in the realm of science fiction, but is now science reality, thanks to researchers at Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine (WFIRM).  

Clinical trials have already been performed where tissue samples have been taken from patients, replacement tissue and organs cultivated in WFIRM's laboratory, and then implanted back into the patient. Revolutionary research and development like this could be multiplied exponentially with a properly informed population, properly educated youth, and a larger pool of both medical practitioners and biomedical technology developers.

Gene-Therapy at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital

Imagine going to the doctor with a condition, and instead of leaving with a prescription medication to take (and pay for) for the rest of your life, you walked out with a permanent treatment derived from simply correcting your problem on a genetic level. For patients suffering from hemophilia B, a disorder where blood does not properly clot during bleeding, this is now becoming a reality.

At St. Jude's Children's Research Hospital in Memphis Tennessee a treatment involving the modification of a patient's DNA through gene therapy has yielded unexpectedly positive results, opening the door not only for the permanent treatment for hemophilia B, but hemophilia A - a more common variant - as well as other more complex conditions in the future.

Combined with bio-printing, gene therapy stands to turn the concept of medical treatment on its head, excising from the pharmaceutical giants a massive proportion of their profits and subsequently their grip on government through their immense lobbying efforts. Such lobbying efforts, however might explain why more people are aware of, and even on the toxic cocktails they produce, and clueless about the revolutionary work taking place at St. Jude's Children's Research Hospital.  

DNA Sequencing and Printing at the J. Craig Venter Institute  

What if you could have your DNA sequenced in the morning, repaired and reintroduced into your body by evening? The steps necessary for such a future are being taken first at the J. Craig Venter Institute. Dr. Craig Venter pioneered methods of sequencing DNA and was first to map the human genome. Since then, his institute has created the first "synthetic lifeform," engineered on the genetic level and "printed" with a machine that combines the basic chemicals found in DNA, then swapping out the genes of an existing species of bacteria with Venter's own creation.

Eventually it may be possible to combine the work of Venter with that of both St. Jude's and Wake Forest to treat nearly every conceivable condition, from injuries and failing organs, to genetic conditions like hemophilia, and even aging. Yet the work of scientists like Venter suffers from underfunding and under exposure, narrowing the choices they have of who to turn to for funding and being faced with the prospect of either ending their research or compromising their goals and ethics for the sake of a profiteering corporation. This is why it is essential to raise awareness of this revolutionary work so that it ends up cultivated by those who seek to serve humanity rather than exploited by those who seek to dominate it.


Already around the world people old and young alike come together to share a passion for designing, tinkering, building, and modifying. Similar to MIT professor Neil Gershenfeld's "Fabrication Laboratories" (Fab Labs), these groups not only serve as a community resource for solving problems on a local level, but have served as the launching pad for aspiring entrepreneurs. New York City's "Resistor" collective has produced not only a company that makes and sells 3D printers called "MakerBots," but many of its members are involved in the "Make Magazine" publication and videos.

These groups as well as individuals constitute an expanding "maker culture" and are tackling problems with innovation and ingenuity across the spectrum from the mundane and comical, to the incredibly practical and even revolutionary. Medical technology, especially in non-critical areas, has also benefited from this Do-It-Yourself culture.

Renowned in maker circles is "Hack-a-Day," featuring projects from around the world, including an entire category titled, "Medical Hacks." One project titled, "CheapStat: An Open-Source Potentiostat," features an open-source version of a device used to analyze the chemical composition of substances at a fraction of the cost of a commercial unit. Other devices measuring pulse, or automating medication dispensers also demonstrate the possibilities of a bottom-up model of research and development of medical technology that will overall reduce its cost while increasing accessibility for more people.

As manufacturing technology becomes smaller, cheaper, and easier to use, hobbyists and professionals alike will be able to implement their ideas quicker and more efficiently, and through the use of information technology, collaborate and disseminate their work at a greater pace. 


This "do-it-yourself" mentality used to be a hallmark of American society, and coincidentally produced a culture with a "can-do" attitude. It is not only possible for America to solve its problems today with such a mentality, but an absolute necessity. The nanny-state run by faux-governance controlled by corporate-financiers demonstratively doesn't work.  

When we understand the true problem facing us in terms of providing quality, affordable healthcare to an entire population, that it ultimately hinges on supply and demand, and that education, technology, and innovation are the only ways to truly resolve this problem, the debate over healthcare ends. By no means should any nation simply pull the plug on benefit plans people depend on no matter how ill-conceived they are, or how inadequate the care they provide may be. However, we must look at subsidized programs as a temporary stop-gap while we pursue permanent, pragmatic solutions seeking to solve permanently problems the government and the corporations that they truly represent seek to perpetuate indefinitely.

Instead of figuring out the best way to funnel public funds into the pockets of Bayer, Gilead, Pfzier, Roche, and GlaxoSmithKline to treat the symptoms of diseases ad infinitum, bankrupting ourselves and our nation while these gargantuan multinationals get larger yet, we should be investing in education, research and development, and dedicating our time to studying design, innovation, and technology to prevent diseases where possible and cure diseases permanently when prevention isn't enough.

A single individual's contributions to either tackling these problems head-on, or simply raising awareness of these issues and ideas to generate the support innovators and pioneers need to continue doing their work honestly, openly, and for the benefit of mankind may seem negligible, but our collective efforts can eclipse even that of the largest multinationals by many factors.

The state of the society we live in, including the quality and future of our healthcare, is determined daily by how we collectively choose to spend our time, money, attention, and energy. Spend it wisely and we will achieve true progress. Spend it poorly and we will continue to be mired in this circular futile healthcare debate, where we are promised the sky, receive nothing, all while large pharmaceutical and insurance companies prosper. 

Demand from your elected representatives that for every nanny-state solution they propose, they develop two more to improve education, research and development to produce permanent, pragmatic solutions. Ensure that they include benchmarks for achieving these goals and language in each panned entitlement program that clearly states such socialist policies are meant only to ensure people do not go without proper care until innovation, ingenuity, and invention provide care they can afford without subsidies.

If elected representatives insist on serving corporate-financier interests instead of the best interests of the people, if they insist, as Representative Mike Rogers of Michigan does, on dangling accurate depictions of our current problems before us, but then disingenuously continuing to compound them, we must begin organizing, collaborating, and solving these problems on our own, on a local level, and ensuring that our resources go to those truly seeking to solve these problems with innovation and ingenuity instead of to exploiters, lobbyists, and shareholders and their proxies in government.

Since the dawn of man we have ensured our survival, prosperity, and progress by building better spears, devising new technologies, and climbing over the next horizon. The day we stop doing this, is the day we stop moving forward. Politicians who would have us ration our resources and relinquish our health to policies and rationing regimes conjured up by bureaucrats would have ensured our extinction ages ago if braver visionaries didn't prevail. Today, braver visionaries must prevail. End the healthcare debate today, and begin tomorrow with a new dialogue on how to use improved education, innovation, and development to expand the supply of competent medical practitioners and the technology they need to provide the best healthcare possible to all.

Blind Chinese Activist is US NED Proxy

Strategy of Tension: West Creates Eugenics Nightmare in China - then Celebrates Activists Fighting It.
by Tony Cartalucci 

April 28, 2012 - Anytime the Western media becomes ecstatic over the activities of a so-called "rights advocate," it is almost certain that they are either backed by convicted criminal, Wall Street speculator George Soros, or a recipient of US State Department-funded National Endowment for Democracy (NED) funds and support, or both. In the case of China's Chen Guangcheng, allegedly blind and having recently escaped from house arrest in a rural Chinese town, it didn't take long to trace his ties back to the US State Department's National Endowment for Democracy.

Image: A visual representation of the National Endowment for Democracy's corporate-financier ties found across their Board of Directors. Far from "human rights advocates," they are in fact amongst the most vicious warmongers and violators of such rights - simply leveraging such issues to disguise what is in reality corporate-financier hegemonic expansion.

NED's "Democracy Digest" celebrated Guangcheng's "activism" and his use of "social media tools" in their 2011 article titled, "‘Extraordinary’ campaign for barefoot lawyer Chen Guangcheng." Democracy Digest reveals that fake-Christian charity front ChinaAid and propaganda outlet China Digital Times, who have been Gunagcheng's primary backers, are both NED grantees and that Guangcheng himself was the recipient of NED's 2008 "Democracy Award." This award has been more recently given to NED's proxies used during the US-engineered "Arab Spring."


Images: Top - 2008's "Democracy Awards" presented to representatives of Chen Guangcheng. Bottom - In late 2011, Egyptian and Tunisian proxies receive their awards for helping the West topple sovereign governments and install client regimes - Tunisia in particular now sports a NED-funded "activist leader" as president.

Also mentioned in Democracy Digest's article is the name of Council on Foreign Relations member Jerome Cohen as a "witness." Cohen, of course, is providing "pro-bono" legal aid from the Council on Foreign Relations lined, Soros-funded "Freedom Now" organization for various dupes, stooges, and proxies of Wall Street and London. Readers may remember "Freedom Now" from their extensive involvement in supporting the Syrian opposition who triggered the current unrest now plaguing Syria, as well as being backers of Wall Street and London's proxy in Myanmar (Burma), Aung San Suu Kyi. Freedom Now is also currently backing a leading Bahraini activist, Abdulhadi al-Khawaja, who was regional coordinator of "Frontline Defenders," a Ford Foundation, Freedom House, American Jewish World Service, Soros Open Society Institute-funded "human rights" advocacy group. Al-Khawaja is now carrying out a "hunger strike" while in prison - part of a grander strategy to keep neighboring despotic regimes Saudi Arabia and Qatar loyal to the West's agenda.

Image: Freedom Now's corporate and foundation sponsors revealing that it, like so many others, is yet another Fortune 500 front carrying out the agenda of the monied elite under the guise of "humanitarian concerns." 

Freedom Now also backs a number of other Chinese proxies including Nobel Laureate and "human rights activist" Liu Xiaobo and Gao Zhisheng, both of whom are used to leverage the issues of human rights to undermine nationalist elements of China's government while asserting the primacy of "international law" and the West's "civil society" overlay across the vast East Asian nation-state.
"Blind Activist" Rails Against Policies of his Western Backers' Creation

What makes the "blind activist" Chen Guangcheng different is that he has been allegedly fighting against China's abhorrent population control methods, including forced sterilizations and abortions to maintain China's draconian "one child policy." The catch of course is, the corporate-financier oligarchs backing Guangcheng's activism are also the architects of China's population control programs in the first place, supported, defended, and whitewashed fully by the United Nations (see also here, and here), and even gloried in excruciating detail in current White House science adviser John P. Holdren's 1,000+ page book, "Ecoscience."

Indeed, the very practices carried out in China today were pioneered by Western corporate-funded foundations and government agencies like USAID's forced-sterilization program in Peru during the late 90's and the Carnegie Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation's work in founding the Nazi's eugenics cult, including the program Nazi war criminal Josef Mengele worked in before moving to the infamous Auschwitz death camp.

China's brutal population control policies have been praised and lauded by people like Ted Turner who said during an interview with Diane Rehm (well worth listening to) that the Chinese "wisely instituted a one child policy" which he believes isn't "draconian."

Worst of all, is the gushing admiration David Rockefeller himself has shown for Maoism and the genocidal "great leap forward" that killed at least 45 million in 4 years, and up to 80 million in all. Rockefeller noted in a New York Times article titled "From a China Traveler" in 1973 that “The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history.” He considers the resulting policies "social innovations."

The fact that David Rockefeller founded and chairs the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a globalist forum of which nearly all of America's most influential politicians are members of and from which nearly all of America's policy originates from, constituting the collective interests of Wall Street and London's corporate-financier elite, are the very people now supporting Guangcheng's "activism" reveals astounding hypocrisy perhaps so gargantuan its full shape fails to come into focus for most.

Indeed, the West's support for Guangcheng isn't because they believe the eugenics programs they have carefully constructed, meticulously propagated, and brutally claimed the lives of tens of millions with is now suddenly bad, but rather because Guangcheng represents a convenient point of leverage from which to undermine the Chinese government regarding an unpopular program the West itself has engineered. Feeding off of the warranted and legitimate backlash against China's population control programs may be the loose shingle the West can use to blow the rest of the roof off - where concerns over "democracy" and "civil society" have fallen flat.

China's best response would be to withdraw from its obligations at the UN and replace its unpopular population control policies with technical education, research and development and other pragmatic industry and technologically-based, rather than policy-based solutions to deal with China's large population.

Meanwhile, the West continues to openly announce their intentions of encircling China, containing its military and economic rise, as it sabotages sovereignty and economic prosperity along its peripheries and destabilizes its economic partners across all of Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia. The latest manifestation of this policy comes to us from US Army Chief of Staff, General Raymond Odierno who eagerly parrots talking points being peddled by the US State Department, which in turn are nearly decade-old plans drawn from corporate-funded think-tanks long planning to sabotage the rise of Asia and maintain another century of Western led global hegemony.

Syria, Waco, Occupy, and Los Angeles

Correlations They Hope You Never Make.
by Tony Cartalucci

Image: While the UN demands that Syria not only allow admittedly armed terrorists to roam freely through its cities, but that they also capitulate to their demands, the West has driven peaceful "Occupy" protesters from the streets of their cities by force. One wonders what events would have followed if protesters being sprayed and beaten in the streets pulled out assault rifles and fired on police. Would Washington withdraw security forces and entertain their demands? 

April 27, 2012 - While the West demands Syria pull its security forces from cities where roving bands of terrorists are on record committing widespread atrocities including the kidnapping, torture, and murder of civilians, as documented by the West's own Human Rights Watch report, "Syria: Armed Opposition Groups Committing Abuses," it has denied its own citizens the right to even peacefully assemble at "Occupy" protests to address their grievances back home. Syria's government has been threatened continuously by the West to begin a process of political "transition," or more accurately, to submit to Western-backed regime change, in the face of armed militants, while the West itself maintains a strict policy of non-negotiation with terrorist demands.

Image: Homs, Syria? No, this is Waco, Texas after a combination of military and federal security forces raided, burned down, and killed nearly every man, woman, and child in this sprawling complex located on private property. The US will kill its own citizens with weapons of war just for breaking their laws, mentioning nothing of what they would do should Americans take to the streets and carry out a campaign of terror while demanding the government step down.

As the West conjures up a myriad of excuses to sweep prolonged "Occupy" protests off the streets of their biggest cities, they insist that the Syrians not only tolerate an armed "occupation," but capitulate immediately to their demands. But one must wonder just what any given Western nation would do if protesters demanded the nation's leadership to stand down, and did so through armed violence.

Video: Hardly unarmed civilians, meet Syria's tank-driving, rocket-firing, Kalashnikov-waving rebels. Had rioters in Los Angeles raided government armories and patrols, capturing armored vehicles and rocket launchers, or had violence escalated to the point where such weapons were crossing in from Mexico, surely Washington would have mobilized armored divisions, gunships, and aircraft to crush them and would be considered negligent if they failed to do so. 

In Europe there are the Basque separatists of Spain - considered terrorists across the European Union, England, and the United States. The Irish Republican Army likewise was considered a vicious terrorist organization the United Kingdom sought to crush with a brutal military campaign of their own, turning entire cities into Syrian-esque war zones.

In the United States, there have been no real organized armed uprisings, yet the government has still mobilized its military to slaughter its own citizens as seen during the siege in Waco Texas in 1993. Scenes of tanks and helicopters against the backdrop of a Texan landscape and the subsequent destruction of the Branch Davidian compound are on par with anything allegedly unfolding in Syria, including the murder of women and children.

However, unlike in Syria, where terrorists are actively carrying out widespread violence, including bombing campaigns, targeted assassinations, and kidnappings, the people of Waco, Texas were on their own property attempting to mind their own business.

Image: Not tanks headed for Hama, Syria, but rather tanks waiting in a Texan parking lot for their chance to roll over men, women, and children barricaded on their own private property. The siege at Waco, Texas illustrates that federal authority will not be challenged and that the penalty is certain death - even if a column of tanks must be mobilized. The cheap veneer of civility across Western civilization is peeled back at times like this as is the hypocrisy of their international "responsibility to protect." .

When armed groups do take to the streets, such as during the 1992 LA Riots, the government was far from "withdrawing" security forces from the city and accepting demands. In addition to the police who were gunning down both armed threats as well as looters, thousands of National Guardsmen and Marines were also mobilized to restore order. Unlike in Syria, where rebels are armed with rocket propelled grenades, tanks, French-made missiles, assault-rifles, machines guns, and mortars, the rioters in LA were armed with pistols, rifles, shotguns, or simply their own cars - yet still the military was mobilized, and indeed killed Americans in their own streets.

Image: Not Syrian soldiers in the suburbs of Damascus, but rather National Guardsmen and Marines amongst thousands brought in to restore order in California's city of Los Angeles during the 1992 riots. Such a mobilization of military force represents astounding hypocrisy when the Syrian government is then told to stand down in the face of Syrian rebels openly waging war against both the government and minority ethnic groups

It is sensible for a government to restore order in their own country, preserving the life and liberty of the vast majority of citizens not taking to the streets to carry out theft, violence, and mayhem. The people of Los Angeles, had the government not acted and had the violence continued to spiral out of control, would have begged for security forces to restore order and viewed the government as negligent in their duties should they have failed to do so. They also most likely would have taken the law into their own hands, just like thousands of Syrians are doing now against NATO-backed death squads.

So why is the West holding Syria to standards they themselves have demonstratively rejected? It goes beyond hypocrisy - it is a declaration to the world that the "international rule of law" exists solely as a means to justify the expansion of the West's global hegemony. It is naked military conquest hiding behind the fig leaf of "humanitarian concerns." Syria, as does any sovereign nation or individual on Earth, has the right to defend itself and restore order within its realm.

The United States, England, and France would never withdraw security forces from their own cities where militants were armed with rockets, tanks, and machine guns while killing security forces and civilians alike and they certainly would not step down from power in the face of such armed threats. In fact, after invading foreign nations on patently false pretenses and stirring up warranted armed resistance, they then use such violence to justify perpetual occupation. They promptly label these people "terrorists" and then execute a bloody campaign to eliminate them.

The depths of depravity, the hypocrisy, the illegitimacy flaunted by the United Nations and the Western interests pulling its string, demanding Syrian troops to withdraw from cities plagued by terrorists, but making no mention of the terrorists themselves or their own serial violations of the "peace plan," even as they drive tanks around on camera in front of the world, forever renders moot this latest attempt to assert the "primacy of international law" over that of the nation-state.

What Wall Street and London do through their "international institutions" from this point forward, is done as poorly disguised imperialism with their "humanitarian concerns" nothing more than the weakest sort of rhetoric in the long history of weak rhetoric used to propel the interests of empire.

Salvador Option Deployed in Syria

Will NATO Try a Wag-the-Dog Provocation Against Syria to Keep Sarkozy in Power After May 6?

Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.
PressTV /
April 24, 2012

Video: "PressTV has conducted an interview with Washington-based author and historian, Dr. Webster Griffin Tarpley, to further discuss the developing issue."

The Next US President Will Be....

....the Fortune 500. Why no matter who you vote for, nothing will ever change. 
by Tony Cartalucci

April 26, 2012 - President George Bush, President Barack Obama, and presidential hopeful Mitt Romney all work for the exact same handful of corporate-financier interests. While they vary in how they dress up their methods of carrying out what is essentially a singular agenda, there is glaring continuity from one administration to the next in a process analogous to a corporate spokesman presenting the agenda of the board of directors. Changing spokesmen doesn't change the agenda of the board of directors.

While the corporate media focuses on non-issues, and political pundits accentuate petty political rivalries between the "left" and the "right," a look deeper into presidential cabinets and the authors of domestic and foreign policy reveals just how accurate this analogy is and who sits on the "board of directors."

Image: Professional spokesmen, representative not of the American people but of Fortune 500 multinational corporations and banks. Since the time of JP Morgan 100 years ago, the corporate-financier elite saw themselves as being above government, and national sovereignty as merely a regulatory obstacle they could lobby, bribe, and manipulate out of existence. In the past 100 years, the monied elite have gone from manipulating the presidency to now reducing the office to a public relations functionary of their collective interests.

George Bush's cabinet consisted of representatives from FedEx, Boeing, the Council on Foreign Relations, big-oil's Belfer Center at Harvard, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Circuit City, Verizon, Cerberus Capital Management, Goldman Sachs, and the RAND Corporation, among many others.

Image: The Henry Jackson Society is just one of many Neo-Conservative think-tanks, featuring many of the same people and of course, the same corporate sponsors. Each think-tank puts on a different public face and focuses on different areas of specialty despite harboring the same "experts" and corporate sponsors. 

His foreign policy was overtly dictated by "Neo-Conservatives" including Richard Perle, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Paul Wolfowitz, James Woolsey, Richard Armitage, Zalmay Khalilzad, Elliot Abrams, Frank Gaffney, Eliot Cohen, John Bolton, Robert Kagan, Francis Fukuyama, William Kristol, and Max Boot - all of whom hold memberships within a myriad of Fortune 500-funded think-tanks that to this day still direct US foreign policy - even under a "liberal" president. These include the Brookings Institution, the International Crisis Group, the Foreign Policy Initiative, the Henry Jackson Society, the Council on Foreign Relations, and many more.

Image: A visual representation of some of the Brookings Institution's corporate sponsors. Brookings is by no means an exception, but rather represents the incestuous relationship between US foreign and domestic policy making and the Fortune 500 found in every major "think-tank." Elected US representatives charged with legislative duties, merely rubber stamp the papers and policies drawn up in these think-tanks.  

Obama's cabinet likewise features representatives from JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, the Council on Foreign Relations, Fortune 500 representatives Covington & Burling, Citi Group, Freedie Mac, and defense contractor Honeywell. Like Bush's cabinet, foreign policy is not penned by Obama sitting behind his desk in the Oval Office, but rather by the very same think-tanks that directed Bush's presidency including the Council on Foreign Relations, RAND Corporation, the Brookings Institute, the International Crisis Group, and the Chatham House. There are also a myriad of smaller groups consisting of many of the same members and corporate sponsors, but who specialize in certain areas of interest.

Image: A visual representation of current US President Barack Obama's cabinet's corporate-financier ties past and present. As can be plainly seen, many of the same corporate-financier interests represented in Obama's administration were also represented in Bush's administration. 

And with Mitt Romney, the likely republican candidate running for president against Obama in 2012, we see already his foreign policy advisers, Michael Chertoff, Eliot Cohen, Paula Dobrainsky, Eric Edelman, and Robert Kagan, represent the exact same people and corporate-funded think-tanks devising strategy under both President Bush and President Obama.

While Presidents Bush and Obama attempted to portray the West's global military expansion as a series of spontaneous crises, in reality, since at least as early as 1991, the nations of Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, and many others that previously fell under the Soviet Union's sphere of influence, were slated either for political destabilization and overthrow, or overt military intervention. While the public was fed various narratives explaining why Bush conducted two wars within the greater global "War on Terror," and why Obama eagerly expanded these wars while starting new ones in Libya and now Syria, in reality we are seeing "continuity of agenda," dictated by corporate-financier elite, rubber stamped by our elected representatives, and peddled to us by our "leaders," who in reality are nothing more than spokesmen for the collective interests of the Fortune 500.

Image: The International Crisis Group's corporate sponsors reveal a pattern of mega-multinationals intertwined with not only creating and directing US, and even European foreign policy, but in carrying it out. ICG trustee Kofi Annan is in Syria now carrying out a ploy to buy time for NATO-backed terrorists so they can be rearmed, reorganized, and redeployed against the Syrian government for another Western-backed attempt at regime change - all done under the guise of promoting "peace." 

No matter who you vote for in 2012 - until we change the balance of power currently tipped in favor of the Fortune 500, fed daily by our money, time, energy, and attention, nothing will change but the rhetoric with which this singular agenda is sold to the public. Romney would continue exactly where Obama left off, just as Obama continued exactly where Bush left off. And even during the presidencies of Bill Clinton and Bush Sr., it was the same agenda meted out by the same corporate-financier interests that have been driving American, and increasingly Western destiny, since US Marine General Smedley Butler wrote "War is a Racket" in 1935.

A clear pattern should be apparent. The influence of corporate-financiers transcends more than presidencies, but contaminates all aspects of modern society including what is often called "non-governmental organizations" or NGOs. Modern NGOs are entirely funded and centrally directed by Fortune 500 corporations to carry their neo-imperial agenda to the four corners of the globe under the guise of the very best of intentions. The National Endowment for Democracy (NED), for instance, portends to be "supporting freedom around the world." A quick look at their board of directors reveals they are in fact drawn from big-oil, big-banking, and defense contracting boards of directors, Neo-Conservative warmongering think-tanks, corporate lobbyists, and US State Department functionaries, past and present.

Image: A visual representation of the National Endowment for Democracy's corporate-financier ties. It is not freedom they are interested in "supporting around the world," but rather the interests of the corporations and institutions their board of directors represents. 

NED was central in funding, training, and directing mobs of protesters across the Arab World during the 2011 US-engeineered "Arab Spring," only to see US proxies put into power where these mobs successfully toppled governments or led to violence and foreign military intervention that successfully implemented regime change. Tunisia and Libya both have overt, long-time associates of the West now in power, while similar proxies are fighting to take power in Egypt as well as battling for control over Syria. It then becomes obvious that it is not "freedom" NED is supporting worldwide, but rather the corporate-financier hegemony of the Fortune 500.

Image: NED, Freedom House, and the US State Department don't just reflect the interests of the Fortune 500, they actively carry them out, many times using the resources and reach of these very interests to implement global policy. The Alliance for Youth Movements (AYM) starting in 2008 began recruiting, networking, training, funding, and equipping armies of "activists" from around the world to prepare for the "spontaneous" Arab Spring in 2011. 

And the very shell organizations created to train NED's mobs, including the US State Department's Alliance for Youth Movements (AYM), was likewise funded by a myriad of Fortune 500 corporate-financier interests and attended and directed by representatives of these corporate interests. 

The various business councils within the US Chamber of Commerce are also directed by the very same corporate interests directing both the US Presidency and carrying out their agenda through US-funded organizations like NED. The US-Qatar Business Council is one such example, whose representatives sit on the Washington D.C. based Middle East Policy Council alongside the UN's Karen Koning AbuZayd. AbuZayd was charged with compiling human rights reports in regards to Syria. Clearly she is the subject of a gross conflict of interests exposing yet again how US and even Western policy is not directed by presidents, prime ministers, or legislative branches, but rather by cadres of corporate-financiers and their representatives who have infiltrated every institution in Western society and even contrived a few of their own to perpetuate their agenda.  

While there are a number of reasons to vote - including to simply write in the names of candidates to show dissatisfaction with the predetermined choices presented before us - we must recognize that voting alone will not change anything. And as the Occupy Wall Street movement has taught us, while our leaders demand nations like Libya and Syria allow their people to roam the streets armed and terrorizing the population, they have no intention of allowing even peaceful protests to take place back at home.

The solution is to identify and undermine the very source of power driving these world-spanning corporate-financier interests. One needs not travel further in search of this source of power than their own bathroom mirror. It is we the people, who on a daily basis, feed this monolithic corporate-financier machine of domination, exploitation, and destruction. And we need not do more than simply withdraw the time, money, energy, and attention we pay into this machine on a daily basis. We can begin by eliminating from our lives entirely the unnecessary amenities we purchase from this machine. This includes junk-food like that peddled by Pepsi Co., Coca-Cola, and the mega-chain restaurants, cafes, and fast food outlets spanning the world.

We can then begin devising local alternatives to replace these amenities, and eventually the necessities. We need not live a life of austerity or of want in the wake of deciding to boycott entirely the Fortune 500. We can leverage education, technology, and ingenuity to devise alternatives that not only match, but exceed the quality and comfort provided to us by these mega-multinationals.

While the system wants you to vote in their elections, you would be better served to instead vote with your wallet, time, energy, and attention. Don't be drawn into the establishment's circular debates, distractions, and especially the charade of predetermined elections. Regardless of who wins, Obama or Romney, the Fortune 500 will have a professional spokesman to present their collective agenda to the public under the guise of "democracy." America, and the West in general, is run by the Fortune 500, they were your last president or prime minister, they will be your next president or prime minister.

If this dissatisfies you - boycott them and put them out of business.

Neo-Imperialists Grind Away at Syrian Sovereignty

Recolonization of Syria 20 years in the making.
editorial by Tony Cartalucci 

Editor's Note: Brookings has since taken down Middle East Memo #21 - it has been reposted by Land Destroyer here in its entirety.  

April 24, 2012 - Western corporate-financiers have plotted since at least 1991 to overturn not only Syria's government, but to topple and co-opt the governments of every nation previously in the Soviet sphere of influence. US Army General Wesley Clark made it known during a 2007 speech given to the Commonwealth Club of California, that in 1991, then Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz said the US had 5-10 years to clean up the old Soviet "client regimes" before the next super power rose up and challenged western hegemony.

Clark would go on to say that shortly after September 11, 2001, while at the Pentagon, a document handed down from the Office of the Secretary of Defense indicated plans to attack and destroy the governments of 7 countries; Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Iran, Lebanon and Libya.

More recently, US State Department is on record stating that millions of dollars have been spent recruiting, training, networking, and equipping armies of "activists" from these targeted nations since at least 2008 to return home and sow the very unrest seen at the beginning of the "Arab Spring" - unrest that has served as the very foundation for the violence now plaguing Syria.

And even as the UN's Kofi Annan disingenuously peddles his 6-point "peace plan," the US, European Union, and their Arab League junior partners, are funding and arming the rebels to continue the fight even while attempting to hold the Syrian government accountable to the peace deal they themselves brazenly flaunt.

Never has it been so obvious that "international law" and "humanitarian concerns" are merely the latest contrived rhetorical devices, institutionalized as "the responsibility to protect," to expand the financial, political, and tactical hegemony of today's imperialists across the globe.

Image: Brookings Institution's Middle East Memo #21 "Assessing Options for Regime Change (.pdf)," makes no secret that the humanitarian "responsibility to protect" is but a pretext for long-planned regime change.

Yet despite brazen admissions by US policy think-tanks like the Fortune 500 funded Brookings Institution, that the latest peace deal in Syria is nothing more than a ploy to buy time to continue eroding the Syrian government in pursuit of Western orchestrated regime change, and political "commentators" drawn from Fortune 500 funded institutions like the Henry Jackson Society admitting that "diplomatic options" are merely the West paying lip service ahead of unilateral military intervention, there are still throngs of brain-addled pundits parroting the latest US State Department talking-points regarding a brutal regime mass murdering its own people and how it is the moral imperative of the West to intervene.

The latest, and perhaps most depraved grandstanding yet, comes to us from United States President Obama, who stood in front of the Washington D.C. Holocaust Museum correlating Syria's President Bashar al-Assad's efforts to restore order to his nation to Adolf Hitler's US and British eugenics-inspired, Bush-bankrolled, IBM facilitated racial superiority death cult. Worse than even the real history behind World War II, is the fact that since then, the United States has conducted a global campaign of systematic atrocities killing easily as many Vietnamese and Iraqis as Hitler did Jews. To this day, the United States maintains an unparalleled global network of torture chambers and hit teams as it combs the planet extra-judicially executing and imprisoning people with absolute impunity.

File:Special exposition, Holocaust Museum, D.C. IMG 4789.JPG

Image: A particularly relevant exhibit at the Washington D.C. Holocaust Museum. President Obama, using the museum as a backdrop, set the stage for the continuation of Wall Street and London's own crimes against humanity. Students of history however, will understand that Hitler's Nazis weren't pioneers of genocide and global domination, but merely clumsy imitators inspired by what the Anglo-Americans were already in the process of perfecting.

In fact, the very personalities behind the sort of atrocities carried out by the United States over the last 20 years are still dictating US foreign policy today. Despite the charade carried on by Obama and his alleged "liberal" presidency, he has merely fronted for the continuation of a singular agenda meted out by Wall Street and London's think-tanks with but the flimsiest veneer of "progressive liberalism" laid over it.

For those that take a few minutes to look into the details of what is presented to them by a serially compromised corporate-media, they will see yet another "Iraq-style" pack of lies being paraded before them to justify continued meddling in Syria. Just like in Libya before it, Syria will not face salvation by means of a NATO intervention, it will face total destruction. Sanctions of "luxury goods" announced just this week by the White House are aimed at peeling away the Syrian government's supporters, hoping that, through basic game theory, the ruling elite across Syria will take the bait to "save themselves." In reality, the collapse of the Syrian government will lead to the same perpetual instability, lawlessness, division, and murderous mayhem Libya has been plunged into- to the benefit of no one but the multinationals.

Imperialism throughout the ages has always been sold with rhetoric peddling a "higher cause." Whether it was taming the barbarians outside the gates of Rome, spreading "superior" Anglo civilization to the four corners of the globe, the big-oil and banker expansionism during America's manifest destiny, or today's "humanitarian wars," the underlying truth is one of megalomania, exploitation, and human depravity on an ever increasing scale. It is peddled with simplistic rhetoric aimed at the most impressionable, weakest of minds. The support these gullible minds lend the powered elite results in catastrophic consequences not only for the victims of imperialism, but for the empires themselves - inevitably wrecked by insatiable, unchecked greed.   

Syria is just one prize of many sought after by a long line of empires attempting to feed the world, its people, and resources into its ever-hungry maw. And Syria itself has been the subject of imperial ambitions many times in the past, including those of the Romans, Ottomans, the French, and now the Anglo-Americans. Unlike in the past, where information was difficult to come by for the average person, there is no excuse for ignorance, nor for believing the same tired lies told by the global elite in their quest to mobilize entire populations to sustain their own self-serving agenda. While the allure to "fit in" with what we think the rest of the world is thinking is persuasive, it is illogical, and in reality an illusion. What the TV tells us on a daily basis is not what the rest of the world thinks - it is what the rest of the world is told to think by an extremely small minority.

Image: Confessed liar Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi is proud that his politically motivated fabrications regarding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were eagerly used by the West as a convenient casus belli for their predetermined invasion and the subsequent death, maiming, and displacement of millions. There are "al-Janabis" in every nation waiting for the right climate in which to flourish - and an eager cadre of neo-imperialists seeking them out as they expand their corporate-financier empires across the planet. Libya's Sliman Bouchuiguir was one of them. Syria's human rights "Observatory" is another.

Syria's government could not stand for as long as it has with only a military backing it. It has support across both the upper echelons of Syrian society, as well as across the myriad of minorities who all stand to lose should NATO's terrorist proxies, drunk on extremist doctrine and promises of dominion over their fellow Syrians, come to power. This is precisely why NATO has adopted a two-prong strategy - terrorize Syria's minorities into submission and penalize Syria's elite until they defect.

More importantly, Syria has stood against insidious foreign meddling for over a year because the people see themselves, their nation, and their sovereignty, both personal and national, at risk. Whatever transgressions they face under the Syrian government, it is ultimately still a Syrian government. Whatever comes into being by NATO's blood-soaked hands will be entirely divorced from anything "Syrian." In Libya, it took the form of Abdurrahim el-Keib - a long time US resident, chairman of the BP, Shell, Total-funded Petroleum Institute who has swiftly moved to sell the nation out from under the Libyan people. Worst of all, he has done so as a first priority, even at the expense of Libya's security and territorial integrity.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton shakes hands with Libya's Prime Minister Abdurrahim el-Keib, March 8, 2012, at the State Department in Washington

Image: The "fruits" of NATO's regime change in Libya - a client state run by US resident, BP, Total, and Shell-funded Petroleum Institute chairman, Abdurrahim el-Keib whose policy is dictated by Wall Street and London, not the aspirations of the Libyan people. Neo-imperialists seek to turn Syria into a similar footstool of Western power. 

The oligarchs of Wall Street and London will continue directing their vast propaganda networks to portray the violence they themselves are fueling as a one-sided atrocity carried out solely by the long-targeted Syrian government. They will continue to use the UN as a willing tool to develop their casus belli for military intervention on behalf of known terrorists. We will also see the West attempt various ploys to prod members of the Syrian government and military into defecting as Syria is slowly destroyed just as in Libya.

It is not enough for the world to simply ward off a military intervention by the Wall Street and London oligarchs. Regardless, Syria will still be picked apart. It must be made clear that as US President Obama stands before a memorial for victims of Nazi war crimes, he and the corporate-financiers he speaks on behalf of, are in the middle of carrying out their own vast crimes against humanity - on a scale far exceeding anything the Nazis could have hoped to accomplish - and they do so with UN and NATO complicity.

No matter how much power these self-proclaimed leaders garner, no matter how many people they succeed in turning to their cause, rationally, logically, historically, and morally, they are wrong. No amount of contrived institutional approval or signed resolutions makes what is being done in Syria, or what was done to Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan right. This is modern day empire being propagated not by nation-states, but by corporate-financiers, fueled by our daily patronage of their goods and services, who see themselves as transcending the nation-state. And because even imperialism in its purest form is beyond the understanding of many people, it becomes doubly so in its new, stateless form.