Washington Opposes Peace

Washington's humanitarian aid program
Anthony Freda Art

Stephen Lendman, Contributor

America's history is blood-drenched. Permanent war is policy. Peace and stability are verboten.

One nation after another is targeted. Aggressive wars follow. Rule of law principles and democratic values are discarded. Wealth, power and unchallengeable dominance alone matter.

Scoundrel supporters glorify what they should condemn. More on them below. Syria is being ravaged and destroyed. Spurious accusations target Iran. Neither country threatens anyone. Malicious lies say otherwise. 

Banging the Drums of War: Iran and the Neo-cons

Dees Illustration

Robert Bonomo, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

All the Usual Suspects

In the last few years Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic, Norman Podhoretz of Commentary, Charles Krauthammer of The Washington Post, Bill Kristol from the The Weekly Standard and Thomas Friedman of The New York Times have all clamored for an attack on Iran. The debate has been shaped. Do we or don’t we attack Iran in order to destroy or delay their supposed nuclear weapons program.

All the usual suspects that hyped a war in Iraq which was started on false precepts and lies.  Here are some excerpts from their new project.

Congressman Ryan: Let’s make a deal!

image source: PPJ Gazette

Marti Oakley, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

Dear Congressman Ryan:

I have seen you many times on Lame Street Media promoting your grandiose plan to kill Medicare. I realize targeting those least able to defend themselves from yet another round of the neo-con movement to redistribute the wealth to the upper 3% while leaving the country in ruins as jobs are shipped out and as corporations plunder the country, is underway.

While helping to spend the country into untenable debt and rolling out the red carpet to foreign investors and corporations who are steadily consuming everything in sight, I realize that you have to dispense with any program or initiative which would lend support to the elderly, that class of useless eaters so despised by so many of you.

While railing against Medicare and what it costs the country, you never made mention of what it costs the country to support you while you are in office and even when you leave.  For someone whose existence is now predicated upon the parasitic relationship of elected officials dependent on taxpayers, I am surprised that you did not readily identify yourself and the rest of congress as an unsustainable drain on the economy.  We can no longer afford to support you people, especially when you contribute virtually nothing to the economy or GDP while availing yourselves of special privileges, perks and financial enrichments.

Ron Paul Explains Neoconservatism (Video)

YouTube -- f328owner


Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner

RAND Researcher: Iran can produce nuke within 2 months

Editor's Note: This propaganda might be the most relevant indicator of coming events in some time. Good thing "Anonymous" has control of Iran's servers to protect us all from Iran's nukes.

Airstrikes can no longer stop nuclear program, US can do nothing short of military occupation, says report

Yitzhak Benhorin
YNet News

The Iranian regime is closer than ever before to creating a nuclear bomb, according to RAND Corporation researcher Gregory S. Jones.

At its current rate of uranium enrichment, Tehran could have enough for its first bomb within eight weeks, Jones said in a report published this week.

He added that despite reports of setbacks in its nuclear program, the Iranian regime is steadily progressing towards a bomb. Unfortunately, Jones says, there is nothing the US can do to stop Tehran, short of military occupation.

Read Full Article

Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner

Novo Ordo Seclorum - NeoCon Hell on Earth

SARTRE, Contributing Writer

Activist Post 

The 20th Century was the most destructive era in history. Deaths from all the wars and the genocides estimated at 160 million may seem small if the planet descends into the approaching holocaust.  Globalization is the catchword of the ruling class. Sovereign nations are obsolete to the corporatists. Militarization for suppressing conflicts is the mission, since warfare among nations are passé. The old alliances based upon ethnic composition or ideology has vanished. Only dissenters against the New World Order pose a threat to the Novo Ordo Seclorum.  

This New Order of the Ages has been in the works for over a millennium. Lest you forget the horrors of man’s inhumanity to man, a short vignette looks back at some of the worst practices of Totalitarian Collectivism.

Caution some of the images in this NOVO ORDO SECLORUM video are ghastly, but the chronological documentation deserves your viewing. 

Statism is the common thread that links all totalitarian regimes. Most living souls do not believe that the Soviet, Lenin and Stalin gulag, is possible today. A diluted revulsion level of atrocities is characteristic of the media script of current events. Disconnect between what really happens and what is reported is so dramatic that reality is unknown to most people. 

The term NeoCon, commonly used as a synonym for neoconservative, begs the real issue. There is nothing conservative about a top-down authoritarian central government. Originally, refugees from the liberal Marxist strain, the former Bush NeoCon cronies applied their perverted viewpoint to discredit the meaning of real conservatism. Now you have the Obama LibCons outdoing their statist cousins to advance the War Party outreach intervention, well beyond Iraq and Afghanistan.

Libya At Any Cost: Warmongers Seek Escalation

Dees Illustration

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

Bangkok, Thailand May 6, 2011 - "It is a test that the international community has to pass. Failure would shake further the faith of the people's region in the emerging international order and the primacy of international law." This comes from Brookings Institution's "Libya's Test of the New International Order," February 2011.

Perhaps no single statement encapsulates better what the war in Libya is really about. Incentives for collaborators most certainly include Libya's oil, the exploitation of their people, and the destruction of a financial, economic, political, and strategic competitor in the region. However, the exercise of the global corporate-financiers' "primacy" over national sovereignty and the alarming, subsequent implications such an assertion represents, is the fundamental motivation driving this war.

Libyan Rebels Fighting the Globalists' War

If these rebels really think the West is going to hand them
Libya and its riches, they have another thing coming. The
Neo-Con arm of the globalist agenda is already seeding the
ground to deal with "extremists" coming to power after the 
"Arab Spring" runs its course. That means Libya's oil & future
will be left in the hands of NATO troops, not the Libyan people.

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

Bangkok, Thailand April 20, 2011 - As the global corporate-financier oligarchs prepare the way rhetorically and logistically to send in the ground troops we were told would never set foot on Libyan soil, in a war that was only to last days, then weeks, but now over a month, the discernment, ambition, and true intentions of the Libyan rebels must be called into question.

After rebel leader Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi admitted to being trained in Afghanistan and subsequently fighting American troops there, and admitting many of the rebel fighters now joining him in Libya had similarly returned from Afghanistan as well as Iraq, it must strike them as tremendous irony that the same Americans they were filling pine boxes with overseas, are now protecting their lives and handing them an entire country to rule over.

Of course in life, nothing is quite that simple

Globalists Coming Full Circle: Obama executes final leg of Neo-Conservative imperialism

Paul Wolfowitz (right) in 1991 was apparently pleased with the 
outcome of Desert Storm. He believed that the time was ripe
to seize global hegemony before another world power rose to
challenge the Anglo-American establishment.

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

Long before the verified lies of Qaddafi's "door-to-door" genocide and even before the media cleverly tagged the engineered destabilization of the Middle East the "Arab Spring," Libya was already marked for destabilization and regime change. For nearly thirty years the US and UK have funded groups both inside Libya and beyond its borders in various attempts to remove Qaddafi from power. The current administration's feigned ignorance over the nature of the rebels in Libya is nothing short of absolute deception. The CIA and MI6 are on record for decades following, and in many cases supporting, these very groups.

Below is a partial time line covering Western efforts to implement regime change in Libya.

1980s: US-CIA backed National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL) made multiple attempts to assassinate Qaddafi and initiate armed rebellion throughout Libya.
1990s: Noman Benotman and the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) wage a campaign of terror against Qaddafi with Osama Bin Laden's assistance.
2003: Upon Qaddafi's abandonment of WMD programs, Libya's collaboration with MI6 & the CIA to identify and expose the LIFG networks begins, giving Western intelligence a windfall of information regarding the group.
2005: NFSL's Ibrahim Sahad founds the National Conference of Libyan Opposition (NCLO) in London England.
2011: Early February, the London based NCLO calls for a Libyan "Day of Rage," beginning the "February 17th revolution."
2011: Late February, NFSL/NCLO's Ibrahim Sahad is leading opposition rhetoric, literally in front of the White House in Washington D.C. Calls for no-fly zone in reaction to unsubstantiated accusations Qaddafi is strafing "unarmed protesters" with warplanes.
2011: Late February, Senators Lieberman and McCain and UK PM David Cameron call for providing air cover for Libyan rebels as well as providing them additional arms.
2011: Early March; it is revealed UK SAS special forces are already operating inside Libya
2011: Mid-March; UN adopts no-fly zone over Libya, including air strikes. Immediately, the mission is changed from "protecting civilians" to "ousting Qaddafi." Egypt violates the arms embargo of UN r.1973 with Washington's full knowledge by supplying Libyan rebels with weapons, while Al Qaeda's ties to the rebels are admitted by everyone including the rebels themselves.

Liberals Willing to Trade Blood and Treasure for Oil Company Profits Under Obama

US Navy/Wikimedia Commons image

Eric Blair
Activist Post

It's perplexing to see a high level of support for the unprovoked bombing of Libya on so-called "progressive" websites.

There has been an endless stream of humanitarian propaganda flowing from these sites trying to convince average liberals that the "human thing to do" is to rain down tomahawk missiles with depleted uranium to bring freedom and democracy to an oppressed people.

Huffington Post ran a piece by Ed Schultz titled Why I Support President Obama's Decision to Invade Libyawhere he described his reasoning as follows:

...President Obama explained this won't be a long-term operation. 

Matter of days, not a matter of weeks. Not even months. 

...He's (Obama) trying to give the rebels, those who want democracy, a fighting chance at just that and trying to stop Gaddafi -- this is the human thing to do -- from slaughtering his own people.

Obama in staunch defense of US Libya policy

A Libyan rebel stands at the site of a Western-led
air strike in the strategic oil town of Ajdabiya
© AFP Patrick Baz

AFP

WASHINGTON (AFP) - President Barack Obama gave a staunch defense of the US role in the international military mission in Libya Saturday, as he comes under pressure to explain US goals to a public exhausted by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Obama's weekly radio and online address was his most detailed review of the UN-sanctioned action so far, and comes ahead of an address to the nation Monday on the US strategy in Libya.

"Make no mistake, because we acted quickly, a humanitarian catastrophe has been avoided and the lives of countless civilians -- innocent men, women and children -- have been saved," Obama said.

Egypt Arming Libyan Rebels

Wikimedia Commons

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

After the corporate owned media's failed attempt in February 2011 to portray the Libyan unrest as "unarmed protesters" being brutalized by Qaddafi, reports began trickling in of what was actually a full-scale rebellion with weapons coming across the border from Egypt. These reports are now confirmed, as large scale operations to supply the rebels with weapons have now been admitted by both the US and Egyptian governments.

The Wall Street Journal, quoting a "senior US official," claimed that the latest Egyptian operation to arm Libyan rebels had started several days ago and is ongoing. The WSJ reiterates what many globalist think-tanks have been saying all along, that the operation to overthrow Libya, despite being a Western project, should be led by the newly "reordered" and shook up Arab states. The WSJ concedes that the US "wanted to avoid being seen as taking a leadership role in any military action against Mr. Gadhafi after its invasions of Iraq and Afganistan fueled anger and mistrust with Washington throughout the region." We are left to believe that the US deceptively meddling in Libya by proxy, somehow, is supposed to alleviate this anger and regain lost trust.

If all goes well for the globalists, this servile proxy Arab conglomerate, after being marshaled to raid Libya on behalf of the West, will then be organized and ready to turn its attention east toward Iran at the behest of their globalist masters. The WSJ in their article recognized this new servile fervor as an "unusually robust diplomatic response from Arab states."

The Globalists' Egyptian Gambit: ElBaradei

From the Council on Foreign Relations to the Brookings Institute, Globalists agree. Mohamed ElBaradei for (Egyptian) President 

source

Tony Cartalucci, Contributing Writer

Activist Post 

 It was previously reported that Mohamed ElBaradei, the self-proclaimed leader of the unfolding Egyptian protests, is actually sitting on the Board of Trustees of the Zbigniew Brzezinski/George Soros globalist think-tank, the International Crisis Group.

The mainstream media has been backing ElBaradei's ownership of the protests, hailing this Nobel Laurette and former UN IAEA director as the potential next president of Egypt and the "hero" of the protests. The New York Times refers to him as the "Nobelist" portraying him as standing "toe-to-toe" with hundreds of riot police and promising to run for president if and only if elections were "free and fair."

While ElBaradei poses as a critic of the United States, it is not because of their meddling with Middle Eastern affairs, it is because they are not meddling enough. ElBaradei berates the United States for not intervening in what he calls "social disintegration, economic stagnation, and political repression" in Egypt. Apparently ElBaradei isn't the only one who thinks so either.

Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) senior fellow, Project for a New American Century signatory, and Bush wrangler Elliott Abrams elaborated on the sort of "intervention" the United States should be committed to in his piece "Less 'Engagement,' More Democracy" in the New York Times. In his piece he criticizes the current policy of engaging with nations he deems repressive regimes as equals and calls for a revisit to George Bush's "freedom agenda." In other words - the export of "democracy" that has brought America the trillion dollar military adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan at the cost of thousands of US soldiers' lives and the lives of millions of foreigners killed, maimed, or displaced.

Totalitarian Collectivism

No Labels = The Ignorant Middle

SARTRE, Contributing Writer 
Activist Post

The American electorate seldom demonstrates an ability to resist the appeals of slick marketing and charlatan candidates. The "so called" swing vote is the battleground where every election is fought. View the vast middle as the ill-equipped idiots that continually waste their vote on establishment surrogates who always protest the corporate/state as their primary campaign pledge. They spin it with charming platitudes, but in the end, they shield their corporate masters.

In spite of this perennial passion play a recent Gallup Poll Puts Congressional Approval at Lowest in History. "83 percent polled over the weekend said they disapprove of Congress' performance. The 13 percent who do approve makes for the lowest approval rating ever".

A twist on buyer’s remorse, provided from the Republican/Democratic one party dynasty. So what is the alternative? Get ready for the seal of approval and focus group tested "No Labels" campaign.

The New York Observer sums up New York Times columnist David Brooks this way: "He suggested that a bipartisan group like No Labels is necessary to aid those politicians who step out of party lines for the greater good". Wonder just who some of these bipartisan politicians might be?

The Christian Science Monitor sheds some light on this search. 

Monday’s launch of a new movement called Nolabels.org – an effort to get beyond the hyperpartisanship that infuses Washington – can’t help but keep the "will Bloomberg run" question alive. The daylong rollout was held in New York City, and Mayor Bloomberg, a political independent, was a marquee participant. And Nolabels’ centrist approach to policy fits his own message, laid out just last week in a campaign-style speech on the economy. The billionaire Bloomberg’s willingness to self-fund as a politician has been amply demonstrated in his three successful runs for New York mayor, and he reportedly considered running for president in 2008". 

Such a shining example of populism and ordinary people like Bloomberg must be different from the standard party hack, do you agree? Gee, what party tag is he using this time . . .?

The Politico views this non-party label a little different.

 "The group "No Labels" kicked off its first conference Monday at New York's Columbia University with just one label largely absent: "Republican."

The non-partisan initiative with the slogan, "Not Left. Not Right. Forward", is seeking to fill what the American people regularly tell pollsters is the vital center: a non-ideological space where the commitment is to getting things done. And its speakers—who ranged from Republican moderates like ex-Virginia Rep. Tom Davis to liberal Democrats like New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand—sang the praises of cooperation and compromise.

But the only Republicans present at Columbia University's modern, square Alfred Lerner Hall seemed to be those who had recently lost primary races, such as South Carolina Rep. Bob Inglis and Delaware Rep. Mike Castle, or former Republicans like Florida Gov. Charlie Crist and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg".

Wow, could this be a clan of mostly losers or wannabees just masquerading as moderates?

Emily Esfahani Smith, managing editor of the Hoover Institution journal, name names:

 "No Labels' purpose is to fight hyper-partisanship in politics, to be the "centrist equivalent to the tea-party movement on the right and MoveOn on the left." Does it surprise you that David Frum is one of the organization's founding leaders? So are Republican strategist Mark McKinnon and Democratic fundraiser Nancy Jacobson". And provides this quote from No Labels' website:

"Hyper-partisanship is one of the greatest domestic challenges our nation faces. It divides America and derails our ability to solve our shared challenges. Rather than focusing on solving problems, hyper-partisans use labels to demonize their opponents, enforce orthodoxy within their own ranks, and marginalize sensible compromises".

Ms. Esfahani Smith concludes:

"When it comes to politics and political parties, I think litmus tests and "orthodoxy" are foolish and harmful--especially for the GOP right now. However, I don't agree with No Labels that partisanship itself is a problem. "Ordinary politics is partisan politics," as Harvey Mansfield has written. To say otherwise--to try to create a postpartisan era of "No Labels"--is a utopian departure from reality".

Need some more points of view to add to the confusion? View the video’s Imagine There's No Labels and Moderate Politicians Taking Part In 'No Labels'. 

In order to make sense out of another feeble attempt to hoodwink the populace, the ruling establishment is molding an alliance between the NeoCons and the NeoLibs. No Labels really means lead the dumbed down public by the nose. 

Compare and contrast the stretch from Rush Limbaugh and the alluring lyrics of Akon, "See a man with a blue tie, see a man with a red tie; so how about we tie ourselves together and get it done".Who is correct? If you are one of the walking zombies that believe that we can all just get along, you are a prime target for the No Labels deception. Watch these videos of Limbaugh: No Labels Is A Racist Organization and Akon: No Labels and take away the lesson that both miss the real point of what No Labels is attempting to accomplish. 

No Labels looks more like a pilot plot for the sequel to Mad Men. Madison Avenue selling the youth on a message of communal unity, the career working taxpayer that government theft helps society and the struggling single parent that their kids are really being educated in government schools. Sadly, the Ignorant Middle, all too often, buys into the hype and snake oil.

Gotham City, the source of original sin and seat of eternal damnation leads the carnival that sucks in the suckers into playing a no win game. Need evidence, just ponder the results from the New York State election.

The gubernatorial results by party are: Democratic 2,610,123; Republican 1,290,017; Conservative 232,264; Working Families 154,847; Independence 146,646; Green 59,928; Libertarian 48,386; Rent is 2 Damn High 41,131; Taxpayers 25,820; Freedom 24,572; Anti-Prohibition 20,429. There were 4,423 write-ins.

The Libertarian Party no long qualifies to be on the ballot without obtaining new signatures. The progressive left Working Families and 2 Damn High media creation just want more government handouts. Just add in the Green and Independence vote to most of the Democratic platform and you have very few people standing up for limited government. 

Remember the Coffee Party, that alternative to the Tea Party. Christian Matthias in The Coffee Party and No Labels Prepare for an Independent Candidate while Offering No Solutions, writes:

“The Coffee Party has finally done it…  They haveofficially endorsed (Titled: In Praise of No Labels) the startup political group labeled No Labels in their quest for political obscurity guised by a right-winged led call for civility. To the point, they have lost all credibility as an organization. People of this great nation cannot be fooled any longer. The Coffee Party is leading you down a road to the slaughter house. These words may seem harsh but the stakes could not be higher. The Coffee Party along with No Labels is an organization meant to harm you. The end result of their efforts will be to siphon votes to a third party Independent candidate: most likely – Michael Bloomberg. Beware of lessons learned from 1992”.

Well, Mr. Matthias is correct about both the Coffee Party and No Labels but his conclusion misses the most important issue. As long as the Ignorant Middle keeps voting for either version of Democrat or Republican collectivism, the final results guarantee totalitarian tyranny. Manufactured third parties are quite different from spontaneous populist grassroots rebellion. The basic reason why No Labels is the latest adaptation of defusing groundswell dissent is to siphon off lukewarm support from the Tea Party movement.

No doubt, the RINO establishment has their own style of drinking GOP tea, but the authentic voice of individual liberty revolt is distinctively ideological, paleo-conservative and America First. Any organization where David Frum influences policy is an enemy of the Republic.

As true as the record of despotism is documented, the more the Ignorant Middle demand added repression. Elections are fabricated spectacles of coronation. The real lesson of 1992 is that H. Ross Perot was threatened to marginalize himself with bazaar conduct of dropping out and then jumping back into the race. A true viable Third Party is the only way to scare the bejesus out of the establishment whores. As long as the Ignorant Middle swings between burros and pachyderms, the ‘TC’ society will wear the dullard label.

For any reform or revolutionary movement to be legitimate, it must reject a top-down model. If a mere 13% approve Congress' performance, please explain how Obama has a 79 percent job-approval rating among liberal Democrats? Are the irresistible statists wearing a liberal label or do they just make up the vast majority of the Ignorant Middle? Do not be fooled. No Labels is an alliance of NeoCon and Libs to play on the shallow sophistication of part-time citizens.

SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit's formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce.  SARTRE is the publisher of BREAKING ALL THE RULES. Contact batr@batr.org 


Recently by SARTRE:
The Reemergence of The NeoCons

Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner

The Reemergence of The NeoCons

Our 'neoconservatives' are neither new nor conservative, but old as Babylon and evil as Hell.Edward Abbey

SARTRE, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

If you believed that the NeoCons disappeared after the 2008 election, how soon do you forget? With the next round in the never-ending beltway two-step, the Republican leadership readies their hold of the House of Representatives agenda. The Tea Party freshmen promise to bring a breath of fresh air to a stuffy chamber. Time will tell if their pledge of hope will pan out. What is known with certainty is that the entrenched GOP leadership continues with their dedication to the policies that exemplify their NeoCon mindset. So what is a neoconservative? 

Back in 2003 the courageous Justin Raimondo offers this description.

Conservatives are accustomed to liberals not understanding the zoology of our movement. But the use and abuse of the term 'neoconservative' has exceeded even the high allowance for cliché and ignorance generally afforded to those who write or talk about conservatism from outside the conservative ant farm. In fact, neoconservative has become a Trojan Horse for vast arsenal of ideological attacks and insinuations. For some it means Jewish conservative. For others it means hawk. A few still think it means squishy conservative or ex-liberal. And a few don't even know what the word means, they just think it makes them sound knowledgeable when they use it. 

 From these comments three examples emerge, Pro Zionists, Global Interventionists and RINO Republicans. Implied is that all three wear the GOP label and adopt the badge of being a conservative. Each is not mutually exclusive and often embraces all three distinctions. The best way to view NeoCons is not by what they say but by the deeds and the policies, they champion. The true test of their impact lies in the consequences of their actions.

The analysis in NeoCons are a terminal disease concludes.

The reality of current events, clearly demonstrates that our country is paying a terrible price to expand the regional domination of a country that is consistently against the best interest of our own citizens. While this is the core motivation of NeoCons, the lust for expanding the power of centralized rule, is not far behind. Neoconservatives are devoted Statists and detest limited government, and especially State Rights. The concept that people should be able to live their lives locally, and have the effective ability to reject the "metropolitik" of the urbane cultural of coercion, is unfamiliar to the tyrants. There is nothing remotely conservative within the cult of the NeoCon.

The standard to use in evaluating the new Republican majority in the House of Representatives in the next Congress should consider the varied tribes of the NeoCon specie. Three examples illustrate what to look for.

1) Unequivocal endorsement of AIPAC Zionism and complete support for State of Israel
2) Full support for "War on Terror", ongoing Afghan/Iraq presence and future attack on Iran
3) Backing of Patriot Act, Homeland Security, Open Borders, Federal Reserve and deficit spending

These basic establishment viewpoints are the essence of the bi-partisan political elites. What confuses many people who target NeoCons as betrayers of genuine conservative principles is that the unholy alliance with progressive and liberal Democrats is fundamental to the existence of the NeoCon con-job. The CFR - NeoCon Connection makes the point. "Authentic conservatives have long been opponents of the Council on Foreign Relations . . . The subtle merging of the mainstream CFR elites with their Trotskyists and subrosa NeoCon cousins, continues. Both are part of the same scheme - an enemy of America".


Internationalists swing an elephant trunk while excreting from a donkey’s ass. Globalists share the same NeoCon core devotion to empire. There is nothing conservative in this outlook.

The watershed excuse for systemic despotism rests upon the fairy tale of government’s version of911. As long as the public remains mesmerized with false enemies and pointless foreign adventures, expect more body scanning, financial intrusion and electronic surveillance. Notwithstanding the election of Tea Party candidates, the reemergence of NeoCons is assured. The leadership in the Republican Party is solidly in the NeoCon camp. The Absurd Report warns, "It appears that the House GOP hasn’t learned their lesson from last time around because these two picks signal it is back to business as usual".

STRIKE ONE: Rep. Fred Upton (RINO MI) – As chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee oversight of EPA is the number function of this committee. If any agency needs a tough watchdog it is the EPA who is dismantling our free enterprise system with meaningless regulations. Upton is your classic fence sitting RINO.

STRIKE TWO: Rep. Hal Rogers of Kentucky as chairman of the Appropriations Committee. Rogers is an earmark-happy member of ‘Good Old Boys Club’ and giving him the chair in the Appropriations Committee is akin to giving a burglar the keys to the bank. This is the last guy we need in charge of Appropriations.

What is lost in looking to Congress to save the Republic is that bureaucrats, who may follow the lead of executive branch direction, but actually implement the rules and regulations that force compliance upon a belittled public, make real policy.


If you think that Barry Soetoro wheels the clout of the presidency and is willing to oppose NeoCon thinking, you must believe he is a natural born citizen. The Con in NeoCon is a standalone practice, practiced by both parties.


The only reason that a reemergence is applicable is that the faces and committee assignments are changing. What has never altered is that those same three crux NeoCon tenants continue under every Democratic administration. Therefore, the more accurate description might well be the NeoConJob.


Alas, that would be too traumatic for the "squishy conservative" and especially would be inconceivable to the "true believer" liberal-progressive to accept that there is no real difference between the inalienable interests of the controllers, who select the Face in the Crowd.

The headline in the Huffington Post reads: Newt GingrichLeaning Toward Presidential Run: I'm 'Much More Inclined To Run Than Not Run' and cites him in Politico, "We are not going to deport 11 million people," Gingrich said. 

 The NeoCon friendly WorldNetDaily publishes, "The U.S. should support an Israeli military strike against Iranian nuclear installations if the Jewish state, fearing diplomacy has failed, ultimately takes that course of action, stated former Arkansas governor and Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee."


The Neoconservative princess, Sarah Palin even voices her NeoCon credentials in An Open Letter to Republican Freshmen Members of Congress.

You must push President Obama to finish the job right in Iraq and get the job done in Afghanistan

You should be prepared to stand with the president against Iran’s nuclear aspirations using whatever means necessary

You will also have the opportunity to push job-creating free trade agreements with allies like Colombia and South Korea

You can stand with allies like Israel, not criticize them

These triplet aspirer’s for Obama’s crown are typical models of national destruction. Do they really represent the views of the disenchanted groundswell that underpins the views of historic Tea Party dissenters?


Scott McConnell in Standard Operating Procedures: How the Neocons Are Co-opting the Tea Party puts the perspective in focus.

A case in point is the sharp contrast between what appear to be core Tea Party beliefs and those of the neoconservatives, the political faction most closely associated with the drive to attack Iraq and a vanguard force in hawkish policy discourse.

Add to this mix the Tea Party, an amorphous, populist, ideologically diverse explosion of anti-Obama activism, permeated with libertarian and quasi-isolationist sentiments. Could the Republicans be on the verge of a battle over foreign policy as divisive as the one Democrats experienced in the 1960s and 1970s? And will the neoconservatives emerge substantially weaker? Many on the paleoconservative and libertarian right hope so.

Anyone who understands the eternal spirit of America must be a defender of civil liberties. The gross betrayal of natural rights by crazed NeoCon must not resurrect its ugly treason. Keep abreast of the latest developments on NeoCon Watch and Original Dissent Neo-Con Watch forum.

You can judge the new Congress by their willingness to repeal the Patriot Act, dismantle Homeland Security and abolish the Federal Reserve. If this latest crop of would be demigods refuse to support the legislation of Ron Paul, you know that the GOP leadership has their claws into the backbone of first timers.


Paleoconservatives have their own message for the Congressional freshman class. Dump your leadership. Purge NeoCons from your party. Vote down any spending bills that fund tyranny and support a foreign policy of empire. Refuse to endorse or campaign for any 2012 presidential candidates that avow NeoCon policies. Organize district and national grassroots involvement to promote national outrage against the corporate/state. Demand real national defense by closing the open border invasion. Last and certainly not least, stand up to the extortion from foreign countries and their agents that betray America as a routine practice. Relegate NeoCons to their own Leon Trotsky paradise. "You are pitiful isolated individuals; you are bankrupts; your role is played out. Go where you belong from now on / into the dustbin of history!"


SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit's formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce.  SARTRE is the publisher of BREAKING ALL THE RULES. Contact batr@batr.org

Enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter:


Delivered by FeedBurner