Friday, March 28, 2014

Monday, March 3, 2014

For Netanyahu, a bombshell battering by Obama

En route to his meeting at the White House, the PM and the rest of the world read that the president believes he’s leading Israel to wrack and ruin

By David Horovitz March 3, 2014, 4:18 am

US President Barack Obama talks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House in 2012 (photo credit: Avi Ohayon/Government Press Office/Flash90)

Hello, Mr. Prime Minister. You’re attempting to maintain “a chronic situation” as regards the Palestinians. You’ve been pursuing “more aggressive settlement construction over the last couple years than we’ve seen in a very long time.” There’ll come a point, you know, “where you can’t manage this anymore, and then you start having to make very difficult choices: Do you resign yourself to what amounts to a permanent occupation of the West Bank?… Do you perpetuate, over the course of a decade or two decades, more and more restrictive policies in terms of Palestinian movement? Do you place restrictions on Arab-Israelis in ways that run counter to Israel’s traditions?” But other than that, Mr. Prime Minister, welcome to the White House.

Until he read the breaking news of President Obama’s earth-shattering interview with Bloomberg’s Jeffrey Goldberg on Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu might have anticipated that Monday’s meeting was going to be one of his less confrontational and unpleasant sessions of frank, allied diplomacy with his good friend Barack.

Sure, the stakes were always going to be high: The president was going to be urging Netanyahu to assent to Secretary of State John Kerry’s framework proposal for continued peace talks. And the prime minister was going to be urging Obama to toughen his demands on Iran, to ensure that the ayatollahs are deprived of the wherewithal to build the nuclear weapons they swear they don’t want to build, just on the off chance that they might be lying.

But Netanyahu, his aides had long been indicating, was ready to accept the framework proposals — as a non-binding basis for further negotiations. So no need for confrontation there. And he must have had little hope that he was going to shift Obama’s stance on Iran, however powerful he believes his arguments to be. So not much point in confrontation there, either.

But then came that bombshell Bloomberg battering.

The timing could not have been any more deliberate — an assault on the prime minister’s policies delivered precisely as Netanyahu was flying in to meet with him, and on the first day, too, of the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC’s annual tour de force conference across town.

At the very least, that might be considered bad manners, poor diplomatic protocol, a resounding preemptive slap in the face: I’ve just told the world you’re leading your country to wrack and ruin, Mr. Prime Minister. Now, what was it you wanted to talk to me about?

More substantively, the president’s comments reinforce years of grievance that have accumulated in Netanyahu’s circles and some distance beyond, to the effect that the president ignores the inconsistencies, duplicities and worse of the Palestinian Authority and its leader Mahmoud Abbas, while placing exaggerated blame for the failure of peace efforts at the door of the Israeli government.

As they read through the transcript of the interview, Netanyahu and his aides were doubtless bemoaning what they see as Obama’s obsession with settlements, to the exclusion of almost any other issue on which the Israelis and the Palestinians are deadlocked. They would certainly have been lamenting that the president’s public display of disaffection will hardly encourage the Palestinians to adopt more flexible positions on such other core issues as their demand for a “right of return” for millions of Palestinians to Israel. And they might have been wondering if some of the Obama ammunition had been fired precisely now as a mark of his displeasure with AIPAC, the irritating lobby that just won’t keep quiet on pressuring Iran.

Since even before he became president, Obama has made plain his conviction that Israel’s settlement enterprise is profoundly counterproductive for the Jewish state. Many Israelis share this belief. That Obama chose to highlight his concern in such ominous and pointed terms, going so far as to warn that it would become harder in the future for the US to protect Israel from the consequences of its misguided West Bank building, would suggest that he has all but despaired of Netanyahu’s willingness to rein in construction. Otherwise, surely, he would have held his fire, and first consulted face-to-face with the prime minister.

For one thing is certain, the president’s resort to a newspaper interview on the eve of their talks to issue near-apocalyptic warnings about the disaster Netanyahu risks bringing upon Israel is just about the last thing likely to bolster the prime minister’s confidence in their alliance, and just about the last thing likely to encourage Netanyahu to further alienate his hawkish home base by taking steps such as halting building outside the settlement blocs.

It will be particularly interesting now to see what platitudes the pair can manage when they invite in the press for the traditional, brief Q&A session at the White House on Monday. Doubtless they’ll come up with something. But the fact is that Obama chose to have his real say about Netanyahu before the prime minister had arrived, and it constituted a brutal political assault. Other than that, Mr. Prime Minister, how are you enjoying Washington, DC?

The Backstory to the Russia-Ukraine Confrontation: The US-NATO Encirclement of Russia

By Washington's Blog

Global Research, March 04, 2014

Region: Europe, Russia and FSU

Theme: US NATO War Agenda

The Big Picture: The U.S. and NATO Have Been Trying to Encircle Russia Militarily Since 1991

The American press portrays Putin as being the bad guy and the aggressor in the Ukraine crisis.
Putin is certainly no saint. A former KGB agent, Putin’s net worth is estimated at some $40 billion dollars … as he has squeezed money out of the Russian economy by treating the country as his own personal fiefdom. And all sides appear to have dirt on their hands in the Russia-Ukraine crisis.
But we can only see the bigger picture if we take a step back and gain a little understanding of the history underlying the current tensions.
Indeed, the fact that the U.S. has allegedly paid billions of dollars to anti-Russian forces in Ukraine – and even purportedly picked the Ukrainian president – has to be seen in context.
Veteran New York Times reporter Steven Kinzer notes at the Boston Globe:

From the moment the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the United States has relentlessly pursued a strategy of encircling Russia, just as it has with other perceived enemies like China and Iran. [Background here, here and here.] It has brought 12 countries in central Europe, all of them formerly allied with Moscow, into the NATO alliance. US military power is now directly on Russia’s borders.
“I think it is the beginning of a new cold war,” warned George Kennan, the renowned diplomat and Russia-watcher, as NATO began expanding eastward. “I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely, and it will affect their policies.”

Stephen Cohen – professor emeritus at New York University and Princeton University who has long focused on Russia – explained this weekend on CNN:

We are witnessing as we talk the making possibly of the worst history of our lifetime. We are watching the descending of a new cold war divide between west and east, only this time, it is not in far away Berlin, it’s right on Russia’s borders through the historical civilization in Ukraine. It’s a crisis of historic magnitude. If you ask how we got in it, how we got into the crisis, and how therefore do we get out, it is time to stop asking why Putin – why Putin is doing this or that, but ask about the American policy, and the European Union policy that led to this moment.
***

I don’t know if you your listeners or views remember George Kennan. He was considered [a] great strategic thinker about Russia among American diplomats but he warned when we expanded NATO [under Bill Clinton], that this was the most fateful mistake of American foreign policy and that it would lead to a new Cold War. George lived to his hundreds, died a few years ago, but his truth goes marching on. The decision to move NATO beginning in the 90′s continuing under Bush and continuing under Obama, is right now on Russia’s borders.
And if you want to know for sure, and I have spent a lot of time in Moscow, if you want to know what the Russian power elite thinks Ukraine is about, it is about bringing it into NATO. One last point, that so-called economic partnership that Yanukovych, the elected president of Ukraine did not sign, and that set off the streets – the protests in the streets in November, which led to this violence in and confrontation today, that so-called economic agreement included military clauses which said that Ukraine by signing this so called civilization agreement had to abide by NATO military policy. This is what this is about from the Russian point of view, the ongoing western march towards post Soviet Russia.

Jonathan Steele writes at the Guardian

Both John Kerry’s threats to expel Russia from the G8 and the Ukrainian government’s plea for Nato aid mark a dangerous escalation of a crisis that can easily be contained if cool heads prevail. Hysteria seems to be the mood in Washington and Kiev, with the new Ukrainian prime minister claiming, “We are on the brink of disaster” as he calls up army reserves in response to Russian military movements in Crimea.
Were he talking about the country’s economic plight he would have a point. Instead, along with much of the US and European media, he was over-dramatising developments in the east, where Russian speakers are understandably alarmed after the new Kiev authorities scrapped a law allowing Russian as an official language in their areas. They see it as proof that the anti-Russian ultra-nationalists from western Ukraine who were the dominant force in last month’s insurrection still control it. Eastern Ukrainians fear similar tactics of storming public buildings could be used against their elected officials.
Kerry’s rush to punish Russia and Nato’s decision to respond to Kiev’s call by holding a meeting of member states’ ambassadors in Brussels today were mistakes. Ukraine is not part of the alliance, so none of the obligations of common defence come into play. Nato should refrain from interfering in Ukraine by word or deed. The fact that it insists on getting engaged reveals the elephant in the room: underlying the crisis in Crimea and Russia’s fierce resistance to potential changes is Nato’s undisguised ambition to continue two decades of expansion into what used to be called “post-Soviet space”, led by Bill Clinton and taken up by successive administrations in Washington. At the back of Pentagon minds, no doubt, is the dream that a US navy will one day replace the Russian Black Sea fleet in the Crimean ports of Sevastopol and Balaclava.

***
Vladimir Putin’s troop movements in Crimea, which are supported by most Russians, are of questionable legality under the terms of the peace and friendship treaty that Russia signed with Ukraine in 1997. But their illegality is considerably less clear-cut than that of the US-led invasion of Iraq, or of Afghanistan, where the UN security council only authorised the intervention several weeks after it had happened. [Indeed, top American leaders admit that the Iraq war was for reasons different than publicly stated. And the U.S. military sticks its nose in other countries' business all over the world. And see this.] And Russia’s troop movements can be reversed if the crisis abates. That would require the restoration of the language law in eastern Ukraine and firm action to prevent armed groups of anti-Russian nationalists threatening public buildings there.

Again, we don’t believe that there are angels on any side. But we do believe that everyone has to take a step back, look at the bigger picture, calm down and reach a negotiated diplomatic resolution.
And see this, this, this and this (interview with a 27-year CIA veteran, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates and personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and the Joint Chiefs of Staff).

Natural Gas is What Detonated the Ukraine Crisis

By Andrew McKillop

Global Research, March 03, 2014

21st Century Wire

Region: Europe, Russia and FSU

Theme: Oil and Energy

This week the whole of the western media and geopolitical discourse reads ‘Crisis in Ukraine’, and the media juggernaut is quickly morphing into one of ‘The West vs Russia’.

Few in the western media, much less the leading political mouths in Britain, Europe and the US, are willing to address what triggered this latest geopolitical ‘crisis’. It’s better to move the public along with the threat of war narrative (much better for news ratings).

Always Smoldering – Ukraine’s Gas Debts to Russia
Defending Moscow’s December 18, 2013 agreement to provide Ukraine with an aid package estimated at about $15 billion, and cheaper natural gas through discounts and “gas debt forgiveness” estimated as able to save Ukraine $7 bn in one year, Vladimir Putin said the decision to invest $15 bn in ‘brotherly slavic’ Ukraine, and grant the gas discount was “pragmatic and based on economic facts”.
At the time, the “investment” in Ukraine was already conditional – not only on the political issue of Ukrainian loyalty to Moscow – but on Ukraine complying with previous longstanding, often revoked, modified or extended commitments to repay gas debts dating from as far back as the early 1990s. In December, Russia’s Finance minister Anton Siluanov said payment of the “aid or investment” funds to Ukraine, in tranches of about $2 bn each, would need Ukraine making a serious response to end-2013 estimates, by Russia, of the minimum “monetized gas debt” Ukraine has to pay. Siluanov’s ministry said this was about $2.7 bn, itself a large downward revision on other published figures from Russian sources, extending well above $5 bn. His ministry also published statements suggesting that Ukraine’s non-payment of gas taken and consumed by the country, since 2010, ran at a yearly average as high as $2 – $2.25 bn.
To be sure, events starting in February as the “Maidan movement” drew massive public support in the capital and western Ukraine to overthrowing the government-in-place. This was a repeat of Egypt’s anti-Morsi flash mob street revolution, followed by the Saudi-financed military coup against elected president Morsi. In Ukraine, however, the street magic stopped in the east, and especially in Crimea where 75%-85% of votes cast in the 2010 election were for Viktor Yanukovych.

To be sure, this blood-colored version of the Orange Revolution aimed at aligning Ukraine with the European Union may have scarpered further bail out payments by Moscow. Any upping of the ante, as enacted and supplied by NATO and John Kerry, could lead to Russia also making a total shutdown of gas supply to Ukraine – Kiev’s Independence Square flash mob could hope that Global Warming will shorten the winter, ease heating needs, and give Ukraine a head start for becoming a debt wracked European Union associated country – but this is far from a sure thing.
Debt, Gas Debt and Gas Prices
The national gas debt will surely feature in the round of proposals for “Ukraine bailout” being developed by the IMF, European Commission, EU member states on a bilateral basis, the US and potentially other actors, including the ECB and the UN ECE (the UN’s European economic agency), as well as private banks and energy companies. One thing is sure and certain, much higher gas prices for Ukraine are inevitable, under any scenario.
As of early January 2014, Russia’s second largest state bank, VTB, organized the first tranche of the $15 bn financial bailout, by making a $3 bn sale of Ukrainian debt bonds on the Irish Stock Exchange, guaranteed by Russia’s $88 bn sovereign-wealth National Welfare Fund, which was also tasked with financing of the $7 bn natural gas price discount and gas debt forgiveness to Ukraine in counterparty for Ukrainian starting payment of its monetized gas debt.
Current estimates of Ukraine’s total national debt stand at about $145 bn, around 80% of GDP in 2013, but late-February foreign exchange reserves were said by newswires to be only about $15 bn.
Although heavily affected by political rivalries and disputes, Yulia Tymoshenko’s two-month-only role as Ukrainian deputy prime minister responsible for fuel and energy, in 1999-2000, included her attempts at cutting back Ukraine’s constantly rising gas debt, by proposing a huge increase in gas prices inside the country. One of her proposals was for Ukraine to start paying Russia’s Gazprom $400 per thousand cubic meters (about $11 per million BTU, close to current west European prices at the major gas hubs NBP, Zeebrugge, Baumgarten).
After her “time in the political wilderness” and return to power as Prime Minister in 2007, this price was a major bargaining chip in very rocky Ukrainian negotiations with the Kremlin and Gazprom. Her supposedly “surprising” decision to pay for Ukraine’s gas through gas trading using a specially created Switzerland-based trading subsidiary, partly owned by Gazprom and major business and political figures in Ukraine – several of them “suspected of organized crime” – was a key factor in the 2009 “Ukraine-Russia gas crisis”. Tymoshenko tried a political wriggle-out by claiming there was either no outstanding Ukrainian gas debt – or that if it existed, it was now the debt of Swiss-registered company called, RusUkrEnergo.
Only for year 2008 gas deliveries, the new and additional gas debt of Ukraine towards Gazprom was estimated by analysts at about $2.4 bn. Since 2010, about the same annual rate of gas debt increase is claimed to have been racked up by Ukraine, according to Russian sources such as Alfa Bank Moscow.
Certainly at times in the long, complicated and dispute-riddled negotiations with Tymoshenko, Alexei Miller, CEO of Gazprom said his corporation could and would supply Ukraine with gas at $235 per thousand m3, but RusUkrEnergo was too attractive to Ukrainian business and political players as an opaque gas payments and trading entity able to be milked for huge kickbacks. On January 1, 2009 Russia halted all shipments of gas to Ukraine and demanded $450 per thousand m3. Then prime minister of Russia, Vladimir Putin said that $470 would be the future price, close to the 2009-price paid by many EU national gas companies “lower down the gasline”, of about $500.
Proving the extent to which this was Kremlin armtwisting of Ukraine, to make Tymoshenko close down RusUkrEnergo for reasons including this entity’s total impossibility of repaying national gas debt, when gas supplies were resumed after the crisis they were billed by Gazprom at about $230 per thousand m3, far below then-current west European gas prices, and still so, today.
Even this price was however too much to pay, for Ukraine. To be sure, inside Ukraine, especially after its government collapse and the “disappearance” of its now-fugitive (for western Ukrainians) former president Yanukovych, Russia can be portrayed as cynically allowing Ukraine to run up massive, unpayable gas debts. For Gazprom however, the euros-and-cents costs of gas supplies, trade and disputes with Ukraine over the years is a black hole for corporate finances. Some analysts suggest that only for the three years 2011-2013 Ukraine’s total gas debt could be $7 bn, and that writing this amount off (calling it a “friendship discount”), and returning to the previous $2.7 bn “official monetized gas debt” figure was pure political largesse by Vladimir Putin, aimed at buying Ukrainian loyalty.
The Spring Gas Crisis is Coming
Ukraine-Russia gas crises are “traditionally” short wintertime crises, which ups the ante each time, as Ukrainians start to freeze, businesses and industry shut down and the lights go out. This time however, the effects may be enduring. Ukraine’s gas debt will certainly feature in negotiations aimed at relaunching the Ukrainian economy. Gas supplies to the country from Russia, under a presently far-from-impossible worst case scenario, could be terminated pending the immediate and full payment of outstanding gas debt – without “friendship discounts”. Currently Ukraine is unable to pay west European gas prices or repay gas debt, or its sovereign national financial debt. To be sure, if Ukraine’s gas supply is cut off, this will create havoc “further down the gasline” and reignite the energy security debates that the short but dramatic 2009 crisis triggered across Europe.
In a 26 February article “Sustaining Ukraine’s Breakthrough” published by Project-syndicate, George Soros argued that Ukraine needs a modern equivalent of the Marshall Plan. He reminded his readers that while the Marshall Plan aided western Europe’s recovery from the ravages of World War II, it did not include the Soviet bloc and reinforced the Cold War division of Europe. Soros said that a replay today of the Cold War would cause immense damage to both Russia and Europe, but he forgot to say that this time around, Ukraine needs a Marshall Gas Plan.
With no shadow of doubt “the gas question” will feature in what happens in the present stand-off between Putin’s Russia and the west – and inside Ukraine – and will powerfully underline the energy economic interdependence of Russia and Europe.
Also sure and certain, Ukraine will pay much more for its gas, and will have to face its accumulated gas debt, as the role of seaboard LNG terminals is given more attraction due to the present crisis, underlining the geopolitical risk of international gas pipelines.

Our new society is "almost" here.

Be the Ones to Deliver the most important document at the time of the Event

Community Leaders Brief can be seen HERE

Beautiful and holistic changes are occurring everywhere on Earth! All people are invited to Participate as a New Society is being born into the Light of Truth. A massive surge of positive feelings is powering a deep shift worldwide. Optimism and joy are creating peace in everyone as they are filled with an instinctive knowing of truth and humanity’s potential for loving change.
The unfolding of love and truth has been written about and spoken of by the great prophets, sages and mystics of all cultures for thousands of years, it is THE EVENT when humanity is lifted above the darkness and fear that has so engulfed us. Now is the time prophesied, the Victory of the Light!
Prepare For Change is here to connect all people, particularly those who have experienced the Light of Truth, together in loving, peaceful support of a prosperous New Society. Those who have experienced the Light of Truth know more from that brief interlude than they could learn from any teacher alive today. You, who already have this knowing, are called to action. Assisting the awakened as they seek the presence of other lighted beings is our first job, so that we can then share the awareness that is our unique gift. Call all who know the Light of Truth! Ask them to join you in meditation and prayer to increase the energy of peace in your community! Organize to lift the spirits of everyone by sharing your special gifts in true love and openness. Every village, town and city needs loving leadership to embrace change as never before in human history.

The Event by Rob Potter A Video by Gary Lite.

It is very important that after you have registered a new “Event Support Group” on the “Meet-Up” site that you come back to this page and click here so we can put your information on our site Click Here

The official “Meet-Up” site ( http://www.meetup.com/Prepare-for-Change/?see_all=1) will always have all of our “Event Support Groups” list in its entirety and all new members should always check there to see if there is a group already formed in their area.
Please be aware that at the time of “The Event” this site will be getting perhaps millions of hits and sign up for groups will increase tremendously. We hope you will still be active and take your role seriously and be able to be a force for peace, truth and understanding at the time of “The Event”. The PFC Team Thanks you

Show entries

Search:

Country	Territory / State	City	Organizers
A
Australia	Braidwood	Braidwood	Mandi Lamont mandi.lamont @gmail.com
Australia	Victoria	Melbourne	N/A
Australia	Western Australia	Geraldton	Dave Ashwell: info@agrilube.com.au
Australia	Western Australia	Perth	N/A
Austria	Vienna	Vienna	Sylvia Blue
B
Bulgaria	Plovdiv	Plovdiv	Jordan Georgiev
Belgium	België	Antwerpen	S.J: 2012transitie @gmail.com Page
Belgium	Liège	Liège	phgilis2 @gmail.com

Showing 1 to 10 of 298 entries

Previous Next

If you do not see your “Meet-Up” Event Support Group listed here on our site please Click Here

China Joins Forces With Russia Against U.S.

It remains to be seen what, if any, support China might offer in Russia’s action.

B. Christopher Agee — March 3, 2014

As Russian military action escalates in the Ukraine, the weakness of American influence is being highlighted on the world’s stage. The White House reported this weekend that Russia is “in an occupation position in Crimea,” a Ukrainian peninsula reportedly being bombarded with more than 6,000 air and naval forces.
Secretary of State John Kerry is expected to visit Kiev this week to meet with Ukraine’s current leaders.

While American leaders offer rhetorical support for Ukrainian opposition forces, China has recently emerged as a Russian ally in the takeover.
Sergei Lavrov, Russia’s foreign minister, announced Monday that he and Wang Li, who holds an equivalent position in China, discussed the ongoing occupation of Crimea, describing “broadly coinciding points of view” regarding the issue.
In addition to America and Canada, several European nations issued a statement indicating they “condemn the Russian Federation’s clear violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.”
William Hague, Britain’s foreign secretary, is already in Kiev and called the current action this century’s biggest European crisis.
“It’s impossible to be optimistic at the moment,” he asserted. “We’re not in any position to be optimistic about the security situation and what is happening in the Crimea.”
Russia, which has military capabilities that best the Ukraine in virtually all respects, is now further emboldened by its alignment with China. The Russian parliament authorized President Vladimir Putin to use force in the region Saturday, leading to an operation that took place as millions of Americans were watching the Oscar awards Sunday evening.
It remains to be seen what, if any, support China might offer in Russia’s action. Likewise, America has yet to offer any firm response to the ongoing dispute.
Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk remains defiant, however, insisting the nation will “never give up Crimea to anyone” and imploring Russian occupiers to leave the area.
Still, an alliance between China and Russia in any military operation is cause for concern around the world. As Trevor Loudon, a political activist and author from New Zealand, reported in the recent Western Conservative Conference, both nations have hinted at both the capability and desire to potentially engage in military action against the U.S.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration is determined to continue shrinking American armed forces and driving up our national debt, making our potential retaliation to such threats woefully inadequate.
–B. Christopher Agee
Have an idea for a story? Email us at tips@westernjournalism.com
Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Why is China Hoarding all the Gold? Get this Critical Info for Your IRA or 401(k) >

Ukraine: Israeli Special Forces Unit under Neo-Nazi Command Involved in Maidan Riots

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, March 03, 2014

Region: Europe, Russia and FSU

Theme: Police State & Civil Rights

Image: Neo-Nazi Militia
Under the title “In Kiev, an Israeli army vet led a street-fighting unit”, the Jewish News Agency JTA confirms that soldiers from the IDF were involved in the EuroMaidan protest movement under the direct command of the Neo-Nazi Svoboda Party. The Svoboda Party follows in the footsteps of World War II Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera.
The leader of the “Blue Helmets of Maidan” is Delta “the nom de guerre of the commander of a Jewish-led militia force that participated in the Ukrainian revolution”. Delta is a Veteran of the notorious Givati infantry brigade, which was involved in numerous operations directed against Gaza including Operation Cast Lead in 2008-2009.
The Givati brigade was responsible for the massacres in the Tel el-Hawa neighborhood of Gaza. Delta, the leader of the EuroMaidan IDF unit acknowledges that he acquired his urban combat skills in the Shu’alei Shimshon reconnaissance battalion of the Givati brigade.

Delta, the nom de guerre of the Jewish commander of a Ukrainian street-fighting unit, is pictured in Kiev earlier this month. (Courtesy of ‘Delta’)
According to the JTA report, Delta was in command of a force of 40 men and women including several former IDF veterans. In the EuroMaidan, Delta was routinely applying his skills of urban warfare which he had used against the Palestinians in Gaza.
The Maidan “Street fighting unit” under Delta’s command was involved in confronting government forces. It is unclear from the reports whether the EuroMaidan combat unit was in liaison with IDF command headquarters in Israel:

The Blue Helmets comprise 35 men and women who are not Jewish, and who are led by five ex-IDF soldiers, says Delta, an Orthodox Jew in his late 30s
Delta, who immigrated to Israel in the 1990s, moved back to Ukraine several years ago … He says he joined the protest movement as a volunteer on Nov. 30, after witnessing violence by government forces against student protesters.
“I saw unarmed civilians with no military background being ground by a well-oiled military machine, and it made my blood boil,” Delta told JTA in Hebrew laced with military jargon. “I joined them then and there, and I started fighting back the way I learned how, through urban warfare maneuvers. People followed, and I found myself heading a platoon of young men. Kids, really.”
The other ex-IDF infantrymen joined the Blue Helmets later after hearing it was led by a fellow vet, Delta said.

In a bitter irony, Delta, the commander of the IDF militia unit was taking his orders directly from the Neo-Nazi Party Svoboda:

As platoon leader, Delta says he takes orders from activists connected to Svoboda, an ultra-nationalist [Neo-Nazi] party that has been frequently accused of anti-Semitism and whose members have been said to have had key positions in organizing the opposition protests.
“I don’t belong [to Svoboda], but I take orders from their team. They know I’m Israeli, Jewish and an ex-IDF soldier. They call me ‘brother,’” he said. “What they’re saying about Svoboda is exaggerated, I know this for a fact. I don’t like them because they’re inconsistent, not because of [any] anti-Semitism issue.”

Neither the Tel Aviv government nor the Israeli media have expressed concern regarding the fact that the EuroMaidan protests were led by Neo-Nazis.
With the formation of a new government composed of NeoNazis, the Jewish community in Kiev is threatened. This community is described as “one of the most vibrant Jewish communities in the world, with dozens of active Jewish organizations and institutions”. A significant part of this community is made up of family members of holocaust survivors. “Three million Ukrainians were murdered by the Nazis during their occupation of Ukraine, including 900,000 Jews.” (indybay.org, January 29, 2014).
“It’s bullshit. I never saw any expression of anti-Semitism during the protests”
In a bitter twist, the Blue Helmet IDF unit in the EuroMaidan has been the object of praise by the Israeli media. According to Ariel Cohen of the Washington based Heritage Foundation: “The commanding position of Svoboda in the revolution is no secret”. The participation of Israeli soldiers under Neo-Nazi Svoboda command does not seem to be an object of concern:

On Wednesday, Russian State Duma Chairman Sergey Naryshkin said Moscow was concerned about anti-Semitic declarations by radical groups in Ukraine.But Delta says the Kremlin is using the anti-Semitism card falsely to delegitimize the Ukrainian revolution, which is distancing Ukraine from Russia’s sphere of influence.
“It’s bullshit. I never saw any expression of anti-Semitism during the protests, and the claims to the contrary were part of the reason I joined the movement. We’re trying to show that Jews care,” he said.

See Svoboda and Right Sector militants honoring Stepan Bandera(image below)
Bandera was a Nazi collaborator involved in the Third Reich’s Einsatzgruppen (Task Groups or Deployment Groups) . These “task forces” were paramilitary death squads deployed throughout the Ukraine.
Reuters / Gleb Garanich

Neo-Nazis Honoring Stepan Bandera
The JTA article can be consulted at www.jta.org/2014/02/28/news-opinion/world/in-kiev-an-israeli-militia-commander-fights-in-the-streets-and-saves-lives#ixzz2uvYcMBEl

Georgia House passes bill to begin the process of nullifying Obamacare, 115-59

You are here:

Home
Issues
Health Care
Georgia House passes bill to begin the process of nullifying Obamacare, 115-59

ATLANTA, Mar. 3, 2014 – Today, the Georgia state house of representatives passed a bill which bans the state from participating in significant portions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). House Bill 707 (HB707), introduced by Rep. Jason Spencer, pushes back against the ACA in five ways. It passed the house in a late-night vote of 115-59.
Specifically, HB707:
1. Prohibits any state agencies, departments or political subdivisions from using resources or spending funds to advocate for the expansion of Medicaid. This provision works hand-in-hand with HB990 to make it more difficult to expand Medicaid. HB990 would require legislative approval for expansion of the program, barring the governor from doing it by executive order.
2. Prohibits the state of Georgia from running an insurance exchange.
3. Refuses and federal grant money for the purpose of creating or running a state insurance exchange.
4. Ends the University of Georgia Health Navigator Program.
5. Prohibits the Commissioner of Insurance from investigating or enforcing any alleged violation of federal health insurance requirements mandated by Obamacare.
Each of these provisions creates impediments to the implementation and execution of Obamacare in Georgia. We’ve seen the difficulties created by the number of states simply refusing to set up exchanges. The ACA was predicated on state cooperation. By refusing to help, passage of the bill puts the federal government in an almost impossible position. It never intended to run the healthcare system alone, and ultimately, it can’t do it without state help. Judge Andrew Napolitano agreed recently, when pointing out that if a number of states were to refuse to participate with the ACA in a wholesale fashion, that multi-state action would “gut Obamacare.”
Tenth Amendment Center executive director Michael Boldin agreed. “While Georgia can’t fully stop Obamacare on its own, it can serve as a pretty major roadblock to implementation,” he said. “And as more states get on board with this strategy, it will pull the rug out from under it. Bills like this will end Obamacare from the bottom up.”
The provision prohibiting the Georgia insurance commissioner from investigating or enforcing violations of federally mandated health insurance requirements will prove particularly problematic for the feds. Insurance commissioners serve as the enforcement arm for insurance regulation in the states. The federal government has no enforcement arm. It assumed the state insurance commissioners would enforce all of the provisions of the ACA. So, when people have issues with their mandated coverage, they will have to call the feds. At this point, it remains unclear who they will even call. Issues the Georgia insurance commissioner will not address include prohibiting a denial of insurance for preexisting conditions, requiring dependent coverage for children up to age 26, and proscribing lifetime or yearly dollar limits on coverage of essential health benefits.
“Disputes over these mandates arise under federal, not state law,” HB707 sponsor Rep. Jason Spencer said. “The federal Department of Health and Human Services can be expected to seek to commandeer the machinery of Georgia’s commissioner of insurance to enforce them or to investigate alleged violations because at present there is no federal health insurance agency and Congress is not likely to create one given the substantial opposition to Obamacare. Under HB707, the feds won’t be able to do that. They’ll have to figure out how to do it themselves.
This provision stands on solid legal ground under the anti-commandeering doctrine. It rests primarily on four SCOTUS cases: Prigg v. Pennsylvania (1842), New York v. US (1992), Printz v. US (1997) and National Federation of Businesses v. Sebelius. (2012) The Printz case serves the cornerstone. Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia asserted that commandeering is incompatible would the constitutional system.

“We held in New York that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the States’ officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policy making is involved, and no case by case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.”

HB707 and HB990 are both scheduled for a vote in the full House on Monday, March 3.

ACTION ITEMS:

In Georgia: Take steps to support HB707 HERE.

Other States: Contact your state legislators today – urge them to introduce similar legislation. Model bills and contact info HERE.

China Joins Forces With Russia Against U.S.

It remains to be seen what, if any, support China might offer in Russia’s action.

B. Christopher Agee — March 3, 2014

Why is China Hoarding all the Gold? Get this Critical Info for Your IRA or 401(k) >

Senior Russian Official: ‘We Expect All Sanctions on Iran to be Lifted’

March 3, 2014 1:27 pm 3 comments

Author:

Gidon Ben-zvi

Share this Article

Tags:

Ali Khamenei Iranian nuclear program Benjamin Netanyahu Iran nuclear program Hassan Rouhani nuclear program iran israel sanctions Iran Nuclear Program Mikhail Margelov iran sanctions Mikhail Margelov russian Mikhail Marglov Russian parliament Iran P5+1 Iran Geneva deal russia iran sanctions

Iraian President Rouhani at a rally celebrating the 1979 Islamist revolution. Photo: Screenshot.

The Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee in Russia’s parliament, Mikhail Margelov, said on Monday that his country expects all economic sanctions against Iran to be removed immediately, Israeli daily Ma’ariv reported.
“There have been important developments. President Hassan Rouhani has openly declared that Iran has no intention to develop an atomic bomb,” Margelov said. ”Furthermore, Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, has issued a decree that prohibits the building of a bomb, calling it ‘a sin.’ ”
As a result of these public statements, Marglov concluded, “The conditions have now been met to justify the full lifting of sanctions on Iran.”
According to the senior Russian official, the sanctions issue will be brought up during the next round of talks between the Islamic Republic and world powers, scheduled for March 17.
Iran and the P5+1 countries agreed to a landmark nuclear deal in November 2013 allowing Tehran access to frozen assets in exchange for limitations on the country’s nuclear program. As part of the agreement, the international community effectively accepted peaceful nuclear activity on the part of Tehran.
At the time of the agreement’s signing, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanayhu said it was a ”historic mistake” and that the world had become a more dangerous place as a result.

BREAKING: Israeli Air Force Attacks Targets In Gaza

Palestinians reported that one person was killed and two were wounded in an air strike by the IAF. Earlier the “red alert” alarm sounded in the western Negev.

Mar 03, 2014, 08:43PM | Jonathan Benedek

The IAF launched another airstrike in Gaza tonight. Photo Credit: Reuters/Channel 2

Israeli Air Force planes attacked a terrorist target in Gaza tonight. Palestinians have reported that that one person was killed and two were wounded. Apparently, the attack came after a red alert sounded earlier in the western Negev.

Last month, the IAF attacked multiple targets in response to rocket attacks on the Negev. The IDF Spokesperson announced in a message that the IAF identified precise targets. A rocket launcher was hit in the central Gaza Strip along with a terrorist target in the northern part of the Gaza Strip. Every aircraft that participated in the attack returned safely to their bases.
"The attack took place after a high trajectory of repeated fire…by Hamas in recent days," the IDF said in February. "The IDF takes all firing at Israeli territory very seriously and will continue to act with determination against anyone who is involved terror against the State Israel."

Watch The Main Newscast - Click Here

Merkel Warns Iran Nuclear Program is EU Threat

Posted by: Video Manager February 27, 2014 , 10:22 am

German chancellor Angela Merkel has said Iran’s nuclear program is not just a threat to Israel but to Europe as well. Speaking at a joint news conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem, she ceded that Iran’s ballistic missile program is ‘closely connected’ to its nuclear capability. However, Merkel stopped short of demanding Tehran give up all its most sensitive nuclear projects, a move which Netanyahu believes could lead to ‘waves of nuclear armament’.

Enjoy this video? Get BIN updates directly to your inbox.*

Russia And China Stand In Agreement On Ukraine – Is That Bad News For The United States?

Michael Snyder 2 hours ago

So much for "isolating" Russia. The Chinese government is publicly siding with Russia on the crisis in Ukraine, and that is very bad news for the United States. Not only does it mean that the U.S. is essentially powerless to do anything about the situation in Ukraine, it also means that Russia and China are starting to understand how much economic leverage that they really have. Yes, the Obama administration can threaten to slap "sanctions" on Russia or threaten to kick Russia "out of the G8", but those actions would not actually hurt too much. On the other hand, Russia and China hold approximately 25 percent of all foreign-owned U.S. debt, and if they started massively dumping U.S. debt it could rapidly create a nightmare scenario. In addition, it is important to remember that Russia is the largest exporter of natural gas and the second largest exporter of oil in the world. And China now imports more oil than anyone else on the planet does, including the United States. If Russia and China got together and decided to kill the petrodollar, they could do it almost overnight. So when it comes to Ukraine, it is definitely not the United States that has the leverage.
If China and the rest of the world abandoned Russia over Ukraine, that would be one thing. But that is not happening at all. In fact, China has chosen to publicly stand with Russia on this issue. The following is from a Sky News article entitled "Russia And China 'In Agreement' Over Ukraine"...

Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov discussed Ukraine by telephone with his Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, on Monday, and claimed they had "broadly coinciding points of view" on the situation there, according to a ministry statement.

And Chinese state news agency Xinhua is publicly rebuking the West for their handling of the Ukrainian crisis...

China's state news agency Xinhua accused western powers of adopting a Cold War- like mindset towards Russia, trying to isolate Moscow at a time when much needed mediation is need to reach a diplomatic solution to the crisis in Crimea.
"Based on the fact that Russia and Ukraine have deep cultural, historical and economic connections, it is time for Western powers to abandon their Cold War thinking. Stop trying to exclude Russia from the political crisis they failed to mediate, and respect Russia's unique role in mapping out the future of Ukraine," Xinhua wrote in an opinion piece.

Apparently clueless as to how the geopolitical chips are falling, the Obama administration is busy planning all sorts of ways that it can punish Russia...

Behind the scenes, Obama administration officials are preparing a series of possible battle plans for a potential economic assault on Russia in response to its invasion of Ukraine, an administration source close to the issue told The Daily Beast. Among the possible targets for these financial attacks: everyone from high-ranking Russian military officials to government leaders to top businessmen to Russian-speaking separatists in Ukraine. It’s all part of the work to prepare an executive order now under consideration at the Obama administration’s highest levels.

Does the Obama administration really want to start an "economic war" with Russia and potentially against China as well?
Considering how much money we owe them, and considering the fact that we desperately need them to continue to use the petrodollar, we stand to lose far more than they do.
This is one of the reasons why I have always insisted that the national debt was a national security issue. By going into so much debt, we have given other nations such as Russia and China a tremendous amount of leverage over us.
Unfortunately, the debtmongers in Washington D.C. never have listened to common sense.
When it comes to Ukraine, there are other economic considerations as well.
For example, about 25 percent of the natural gas that Europe uses comes from Russia, and Ukraine only has about four months of natural gas supplies stockpiled.
If Russia cut off the natural gas, that would create some huge problems. Fortunately, winter is just about over or the Russians would have even more leverage.
In addition, Ukraine is one of the leading exporters of wheat and corn on the planet, and a disruption in the growing of those crops could make the emerging global food crisis even worse.
But of course the biggest concern is that the Ukraine crisis could ultimately spark a global war.
Unfortunately, there is a treaty that requires the United States to defend Ukraine if it is attacked...

President Bill Clinton, along with the British, signed in 1994 a nearly forgotten agreement to protect Ukraine’s borders. Ukraine now is appealing to the countries that signed the agreement.
As the British Daily Mail points out, it means that, technically, if Russia were to invade Ukraine, it would be difficult for the U.S. and Britain to avoid going to war.

Given that the late Russian president, Boris Yeltsin also signed it, it was apparent that it wasn’t expected that the Russians would take the action that Putin now is undertaking.

And top Ukrainian politicians are now asking western nations to come to the aid of Ukraine militarily...

Ukraine's former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko has appealed for the West to adopt 'strongest means' to intervene in Russia's occupation of Crimea if diplomacy fails.
In an interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour, Tymoshenko, freed last week after the riots throughout the nation, said if Russia is allowed to 'take away' Crimea, life will change 'practically everywhere in the world.'
She added: 'Then we have to accept... an aggressor, can violate all the international agreements, take away territories, whenever she likes.'

On the other side, deposed Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych has formally requested that Russia militarily intervene in his nation...

Russia's U.N. envoy said Monday that ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych asked Russia to send troops to "establish legitimacy, peace, law and order, stability, and defending the people of Ukraine." Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin read a letter from Yanukovych at the U.N. Security Council meeting.

"Ukraine is on the brink of civil war. In the country, there is chaos and anarchy. The life, the security and the rights of people, particularly in the southeast part in Crimea are being threatened. So under the influence of Western countries, there are open acts of terrorism and violence. People are being persecuted for language and political reasons," the letter said. "So in this regard, I would call on the President of Russia, Mr. Putin, asking him to use the armed forces of the Russian Federation to establish legitimacy, peace, law and order, stability, and defending the people of Ukraine."

And it is very important to note that Yanukovych would have never issued this letter if the Russian government has not asked him to.
So the stage is set.
Russia has already grabbed Crimea, and it is eyeing other territories in eastern Ukraine.
China is publicly backing Russia, and collectively they have a tremendous amount of economic leverage.
The Obama administration is barking loudly about what Russia has done, but the reality is that the U.S. has very little economic leverage at this point.
What the U.S. does have is the strongest military on the entire planet, but let us hope and pray that Obama does not decide to get the U.S. military involved in Ukraine. That would be absolutely disastrous.
In the end, the U.S. has no good options in Ukraine. The Obama administration helped aid and organize the violent revolution that overthrew the Ukrainian government, and now we have a giant mess.
Nobody is quite sure what comes next, but one thing is certain...
The relationship between the United States and Russia will never, ever be the same again.
Get a look at the future of America: The Beginning of the End.
Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

Tagged with

china chinese government debt Dumping U.S. Debt Economic Leverage Foreign-Owned U.S. Debt Isolating Russia Leverage Michael T. Snyder natural gas russia The United States U.S. Debt ukraine