Listen: Lindsey Buckingham & Christine McVie debut new song ‘Feel About You’

Lindsey Buckingham and Christine McVie fans stoked to catch the Fleetwood Mac stars on their first-ever solo tour together and itching to hear their upcoming self-titled studio album can whet their appetites with a brand new song. The multi-platinum sellers have premiered a new track titled “Feel About You.”

The pair of Rock and Roll Hall of Famers premiered the audio for the song on April 27 at Rolling Stone. “Feel About You” is the second track to surface from the upcoming duo effort, following the release of the lead single “In My World,” which dropped on April 14.

The jangly pop-rocker clocks in at 3:30 minutes and was co-written by both Buckingham and McVie. McVie handles primary lead vocal duties and the song is slightly reminiscent of her work on Mac’s 1987 studio album Tango in the Night with the Grammy winner waxing poetically about distant love on the first verse, singing, ”You’re so far away/I wonder if you hear what I say/This love you I can’t conceal/That’s how I feel.”

Lindsey Buckingham/Christine McVie will hit shelves on June 9 via Rhino Records. The album features 10 original tracks and is available here for preorder here in CD, digital and vinyl formats.  Fans can check out the new song ‘Feel About You’ above and listen to the lead single “In My World” here.

Buckingham & McVie will launch their U.S. summer tour on June 21 in Atlanta at Chastain Park and wrap things up up July 27 in Denver at The Paramount. Tickets for select Buckingham & McVie are available now at AXS.

The pair will be rejoining their bandmates in Fleetwood Mac for the inaugural run of The Classic Concerts. The “Don’t Stop” hitmakers will top a bill that also features special guests Journey and Earth, Wind & Fire at Classic West on July 15 in Los Angeles at Dodger Stadium and the same line up will perform at Classic East on July 30 in New York at Citi Field.

For all the latest details on Lindsey Buckingham and Christine McVie, click here. For more information on Fleetwood Mac, click here.

Source Article from

Trump expects Seoul to pay for THAAD, complains Saudis take unfair advantage of US protection

President Trump wants South Korea to pay around $1 billion for the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery, he told Reuters in an exclusive interview. 

“I informed South Korea it would be appropriate if they paid. It’s a billion dollar system,” said Trump.

“It’s phenomenal, shoots missiles right out of the sky,” he added, promoting the anti-missile system that is being deployed in South Korea amid much public discontent and fears that it will only make the immediate surroundings a prime target of a potential strike.

This was the first time Trump has spoken directly about the costs of THAAD’s deployment in Korea. In order for Seoul to pay up, Trump would need to convince the next South Korean President, who will be decided on May 9 when the country head to the polls.

Meanwhile, a top foreign policy adviser to South Korean presidential frontrunner Moon Jae-in has already said that paying for THAAD would be an “impossible option.”

“Even if we purchase THAAD, its main operation would be in the hands of the United States,” said Kim Ki-jung, a foreign policy adviser to Moon and professor at Seoul’s Yonsei University.

“So purchasing it would be an impossible option. That was our topic when we were considering the options,” Kim said.

Following a series of nuclear and missile tests by North Korea, the Barack Obama administration in 2016 managed to strike a deal to place THAAD missiles in South Korea with the declared goal of keeping Pyongyang’s nuclear ambitions at bay.

The first elements of the system were moved onto a golf course in Seongju, North Gyeongsang Province, South Korea on Tuesday, prompting clashes between locals and police.

READ MORE: Pyongyang seeks Southeast Asian states’ help to avert ‘nuclear holocaust’

THAAD provides the ballistic missile defense system with a globally transportable, rapidly deployable capability to intercept and destroy ballistic missiles inside or outside the atmosphere during the final phase of flight. In Korea, the 35th Air Defense Artillery Brigade, subordinate to the US Eighth Army, would operate the system.

Seemingly looking forward to collect payments from each and every country that falls under the US security umbrella, Trump then turned on America’s most loyal ally in the Middle East, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

“Frankly, Saudi Arabia has not treated us fairly, because we are losing a tremendous amount of money in defending Saudi Arabia,” Trump told Reuters, echoing his statements made on his campaign trail last year.

“Nobody’s going to mess with Saudi Arabia because we’re watching them,” Trump told a campaign rally in Wisconsin a year ago. “They’re not paying us a fair price. We’re losing our shirt.”

Despite Trump’s suggestion that Saudi Arabia should cough up more cash, the State Department last month approved resuming arms sales to Saudi Arabia which was previously blocked by Barack Obama.

Last year, Obama’s administration approved a $1.15bn sale of tanks and armored vehicles to Saudi Arabia, but due to the ongoing bombardment of Yemen by Saudi led forces, the former US president blocked the sale.

Until now, Trump and his team have primarily focused on getting all NATO members to pay their “fair share” for their protection. The US is the biggest contributor to NATO’s defense expenditures, spending roughly two and a half times more than the rest of the allies combined. The US spent an estimated $664 billion on defense last year.

Only five out of 28 NATO nations are currently meeting the two percent of GDP spending mark demanded by Trump. Besides the US, these are the UK, Estonia, Greece and Poland.

Source Article from

Employers can pay women less based on previous salaries, US court rules

On Thursday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in the case of Aileen Rizo, a female employee who sued the county public schools in Fresno after discovering she was being paid less than her male co-workers for doing the same job. 

Rizo sued the school in 2014, arguing that although she was being paid a higher salary than her previous employer, her male counterparts had salaries more than $10,000 higher than hers.

According to the lawsuit, the school “conceded that it paid the female plaintiff less than comparable male employees for the same work.” Rizo complained to the County about the disparity, but they informed her that her salary was determined by a salary schedule known as “Standard Operation Procedure 1440.

When Rizo was hired as a math consultant in 2009, the school determined her starting salary by using a policy where they add 5 percent to the previous salary of any new employee.

The county argued that the pay bump incentivizes potential employees to leave their previous jobs since they are guaranteed to receive a raise. They also said the policy is objective, prevents favoritism and encourages consistency.

A three-judge panel overturned a lower court ruling from February, citing a 1982 ruling by the court that employers could use previous salary information as long as they applied it reasonably and had a business policy that justified it.

In the opinion written by US District Court Judge Lynn Adelman, he said that “prior salary alone can be a ‘factor other than sex’ if the defendant shows that its use of prior salary was reasonable and effectuated a business policy.

This decision is a step in the wrong direction if we’re trying to really ensure that women have work opportunities of equal pay,” Deborah Rhode, who teaches gender equity law at Stanford Law School, said, according to the Associated Press. “You can’t allow prior discriminatory salary setting to justify future ones or you perpetuate the discrimination.

The Fresno County Office of Education has since revised their policies after the California Equal Pay Act went into effect on January 1, 2016. Under the new law, employers in the state are prohibited from paying different wages to men and women with the same qualifications. 

However, the lawsuit did not mention the state’s Equal Pay Act, since it went into effect after Rizo filed the lawsuit, and the courts have not ruled if the law would apply retroactively.

Rizo’s lawyer, Dan Siegel, told the Associated Press that they have not decided if they are going to take the case to the US Supreme Court.

The logic of the decision is hard to accept,” Siegel said, according to AP. “You’re OK’ing a system that perpetuates the inequity in compensation for women.

Source Article from

Pyongyang seeks ASEAN’s help to avert ‘nuclear holocaust’ as Trump warns of ‘major conflict’

Washington’s actions and rhetoric are pushing the region to the “brink of war,” North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong-ho wrote in a letter to ASEAN’s chief Le Luong Minh from Vietnam.

“As you know, due to the annual war games in South Korea conducted by the United States and South Korea, the situation in the Korean Peninsula is out of control,” the letter, seen by AFP and dated April 23 reads.

“It is a fact clear to everyone that when they deploy the means of nuclear strike that can drive the Korean Peninsula into a nuclear holocaust in just seconds… the nature of such exercises can in no way be defensive.”

Pyongyang penned the letter just ahead of the 30th Asean Summit taking place in Manila on April 26-28 in which it also justified its effort to develop its own nuclear arsenal as the only means of a deterrent against the United States.

North Korea’s chief diplomat urged the ASEAN chief to inform the 10-nation organization’s foreign ministers “about the grave situation” and to develop a “proper proposal” on how to preserve peace on the Peninsula.

“I express my expectations that ASEAN which attaches great importance to the regional peace and stability will make an issue of the US-South Korean joint military exercises at ASEAN conferences from the fair position and play an active role in safeguarding the peace and safety of Korean Peninsula,” Ri Yong-ho wrote.

This is not the first time that Pyongyang has sent a letter to the 10-member regional body of which North Korea is not a member. The official North Korean news agency, KCNA, reported that its foreign ministry sent a dispatch to the ASEAN Secretariat on April 4, in which they also addressed the issue of the war games being conducted by the US and South Korea.

The North Korean plea to ASEAN comes amid escalating tensions in the region. Just this week, the South Korean and US militaries held a combined firing drill in Pocheon featuring dozens of tanks and fighter jets. The military exercises came only a day after North Korea held its own firing maneuvers in Wonsan.

The US has meanwhile launched its Minuteman III ICBM to demonstrate its “nuclear capabilities.” In addition, a US nuclear submarine armed with guided missiles made a port call in South Korea on Tuesday, while a carrier strike group led by the USS Carl Vinson approached the potential conflict theater.

On Friday, South Korea’s Ministry of National Defense announced that the US plans to continue deploying its “strategic” weapons to the country, Yonhap reports.

The two sides agreed to push for “measures available in all aspects including the regular deployment of US strategic assets,” the ministry said commenting on the two-day Korea-US Integrated Defense Dialogue (KIDD) meeting held in Washington DC.

While the US continues to pursue ‘peace’ through boosting its military force in the region, China and Russia are urging for a diplomatic solution.

Beijing is trying to pressure North Korea not to conduct a sixth nuclear test which many believe could spark retaliatory action from Washington, similar to the one seen in Syria, when Trump ordered a strike on a Syrian air base in retaliation to an alleged sarin gas attack in Idlib.

On Thursday, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said China agreed to impose unilateral sanctions should Pyongyang carry out another nuclear test.

“And in fact we were told by the Chinese that they informed the regime that if they did conduct further nuclear tests, China would be taking sanctions actions on their own,” Tillerson told Fox News without elaborating.

In February, China banned coal imports from its neighbor and raised the possibility of restricting oil shipments to the North.

“We’re going to be discussing what next steps may be necessary to increase the pressure on the regime,” Tillerson added. “We do not seek regime change in North Korea. What we are seeking is the same thing China has said they seek – a full denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.”

Donald Trump meanwhile told Reuters that there is “chance” of a major conflict in the region.

“There is a chance that we could end up having a major, major conflict with North Korea. Absolutely,” Trump told Reuters. “We’d love to solve things diplomatically but it’s very difficult.”

Earlier in the day, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe advocated a diplomatic solution to the Korean crisis.

“We call on all states involved in the region’s affairs to refrain from military rhetoric and seek peaceful, constructive dialogue,” Putin said after meeting Abe at the Kremlin.

A day earlier, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, insisted that the six party talks should be revived.

“There is a mechanism, six-party talks, and the question is not for Russia. The question should go to the United States (as to) why they have rejected this mechanism of improving the situation in the Korean Peninsula,” Zakharova told Yahoo news.

“We should use all the diplomatic efforts and all the possibilities of international law which we have on the table,” Zakharova added.

The six-party talks involving North and South Korea, China, the United States, Japan and Russia collapsed in 2008 following a rocket launch by North Korea. The multilateral negotiations were aimed at achieving a complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

Source Article from

The Rush-Bagot Treaty that demilitarized the Great Lakes is 200 years old today

Exactly two hundred years ago today, on April 28, 1817, Acting United States Secretary of State Richard Rush and the British Minister to Washington Sir Charles Bagot exchanged and signed letters that became the Rush-Bagot treaty, which demilitarized the Great Lakes.

The treaty provided for a large demilitarization of lakes along the international boundary, where many British naval arrangements and forts remained. The treaty stipulated that the United States and British North America could each maintain one military vessel (no more than 100 tons burden) as well as one cannon (no more than eighteen pounds) on Lake Ontario and Lake Champlain. It later extended this to the other Great Lakes and in fact, the entire Canadian border.

It’s pretty amazing actually, that the USA and Canada have done a pretty good job of working together at cleaning up the lakes and keeping them demilitarized, although the Coast Guard now has bigger guns, Canada is looking the other way. According to Wikipedia, “The Canadian government decided that the armament did not violate the treaty, as the guns were to be used for law enforcement rather than military activities. Canada reserved the right to arm its law enforcement vessels with similar weapons.”

GLRI projectsGLRI/Public Domain

Today those Great Lakes are at risk, because of cutbacks at the EPA that may kill The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative of 2010. The border is being thickened against trade and immigration; there are lumber wars and milk wars and who knows what else perfidious Canadians are doing since as the President says, they have been “very rough” with America and “they’ve outsmarted our politicians for many years”.

But Rush-Bagot has stood for exactly 200 years today, which is a pretty good run for a treaty. Let’s hope it, and the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, have a few more it it.

Source Article from

04-28-17 — Tom Jenney – Scott Horton – David Scotese — LISTEN LIVE on LRN.FM, M-F, 9-Noon EDT

Tom Jenney

Americans for Prosperity

Hour 1 —  Tom Jenney (DIrector of the Arizona chapter of Americans for Prosperity) talks about the good legislation recently passed in AZ

Hour 2 — Scott Horton (Scott Horton Radio) provides world new update

Hour 3 – David Scotese (Litmocracy) talks about cryptocurrencies/Bitcoin


CALL IN TO SHOW: 602-264-2800


Feature Article  •  Global Edition
Freedom’s Phoenix
Declare Your Independence APP now on Google Play 
Donna Hancock

   Listen to any recent show of “Declare Your Independence” at the click of a button!




April 28th, 2017

Declare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock

on LRN.FM / Monday – Friday

9 a.m. – Noon (EST)

Studio Line: 602-264-2800 



Hour 1

Tom Jenney


Arizona Director – American’s for Prosperity



Tom Jenney is director of the Arizona chapter of Americans for Prosperity, formerly the Arizona Federation of Taxpayers.  As director of AFT in 2006, Jenney helped to reduce state income and property taxes, and helped lead the fight to pass Prop 207, the Private Property Rights Protection Act.  Since joining Americans for Prosperity in 2007, Jenney has won multiple legislative and local government victories on tax policy, privatization, budget reform and worker freedom.  In November 2010, Jenney and AFP-Arizona were helpful in passing Prop 106, the Arizona Health Care Freedom Act, and Prop 113, the Save Our Secret Ballot Act.  In 2012, AFP-Arizona led the successful fight against the Arizona ObamaCare insurance exchange, and helped in defeating the Prop 204 permanent sales tax increase.

Since 2004, Jenney has overseen the publication of the AFT-AFP “Friend of the Taxpayer” Legislative Scorecard, which is often cited by candidates and their opponents in primary and general election fights.  Since 2007, Jenney has overseen the publication of AFP-Arizona’s Local Government Scorecard, which grades city council members and county supervisors on taxes and spending.  In 2009, Jenney was honored to serve as the emcee at the April 15 Taxpayer Tea Party at the Arizona state capitol, which attracted about 10,000 taxpayer activists.  On April 15 of 2010, the AFP-Arizona tea party rallied 7,000 people at Diablo Stadium in Tempe.  AFP-Arizona activists distributed 35,000 informational door hangers and made more than 193,000 phone calls as part of the “November is Coming” campaign in the fall of 2010.

Jenney is a Tucson native and a 1988 graduate of University High School.  He earned an associate’s degree from the New Mexico Military Institute and a bachelor’s degree in Spanish and Latin American Studies from Georgetown University.  Jenney has worked for the Institute for Justice and the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C. and done translations for the International Center for Pension Reform in Santiago, Chile.  From 2002 to 2004, he was communications director of the Goldwater Institute.  Jenney taught government, economics and Spanish at St. Paul’s Preparatory Academy in Phoenix, and worked for the UNIQUE Learning Center, an inner-city after-school program in Washington, DC.  He is treasurer for the Arizona School Choice Trust and a deacon at the Emmanuel Presbyterian Church in Phoenix.  He can be reached via email at, and by phone at (602) 478-0146.  AFP Arizona’s website is


Good legislation recently passed in Arizona…

*PHOENIX*, Ariz. (April 24, 2017) – Today, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey signed a bill that bans the use of “stingrays” to track the location of phones and sweep up electronic communications without a warrant in most situations. The new law will not only protect privacy in Arizona, but will also hinder one aspect of the federal surveillance state.

Sen. Bob Worsley (R-Mesa) introduced Senate bill 1342 (SB1342

<>) back in January.

The legislation would help block the use of cell site simulators, known as “stingrays.” These devices essentially spoof cell phone towers, tricking any device within range into connecting to the stingray instead of the tower, allowing law enforcement to sweep up communications content, as well as locate and track the person in possession of a specific phone or other electronic device.

SB1342 will require police to get a search warrant based on probable cause before deploying a stingray to locate or track an electronic device. It will also require law enforcement agencies to obtain a warrant under existing wiretapping statutes before using a stingray to intercept, obtain or access the content of any stored oral, wire or electronic communication.

Last Monday, the House passed an amended version of SB1342 by a 57-1 vote <>. The amendment decreases the time between the issuance of a warrant and notification of the target from 120 to 90 days. The Senate initially passed the legislation 30-0 <> in February. It approved the amended House version 28-0 last week.


The federal government funds the vast majority of state and local stingray programs, attaching one important condition. The feds require agencies acquiring the technology to sign non-disclosure agreements.

This throws a giant shroud over the program, even preventing judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys from getting information about the use of stingrays in court. The feds actually instruct prosecutors to withdraw evidence if judges or legislators press for information. As the Baltimore Sun reported <>

in April 2015, a Baltimore detective refused to answer questions on the stand during a trial, citing a federal non-disclosure agreement.

Defense attorney Joshua Insley asked Cabreja about the agreement.

“Does this document instruct you to withhold evidence from the state’s attorney and Circuit Court, even upon court order to produce?” he asked.

“Yes,” Cabreja said.

As <> put it, “The FBI would rather police officers and prosecutors let ‘criminals’ go than face a possible scenario where a defendant brings a Fourth Amendment challenge to warrantless stingray spying.”

The feds sell the technology in the name of “anti-terrorism” efforts.

With non-disclosure agreements in place, most police departments refuse to release any information on the use of stingrays. But information obtained from the Tacoma Police Department revealed that it uses the technology primarily for routine criminal investigations.

Some privacy advocates argue that stingray use can never happen within the parameters of the Fourth Amendment because the technology necessarily connects to every electronic device within range, not just the one held by the target. And the information collected by these devices undoubtedly ends up in federal data bases.

The feds can share and tap into vast amounts of information gathered at the state and local level through a system known as the “information sharing environment” or ISE. In other words, stingrays create the potential for the federal government to track the movement of millions of Americans with no warrant, no probable cause, and without the people even knowing it.

According to its website


the ISE “provides analysts, operators, and investigators with information needed to enhance national security. These analysts, operators, and investigators…have mission needs to collaborate and share information with each other and with private sector partners and our foreign allies.” In other words, ISE serves as a conduit for the sharing of information gathered without a warrant.

The federal government encourages and funds stingrays at the state and local level across the U.S., thereby undoubtedly gaining access to a massive data pool on Americans without having to expend the resources to collect the information itself. By placing restrictions on stingray use, state and local governments limit the data available that the feds can access.

In a nutshell, without state and local cooperation, the feds have a much more difficult time gathering information. Passage of SB1342 represents a major blow to the surveillance state and a win for privacy.


The bill goes into effect 90 days approximately July 24, 2017.


Source Article from

Journalist Barrett Brown re-arrested amid media tour, lawyer calls it ‘terrible affront to 1st Amendment’


Barrett Brown, the journalist and “hacktivist” who is on parole after serving a four-year prison term over reporting on corporate espionage against Americans, has been arrested again. He had been speaking to the media and was set to appear on PBS.

On Thursday, Jay Leiderman, Brown’s lawyer, tweeted that Brown was arrested “for trying to talk to the press without BOP [Bureau of Prisons] approval.” He also called the arrest “a terrible affront to the First Amendment” in an interview with Sputnik News.

Brown’s mother, Karen Lancaster, who spoke to him by phone after the arrest, said he was arrested during a routine check-in for what he believes was “his refusal to get ‘permission’ from crews to film and interview him,” according to a note she sent to D Magazine, one of the publications Brown wrote for while in prison.

The note from his mother claims Brown never missed a check-in or bed check from the Federal Board of Prisons (BOP) and never failed a random drug test since he was released to a halfway house last November.

His mother claims that Brown had requested the documents two weeks ago, but his BOP contact “refused to provide him with copies of program statement rules saying this is a requirement during halfway house and/or home confinement status.”

On Wednesday, Brown uploaded a recorded call with the director of the halfway house and his case manager, in which he refused to fill out any forms until he was provided with a written statement that required him to seek approval before participating in interviews.

“You guys are going to carry out this, and you guys are going to characterize this as a refusal – a refusal of an order that they’re not giving me in writing,” Barrett said.

Brown says he was never provided a copy of the form he was arrested for not filling out.

Kevin Gallagher, who runs the Free Barrett Brown website, told Reason that Brown’s supervised release did not include any restrictions on doing interviews with the media.

According to his mother, Brown said there was “never any mention of these rules during the past four months of his federally approved employment at D Magazine when he was working with media and involved with a range of interviews.”

Last week, Brown was interviewed by Vice News, and he was scheduled to be interviewed Friday for a PBS documentary.

Leiderman told The Intercept that he believes the BOP’s actions were due to certain criticisms Brown had made about the government.

“I would call the people who did this a bunch of chicken-s*** assholes that are brutalizing the Constitution,” Leiderman said.

His mother told D Magazine that she has no idea where Brown was taken but thinks that he will be held until May 25, when his original sentence was scheduled to end.

Brown was first arrested in 2012 after reporting on leaks that showed the private intelligence firm Stratfor was conducting operations directed at US citizens. Later that year, Brown was indicted on 12 federal charges for sharing stolen data that was connected to the FBI investigation into the Stratfor email hack. Initially facing a 100 year sentence, Brown pleaded guilty in 2015 and his sentenced was reduced to 63 months in prison. He was also ordered to pay $890,000 in restitution.

Source Article from

Trump is puppet of US ‘deep state,’ has no ‘own’ foreign policy – Assad


US president Donald Trump is not a truly independent political leader but merely a puppet of US corporations, military and intelligence, and who serves their interests, Syrian President Bashar Assad has told the Latin American TeleSUR TV network.

Trump pursues “no own policies” but only executes the decisions made by the intelligence agencies, the Pentagon, the big arms manufacturers, oil companies, and financial institutions,” the Syrian leader said in an exclusive interview with TeleSUR.

“As we have seen in the past few weeks, he changed his rhetoric completely and subjected himself to the terms of the deep American state, or the deep American regime,” Assad added.

He referred to the fact that Trump came to power on a political platform promising a departure from the interventionist policy of the previous US president, Barack Obama, but soon forgot his promises and ordered a missile strike against the Syrian air base following a chemical weapons incident in Syria’s Idlib province.

The Syrian president also said that it is “a complete waste of time to make an assessment of the American president’s foreign policy” as”he might say something” but what he really does depends on “what these [US military and business] institutions dictate to him.”

He also added that it “is not new” and “has been ongoing American policy for decades.”

“This is what characterizes American politicians: they lie on a daily basis… That’s why we shouldn’t believe what the Pentagon or any other American institution says because they say things which serve their policies, not things which reflect reality and the facts on the ground,” Assad told TeleSUR.

He went on to say that the US continues to pursue its age-long policy aimed at establishing and maintaining a global hegemony by turning all countries that oppose it into war zones.

“The United States always seeks to control all the states of the world without exception. It does not accept allies, regardless of whether they are developed states as those in the Western bloc or other states of the world,” the Syrian leader explained.

He also added that what is happening to Syria, to Korea, to Iran, to Russia, and maybe to Venezuela now, aims at re-imposing American hegemony on the world because they believe that this hegemony is under threat now, which consequently threatens the interests of American economic and political elites.”

Assad expressed similar views in an interview with Russia’s Sputnik news agency about a week ago. “The regime in the United States hasn’t changed,” he said, adding, “since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States has been attacking different countries in different ways without taking into consideration the Security Council or the United Nations.”

He also said that for the US, the end justifies the means, no values, no morals at all, anything could happen.”

Despite his criticism, Assad once again confirmed the readiness of the Syrian government to cooperate with the US if it could change its attitude towards respecting other countries’ sovereignty and that of Syria in particular.

Source Article from


[4/28/17]  PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS– When the gullible and insouciant American public and the presstitutes who participate in the deceptions permitted the Deep State to get away with the fairy tale that a few Saudi Arabians under the direction of Osama bin Laden, but without the support of any government or intelligence agency, were able to outwit the entirety of the Western Alliance and Israel’s Mossad and deliver the greatest humiliation in history to “the world’s only superpower” by making the entirety of the US government dysfunctional on September 11, 2001, Washington learned that it could get away with anything, any illegal and treasonous act, any lie. The gullible Western populations would believe anything that they were told.

Not only insouciant Americans, but much of the world accepts any statement out of Washington as the truth despite the evidence. If Washington said it, Washington’s vassals in Germany, France, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Netherlands, Belgium, and Japan assent to the obvious lie as if it were the obvious truth. So do the CIA purchased media of these vassal states, a collection of whores who prefer CIA subsidies to truth.

When Obama inherited the Deep State’s agenda from George W. Bush, he set up Syria’s Assad for regime change by repeating for many months that if Assad used chemical weapons in the “civil war” that Washington had sent ISIS to conduct, Assad would have crossed the “Red Line” that Obama had drawn and would, as the consequence, face an invasion by the US military, just as Iraq had been invaded based on Washington’s lie about “weapons of mass destruction.”

Having burnt this idea into the feeble minds of the Western populations, Obama then arranged for a chemical weapon to be exploded in Syria and blamed it on Assad. Thus, the Red Line had been crossed, the insouciant West was told, and America would now invade.

The UK prime minister, the usual piece of Washington-owned garbage, rushed to the support of the American invasion, promising British support. But the British Parliament voted NO. The MPs said that the UK was not going to support another American war crime justified by obvious lies. Only in Britain does democracy still have any teeth, as we saw a second time with the Brexit vote. All the rest of the West lives in vassalage and slavery.

The Russian government also took a firm stand, admitting that Russia stupidly trusted America in Libya, but no more. We, said the Russians, will ourselves remove any and all chemical weapons from Syria and turn them over to Western “civilization” to be destroyed, which the Russians did.

What did Western “civilization” do with the weapons? They gave some of them to ISIS. This gave Washington a second chance to accuse Assad of using chemical weapons “against his own people.”

And so Washington has rolled out this hoax a second time. During a Syrian air force attack on an ISIS position, a chemical weapon exploded, or so it is alleged. Instantly Washington said that Assad had used “Sarin gas against his own people.” Trump was shown photos of dead babies and stupidly ordered a US military strike against Syria.

This was the first time that Washington had engaged in an unambigious war crime without any cover. Trump had no UN resolution, not even one that could be stood on its head as in Libya. Trump had no NATO participation, no George W. Bush “coalition of the willing” to give cover to the war crime with the support of other governments.

There are no skirts for Trump to hid behind. He stupidly let himself be pushed into commiting an unambigious war crime.

Now all his opponents—the Deep State, the military/security complex, the CIA, the Hillary Democrats, the warmonger Republicans—have the New White House Fool under their control. If Trump doesn’t do as they want, they will impeach him for his war crime.

Meanwhile the risk of war with the Russian/Chinese/Iranian/Syrian alliance grows closer. The US shows every intention of provoking this war. Washington has imposed sanctions on 271 employees of Syria’s Scientific Studies and Research Center for, in Washington’s lying words, responsibility “for developing and producing non-conventional weapons and the means to deliver them.”

In order to make this false charge stick, Washington prevented any investigation whatsoever into the facts of the alleged chemical weapon associated by Western propaganda, not by any known fact, with a Syrian air attack on ISIS. If Washington is so certain that Syria is responsible, why does Washington block an investigation? If Washington is right, an investigation would prove Washington’s case. But as Washington is again lying through its teeth, an investigation would prove the contrary. And that is what Washington fears and is the reason Washington blocked an investigation.

Why do Western peoples believe the US government, a well proven liar, who blocks an investigation and asserts that everyone must believe Washington or else be put on a list of Russian agents?

Here is the lie, the raw propaganda, that the US government has no qualms about issuing: It comes from the US Department of the Treasury in which I once served honorably. But honor no longer exists in the US Treasury.

Are Western populations intelligent enough to understand that the only reason for Washington to block an investigation of the alleged use by Syria of a chemical weapon is that the facts clearly do not support Washington’s lie? No, they are not.

Theodore Postol, a scientist at MIT, has concluded from his investigation that the chemical weapon was not dropped from the air but was set off on the ground and that it was not Sarin gas as Sarin lingers and the alleged aid workers who were immediately on the scene were unprotected by gloves or masks or by anything. If the gas were Sarin, they would be dead also.

The Russian explanation is that the Syrian air force attack hit a storage facility, conveniently arranged by Washington, that contained chemical weapons. I have seen reports that Washington, or Washington’s vassals such as Saudi Arabia, have provided ISIS with chemical weapons. President Putin of Russia says the reason Washington has delivered chemical weapons to ISIS is that there can be more orchestrated instances of their use that can be blamed on Assad.

I think I can say in complete confidence that this is what is happening: Washington intends to wear Russia down with orchestrated chemical attack after chemical attack, portraying Russia as an inhuman defender of Assad’s alleged chemical attacks, in order to more thoroughly isolate Russia and in order to provoke opposition to Putin’s government, especially among the US and German financed NGOs that Russia stupidly permits to operate in Russia and in the Russian media. Washington’s goal is to force by the weight of world opinion Putin to abandon Assad to Washington.

US Secretary of State Tillerson, another gigantic disappointment to those who hoped for peaceful relations between the US and Russia/China/Iran/Syria, has said that the US still intends regime change in Syria. Tillerson has advised Russia to get out of Washington’s way and to “consider carefully their support for Bashar al-Assad.”

Russia cannot abandon Assad, because if Syria falls to Washington, Iran will be next, and then the Washington-financed jihadists will be set upon the Muslim populations of the Russian Federation and China.

This is Washington’s game plan. I am certain Putin is aware of it, and I think the Chinese are, despite their inordinate focus on making money.

The questions before us could not be any clearer: Will Russia and China break and give in to Washington? If not, will Washington become a good world citizen for the first time in America’s history, or will Washington issue more threats, thereby convincing Russia and China that their alternative is to wait for Washington’s preemptive nuclear strike or deliver one themselves?

This is the only question that the world faces that is worth our attention. I spent a quarter century in Washington. The evil that is in control there at the present time is unprecedented. I have never seen anything like it.

Can the world survive the evil that is concentrated in Washington, evil that has the support of the governments of the Western world?

Source Article from


[4/28/17]  The United Nations is again acting as a wannabe global government and perverting the meaning of human rights, warning the Trump administration in a bizarre letter that repealing the unconstitutional ObamaCare takeover of health insurance may violate what the UN likes to call “international law.” However, critics were quick to ridicule the UN and its alleged legal reasoning. Instead of acquiescing, they called for the U.S. government to withdraw from the scandal-plagued, dictator-controlled UN “Human Rights Council” altogether.

The UN’s legal “reasoning” was based on a number of unconstitutional international agreements, some of which have never even been ratified by the U.S. government. According to a UN “special rapporteur,” abolishing the so-called Affordable Care Act (ACA) would represent a violation of the UN’s “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” As The New American has documented extensively, the UN document perverts the very meaning of rights and stands in direct contradiction to American notions of God-given, unalienable rights enshrined in America’s founding documents.

The UN also pointed to other obscure global agreements, including at least one that the U.S. government never even ratified. And yet, the UN has nonetheless weaponized the unratified scheme to dictate policy to nations around the world, and especially the United States. Despite the UN’s bogus claims, however, the U.S. Constitution remains the Supreme Law of the Land in the United States. That means any international agreements that conflict with it are null and void by definition. The authors of the U.S. Constitution and even the U.S. Supreme Court have made that crystal clear.

The threatening UN letter in question, dated February 2, was sent to the U.S. government mission to the UN in Geneva by Dainius Puras (shown), the UN “Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.” And yes, that is his real title. He serves the almost comically discredited UN “Human Rights Council,” which, in addition to being run by a discredited prince from an Islamic dictatorship, is literally dominated by mass-murdering dictators and brutal autocrats infamous for their human-rights abuses.

In the letter, Puras, a Lithuanian psychiatrist, warns of his “serious concerns” about efforts to repeal ObamaCare. Among other UN instruments he describes falsely as “international law,” Puras points to Article 25 of the UN “human rights” declaration, which purports to mandate government healthcare.  “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services,” it says, fundamentally perverting the meaning of rights as they have always been understood in the Christian West and the United States in particular.

If Puras had gone down a bit further to Article 29 of that same UN declaration, he would have seen that any of the pseudo-“human rights” the UN purports to bestow on lowly humans can be revoked or limited under virtually any pretext — including, presumably, the phony “right” to take other people’s money for whatever purpose. That same Article 29 also makes clear that the UN’s pseudo-rights do not extend to opposing the UN’s globalist agenda. “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations,” the declaration says in clear language.

Puras claimed in the letter that the bizarre UN “human rights” document — a massive threat to the U.S. Constitution and the freedoms it protects — has “become a source and expression of international customary law.” He did not explain how or when that happened, or who supposedly gave approval for it on behalf of the American people. Next, the UN “rapporteur” claimed that “all States, including the United States of America, are obliged to protect and guarantee the rights therein.” Of course, in the real world, the U.S. government is explicitly prohibited by the Constitution from doing much of what Puras claims is obligatory.

Separately, the UN bureaucrat pointed to Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESC). While acknowledging that the U.S. government has not ratified that scheme, he claimed the U.S. government is nevertheless “obliged to refrain from acts that would defeat the covenant’s object or purpose.” In other words, even though Americans never agreed to the scheme through their elected officials, in the UN’s view, they must comply anyway. Self-government, then, would be a thing of the past if the UN were to get its way.

Finally, the extremist UN “rapporteur” cited the “International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.” That scheme purportedly requires that national governments and dictatorships “guarantee the right of everyone,” including “the rights to public health, medical care, social security and social services,” without regard to race or color. Of course, the Constitution does not authorize the federal government to provide healthcare to everyone, so without a constitutional amendment delegating such authority to Washington, D.C., that power is reserved to the states or the people. The U.S. government is legally prohibited from expanding its powers using treaties.

Source Article from