geek tragedy
geek tragedy's JournalDespicable truthers use photos of four different women to ‘prove’ that Paris attacks were staged
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/11/despicable-truthers-use-photos-of-four-different-women-to-prove-that-paris-attacks-were-staged/Note the names in bold font--some of them may seem familiar to some folks.
According to Before Its News, There are currently numerous explanations being offered for the alleged false flag terrorist attacks orchestrated in Paris on Friday the 13th. Each of them has their own merits and ought to be read very carefully.
As evidence, the website published a collection of photos (seen below) of a woman they claim is a crisis actor crying in Paris who they assert is the same women seen crying following the mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado and Sandy Hook, Connecticut as well as being spotted crying following the terrorist bombing at the Boston Marathon in 2013.
Can it possibly be the same crisis actor yet again?! SOTN posted the top photo because of how staged it looked, and then this photo montage was brought to our attention with the same professional crisis actress, they write before adding, There should be no doubt that the number one reason for the alleged Paris Terror attacks is to completely lock down Paris in order to totally control the upcoming Climate Summit. Thats not to say there arent other very significant purposes operating in the background, especially some quite stealthy geopolitical strategies involving the Middle East.
At the Activist Post, nine reasons are given to question the events in Paris, including questioning developing news reports over how many terrorists were involved and whether they used automatic weapons or shotguns.
According to Brandon Turbeville, the false flag operation was created to increase support for the security state.
Considering the fact that the security had been so heightened both on the heels of the Charlie Hebdo attacks and the anticipation of disorder for the U.N. Conference on Climate Change, how on earth did such a major terror attack slip through the hands of the DGSE? he wrote. After all, France is nothing if not a police state. It is also giving the United States a run for its money in the contest for how much information it is able to nab up on its citizens. No doubt, we will be sold the line of pre-civilized savages outsmarted first-world high end military surveillance states.
According to Paul Craig Roberts, the attack was part of a master plan by the Hollande government to undercut Marine Le Pens racist National Front Party.
Realizing its vulnerability, it is entirely possible that the French Establishment made a decision to protect its hold on power with a false flag attack that would allow the Establishment to close Frances borders and, thereby, deprive Marine Le Pen of her main political issue, he wrote.
Roberts added, Considering the Western Worlds long tradition of false flag orchestrations, the terrorist attacks in Paris could be the most recent manifestation.
Vile, horrible creatures, not a whole lot better than the perps.
Scenes from a Marriage
The worst relationship between a U.S. president and an Israeli prime minister everas autopsied by the people closest to them.
http://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/bibi-obama/
Very long piece.
US OK with EU labeling rule for settlement goods
Bibi's charm offensive, not such a triumphhttp://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/us-ok-with-eu-labeling-rule-for-settlement-goods/
The US clarification of its position comes a day after the decision by the EU, which applies to goods produced in Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
We do not believe that labeling the origin of products is equivalent to a boycott, State Department spokesman Mark Toner says. And as you know, we do not consider settlements to be part of Israel. We do not view labeling the origin of products as being from the settlements as a boycott of Israel.
Thank you, Ted Cruz.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ted-cruz-marco-rubio-moderateRubio's campaign manager Terry Sullivan told Bloomberg Politics that calling the freshman senator a moderate was "ridiculous."
It's crazy," Sullivan told Bloomberg. "Absolutely, positively most ridiculous thing I've ever heard in my entire life. Marco Rubio is the conservative's conservative."
This is his version of "severely conservative."
Israel suspends dialogue with EU over product labeling
The double standard with which the union treats Israel is incomprehensible, says a top official at the Foreign Ministry.
Lars Faaborg Andersen, the EU ambassador to Israel, was called for a reprimand at the Foreign Ministry following the decision.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/israel-suspends-dialogue-with-eu-over-product-labeling/
Being excused from having to deal with Netanyahu, Danny Danon and Tzipi Hotovely sounds more like a gift than a punishment. Lots of Israelis would take that deal.
Top Obama Adviser to Haaretz: Israel to Face Growing Pressure Over Settlements, Peace Process Impass
...
In recent months, the prime minister and his people seem to be counting the days until January 2017, when a new American president preferably, they hope, Republican takes office. The thinking appears to be that with Obama and Kerry out of the picture, the threat of peace will be removed or at least that the motivation to pressure Israel to make decisions and progress on the Palestinian issue will be lessened.
Sometimes it is an excuse to suggest that this is solely an interest of Kerry or Obama. It will be an interest of whoever the next president is, says Rhodes. Sometimes people see this as a scorecard like the comments about Kerry that this is a desire to win some award. This is about peoples lives and the president has met with Israeli families of terror victims, he met with Palestinian young people who are growing up without hope of living in their own state those people are still going to be there after Obama leaves office All the problems created by the lack of [a] Palestinian state will be there.
....
When President Obama put forward two parameters in May 2011, our purpose was to create an alternative to the Palestinians going to the UN and to create a basis for talks, says Rhodes. And if you look at what the president said, it was entirely consistent with every negotiation in recent years on territory, the 67 lines with mutually agreed swaps, and on security language that was very favorable to Israel We wanted to signal to Israel that we recognize its security needs to be the starting point for any final-status discussion.
The prime minister made a decision to attack this proposal rather than work with it, continues Rhodes. Frankly casting it as 67 lines and not embracing the part on mutually agreed swaps In his initial comments the prime minister misrepresented what the president said suggesting we wanted Israel to go back to the 67 lines which we didnt. Everybody knows what mutually agreed swaps mean but the approach taken by Israel was to take it as the most threatening language possible. That was a determination by Netanyahu to basically reject this as a basis for discussion. And then the Palestinians went to the UN and it was our last chance during the first term.
...
Obama, though, is much more skeptical than Kerry about the chances of achieving a breakthrough by the time he leaves office in January 2017. We dont have particularly high expectations for what can be accomplished in the next year, admits Rhodes. On the other hand, there has not been a year since we have been here in which there was not some effort made to bring Israelis and Palestinians together either because we saw a diplomatic opening or because there were tensions that required trust building between the parties. Every day that John Kerry is secretary of state, he will continue to see this as [a] priority. He is personally willing to commit his time and energy to bring Israelis and Palestinians to the table, adds Rhodes.
At this point, the U.S. administration has no solid plan of action for addressing the Israeli-Palestinian issue over the next year, but Rhodes says it also has no intention of ignoring it: Kerry will continue his exploratory efforts in the coming months, but in order for the president to intervene and invest his time in the matter, the secretary of state will have to convince him there is a high probability it will pay off. I think we will be looking for opportunities and ways to build some confidence between the parties to avoid deterioration and keep some space open for the pursuit of peace, adds Rhodes.
...
In this regard, asserts Rhodes, settlement construction weakens the prospects of ever achieving a two-state solution even further. For Israel, the more there is settlement construction, the more it undermines the ability to achieve that peace and the more Israel will only have to be defending its settlement policies in the years to come. Thats a reality. It is not something the U.S. or the international community has chosen to make an issue. Its an issue because there are settlements being built in the West Bank. Thats not going to go away thats going be an issue of international concern. There is no alternative that people can just forget this issue and say, You know what, it is just going to work itself out. It is only going to get more difficult over time, he elaborates.
...
Barack Obama has been an enormous supporter of Israel. He has done more for Israels security than any other president, and he understands Israeli history very well. He has been and can be an enormous asset for Israel. He believes in Zionism. He believes in how just Israel is as a Jewish state and a democracy, and he can make that case to the world. He is more than happy to go around the world and defend Israel and Zionism. If anything, the fact he was in the Oval Office prevented and slowed other international efforts certain actions in the UN or by some of our EU allies. He has been a brake on efforts to single out Israel. He should be seen as an ally, as a friend and as an asset to Israels standing in the world.
http://www.haaretz.com/peace/.premium-1.684915
The Israelis are going to learn the hard way that President Obama was not the problem, but could have been the solution.
Bernie Sanders might have similar credibility to help Israel on the international stage. Hillary and the Republicans would have none, as they are perceived as being 100% in the tank for Israel.
So, with Ben Carson ready to crash and burn, who benefits (besides America)?
Which GOoPer is going to inherit his legions of idiotic supporters?
Obama rules out Israeli-Palestinian peace deal before leaving office
Put this one alongside "reaching across the aisle to work with Republicans."
http://www.timesofisrael.com/obama-rules-out-israeli-palestinian-peace-deal-before-leaving-office/
...
At a press conference last month, Obama reiterated his long-held conviction that the only way Israel would be secure, and the Palestinians would meet their aspirations, was via a two-state solution. He indicated then, but did not spell out, that the US was not about to start a new peace effort, saying its going to be up to the parties to do that, and we stand ready to assist.
Kerry sought to be broker an accord in 2013-2014, but the effort collapsed amid a stream of bitter accusations and recriminations between the sides.
With no realistic prospect of substantial negotiated progress, the Obama administration is said to remain determined to keep the idea of a two-state solution viable, and it is understood the president and the prime minister will discuss possible steps in that direction.
The two leaders will likely discuss means to prevent a further deterioration on the ground, including how to thwart further terrorism; tackle incitement more effectively; deal with the strained Palestinian Authority; and safeguard Israeli-Jordanian relations.
His successor is not going to have any appetite for this either. It took 50 years or so, but the US has finally figured out that it needs to butt out of the I/P dispute and let the two parties settle this, or not settle it, on their own. We are not Israel's, or Palestine's, keeper.
Netanyahu’s new media czar called Obama ‘anti-Semitic’
Source: Times of Israel
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahus fresh appointment for spokesman, Ran Baratz, accused US President Barack Obama of anti-Semitism earlier this year.
Allow me to diverge from my usual moderate ways and be a bit blunt, he wrote in a March 3 Facebook post after Netanyahu addressed the US Congress on the Iran deal. Obamas response to Netanyahus speech this is what modern anti-Semitism looks like in Western liberal countries. And it is of course accompanied by a lot of tolerance and understanding for Islamic anti-Semitism; so much tolerance and understanding that theyll even give them [an atomic bomb].
...
In addition to his posts disparaging Obama and Rivlin, Baratz also took aim at US Secretary of State John Kerry on October 18, 2014, after Kerry linked the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to the rise of the Islamic State terror group.
I went to see Kerrys speech, where he linked Israel and the Islamic State, and it was pretty hilarious, so I summed it up for you: After his term as secretary of state, Kerry can look forward to a flourishing career in one of the comedy clubs in Kansas City [where a gunman shot and killed three people at Jewish sites in April 2014], Mosul or the Holot detention facility, where Israel confines many of the African migrants who have entered the country on recent years, Baratz wrote. It was not clear what connection he drew between these three locations.
Read more: http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahus-new-media-czar-called-obama-anti-semitic/
Netanyahu finds new ways to spit in the face of the United States.
Ralph Nader Mansplains Monetary Policy to Janet Yellen
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/11/nader-mansplains-monetary-policy-to-yellen.htmlThat last bit astonishingly, or maybe not so astonishingly is a real-life, actual suggestion being made by Ralph Nader, who dings Yellen for hurting seniors, not helping payday-loan borrowers, being in the pocket of the big banks, and for playing politics, all in one fantastically sexist opinion piece.
Chairwoman Yellen, I think you should sit down with your Nobel Prize winning husband, economist George Akerlof, who is known to be consumer-sensitive. Together, figure out what to do for tens of millions of Americans who, with more interest income, could stimulate the economy by spending toward the necessities of life.
For heaven's sake, you're a "liberal" from Berkeley! That is supposed to mean something other than to be indentured by the culture and jargon of the Federal Reserve. If you need further nudging on monetary and regulatory policies of the Fed, other than interest rate decisions, why not invite Berkeley Professor Robert Reich, one of your long-time friends and admirers, to lunch on your next trip home?
Readers will be stunned, STUNNED, to learn that (a) Janet Yellen's husband agrees with her on macroeconomic issues; (b) Robert Reich agrees with Yellen and disagrees with Nader on interest rates; and (c) Janet Yellen--the Chair of the Fed--already has an understanding of how interest rates affect people and the economy, and doesn't need her husband to tell her what to think on the matter.
Being a sexist jackass doesn't mean you're right on economic policy, Ralphie.
Profile Information
Member since: Thu May 13, 2004, 12:50 PMNumber of posts: 68,868