Hong Kong in US’ crosshairs? No matter where there’s revolution, we’re there, Ron Paul says

hong-kong-in-us’-crosshairs?-no-matter-where-there’s-revolution,-we’re-there,-ron-paul-says

16-08-19 08:56:00,

The United States has a habit of involving itself in political unrest all over the world, Ron Paul said, noting that Washington lacks the moral authority to lecture China about the unrest in Hong Kong.

The former Texas congressman and presidential candidate said that he wasn’t surprised by reports of US involvement in demonstrations that have rocked Kong Hong since March.

“No matter where there’s a revolution starting or stirring, we’re there, because we have a lot at stake,” he told Politicking host Larry King.

Paul sharply criticized statements made by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other US lawmakers warning China of consequences if the crisis in Hong Kong wasn’t settled to Washington’s liking.

He argued that using political unrest in the semi-autonomous territory to “attack” China is “foolish.”

We in the United States don’t have the moral authority to think that we can go in and lecture and change [the situation in Hong Kong].

Watch the full interview.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

 » Lees verder

FBI and CIA Crimes Only Matter When the Political Class Is Targeted – Global Research

fbi-and-cia-crimes-only-matter-when-the-political-class-is-targeted-–-global-research

09-07-19 02:49:00,

Rep. Peter King of New York said recently there will be plenty of dirt revealed on the FBI and CIA after Attorney General Bill Barr concludes his investigation into the efforts to sabotage Donald Trump’s election campaign. 

I have news for Mr. King. Both agencies have been involved in nasty business for decades, the difference is most of the nastiness focused on ordinary citizens, including your humble blogger, and not rich crony capitalists like Trump.

‘Severe, Serious Abuses’ By FBI, CIA Are ‘Going To Come Out’: Rep. Peter King https://t.co/btyJdLxIuN

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) July 7, 2019

In the mid-1970s, the Church Committee revealed all manner of illegal and unethical behavior by both the FBI and the CIA, mostly directed against political opponents of the state. 

For the FBI, it was COINTELPRO, while the CIA engaged in a number of operations in America forbidden by its charter. Both presidents Johnson and Nixon worked with the CIA to undermine the antiwar movement. Nixon characterized those opposed to the illegal war in Vietnam as “a wild orgasm of anarchists sweeping across the country like a prairie fire.”

The American Civil Liberties Union described it as follows:

Until the mid-1970’s, both the CIA and the National Security Agency (“NSA”) illegally investigated Americans. Despite the statutory provision in its charter prohibiting the CIA from engaging in law enforcement or internal security functions (50 U.S.C. 403-3(d)(1)), the CIA spied on as many as seven thousand Americans in Operation CHAOS. This operation in the 1960’s and early 1970’sinvolved spying on people who opposed the war in Vietnam, or who were student activists or were so-called black nationalists. Operation CHAOS involved an extensive program of information sharing from the FBI and other agencies to the CIA. The CIA received all of the FBI’s reports on the American peace movement, which numbered over 1,000/month by June of 1970, according to a Senate report issued by the Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations With Respect To Intelligence Activities (” Church Committee Report”). The Church Committee Report revealed how simple passive information sharing from other agencies to the CIA became authorized spying and data collection on lawful American political activity protected by the First Amendment. 

 » Lees verder

No Matter How You Vote, The New Congress Won’t Represent You

no-matter-how-you-vote-the-new-congress-won8217t-represent-you

06-11-18 11:30:00,

Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

One of the most foundational assumptions behind modern democracy is that the elected officials somehow represent the interests of those who elected them.

Advocates for the political status quo flog this position repeatedly, claiming that taxation and the regulatory state are all morally legitimate because the voters are “represented.” Even conservatives, who often claim to be for “small government” often oppose radicalism of any kind — such as secession — on the grounds that political resistance movements such as the American Revolution are only acceptable when there is “taxation without representation.”The implication being that since the United States holds elections every now and then, no political action outside of voting — and maybe a little sign waving — is allowed.

This, position, however, rests on the idea that elected officials are truly representative. If taxation with representation makes government legitimate – as some argue – then we must first establish that the government’s claims of representation are believable.

On a theoretical level, Gerard Casey has already cast serious doubt on these claims. Casey draws on the work of Hanna Pitkin, who admits it is plausible that:

Perhaps representation in politics is only a fiction, a myth forming part of the folklore of our society. Or perhaps representation must be redefined to fit our politics; perhaps we must simply accept the fact that what we have been calling representative government is in reality just party competition for office.

After all, as Casey points out, representation in the private sector usually means there is an agent-principal relationship in which the agent is legally bound to attempt to represent the material interests of a clearly defined person or group of people. Clearly, this does not describe political representation. Not only is is unclear what the material interests of the voters — as a group — are, but the supposed agent in the relationship — the elected official — is not legally bound to represent the interests of the voters he supposedly represents.

To conclude therefore, that any specific voter has consented to, say, a tax increase because his “representative” approved it, is an extremely sketchy endeavor,

 » Lees verder

Dementie als ‘mind over matter’…?!

Dementie als ‘mind over matter’…?!

10-07-18 06:19:00,

x
x
Dementie als ‘mind over matter’…?!

x
2018 © WantToKnow.nl/be

x

Marieke de Vrij

Marieke de Vrij (1953) is een vrouw, die haar fijnzintuigelijke gaven al sinds jaar en dag ten dienste stelt van mens en maatschappij. Zij heeft met haar buitengewoon heldere inzichten tal van veranderingsprocessen in persoonlijke levens, maar zeker ook in bedrijven, organisaties en instellingen in allerlei lagen van de samenleving in gang gezet en ondersteund.

Ken je haar (werk) nog niet, dan is het in onze ogen zaak, eens naar haar prachtige werk te kijken en de informatie die zij voor haar medemens heeft neergelegd. Wij plaatsten hier op de site regelmatig artikelen/informatie van haar hand. (HIER stellen we haar voor in 2013)

Marieke beschikt over bijzonder heldere, fijnzintuiglijke vermogens en is daarmee in staat het collectief en individueel bewustzijn en de potentie die hierin ligt, genuanceerd aan te voelen. Voor Marieke is dit alles ‘gewoon’ haar inbreng, op basis van háár talenten, waarbij het in deze tijd van belang is om te begrijpen dat iedereen ‘zijn deel doet’ met zijn/haar talent als ‘natuurlijke aanleg’. In een éénheid in verscheidenheid:

“Dat mensen elkaar daarin moeten durven láten. Daarin mag het gaan om verbroederen en verzusteren, in plaats van elkaar aan elkaar gelijk te maken. Hoe zwaar de weg ook is: vriendschap maakt de weg lichter. Je mag anderen waarnemen in hún unieke route. Je hoeft niet te zoeken naar dat een ander goed moet zijn waarin jij goed functioneert. Vanuit waardering en ondersteuning mag je ieders route tegemoet treden.

Het allerbelangrijkste is dat we allemaal durven dóór te stromen. Dat je de inzichten die in jou ontwaakt zijn in eenvoud en zelfacceptatie in jezelf laat doorstromen. Zo vrijgevend dat niemand verplicht is daar iets mee te doen. Zo zie ik mezelf ook; als iemand die ervaringen deelt.  Als ik inspiratief werk, is het zo’n doorleving. Dan is de kennis die ik deel, niet wezensvreemd. De indaling bij zo’n inspiratie vindt plaats op zo’n diep niveau, dat de doorleving, die natuurlijk ook al in voormalige levens op allerlei facetten heeft plaatsgevonden, zeer wakker wordt en waakzaam.”

Marieke wil graag bezieling terugbrengen in de samenleving en daarmee duurzame vooruitgang boeken.

 » Lees verder