OSCE Observers Haven't Seen Russia Invading Ukraine: No Tanks, Artillery, Air-Defense Systems, Troops, Nothing

Pepe Escobar:

03301503NATO has no proper intel agency of its own. NATO’s military intel is gathered by American, Brit or German agents – thus politically manipulated. That’s why NATO’s current Dr. Strangelove, Gen. Breedlove – call him Breedhate – is able to relentlessly spew out the same nonsense about “columns of Russian equipment - primarily Russian tanks, Russian artillery, Russian air defense systems and Russian combat troops” invading Ukraine over and over again, even as OSCE observers insist they have never seen them.

Source: Donbass: ‘The war has not started yet’ — RT Op-Edge.

They haven't seen any Russian invasion because there hasn't been any. However, if NATO continues to ramp up and if it gets directly involved in the fighting by placing NATO troops in Ukraine to kill Russian ethnics there, Putin will have no choice but to invade Ukraine, drive NATO out, take Kiev, and hold the whole country. It will be entirely Obama's fault. Frankly, I don't think Angela Merkel is stupid enough to go for it. Also, the French are turning back to conservatism and Nicolas Sarkozy, who has made it extremely clear that he completely disagrees with the current US foreign policy toward Russia on Ukraine.

Here's what he said:

Crimea has chosen Russia, and we cannot blame it [for doing so], just like I imposed Putin to let the Kosovars separate from Serbia. If Kosovo has had the right to separate from Serbia, I don't see how we could say with the same reasoning that Crimea doesn't have the right to leave Ukraine to join Russia.

Source: Video on Demand :: View and Buy - France: 'Crimea chose Russia, don't follow American drama' - Sarkozy - Ruptly

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest's Very Ignorant/Illogical Reply Concerning Indiana Gov. Mike Pence

Mike PenceIn response to Indiana Gov. Mike Pence explaining about Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) "that then-President Bill Clinton signed a version of it into law in the early 1990s and then-State Sen. Barack Obama voted for a version of it in the Illinois legislature," White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said, “If you have to go back two decades to try to justify something you are doing today, it may raise some questions about the wisdom of what you’re doing.”

Source: POLITICO.

Really? Well, it's a good thing for Josh Earnest that he added the word "may" there because it very well may not, as in this case. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which amendment guarantees the free exercise of religion while the Constitution is completely silent on homosexuality, was adopted on December 15, 1791. There. I just went back to 1791 to not just try to justify but to actually legally justify, under the assumption that Josh Earnest believes that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution applies here.

What the vast majority of homosexualists have been trying to do to the United States is to force the right to freely exercise one's religion not to be involved in the celebration of a homosexual "marriage" in anyway (including commercially) to be completely trumped by the supposed Constitutional right, for one, of males to sodomize each other.

Truth be told, Lawrence v. Texas was decided incorrectly. The state had a compelling reason not to allow males to sodomize each other, which, also for one among many, the current situation in the US, where religious liberty is being severely eroded due to the move to homosexualize the nation, clearly proves: part of the slippery slope!

What part of Bill Clinton's speech does Josh Earnest claim is wrong just with the passing of two decades? See Clinton's speech: Remember When Democrats Supported Religious Freedom? Good Question.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Assad Says US Airstrikes Have Made ISIS Stronger; Says ISIS, Saudi Arabia Of Same Ideological Bent

03301501Assad has plenty of support in Syria. His military is made up of plenty of Sunnis.

Is he wrong about Erdogan and the Brotherhood? Not really.

Is he wrong about the Saudi "Royal" family and Wahhabism? Not at all.

Did he know those things before the "Arab Spring"? Definitely.

Is he open to impartial delegations investigating claims about chlorine gas and barrel bombs? Yes.

Is he open to democracy in Syria? Yes but with limits. He would preclude sharia because it would discriminate against all other sects, including his own.

Should he have reformed more before the "Arab Spring"? Yes, but he would still have faced Takfiris trying to oust him.

Is the Obama administration right on Syria? Absolutely not.

See: Assad Says US Airstrikes Have Made ISIS Stronger; Says ISIS, Saudi Arabia Of Same Ideological Bent.

Someone posted a question on Facebook: "If it's only an issue of concern to the Syrian people, as to whether or not he leaves office, then why not hold an election?"

My response:

They did hold an election. He won. The West didn't want it held. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_presidential_election,_2014

Plus:

In case you don't look:
Turnout 73.42%
Assad got:
Popular vote 10,319,723
Percentage 88.7%

If that's not the Syrian people backing him, what is?

Syrian population: July 2014 estimate 17,951,639. That's including kids too young to vote. Even if everyone who didn't want him had voted, he still would have won. The US and EU couldn't handle that.

It was a very highly observed election that was certified by many nation-states as being free and fair.

So, why hasn't the US backed off?

Why is the US backing the Saudis against the duly elected president of Syria? When was the last time the Saudis voted for their king?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment