31 maio 2015


China Daily - Asia Times - DNA India - May 2015 - clik 1 - clik 2 - clik 3 
China bota ciclópicos $900bi para conectar Ásia à Europa: são 900 projetos, 9 corredores, 60 países.
The China Development Bank (CDB) unveiled plans Thursday to invest more than $890 billion in the project which goes by the official moniker of “One Belt, One Road.” The CDB, one of China’s key policy banks, said the money will fund more than 900 projects involving 60 countries. These projects include coal and gas, mining, electricity, telecommunications, infrastructure, agriculture, and people-to-people exchanges that will help trade and capital flow. Meanwhile, at the opening ceremony of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) Industry Dialogue on Connectivity on Wednesday, Vice Premier Zhang Gaoli said China wants to build six economic corridors to connect Asia to Europe.
The funding for this would come from the new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and the Silk Road Fund. The six corridors would be China-Mongolia-Russia, New Eurasian Land Bridge, China-Central and West Asia, China-Indo-China Peninsula, China-Pakistan, and Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar, said Zhang, according to a report in China Daily. Government officials and company representatives from ASEM’s 53 members attended the two-day event in Chongqing city. 


Asia Times Online - Veteran News Now - clik 1 clik 2 clik 3 
"Sem poder competir com China, EUA no colapso prepara guerra na Europa, fraca e submissa".
Russia could always deploy an economic “nuclear” option, declaring a moratorium on its foreign debt. Then, if Western banks seized Russian assets, Moscow could seize every Western investment in Russia. In any event, the Pentagon and NATO’s aim of a shooting war in the European theater would not happen; unless Washington was foolish enough to start it. Still, that remains a serious possibility, with the Empire of Chaos accusing Russia of violating the Intermediate-Range escobarchaos Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) even as it prepares to force Europe in 2015 to accept the deployment of US nuclear cruise missiles. Russia could outmaneuver Western financial markets by cutting them off from its wealth of oil and natural gas. The markets would inevitably collapse – uncontrolled chaos for the Empire of Chaos (or “controlled chaos”, in Putin’s own words). Imagine the crumbling of the quadrillion-plus of derivatives.
It would take years for the “West” to replace Russian oil and natural gas, but the EU’s economy would be instantly devastated. Just this lightning-bolt Western attack on the rouble – and oil prices – using the crushing power of Wall Street firms had already shaken European banks exposed to Russia to the core; their credit default swaps soared. Imagine those banks collapsing in a Lehman Brothers-style house of cards if Russia decided to default – thus unleashing a chain reaction. Think about a non-nuclear MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) – in fact warless. Still, Russia is self-sufficient in all kinds of energy, mineral wealth and agriculture. Europe isn’t. This could become the lethal result of war by sanctions.


Press TV - May 2015 - clik 1 - clik 2 - clik 3 
"EUA no colapso prepara guerra a China e Rússia".
The United States is preparing for a possible war against China and Russia aimed at preventing the collapse of the Western banking system, an American political commentator and activist says. “The point that has to be made is that the Chinese, like the Russians, are very, very clear that the United States and their NATO allies are in a war mobilization, preparing for war on Russia, preparing for war on China,” Billington stated. “There’s a general recognition growing that the driving force for this war is the utter collapse of the entire Western banking system,” he added. “Here in the United States and we are now facing a collapse far greater than the 2008 collapse,” the analyst said. “And the view from London and Washington and New York is we have to go to war, we cannot allow this BRICS alliance between Russia, China, India, South Africa and most of Latin America creating new financial institutions to take away our ability to loot the resources in the developing sector,” Billington noted. “So they are going for war,” he stressed.

28 maio 2015


Zero Hedge - May 2015 - clik 1 
É OFICIAL : EUA criou o grupo terrorista ISIS para derrubar governo pró-Rússia da Síria.
That may all have changed now when a declassified secret US government document obtained by the public interest law firm, Judicial Watch, shows that Western governments deliberately allied with al-Qaeda and other Islamist extremist groups to topple Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad. According to investigative reporter Nafeez Ahmed in Medium, the "leaked document reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states and Turkey, the West intentionally sponsored violent Islamist groups to destabilize Assad, despite anticipating that doing so could lead to the emergence of an ‘Islamic State’ in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). According to the newly declassified US document, the Pentagon foresaw the likely rise of the ‘Islamic State’ as a direct consequence of the strategy, but described this outcome as a strategic opportunity to “isolate the Syrian regime.” And not just that: as we reported last week, now that ISIS is running around the middle east, cutting people's heads of in 1080p quality and Hollywood-quality (perhaps literally) video, the US has a credible justification to sell billions worth of modern, sophisticated weapons in the region in order to "modernize" and "replenish" the weapons of such US allies as Saudi Arabia, Israel and Iraq. But that the US military-industrial complex is a winner every time war breaks out anywhere in the world (usually with the assistance of the CIA) is clear to everyone by now.
What wasn't clear is just how the US predetermined the current course of events in the middle east.Now, thanks to the following declassified report, we have a far better understanding of not only how current events in the middle east came to be, but what America's puppermaster role leading up to it all, was.From Nafeez Ahmed: Secret Pentagon report reveals West saw ISIS as strategic asset Anti-ISIS coalition knowingly sponsored violent extremists to ‘isolate’ Assad, rollback ‘Shia expansion', originally posted in MediumThe revelations contradict the official line of Western government on their policies in Syria, and raise disturbing questions about secret Western support for violent extremists abroad, while using the burgeoning threat of terror to justify excessive mass surveillance and crackdowns on civil liberties at home. Among the batch of documents obtained by Judicial Watch through a federal lawsuit, released earlier this week, is a US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document then classified as “secret,” dated 12th August 2012. The DIA provides military intelligence in support of planners, policymakers and operations for the US Department of Defense and intelligence community.So far, media reporting has focused on the evidence that the Obama administration knew of arms supplies from a Libyan terrorist stronghold to rebels in Syria. Some outlets have reported the US intelligence community’s internal prediction of the rise of ISIS. Yet none have accurately acknowledged the disturbing details exposing how the West knowingly fostered a sectarian, al-Qaeda-driven rebellion in Syria.


YouTube VIDEO - Fox News - May 2015 - clik 1 
"Nós manipulamos radicais islâmicos para nossos objetivos de política externa".
Wesley Clark to Fox News : "We use radical Islamists for foreign policy objectives"

20 maio 2015


YouTube VIDEO - The Blaze - Glenn Beck - clik 1 - clik 2 
" O colapso do sistema monetário internacional será gigantesco, e é perfeitamente previsível hoje".
“The next financial collapse will resemble nothing in history. . . . Deciding upon the best course to follow will require comprehending a minefield of risks, while poised at a crossroads, pondering the death of the dollar.” But in the last few years, the risks have become too big to ignore. While Washington is gridlocked and unable to make progress on our long-term problems, our biggest economic competitors—China, Russia, and the oilproducing nations of the Middle East—are doing everything possible to end U.S. monetary hegemony. The potential results: Financial warfare. Deflation. Hyperinflation. Market collapse. Chaos. Rickards offers a bracing analysis of these and other threats to the dollar. The fundamental problem is that money and wealth have become more and more detached. Money is transitory and ephemeral, and it may soon be worthless if central bankers and politicians continue on their current path. 

But true wealth is permanent and tangible, and it has real value worldwide. The author shows how everyday citizens who save and invest have become guinea pigs in the central bankers’ laboratory. The world’s major financial players—national governments, big banks, multilateral institutions—will always muddle through by patching together new rules of the game. The real victims of the next crisis will be small investors who assumed that what worked for decades will keep working. Fortunately, it’s not too late to prepare for the coming death of money. Rickards explains the power of converting unreliable money into real wealth: gold, land, fine art, and other long-term stores of value. As he writes: “The coming collapse of the dollar and the international monetary system is entirely foreseeable. . . . Only nations and individuals who make provision today will survive the maelstrom to come.” 

16 maio 2015


Zero Hedge - Paul C. Roberts - Washington Blog - Hang Bankers - May 2015 - clik1 clik2 clik3 clik4 clik5 
"A guerra dos EUA contra Rússia e China já está em andamento".
Top economic and political experts say we're drifting towards World War 3. And see this. We noted in March that we're already at war with Russia. Many experts agree ... Former White House official Dr. Philippa Malmgren - former presidential adviser and member of the U.S. President's Working Group on Financial Markets - said last December that the United States is already at war with China and Russia: I was recently at a meeting with a lot of very senior people from the defense community, and their view is that we are already in a nose-to-nose confrontation (war) with China and Russia. But these (wars) are being conducted through cyberspace rather than through traditional conventional weapons. An advisor to the US government - Scott Borg, CEO of US Cyber Consequences Unit - says that the United States has already started launching widespread hostile cyber warfare against Russia, China and Iran. Indeed, the U.S. has admitted that it deployed cyber-warfare against Iran's nuclear power plant. Paul Craig Roberts – former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under President Reagan, former editor of the Wall Street Journal, listed by Who’s Who in America as one of the 1,000 most influential political thinkers in the world – says that U.S. war against Russia has already begun.

Mark Galeotti - a Full Professor of Global Affairs at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University, and a prominent expert on modern Russia - says "the West and Russia are already at war". Ron Paul says that sanctions are an act of war ... and we've had sanctions on Russia and Iran for some time now. And see this. And the U.S. is threatening military confrontation in the South China Sea. China is taking the threat seriously. Remember, Russia and the U.S. each have enough nuclear weapons to wipe each other out ... and American, British, Polish and Russian Experts warn that continued fighting in Ukraine could lead to nuclear war. The Pentagon reports that China now had ballistic missiles which can hit nearly the entirety of the U.S. with nuclear warheads. Russia and China are in a military alliance, and are conducting joint military exercises. China has warned the U.S. to stop its Ukranian proxy war against Russia. China and Russia have both said that an attack on Iran - or Syria - will be considered an act of war against the Bear and the Dragon. We're already in Syria trying to overthrow Assad, and we've been supporting terrorists in Iran for many years. On the other side of the coin, a former high-level Commander in the German Army warns: NATO is formed out of 28 states, if just one of them gets involved into a conflict with Russia, the contract obliges all of them to assist. And out of a sudden we get a third world war. The only way to prevent it is if the people rise and say: Russia had to mourn more than enough victims in WWII, do you really want to start a war again? What could possibly go wrong? 

09 maio 2015


YouTube VIDEO - Refreshing News - May 2015 - clik 1 - clik 2 
Princeton University: "opinião pública tem impacto quase zero no fazer das leis, é irrelevante".
Professors Martin Gilens (Princeton University) and Benjamin I. Page (Northwestern University) looked at more than 20 years worth of data to answer a simple question: Does the government represent the people? Their study took data from nearly 2000 public opinion surveys and compared it to the policies that ended up becoming law. In other words, they compared what the public wanted to what the government actually did. What they found was extremely unsettling: The opinions of 90% of Americans has essentially no impact at all. This video gives a quick rundown of their findings — it all boils down to one simple graph:

Princeton University study: Public opinion has “near-zero” impact on U.S. law. Gilens & Page found that the number of Americans for or against any idea has no impact on the likelihood that Congress will make it law. “The preferences of the average American appear to have only a miniscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.” One thing that does have an influence? Money. While the opinions of the bottom 90% of income earners in America have a “statistically non-significant impact,” Economic elites, business interests, and people who can afford lobbyists still carry major influence. Nearly every issue we face as a nation is caught in the grip of corruption.
From taxation to national debt, education to the economy,America is struggling to address our most serious issues. Moneyed interests get what they want, and the rest of us pay the price. They spend billions influencing America’s government. We give them trillions in return.

05 maio 2015


Assemblée General - R.T. News - May 2015 - clik 1 - clik 2 
França sente perigo de guerra, aí desmente OTAN na cara: "Rússia não prepara invasão à Ucrânia".
France’s intelligence chief has questioned NATO’s claims of Russia preparing to attack Ukraine as their agents failed to spot any activities signaling this - either before or after the crisis began. A statement by the chief of France’s military intelligence, General Christophe Gomart, was published on the National Assembly’s website. “NATO announced that the Russians were about to invade Ukraine. But, according to French intelligence, there is nothing to corroborate this hypothesis – we determined that the Russians were deploying neither command posts nor logistical facilities, including field hospitals, needed for a military incursion,” General Gomart told a parliamentary hearing. 
NATO’s top brass has been incanting mantras about a “Russian invasion” ever since the crisis in Ukraine began a year ago. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, as well as his predecessor Anders Fogh Rasmussen, have lashed at Russia on numerous occasions, claiming that the Russian military is present on the ground in Ukraine, but failing to provide evidence supporting these claims. “Our conclusion eventually proved correct because even if some Russian soldiers had indeed been seen on the Ukrainian side of the border, it was just a ploy, meant to bring pressure to bear on President Poroshenko, rather than an attempt to invade Ukraine,” General Gomart said.


Al Jazeera - White Court Press - Sott Net - May 2015 - clik 1 - clik 2 - clik 3 
Países por toda a Terra já estão extinguindo o direito de reunião.
On March 26, without much fanfare or attention from U.S. media, the Spanish government ended freedom of assembly. In the face of popular opposition (80 percent of Spaniards oppose it), the upper house passed the Citizens' Security Law. Under the provision, which goes into effect on July 1, police will have the discretionary ability to hand out fines up to $650,000 to "unauthorized" demonstrators who protest near a transport hub or nuclear power plant. They will be allowed to issue fines of up to $30,000 for taking pictures of police during protest, failing to show police ID, or just gathering in an unauthorized way near government buildings. The law doesn't technically outlaw protest, but it's hard to see what difference that makes in practice. Imagine if the NYPD, without judicial oversight, could give $650,000 fines to every Black Lives Matter protester participating in a die-in at Grand Central. Never mind that they could never pay: Would anyone have come back day after day, racking up millions of dollars more in fines? Spain is only the latest "democracy" to consign freedom of assembly to the dustbin. While earlier eras of protest and riot sometimes wrested concessions from the state, today the government's default response is to implement increasingly draconian laws against the public exercise of democracy. It raises the question: How many rights must be abrogated before a liberal democracy becomes a police state?
In Quebec, where student strikes against austerity once again disrupt civil society, marches are being declared illegal before they've even begun. At the height of the last wave of student strikes in 2012, the Quebec legislature passed Bill 78, which made pickets and unauthorized gatherings of over 50 people illegal, and punished violations with fines of up to $5,000 for individuals and $125,000 for organizations. Similar fines are once again imposed on protesters.  Last October, a new law was passed in Turkey allowing police to search demonstrators and their homes without warrants or even grounds for suspicion, a much looser definition and harsher punishment for resisting arrest, and making covering your face at a protest or shouting particular slogans crimes punishable by years of jail time. This February in London police forced climate protest organizers to hire private security for marshaling a rally, making protesting not a free public right but an expensive private service. The list goes on: France banned Palestine solidarity demonstrations; police in Australia gained the power to ban protesters from appearing in public spaces for a year, even if they work or live there; and Egypt, UkraineandRussia's governments have outlawed protest entirely. Mexico's congress approved "la ley antimarchas", which, if ratified by the state-level governments, will modify the constitution so that any unauthorized gathering would be illegal: the constitutional end to freedom of assembly. All of this in 2014. And the United States is hardly doing better. In Baltimore, many of those who protested Freddie Gray's death were held without charges for over 48 hours. Cells designed for one or two people were crammed with dozens, and prisoners haven't been allowed phone calls, blankets, pillows, or any contact with lawyers or anyone from the outside world. In 2012, H.R. 347 made protesting near government buildings, political conventions or global summits — except in heavily policed and encaged "free speech zones" — a federal crime. After the Black Lives Matter movement had subsided in New York City Police Commissioner William Bratton demanded a new force of 1,000 police, armed with machine guns, specifically to monitor protests and sought to turn resisting arrest into a felony charge.  The right to freedom of assembly is guaranteed in the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights and appears in almost all democratic constitutions, including the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The freedom to speak out and protest were often at the heart of Cold War claims that the "free world" was superior to the "Evil Empire."  Of course, even in democratic countries the police and the courts have a long history of shutting down genuinely threatening gatherings or political meetings. The First Amendment didn't stop the state from imprisoning Eugene Debs for an anti-World War I speech, or from shooting black student protesters at Orangeburg and Jackson State during the Black Power era.  But if the promise of free assembly is often and easily broken, why would a democratic state go so far as to officially revoke it? Why, in 2014, did we begin to see the de facto power of state repression made de jure?