The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity
Subscribe to the Institute View Us on YouTube Follow Us On Twitter Join Us on Facebook Join Us at Google Plus

Search Results

for:

Why Libya's Cry for Justice Must be Heard

undefined

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s meeting in Moscow with Fayez al-Sarraj, prime minister of the Government of National Accord of Libya, reminds us that security and stability has yet to be restored in the war-torn country.

Though it may have slipped off the radar of global consciousness, Libya’s central importance when it comes a region that has been mired in conflict and chaos over the past few years cannot be overstated. The country’s destruction and societal collapse will forever stand as a withering indictment of Western foreign policy towards the region and NATO’s role, not as a defender of democracy, peace, and stability, but as an instrument of Western imperial power. The savage murder of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi at the hands of a NATO-supported mob in October 2011 was a ghastly and despicable crime, one that stands comparison with the legal lynching of Saddam Hussein in Iraq in 2006.

This is without factoring in the refugee crisis that erupted in the wake of Gaddafi’s overthrow, the worst such crisis the world has seen since the end of World War II. It involved untold thousands of men, women, and children attempting a perilous journey across the Mediterranean to Europe. According to the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), over 5,000perished in 2016 alone while attempting to cross the Mediterranean, evidence that this ongoing human catastrophe shows no signs of improving.

Perhaps the most grievous aspect of the military campaign in support of regime-change in Tripoli was the fact that for most of the previous decade, Libya under Gaddafi had been an economic and strategic partner of the West, ending decades of enmity and isolation, with Western oil companies in particular benefiting from Gaddafi’s volte-face where Western governments were concerned.
read on...

TSA Launches 'Invasive' Pat-Downs With 'More Intimate Contact Than Before'

undefined

As a result of a study, which found that weapons routinely make it past airport security, the TSA is introducing “more rigorous” and “comprehensive” physical inspections at airports around the country, according to Bloomberg. The security agency, which until now had the option of using five different types of physical pat-downs in the screening line, is eliminating the "options" and replacing them with a single, universal method which would involve heavier groping.

The Transportation Security Administration made the announcement to its agents this week, and in the case of Denver International Airport employees, advised employees and flight crews on Thursday that the “more rigorous” searches “will be more thorough and may involve an officer making more intimate contact than before.”

In an ominous warning, TSA spokesman Bruce Anderson told Bloomberg that "people who in the past would have gotten a pat-down that wasn’t involved will notice that the [new] pat-down is more involved." The shift from the previous, risk-based assessment on which pat-down procedure an officer should apply was phased in over the past two weeks after tests at smaller airports. In their notice, Denver airport officials said employees are subject to search at random locations: “If a pat down is required as part of the operation, badged employees will be required to comply with a TSA officer’s request to conduct a full body pat down.”
read on...

Obama Ordered Abuse Of Intelligence To Sabotage Trump Policies

undefined

In its last months the Obama administration ordered the intelligence agencies to collect and distribute information of contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia. This to prevent any change by the Trump administration of the hostile policy towards Russia that the Obama administration instituted. The intent was also gives the intelligence services blackmail material to prevent any changes in their undue, freewheeling independence.

The above is reported in a rather short New York Times piece published yesterday. The reporting angle captured in the headline is biased to set the Obama efforts into a positive light. But the Obama Administration Rushed to Preserve Intelligence of Russian Election Hacking.

But make no mistake. Not single shred of evidence has been provided that "Russia hacked the election" or had anything to do with various leaks of Clinton related emails. A lot of fluff and chaff was thrown around but not even one tiny bit of evidence.

The effort was clearly to sabotage the announced policy of the incoming administration of seeking better relations with Russia. Obama intended to undermine the will of the voters by abusing instruments of the state.

Excerpts from the piece:
In the Obama administration’s last days, some White House officials scrambled to spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election — and about possible contacts between associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump and Russians — across the government. Former American officials say they had two aims: to ensure that such meddling isn’t duplicated in future American or European elections, and to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators.
It is completely normal for any campaign, and especially an incoming administration, to have contacts with foreign government officials.
read on...

GOP - Which Way?

The Trump presidency is shaking the Republican Party to its core. The neocons, led by Senators Graham and McCain are actively working to undermine the president in league with the Democrats. The old-guard elites cannot bear the bombastic Trump as head of their party. And the millions of mainstream voters who backed him are increasingly angry at their own party. What's the future of the GOP under President Trump? RPI Director Daniel McAdams is on RT's Crosstalk to add his views
read on...

Dissent and the State Department: What Comes Next?

undefined

Some 1000 employees at the Department of State are said to have signed a formal memo sent through the “Dissent Channel” in late January, opposing President Donald Trump’s Executive Order initially blocking all Syrian refugee admissions indefinitely, delaying other refugees 120 days, prohibiting for 90 days all other travelers (diplomats excluded) from seven Muslim-majority nations, and other immigration-related issues.

What is the Dissent Channel those State employees used? What effect if any will the memo have on policy? What does the memo say to the new Secretary of State Rex Tillerson about the organization he now heads, and what will he do about it?

What the State Department calls the Dissent Channel is unique inside the American government. Created in 1971 during the Vietnam War, the system allows Foreign Service officers to express their disagreement with U.S. policy directly to senior leaders. The secretary of state is obliged to read and through his staff respond to all Dissent Channel messages, normally within 30-60 days. Persons using the Channel are fully protected against retaliation. Dissent messages are intended to foster internal dialogue within the State Department, and are never intended for the public.

The issues surrounding the most recent dissent memo begin where that previous sentence ends.

What was once understood to be a way to foster internal dialogue is in this case playing out more like an online petition. Multiple versions of the memo circulated within the State Department globally, with persons adding their signatures and making edits as they opened their email. Someone (no one seems to know exactly who) later allegedly melded the multiple versions into the one that was submitted, meaning some signers did not see the final text until it was leaked.
read on...

The Basic Formula For Every Shocking Russia/Trump Revelation

undefined

The basic formula for every breaking Trump/Russia story is essentially as follows:

1. The New York Times or Washington Post releases an article that at first blush appears extremely damning.

2. Anti-Trump pundits and Democrats react reflexively to the news, express shrieking outrage, and proclaim that this finally proves untoward collusion between Trump and Russia — a smoking gun, at last.

3. Aggrieved former Clinton apparatchiks *connect the dots* in a manner eerily reminiscent of right-wing Glenn Beck-esque prognostication circa 2009.

4. Self-proclaimed legal experts rashly opine as to whether the new revelation entails some kind of criminally actionable offense. (Recall the now-laughable certitude that felled National Security Advisor Mike Flynn violated the 200+ year old Logan Act.) This latest version is the certitude that Jeff Sessions committed perjury, when that at the very least is highly questionable.

(Probably best to at least read the relevant statute first.)

5. The notion of Russian “collusion” being key to toppling Trump becomes further implanted in the minds of the most energized Democratic activists, as evidenced this time around by a troupe of protesters who showed up to the Department of Justice headquarters brandishing trademarked “Resist” placards, chanting “Lock Him Up,” and (as usual) hyperventilating about Putin. As I’ve written before, Trump/Putin theories are increasingly the top concern that plugged-in “Resistance” types bring up at the highly-charged town hall meetings that have received so much attention of late.
read on...

Lobbyists Concealed Their Saudi Paymasters From Veterans Pressed to Lobby Against 9/11 Bill

undefined

Three veterans who were flown to Washington as part of a Saudi-sponsored campaign to lobby for changes to the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) say organizers of the event concealed the Saudi role in the initiative.

Enacted in September 2016 over President Obama’s veto, JASTA altered the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act in a way that cleared the path for 9/11 families and survivors to sue the kingdom for its alleged support of the hijackers.

Earlier this month, The Daily Caller and Politico were first to report that Qorvis MSLGROUP, the public relations giant that works on behalf of Saudi Arabia, has been organizing veterans to travel to Washington at no expense to lobby against JASTA. The veterans initiative is part of a much broader Saudi campaign against the law.

The central argument motivating veterans’ participation—and being used in their lobbying—is that, if other countries reciprocate and pass laws similar to JASTA, individual US service members could be sued in foreign courts. That claim is false, according to William S. Dodge, former counselor on international law at the US State Department and a professor at the University of California, Davis School of Law. (See our detailed analysis of this and related claims.)

In exclusive interviews with 28Pages.org, US Marine Corps and Iraq war veterans David Casler, Tim Cord and Dan Cord shed damning new light on a brazen campaign that turns American veterans into unwitting lobbyists for a kingdom accused of aiding the 9/11 attacks and continuing to support extremism well beyond that day.
read on...

Will The Neocons 'Flynn' Jeff Sessions?

On Capitol Hill, Congressional business and campaign business is by law separate. Members or their staff must go off-site when conducting phone calls or other campaign related activities. When Senator Session said in his confirmation hearing that his campaign work did not include meetings with Russian officials he did not commit perjury, as the Democrat/Neocon alliance is claiming. But they are too lazy to have opposed Sessions on his terrible track record when it comes to civil liberties so they are determined to take down another senior member of the Trump Administration by perpetuating the laughable lie that somehow Washington, D.C. has been taken over by Putin and his KGB team. Will the Democrats and Neocons take down Sessions? We discuss the bizarre case in today's Liberty Report...
read on...

US-Backed Siege of Mosul Shows How Hypocritical Media Manipulates Us

undefined

In order to determine the truth when it comes to the mainstream media’s coverage of American-led offensives in the Middle East, be sure to scroll down to the bottom of any article. This is where the most important information can be found. As can be seen in a BBC report on the U.S.-backed offensive to retake the Iraqi city of Mosul from the Islamic State, the last line of the article reads:
The UN said in late January that almost half of all the casualties in Mosul were civilians. At least 1,096 have been killed and 694 injured across Nineveh province since the start of October. [emphasis added]
Compared with a separate BBC report on the Russian-backed offensive to retake the Syrian city of Aleppo, the media’s coverage of these two military operations can hardly be viewed as balanced. In that report, the idea that Russia is constantly killing civilians is laid out in almost every paragraph.

A spokesperson for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)  reportedly told Russian state-owned news site RT that the situation in Mosul is “incredibly desperate.”

In Mosul, 650,000 civilians are reportedly at risk, and as the U.N. has indicated, half of those being killed in the US-backed operation are civilians. The notion that American bombs are safer and more precise than Russia’s has no evidentiary basis, nor does any suggestion that the troops the US military is fighting alongside are less violent than Russian or Syrian authorities.
read on...

Was Trump's Speech Libertarian?

Dr. Paul watched President Trump's address to Congress last night with one hand on his keyboard, live-Tweeting the event with his own critique and commentary and finally giving the speech a grade from a libertarian perspective. The response to Dr. Paul's "Tweet-storm" was overwhelming, but much of it missed the point. This is not an issue of whether one "likes" or "supports" President Trump or any other politician. It is about the policies not the people. In today's Liberty Report, Dr. Paul looks back over some of his Tweets from last night to provide more context to the brevity demanded by that medium...
read on...


Authors

Tags