Archive

Posts Tagged ‘obama administration’

Why Does Iran Want Nuclear Weapons? An Alarming Possibility

March 3rd, 2015 Comments off

A heavy cloak of surrealism encapsulates the negotiations the Obama administration is conducting with Iran over the latter’s nuclear enrichment program. Though the premise of the diplomatic negotiations being spearheaded by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is to permit Iran to retain a substantial uranium enrichment program so long as the Iranian nuclear project is “peaceful,” there is a clear consensus by senior members of America’s intelligence community, past and present,  that Iran’s nuclear activities are solely geared towards eventual weapons production. An example of that viewpoint was expressed recently by the former deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency,  Michael Morell.

 

In a February interview with Charlie Rose on Bloomberg TV, the former CIA deputy director, commenting on leaks indicating that the Obama administration proposed to allow Tehran to retain more than 6,000 functioning centrifuges utilized for uranium enrichment, said “If you are going to have a nuclear weapons program, 5,000 is pretty much the number you need.” Morell added, “If you have a power program, you need a lot more. By limiting them to a small number of centrifuges, we are limiting them to the number you need for a weapon.” (http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/feb/25/michael-morell/odd-reality-irans-centrifuges-enough-bomb-not-powe/) In the same interview, the former number two man at the CIA stated that he is convinced that Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has already made a decision to acquire nuclear weapons capability, most probably through an undetected covert program. (https://archive.org/details/BLOOMBERG_20150219_000000_Charlie_Rose#start/2640/end/2700)

 

Having made the leap in recognizing that Iran’s claimed “peaceful” nuclear project is  without question a weapons program, functioning alongside Tehran’s large-scale ballistic missile development and production project, the intelligence experts, including Michael Morell, provide explanations for the motivation behind Iran’s nuclear weapons program deeply rooted in Western concepts, including regime preservation and enhancing Iranian hegemony in the Middle East. In my view, this is a mistaken approach, because it is based solely on speculation from analysts schooled in secular geopolitical theories.

 

I offer a dissenting view on the purpose of Iran’s nuclear weapons project, which is based on what the supreme leader of Iran has communicated to his own Iranian constituents. On July 9, 2011 Ayatollah Ali Khamenei delivered a speech to teachers and graduates of Mahdaviat, a term referring to the belief in Shia Islam in the return of the 12th Imam or Mahdi, an eschatological figure that will supposedly herald in an era of global Islamic justice through an apocalyptic annihilation of the present world order. The speech the supreme leader delivered is extraordinary in its content, and can be viewed on YouTube, complete with English subtitles (http://youtu.be/MtzvMkV3V-g). What is most striking about Khamenei’s discourse is that the most senior political leader of a geographically complex nation of 80 million people, with major economic and social challenges, spoke for more than twenty minutes without a single reference to the myriad of secular issues confronting Iran. The entirety of the speech delivered by the supreme leader of Iran was devoted to the return of the 12th Imam as the Mahdi from a state of occultation. He closed his address with the following words: “I hope we will be among his followers both when he is in occultation and when he re-appears. By Allah’s favor, we will be among the soldiers who will fight alongside Imam Mahdi and I hope we will be martyred for his cause.”

 

In the second decade of the 21st century it staggers the Western mind to have to intellectually confront a nation-state conducting its policy for a theological and possibly eschatological purpose. However, based on what Iran’s supreme leader has clearly communicated is his top priority, namely the martyrdom of the Iranian people for the sake of the return of the 12th Imam, the possible connection of Tehran’s nuclear weapons project with the theological agenda of that nation’s rulers should not be discounted by policymakers in Washington. The Obama administration and the State Department may find it inconceivable that a nation in our contemporary world would create a vast uranium enrichment capability, much of it at hardened or underground locations, for the objective of bringing about an apocalyptic event that will set the stage for the return of the 12th Imam. However, ignoring the words of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei  and transposing our own Western concepts on how we perceive Iran’s motivation for creating its nuclear project is a perilous course for America and the world to pursue.

 

If Hillary Clinton runs for President of the United States  in 2016, see the video about the book that warned back in 2008 what a second Clinton presidency would mean for the USA:

 

CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW VIDEO

Hillary Clinton Nude

Hillary Clinton Nude

U.S. Economy Was In Slowdown In Final Quarter of 2014

January 31st, 2015 Comments off

The U.S. Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis  has released its initial figures for the final quarter of 2014; GDP grew by 2.6 percent, a disappointing showing after the Q3 results supposedly showed 5 percent GDP growth. Several observers were skeptical of the 5 percent number for Q3, which was the basis for the Obama administration proclaiming victory and the return of economic prosperity in the United States.  Even if the Q3 number was correct,  overall GDP growth in the U.S. economy, based on official figures, was 2.4 percent for all of 2014.

While the official GDP growth figures for 2014 indicate the fastest level of economic growth in the U.S. since the global economic and financial crisis arose in 2008, it is still a very weak number after six years of a supposed recovery, and after trillions of dollars of deficit spending and vast monetary easing by the Federal Reserve in a frantic effort to stimulate the American economy. And now, Europe and even China are facing a slowdown, and in the case of the Eurozone, probable recession, likely to be exacerbated by the looming conflict with Greece over the terms of that nation’s financial bailout.

The U.S. is not immune to what is happening elsewhere in an era of interconnected economics. The lackluster growth figures for Q4 is a clear sign of that.

 

If Hillary Clinton runs for President of the United States  in 2016, see the video about the book that warned back in 2008 what a second Clinton presidency would mean for the USA:

 

CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW VIDEO

Hillary Clinton Nude

Hillary Clinton Nude

 

Does the Islamic State (aka ISIS and ISIL)Pose A Threat To America?

September 20th, 2014 Comments off

As the Obama administrations engages in an awkward and uncertain recalibration of its policy towards the Middle East since of the emergence of the caliphate of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi–the Islamic State–the internal debate amongst the President’s inner circle is being mirrored by pundits on both the Right and the Left. They have vastly different perceptions of the degree of threat the Islamic State poses to the United States, however they share a common disaffection with President Barack Obama’s policymaking.

The rightwing media pundits excoriate Obama as an incompetent in the face of hordes of ISIS jihadists stealthily penetrating the nation’s southern border, aiming to engage in a multitude of attacks against individual Americans. On the other extreme of the ideological divide, liberal media commentators, particularly on one cable news network, seize upon any alarm being sounded by those on the Right as sure evidence of conservative hysteria, clear proof that any claims of a threat being directed at the United States by ISIS are simply wildly exaggerated scare-mongering.

I think they are both wrong.

Neither the Right nor the Left  in America have any credible insights into the strategy, goals and tactical doctrine of the Islamic State. I recall the media response to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s first public appearance at the Great Al-Nuri  Mosque located in the second largest city in Iraq, Mosul, soon after its capture by the caliph’s army.  There was universal scorn espoused by mainstream media representing the entire political spectrum, with more attention devoted to what brand of luxury watch al-Baghdadi was wearing on his wrist rather than the content and meaning of the violent and threatening words pouring from his lips. While the public discourse may have adopted a new script since then, it remains characterized by superficiality.

If it is not for the media pundits to diagnose the threat posed by the Islamic State, can America’s intelligence community be relied upon to perform better? The evidence is not reassuring. The most fateful miscalculation the U.S. has made to date in the region has been the invasion of Iraq mounted in 2003–an intervention which, to his credit, Obama opposed at the time–which opened the Pandora’s box that fueled the jihadist movements in the heart of the Middle East. The justification for that disastrous military escapade was based on the premise of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which we now know was a fallacy. What we must remind ourselves of is that the world’s most expensive intelligence community lacked a single credible human source in the nation its military was planning to invade. In 2014 the intelligence picture is no more reassuring. It is likely that the United States has no human sources operating within the inner command structure of the Islamic State. That being the case, the policymakers in Washington, and the ideological media pundits of both the Right and the Left, lack any substantive basis to construct a meaningful threat assessment with respect to the intentions of al-Baghdadi and his caliphate towards the United States.

What we are left with are the words spoken by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in Mosul in early July of this year.  There is no ambiguity or subtlety in his message. The creation of the caliphate is not an end in itself, but merely the means to achieving the ultimate end, which is total victory for the religion of Allah–Islam. “So take up arms, take up arms, O soldiers of the Islamic State! And fight, fight!,” proclaimed the caliph to his followers, reinforcing his message that the Islamic State’s raison d’être was waging perpetual war and inflicting vengeance against the “unbelievers” until their complete destruction and submission (https://ia902501.us.archive.org/2/items/hym3_22aw/english.pdf).

Though  al-Baghdadi defines the entire non-Islamic world as the enemy, and adds to the list Muslims he views as collaborators with those enemies, in the hierarchy of targets it is the “crusaders,”  primarily represented by the United States and Russia, who are at the top of the hierarchy of  “unbelievers.” Accordingly, I would infer from his speech the intention of attacking the United States. Furthermore, based on the observable military characteristics of the Islamic State, one can see clear evidence of well conceived strategic planning, effective tactical execution on the battlefield, the ability to think long-term and, most importantly, utter ruthlessness in the infliction of maximum casualties upon its enemies.

I don’t have a crystal ball, however, any serious observer and analyst of the intentions and capabilities of the Islamic State must conclude that their command authority is constantly thinking of ways and means of inflicting maximum damage on the United States, and should they succeed, I fear the consequences would surpass that horrible day of September 11, 2001.

If Hillary Clinton runs for President of the United States  in 2016, see the video about the book that warned back in 2008 what a second Clinton presidency would mean for the USA:

 

CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW VIDEO

Hillary Clinton Nude

Hillary Clinton Nude

 

U.S. Jobs Report For June Shows Continued Economic Stagnation; This Is Not The “New Deal”

July 6th, 2012 Comments off

The latest report from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistic indicates that only 80,000 jobs were created in the United States in June. One must take into account that the BLS figures are abstractions and not exact, and usually reveal only the most optimistic spin of the employment data. The BLS also reports that the American unemployment rate remains unchanged at 8.2 percent.

Since the U.S., with a population in excess of 300 million, must create between 150,000 and 200,000 jobs a month just to keep even with population growth, the only reason a tepid jobs creation number of 80,000 would also reveal no increase in the unemployment rate is that many Americans formerly classified as unemployed were reported by the BLS as having “left” the workforce in June, so they are no longer counted as unemployed. Such mathematical gymnastics may produce a slightly better spin on the unemployment picture in the United States, but they obviously do not resolve America’s profound economic problems.

It must be pointed out that even the exceedingly poor job creation figures of the past several months have been purchased at a very high opportunity cost. Since the global economic and financial crisis of 2008, the U.S. has been running annual structural mega-deficits of more than a trillion dollars annually. In fiscal year 2012, the U.S. federal budget projects expenditures of $3.8 trillion dollars and revenue of only $2.5 trillion. That means one third of U.S. federal government expenditures are derived from borrowed money. If such a massive fling of red ink can produce, at best, economic stall speed, one shudders to think what will befall the world’s largest economy once the spigot of cheap borrowed money is shut off by creditors who have lost their patience with America’s hopelessly gridlocked political system.

What went wrong with the Obama administration’s stimulus program? In the decades to come, scholars will wax eloquent in their analyses and academic explanations. However, one need only look to the last great American recession, the Great Depression of the 1930s, to note a major difference. The priority of the Obama administration was saving Wall Street, meaning the banks, including investment banks, at all costs, viewing the financial sector as the center of gravity of the American economy. In the case of the administration of Franklin Roosevelt in the 1930s, its policies, known as the New Deal, focused on the industrial sector and job creation as the nation’s economic center, and viewed the financial sector in a punitive manner, requiring investigation and strict regulation and reform. Arguments over the effectiveness of the New Deal continue to this day, however one fact cannot be denied. On the day that Franklin Roosevelt died in office, America was unquestionably the leading industrial and manufacturing nation on earth, and the role of financialization was below 2 percent of GDP. How different things are today.

 

WALLSTREET KILLS-A CHILLING NOVEL ABOUT WALL STREET GREED GONE MAD

To view the YouTube video overview of “Wall Street Kills,” click image below:

 

On Wall Street, a secretive group of investors plan on making the ultimate snuff movie (a snuff movie is an erotic film in which one of the performers is murdered in front of the camera). Their goal: massive financial returns on their investment. Their plan: kidnap a female celebrity and have her tortured and killed before a live Internet audience. Wall Street greed, financial power, the Federal Reserve and corrupt politics come together in the explosive thriller by Sheldon Filger, “Wall Street Kills.”

 

photo

 

 

Obama’s Economy and the Jobs Crisis

November 15th, 2009 Comments off
The Obama administration has announced that it will be conducting a White House conference on job creation in December. This  upcoming employment pow-wow apparently was sparked by the continuing rise in U.S. unemployment numbers combined with a decline in polling numbers favourable to the Democratic Party.
President Barack Obama made a critical strategic error, in my opinion, when he selected Clinton administration retreads and Bush administration continuity to frame his economic agenda during his first year in office. Larry Summers, Timothy  Geithner and Ben Bernanke are the hand maidens of Clinton and Bush administration deregulation that crippled America’s financial system. Yet, it is precisely these minions of economic disarray that Obama selected as the saviours of the U.S. economy. It is as though  the ex-CEO of Enron was pulled out of prison to head the salvation of General Motors.
The clique picked by Obama to head economic policymaking has done what would be expected of them. They have sacrificed the real economy to backstop Wall Street, socialize its losses incurred through its unique brand of casino capitalism, and inflate a new equities asset bubble. Grow the bubble big enough, they must  think, and eventually the unemployment  numbers will recede.

Economic mythology is now being confronted by political reality. The so-called jobs summit has an air of desperation about it, as the Democrats begin to contemplate the loss of Congress in the 2010 mid-term elections. The next step will probably be a second Obama economic stimulus program, which may temporarily bring about a slight improvement in employment numbers, but at the cost of a further deterioration of America’s already bleak public fiscal posture. This will further weaken the dollar, which undoubtedly will bear political consequences in the 2010 mid-term elections. Obama may be in for a bitter surprise in the second half of his presidential term.

 

 

 

For More Information on “Global Economic Forecast 2010-2015” please go to the homepage of our website, http://www.globaleconomiccrisis.com