2017 World Resolution: End War Forever.

By Jerry Alatalo

“I am tired. My heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands, I will fight no more forever.”

– CHIEF JOSEPH

child-prayingAlphabet The gripping, searing and profoundly moving personal testimony of Stacy Bannerman during the recent People’s Tribunal on the Iraq War points out in a most powerful manner why war must become banished from this Earth forever. Perhaps people around the world can make ending war their collective, focused, top 2017 New Year’s resolution.

Ms. Bannerman is the author of “Homefront 911”. She was one of many men and women who testified during The People’s Tribunal on the Iraq War.

(Thank you to TheRealNews at YouTube)

Words written by Ken Carey in his 1991 book “The Third Millennium” offer more texture and depth to the idea of making the banishment of war humanity’s #1 resolution moving into 2017. The following excerpt comes from Chapter 8 – “This Season’s Children” – in that extraordinary spiritual writing.

Clothed in words, what the grandparents, the ancestors say – it would be something like this. Do what we have always dreamed of doing but did not quite achieve. You do not know young ones what we had to work against, and how much easier we have made it for you. We feel as though we have almost done it; go one step beyond. Do what we have almost done – create a world where our descendants will not have to struggle and fight as we have struggled, as we have fought. A cooperative world, a peace filled world, created first in your hearts and homes. In our time this was our challenge; in your time it is yours. You see how well we met this task, this challenge.

We have done better than some, perhaps, and not as well as others. But it is no matter now. You are this season’s people. We speak to you children of the 21st century. Do not throw away your caution; do not open yourselves to those who would exploit you or deprive you of your rights, but please live with less fear than we did. The rights you enjoy today are here to stay. Armed struggle is not essential to the procurement of your daily bread; this much we have given you. There are still those who would take advantage of you, but they are fewer and less powerful than they were in our time.

The communication tools you have today make it far more difficult for those who would abuse power. Perhaps the most important lesson our lives have taught us is this:  you are always better off communicating with friends, with enemies, it makes no difference. Be open, honest… state your views as clearly as possible. Do not be afraid of giving away secrets. It is best to have no secrets; they are the source of much mistrust. Share with others who you are, your goals, your ambitions. We have found that on those occasions when we have communicated with our adversaries miracles have occurred across national borders, across racial lines, across economic and social barriers.

Breakthroughs of understanding have occurred. We came to respect those with whom we spoke, and they came to respect us. These are the friendships that have served us well in our lives. Agreement is less important than respect, for with respect agreement may one day occur but without it agreement is impossible. Honesty and openness will earn you respect. The times we fought when we did not need to fight we lost both the fight and potential friends. Count everyone a potential friend, then do what you can to make that friendship real.

Communication is a power much greater than confrontation – do not lose sight of that.

We have seen, as all the elders of our race have seen, that there is no scarcity of resources. The only scarcities have been of love and of imagination. As long as the sun shines and rivers flow, as long as the winds blow and ocean waves lap on these shores, there is no shortage of energy nor is there any thing over which to fight. Unless perhaps your basic needs are denied by another’s greed, then we would say yes defend your rights, but speak first. First use all your wit and ingenuity to avoid the conflict. Then if you must, defend what you must, but know you may well lose as much as you will gain. Use force only in defense and only as a last resort. There is no cause but defense that justifies violence.

No nation whose people are motivated for any reason other than defense can win a war in the present climate of the world. Perhaps this was not always true, but the wise ones among us have noticed this, and whatever its cause it is reality for the times in which you live. Can you understand? This is the real news. Consider what it means. No nation desires to lose a war, and if only a defensive war can be won we will not launch a war. Can nations battle in mutual defense?

If your youth pumps passion through your blood and you desire an arena in which to test your spirit fire turn to the athletic field, to the Olympic Games, to amateur and professional sports, to baseball, basketball, football, soccer, rugby, curling, skiing, sailing, bicycling, dancing, cross-country racing… The options before you are endless.

Choose the field that best suits your nature; compete to your heart’s content. Enjoy the pursuit of excellence, compete in marketplaces and music halls, in fields and amphitheaters, but if you seek to enjoy your lives do not compete on the battlefield. Leave behind the old world’s greatest bane. Do not kill, do not destroy, do not main, murder and ruin. In the end you but do these things to yourselves – there are no others.

Let your competition be light-hearted and friendly. Celebrate the diversity of excellence. We have lived that you might know a brighter world. Do not throw away the promise we have given you; if you turn to violence in any of its forms you betray those of us who have gone before you and those of us who follow.

There are no winners in violent confrontation – only losers and more losers. Do not let the pursuit of excellence in your chosen field blind you to the excellence of another. See the same spirit in them pursuing the same excellence to which you aspire. Appreciate them in the same way you appreciate the skilled opponent who helps you hone and develop your skills. Appreciate them as you would a partner, a coach, a trainer who helps you transcend what you thought were your limitations.

These attitudes, simple though they are, lie at the heart of the world we want you to know.

From 9/11 To Syria: Inescapable Truths.

By Jerry Alatalo

“The man who wishes to remain faithful to justice must make himself continually unfaithful to inexhaustibly triumphant injustice.”

– CHARLES PEGUY (1873-1914) French writer

oil wellAlphabet Many have come to accept the theory that overthrowing  Bashar al-Assad in Syria was one of the objectives of those who planned, facilitated and destroyed World Trade Center Buildings 1 and 2, along with the lesser-known Building 7, on September 11, 2001. Now that Congress has overturned President Barack Obama’s veto of the JASTA bill allowing legal action by surviving family members of those who perished on 9/11 against Saudi Arabia, there has been a renewal of hope and optimism – a sense that a crack in the dam of coverup has developed – among those who believe the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks have never become identified and prosecuted.

Immediately after the Twin Towers were hit by airplanes, before the Towers fell or any semblance of investigation had begun, news reports went out over the airwaves reflecting commentary by politicians and terrorism experts asserting Osama Bin Laden was behind and guilty of the attacks. Instead of sending a small force of special operations personnel to Afghanistan to capture Bin Laden, the Bush-Cheney administration carried out a war against the entire Afghan nation – learned later so to control highly valuable energy pipelines and mineral resources in the region, as well as overseeing massive re-cultivation of poppy fields and Afghanistan’s lucrative heroin trade.

Americans were then subjected to an organized (unfortunately, successful) propaganda campaign by the Bush-Cheney administration that resulted in 70% holding the false perception that Iraq’s Saddam Hussein was somehow connected to the 9/11 attacks, that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction threatening American cities with mushroom clouds, and leading to Washington’s lawmakers voting for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The Bush-Cheney administration, Tony Blair in the United Kingdom, and other European nation heads went along with the lies, estimates are that over 1,000,000 Iraqis perished, and Iraq after being bombed to rubble has never recovered.

Barack Obama became president in 2008 and the next nation targeted for overthrow was Libya under Muammar Gaddafi. The Obama-Biden administration, in a “successful” manner similar to its predecessor Bush-Cheney group with Iraq, convinced the United Nations Security Council to establish a no-fly zone over Libya with the argument that Gaddafi’s slaughter of his own citizens was “imminent”, and only a matter of hours away. The claims that Gaddafi was on the verge of slaughtering the Libyan people were proven to be lies, thousands of Libyans perished  under NATO bombing in 2011, the nation’s infrastructure became destroyed, and Libya is now commonly described as a “basket case”.

Later, released emails of the U.S. Secretary of State in 2011 Hillary Clinton revealed the real reasons for Libya’s destruction and Gaddafi’s murder. One of the factors was control of Libya’s energy resources and another was Gaddafi’s plan to establish a new currency for the African continent. Understanding that oil was one of the prime motivators for those who engineered the bombing of Libya is easy enough; it’s safe to say the majority of wars in mankind’s history have been about natural resources and/or land/territory. Getting one’s head around the implications of an African currency and new, competitive monetary system involves higher level complexity of thought to grasp and/or imagine the powerful persons and groups involved in the direct decision-making that led to Libya’s military destruction.

Next after Libya in the line of military fire of the powerful persons and groups at the control of geopolitical decision-making came Syria. Some hold the theory that the main reason for attacks on Syria since 2011 until today has to do with natural gas pipelines delivering massive quantities of energy supply to European markets. The nations of Qatar and Iran share an immensely large natural gas field between them, and both proposed running a multi-billion dollar pipeline across Syria to Europe to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Assad rejected the Qatar offer and accepted the Iranian, plans were drafted, contracts written and signed on an Iran-Iraq-Syria project, then the violence in Syria began to dramatically escalate.

Other observers believe the Qatar-Iran natural gas pipeline competition is a real and significant factor for explaining the warring in Syria, but that broader regional factors having to do with national political structures in Middle East-North Africa are also necessary to consider. Maintaining the monarchies in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, etc. and holding off serious democratic reform that transforms the region politically is also an important factor, among many others in a range from less to more influential, for persons engaged in analysis.

Suffice to say Bashar al-Assad, like Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi before him, has experienced the same “demonization” coming from the Obama administration, European governments, and Western corporate media since 2011. An unbalanced, concentrated, organized strategy of attack which portrays Assad as a “ruthless dictator… killing his own people.. barrel-bombing” became developed then implemented to sway public opinion into favoring major military actions leading to his removal/overthrow from power. The main, important-to-consider aspect of the strategy is the intentional repeated focusing on the Syrian government and Assad, while minimizing or even excluding any focus on the estimated 350,000 paid mercenary terrorists who’ve entered Syria since 2011.

That exclusion and/or minimization of terrorism and terrorists operating in Syria since 2011 was verified in the first presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Anyone who watched and listened to that debate looking for the candidates’ positions on the situation in Syria became completely disappointed – Syria was never brought up for discussion, at any point, during the entire course of their exchange. What has developed in Syria is of major historic significance and could hardly become explained away as “not of sufficient importance for discussion in presidential debate(s)”. Most shocking and disturbing are increasing revelations that the terrorists who’ve attacked Syria and its people for 5 1/2 years have received their entire support from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Israel, the United States, United Kingdom, France and other governments. That describes in the mind of any sane and reasonable man or woman war crimes – state-sponsored terrorism.

In the video that follows attorney Daniel Sheehan describes crimes of an entirely different, higher magnitude and nature – in this talk referring specifically to 9/11 – reaching a level of consequence that “shakes the very legal foundation itself”. The accumulated crimes of state-sponsored terrorism committed against Syria – its people, military, government, property and infrastructure – are arguably in that category, but different from 9/11 in that the crimes have become identified, revealed, and acknowledged long before 15 years have elapsed. Events on 9/11 and in Syria could be described or visualized as two ends of a continuum of major historic, illegal and deceptive events on Earth.

When referring to 9/11, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and other crime scenes which originated from the events of September 11, 2001, one finds a period of (15) fifteen years where humanity has experienced crimes of such size that international law’s foundation itself has become shaken, at risk, under attack, and in urgent need of defense. How the human collective deals with these profoundly worrying circumstances and comes to an agreement on moving forward with a firm foundation of truth is possibly the greatest challenge of this generation.

****

9/11: The origin of war in the 21st century

While many people are still unaware that a third skyscraper – Building 7 – collapsed on 9/11, those who’ve seen videos of its collapse nearly unanimously describe it as a “controlled demolition”. It is worth noting that Building 7 is commonly referred to in the 9/11 truth community (those who’ve done any research to speak of on 9/11) as “the smoking gun”, but that the official 9/11 Commission Report didn’t even mention Building 7.

The collapse of the South Tower has some similarity to Building 7 when observed in that one notices at the initial phase of collapse a physical event which seems to make impossible the tower’s total collapse. That event is the top 1/4 to 1/5 (estimated) of the structure seemingly “breaking off” and moving sideways. While not having any expertise or training in engineering, simple observation leads one to offer the suggestion that the top section, which clearly starts falling away from the rest of the structure, at some point in its ongoing out-and-away momentum would have ceased having any further weight-bearing effect on the collapse of floors below. In other words, it seems the South Tower’s collapse should have become ultimately partial – with perhaps 1/3 to 1/2 of the structure still standing – as opposed to collapsing completely down to the 1st floor.

Certainly the over 2,000 architects and engineers belonging to the group Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have taken great pains in studying every aspect of the South Tower’s collapse, and “scientifically presumptuous” would entail the correct term for describing this layperson’s simple observation. Details on the collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7 are only a few of the thousands any legal team determined to bring charges against defendants will need to comb through in preparation for their case.

(Thank you to Nathan Flach at YouTube)

****

Veteran attorney involved in many of America’s most important legal cases Daniel Sheehan talked to those attending the Justice In Focus symposium September 11, 2016 in New York City about 9/11 legal options and strategies.  In the highly informative, insightful and historically revealing keynote address, Mr. Sheehan provided valuable descriptions of facts surrounding the cases he’s fought, in particular the difficulties, roadblocks and opposition attorneys face when engaging in highly politicized complex court battles.

Among the many astonishing points made by Mr. Sheehan was his mention that during the Karen Silkwood case the smuggling of 40 pounds of plutonium from the Kerr-McGee plant in Oklahoma to Israel became revealed, and that the plutonium was to become divided with portions going to the Shah of Iran and apartheid South Africa. That astounding set of facts became suppressed by the presiding judge, therefore concealed from the American public – because Sheehan failed to prove that Karen Silkwood was a member of the black race.

In a real sense, the world has traveled a circle that started on 9/11 and effectively ends in Syria. Humanity now has no other alternative but to face inescapable truths.

(Thank you to AE911Truth at YouTube)

Anyone interested can watch the entire 16 hours of proceedings in the “Justice In Focus” video archive by visiting:

http://911JusticeInFocus.org

World Can End ISIS In Days.

By Jerry Alatalo

“It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.”

– VOLTAIRE (1694-1778) French philosopher

HighwayDoes anyone remember that shortly before violence erupted in Syria in 2011 that Iran, Iraq and Syria signed a $multi-billion natural gas pipeline deal to move Iran’s natural gas resource to sell in Europe – and that Syria’s government had rejected a similar pipeline deal proposed by Qatar, which has access to the same huge natural gas field as Iran?

The question is important because the pipelines issue is the source of the humanitarian catastrophe innocent Syrians have suffered in the five-year war. It was shortly after Iran, Iraq and Syria agreed and signed a massive pipeline deal to build infrastructure for transporting natural gas to the tremendous European market that violence erupted in Syria. Terrorist/mercenary groups financed by Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and western nations became tools for toppling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Would a compromise of two pipelines, one carrying natural gas from Iran and the other from Qatar, built to Syria and joining there, then metered after becoming a single pipeline to Europe, with a 50/50 guaranteed split of profits shared between Iran and Qatar – offer a solution and real chance for peace in Syria?

It’s worth noting and remembering that former NATO Supreme Commander General Wesley Clark told the world that the United States had a five-year plan to overthrow the governments of seven countries, Iraq, Libya, Syria and “finally” Iran among them. The other three nations targeted were/are Lebanon, Somalia and Sudan. In case some readers are still unaware of, or forgotten, Mr. Clark’s bombshell revelation:

(Thank you to FacelesswithEyesOpen at YouTube)

The wars in the Middle East-North Africa (MENA) region, with their overwhelmingly tragic consequences for the people living in those countries, have all been about oil, natural gas and other valuable resources – in particular who controls and profits from their sale. In case some readers have the idea that “false flag” operations are just the result of overactive imaginations possessed by “conspiracy theorists”, perhaps a certain Mr. Patrick Clawson, Senior Fellow at the Washington Institute of Near East Policy,  can convince you otherwise:

(Thank you to TNSONSOFLIBERTY at YouTube)

Ask yourself why in around a month Russia’s air campaign against ISIS and other mercenary terrorist groups, who’ve destroyed untold lives and property in five years in Syria and Iraq, has done more to effectively battle the mercenaries than the United States’ “coalition” has in over a year. Keep in mind when pondering that the United States spends more on defense (intelligence and the military) than the rest of the world combined, and that the U.S. military because of that world-leading expenditure is the most powerful force in world history.

Ask yourself how it is that, since the “coalition” began its campaign against ISIS over a year ago, the terrorist group remains operational – in other words, the most powerful military in world history has not been able to defeat, or crush, ISIS out of existence. Ask why you see no “success stories” in the war against ISIS reported about prevention of ISIS’ selling stolen oil on the world market, no six o’clock news lead stories showing arrest, detainment, prosecution, trial and conviction of those involved with buying ISIS oil, or no newspaper headlines announcing revealed scandals that include oil buyers, bankers, and others whose intentional actions have helped sustain ISIS.

Is it impossible to investigate and find who supplied the bright, shiny-new fleets of Toyota pickups? Is it impossible to find where ISIS obtained their money and weaponry, where and by whom they received training, who has supplied their necessities, or any real facts surrounding ISIS’ remaining a “going (and growing) concern”?  No, it’s not impossible to investigate these matters related to ISIS. But if those who tell the world how important it is to defeat ISIS fail to investigate – in effect engaging in a giant cover-up – it may as well be impossible.

When ISIS began its rampage of war and destruction in the summer of 2014, this writer urged the world’s leaders to organize a multinational military force to take the terrorist group down. Well over a year later, ISIS has gone on to kill more innocents and destroy more homes and property, Europe faces a profound refugee crisis, while someone has provided them the weapons, money, equipment, necessities – and cover – to continue. The lives of millions are shattered, and the guilty facilitating ISIS are known when their words are absent sincere concern, empathy, compassion or resolve to end the immense suffering those innocent millions are experiencing. They are known when their words do not include “peace”.

It’s now overwhelmingly clear – well beyond any reasonable doubt – that those who’ve aided and abetted ISIS mercenary terrorists are war criminals and must face punishment in the International Criminal Court for their truly heinous actions. Very soon, the people of the world will know the truth.

(Thank you to Press TV News Videos at YouTube)

Rocky Anderson On RT: “Propaganda” or Truth?

by Jerry Alatalo

Mount Rainier - 1Former Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah, founder of U.S. Justice Party, and its 2012 candidate for President of the United States Rocky Anderson gave an astonishing interview recently on “SophieCo” at RT. The astonishing thing about the interview was Mr. Anderson’s complete truthfulness throughout the discussion, leading one to ask: “how did it come to the point where one becomes astonished at hearing someone speak the truth?”

Nowadays, the fact of the matter is that more often than not people watching TV are not astonished or moved when listening to the talking heads on their big screens, making one wonder why the situation hadn’t become reversed a long time ago. Many who pass this way and read these words have a good grasp of the reasons truth is too rare on television, yet finding an interview such as this offers some hope that perhaps good changes are in the air.

One of the aspects of Mr. Anderson’s interview that’s also remarkable is that he’s interviewed on RT (Russia Today), the state-run network which was the topic discussed during recent hearings in the United States Congress, where deep concerns were discussed about countering RT and Russian “propaganda”. This writer was unfamiliar with the views of Mr. Anderson until watching this interview, but it seems safe to say the former Mayor of Salt Lake City and 2012 presidential candidate doesn’t come across as a “godless communist”, traitor to the U.S., or in any observable way calling for Russia’s “takeover of the world”.

For those who get their news of world events from Fox, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC and similar corporate media groups, ask yourself to name the last time you saw a mayor or former mayor of a major Russian city interviewed on any of those outlets. Ask yourself why it’s such a rare occurrence (if at all) that leaders of nations around the world – especially now with the Syria crisis, Vladimir Putin – appear for long interviews on any of those outlets.

Wouldn’t prime time hours devoted to discussion and debate on current events among journalists from, say, Fox News and RT, CNN and CCTV, or ABC and teleSUR lead to a better understanding between Americans, Russians, Chinese and Latin Americans, plus clarify facts surrounding important, stressful situations around the world such as those now present in Syria, Ukraine, Venezuela, Libya, the South China Sea, and elsewhere?

The answer to that question is obvious: of course such joint media efforts would increase understanding between the people of the world, and very likely would increase the peace. The producers from the various nations could agree to call the program “World Peace Talks”. Yet, sadly, such creative media collaborations have never occurred, and one has to think deeply about why such a potentially powerful, possibly world-changing tool has not been taken “out of the toolbox” and used. All that’s needed is a Skype connection – for media technical wizards, literally a piece of cake.

Returning to the astonishingly straightforward  interview of Rocky Anderson, one receives a greater sense about why media organizations from nations around the Earth haven’t collaborated on programs devoted to analyzing major events. Certain media owners have agendas in which investigative journalism – discovery of facts, reporting the truth surrounding vital situations around the planet – is not included. Such as Fox News…:

(Thank you to Brave New Films at YouTube)

Mr. Anderson advocates for the United States working with Russia to bring a peaceful resolution to the devastating five-year war and humanitarian crisis in Syria.

“We have common cause with Russia in defeating ISIS”.

Talking about members of the U.S. Congress opposed to U.S./Russia coordination to defeat ISIS, Rocky Anderson said: “Those people are more concerned about their own political futures and interests than they are about doing the right thing, and we all know that if we are able to align with Russia, and coordinate our efforts against ISIS, we stand a whole lot better chance – in fact, I think it’d be a virtual certainty that we could defeat ISIS in Syria, and in the long run, perhaps find common cause in finding a solution in terms of what’s happening between the President of Syria and the other opposition that the United States has supported”.

“I think working with others with whom we have common cause is the only way we’re going to solve those problems. The United States went into Iraq on a pack of lies from the Bush Administration. It was incredibly destructive to everybody concerned, and we need to recognize that, and stop alienating the Muslim world. We need to stop creating more hatred and hostility with the drone attacks that are not only killing so many civilians with those indiscriminate attacks, but we’re also seeing the destruction, for instance, of the Doctors Without Borders hospital in Afghanistan”.

“That can’t help but create more hatred and hostility for generations to come. So, it’s a very unwise policy for the United States to continue going it alone. We need to join with those who could be our allies, like Iran was our ally in the early days in Afghanistan after 9/11. And what happened? President Bush gave his speech identifying Iran as part of the “axis of evil” and he destroyed this great relationship we’d been building up with Iran, and the very positive effects of working with them in our early efforts in Afghanistan. We should never look at those who we can work with as our enemies. We need to build alliances wherever we can”.

After mentioning U.S. military coups which overthrew democratically elected leaders in Iran (1953) and Guatemala (1954), he noted: “We’ve got to be honest about these things. We’ve got more , the… history of most of civilization has been that those with the most power and wealth have dominated those… and stole the resources from those who didn’t have the power. It’s absolutely so clear that in the long run that’s very self-defeating in this world, and we need to be focusing more on building peaceful relationships”.

The host asked Rocky Anderson what American “exceptionalism” and being the world’s strongest military means for the world’s security today.

“Obviously, it has created a much more dangerous world. The people in the United States are less secure, we’re less safe than we were before the Iraq War – and I think the Iraq War was a product of the neocons, those people who signed off on the “Project for a New American Century”, where the entire plan was premised on the idea that the United States needs to dominate militarily and economically throughout the world. And of course the Middle East was the first place that was in the neocons’ target, and they persuaded President Bush to go into Iraq when there was absolutely no cause for concern, and, even in the words of then Secretary of State Colin Powell, and National Security advisor Condoleeza Rice, before 9/11 they said Saddam Hussein had not built up his weapons of mass destruction, didn’t even pose a danger with conventional weapons to his neighbors”.

“All of this has created a much more dangerous situation, and it needs to be turned around, with more effort focused on peaceful relationships rather than ripping off people’s resources”.

The host then asked about the “human cost”…

“In the long run, we know that looking out for others, when we’re looking out for the interest of people in other nations, our world’s going to be more safe and secure. But if the thrust is to benefit multinational corporations, it makes for a very dangerous world”.

Mr. Anderson clearly makes the point that U.S. foreign policy needs to change because of the enormous, tragic cost, ever since 2003 and the Iraq War, paid by millions of innocent people in the Middle East, and he includes the hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing Syria, Libya and other war-ravaged lands to Europe.

The interview then turned to the race for President in the United States, where Mr. Anderson noted that Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, former and current Secretaries of State, both voted to authorize the Bush Administration’s Iraq War. He noted that they “didn’t do their homework” before voting by ignoring intelligence reports that provided evidence showing Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction. He also shared with RT’s host and its viewers the disturbing fact that Hillary Clinton received $400,000 for two speeches from the Wall Street giant Goldman-Sachs, Barack Obama’s largest contributions came from Wall Street, and that financial deregulation legislation signed into law by President Bill Clinton led to the world financial crisis of 2007-8.

In recent campaign speeches, Hillary Clinton has said she’d start “jailing bankers” upon becoming President.

Rocky Anderson believes Americans have become fed up with the duopoly of Republican and Democratic politicians who have sold them out to Wall Street banks, multinational corporations, and the 158 wealthiest families in America who control them. He notes that those 158 families have spent $176 million so far on the presidential race, with most of the money going to Republican candidates. From his perspective, Americans are ready for major political change, mentioning that Bernie Sanders is surging past Hillary Clinton in polls and “can win the Democratic nomination”. While Americans are looking for presidential candidates outside the duopoly, the corporate media downplays the chances for Bernie Sanders and outright ignores the probable Green Party candidate Dr. Jill Stein.

If Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s lawsuit/legal fight for inclusion in the presidential debates succeeds, Americans in the not-too-distant future might find Ms. Stein, Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders on their big screen TVs – each presenting, explaining and attempting to prove the wisdom of choosing his/her plans for improving the country.

Those debates will represent a truly historic moment for America.

Finally, Rocky Anderson believes whistleblower Edward Snowden would not get fair legal treatment in America, that Mr. Snowden is a hero for “putting it all on the line” to inform the American people, that statues of him should become erected across the country, and compared him to Daniel Ellsberg, the man who released the Pentagon Papers. Mr. Anderson finds it very ironic that Americans under surveillance have come to experience what in the past was negatively ascribed to Russia’s intelligence branch the KGB.

Judge for yourself. “Propaganda” or truth?…

(Thank you to RT Shows on YouTube)