The following is an interesting article. It highlights the Incompetence of the Obama Administration in Foreign Policy, while at the same time blaming Obama’s Military action in Libya entirely on Hilary Clinton.
When our government deals with a Foreign Nation it does so with one voice. That is the way it has always been. The following article shows that the White House allowed 3 other differing views to negotiate with Libya at the same time before it destroyed the Gaddafi Regime. It is a long article 7 pages, so I place it under the fold.
The article if you go to it’s sorce also has a video that includes excerpts from the tapes that the article is based on. I understand that there are those here that believe my critical view of the Obama Presidency is based on some sort of hate. It is however based on multiple reasons all with the underlying theme of President Obama’s incompetency.
I understand that the length of this article is beyond the attention span of most here. Those especially the Americans ought to make the effort to at least try to stay focused long enough to read it.
We all know what “Victorian values” are. It’s common knowledge that the 19th-Century was all Gradgrind and Hard Times, an era of stern, uptight, moralistic corporal punishers who even draped furniture and piano legs. Well common knowledge has it completely wrong.
On the face of it this caricature doesn’t stand up. Any comparison between 1837 (when Victoria ascended to the throne) and 1901 will show the obvious; they were revolutionary, free-wheeling, imaginative, exciting, adventurous times. A nation of stiff prudes couldn’t begin to accomplish what our wonderful forebears achieved.
I don’t know why, but it’s always been in my mind that the Bloomsbury Group was mainly responsible for propogating most of the myths and propaganda about “Victorian values” which are still widely accepted. It was a spiteful campaign but highly successful. It’s interesting to see then that AN Wilson has written about these myths, and finding that the Victorians were always much more fun and liberal than is imagined. His explanation for why we have it so wrong –
So where did this dour image of the Victorian age come from? How did we get the idea that they were all puritanical, unsmiling, and cruel?
When Bertrand Russell, the famous philosopher, was jailed during the First World War for being a conscientious objector, his warder was surprised to hear laughter coming from his cell. He went in and saw Russell reading a volume by his friend Lytton Strachey, called “Eminent Victorians”.
Russell, the grandson of the Liberal Prime Minister Lord John Russell, had experienced an austere upbringing, largely at the hands of a rather frightening grandmother. Strachey saw many such alarming parent figures in the upper class world to which he and Russell belonged, and when they grew up and formed the friendship group that came to be known as the Bloomsbury Set, they determined to lampoon everything about the Victorians.
And from there common knowledge grew to be completely wrong. No, the Victorians did not dress scandalously uncovered furniture. No, Queen Victoria did not refuse to sign a Bill which would have outlawed lesbianism, famously refusing to accept that lesbianism could exist in the first place. These are lies which became widely accepted beliefs. In fact naturism was much more widely practiced than it is now, and Queen Victoria was a high spirited, intelligent, fun, open-minded woman. But these truths don’t fit the comfy caricatures.
There’s a lesson in here somewhere. Maybe it’s not just with the Victorians, but also with other common beliefs that things ain’t necessarily so.
The scene: A quiet living-room of a home in Durham City. The snow has been falling, but the central heating is keeping the home warm.
The home-owner is seated in front of his computer, deep in the plot of a story he has been writing. He is concentrating on a line of dialogue from one of the plotters in his book, when the phone rings. The home owner has identified all his usual callers; family members, relatives, a few friends whom he would wish to talk with, but the call is anonymous. The phone keeps ringing, so he reaches out and answers.
“Hello, who’s calling?”
“This is the UK Claims office calling, Ahmed speaking.”
“I have no knowledge of any UK Claims business, nor of anyone named Ahmed. Please identify yourself, and why you are calling.”
“I am calling to ask if you wish to make a compensation claim for the injuries you suffered during your car accident three months ago….”
Bloody Telephone so-called Preference System
Socialism and price controls are taking their natural path in Venezuela. Government is not content with hammering the economy into pieces; now its Praetorians have been authorised to shoot hungry protestors if they get a bit too uppity.
As Venezuelans face chronic food shortages and their country’s economic crisis deepens, its government has authorised its armed forces to use lethal force against protesters if they believe their lives are at risk during demonstrations.
This is government all over. Having made the crises, it creates dupes and targets at which to strike. This is the cycle of government:
It prints up money to create the false illusion of economic wellbeing. It’s not wealth. It actually drains wealth from real assets, but it’s a short economic sugar rush. It usually works because hardly anyone looks at money supply stats. They see only jobs and goods in the shops and think all is good.
The extra money bids up prices. Taken to excess, price inflation accelerates. At this point government often blames mysterious “speculators”. Price controls are imposed, which even mainstream economists realise always lead to shortages. Venezuela is short of everything. Long queues exist for basic staples, people are going hungry. They protest and the government responds with threats of deadly force. This is government, and this is a crises completely, absolutely and 100 per cent caused by government intervention in the economy. Its money printing shot prices sky high, then its price controls choked off supply.
Only less government, fewer regulations and much more free markets can possibly resolve the situation, but as always it’s a hopeless situation. People are conditioned to call for more government to resolve problems. That the problems are caused by government in the first place is rarely seen. If today’s leaders cannot make us better then we’ll vote for another bunch of distorting, interventionist leaders. That’s what they’ll do, when all along they need no leaders, just free markets.
I was reading that the poet Rod McKuen died today. McKuen famously co-wrote the words to one of my favourite songs of all time. Let’s go back to 1974 and recall innocent times and a poignant pop classic!
Because Friday night is Music Night
I had Desert Island Discs on the wireless this morning. Nope, still not a penny. For those born in a vanquished land, Desert Island Discs is a long running BBC radio show. A famous guest, or someone prominent in his field, is invited to tell their life story and choose the ten songs they’d like to have with them if marooned on a desert island. This morning’s guest was some Belgian scientist who I’ve never heard of, but who chose this number by Jacques Brel. Brel’s one of those types who I’ve long heard of but about whom I know nothing. But I like this gentle song, which is about the northern flatlands of his birthplace. It becomes a little haunting after a minute or so, which is sweet.
As always, feel free to link to what sounds you like –
Since the beginning of his Presidency Obama has shown repeated support for the Terrorist Group The Muslim Brotherhood. 2 days after once again hosting members of the Terrorist organization at the State Dept. The Brotherhood have declared a new Jihad in Ally Egypt.
The Muslim Brotherhood called for “a long, uncompromising jihad” in Egypt just days after a delegation of the Islamist group’s key leaders and allies met with the State Department, according to an official statement released this week.“It is incumbent upon everyone to be aware that we are in the process of a new phase, where we summon what is latent in our strength, where we recall the meanings of jihad and prepare ourselves, our wives, our sons, our daughters, and whoever marched on our path to a long, uncompromising jihad, and during this stage we ask for martyrdom,” it states.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., announced on Thursday that he is actively exploring the possibility of a presidential run in 2016.
Graham said that his new website, Security Through Strength – marketed as Graham’s version of Reagan’s “peace through strength” philosophy – will help him “test the waters” for “a potential presidential candidacy.”
Graham represents everything that is wrong in the Republican Party. Another poster child for Term Limits he was elected in the wave against Bill Clinton in 94. However in 1997, he took part in an abortive coup against House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
The list of grievances I have against Graham could fill the whole front page of the site. My feelings toward this Republican can only be summed up in this manner.
If Graham were to ever win the nomination, which thank god he hasn’t a prayer of doing so. I would gleefully vote and campaign for Hillary Clinton.
This is just the beginning, the demography is happening across the country, it is simply more obvious in those areas where it first started.
Two seats will be contested at the UK General Election where the majority of voters were born overseas. A record four million people born abroad will be able to vote in May after a decade of mass immigration, a study predicted yesterday. The figure – up 500,000 since the last election – represents one-tenth of the electorate. In a historic development, more than half of those eligible to vote in London’s East Ham and Brent North seats were born overseas.
This is what Labour was hoping for when they opened the floodgates in 1997. They imported MILLIONS of people who realise that if the current bloated dysfunctional system is to stay in place, they should really vote for a Party dedicated to ensuring that (In the name of “social fairness)
The entire multicultural agenda is predicated on changing the face of Britain forever. In East Ham and Brent North, that has now happened. Give it five years and see where it has spread.