McCain asks for strategy to end terrorism. Here’s one: US military arrests .01% War Criminals like McCain

hat tip: PressTV and David Icke

US Senate Armed Services Committee Chair, John McCain, says he prays for the US military to end terrorism in the Middle East.

Those of us awake to the long history of US-initiated Wars of Aggression began on lies share Senator McCain’s prayers. Therefore, we formally request US military to enact their Oaths of Enlistment to refuse all orders related to obviously unlawful armed attacks, and for US military officers to enact their lawful responsibility to arrest those who issue obviously unlawful orders associated with Wars of Aggression.

Senator McCain and other .01% “leaders” in government and corporate media should be arrested for treason because according to Article III of the US Constitution, their support for obvious unlawful Wars of Aggression all based on lies directly cause US military to suffer war upon them. They should also be arrested for the most important War Crime: Wars of Aggression. States should also issue arrest warrants for premeditated First Degree Murder of state-resident US military killed in these unlawful wars.

I support the option of Truth & Reconciliation for Orwellian criminals such as Mr. McCain, whereby they can live the rest of their short lives on a comfortable pension in exchange for the full truth of their crimes. I recommend this option so the 99.99% can learn the full truth, and prevent dangerous responses from the .01% criminals with access to lethal weapons.

How do we know Mr. McCain and cohorts are obvious War Criminals?

It’s as easy as understanding the two simple treaties after each of the two world wars; the most important laws on planet Earth to defend and for which all our families sacrificed:

“No treaty, however much it may be to the advantage of all, however tightly it may be worded, can provide absolute security against the risks of deception and evasion.” – President Kennedy, June 10, 1963

Unlawful Wars of Aggression: The US/UK/Israel “official story” is that current wars are lawful because they are “self-defense.” The Emperor’s New Clothes fact here is that “self-defense” means something quite narrow and specific in war law, and US/UK/Israel armed attacks on so many nations in current and past wars are not even close to the definition of “self-defense.”

Addressing three nations and several wars seems ambitious for one article, and again, these are all simple variations of one method:

  1. Ignore war law.
  2. Lie to blame the victim and claim “self-defense.”
  3. “Officials” and corporate media never state the Emperor’s New Clothes simple and obvious facts of war law and war lies.

Proving unlawful wars with massive deception is easier when the scope is broadened to see the same elements in three cases.

Importantly, a nation can use military, police, and civilians in self-defense from any attack upon the nation. This is similar to the legal definition of “self-defense” for you or I walking down the street: we cannot attack anyone unless either under attack or imminent threat. And, if under attack, we can use any reasonable force in self-defense, including lethal.

Two world wars begat two treaties to end nations’ armed attacks forever. They are crystal-clear in content and context:

  • Kellogg-Briand Pact (General treaty for renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy as official title)
  • United Nations Charter.

Both are listed in the US State Department’s annual publication, Treaties in Force (2013 edition pages 466 and 493).

Article Six of the US Constitution defines a treaty as US “supreme Law of the Land;” meaning that US policy may only complement an active treaty, and never violate it.

This is important because all of us with Oaths to the US Constitution are sworn to honorably refuse all unlawful war orders; military officers are sworn to arrest those who issue them. Indeed, we suffer criminal dishonor if we obey orders for armed attack when they are not “self-defense,” and family dishonor to so easily reject the legal victory won from all our families’ sacrifices through two world wars.

Treaty 1. Kellogg-Briand: General treaty for renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy:

The legal term renounce means to surrender access; that is, to remove that which is renounced as lawful option. This active treaty (page 466 “Renunciation of War”), usually referenced as the Kellogg-Briand Pact, states:


The High Contracting Parties solemly declare in the names of their respective peoples that they condemn recourse to war for the solution of international controversies, and renounce it, as an instrument of national policy in their relations with one another.


The High Contracting Parties agree that the settlement or solution of all disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may be, which may arise among them, shall never be sought except by pacific means.”

Treaty 2. United Nations Charter:

It’s helpful to understand what the UN is not. The only area of legal authority of the UN is security/use of force; all other areas are advise for individual nation’s legislature’s consideration. The UN is not global government. It is a global agreement to end wars of choice outside of a very narrow legal definition of national self-defense against another nation’s armed attack.

The preamble of the United Nations includes to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war… to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and… to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used…”

The UN purpose includes: “To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace…”

Article 2:

3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

  1. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter…

Article 24: In order to ensure prompt and effective action by the United Nations, its Members confer on the Security Council primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and agree that in carrying out its duties under this responsibility the Security Council acts on their behalf.

Article 25: The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter.

Article 33:

  1. The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.
  2. The Security Council shall, when it deems necessary, call upon the parties to settle their dispute by such means.

Article 37: Should the parties to a dispute of the nature referred to in Article 33 fail to settle it by the means indicated in that Article, they shall refer it to the Security Council.

Article 39: The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.

Article 40: In order to prevent an aggravation of the situation, the Security Council may, before making the recommendations or deciding upon the measures provided for in Article 39, call upon the parties concerned to comply with such provisional measures as it deems necessary or desirable.

Article 51: Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the judicial branch of the UN. Their definition of “armed attack” is by a nation’s government. Because the leadership of the CIA and FBI both reported that they had no evidence the Afghan government had any role in the 9/11 terrorism, the US is unable to claim Article 51 protection for military action in Afghanistan (or IraqSyriaUkraine, Iran [hereherehere], Russia, or claims about ISIS or Khorasans). The legal classification of what happened on 9/11 is an act of terrorism, a criminal act, not an armed attack by another nation’s government.

The US use of force oversees could be a legal application of Article 51 if, and only if, the US could meet the burden of proof of an imminent threat that was not being responded to by the Security Council. To date, the US has not made such an argument.

American Daniel Webster helped create the legal definition of national self-defense in the Caroline Affair as “necessity of that self-defence is instant, overwhelming, and leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation.” The US attack on Afghanistan came nearly a month after the 9/11 terrorism. Article 51 only allows self-defense until the Security Council takes action; which they did in two Resolutions beginning the day after 9/11 (1368 and 1373) claiming jurisdiction in the matter.

In conclusion, unless a nation can justify its military use as self-defense from armed attack from a nation’s government that is “instant, overwhelming, and leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation,” all other acts of war are unlawful. The legal definition of “self-defense” ends when the attack terminates.

In general legal definitionno party is allowed use of force under the justification of “self-defense” if the law can be applied for redress and remedy. 

Another area to clarify is the US 1973 War Powers Act (WPA). The authorization by Congress for US presidential discretion for military action in Afghanistan  and Iraq references WPA. This act, in response to the Vietnam War, reframes the Founders’ intent of keeping the power of war in the hands of Congress. It also expressly limits the president to act within US treaty obligations; the principle treaty of use of war being the UN Charter.

This means that presidential authority as commander-in-chief must always remain within the limitations of the UN Charter to be lawful orders. It’s not enough for Congress to authorize use of force; that force must always and only be within the narrow legal definition of self-defense clearly explained in the UN Charter. Of course, we can anticipate that if a government wanted to engage in unlawful war today, they would construct their propaganda to sell the war as “defensive.” The future of humanity to be safe from the scourge of war is therefore dependent upon our collective ability to discern lawful defensive wars from unlawful Wars of Aggression covered in BSEmperor’s New Clothes claims of self-defense.

Governments have been vicious killers over the last 100 years, using “self-defense” to justify their wars. The US has started 201 foreign armed attacks since WW2, causing the world’s peoples to conclude in polling that the US is indeed #1 as the most threatening nation to world peace. These US-started armed attacks have killed ~30 million and counting; 90% of these deaths are innocent children, the elderly and ordinary working civilian women and men. These US armed attacks have war-murdered more than Hitler’s Nazis, and continue a long history of lie-began US Wars of Aggression.

The most decorated US Marine general in his day warned all Americans of this fact of lie-started wars, and W. Bush’s Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff, Karl Rove, chided Pulitzer-winning journalist, Ron Suskind, that government will continue with such actions to “create our own reality” no matter what anyone else might say.

The first round of US current wars, the attack of Afghanistan on October 7, 2001, continues this history as a deliberate act of unlawful war, not defense that was “instant, overwhelming, and leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation.” The burden of proof the US would have to provide is imminent threat of another attack in order to justify self-defense. US Ambassador to the UN, John Negroponte, in his letter to the UN Security Council invoking Article 51 for the attack upon Afghanistan mentions only “ongoing threat;” which does not satisfy this burden of proof.

Article 51 requires self-defensive war coming from an attack by a nation’s government, which the CIA and FBI refute in the case of the Afghan government with the terrorism on 9/11. Self-defense ends when the attack ends. The US war began four weeks after 9/11 ended; making the US war one of choice and not defense.

Article 51 ends self-defense claims when the UN Security Council acts. Resolution 1373 provides clear language of international cooperation and justice under the law, with no authorization of force.

This evidence doesn’t require the light of the UN Charter’s spirit of its laws, but I’ll add it: humanity rejected war as a policy option and requires nations to cooperate for justice under that law. The US has instead embraced and still embraces war with its outcomes of death, misery, poverty, and fear expressly against the wishes of humanity and the majority of Americans. These acts are clearly unlawful and should be refused and stopped by all men and women in military, government and law enforcement.

Some war liars argue that UN Security Council Resolution 687 from 1991 authorizes resumption of force from the previous Gulf War. This resolution declared a formal cease-fire; which means exactly what it says: stop the use of force. The resolution was declared by UNSC and held in their jurisdiction; that is, no individual nation has authority to supersede UNSC’s power to continue or change the status of the cease-fire. The idea that the US and/or UK can authorize use of force under a UNSC cease-fire is as criminal as your neighbor shooting one of your family members and claiming that because police have authority to shoot dangerous people he can do it.

The categories of crime for armed attacks outside US treaty limits of law are:

  1. Wars of Aggression (the worst crime a nation can commit),
  2. Treason for lying to US military, ordering unlawful attack and invasions of foreign lands, and causing thousands of US military deaths.

All 27 UK Foreign Affairs Department attorneys concluded Iraq war is unlawful: I wrote in 2010:

“All the lawyers in the UK’s Foreign Affairs Department concluded the US/UK invasion of Iraq was an unlawful War of Aggression. Their expert advice is the most qualified to make that legal determination;all 27 of them were in agreement. This powerful judgment of unlawful war follows the Dutch government’s recent unanimous report and UN Secretary General Kofi Annan’s clear statements.

“This stunning information was disclosed at the UK Chilcot inquiry by thetestimony of Foreign Affairs leading legal advisor, Sir Michael Wood, who added that the reply from Prime Minister Tony Blair’s office to his legal department’s professional work was chastisement for putting their unanimous legal opinion in writing.

Sir Michael testified that Foreign Secretary Jack Straw preferred to take the legal position that the laws governing war were vague and open to broad interpretation: “He took the view that I was being very dogmatic and that international law was pretty vague and that he wasn’t used to people taking such a firm position.”

“UK Attorney General Lord Goldsmith testified he “changed his mind” against the unanimous legal opinion of all 27 of the Foreign Office attorneys to agree with the US legal argument that UN Security Council Resolution 1441 authorized use of force at the discretion of any nation’s choice. This testimony is also criminally damning: arguing that an individual nation has the right to choose war violates the purpose, letter and spirit of the UN Charter, as well as violates 1441 that reaffirms jurisdiction of the Security Council in governance of the issue. This Orwellian argument contradicts the express purpose of the Charter to prevent individual nations from engaging in wars.

“Moreover, the US and UK “legal argument” is in further Orwellian opposition to their UN Ambassadors’ statements when 1441 was passed that this did not authorize any use of force:

John Negroponte, US Ambassador to the UN:

[T]his resolution contains no “hidden triggers” and no “automaticity” with respect to the use of force. If there is a further Iraqi breach, reported to the Council by UNMOVIC, the IAEA or a Member State, the matter will return to the Council for discussions as required in paragraph 12.

Sir Jeremy Greenstock, UK Ambassador to the UN:

We heard loud and clear during the negotiations the concerns about “automaticity” and “hidden triggers” — the concern that on a decision so crucial we should not rush into military action; that on a decision so crucial any Iraqi violations should be discussed by the Council. Let me be equally clear in response… There is no “automaticity” in this resolution. If there is a further Iraqi breach of its disarmament obligations, the matter will return to the Council for discussion as required in paragraph 12.

“The Chilcot inquiry was initiated from public outrage against UK participation in the Iraq War, with public opinion having to engage a second time toforce hearings to become public rather than closed and secret. The hearings were not authorized to consider criminal charges, which is the next battle for UK public opinion.”

The UN Charter is the principle law to end wars; designed by the US to produce that result. That said, West Point Grads Against the War have further legal arguments of all the violations of war from US attack and invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, including further analysis of the UN Charter and expert supporting testimony. Another resource for documentation and analysis is David Swanson’s War is a Crime. Ironically, Americans would never allow a favorite sport such as baseball or football to be similarly destroyed by such Emperor’s New Clothes lies to those rules/laws.

Lawful war analysis: Negroponte’s letter invokes a legal Charter Article of self-defense in contrast with the loss of over 3,000 lives on 9/11. The letter portends legal evidence of al-Qaeda’s “central role” in the attacks and claims military response is appropriate because of al-Qaeda’s ongoing threat and continued training of terrorists. This reasoning argues for a reinterpretation of self-defense to include pre-emptive attack while lying in omission that such an argument is tacit agreement of current action being outside the law.

The US Army’s official law handbook provides an excellent historical and legal summary of when wars are lawful self-defense and unlawful War of Aggression in a seven-page Chapter One.

Importantly, after accurately defining “self-defense” in war, the JAG authors/attorneys explicitly state on page 6 that war is illegal unless a nation is under attack from another nation’s government, or can provide evidence of imminent threat of such attack:

“Anticipatory self-defense, whether labeled anticipatory or preemptive, must be distinguished from preventive self-defense. Preventive self-defense—employed to counter non-imminent threats—is illegal under international law.”

However, despite the US Army’s law handbook’s accurate disclosure of the legal meaning of “self-defense” in war, they then ignore this meaning to claim “self-defense” as a lawful reason for US wars without further explanation (details here).

President George Washington’s Farewell Address, the culmination of his 45 years of political experience, warned of the primary threat to America as “the impostures of pretended patriotism” from people within our own government who would destroy Constitutional limits in order to obtain tyrannical power:

“All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency.”

Young Abraham Lincoln wrote eloquently to defend the US Constitution from unlawful tyrants within our own government. In Congress, he spoke powerfully and truthfully that the President’s claims for armed attack and invasion of a foreign country were lies. Although war-mongers slurred Lincoln’s name at the time, history proved him correct in asserting the President of the US was a war-mongering liar:

“I carefully examined the President’s messages, to ascertain what he himself had said and proved upon the point. The result of this examination was to make the impression, that taking for true, all the President states as facts, he falls far short of proving his justification; and that the President would have gone farther with his proof, if it had not been for the small matter, that the truth would not permit him… Now I propose to try to show, that the whole of this, — issue and evidence — is, from beginning to end, the sheerest deception.”

Lincoln also wrote that “pre-emptive” wars were lies, and “war at pleasure.”

Of course, there is more:

And there is more to the history of Mr. McCain than just this one episode of pimping for Middle East war, as there is much more to the histories of the rest of the big players. The abuse the .01% wage upon all Earth’s inhabitants is endemic, and has causes to justify Truth & Reconciliation if they are allowed to tell their stories.

As always, we invite the .01% and their minions to reclaim their hearts and join us to fulfill the beautiful and powerful place Earth can be. This may include unique contributions from the inside. Please consider the wisdom of a “Scrooge conversion” to act for the benefit of all humanity rather than your self-proclaimed loveless “masters.” From Dickens’ 1843 text:

“Scrooge was better than his word. He did it all, and infinitely more; and to Tiny Tim, who did not die, he was a second father. He became as good a friend, as good a master, and as good a man, as the good old city knew, or any other good old city, town, or borough, in the good old world. Some people laughed to see the alteration in him, but he let them laugh, and little heeded them; for he was wise enough to know that nothing ever happened on this globe, for good, at which some people did not have their fill of laughter in the outset; and knowing that such as these would be blind anyway, he thought it quite as well that they should wrinkle up their eyes in grins, as have the malady in less attractive forms. His own heart laughed: and that was quite enough for him.”


Note: I make all factual assertions as a National Board Certified Teacher of US Government, Economics, and History, with all economics factual claims receiving zero refutation since I began writing in 2008 among Advanced Placement Macroeconomics teachers on our discussion board, public audiences of these articles, and international conferences. I invite readers to empower their civic voices with the strongest comprehensive facts most important to building a brighter future. I challenge professionals, academics, and citizens to add their voices for the benefit of all Earth’s inhabitants.


Carl Herman is a National Board Certified Teacher of US Government, Economics, and History; also credentialed in Mathematics. He worked with both US political parties over 18 years and two UN Summits with the citizen’s lobby, RESULTS, for US domestic and foreign policy to end poverty. He can be reached at

Note: has blocked public access to my articles on their site (and from other whistleblowers), so some links in my previous work are blocked. If you’d like to search for those articles other sites may have republished, use words from the article title within the blocked link. Or, go to, paste the expired link into the box, click “Browse history,” then click onto the screenshots of that page for each time it was screen-shot and uploaded to webarchive. I’ll update as “hobby time” allows; including my earliest work from 2009 to 2011 (blocked author pages: here, here).

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
  • nick quinlan

    Another excellent, precise, and well researched essay Carl. Thank you for continuing to shine a light on the ongoing crimes of this corrupt, criminal Empire that continues to terrorize the world

    • Carl_Herman

      Thanks, nick. It’s all of us shining light, Bro, that will finally end the criminal empire and open an era of creative power and beauty. Thank you for all you be and do 🙂

  • Silverado

    That’s a great headline!! And I wish you could have seen my reaction when I realized what it…said. You made my day! But then again that’s why I like to read here. Great minds DO think alike…

  • TruthJusticeAndTheAmericanWay!

    I vote the war criminals are brought to full and complete justice — to the letter of the law…fraud, theft, corruption, treason, war crimes, and crimes against humanity! These cowardly and greedy and self-aggrandizing maniacs knew full and well the horror they were and are still doing. McShame is at the top of the heap, all evidence shows he helped orchestrate many false flag terror psyops like ISIS and Al-CIAdah. …and don’t get suckered into that Rand Paul character. He’s a full blown flip flopping political sellout controlled opposition Agenda 21…swiss pharaonic cold blooded and ruthless liar . Paul made his statement at the whaling wall. Bush? lol. We won’t get bushwhacked again…the republican party, over. …the democratic party, over. …the next *selection* should be interesting.

  • berger friedrich-wolfgang

    >>>Thanks to All of “You American Guys”<<< , tirelessly Fighting the "Materialistic VERMIN" in "THEIR Full – Spectrum BID" to gather "Planetary DOMINANCE" , by "Forcing Mankind , to ACCEPT" the "YOKE of SLAVERY" ! Your Active RESISTENCE , is a "Unrenounceable FACTOR" in the "GLOBAL UNIFICATION of MANKIND" !

  • Southern

    Brilliant article !

    McCain’s hypocrisy is completely astounding, one moment he’s photographed with several FSA members, [A terrorist group] the next he is in Ukraine handing out cookies next to Victoria fuck the EU Nuland on Maydan Sq in the lead up of a fascist takeover of a democratically elected government willing to hold early elections.

    The man is the pot calling the kettle black but not only him, there are not many governments that actually dare challenge the US, when they do they become the enemy – even when a head of state does not meet the approval of Washington’s deep state Neo-Cons they WILL BE swiftly removed and replaced with a more suitable candidate, like the internal coup in Canberra where Kevin Rudd was replaced with the more Washington friendly Julia Gillard and who obediently committed AU troops to stay in Afghanistan to 2024 and beyond, O well just another duopoly.

    It’s been perfectly obvious that the fallacious GWOT has always been about the pursuit of profits for the corporate elite – Ongoing global wars based on series of lies and where the purveyors of these lies have been allowed to profit from telling these lies, and on that note I think the author has left several nations out of the spot light, Australia has also been involved and likewise all those nations assisting with the rendition flights.

  • Mick McNulty

    Nobody radicalized more Muslims than the Bush, Blair and Obama Administrations. No preachers could ever match them.

    • Man on the street

      The radicalization of MUSLIMS started with the ARAB oil embargo that created an avalanche of cash at a hate infest crazy ISLAMIC / Wahabi cult. At that time, we recruited barbarians from MUSLIM hell holes around the world to create trouble for the USSR in Afghanistani! Since that time the Saudis hate dogma, with the CIA bonus to recruit jihadis insured a constant flow of crazies.

  • The least talked about subject with the most importance, and the reason McCain is actually still a senator: ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES.
    Think about it: do you really think these same politicians that are screwing us constantly…ACTUALLY ALLOW US TO VOTE? It’s obviously controlled via electronic voting machines.

    • Man on the street

      If that is true, and I would not be surprise if it is, then, we should simply forget about voting as a way of exposing this banana republic. If less than 5% of the population voted then the illegitimacy of our government would be very evident to the whole world to see? But, what if our media never told us!

  • Edward Huguenin

    The GOP can no longer win an election fairly because of their backward stances on women’s issues, resistance to science, decimating the middle class, rewarding tax breaks to the 1%, opposing the ACA, shutting down the government, having no jobs bill, union busting, de-funding the public safety net, suppressing the vote, etc.

  • Leydenzar

    start with gathering up your war criminals like this total clown show mccain plenty of them running around america dragging you into the next quagmire and drop them all right smack in the middle east, get rid of your two party joke that is one in the same different only in name get rid on the terror that is the treasonous c.i.a., that would be a start

  • Charles Savoie

    The Pilgrims, a group founded in 1903 in New York as a correspondent group to one of the same name in London in 1902. was created to bridge the gap caused by the Revolutionary War, and to complete the re-linkage of our monetary system to that of England. Many old European dynasties are represented by ancestry and marriage especially in The Pilgrims London. The idea for the group traces to Cecil Rhodes who took over the South African diamond mines. Whereas his Rhodes Scholars was to be quasi-public, The Pilgrims were to remain in the shadows as their goal was to “absorb the wealth of the world” (Review of Reviews, May 1902, page 557). A few lists of The Pilgrims have come into outsiders hands. Admiral John S. McCain was in the 1969 list—the Senator’s father, who headed the U.S. Naval Institute. Generations after Charles Collman’s 1915 book “War Plotters of Wall Street” (the first outsider to have discovered them) The Pilgrims Society continues brewing wars. Henry White and Lord Curzon, both members, acted at the Treaty of Versailles to guarantee that Germany would turn to a dictator and Curzon as much as admitted it—“It is not a peace treaty but a break in hostilities.” This is the only group not mentioned in David Rockefeller’s “Memoirs,” yet he was a member at least as of the 1949 list (his father also). Harvard University always has Pilgrims on its overseers board.

    • Here is something else few know or research!

      Saturday 25 September 2004.

      How Bush’s grandfather helped Hitler’s rise to power Rumours of a link between the US first family and the Nazi war machine have circulated for decades. Now, the Guardian can reveal how repercussions of events that culminated in action under the Trading with the Enemy Act are still being felt by today’s president’s.


    On Memorial Day, Americans honor the soldiers who have died in the defense of our country. There is one big problem though: Those soldiers didn’t die in the defense of our country. Instead, they died in the defense of empire and hegemony. For obvious reasons, U.S. officials, as well as many of the family members of the deceased, can’t bring themselves to admit that and so they settle for just mindlessly repeating the mantra, “They died defending our country,” Consider the Spanish American War in 1898. Did Spain ever attack and invade the United States? Nope. The U.S. government intervened in a war of independence that was being waged between the Spanish Empire and its colonial possessions, including Cuba and the Philippines. Thus, U.S. soldiers clearly didn’t die in the defense of our country in that war. This is especially true with respect to those U.S. soldiers who died in the Philippines in a war designed to replace Spanish rule with U.S. rule.

  • Since McCain is this days topic in this article here is some background on the Big Statist RINO!

    June 08, 2014 Navy Releases McCain’s Records about the USS Forrestal, July 29, 1967 – The worst accident aboard a US Navy surface vessel since WWII

    The Navy released John McCain’s military record after a Freedom of Information Act request from the Associated Press. The record is packed with information on McCain’s medals and commendations but little else. The one thing that the McCain campaign does not want to see released is the record of McCain’s antics on board the USS Forestal in 1967. McCain was personally responsible for the deadliest fire in the history of the US Navy. That catastrophe, with 27 dead and over 100 wounded trumps McCain’s record as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam.

  • berger friedrich-wolfgang

    Two Informative Articles related about CORPOCRAZY’s STAND in Our “Common CAUSE” on “Information Clearing House” ! Look for “Thierry MEYSSON & F.William ENGDAHL” !

  • berger friedrich-wolfgang

    Have a Look into “LAROUCHE” !

  • Rothbardian Slip

    I disagree with allowing McCain to live out his life on a pension. He’s lived long enough at the expense of others. For that matter, he’s lived long enough.

    • JAM

      He should live out his life in prison, along with about 99.9% of his “colleagues” on the hill…

      • berger friedrich-wolfgang

        RE;EMBER ! >>> An Eye FOR An Eye !!! And “It’s not UP , To US” !

  • The world would be a much better place with people like McCain, Graham, Pelosi, Bush (all of them), Obama, etc in jail…will NEVER happen though.

    • berger friedrich-wolfgang

      Do not think “HUMANITY” , Could be as “GENEROUS” as You would Pledge !

    • Man on the street

      Let us learn from EGYPT, which has two of its previous presidents behind bars.

  • Man on the street

    The reality of our wars during the sixties against communists has left our own media which is dominated by liberal Jews/ communists to freely oppose the government. Now, our wars are basically to support Israel, which eliminates the media role in formulating opposition to the government. Remember in the sixties our media told UN to spit on the Vets, and now that same media is telling us to worship the Vets.

  • LeseMajeste

    It would be easy to stop ISIS and other ME terrorist groups like DAESH, just find out which Wall Street and City of London banks are laundering their money and shut those banks down.
    Easy, right?