Guest Post: The Language Of Despotism

Submitted by Bruce Thornton of The Hoover Institution,

Long before 1984 gave us the adjective “Orwellian” to describe the political corruption of language and thought, Thucydides observed how factional struggles for power make words their first victims. Describing the horrors of civil war on the island of Corcyra during the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides wrote, “Words had to change their ordinary meaning and to take that which was now given them.” Orwell explains the reason for such degradation of language in his essay “Politics and the English Language”: “Political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible.”

Tyrannical power and its abuses comprise the “indefensible” that must be verbally disguised. The gulags, engineered famines, show trials, and mass murder of the Soviet Union required that it be a “regime of lies,” as the disillusioned admirer of Soviet communism Pierre Pascal put it in 1927.

Our own political and social discourse must torture language in order to disguise the failures and abuses of policies designed to advance the power and interests of the “soft despotism,” as Tocqueville called it, of the modern Leviathan state and its political caretakers. Meanwhile, in foreign policy the transformation of meaning serves misguided policies that endanger our security and interests.

One example from domestic policy recently cropped up in Supreme Court Justice Sonya Sotomayor’s dissent in the Schuette decision, which upheld the Michigan referendum banning racial preferences. In her dissent, Sotomayor called for replacing the term  “affirmative action” with “race-sensitive admissions.” But “affirmative action” was itself a euphemism for the racial quotas in use in college admissions until they were struck down in the 1978 Bakke decision. To salvage racial discrimination, which any process that gives race an advantage necessarily requires, Bakke legitimized yet another euphemism, “diversity,” as a compelling state interest that justified taking race into account in university admissions.

Thus the most important form of “diversity” for the university became the easily quantifiable one of race. Not even socio-economic status can trump it, as the counsel for the University of Texas admitted during oral arguments in Fisher vs. University of Texas last year, when he implied that a minority applicant from a privileged background would add more diversity to the university than a less privileged white applicant. All these verbal evasions are necessary for camouflaging the fact that any process that discriminates on the basis of race violates the Civil Rights Act ban on such discrimination. Promoting an identity politics predicated on historical victimization and the equality of result is more important than the principle of equality before the law, and this illiberal ideology must be hidden behind distortions of language and vague phrases like “race-sensitive” and “diversity.”

Another example can be found in the recently released report from the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault. The report is the basis for the government’s numerous policy and procedural suggestions to universities and colleges in order to help them “live up to their obligation to protect students from sexual violence.” Genuine sexual violence, of course, needs to be investigated, adjudicated, and punished to the full extent of the law by the police and the judicial system. But the “sexual assault” and “sexual violence” the Obama administration is talking about is something different.

At the heart of the White House report is the oft-repeated 2007 statistic that 20 percent of female college students have been victims of “sexual assault,” which most people will understand to mean rape or sexual battery. Yet as many critics of the study have pointed out, that preposterous number––crime-ridden Detroit’s rape rate is 0.05 percent––was achieved by redefining “sexual assault” to include even consensual sexual contact when the woman was drunk, and behaviors like “forced kissing” and “rubbing up against [the woman] in a sexual way, even if it is over [her] clothes.”

The vagueness and subjectivity of such a definition is an invitation to women to abandon personal responsibility and agency by redefining clumsy or boorish behavior as “sexual assault,” a phrase suggesting physical violence against the unwilling. As one analyst of the flawed study has reported, “three-quarters of the female students who were classified as victims of sexual assault by incapacitation did not believe they had been raped; even when only incidents involving penetration were counted, nearly two-thirds did not call it rape.” As many have pointed out, if genuine sexual assault were happening, colleges would be calling in the police, not trying the accused in campus tribunals made up of legal amateurs and lacking constitutional protections such as the right to confront and cross-examine one’s accuser.

What matters more than protecting college women against a phantom epidemic of rape, then, is the need to expand government power into the social lives of college students, empowering the federal bureaucrats, university administrators, and ideological programs like women’s studies that all stand to benefit by this sort of coercive intrusion. This enshrining of racial and sexual ideology into law through the abuse of language has had damaging consequences, whether for the minority college students mismatched with the universities to which they are admitted, thus often ensuring their failure and disillusion; or for the young women encouraged to abandon their autonomy and surrender it to government and education bureaucrats who know better than they how to make sense of their experiences and decisions.

In foreign policy, however, the abuse of language is positively dangerous. Since 9/11, our failure to identity the true nature of the Islamist threat and its grounding in traditional Islamic theology has led to misguided aims and tactics. Under both the Bush and Obama administrations, for example, the traditional Islamic doctrine of jihad––which means to fight against the enemies of Islam, which predominantly means infidels––has been redefined to serve the dubious tactic of flattering Islam in order to prevent Muslim terrorism.

Thus in 2008 the National Terrorism Center instructed its employees, “Never use the term jihadist or mujahideen in conversation to describe terrorists,” since “In Arabic, jihad means ‘striving in the path of God’ and is used in many contexts beyond warfare.” Similarly, CIA chief John Brennan has asserted that jihad “is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one’s community,” despite the fourteen centuries of evidence from the Koran, hadiths, and bloody history that jihad is in fact predominantly an obligatory armed struggle against the enemies of Islam. The reluctance to put Muslim violence in its religious context reflects not historical truth, but a public relations tactic serving the delusional strategy of appeasing Muslims into liking us.

That’s why, to this day, the 2009 murders of 13 military personnel at Fort Hood by Muslim Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan are still classified as “workplace violence” rather than an act of terror. This despite the fact that Hasan––whose business cards had the initials “SoA,” “Soldier of Allah,” on them––shouted the traditional Islamic battle cry “Allahu Akbar” during his rampage. Or that in a presentation at Walter Reed Hospital, Hasan had put up a slide with the great commission to practice jihad that Mohammed delivered in his farewell address: “I was ordered to fight all men until they say ‘There is no god but Allah.’” This command to wage jihad was echoed in 1979 by the Ayatollah Khomeini, revered as a “Grand Sign of God” for his theological acumen, and by Osama bin Laden in 2001. Those ignoring this venerable jihadist tradition must use verbal evasions like “workplace violence” and “striving in the path of God” to hide the indefensible––and failed––tactic of appeasement that prevents us from accurately understanding the religious motives of Muslim terrorists, and the extent of the Muslim world’s support for them.

No foreign policy crisis, however, is more illustrative of the “regime of lies” and abuse of language to serve “indefensible” aims than the conflict between Israel and the Arabs. The Arabs’ aim, of course, is to destroy Israel as a nation, a policy they have consistently pursued since 1948. Since military attacks have failed ignominiously, an international public relations campaign coupled to terrorist violence has been employed to weaken Israel’s morale and separate Israel from her Western allies. An Orwellian assault on language has been key to this tactic.

Examples are legion, but one is particularly insidious, here seen in a New York Times headline from 2011: “Obama Sees ’67 Borders as Starting Point for Peace Deal.” The common reference to “borders” in regard to what is in fact the armistice line from the 1948 Arab war against Israel is ubiquitous. Yet there has never been recognized in international law a formal “border” between Israel and what the world, in another Orwellian phrase, calls the “West Bank,” because that territory has never been part of a modern nation. Its only international legal status was as part of the British Mandate for Palestine, which was confirmed by the League of Nations in 1922, and which was intended as the national homeland for the Jewish people. The Arabs’ rejection of the U.N. partition plan and their invasion of Israel in 1948 put the territory’s status in limbo once Jordan annexed Judea and Samaria, which the international community with a few exceptions refused to recognize. In 1967 Israel took it back in another defensive war against Arab aggression. Since then, its final disposition has awaited a peace treaty that will determine the international border.

This may sound like quibbling over careless language, but the dishonest use of “border” reinforces and encodes in peoples’ minds the big lie of the conflict––that a Palestinian “nation” is being deprived of its “homeland” by Israel, a canard that didn’t become current among Arabs and the rest of the world until after the 1967 Six Day War. And this lie in turns validates the common use of “occupation”––which implies an illegal invasion into and control of another nation, as the Germans did to France in 1940––to describe Israel’s defensive possession of territories that have long served as launch pads for aggression against Israel. Until a peace treaty, the territory known as the “West Bank”––more accurately Judea and Samaria, the heartland of historical Israel for centuries––is disputed, not “occupied.”

To paraphrase Thucydides, words like “borders” and “occupation” have had their ordinary meanings changed, and been forced to take meanings that serve tyranny and aggression. And we who accept those new meanings are complicit in the resulting injustice that follows.




via Zero Hedge Read More Here..

Japanese Man Self-Immolates Over Abe's Increasingly Militarist Shift

Under Article 9 of its post-war pacifist constitution, Japan is blocked from the use of force to resolve conflicts except in the case of self-defense; but, as The BBC reports, Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe says he wants a new interpretation of the constitution to be agreed on. This has brought major protests in Japan, climaxing this weekend when a man set himself on fire in central Tokyo in protest at a proposed law which could allow Japan to deploy its military overseas. With stocks falling, JPY strengthening, an economy collapsing, and a surging disapproval rating, it seems Abe needs a 4th arrow – war?

 

As The BBC reports,

Japan has well-equipped and well-trained armed forces but there are severe restrictions on them being deployed abroad.

 

Under Article 9 of its post-war pacifist constitution, Japan is blocked from the use of force to resolve conflicts except in the case of self-defence.

 

But Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe says he wants a new interpretation of the constitution to be agreed on.

 

The move has split opinion inside the country. Critics of the move warn against what they see as increasing militarism, while conservatives argue that the restriction is a double standard forced upon Japan.

And that led to this weeken’ds self-immolation…

A man set himself on fire in central Tokyo in protest at a proposed law which could allow Japan to deploy its military overseas.

 

The man was taken to hospital after being hosed down but his condition was not immediately known, officials said.

 

Japan’s government could make the change to its pacifist constitution as early as next Tuesday.

 

The US-drafted constitution bans war and “the threat or use of force” to settle international disputes.

 

Witnesses said the middle-aged man, wearing a suit and tie, climbed onto a pedestrian bridge at Tokyo’s Shinjuku station.

 

“He was sitting cross-legged and was just talking, so I thought it would end without incident,” one eyewitness told Reuters. “Then all of a sudden his body was enveloped in fire.”

 

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxvZyEroGGo]

 

Reports said the man used a megaphone to shout for over an hour about the change to Japan’s constitution.

Of course, while some disapprove, others (cough USA cough) do not…

Mr Abe’s plan has led to criticism from China, whose relations with the Japan have become strained over territorial disputes in East China Sea.

 

Correspondents say the move will likely please the US, with whom Japan has a long-standing security treaty.

*  *  *
Sadly, with the economic mirage of printing yourself to prosperity having failed, we wonder (and worry) that Abe is increasingkly cornered…




via Zero Hedge Read More Here..

Et Voila: World War Three

Authored by Howard J. Kunstler of Kunstler.com,

Whoever really runs things these days for the semi-mummified royal administration down in Saudi Arabia must be leaving skid-marks in his small-clothes thinking about Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and his ISIS army of psychopathic killers sweeping hither and thither through what is again being quaintly called “the Levant.” ISIS just concluded an orgy of crucifixions up in Syria over the weekend, the victims being other Islamic militants who were not radical enough, or who had dallied with US support.

Crucifixion sends an interesting and complex message to various parties around this systemically fracturing globe. It’s a step back from the disabling horror of video beheadings, but it still packs a punch. For the Christian West, it re-awakens a certain central cultural narrative that had gone somnolent there for a century or so. ISIS’s message: If you thought the Romans were bad…. Among the human race, you see, the memories linger.

ISIS has successfully shocked the world over the last two weeks by negating eight years, several trillion dollars, and 4,500 battle deaths in the USA’s endeavor to turn Iraq into an obedient oil dispensary. Now they have gone and announced that their conquests of the moment amount to a Caliphate, that is, an Islamic theocracy. In that sense, they are at least out-doing America’s Republican Party, which has been trying to do something similar here from sea to shining sea but finds itself thwarted by hostile blue states on both coasts.

More to the point, the press (another quaint term, I suppose) is not paying any attention whatsoever to what goes down with ISIS and the other states besides Iraq and Syria in the region. I aver to Saudi Arabia especially because Americans seem to regard it as an impregnable bastion against the bloodthirsty craziness spreading over the rest of the Muslim world. Saudi Arabia is, of course, the keystone of OPEC. Saudi Arabia has had the distinction of remaining stable through all the escalating tumult of recent decades, reliably pumping out its roughly 10 million barrels a day like Bossy the cow in America’s oil import barn.

Or seeming to remain stable, I should say, because the Saud family royal administration of mummified rulers and senile princes looks more and more like a Potemkin monarchy every month. 90-year-old King Abdullah has been rumored to be on life support lo these last two years, his successor brothers already dead and gone, and other powerful Arabian clans with leaders who can walk across a room and speak itching to kick this zombie Saud family off the throne. To make matters worse, the Sauds have also managed to sponsor much of the organized Sunni terrorism in the region (around the world, really) in their role as the chief enemy of the Shia ­— as represented by the politicized clergy of Iran.

Things are happening at lightning speed over in the region and beware of how the turmoil spreads from one flashpoint to another. This would be an opportunity for ISIS to put the Saud family on the spot regarding the just-announced Caliphate — as in the question: who really calls the shots for this new theocratic kingdom? (Answer: maybe not you, doddering, mummified, America suck-up Saudi Arabia). What’s more, what happens to the other kingdoms and rickety states in that corner of the world? For instance, Lebanon, which has been a sort of political demolition derby for three decades. The founder of the group al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), pre-cursor to ISIS, was the Lebanese Abu Mus‘ab al-Zarqawi — blown up in a USA air strike some years ago. Lebanon has been under the sway of Hezbollah for a decade and Hezbollah is sponsored by Shi’ite Iran, making it an enemy of ISIS. Might ISIS roll westward over Hezbollah now to capture the pearl of the Mediterranean (or what’s left of it) Beirut? I wouldn’t be surprised.

Then there’s Jordan, and it’s youngish King Abdullah, another notorious USA ass-kisser. Those crucifixion photos coming out of Syria must be making him a little loose in the bowels. And, of course, Syria, where this whole thing started, is a smoldering rump-roast of a state. And finally, that bugbear in the bull’s-eye of the old Levant: Israel.

It is miraculous that Israel has managed so far to stay out of the way of this juggernaut. Of course, among its chief enemies are Hezbollah and Hezbollah’s foster father, Iran, which happen to be the enemy of ISIS and, of course, in that part of the world the enemy of my enemy is my ally — though, I’m sorry, it’s rather impossible to imagine Israel getting all chummy with the psychopaths of ISIS. One thing is a fact: all other things being equal, Israel has the capability of turning any other state or kingdom in region into an ashtray, if push came to shove. Voila: World War Three.




via Zero Hedge Read More Here..

GENERAL MOTORS ANNOUNCES YET ANOTHER MASSIVE RECALL

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

More bad news for General Motors.

The biggest automotive company in the U.S. has announced another massive recall –  bringing G.M.’s total number of recalled vehicles this year to 29-million.

The automaker has now added 8.2 million vehicles to its ballooning list of cars recalled over faulty ignition switches.

The latest recalls involve mainly older mid-size cars for what G.M calls “unintended ignition key rotation.”

The announcement covers seven vehicles, including the Chevrolet Malibu from 1997 to 2005, the Pontiac Grand Prix from 2004 to 2008, and the 2003-2014 Cadillac C-T-S.

Meanwhile: A group of Toronto-area G.M. dealers say they’re tired of waiting for General Motors to help.

They’re now suing the automaker, claiming G.M. failed to provide them with adequate financial support despite receiving million of dollars in aid from taxpayers.

The Canadian dealers say they’ve been struggling to make a profit amid a big drop in market share and sluggish sales and are seeking 400-million dollars in damages.

G.M. says the claims are without merit.

The post GENERAL MOTORS ANNOUNCES YET ANOTHER MASSIVE RECALL appeared first on Zoomer Radio AM740.

Vía Zoomer Radio AM740 http://ift.tt/1mC0uE7

RARE LOU GEHRIG TICKET GOES ON AUCTION BLOCK

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Its’ being called ”the most significant baseball ticket in the world.”

The stub was signed by Lou Gehrig July 4, 1939.

Many older Zoomer sports fans know that’s the day the Yankees great retired.

More than 60,000 tickets to the game were sold.

Only two are known to have survived.

Of the two, only the mezzanine box ticket was signed by Gehrig.

The owner’s an unidentified collector.

It’s believed the ticket could go for more than $100,000 at the August 1 sale in Cleveland.

Gehrig retired after being diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral scleroris, now simply known as ALS or Lou Gehrig’s disease.

He died less than two years later at age 37.

The post RARE LOU GEHRIG TICKET GOES ON AUCTION BLOCK appeared first on Zoomer Radio AM740.

Vía Zoomer Radio AM740 http://ift.tt/V4EVq3

Ukraine President Declares End To Cease-Fire; Vows To "Attack & Liberate Our Land"

As propogandists prepare their “it’s the other guy’s fault” press releases, Ukraine’s President Poroshenko issued a statement declaring the cease-fire over…

  • *POROSHENKO SAYS UKRAINE TO END CEASE-FIRE IN EASTERN REGIONS
  • *POROSHENKO PLEDGES TO MOVE AGAINST REBELS, ‘FREE OUR LAND’
  • *POROSHENKO BLAMES REBELS FOR FAILURE OF PEACE PLAN IN UKRAINE
  • *POROSHENKO SAYS MILITANTS VIOLATED CEASE-FIRE OVER 100 TIMES

Furthermore, his promise to “attack and liberate” the land and resumption of the “anti-terrorist” operations, means civil war is back on (and what appeasrs to be martial law) as he explains Armed Forces, National Guard, the State Border Guard Service, Security Service received appropriate instructions.


Full Poroshenko Statement (via Google Translate):

Address of the President of Ukraine Poroshenko

Dear compatriots!

On the twenty-second hour of Monday 30 June expired validity of a unilateral ceasefire.

Within the plan of peaceful settlement of the situation in the Donbas this step was first initiated on June 20.

June 27 Ukraine continued for an additional three days.

For ten days we have demonstrated the Donbass, Ukraine, to the world their commitment to peacefully settle the conflict triggered externally.

Residents of Donetsk and Lugansk regions, we demonstrated goodwill Ukrainian authorities. 

Hardworking and peaceful people, which is the vast majority of the citizens of Donetsk and Lugansk Oblast, feel our sympathy, love and respect. They saw a sincere willingness Kyiv ignore their special opinions and specific interests. And they realized that their safety is our top priority.

Become even more international support for Ukraine. It was during the ceasefire I signed the Association Agreement and the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area with the EU.

However, with a unique opportunity to implement the peace plan is not implemented. This happened because of the criminal actions of militants. They have publicly declared their unwillingness to support the peace plan as a whole and particularly the ceasefire. Defiantly, more than a hundred times, violated the armistice regime.

The political leadership of the separatist demonstrated unwillingness and inability to control the actions of their departments and the terrorist gangs of looters.

Annulment of the Federation Council for permission to enter the Russian troops in Ukraine was positive, but symbolic. We did not wait for concrete steps to de-escalation of the situation. Including in terms of strengthening control abroad.

Despite all this, the world was, is and will be my goal. Changing only the tools to achieve it. 

June 30 evening, a meeting of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine. After discussing the situation, I, as Commander-in-Chief, has decided not to pursue a unilateral cease-fire regime. 

Protection of the territorial integrity of Ukraine, safety and life of civilians requires not only defensive but also offensive operations against terrorist militants.

Armed Forces, National Guard, the State Border Guard Service, Security Service received appropriate instructions.

In achieving the objectives of the present protection of territorial integrity are no longer limited ceasefire.

We will attack and liberate our land. Non-renewal of the ceasefire – is our response to terrorists, rebels, looters. To all those who are making fun of civilians. Who paralyzing the work of regional economy. Who plucks the payment of salaries, pensions, stipends. Who undermines and destroys railroad plumbing. Who has deprived people of normal, peaceful life. 

The Armed Forces of Ukraine, National Guard, other units will not allow themselves to use force against peaceful people. They never beat on residential neighborhoods.

Ukrainian soldiers and guards will risk his own life, just not to expose threats to women, children and elderly men. All those living in the land of Donbass and does not in the hands of illegal weapons.

This age-old chivalrous nature Ukrainian army.

For us – and responsibility for every supporter peaceful life that do not bring God can break off during a military or anti-terrorist operation.

This requires us to extraordinary adjustedness every movement operations.

I appeal to every resident of Donetsk and Lugansk regions, asking to be taken with the understanding of my decision. Please become allies in return for security Donbass.

So, you can not resist the bandits physical strength. But your willpower and fortitude, your civil disobedience to the so-called “people’s republics,” the intolerance and contempt for those who took the path of banditry, looting and terror, bring the day when your homes, your streets back lasting peace .

Everyone who stood in the way of armed resistance to lawful authority, but realizing that mistake and wants to correct it, as president, I guarantee FAILURE to justice. Condition One – voluntarily lay down their arms.

Our peace plan as a strategy for Ukraine and Donbas, remains in force. And disarmament. And decentralization. And free use of the Russian language. And the restoration of housing by the state. And together with the EU program to create new jobs. And even before the ceasefire, we are ready to return at any moment. When we see that all parties adhere to performing the basic points of the peace plan. What gunmen freed the hostages. What and beyond the eastern border of red light on fire for saboteurs and arms supplier, and for adherence to the OSCE border monitors.

Dear compatriots!

The road to peace was somewhat more complex than desired. Do not want to embellish reality. It will be hard and difficult.

 

We, more than ever, we should unite to protect Ukraine. It requires dedication and discipline not only at the front but in the rear.

 

But there was not any war, after which there occurred a to peace.

 

So happens this time.

Glory to Ukraine!

*  *  *

Now we await the Russian response; the USA’s retaliatory sanctions, and Putin’s boomerang… with all eyes on Austria and Bulgaria (as the Chess game just got larger)




via Zero Hedge Read More Here..

F**k Y**, Facebook

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J


Photo Credit: AFP/Leon Neal

***CAF Note: Now you know why the Solari Report and Catherine Austin Fitts do not have a Facebook page.***

By RT

Facebook conducted a psychological experiment on its users by manipulating their emotions without their knowledge, a new study reveals.

Researchers toyed with the feelings of 689,003 randomly […]

Vía The Solari Report Blog http://ift.tt/1r8fRvu

Obama Lied: US Sending 300 Additional Troops Into Iraq, Including Detachment Of Helicopters And Drone Aircraft

The lukewarm war waged by the Nobel peace prize winner is getting warmer by the day. Just out from Reuters:

  • UNITED STATES SENDS UP TO AN ADDITIONAL 300 TROOPS INTO IRAQ, DETACHMENT OF HELICOPTERS AND DRONE AIRCRAFT – PENTAGON

From Bloomberg:

President Barack Obama says he’s sending about 200 more U.S. troops to Iraq to protect Americans and the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.

 

The announcement will bring to nearly 800 the total number of U.S. forces in and around Iraq to train local forces, secure the embassy and protect American interests.

 

Obama notified House and Senate leaders in a letter on Monday. Obama says the additions include security forces, rotary-wing aircraft, and support for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

 

Obama has ruled out sending combat troops back into Iraq. But he says the additional troops will be equipped for combat. He says their purpose is to protect U.S. citizens and property if needed.

 

Obama says the troops will stay in Iraq until security improves so that the reinforcements are no longer needed.

Note that “this time” it is not just “military advisors” but outright troops: according to the Pentagon, the deployment is “separate and apart” from military advisers deployed to Iraq.  This force is deploying for the purpose of protecting U.S. citizens and property, if necessary, and is equipped for combat. This force will remain in Iraq until the security situation becomes such that it is no longer needed,” Obama says in letter to Congress.

Here is the full Pentagon statement:

Statement from Pentagon Press Secretary, Rear Admiral John Kirby on Additional Security Forces to Iraq

At the direction of the president, the U.S. military augmented its security assistance by up to approximately 200 personnel to reinforce security at the U.S. embassy, its support facilities, and Baghdad International Airport. The president authorized this augmentation as a prudent measure to protect U.S. citizens and property.

 

These additional personnel arrived in Iraq Sunday and today from locations within the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility. Capabilities provided include a detachment of helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles, which will bolster airfield and travel route security. Similar to the U.S. security personnel who arrived in Baghdad earlier this month to provide support and security for U.S. personnel and the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, they will integrate with existing U.S. embassy security teams.

 

The presence of these additional forces will help enable the embassy to continue its critical diplomatic mission and work with Iraq on challenges they are facing as they confront Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

 

In addition, the approximately 100 personnel already prepositioned in the Central Command region — previously announced by the Defense Department in mid-June — will also move forward to Baghdad to provide security and logistics support.

 

These forces are separate and apart from the up to 300 personnel the president authorized to establish two joint operations centers and conduct an assessment of how the U.S. can provide additional support to Iraq’s security forces as they confront the grave threat posed by ISIL.

So much for Obama’s historic withdrawal of US armed forces from Iraq. Also so much for Obama’s latest lie that the US won’t be sending US troops to Iraq:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxhLu1cU2UY&w=600&h=338]

Elsewhere, that other civil war that was put on “hold” has now officially resumed following a statement by Ukraine’ president Poroshenko has called an end to the ceasfire and has once again declared martial law in the Lugansk and Donetsk regions.From his just released announcement:

June 30 evening, a meeting of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine. After discussing the situation, I, as Commander-in-Chief, has decided not to pursue a unilateral cease-fire regime. 

 

Protection of the territorial integrity of Ukraine, safety and life of civilians requires not only defensive but also offensive operations against terrorist militantsArmed Forces, National Guard, the State Border Guard Service, Security Service received appropriate instructions.

 

We will attack and liberate our land. Non-renewal of the ceasefire – is our response to terrorists, rebels, looters. To all those who are making fun of civilians. Who paralyzing the work of regional economy. Who plucks the payment of salaries, pensions, stipends. Who undermines and destroys railroad plumbing. Who has deprived people of normal, peaceful life.

Look for the US to be sending “military experts” in that region shortly as well.




via Zero Hedge Read More Here..