Tuesday, September 10, 2013

It's Bowe Tuesday...

In all the hoopla over Syria let's NOT forget the one 
Obama has left behind.

Russia offers Obama a way to save face on Syria

From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer

PutinObama.jpg(Photos thanks to Pamela Geller)

The networks are reporting as of now, however, that Obama is "looking" at this proposal while still moving ahead with plans for a military strike. "Syria positive about giving up chemical weapons," by Vladimir Isachenkov for the Associated Press, September 9 (thanks to Pamela Geller):
MOSCOW (AP) — Syria on Monday quickly welcomed a call from Russia, its close ally, to place Syrian chemical arsenals under international control, then destroy them to avert a U.S. strike, but did not offer a time frame or any other specifics. 
The statement by Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem appeared to mark the first official acknowledgement by Damascus that it possesses chemical weapons and reflected what appeared to be an attempt by Syrian President Bashar Assad to avoid the U.S. military attack.
But it remained to be seen whether the statement represented a genuine goodwill gesture by Syria or simply an attempt to buy time.
"Syria welcomes the Russian proposal out of concern for the lives of the Syrian people, the security of our country and because it believes in the wisdom of the Russian leadership that seeks to avert American aggression against our people," al-Moallem said during a visit to Moscow, where he held talks with his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov.
However, al-Moallem, would not give any further details in his brief statement and didn't take any questions from reporters.
Moallem's statement came a few hours after U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said Assad could resolve the crisis surrounding the alleged use of chemical weapons by his forces by surrendering control of "every single bit" of his arsenal to the international community by the end of the week....

Syrian Foreign Minister: "We are asking ourselves how Obama can...support those who in their time blew up the World Trade Center in New York"

From Jihad Watch / Posted by Robert Spencer

I am asking myself the same question. "Syria: US strikes would help those who 'blew up World Trade Center,'" by Albina Kovalyova and F. Brinley Bruton for NBC News, September 9:
MOSCOW - Syria’s foreign minister accused Barack Obama of backing terrorists as the White House ramped-up its efforts to make the case for military strikes to punish President Bashar Assad's regime for the alleged use of chemical weapons. 
"We are asking ourselves how Obama can ... support those who in their time blew up the World Trade Center in New York,'' Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem said during a press conference with Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov in Moscow.
Sunni Muslim extremists allied with al Qaeda are among the rebels fighting to overthrow Assad, a member of the Alawite sect, a Shiite offshoot.
Lavrov said there was enough evidence to show that the rebels fighting Assad have chemical weapons themselves, raising questions about who was behind the gas attack on August 21.
Russia, one of Assad’s staunchest supporters, continued its call for a political solution to the crisis, which has claimed some 100,000 lives, displaced close to a third of Syria’s population and destabilized the region....

On the first Friday of every month, I go through the jobs report and note the grossly distorted statistics.

For example, please see BLS in Wonderland written Friday, September 6

Every month I conclude with a couple paragraphs like these:
 Grossly Distorted Statistics

Were it not for people dropping out of the labor force, the unemployment rate would be over 9%. In addition, there are 7,911,000 people who are working part-time but want full-time work.

Digging under the surface, much of the drop in the unemployment rate over the past two years is nothing but a statistical mirage coupled with a massive increase in part-time jobs starting in October 2012 as a result of Obamacare legislation.
Wonderland Statistics

This past month I had a couple of extra paragraphs:
 Compared to recent Gallup surveys, these BLS stats regarding the base unemployment rate and the alternative measures as well are straight from wonderland. For details, please see Gallup Says Seasonally-Adjusted Unemployment Climbs to 8.6%; Who to Believe (Gallup or the BLS)?

I believe Gallup. Thus, I expect more downward revisions in jobs, and upward revisions in the unemployment rate.
Let's take a look at BLS data to get a handle on what is happening, and why.

Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate

The participation rate is the "labor force as a percent of the civilian noninstitutional population."

Explaining the Graph

  1. Women entered the labor force in huge numbers as two-wage earners per household became the norm
  2. An internet boom provided ample jobs for those who looked for jobs (and you have to look for a job to be a part of the labor force)
  3. A dotcom crash followed
  4. In response to the dotcom crash, the Fed blew the biggest housing and credit bubbles the world has ever seen, but the effect on the participation rate was small
  5. The housing boom turned to bust, but even in the recovery, the participation rate continued to decline

It's Not Demographics

Many people believe demographics explains the decline in the workforce. However, that's not the case.

To prove the point, let's focus in on an age group that is generally not retired and historically not in school.

Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate - 25 to 54 years

Notice how the participation rate of those 25 to 54 has been in steady decline since
the year 2000 except for a slight uptick in the housing boom years.

Allowing 6-7 years after high school for college education, most of those 25 should be looking for a job or have a job. Yet the trend is unmistakable.

Rick Newman, writing for Yahoo Finance posted the following table in Here Are the Real Labor Force Dropouts.

Here is a chart I posted previously in Normalized Unemployment Rates; Cyclical vs. Secular Forces

Participation Rate by Age Group

Not in Labor Force Want a Job

To be in the labor force you have to want a job and look for a job. To be "unemployed" you have to be in the labor force.

At the start of the recession, there were 4,648,000 people who wanted a job but were not considered unemployed. There are now 6,285,000 people who want a job now but do not have one.

That is an increase of 1,637,000.

Adding just the increase back would raise the labor force to 157,123,000 from 155,486,000. It would raise the number of unemployed to 12,953,000 from 11,316,000. And it would raise the unemployment rate to 8.2%.

But why stop there?

It's All In The Definition

The definition of "unemployed" is what it is (for political reasons), but by my more practical definition "you are unemployed if you want a job and do not have one", the corresponding numbers would be as follows:

  • Labor Force: 155,486,000 + 6,285,000 = 161,771,000
  • Unemployed: 11,316,000 + 6,285,000 = 17,601,000
  • Unemployment Rate: 17,601,000 / 161,771,000 = 10.9%

Actual Employment

We can arrive at similar conclusions by looking at the number of employed. Once again the age group 25-54 is the most logical to study. (Total employment is not the best measure because of demographics, those over 60 retiring voluntarily).

Employment Rate: Aged 25-54: All Persons in the United States

Demographics sure does not explain that chart so something else must. The answer is threefold:

  1. Rampant Disability Fraud
  2. It Doesn't Pay to Work
  3. School: Kids stay in school for advanced degrees because there are no jobs, and middle-aged persons out of a job going back to school.
Rampant Disability Fraud

I have talked about disability fraud on numerous occasions. Here are a few examples:

Please read that last link above. It's a real eye opener.

Not in Labor Force With a Disability

I would love to show data pre-recession. Unfortunately, the data only goes back to mid-2008. We can see however, that nearly 23 million Americans are not in the labor force because of "disabilities".

I suggest "fraud" is more like it.

It Doesn't Pay to Work

The second reason the unemployment rate is artificially low is "It Doesn't Pay to Work".

I wrote about this recently in Why Work for $7.25 When Welfare Pays $15.00 in 12 States and $8.00 in 33 States? Is a Low Minimum Wage the Problem?


I hardly think hiding out in school because there are no jobs (when you really want a job) should constitute someone being "not in the labor force" (yet it does).

So What's the Real Unemployment Rate?

If you use my definition, "you are unemployed if you want a job and do not have one" then the starting point is 10.9%.

But what about those who do not have a job and don't want a job because of disability fraud or welfare considerations?

Factor that in and the unemployment rate would be several points higher, say 14-15%.

However, that does not count another 7% who have a part-time job but want a full-time job.

So if you watch the unemployment rate drop month after month, and you think the number is grossly distorted and totally void of common-sense reality, you are absolutely correct.

Perhaps if America had a successful track record in the Middle East, President Obama's appeal for a "limited" attack on Syria might carry more weight. But because our attention span in the region increasingly resembles that of a fidgety 4-year-old, an examination of recent history is in order.

Consider Iran. In 1979, President Jimmy Carter supported toppling the shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Whatever the shah's shortcomings, who believes the theocratic government of the ayatollahs, which replaced him, was better than the one we helped overthrow? At least the shah was not pursuing nuclear weapons or fighting proxy wars like Syria.

Or Iraq. In 2003, President George W. Bush ordered an invasion of Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein and rid the country of weapons of mass destruction. Remember the Iraqi refugee codenamed "Curveball"? He was the main provider of "intelligence" that Saddam was pursuing WMDs. No WMDs were ever found. In 2004, "Curveball" was officially classified a "fabricator" by the CIA; too late for those thousands of Americans who died or were wounded. Now, President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry say we can trust the intelligence on Syria. Do you?

Even if the videos showing dead Syrian children are real and the intelligence is accurate, that is still not sufficient reason to attack Syria. Given our experience with Iran and Iraq -- and the increased likelihood that growing instability in Afghanistan, Libya, possibly Egypt and even Lebanon might turn out unfavorably for the U.S., what makes anyone think history won't repeat itself?

Anyone who has spent time in the Middle East knows things are not always what they seem.

Alliances and loyalties shift depending on who is most likely to win a power struggle. The secular West doesn't fully comprehend the religious motivations of extremists who claim to love death more than life. Getting killed by missiles launched by people they regard as "infidels," they say, transports them to paradise. How does America deal with that?

Former Israeli diplomat Yoram Ettinger wrote to me in an email: "The Syrian threat to vital U.S. interests ... is a derivative of Iran's regional and global megalomaniac aspirations. The focus must be on the source and not on the derivative! Shifting attention from Iran to Syria provides Iran with extra time to develop nuclear capabilities."

Exactly. The Middle East is imploding and if the U.S. continues with the fiction that it can make things better, or that freedom "is the hope of every heart," as former President Bush likes to say, we will be sucked into its vortex with no escape. A recent headline in The Weekly Standard, which editorially favors a strike against Syria, branded the region "The Muddle East." Reuel Marc Gerecht, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, writes, "...Obama's sensibilities -- his early friendly outreach to Muslim despots and Iran, his reluctance to apply pressure to authoritarian Muslim rulers, and his obvious discomfort with the moral challenges of American power -- made him particularly diffident. ... Barack Obama is now the American everyone in the region loves to hate."

Having proved the wrongheadedness of pacification ("pacification" also failed in Vietnam), the president seeks authority to push forward and repeat the mistakes of the recent past.

The war we are in has less to do with Syria than with transnational forces like the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaida. Ettinger writes that these radical groups "(aspire) to sweep the Middle East and beyond, first and foremost the remaining pro-U.S. Arab regimes such as Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and other oil-producing Gulf states."

They will then come here. In fact, Clare M. Lopez, writing for the Gatestone Institute, a nonpartisan, not-for-profit international policy council, maintains there is ample evidence they have already infiltrated America, Great Britain and other parts of Europe

D.C. throws up roadblock for patriotic bikers

Permit denied for rally to counter Muslim march

Bob Unruh / WND
Thousands of bikers, maybe even tens or thousands or hundreds of thousands, will be “rallying” in Washington, D.C., Wednesday even though city officials reportedly denied them a permit for a straight-through drive that would have allowed them to travel quickly on roads that would have been blocked to cross-traffic.

Now, the bikers will be stopping at every stop sign or stop light, yielding to pedestrians wherever appropriate, and otherwise observing all traffic regulations.

These are the plans being confirmed today on Facebook and other social media mediums for the bikers who decided to rally at the same time the American Muslim Political Action Committee proposed what originally was billed as a “Million Muslim March,” which was given a permit.

The Muslim organization later changed the name to “Million American March Against Fear,” and where promoters initially said their march was to protest “anti-Islamic bigotry in the years that ensued the al-Qaida terrorist attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people on American soil,” it later was changed.

Now the group says its goal is to “ask all individuals and organizations working for peace to attend this collective action to tell our government leaders we want transparency and policies of peace. In the past 12 years since 9/11 the United States government as failed to protect and promote constitutional liberties and human life, here and abroad. We feel that accountability in government has been ignored and the time has arrived to collectively speak truth to power.”

That was after an early statement from promoters that said, “On 9.11.01 our country was forever changed by the horrific events in New York. The entire country was victimized by the acts done on that day. Muslim and non Muslim alike were traumatized but we as Muslims continue 12 years later to be victimized by being made the villains. To this day every media outlet and anti Islamic organization has committed slanderous and libel statements against us as Muslims and our religion of Islam.”

The issue of the denial of a permit for special accommodations for the bikers seem of little consequence to those attending.

At BizPacReview, writer Joe Saunders reported, “Denied a permit by the nation’s capital for a special ‘non-stop’ ride through town with a waiver for red lights, stop signs and other traffic controls, organizers of the ’2 Million Bikers to DC’ ride to remember 9/11 are undeterred.

“Just riding on a public street doesn’t take any special permission after all, even if you have a million people doing it. They just sought the permit to make life easier on the city’s residents and businesses.

“So the ride will go on. It’s just going to take a little longer.”

On a Facebook page for the organizers of the grass-roots movement, they wrote, “We find this regretful for the residents and businesses of that great city, and humbly offer our apologies. What could have been a one or two hour ride through will now likely be an all-day event. We will be obeying all laws. We will be stopping at all stoplights, stop signs, and yielding to all pedestrians.”

No route is being publicly announced ahead of time, but they said the event is to launch at 8 a.m. at the Harley Davidson of Washington location in Fort Washington, Md.

Kickstands go up at 11 a.m., Saunders reported.

Also on the BizPac site, organizations posted a comment, “We WILL ride as we did not really need a permit, but did apply for THEIR benefit. We were told by Sheila Gotha of the Permits DEPT. ‘This Ride Only event has been denied.’ When asked why, hereonly response was ‘It’s a weekday and DC residents are not going to (sic) happy with you folks.’

“We did our best to explain that IF we received assistance with road blocks, etc. it would be beneficial to the residents of DC as we would be able to get through in much less time. Her response, ‘Permit denied.’ NOW I will say almost every LEO Dept that was on that call did reach out to us afterwards. They were concerned as well, but MOST were “VERY SUPPORTIVE! They were not able to help with road blocks, but wished us well!”

The Muslim organization announced earlier it got a permit for its event.

In what was a virtual impossibility before the Internet, hundreds, even thousands, of biker groups are planning to show up for the “2 Million Bikers to DC.”

At the Mr. Conservative blog, the author said: “The best way to counter bad speech is to oppose it with good speech. Sometimes ‘speech’ can be expressed simply by the number of people who are willing to show up to support a principle. That’s the view that hundreds of bikers (so far) across American have as they prepare to join a ’2 Million Biker Ride to DC’ to counter the planned Sept. 11 ‘Million Muslim March.’”

On the Facebook page, the community purpose is described as: “To honor those who were killed on 911 and our armed forces who fought those who precipitated this attack!”

Volunteers were coordinating travel for groups from various states.

A Ronald Curaba said: “Who ever comments I would like to do this … should shut up and show up! Im a retired FDN Lt. I should be at my old firehouse where I was on that ill fated day …. but I will be in DC riding! God willing!”

Added Bryan Short: “How appropriate. A million muslims surrounded by 2 million hogs!”

Organizers of the page added: “Folks, just wanted to say thank you for your support. This event has been a lot of work. But for our country it is worth it. As with any event such as this we are being attacked from every angle. But we will not allow those distractions to deter us from our goal nor the goal of the originator of this event Mr. Bill Williamson.”

“God Bless Ride Safe,” added Tammy Bowman.

“Ride on brothers,” said Bob Halley.

“Don’t forget ya’ll don’t need a bike to participate. Support vehicles will be needed. I suppose most of the U.S. will be there in spirit. Those of us who are lucky to still have employment still need to work their knickers off to survive these days. Perhaps red/white/blue boys can adorn people’s homes in support?” suggested Trish Zysk.

Options for those who cannot make the trek to D.C.?

“Organize a ride to your own state Capitol! Get with like-mined folks and get started planning!

Someone take a lead in your state and get the event in motion.”

Also, get with your ‘Impeach Obama Overpass’ organization.

“Whatever you decide please do something to support America on 911!”

See a video on the event:
http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/d-c-throws-up-roadblock-for-patriotic-bikers/ACT for America founder Brigitte Gabriel blasted the Muslim organization for setting an agenda, and then modifying it to make it appear more inclusive.

“It is amazing how fast they changed the original language on their website claiming victimhood, bigotry, and unfair treatment since Sept. 11th 2001,” Gabriel said. “Once they were confronted and debated by people like me who pointed out to them that in the last four years alone we have arrested on American soil 226 home grown terrorists. One-hundred eighty six of them were Muslims. Not Jews. Not Hindus, not Buddhist. But Muslims.”

Gabriel says the facts are that Muslim immigrants to the U. S. are responsible for a disproportionally large number of domestic terrorism cases.

“Of all immigrants who have ever immigrated to America since its birth, America never encountered such hatred and terrorism coming out of one faith based group in our country that accounts for less than 2 percent of the American population and is now responsible for over 80 percent of attacks against America,” she said.

“In 11 years since 911, the Islamic American community has not organized a one million man march to condemn Islamic terrorism against America and call Hamas, al-Qaida, Hezbollah, al-Shabaab, and other groups by their names – terrorists,” Gabriel said.

“Instead they are rallying to condemn America for what they call unfair policy here and abroad. It is about time the Muslim American community comes out and condemns every imam’s preaching in mosques throughout America who advocates overthrowing our democracy and inciting hatred against infidels and America,” Gabriel said.

“They should be coming out by the millions supporting America and its policy in eradicating Islamic terrorism, supremacy and violence,” Gabriel said.
Are The Real Enemies In Syria Or Washington?
Are The Real Enemies In Syria Or Washington?
“Engage people with what they expect; it is what they are able to discern and confirms their projections. It settles them into predictable patterns of response, occupying their minds while you wait for the extraordinary moment — that which they cannot anticipate.”–Sun Tzu, The Art of War

The definition of what makes an “enemy” may vary from person to person. But I would say that, generally, an enemy is one who has an active ability to do irreparable harm to you or your essential values. He is motivated by destruction, the destruction of all that you hold dear. He is capable and motivated. He is a legitimate threat. He will not compromise. He will not waver. He will do anything to wound you. He will not stop. He is possessed.

Americans have spent the better part of a century being told who their enemies are with very little explanation or substantiation. We have blindly rallied around our patriotic prerogative without knowing the root cause of the conflict or the nature of the target we are told to annihilate. We have been suckered into war after war, conjured by international interests in order to lure us into accepting greater centralization and concentrated globalism. As a culture, I’m sorry to say, we have been used.

We are a tool of unmitigated doom. We are the loaded gun in the hand of the devil.

This paradigm has done terrible harm to our standing in the eyes of the peoples of the world. But until recently, it has done very little harm to us as a society. We have allowed ourselves to be used like a bloody club, but we have not yet felt the true pain or the true cost. We have been insulated from consequence. However, this exalted situation is quickly coming to an end.

When one applies the above definition of “the enemy” to Syria, one comes away with very little satisfaction. The Syrian government poses absolutely no immediate threat to the United States. In fact, the civil war that now rages within its borders has been completely fabricated by the American government. The insurgency has been funded, armed, trained and ultimately directed by the U.S. intelligence community. Without U.S. subversion, the civil war in Syria would not exist.

So, the question arises: If Syria is not the real enemy, who is?

I point back to the core issue. That is to say, I would examine who poses a legitimate threat to our country and our principles. The Syrian government under Bashar Assad clearly has no capability to threaten our freedom, our economic stability, our social stability or our defensive capabilities. There is, though, a group of people out there who do, in fact, pose a significant threat to the American way of life on every conceivable level. These people do not live on the other side of the world. They do not wear foreign garb or speak another language. They do not have pigmented skin or Asian features.

They look just like you and I, and they live in Washington.

If the so-called “debate” over a possible military strike in Syria has done anything, it has certainly brought the American public’s true enemies to the surface. Men who posed as liberal proponents of peace now salivate over the prospect of bloodshed. Men who posed as fiscal conservatives now clamor for more Federal funding to drive the U.S. war machine. Men who claimed to represent the citizenry now ignore all calls for reason in the pursuit of global dominance.

I have warned of the considerable dangers of a war in Syria for years — long before most people knew or cared about the Assad regime. Being in this position has allowed me to view the escalating crisis with a considerable amount of objectivity. In the midst of so much chaos and confusion, if you know who stands to gain and who stands to lose, the progression of events becomes transparent, and the strategy of the true enemy emerges.

So what have I observed so far?

If you want to know who has malicious intent toward our Constitutional values, simply move your eyes away from the Mideast and focus on our own capital. The ill will toward liberty held by the leadership of the Democratic and Republican parties is obvious in the Congressional support of the banker bailouts, the Patriot Acts, the National Defense Authorization Act, the President’s domestic assassination directives, the hands-off approach to National Security Agency mass surveillance, etc.

But even beyond these litmus tests, the Syrian debate has unveiled numerous enemies of the American people within our own government.

The catastrophe inherent in a Syrian strike is at least partially known to most of the public. We are fully aware that there will be blowback from any new strike in the Mideast, economically as well as internationally. So if the average American with little political experience understands the consequences of such an action, the average politician should be more than educated on the dangers.

Any representative who blatantly ignores the calamity ahead is either very stupid or has an agenda.

I find it fascinating that politicians and bureaucrats from both sides of the aisle are now coming out of the woodwork to cheerlead alongside each other for war and the state.

For those who are predominantly obsessed with Barack Obama as the source of all our ills, I would gladly point out that Republican leader and House Speaker John Boehner has thrown his support behind a Syrian strike, even before the U.N. investigative report on Syrian chemical weapons use has been released.

In the meantime, self-proclaimed Republican stalwarts like John McCain (R-Ariz.) have argued that Obama’s “limited strike” response is “not enough.” This is the same man, by the way, who has been instrumental in the monetary and military support of al-Qaida in Syria.

Secretary of State John Kerry, who not long ago ran for President on the platform of being an anti-war Democrat, now regularly begs the American people to back further war based on the same dubious evidence for which he once criticized the George W. Bush Administration. In fact, Kerry has made it clear that even if Congress votes “no” against a strike, he believes Obama has the right to set one in motion anyway.

Senator Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.), the man who openly admits in mainstream interviews that he believes the President has the right to indefinitely detain or assassinate American citizens without trial or oversight, has loudly indicated his support for a war on Syria. His criticisms parallel McCain’s in that he believes the Obama Administration should have attacked without Congressional approval or should commit to an all-out military shift into the region. Graham consistently fear mongers in the mainstream media. He warns that without a hard, immediate strike against Syria, catastrophe will befall Israel, and chemical and nuclear weapons will rain on America.

All I have to say to Graham is, if chemical or nuclear weapons are used against the American people, it will be because the establishment allowed it to happen — just as it has allowed numerous attacks in the past to occur in order to facilitate pretext for a larger war (Gulf of Tonkin, anyone?).

For those out there in the movement who are hoping for reason and logic to prevail during the Congressional debate on the Syrian issue, I would suggest that they do not hold their breath. This vote was decided before Obama ever allowed it to go to the Hill. The vote has been cast. The debate is a sideshow designed to make the American people feel as if their system of government still functions as it should. Remember, no Congress in the history of the United States has ever refused the request of a President to make war.

The more than 150 Congressmen who demanded a vote on the Syrian crisis did so because they wanted to be included in the process, not because they necessarily opposed a war. That leaves nearly 300 representatives who had no problem whatsoever with Obama attacking Syria unilaterally without any checks or balances. The Senate panel that initiated the voting process on the strike plan passed the initiative 10-7. I have no doubt that Obama has the votes to confirm the use of force.

But let’s say Obama does not get his Congressional approval; his office has asserted on numerous occasions that he has the authority to trigger war regardless. A “no” vote in Washington means nothing today. The probable scenario, though, is the most common scenario. Congress will most likely authorize the “use of military force” without directly declaring war on the Assad regime. This is exactly what Congress did in the wake of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. There was no evidence of an al-Qaida support structure and no evidence of weapons of mass destruction, but war rolled forward nonetheless. Congress gave Bush a blank check to do whatever he saw fit, and I believe this is what it will do for Obama.

America is being set up to look like the bad guy or the fool. Our political leadership is devoted to the ideology of globalization, not sovereignty or U.S prosperity. A Syrian strike places the United States in tremendous peril, the likes of which have not been seen since the Cuban missile crisis. Syria itself is a vacuum of death, a black hole swirling in a void of economic and sociological interdependency.

Where the United States enters, so follows Iran, so follows Israel, so follows Saudi Arabia, so follows Lebanon, so follows Jordan, so follows Egypt, so follows Russia, so follows China and on and on.

In my analysis of Syria over the years, I have exposed the domino effect of war as well as the calamities of economic chain reaction. Escalating war in Syria will eventually lead to the end of the dollar’s world reserve status and the collapse of the U.S. financial system. Knowing that this is the ultimate result of a strike in the region, many people would ask why the White House and so many prominent figures in Congress would be so hell-bent on setting the wheels in motion. I would stand back from the chaos and ask what I always ask: Who gains the most from the disaster?

The demise of American currency dominance and the degradation of the American spirit do indeed benefit a select few. For the most part, central banks and globalists have taken a hands-off approach to the Syrian debacle. Perhaps that’s because doing so makes it easier for them to survey the inevitable collapse from a distance and swoop in later as our “saviors,” ready to rebuild the globe according to their own ideals. Having a debased and desperate U.S. populace certainly makes the transition to total globalization and centralization much easier.

My original query was: Who is the real enemy? No matter what happens in the coming months and years, never forget that question. Who poses the greatest threat to our freedom: Syria or the political ghouls trying to convince us to decimate Syria?

Who claims the power to take everything we have? Who claims the power to take our liberty and our lives at a whim? Who claims the power to kill innocents in our name? Who disregards the checks and balances of constitutionalism at every turn? Who truly threatens our future and the future of our children?

Do not be distracted by stories of foreign monsters so far away when the real monsters lurk so quietly under your bed. If we can find a way to pressure Congress into avoiding a Syrian conflict, remain vigilant. America is one global hiccup away from oblivion. And if this is what the establishment wants, they will find a way to make it happen. The threat of U.S. catastrophe will end only when the poison is removed from our very veins, and that process of purification begins with the removal of the criminal political structures and banking structures in Washington.