Sometimes bad ideas die slowly. It was only one year ago that Obama announced he would bomb the Syrian government, only to change his mind at the last minute. Now the same fetid war talk is sprouting fresh roots in the ever-fertile U.S. military. Various media outlets reported that Obama might "enforce a no fly zone in Syria to protect civilians from the Syrian government."

This just weeks after the U.S. public was told that ISIS was the reason the U.S. military was now in Syria. The 2014 media sound bites mimic the 2013 scare tactics, copying the "humanitarian motives" behind the push towards war with the Syrian government. For example, in 2013 The New York Times blandly discussed the "no fly zone" option:

"To establish buffer zones to protect parts of Turkey or Jordan to provide safe havens for Syrian rebels and a base for delivering humanitarian assistance would require imposing a limited no-fly zone and deploying thousands of American ground forces."


The Washington Post has a positive-thinking headline today: “Afghanistan’s new president: ‘Hold me accountable.'”

A more honest headline would have been:  “Afghan Election Thief says ‘Hold Me Accountable’ – the latest Obama democracy sham success story”

Afghanistan's new President Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai shake hands with Afghanistan's Chief Justice Abdul Salam Azimi as he takes the oath during his inauguration as president in KabulAshraf Ghani took the oath of office after the U.S. government helped finagle a power-sharing deal between Ghani and allegedly second place finish Abdullah Abdullah. Abdullah got far more votes than Ghani in the initial round of voting — but a miraculous surge of votes in the second round supposedly gave Ghani the lead. The U.S. government has not yet revealed how much in payoffs and promises it spent to get the two politicians to appear to cut a deal.

Ghani’s predecessor, Hamid Karzai, also perennially promised to be accountable.  For instance, in December 2004, Newsweek interviewed Karzai and headlined his promise to deliver an “honest, accountable, and austere government.”

Karzai’s promises did not deter him from massively looting U.S. aid and stealing the 2009 presidential election.

The Obama administration is pretending that the Afghans had an election that was clean enough to produce an untainted new regime. But TOLO News reported earlier this month that Afghanistan’s Independent Election Commission (IEC) had invalidated all votes at  more than a thousand polling sites:

 “IEC acknowledged the fact that the June 14 run-off elections witnessed massive frauds.  “There was wide-scale fraud by security forces, governors and IEC employees,” a commissioner for the IEC, Azizullah Bakhtyari, admitted. “Clearly, most of the fraud happened in coordination with IEC employees.” Bakhtyari hopes that the audit process will re-establish people’s trust in the election process. “The audit helped us recognize the employees responsible for the fraud that took place at the 1,028 polling sites,” he said. “Clearly, we will take action against them for harming the public’s trust in the electoral institution.”

The U.S. State Department issued a statement last week that required hip boots even to read: “There were serious allegations of extensive fraud during the election, resulting in an unprecedented 100% audit of all ballots. We join the candidates in deploring any fraud in the electoral process, especially any that was committed by those in the electoral institutions who were most responsible for protecting Afghans’ democratic aspirations…Nonetheless, the final outcome of the election process is legitimate and the results will be transparent.”

The election results are still not transparent and the only reason the Obama administration considers the new government “legitimate” is because it cut a deal to permit extended stays for 10,000 U.S. troops.

The State Department also praised Karzai for his role in “the first democratic and peaceful transfer of leadership in Afghanistan’s history.” The congratulatory declaration omitted to mention that the first such transition should have occurred in 2009 except for Karzai’s brazen fabrication of votes.

When Ghani and Abdullah announced a U.S. brokered/subsidized power-sharing deal, Secretary of State John Kerry whooped: “These two men have put the people of Afghanistan first, and they’ve ensured that the first peaceful democratic transition in the history of their country begins with national unity.”

It is only a matter of time until Ghani’s and Abdullah’s supporters fall upon each other with knives or worse.  But as long as Obama and Kerry can pretend to be spreading democracy, it doesn’t matter how many more American soldiers pointlessly die.

On Twitter @jimbovard  and

“Leave them to their sectarian religious wars. They’ve been killing each other for thousands of years, and it will continue unabated no matter what we enlightened, secular westerners do. Best not to get mixed up in it.”

This sentiment is prevalent within certain strands of anti-interventionist thought, and it betrays an incredible ignorance and arrogance. It neglects the central fact of Muslim civilization since World War I and the fall of the Ottoman Empire, and especially since World War II and the establishment of the state of Israel: the western imperial domination and exploitation of virtually all Muslim lands and people, whether through occupation, puppet dictators, civil war sponsorship, or chaos-inducing regime changes. Westerners sigh derisively at “backward” Muslim culture, yet it is western culture that, by sanctioning such a foreign policy, has proven to be far more barbaric.


A splendid 2011 Ron Paul presidential campaign ad invited viewers to imagine how Americans would respond if another country ever did to America what the U.S. government does to Muslim countries on a routine basis.

Of course, as the ad indicates, the response would be an armed insurgency. Think the “Wolverines” in the 1984 film Red Dawn.

From realizing that, it is only takes a little more reflection to realize that such an American insurgency would draw resolve and inspiration from its dominant religion, Christianity. Moreover, the vanguard of any “American intifada” would be deeply Christian in character, and the more desperate the struggle became, the more dominant would be its religious aspects, and especially its most radically religious aspects.

The Nobel Peace Prize winner has launched another bombing campaign without a declaration of war. President Obama’s latest initiative saw more bombs dropped on Syria in its first night than in a month of attacks on ISIS in Syria.

This week Charles Goyette talks with Ron Paul about the new U.S. front in the never-ending Mideast war, and if ISIS is the real or the only target of the campaign.

Listen to this week’s podcast HERE.

Subscribe to The Ron Paul and Charles Goyette Weekly Podcast on iTunes

Charles Goyette is New York Times Bestselling Author of The Dollar Meltdown and Red and Blue and Broke All Over: Restoring America’s Free Economy . Check out Goyette and Paul’s national radio commentary: Ron Paul’s America . Goyette also edits The Freedom and Prosperity Letter .

If you don’t know Ray McGovern yet, you probably should.

You see, Ray just beat down, in court, Hillary Clinton, the State Department, and a small part of Post-Constitutional America.

Who is this Guy?

McGovern is a changed man. He started out in the Army, then he worked for the CIA from the Kennedy administration up through the first Bush presidency, preparing the president’s daily intel brief. He was a hell of a spy. McGovern began to see the evil of much of the government’s work, and has since become an outspoken critic of the intelligence world and an advocate for free speech. He speaks on behalf of people like Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden.

Ray McGovern was put on the State Department’s Diplomatic Security BOLO list– Be On the Look Out– one of a series of proliferating government watch lists. What McGovern did to end up on Diplomatic Security’s dangerous persons list and how he got off the list are a tale of our era, Post-Constitutional America.

Offending the Queen

Ray’s offense was to turn his back on Hillary Clinton, literally.


When U.S. President Barack Obama addressed the U.N. General Assembly Wednesday, he was outspoken in his criticism of Russia for bullying Ukraine, Syria for its brutality towards its own people, and terrorists of all political stripes for the death and destruction plaguing Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Somalia.

But as the New York Times rightly pointed out, Obama made only a “fleeting” reference to Israel and Palestine in his 47-minute speech to the world body.

Nadia Hijab, executive director of Al-Shabaka: The Palestinian Policy Network, told IPS much of what Obama said about the “brutality” of the Assad regime in Syria and his criticism of “a world in which one nation’s borders can be redrawn by another” applies directly to Israel.

But he simply paid lip service to “the principle” that two states would make the region and the world more just without any indication of what the US might do – or stop doing, she added.