Skip to main content

The U.S. Department Of Clowns

           US Secretary Of State John Kerry

The US State Department has had such an abysmal year that they deserve special mention for their gaffs, errs and blunders, if not for the pure value of the comedy then at least for their demonstration of impotence the US now has in influencing world affairs. Let's give credit where credit is due. Their spokespersons are always dishing out the laughs and they are never thin on material. Here is their website   or is it I get confused sometimes.
Here=>  is how they summarize their spectacular success in Syria, having brought peace to the nation, they have achieved their one true goal, which definitely was not that "Assad must go".  They maintain Assad must go, but that is not their goal, that is something they have always been very clear on.  If, Hypothetically speaking, it were their one true goal, which it isn't, it would be because he gassed his own people, which he did not, but whose counting...

             Emperor Of The Ukraine, Victoria Nuland the 1st (and last)

Victoria Nulands little project placing former State Department agent, Petro Poreshenko, at the helm of the Ukranian State of America, has failed spectacularly. Tragically, after spending billions via their little colour revolution, arab spring generating network of NGO's, it was a dismal waste of life and money.

Read more here:

Or for lighter reading here is my blog post on the issue:  

              John McPain, thinks he runs the State Department but doesn't....

Typical State Dept smooth-talk on the spectacular success of the Syrian Training Program.


That is all.... Sleep Peacefully America, we are on guard.

Popular posts from this blog

Scientific Consensus is that Consensus is overturned 100% of the time

Everything you know is wrong. There is a very good reason why science succeeds more often than politics does.  Unlike politics, It's not a consensus or a vote,  it's actually method.  The scientific method. Anyone who has read this blog before probably knows I'm a lifelong science junkie as well as someone who spends thousands of hours breaking down the the political and economic agendas behind the special interest groups that guide public policy.  In many ways I'm actually uniquely qualified to tie these angles together in ways not well understood by the overwhelming majority of people.  That actually includes scientists. Scientists are notoriously naive in the political and economic forces that drive the human world.

First and foremost,  what is this so called 'consensus' anyway.  You will be horrified to find out,  it's not specifically that global warming is man made.  It's simply that humans contribute to climate change in an unknowable way and to…

CO2 is not a pollutant, it is greening the earth!

Whatever your persuasion is on CO² and AGW, nobody disagrees on the tremendous benefit it provides plant life. Many of the past famine disasters and desertification has CO² decline listed as a contributor.

I feel I've already blown the notion that humans are the main cause of climate change out of the water. Or rather I've used the reasoning of others and put it together in a convenient outline. See my previous post above for starters.  However, I recognize that humans do increase CO² levels, no matter how tiny. Increases are likely to be very short lived because the earth has an effective feedback mechanism, but we can apparently get small increases, and it's been put forward on very poor science that this is a bad thing. That assertion hinges completely on bad models. More on that in the bottom most link.  Model's and the measurement sample dates are dubious at best.

Furthermore, the main increase in CO²  as…

You Don't Know What Capitalism Is So Stop Using The Word!

I am writing this for one purpose, to be able to post it every time the issue comes up in conversation to prevent myself from dying of boredom on a few key issues with label intellectuals, you know, the sort who drop labels for the singular purpose of demonstrating their talent at dodging real issues by posing as someone who knows the definition of a word.

When it comes right down to it, I personally think most economic and, for that matter, socio-economic systems across the entire capitalism/ socialism spectrum could work if corruption could just be reasonably controlled.  Many forget that Socialism still runs on the capitalism economics system and the finer points actually come down to policy and regulations. This is often missed.  That being said, I am fairly sure that many of the criticisms of communism for example are valid, and views that it does not work especially well because it tends to kill the inventiveness and passion of the human spirit do stand, but not for the reasons…