Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says Iran is laying the groundwork for making nuclear weapons someday, but is not yet building a bomb and called for continued diplomatic and economic pressure to persuade Tehran not to take that step. As he has previously, Panetta cautioned against a unilateral strike by Israel against Iran’s nuclear facilities, saying the action could trigger Iranian retaliation against U.S. forces in the region. “We have common cause here” with Israel, he said. “And the better approach is for us to work together.” Panetta’s remarks on CBS’ Face the Nation, which were taped Friday and aired Sunday, reflect the long-held view of the Obama administration that Iran is not yet committed to building a nuclear arsenal, only to creating the industrial and scientific capacity to allow one if its leaders to decide to take that final step. – PressTV/YouTube/Washington Post

Dominant Social Theme: Iran is evil. War is in the offing.

Free-Market Analysis:  Over the weekend, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta admitted on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that Iran was not seeking to make nuclear weapons. OK, we can all relax now, right? Not quite. Panetta went on to caution that Iran was seeking a “nuclear capability” and that this “concerned” him – and presumably others as well.

Who are the others, we ask? President Barack Obama? The military? The CIA? Israel? No, we have another hypothesis. We think the current crisis is a manufactured one and that Iran’s “capability” – whatever it is – has little to do with any contemplated war.

There will be war, if there is war, between the West and Persia because the West NEEDS a war. Already, in the West, the alternative media – often a beacon of truth and hope – is explaining there will be war because ISRAEL feels threatened.

But this is not quite true, either. Israel is a creation of the power elite and it is the Anglosphere power elite that is currently seeking war, in our view. It seems to need or want a war to prop up its failing central banking system.

It is the failure of the financial system, proceeding apace, that gives rise to this talk of war, to the military tensions, to the tendentious statements made by Washington, DC and to a lesser extent by European and Israeli leaders.

What other conclusion can be reached? Iran HAS no nuclear weapons. And even if it did, is Iran somehow more evil or unstable than North Korea, which is evidently bent on increasing a nuclear arsenal that it already has built?

But Iran, it is said, can target Israel with nuclear weapons. Yet North Korea can do the same with South Korea. Compare the “tensions” and rhetoric and one has to conclude that a double standard is being applied. It is seemingly a situation where Iran’s ongoing nuclear program is simply a tool designed to unlock wider rhetoric. Here’s a further excerpt from a Washington Post on the subject:

The comments suggest the White House’s assessment of Iran’s nuclear strategy has not changed in recent months, despite warnings from advocates of military action that time is running out to prevent Tehran from becoming a nuclear-armed state. Iran says its nuclear program is only for energy and medical research, and refuses to halt uranium enrichment.

Several Republican candidates have called for a tougher line against Iran, saying they believe it is committed to building the bomb. “If we re-elect Barack Obama, Iran will have a nuclear weapon,” said Mitt Romney. “And if you elect Mitt Romney, Iran will not have a nuclear weapon.”

Rick Santorum has said that the U.S. should plan a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities and “say to them that if you do not open up those facilities and close them down, we will close them down for you.” Iran has opened two dozen of its facilities to international inspectors, but has refused in defiance of the U.N. Security Council to suspend its uranium enrichment.

Panetta did not rule out launching a pre-emptive strike. “But the responsible thing to do right now is to keep putting diplomatic and economic pressure on them to force them to do the right thing,” he said. “And to make sure that they do not make the decision to proceed with the development of a nuclear weapon.”

We can see from the above excerpt how strongly the drums of war are beating. Panetta, while admitting that Iran has no weaponized nuclear program, will not rule out a “pre-emptive” strike. The entire scenario seems to be some kind of power elite dominant social theme.

These fear-based themes are essentially tools used by the elites to stampede Western middle classes into giving up wealth and power to global institutions specially constructed for that purpose, such as the UN, IMF and World Bank.

In this case, we are not quite sure why the Pentagon – an elite-oriented institution – has decided to focus so intently on Iran. We are sure, however (as we have pointed out previously), that the powers-that-be are creating an Islamic crescent arc in the Middle East by destabilizing secular regimes and replacing them with Islamic ones.

This is ongoing … and perhaps the malicious rhetoric surrounding Iran is merely part of a propaganda process intended to further demonize the region preparatory to a full-on regional war.

Modern wars need years, even decades, to foment, in our view. In the Internet era, this is even harder because people’s natural skepticism about being manipulated will surely be fueled by the fodder provided by various alternative ‘Net news.

Iran/Western tensions seen through this lens are perhaps preparatory and do not indicate an immediate state of hostilities. On the other hand, the amount of weaponry now emplaced in and around Iran certainly gives rise to concern. Even a war planned for later can be generated sooner by mistake (intentional or not). View the video below and make up your own mind.

*Taken from the Huffington Post. Video at link.

There’s no evidence of any extraterrestrial life and “no credible information to suggest that any evidence is being hidden from the public’s eye.”

And there you have it, straight from the White House’s mouth, so to speak. UFO aficionados, skeptics and believers alike have waited patientlysince September to see how the Obama administration would respond to two petitions under the new “We the People” program.

According to the official response written and released Friday evening by Phil Larson at the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy, while the government is saying it has “no evidence that any life exists outside our planet, or that an extraterrestrial presence has contacted or engaged any member of the human race,” the door is still open to the possibility and search efforts “of life outside our planet.”

CONTINUED..

*Taken from the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Written by Allen McDaniels.

While reviewing the writings of the revisionist historian and former teacher of mine James J. Martin, I came upon a reference to John Maynard Keynes’s German-language edition of his General Theory, published in 1936.[1][2] In this edition, Keynes wrote a special foreword for his German readers. This foreword has been largely overlooked by hagiographers, economists, historians, and journalists — definitely by sympathetic politicians and bureaucrats. At the time of the German foreword, September 1936, Adolf Hitler’s National Socialists had been in power for nearly four years.

The kernel of Keynes’s thought is summarized in a short passage within the foreword:

The theory of aggregate production, which is the point of the following book, nevertheless can be much easier adapted to the conditions of a totalitarian state than the theory of production and distribution of a given production put forth under conditions of free competition and a large degree of laissez-faire. This is one of the reasons that justifies the fact that I call my theory a general theory.

CONTINUED..

My Two Cents: Here’s that common sense most religio-righties can’t wrap their heads around. Respect goes out to Justin Amash who the GOP has been pissed at for being the only Republican to vote “no” in an effort to preserve states’ rights. End Two Cents.

*Taken from the Hill.

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) said Thursday he opposes the Republican measure that seeks to reaffirms the country’s “In God We Trust” motto.

The resolution overwhelmingly passed the House on Wednesday, attracting only nine “no” votes. Paul, who is running for president, missed the vote.

Paul said he didn’t think the resolution was necessary, saying he wouldn’t have brought it up.

“I would have voted ‘no’ not because I don’t like the motto and don’t think we can use it but ‘no’ because we were telling the states what to do,” Paul told The Hill.

The GOP measure stands behind the national motto, which is used in public schools, public buildings and other government institutions.

President Obama on Wednesday mocked the House for voting on the measure instead of focusing on job creation.

The only Republican to reject the resolution was freshman Rep. Justin Amash (Mich.), who has endorsed Paul for president.

*Taken from the Washington Post.

A Republican aide e-mails me: “The Speaker, Sen. Reid and Sen. McConnell all agreed on the general framework of a two-part plan. A short-term increase (with cuts greater than the increase), combined with a committee to find long-term savings before the rest of the increase would be considered. Sen. Reid took the bipartisan plan to the White House and the President said no.”

If this is accurate the president is playing with fire. By halting a bipartisan deal he imperils the country’s finances and can rightly be accused of putting partisanship above all else. The ONLY reason to reject a short-term, two-step deal embraced by both the House and Senate is to avoid another approval-killing face-off for President Obama before the election. Next to pulling troops out of Afghanistan to fit the election calendar, this is the most irresponsible and shameful move of his presidency.

As for the House, why not pass the deal that Sen. Harry Reid agreed to, send it to the Senate and leave town? Enough already.

*Taken from Broward Palm Beach.

When Rep. Allen West said in his weekly newsletter that he was going to make a “careful assessment” on the Patriot Act extensions, it sounded like we could already pencil him in for a “yes” vote — especially since he just recently voted for the 90-day extension.

It appears he was actually being serious about considering a vote against it.

West joined only 30 other House Republicans in voting “no” on extending three provisions in the Patriot Act — the government’s expanded wiretap capabilities, ability to obtain records, and the “we’re kinda sure you’re a terrorist” ”lone wolf” targeting.

Here’s what West had to say last night after the vote:

“I have spent the past two months investigating these provisions to the PATRIOT Act, their effect on American citizens and their impact on apprehending terrorists to better keep our country safe. After much reading, many briefings, and conversations with local law enforcement and federal agents, including FBI Director Robert Mueller, I am not fully convinced that by extending these provisions for four years, we would be any safer, but instead I fear they may only give us the illusion of being safer.”

Mueller had sent members of Congress a letter explaining how the Patriot Act ensured safety in the U.S., while West wrote him back with some questions:

• Can you provide a breakdown of how many times these provisions have been used on citizens and non-citizens?
• How many people were ever convicted or investigated?
• Out of those held, how many were released without being charged?
• Are there any individuals that are still being held that were never charged?
• What intelligence, if anything, came from these instances in which Section 206 was implemented?

Mueller didn’t write back.

The four-year extension of the provisions passed 250-153 and was signed by President Barack Obama just before midnight…

My Two Cents: What the hell is with the weird music? End Two Cents.

*Taken from Charisma.

Mike Huckabee confirmed Saturday that he is not running for president in 2012. The former Arkansas governor used his Fox News show, “Huckabee,” to make the announcement.

In 2008, Huckabee appealed to many evangelical voters and won the Iowa caucuses. As he said in his announcement, he was consistently on top of the polls and was favored higher than his peers.

Despite his stature in the polls, Huckabee has taken himself out of the race. “For me the discussion and decision is ultimately not a political one, not a financial one, not even a practical one — it’s a spiritual one,” he said Saturday night.

Although some wonder if he is out for good, Huckabee was pretty clear in his intentions. “All the factors say go, but my heart says no, and that’s the decision I have made. In it, I have finally found some resolution,” he said. “I can’t predict the future, but I know for now, my answer is clear and firm. I will not seek the Republican nomination for president this year.”

CONTINUED..

My Two Cents: Should I even say, “I told you so”? End Two Cents.

*Taken from ABC News.

After a roller-coaster flirtation with a presidential bid, Donald Trump bowed out of the 2012 contest in true Trump fashion, sayng that while he would not be a candidate this year, if he had run, he would have been able to win the primary and the general election.

Trump, who had contemplated running for president in years past, seemed poised take the plunge this year. He even had a tentative date set for a campaign announcement: May 25 in the atrium of Trump Tower in new York City.

Here is Donald Trump full statement on his 2012 decision:

After considerable deliberation and reflection, I have decided not to pursue the office of the Presidency. This decision does not come easily or without regret; especially when my potential candidacy continues to be validated by ranking at the top of the Republican contenders in polls across the country. I maintain the strong conviction that if I were to run, I would be able to win the primary and ultimately, the general election. I have spent the past several months unofficially campaigning and recognize that running for public office cannot be done half heartedly. Ultimately, however, business is my greatest passion and I am not ready to leave the private sector.

CONTINUED..

*Taken from CBS Chicago. Video at link.

Chicago Public Schools is apologizing to a Chicago mother and her two young sons, ages 5 and 6, after they were denied breakfast because they came to schools wearing the wrong kind of shoes.

CBS 2’s Dorothy Tucker reports.

The Nicholson brothers only grab a quick snack before heading to class because they qualify for a full free breakfast at Adam Powell Grade School. It’s something they look forward to every day, and it hurt when they were recently turned away.

They were wearing black athletic shoes. The boys told their mom that the assistant principal, Angela Peagler wouldn’t let them eat because their shoes didn’t fit the school uniform, which calls for a regular black dress shoe.

“I felt sad. We’re always supposed to have breakfast,” first-grader Noah Nicholson says.

Noah and his brother Niko, who is in kindergarten, went to class hungry and didn’t eat until lunch.

CONTINUED..