Energy

Nuclear Security Summit 2014 — Loose Nuke War Game — 1 Nuclear Weapon — NYC or Washington? — You Choose — Videos

Posted on March 26, 2014. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Communications, Constitution, Economics, Employment, Energy, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Films, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Illegal, Immigration, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, media, Obamacare, People, Philosophy, Politics, Programming, Psychology, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Resources, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Technology, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth, Weather, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 231: March 25, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 230: March 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 229: March 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 228: March 20, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 227: March 19, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 226: March 18, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 225: March 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 224: March 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 223: March 6, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 222: March 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 221: February 28, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 220: February 27, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 219: February 26, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 218: February 25, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 217: February 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 216: February 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 215: February 20, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 214: February 19, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 213: February 18, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 212: February 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 211: February 14, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 210: February 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 209: February 12, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 208: February 11, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 207: February 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 206: February 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 205: February 5, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 204: February 4, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 203: February 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 202: January 31, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 201: January 30, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 200: January 29, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 199: January 28, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 198: January 27, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 197: January 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 196: January 22, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 195: January 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 194: January 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 193: January 16, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 192: January 14, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 191: January 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 190: January 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 189: January 9, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 188: January 8, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 187: January 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 186: January 6, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 185: January 3, 2014

Story 1: Nuclear Security Summit 2014 — Loose Nuke War Game — 1 Nuclear Weapon — NYC or Washington? — You Choose — Videos

first-30-cities-to-be-nuked-in-usa

.Wash.DC.nuke

Dr. Strangelove – Precious Bodily Fluids

Dr. Strangelove (1964) – War Room Scene

“Mein Führer…! I can walk!!”

Dr.strangelove ending (good quality)

Obama: ‘The Prospect of a Nuclear Weapon Going Off In Manhattan’

President Obama Speaks at the Nuclear Security Summit

On the Rhodes 3/25/14 – The G7 & Beyond

Nuclear Security Summit 2014

Nuclear Weapons Materials Gone Missing — Nuclear Security Summit Preview 1 of 2

Nuclear Weapons Materials Gone Missing — Nuclear Security Summit Preview 2 of 2

Nuclear Security Summit 2014 in the Hague – Obama & Xi meet

Effects of a Nuclear Bomb Part 1: A Terrorist Nuke Detonates in a City

Effects of a Nuclear Bomb Part 2; Superpower Weapons

Obama and the plan for World War 3

Washington, D.C. gets NUKED! (DAY AFTER DISASTER)

Who’d survive a nuclear attack on D.C.?

Obama’s war games

Nuclear Terrorism and Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 Connection – YouTube

AE 2010: NYC Nuclear Explosion

ATOMIC ATTACK! – New York City Bombed with Nuclear Weapons – How to Survive

Summit goal: Secure “loose nukes”

2012 Young Atlanticist Summit – Conversation with Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall

Fail Safe ending clip

Fail Safe (2000) World Nuclear Holocaust [full movie]

Nuclear Bomb Test Compilation HD

Top 10 Most Powerful Nuclear Bombs In History

 

 

Merkel miffed at Barack Obama and David Cameron ‘nuclear war game’

World leaders played an interactive nuclear war game designed to test their responses to a terrorist atomic “dirty bomb” attack that threatened the lives of hundreds of thousands of people

 

David Cameron joined Barack Obama, Angela Merkel and Xi Jinping and other world leaders to play a “nukes on the loose” war game to see how they would cope with a terrorist nuclear attack.

The German chancellor grumbled at being asked to play games and take tests with the Prime Minister, US and Chinese presidents around a table with dozens of heads of state at a nuclear summit in The Hague.

Her complaints were overruled because Mr Obama was keen on the idea and in on the surprise.

In the war game, played out by actors in a series of short films, a terrorist attack with an atomic “dirty bomb” takes place in the financial heart of an unnamed but Western metropolis. “It could be the City of London, or Wall Street, Milan or anywhere”, summit leaders were told.

As the scenario unfolded, it emerged that the terrorists are from an unidentified global terror network and they have stolen nuclear material from an unidentified country that had poorly secured its radiological and nuclear stockpiles.

The bomb is being built in a clandestine laboratory with stolen uranium. It is an improvised explosive device but deadly and the clock is ticking, the leaders were told. Hundreds of thousands of people could be about to die.

“They had to give an answer on their own, in real time. It was like a test. It put them on the spot. Should they inform the public or keep them in the dark,” said a diplomatic source.

“Should they work with other countries or stand alone to try to thwart or minimise the attack? How should they make the cold calculation of how to get a more sustainable human cost in terms of deaths?”

Each world leader had a computer tablet with a touch screen options to make one of four responses to a series of four scenario films played by actors and mimicking the famous 1983 Cold War Hollywood thriller “War Games”, where a computer hacker triggers a nuclear missile scare.

In a competitive environment, with a ticking clock, the leaders had to make rapid choices before the results were presented to the group, anonymously stripped of their identities and followed by discussion.

Perhaps predictably at a world summit on nuclear security, the war game found that shared, collective international decisions were able to stop the terrorist network before they could actually build the dirty bomb.

US officials said that the unconventional approach had been designed to give a “scare you to death” shock to make leaders seriously think about the security of nuclear materials.

But not everyone was happy about playing the war game with the grumbling led by Mrs Merkel who was unimpressed with role-playing at such a high-powered gathering. Mr Obama, who helped plan the game, overrode the moaning. He had Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, his lead national security adviser on the issue, helpfully by his side.

“Leaders had their doubts about participation on their own without their expert civil servants. It was about discussion and problem solving without leaders relying on written statements to read out. At the end the leaders were more enthusiastic,” said a spokesman for the summit.

 

Would you survive a nuclear blast?

Nuclear Blast Mapper on the PBS “Race for the Superbomb” web site show how horribly destructive thermonuclear weapons are. The fission bomb detonated over Nagasaki had an explosive power equivalent to 20,000 tons of TNT. Blast Mapper’s 1-million ton hydrogen bomb, hypothetically detonated on the earth’s surface at any location you choose, has 50 times the explosive power of that 1945 explosion. Video clips of actual A-bomb detonations and their effects can also be viewed at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bomb

The adjoining map of the Tri-Cities, Washington, shows circles of destruction from a 1 megaton surface blast centered on Columbia Center mall.

Blast map key

NOTE: Blast pressure within the circles is greater than the indicated values and is less outside the circles. The zones of destruction in the map are broad generalizations and do not take into account factors such as weather and topography. Fatality numbers do not include the significant delayed effects of trauma, fire, or radioactivity.

12 psi (pounds per square inch), Radius: 1.7 miles

At ground zero lies a crater 200 feet deep and 1000 feet in diameter. The rim of the crater is composed of highly radioactive soil and debris. Nothing recognizable remains within about 0.6 mile from the center except, perhaps, the remains of some buildings’ foundations. At 1.7 miles, only some of the strongest buildings — those made of reinforced, poured concrete — are still standing. Ninety-eight percent of the population within this area are dead immediately.

5 psi, radius – 2.7 miles

Virtually everything is destroyed between the 12 and 5 psi circles. The walls of typical multi-story buildings, including apartment buildings, are completely blown out. The bare, structural skeletons of some buildings rise above the debris as you approach the 5 psi circle. Single-family residences within this area are completely blown away — only their foundations remain. Fifty percent of the population between the 12 and 5 psi circles are dead. Forty percent more are injured.

2 psi, radius – 4.7 miles

Any single-family residences that are not completely destroyed are heavily damaged. The windows of office buildings are blown away, as are some of their walls. Everything on these buildings’ upper floors, including the people who were working there, are thrown onto the street. Substantial debris clutters the entire area. Five percent of the population between the 5 and 2 psi circles are dead. Forty-five percent are injured.

1 psi, radius – 7.4 miles

Residences are moderately damaged. Commercial buildings have sustained minimal damage. Twenty-five percent of the population between the 2 and 1 psi circles have been injured, mainly by flying glass and debris. Many others have suffered flash burns from thermal radiation generated by the explosion.

Fallout effects

Radiation effects are for downwind areas.

Assumptions: wind speed – 15 mph, time frame – 7 days

3,000 rem*, distance – 30 miles

Much more than a lethal dose of radiation. Death can occur within hours of exposure. About ten years will need to pass before levels of radioactivity in this area are low enough to be considered safe by U.S. peacetime standards.

900 rem, distance – 90 miles

A lethal dose of radiation. Death occurs from two to fourteen days.

300 rem, distance – 160 miles

Causes extensive internal damage, including harm to nerve cells and the cells that line the digestive tract. Also results in a loss of white blood cells and temporary hair loss.

90 rem, distance – 250 miles

No immediate harmful effects, but does result in a temporary decrease in white blood cells. Two to three years will need to pass before radioactivity levels in this area are low enough to be considered safe by U.S. peacetime standards.

*rem stands for “roentgen equivalent man.” It is a measurement used to quantify the amount of radiation that will produce certain biological effects.

NOTE: This information is drawn mainly from “The Effects of Nuclear War” (Office of Technology Assessment, Congress of the United States, Washington DC, 1979).

http://www.wcpeace.org/nuc_weapons-1.htm

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 222-231

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or DownloadShow 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Collectivists Celebrate 100 Anniversary of Start of World War I By Starting World War III? — Accidents Happen — Cold War Turns Into Hot War — Videos

Posted on March 14, 2014. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Constitution, Crime, Culture, Demographics, Diasters, Drones, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Entertainment, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, history, Homicide, Inflation, Investments, Islam, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Natural Gas, Nuclear, Oil, Oil, People, Philosophy, Photos, Pistols, Politics, Programming, Radio, Rants, Raves, Religion, Resources, Rifles, Security, Shite, Strategy, Sunni, Talk Radio, Technology, Terrorism, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , |

europe-mapUkrain-physical-mapukraine_russia_timeline

 map_of_russian_gas_pipelines_supplies_to_europe_via_ukraine

 

gas_europe

map_eurrussian_gas_pipelines

 

Russia dismisses U.S. proposals in Ukraine talks

Drifting Towards War

Ron Paul: U.S. Already Spent $5 Billion to Undermine Ukrainian Government

Victoria Nuland’s Admits Washington Has Spent $5 Billion to “Subvert Ukraine”

Ron Paul: US shouldn’t meddle in Ukraine

Russia Ukraine debate sparks fiery exchange

Putin in Ukraine ‘Russia will lose most from this’

Clashes in Ukraine create tension for U.S. and Russia

Debate: Is Ukraine’s Opposition a Democratic Movement or a Force of Right-Wing Extremism…

A New Cold War? Ukraine Violence Escalates, Leaked Tape Suggests US Was Plotting Coup

OReilly: Distorting Russia: How the American Media Misrepresent Putin, Sochi and Ukraine

2/18/14 Stephen F. Cohen, Ph.D. on O’Reilly claiming we’re Putin bashing

US Betrayal of Russia

 

Learn How The United States Is Behind The Kiev Ukraine Riots

Build up to WW3 - OBAMA Announces SANCTIONS to be Imposed on RUSSIA Amid UKRAINE CRISIS

GERALD CELENTE on the UKRAINE CRISIS – U.S. Agenda To Destabilize Russia

 

OBAMA PUSHING WAR WITH RUSSIA WORLD WAR 3 RUSSIAN TROOPS IN UKRAINE! 3-2-14

John McCain moves to start World War 3 in Ukraine

Why Ukraine matters to the U.S. & Russia

MUST SEE! World War 3 is upon us!

Build up to WW3 - RUSSIAN TROOPS in Uneasy Standoff with UKRAINE TROOPS in CRIMEA

The Road to World War 3: Ukraine, Russia and American Imperialism

The First World War – Part 1/10

The First World War – Part 2/10

The First World War – Part 3/10

The First World War – Part 4/10

The First World War – Part 5/10

The First World War – Part 6/10

The First World War – Part 7/10

The First World War – Part 8/10

The First World War – Part 9/10

The First World War – Part 10/10

The Guns of August

The Guns of August is a documentary that follows the book by the same title by author, Barbara Tuchman (1912-1989), an eminent American historian. She received the first of her two Pulitzer prizes for this 1962 masterpiece on World War I. The documentary was made in 1965. Barbara Tuchman was highly respected for her ability to present complex subjects and present them with clarity. Until I read the previous review, I have never heard of anyone accusing her of hating Germany or its people or of her book being anti-German propaganda. But there are pictures of shot civilians and movies of smoldering ruins. Then again, there are people who claim the Holocaust never took place and is just anti-Nazi propaganda… Facts: On August 3 1914, Germany declared war on France. The German invasion plan for France called for an attack through Belgium, instead of through the heavily defended Franco-German border. Belgium was neutral and its neutrality was protected by treaty with Great Britain. The Germans attacked on August 3rd. The next day, August 4th, Great Britain declared war on Germany. Germany warned Belgium that they only wanted to reach France and if Belgium complied, there wouldn’t be any trouble. Despite its small army, Belgium chose to protect its sovereignty and its honor and paid for it. Liège, Aarschot, Andenne, Tamines, Dinant, and Leuven, where the worst of the German depredations occurred.

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Neocon Warmonger Senate John McCain Off To Beat The War Drums — Go Home Senator — American People Want No US Intervention Into Ukraine! — Drums Beating Along The Black Sea — Videos

Posted on March 13, 2014. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Constitution, Economics, Energy, Family, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, Freedom, Friends, Genocide, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Natural Gas, Natural Gas, Oil, Oil, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Press, Psychology, Radio, Radio, Rants, Raves, Religion, Resources, Security, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

 

John McCain moves to start World War 3 in Ukraine

Sen. John McCain to Ukrainian protesters: ‘This is your moment’

McCain: ‘West must condemn Russian involvement in Ukraine’

War Party : Documentary on the Neoconservative War Party

Richard Perle – Defining Neoconservatism Q&A 1/6

Richard Perle – Defining Neoconservatism Q&A 2/6

Richard Perle – Defining Neoconservatism Q&A 3/6

Richard Perle – Defining Neoconservatism Q&A 4/6

Richard Perle – Defining Neoconservatism Q&A 5/6

Richard Perle – Defining Neoconservatism Q&A 6/6

‘They knew they were right’ A Critique of Neoconservatism 2/5

‘They knew they were right’ A Critique of Neoconservatism 3/5

‘They knew they were right’ A Critique of Neoconservatism 4/5

‘They knew they were right’ A Critique of Neoconservatism 5/5

 

 

 

Congressman Ron Paul, MD – We’ve Been NeoConned

Betrayal of the Constitution: The Neocons Now Run the GOP | John F. McManus

 

John McCain: NeoCon and his NeoCon advisor

 

Roundtable: As Crimea Threatens Secession, Does East-West Split Hasten Ukraine’s Polit. Divide? 1/2

Roundtable: As Crimea Threatens Secession, Does East-West Split Hasten Ukraine’s Polit. Divide? 2/2

 

Who Is Provoking the Unrest in Ukraine? A Debate on Role of Russia, U.S. in Regional Crisis (1/2)

 

Who Is Provoking the Unrest in Ukraine? A Debate on Role of Russia, U.S. in Regional Crisis (2/2)

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Senator Rand Paul Wins CPAC Poll for Second Year In A Row — Republican Candidate for President in 2016 — We Are The Champions — I Stand With Rand — Videos

Posted on March 9, 2014. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Computers, Constitution, Crime, Culture, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Faith, Family, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Food, Foreign Policy, Freedom, Friends, government, government spending, Health Care, Heroes, history, History of Economic Thought, Illegal, Immigration, IRS, Language, Law, Legal, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Macroeconomics, Math, media, Monetary Policy, Money, Natural Gas, Natural Gas, Nuclear Power, Obamacare, Oil, Oil, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Press, Public Sector, Radio, Raves, Regulations, Resources, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

stand_with_rand

why_I_stand_with_rand

CPAC2014-Straw-Poll

Rand Paul

cpac-conservatives

rand-paul-cpac-2013-a_s640x427

stand-with-rand-constitution-restrain-government

RandPaul_family

Senator Paul Extends Lead Fro 2013 Win Over Rubio

cpac straw poll_2013

Rand Paul wins CPAC 2014 Presidential Straw Poll C-SPAN

Rand Paul wins CPAC 2014 Presidential Straw Poll C-SPAN

Rand Paul Previews His CPAC 2014 Speech

Rand Paul CPAC 2014 Speech (FULL) – Let Us All Stand Together in Liberty!

Rand Paul’s CPAC 2013 Speech – 3/14/2013

The BEST foreign policy speech EVER! – Libertarian Senator Rand Paul

Senator Rand Paul

Best 7 minutes of Ronald Reagan at CPAC

President Reagan’s Remarks at the Conservative Political Action Conference – Feb. 26 , 1982

time_cover_rand_paul

stand_with_rand

keep_calm_stand_with_rand

Champions are made from something they have deep inside of them a desire, a dream, a vison.

~ Mahatma Gandhi

Queen - We Are The Champions (HQ) (Live At Wembley 86)

Queen- live at Wembley Stadium 12-07-1986 Saturday (25th Anniversary Edition)

sign_up_stand_with_rand

cap_ISWR

stand_with_rand_2016_button

shirt_stand_with_rand

Rand Paul wins 2014 CPAC straw poll, Ted Cruz finishes a distant second

Rubio and Ryan, GOP leaders in Congress all see big drops in support

Sen. Rand Paul demolished his competition in the 2014 Washington Times/CPAC presidential preference straw poll on Saturday, winning 31 percent of the vote — nearly three times the total of second-place Sen. Ted Cruz.

The poll also found a strong plurality of attendees at the Conservative Political Action Conference believe marijuana should be fully legalized, with 41 percent saying it’s time to change the law and tax it. Another 21 percent said it should be legalized only for medicinal purposes, while just 31 percent said it should remain illegal in all cases.


SEE ALSO: CPAC 2014 straw poll results


In the presidential poll, Mr. Cruz’s 11 percent was a big improvement for the freshman senator, who won just 4 percent in last year’s straw poll. Neurosurgeon Ben Carson was third with 9 percent and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie was fourth with 8 percent in results that signal growing discontent with the GOP establishment in Washington.

Indeed, CPAC voters now have an unfavorable view of Republicans in Congress, with 51 percent saying they disapprove of the job the GOP is doing on Capitol Hill. Just last year the GOP had a 54 percent approval rating, and in 2012 they held a 70 percent approval rating.

But a series of tough votes over the last few months that saw Republican leaders work with President Obama to boost spending and raised the government’s debt limit have deepened a rift between the GOP’s leadership on Capitol Hill and conservative activists around the country.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, speaks at the Conservative Political Action Committee annual conference in National Harbor, Md., Thursday, March 6, 2014. Thursday marks the first day of the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, which brings together prospective presidential candidates, conservative opinion leaders and tea party activists from coast to coast. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)Enlarge PhotoSen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, speaks at the Conservative Political Action Committee annual … more >

That could be one reason why Rep. Paul Ryan, the Wisconsin Republican who wrote December’s budget deal that boosted spending in 2014 and 2015, saw his standing with CPAC voters cut in half — from 6 percent support in last year’s presidential straw poll to just 3 percent this year.

Sen. Marco Rubio suffered an even bigger drop, falling from 23 percent and second place in 2013 to seventh place, with 6 percent, this year.

“I like Ted Cruz, I like Rand Paul, I like Mike Lee. I like Rubio, but less now than I did a year ago because of immigration,” said David Fitzwilliam, 83.


SEE ALSO: Rand Paul urges conservatives to fight with him for liberty


For Mr. Paul, the victory is his second in a row, and he saw his support climb from 25 percent last year to 31 percent this year.

“He is the only true liberty candidate who focuses on civil liberties more than anybody else,” said Al Seltzinger, 36, from Baltimore. “I think the way the nation is going today with the government and the president going against the Constitution that we need someone who holds strict to the Constitution and whose voting record is pretty solid when it comes to the Constitution.”

Mr. Cruz also jumped from just 4 percent last year — when he was a newly sworn-in senator — to his 11 percent this year.

Mr. Carson, who gained prominence with a 27-minute speech challenging Mr. Obama when the two appeared at the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast, is also on the rise. In last year’s straw poll, taken just after that speech, he garnered 4 percent of the vote, but jumped to 9 percent this year.

“I love Ted Cruz, I love Rand Paul, but Ben Carson is all of the above,” said Jean Carlton, a 71-year-old CPAC attendee who said the doctor’s lack of Washington experience was a big plus.

For his part Mr. Christie, who has faced political troubles back home in New Jersey after his staffers caused a traffic jam on the George Washington Bridge to punish a town mayor, seems to be holding steady among activists. He rose from 7 percent last year to 8 percent support this year.

In his speech to the conference on Thursday, Mr. Christie argued that the GOP needs to not only pick a conservative champion, but pick a candidate who can get elected.

“We can’t govern if we can’t win,” he said.

That resonated with some CPAC straw poll voters.

“I think he has the best chance in the general election. I am less optimistic about his chances in the primary, but he seems to be more palatable to Independents and Democrats. I think electability is the main concern,” said Matthew Smith, a 19-year-old student at Yale University.

This year’s straw poll listed 25 potential candidates, which is far more than usual. The high number signals just how wide open the GOP’s presidential contest is with two years to go before the first caucuses and primaries.

On the Democratic side, meanwhile, former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton easily leads the rest of her party’s field in national and state polling.

Previous versions of The Washington Times/CPAC poll showed that the audience that gathers in Washington leans younger and more libertarian than the conservative movement throughout the country, which likely gives Mr. Paul a boost with this crowd here.

Indeed, his father, then-Rep. Ron Paul, won the straw poll twice on a similar libertarian-minded message, though he struggled to translate that support into votes when it came to primaries and caucuses.

The straw poll was conducted between Thursday and Saturday afternoon, and 2,459 votes were cast.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/8/rand-paul-wins-2014-cpac-straw-poll-ted-cruz-finis/

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

We Will Rock You — Rand Rocks Republican Boat At CPAC and Ted Tells The Truth — Lovers of Liberty Unite — We Are The Champions — Videos

Posted on March 8, 2014. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, College, Culture, Education, Employment, Energy, Freedom, Friends, government spending, Heroes, history, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Music, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Raves, Talk Radio, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Queen – We Will Rock You

Hues Corporation – Rock the Boat

Conservatives Gather For CPAC – Special Report All Star

Rand Paul full speech at CPAC 2014

Sen. Ted Cruz at CPAC: How We Win

Queen – We Are The Champions

Rand Paul urges conservatives to fight with him for liberty

Sen. Rand Paul urged the thousands that turned out for the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) to imagine electing a “friend of liberty” to the White House who will defend the Constitution and push back against a federal government that is trampling over their individual rights.

Mr. Paul, a likely 2016 presidential contender, suggested that he might fit the bill, and said it will take a “national revival of liberty” to restore the constitutional rights that have have been under assault by the Obama administration.


SEE ALSO: CPAC 2013: Paul takes ‘stale’ GOP to task


“You may think I am talking about electing a Republican. I am not,” Mr. Paul said. “I am talking about electing lovers of liberty. It isn’t good enough to pick the lesser of two evils. We must elect men and women of principle, and conviction and action that will lead us back to greatness.”

The remarks sparked a round of applause from libertarian-leaning crowd, which is champing at the bit for Mr. Paul to follow in the footsteps of his father, former Texas Rep. Ron Paul, by running for the White House.

“There is a great battle going on,” Mr. Paul told the crowd. “It is for the heart and soul of America. The Fourth Amendment is equally important as the Second Amendment and conservatives cannot forget this.”

The roughly 20-minute address touched on some of the same themes that the Kentucky Republican raised in his 2013 CPAC speech, when he said the “GOP of old has grown stale and moss-covered.”

Mr. Paul raised his national profile almost exactly a year ago when he led a filibuster against the nomination of John O. Brennan as CIA director, threatening to block the confirmation until the Obama administration clarified that it will not use drones to kill Americans on U.S. soil.

More recently, he filed a class-action lawsuit to halt the National Security Agency’s phone records collection program.


SPECIAL COVERAGE: CPAC 2014 – Latest news from the Conservative Political Action Conference


“Mr. President, we will not let you run roughshod over our rights,” Mr. Paul said Friday. “We will challenge you in the courts, we will battle you at the ballot box. Mr. President, we will not let you shred our Constitution.

“It is decidedly not a time for the faint of heart,” he said. “It is a time for boldness and action. The time is now. Stand with me, let us stand together for liberty.”

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/7/rand-paul-urges-conservatives-fight-liberty/#ixzz2vOnLNA8m
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Diplomatic Agreement — The Budapest Memorandum — Will It Lead To US War With Russia Over Ukraine or More Obama Appeasement? — Videos

Posted on March 7, 2014. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Constitution, Crime, Economics, Energy, European History, Faith, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Freedom, Friends, Genocide, government, government spending, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, media, Natural Gas, Natural Gas, Nuclear Power, Oil, Oil, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Psychology, Rants, Raves, Resources, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Technology, Terrorism, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 223: March 6, 2014 Will be posted by Friday noon.

Pronk Pops Show 222: March 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 221: February 28, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 220: February 27, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 219: February 26, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 218: February 25, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 217: February 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 216: February 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 215: February 20, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 214: February 19, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 213: February 18, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 212: February 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 211: February 14, 2014 

Pronk Pops Show 210: February 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 209: February 12, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 208: February 11, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 207: February 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 206: February 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 205: February 5, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 204: February 4, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 203: February 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 202: January 31, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 201: January 30, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 200: January 29, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 199: January 28, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 198: January 27, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 197: January 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 196: January 22, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 195: January 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 194: January 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 193: January 16, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 192: January 14, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 191: January 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 190: January 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 189: January 9, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 188: January 8, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 187: January 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 186: January 6, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 185: January 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 184: December 19, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 183: December 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 182: December 16, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 181: December 13, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 180: December 12, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 179: December 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 178: December 5, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 177: December 2, 2013

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 222-223 

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or DownloadShow 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Story 3: Diplomatic Agreement — The Budapest Memorandum — Will It Lead To US War With Russia Over Ukraine or More Obama Appeasement? — Videos

Donald Rumsfeld on Russia, Ukraine, Obama !

Russian Roulette: The Invasion of Ukraine (Dispatch Two)

Russian Roulette: The Invasion of Ukraine (Dispatch One)

Russia fires first shots of Crimea invasion – Ukraine update – Truthloader

The Alex Jones Show(VIDEO Commercial Free) Sunday March 2 2014: Ukraine Mobilizes For War

Headlines: Hillary Clinton compares Russia’s actions in Ukraine to Nazi Germany

Obama: ‘Russia on the Wrong Side of History’

WW3 UPDATE: Ukrainian FORCES MOBILISING As RUSSIA Approves MILITARY ACTION In Ukraine

Russia Expands Its Natural Gas Infrastructure (Agenda)

Videographic: Sidestepping Russia’s gas monopoly

Ukrainian Protests and Russian Influence (Dispatch)

Crimea in the middlegaspipelines

Story 3: Diplomatic Agreement — The Budapest Memorandum — Will It Lead To US War With Russia Over Ukraine or More Obama Appeasement? — Videos

On 1 March 2014, the White House released a press release stating that Russia had breached its obligations to Ukraine under the Budapest Memorandum:

President Obama expressed his deep concern over Russia’s clear violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity, which is a breach of international law, including Russia’s obligations under the UN Charter, and of its 1997 military basing agreement with Ukraine, and which is inconsistent with the 1994 Budapest Memorandum and the Helsinki Final Act. The United States condemns Russia’s military intervention into Ukrainian territory.

—Office of the Press Secretary

Budapest Memorandums on Security Assurances, 1994

Published December 5, 1994

The Presidents of Ukraine, Russian Federation and United States of America, and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom signed three memorandums (UN Document A/49/765) on December 5, 1994, with the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Through this agreement, these countries (later to include China and France in individual statements) gave national security assurances to Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine. The Joint Declaration by the Russian Federation and the United States of America of December 4, 2009 confirmed their commitment.

Excerpt:

“Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as a non-nuclear-weapon State,

Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time,

Noting the changes in the world-wide security situation, including the end of the cold war, which have brought about conditions for deep reductions in nuclear forces,

Confirm the following:

1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine;

2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or

political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations;

3. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind;

4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear

weapons are used;

5. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm, in the case of Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclearweapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons,

except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a State in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon State;

6. Ukraine, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America will consult in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning these commitments.

This Memorandum will become applicable upon signature.

Signed in four copies having equal validity in the Ukrainian, English and Russian languages.

For Ukraine:

(Signed) Leonid D. KUCHMA

For the Russian Federation:

(Signed) Boris N. YELTSIN

For the United Kingdom of Great

Britain and Northern Ireland:

(Signed) John MAJOR

For the United States of America:

(Signed) William J. CLINTON

U.S./U.K./Ukraine Press Statement on the Budapest Memorandum Meeting

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
March 5, 2014

On 5 March 2014, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry hosted a meeting in Paris with the Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom, William Hague, and the Acting Foreign Minister of Ukraine, Andriy Deshchytsia.

The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the urgent question of the Budapest Memorandum, the agreement signed by the Governments of the United States of America, the United Kingdom and Russia in 1994. The United States had conveyed an invitation to the Russian Federation to the meeting. We deeply regret that the Russian Federation declined to attend.

The Budapest Memorandum sets out the obligations of signatories in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons. Under its terms, the three parties commit to refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine’s territorial integrity. The Memorandum also obliges the UK, US and Russia to consult in the event of a situation arising where the memorandum commitments are questioned.

Ukraine voluntarily surrendered the world’s third largest nuclear weapons arsenal in exchange for these assurances. The three Governments treat these assurances with utmost seriousness, and expect Russia to as well. Russia has chosen to act unilaterally and militarily. The United Kingdom and United States will continue to support Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and we commend the new Ukrainian government for not taking actions that might escalate the situation. Russia’s continued violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity can only degrade Russia’s international standing and lead to greater political and economic consequences.

In the meeting, the Governments of the United States, United Kingdom and Ukraine discussed steps needed to restore Ukraine’s territorial integrity and called on Russia to engage in consultations with Ukraine as they have committed to in the Budapest memorandum.

The United States, United Kingdom and Ukraine agreed that direct talks between Ukraine and Russia, facilitated as needed by members of the international community, are crucial to resolving the current situation. They also agreed that international observers should be deployed immediately in Ukraine, especially in eastern Ukraine and Crimea. The three governments reaffirmed the importance of protecting the rights of all Ukrainian citizens, and believed that international observers would help address any concerns regarding irregular forces, military activity and the treatment of all Ukrainians irrespective of their ethnicity or spoken language.

 http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/03/222949.htm

The Budapest Memorandum and Crimea

With tensions rising in Crimea and pro-Russian forces controlling the peninsula’s main airports, Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk has called on Russia to “not violate the Budapest Memorandum.” So what is the “Budapest Memorandum” and what does it have to do with Crimea?

What exactly is the “Budapest Memorandum”?

The “Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances” is a diplomatic memorandum that was signed in December 1994 by Ukraine, Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom.

It is not a formal treaty, but rather, a diplomatic document under which signatories made promises to each other as part of the denuclearization of former Soviet republics after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Under the memorandum, Ukraine promised to remove all Soviet-era nuclear weapons from its territory, send them to disarmament facilities in Russia, and sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Ukraine kept these promises.

In return, Russia and the Western signatory countries essentially consecrated the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine as an independent state. They did so by applying the principles of territorial integrity and nonintervention in 1975 Helsinki Final Act — a Cold War-era treaty signed by 35 states including the Soviet Union — to an independent post-Soviet Ukraine.

Which principles in the Helsinki Final Act, reiterated in the “Budapest Memorandum,” are relevant to the current situation in the Crimea?

In the “Budapest Memorandum,” Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States promised that none of them would ever threaten or use force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine. They also pledged that none of them would ever use economic coercion to subordinate Ukraine to their own interest.

They specifically pledged they would refrain from making each other’s territory the object of military occupation or engage in other uses of force in violation of international law.

All sides agreed that no such occupation or acquisition will be recognized as legal and that the signatories would “consult in the event a situation arises which raises a question concerning these commitments.”

Is there anything legally binding about the “Budapest Memorandum” regarding Russia’s obligations to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity?

“That’s actually a much more complex question than it may sound. It is binding in international law, but that doesn’t mean it has any means of enforcement,” says Barry Kellman, a professor of law and director of the International Weapons Control Center at DePaul University’s College of Law.

“The ‘Budapest Memorandum’ follows the Helsinki Final Act and essentially reiterates its provisions. There are confidence building measures and then a host of other broader obligations – primarily negative obligations. Don’t interfere.”

Kellman concludes that there are a host of other sources of international law that oblige Russia to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity — including the provisions of the CSCE treaty and the UN Charter.

http://www.voanews.com/content/the-budapest-memorandum-and-crimea/1862439.html

: The forgotten treaty which could drag the US and UK into WAR with Russia if Putin’s troops intervene in Ukraine

  • The agreement sees signatories promise to protect Ukraine’s borders
  • It was signed by Bill Clinton, John Major, Boris Yeltsin and Leonid Kuchma in 1994
  • Ukrainian parliament has now reached out directly to all the countries who signed the treaty
  • Putin currently has 150,000 troops on Ukraine’s borders and it is reported some have crossed into the country
  • President Obama says he is ‘deeply concerned’ by the news
  • The US and Britain have both made ‘crisis calls’ to President Putin to warn him to respect territorial boundaries

By JILL REILLY and LIZZIE EDMONDS

A treaty signed in 1994 by the US and Britain could pull both countries into a war to protect Ukraine if President Putin’s troops cross into the country.

Bill Clinton, John Major, Boris Yeltsin and Leonid Kuchma – the then-rulers of the USA, UK, Russia and Ukraine – agreed to the The Budapest Memorandum as part of the denuclearization of former Soviet republics after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Technically it means that if Russia has invaded Ukraine then it would be difficult for the US and Britain to avoid going to war.

The revelation comes as reports suggest the Kremlin was moving up to 2,000 troops across the Black Sea from Novorossiysk to their fleet base at Sevastopol.

At least 20 men wearing the uniform of the Russian fleet and carrying automatic rifles surrounded a Ukrainian border guard post in a standoff near the port yesterday.

Last night it was still unclear the exact scale of Russian boots on the ground in Crimea or the identity of gunmen who have taken over airports in Simferopol and Sevastopol – though reports suggest they are Russian marines or Moscow- controlled militias.

The action came as President Obama delivered blunt warnings to Moscow.

‘We are now deeply concerned by reports of military movements taken by the Russian Federation inside of Ukraine,’ he told reporters at the White House.

‘Any violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity would be deeply destabilizing,’ he said in a brief appearance.

‘The United States will stand with the international community in affirming that there will be costs for any military intervention in Ukraine.’

U.S. officials also said the President could scrap plans to attend an international summit in Russia and take negotiations on deepening trade ties with the country off the table in response to Russian involvement in the Ukraine.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel added: “This could be a very dangerous situation if this continues in a provocative way.”

Asked about options in a CBS News interview, he said that “We’re trying to deal with a diplomatic focus, that’s the appropriate, responsible approach.”

Both the U.S. and the UK are advising against all non-essential trips to Ukraine – especially Crimea.

former British Ambassador to Moscow Sir Tony Brenton, who served as British Ambassador from 2004 to 2008, said in an interview that war could be an option 'if we do conclude the [Budapest] Memorandum is legally binding.'

former British Ambassador to Moscow Sir Tony Brenton, who served as British Ambassador from 2004 to 2008, said in an interview that war could be an option ‘if we do conclude the [Budapest] Memorandum is legally binding.’

NATO also asked Russia not to take action that could escalate tension. However Moscow responded by telling the organization to ‘refrain’ from provocative statements on Ukraine and respect its ‘non-bloc’ status.

Sir Tony Brenton, who served as British Ambassador from 2004 to 2008, said that war could be an option ‘if we do conclude the [Budapest] Memorandum is legally binding.’

It promises to protect Ukraine’s borders, in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons.

Kiev has demanded the agreement is activated after insisting their borders had been violated.

In response Mr Brenton said in a BBC radio interview: ‘If indeed this is a Russian invasion of Crimea and if we do conclude the [Budapest] Memorandum is legally binding then it’s very difficult to avoid the conclusion that we’re going to go to war with Russia’.

Ukraine accused Russia of a ‘military invasion and occupation’, saying Russian troops have taken up positions around a coast guard base and two airports on its strategic Crimea peninsula.

Russia kept silent on the accusations, as the crisis deepened between two of Europe’s largest countries.

Any Russian military incursion in Crimea would dramatically raise the stakes in Ukraine’s conflict, which saw pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych flee last weekend after three months of anti-government protests. Yanukovych vowed Friday at a news conference in Russia to ‘keep fighting for the future of Ukraine,’ though he called any military action ‘unacceptable.’

Moscow has vowed to protect Russian-speaking Ukrainians in Crimea, where it has a major naval base, and Ukraine and the West have warned Russia to stay away.

Russia did not confirm its troops were involved in Friday’s action in Crimea, which would be a major escalation.

In Kiev, Ukraine’s parliament adopted a resolution demanding that Russia halt steps it says are aimed against Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and called for a U.N. Security Council meeting on the crisis.

THE BUDAPEST REFERENDUM

Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances was a international treaty signed on February, 5, 1994, in Budapest.

The diplomatic document saw signatories make promises to each other as part of the denuclearization of former Soviet republics after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

It was signed by Bill Clinton, John Major, Boris Yeltsin and Leonid Kuchma – the then-rulers of the USA, UK, Russia and Ukraine.

The agreement promises to protest Ukraine’s borders in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons.

It is not a formal treaty, but rather, a diplomatic document.

It was an unprecedented case in contemporary international life and international law.

Whether is it legally binding in complex.

‘It is binding in international law, but that doesn’t mean it has any means of enforcement,’ says Barry Kellman is a professor of law and director of the International Weapons Control Center at DePaul University’s College of Law told Radio Free Europe.

‘I can only describe this as a military invasion and occupation,’ Ukraine’s newly named interior minister, Arsen Avakov, wrote in a Facebook post.

The chief of Ukraine’s security council, Andriy Parubiy, seemed to strike a less strident tone later in the day, saying gunmen had tried to ‘seize’ the airports in the Crimean cities of Simferopol and Sevastopol but insisting in comments to the Interfax news agency that ‘de-facto the airports are controlled by the law enforcement bodies of Ukraine.’

Ukraine’s State Border Guard Service also said about 30 Russian marines from Russia’s Black Sea Fleet – which is based in Sevastopol – had taken up position outside the Ukrainian Coast Guard base in the area. It said the marines said they were there to prevent any weapons at the base from being seized by extremists.

Russia’s defense ministry had no comment.

Yanukovych made his first public appearance since fleeing Ukraine in the southern Russian city of Rostov-on-Don, not far from the Ukrainian border. It was the first confirmation that he had left the country, and he said he was ‘forced’ to do so only after his family received threats.

‘I intend to keep fighting for the future of Ukraine,’ he said.

Yanukovych said he supports Crimea’s residents who are worried about ‘nationalists’ in Kiev and added that Russia cannot stand by while events in Ukraine unfold. He denied, however, that this amounts to a call for military intervention.

‘Any military action in this situation is unacceptable,’ he said. 

Tensions rising: A Russian soldier on an armoured personnel carrier halted on a road in Ukraine around 20 miles from Sebastapol, where there is a large Russian military presence

+11

Tensions rising: A Russian soldier on an armoured personnel carrier halted on a road in Ukraine around 20 miles from Sebastapol, where there is a large Russian military presence

The prosecutor-general’s office in Kiev said it would seek Yanukovych’s extradition to Ukraine, where he is wanted on suspicion of mass murder in last week’s violent clashes between protesters and police, during which over 80 people were killed.

At the airport serving Simferopol, commercial flights were landing and taking off despite dozens of armed men in military uniforms without markings patrolling with assault rifles. They didn’t stop or search people leaving or entering the airport, and refused to talk to journalists.

One man who identified himself only as Vladimir said the men were part of the Crimean People’s Brigade, which he described as a self-defense unit ensuring that no ‘radicals and fascists’ arrive from other parts of Ukraine. There was no way to verify his account.

The airport deployments came a day after masked gunmen with rocket-propelled grenades and sniper rifles seized the parliament and government offices in Simferopol and raised the Russian flag. Ukrainian police cordoned off the area but didn’t confront the gunmen. They remained in control of the buildings Friday.

The Russian foreign and defense ministries had no comment. Russia’s state RIA Novosti and Interfax cited an unnamed official from the Russian Black Sea Fleet denying involvement, saying Russian servicemen stationed in Crimea have not moved into the airports and denying that the Russian military was in control there.

Tensions between the two countries were high, however. Russia continued with massive combat readiness exercises involving most of its troops in western and southern Russia that it said were unrelated to the Ukraine conflict. The moves were reminiscent of Cold War brinksmanship.

Russian military forces are blockading an airport in the Black Sea port of Sevastopol in Crimea, an act Ukraine's new interior minister has announced branded an 'armed invasion'

+11

Russian military forces are blockading an airport in the Black Sea port of Sevastopol in Crimea, an act Ukraine’s new interior minister has announced branded an ‘armed invasion’

As events in the Crimea region heighten tensions with neighboring Russia, this morning armed men also took over the other main Crimean airport, Simferopol, according to a Facebook post by Mr Avakov

+11

As events in the Crimea region heighten tensions with neighboring Russia, this morning armed men also took over the other main Crimean airport, Simferopol, according to a Facebook post by Mr Avakov

Dozens of armed men in military uniforms without markings were seen patrolling the airport in Simferopol, the capital of Crimea

+11

Dozens of armed men in military uniforms without markings were seen patrolling the airport in Simferopol, the capital of Crimea

The move came as U.S. Vice President Joe Biden told Ukraine's new prime minister that the U.S. welcomes the formation of the country's new government

+11

The move came as U.S. Vice President Joe Biden told Ukraine’s new prime minister that the U.S. welcomes the formation of the country’s new government

The Kremlin, in a statement published late Thursday, said President Vladimir Putin had instructed the government to ‘maintain contacts with the counterparts in Kiev in what concerns trade and economic ties between Russia and Ukraine.’

Moscow has been sending mixed signals about Ukraine but pledged to respect its territorial integrity. Putin has long dreamed of pulling Ukraine, a country of 46 million people considered the cradle of Russian civilization, closer into Moscow’s orbit.

Meanwhile, Swiss prosecutors announced they had launched a criminal investigation against Yanukovych and his son Aleksander over ‘aggravated money laundering.’

They said police and Geneva’s chief prosecutor conducted a search and seized documents Thursday at the premises of a company owned by Aleksander Yanukovych.

Ukraine's ex-President Yanukovych has made his first public appearance since being ousted, telling a news conference that he was going to fight for his country's future

+11

Ukraine’s ex-President Yanukovych has made his first public appearance since being ousted, telling a news conference that he was going to fight for his country’s future

Switzerland and Austria both said they would freeze any assets Yanukovych and his entourage might have in those countries.

Ukraine’s population is divided in loyalties between Russia and the West, with much of western Ukraine advocating closer ties with the European Union while eastern and southern regions look to Russia for support.

Crimea, a southeastern peninsula of Ukraine that has semi-autonomous status, was seized by Russian forces in the 18th century under Catherine the Great, and was once the crown jewel in Russian and then Soviet empires.

It became part of Ukraine in 1954 when Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev transferred jurisdiction from Russia, a move that was a mere formality until the 1991 Soviet collapse meant Crimea landed in an independent Ukraine.

In a bid to shore up Ukraine’s fledgling administration, the International Monetary Fund has said it is ‘ready to respond’ to Ukraine’s bid for financial assistance; Ukraine’s finance ministry has said it needs $35 billion over the next two years to avoid default.

The European Union is also considering emergency loans for a country that is the chief conduit of Russian natural gas to western Europe.

And Putin, in his statement, asked his government to ‘hold consultations with foreign partners including the IMF and the G8 nations to provide financial aid to Ukraine.’

Associated Press journalists approaching the Sevastopol airport found the road leading up to it blocked by two military trucks and a handful of gunmen wearing camouflage uniforms and carrying assault rifles.

A car with Russian military plates was stopped at the roadblock. A man wearing a military uniform with a Russian flag on his sleeve got out of the car and was allowed to enter on foot after a brief discussion with the gunmen.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2570335/Former-British-Ambassador-Moscow-warns-Russia-invaded-Ukraine-difficult-avoid-going-war.html

Fact Check: Could a Little-Known International Agreement With Ukraine Force U.S., Britain Into War With Russia?

The United States and Britain “reaffirmed” their commitment to protect Ukraine’s borders in exchange for the nation giving up its nuclear weapons in a little-known agreement known as the “Budapest Memorandum signed by former President Bill Clinton in 1994.

The Daily Mail notes reports “if Russia has invaded Ukraine then it would be difficult for the US and Britain to avoid going to war.”

Sir Tony Brenton, who served as a British ambassador from 2004 to 2008, said war is certainly on the table if it’s determined that the Budapest Memorandum is “legally binding.”

According to the Daily Mail, Kiev has asked that the agreement be honored as it claims its borders have been violated.

“If indeed this is a Russian invasion of Crimea and if we do conclude the [Budapest] Memorandum is legally binding then it’s very difficult to avoid the conclusion that we’re going to go to war with Russia,” Brenton told BBC radio.

Ukraine has accused Russia of a “military invasion,” though details are still coming in.

The unsettling news comes after President Barack Obama warned Russia about military action in Ukraine on Friday.

But a closer look at the Budapest Memorandum shows the specifics might be more complex than some are assuming. Article one of the agreement states:

The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine … to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.

Reaffirming a “commitment” to Ukraine’s borders and being legally required to go to war are two very different ideas.

There will surely be much debate over whether the Budapest Memorandum is a legally binding agreement requiring action. The U.S. going to war with Russia is likely a last resort for the Obama administration.

According to rferl.org, the Budapest Memorandum is a diplomatic memorandum, not an official treaty.

Barry Kellman, a professor of law and director of the International Weapons Control Center at DePaul University’s College of Law, told the website that the answers to questions about whether the agreement is binding are “complex.”

“That’s actually a much more complex question than it may sound. It is binding in international law, but that doesn’t mean it has any means of enforcement,” he said.

“The ‘Budapest Memorandum’ follows the Helsinki Final Act and essentially reiterates its provisions. There are confidence building measures and then a host of other broader obligations – primarily negative obligations. Don’t interfere,” the professor added.

Armed men described as Russian troops took control of key airports in Crimea on Friday and Russian transport planes flew into the strategic region, Ukrainian officials said, an ominous sign of the Kremlin’s iron hand in Ukraine. President Barack Obama bluntly warned Moscow “there will be costs” if it intervenes militarily.

The sudden arrival of men in military uniforms patrolling key strategic facilities prompted Ukraine to accuse Russia of a “military invasion and occupation” – a claim that brought an alarming new dimension to the crisis.

Unidentified armed men patrol outside of Simferopol airport, on February 28, 2014. Ukraine accused today Russia of staging an 'armed invasion' of Crimea and appealed to the West to guarantee its territorial integrity after pro-Moscow gunmen took control of the peninsula's main airport. (Source: AFP PHOTO / VIKTOR DRACHEV VIKTOR DRACHEV/AFP/Getty Images)

Unidentified armed men patrol outside of Simferopol airport, on February 28, 2014. Ukraine accused today Russia of staging an ‘armed invasion’ of Crimea and appealed to the West to guarantee its territorial integrity after pro-Moscow gunmen took control of the peninsula’s main airport. (Source: AFP PHOTO / VIKTOR DRACHEV VIKTOR DRACHEV/AFP/Getty Images)

Obama urged Russia to respect the independence and territory of Ukraine and not try to take advantage of its neighbor, which is undergoing political upheaval.

“Any violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity would be deeply destabilizing,” Obama said.

“Just days after the world came to Russia for the Olympic Games, that would invite the condemnation of nations around the world,” he continued. “The United States will stand with the international community in affirming that there will be costs for any military intervention in Ukraine.”

He did not say what those costs might be.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/28/fact-check-could-a-little-known-international-agreement-force-u-s-britain-into-war-with-russia/#

Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances

The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances is an international treaty signed on 5 December 1994, providing security assurances by its signatories relating to Ukraine‘s accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The Memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear-powers, the Russian Federation, the United States of America, and the United Kingdom. China and France later gave individual statements of assurance as well.[1][clarification needed]

The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine as well as those of Belarus and Kazakhstan. As a result Ukraine gave up the world’s third largest nuclear weapons stockpile between 1994 and 1996.[2][3]

Following the 2014 Crimean crisis, the US stated that Russian involvement is in breach of its obligations to Ukraine under the Budapest Memorandum, and in clear violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity.[4][5]


According to the memorandum, Russia, the US, and the UK confirmed, in recognition of Ukraine becoming party to the 
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and in effect abandoning its nuclear arsenal to Russia, that they would:

  1. Respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty within its existing borders.
  2. Refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine.
  3. Refrain from using economic pressure on Ukraine in order to influence its politics.
  4. Seek United Nations Security Council action if nuclear weapons are used against Ukraine.
  5. Refrain from the use of nuclear arms against Ukraine.
  6. Consult with one another if questions arise regarding these commitments.[6]

Analyse

Under the treaty, the signatories offered Ukraine “security assurances” in exchange for its adhesion to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The memorandum bundled together a set of assurances that Ukraine already held from the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) Final Act, United Nations Charter and Non-Proliferation Treaty. The Ukrainian government nevertheless found it politically valuable to have these assurances in a Ukraine-specific document. [7] [8]

The Budapest Memorandum was negotiated as a political agreement. It refers to assurances, not defined, but less than a military guarantee of intervention. According to Stephen MacFarlane, a professor of international relations “It gives signatories justification if they take action, but it does not force anyone to act in Ukraine.”[7][8]

Issues

Tuzla Island crisis

Main article: Tuzla Island

Ukraine gave up the world’s third largest nuclear weapons stockpile between 1994 and 1996 in return for “security assurances” from five nuclear powers, including Russia who was seen by Ukraine as the main threat to its territorial integrity.[2] In 2003, Russian construction efforts were seen as an attempt to annex Tuzla Island off the Crimean coast of Ukraine.[2] The Russian threat to Tuzla led to the Ukrainian leadership appealing to NATO for consultations on security, as outlined in the 1997 NATO-Ukraine Charter, without result.[2] The dispute led to negotiations over delimitation of the maritime borders. In a 2012 preliminary agreement, Ukraine and Russia agreed that Tuzla Island would be considered Ukraine’s territory.[9][needs update]

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry speaks with British Foreign Secretary William Hague and Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Deshchytsia after hosting the Budapest Memorandum Ministerial on the Ukraine crisis in Paris, France, on March 5, 2014.

2014 Crimean crisis

Main article: 2014 Crimean crisis

In February 2014, unidentified troops seized or blockaded various airports, as well as other strategic sites throughout Crimea.[10] Official Ukrainian sources have said that the troops are Russian, attached to the Russian Black Sea Fleet stationed in Crimea,[11] likely placing Russia in violation of the Budapest Memorandum. The Russian Foreign Ministry has confirmed the movement of armoured units attached to the Black Sea Fleet in Crimea, but asserts that they are acting within the scope of the various agreements between the two countries. Other official Russian sources deny that the units in the area of Sevastopol International Airport, specifically, are attached to the Black Sea Fleet.[12]

On 1 March 2014, the White House released a press release stating that Russia had breached its obligations to Ukraine under the Budapest Memorandum:

President Obama expressed his deep concern over Russia’s clear violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity, which is a breach of international law, including Russia’s obligations under the UN Charter, and of its 1997 military basing agreement with Ukraine, and which is inconsistent with the 1994 Budapest Memorandum and the Helsinki Final Act. The United States condemns Russia’s military intervention into Ukrainian territory.

—Office of the Press Secretary[4]

[5]

In response to the crisis, the Ukrainian parliament has requested that the Memorandum’s signatories reaffirm their commitment to the principles enshrined in the treaty, and further asked that they hold consultations with Ukraine to ease tensions.[13]

See also

References

  1. Jump up^ “Budapest Memorandums on Security Assurances, 1994″. Council on Foreign Relations. December 5, 1994. Retrieved 2014-03-02.
  2. Jump up to:a b c d The Crimea:Europe’s Next Flashpoint, By Taras Kuzio, November 2010
  3. Jump up^ [1]
  4. Jump up to:a b Office of the Press Secretary. “Readout of President Obama’s Call with President Putin”. whitehouse.gov.
  5. Jump up to:a b Washington Post Editorial Board. “Condemnation isn’t enough for Russian actions in Crimea”. Washington Post.
  6. Jump up^ Memorandum on Security Assurances [2]
  7. Jump up to:a b Are the US and the UK bound to intervene in Ukraine?france24, 03-03-2014
  8. Jump up to:a b Ukraine crisis’ impact on nuclear weapons, 4-March-2014
  9. Jump up^ http://en.ria.ru/russia/20120713/174576071.html
  10. Jump up^ Higgins, Andrew; Reevell, Patrick (28 February 2014). “Armed, masked men appear at airports in Crimea”The Boston Globe. Retrieved 1 March 2014.
  11. Jump up^ Booth, William; DeYoung, Karen (28 February 2014). “Reports of Russian military activity in Crimea prompts stern warning from Obama”The Washington Post. Retrieved 1 March 2014.
  12. Jump up^ “Movement of Russian armored vehicles in Crimea fully complies with agreements – Foreign Ministry”. RT. 28 February 2014. Retrieved 1 March 2014.
  13. Jump up^ “Ukrainian parliament appeals to Budapest Memorandum signatories”. Interfax Ukraine. 28 February 2014. Retrieved 1 March 2014.

External links

Ukraine – The Birth of a Nation. Part 1 of 4. From Rus to Ukraine

Ukraine – The Birth of a Nation. Part 2 of 4. Ukraine or Little Russia?

Ukraine – The Birth of a Nation. Part 3 of 4. Together Forever

Ukraine – The Birth of a Nation. Part 4 of 4. Independence

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Coming Stock Market Crash and Recession? The End of American As You Know It? — Videos

Posted on March 3, 2014. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Business, Climate, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, European History, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Freedom, government spending, history, History of Economic Thought, Inflation, Investments, IRS, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, Photos, Politics, Press, Radio, Raves, Regulations, Resources, Securities and Exchange Commission, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 220: February 27, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 219: February 26, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 218: February 25, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 217: February 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 216: February 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 215: February 20, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 214: February 19, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 213: February 18, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 212: February 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 211: February 14, 2014 

Pronk Pops Show 210: February 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 209: February 12, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 208: February 11, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 207: February 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 206: February 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 205: February 5, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 204: February 4, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 203: February 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 202: January 31, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 201: January 30, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 200: January 29, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 199: January 28, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 198: January 27, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 197: January 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 196: January 22, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 195: January 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 194: January 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 193: January 16, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 192: January 14, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 191: January 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 190: January 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 189: January 9, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 188: January 8, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 187: January 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 186: January 6, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 185: January 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 184: December 19, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 183: December 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 182: December 16, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 181: December 13, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 180: December 12, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 179: December 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 178: December 5, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 177: December 2, 2013

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 211-220

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or DownloadShow 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Story 1: The Coming Stock Market Crash and Recession? The End of American As You Know It? — Videos

Obama ObamaCare Economic Collapse stock-market-crash-1929 20141929-IS-A-MOLEHILL-COMPARED-TO-THIS-MOUNTAINdow-today-vs-1929-feb-5

01 - 140121 Strongest + Logest Bull Cycles in the DJIA since 1900stockMCrash

transfer payment

Bubble, Stock Market Crash Coming Like 1929

Bubble, Stock Market Crash Coming New uptade Economic Monitor 2014

Keiser Report: Guest Dough Casey

Doug Casey on Stupidity, Evil, and the Decline of the U.S.

Jim Rogers Stock Market Crash, The Fed Will Come To The Rescue

EU European Union Economic Crisis 2013 2014

Market Crash, Global Economic Shocks Coming in 2014, World War 3 Gerald Celente

World Economy : Chart shows similarities between 1929 Stock Market Crash and Today

Glenn Beck: 1929 vs. 2014

Peter Schiff Market Crash 2014 | London Real

Peter Schiff – Market Crash 2014 | London Real

There Will Be No Economic Recovery. Prepare Yourself Accordingly.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Senator Session Warns Republicans — Immigration Bill is Bad Politics, Bad Policy and Bad Economics — Videos

Posted on January 30, 2014. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, Climate, College, Communications, Constitution, Crime, Culture, Demographics, Diasters, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Food, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Illegal, Immigration, Investments, IRS, Language, Legal, liberty, Life, Links, media, Obamacare, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Press, Private Sector, Psychology, Public Sector, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Resources, Reviews, Security, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Terrorism, Unemployment, Unions, Video, Wealth, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 201: January 201, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 200: January 29, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 199: January 28, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 198: January 27, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 197: January 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 196: January 22, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 195: January 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 194: January 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 193: January 16, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 192: January 14, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 191: January 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 190: January 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 189: January 9, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 188: January 8, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 187: January 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 186: January 6, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 185: January 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 184: December 19, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 183: December 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 182: December 16, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 181: December 13, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 180: December 12, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 179: December 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 178: December 5, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 177: December 2, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 176: November 27, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 175: November 26, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 174: November 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 173: November 22, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 172: November 21, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 171: November 20, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 170: November 19, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 169: November 18, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 168: November 15, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 167: November 14, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 166: November 13, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 165: November 12, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 164: November 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 163: November 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 162: November 7, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 161: November 4, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 160: November 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 159: October 31, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 158: October 30, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 157: October 28, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 156: October 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 155: October 24, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 154: October 23, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 153: October 21, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 152: October 18, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 151: October 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 150: October 16, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 149: October 14, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 148: October 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 147: October 10, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 146: October 9, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 145: October 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 144: October 7, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 143: October 4 2013

Pronk Pops Show 142: October 3, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 141: October 2, 2013

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

 Senator Session Warns Republicans — Immigration Bill is Bad Politics, Bad Policy and Bad Economics — Videos

Sen Sessions: Immigration Increases Income Inequality – The Real Story W Gretchen Carlson

Jeff Sessions Elite Group With Special Agendas Behind Legislation That Impacts All America

Jeff Session Mocks Gang Of Eight and Special Interest Forces Immigration Debate

Jeff Sessions: ‘Elite Group With Special Agendas’ Behind Legislation That Impacts All Amer

The entire memo is here and worth a read:

Sessions Warns House GOP: Immigration Bill Is Bad Politics, Bad Policy

Offers a better way forward.

By DANIEL HALPER

Yesterday afternoon, before President Obama’s State of the Union Address, Senator Jeff Sessions’ staff hand-delivered to each Republican member of the House an important memo on the so-called immigration reform bill being debated on Capital Hill. The 3-page document, written by Sessions, argues that pushing the current immigration legislation forward is bad politics, bad policy, and that there’s a better way for Republicans.

Jeff Sessions

Sessions believes House Republicans are at risk of falling into President Obama’s trap. “[A]ccording to news reports, House Republican leaders are instead turning 2014 into a headlong rush towards Gang-of-Eight style ‘immigration reform,’” writes Sessions. “They are reportedly drafting an immigration plan that is uncomfortably similar to a ‘piecemeal’ repackaging of the disastrous Senate plan—and even privately negotiating a final package with Democrat activists before consulting with their own members.”

It’s bad politics, Sessions writes. “In the rush to pass an immigration bill, there has been a near absence of any serious thought about the conditions facing American workers. The last 40 years has been a period of record immigration to the U.S., with the last 10 years seeing more new arrivals than any prior 10- year period in history. This trend has coincided with wage stagnation, enormous growth in welfare programs, and a shrinking workforce participation rate. A sensible, conservative approach would focus on lifting those living here today, both immigrant and native-born, out of poverty and into the middle class—before doubling or tripling the level of immigration into the U.S.

A sensible immigration policy would also listen to the opinion of the American people. Not the opinions of the paid-for consultants trotted out with their agenda-driven polls to GOP member meetings—but the actual, honest opinion of the people who sent us here. There is a reason why none of the corporate-funded ads for amnesty breathe a word about doubling immigration levels. According to Rasmussen Reports, working and middle class Americans strongly oppose large expansions of our already generous immigration system. Those earning under $30,000 prefer a reduction to an increase by an overwhelming 3-1 margin.

And bad policy, the senator from Alabama details. “Coordinating with a small group of the nation’s most powerful special interests, last year President Obama and Senate Democrats forced through an immigration bill which can only be described as a hammer blow to the American middle class. Not only would it grant work permits to millions of illegal immigrants at a time of record joblessness, it would also double the annual flow of new immigrant workers and provide green cards to more than 30 million permanent residents over the next decade. These new workers, mostly lesser-skilled, will compete for jobs in every sector, industry, and occupation in the U.S. economy.”

He adds, “House Republicans, in crafting immigration principles, should reply to the President’s immigration campaign with a simple message: our focus is to help unemployed Americans get back to work—not to grant amnesty or to answer the whims of immigration activists and CEOs. In turn, that message could be joined with a detailed and unifying policy agenda for accomplishing that moral and social objective.”

As for Sessions’ “Better Agenda,” he lays it out very precisely:

The GOP’s 2014 agenda should not be to assist the President in passing his immigration plan. Rather, it should be a consuming focus on restoring hope and opportunity to millions of discouraged workers. The GOP’s 2014 agenda should be a national effort—announced proudly and boldly—to reduce the welfare rolls and get America back to work, including:

  •  More American energy that creates good-paying jobs right here in the U.S.
  •  A more competitive tax and regulatory code that allows U.S. businesses and workers tocompete on a level global playing field
  •  A trade policy that increases U.S. exports and expands domestic manufacturing
  •  An immigration policy that serves the interests of the American people
  •  Converting the welfare office into a job training center
  •  Making government leaner and more accountable to U.S. taxpayers
  •  Restoring economic confidence by continuing our effort to balance the federal budget

An all-out immigration push is inimical to these goals.

Rep. Ryan: GOP Looking at Legal Status, Chance for Citizenship

Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.), a leading GOP advocate for tackling immigration, confirmed Wednesday that Republicans are looking to give illegal immigrants legal status right away, with the chance for a green card—and citizenship—down the line.

Officials familiar with the planning had said as much before. But Mr. Ryan is the first member of the GOP leadership to lay out the Republican vision publicly.

At issue is how to handle more than 11 million people already in the U.S. illegally. Most House Republicans oppose the Senate approach, whereby all qualified illegal immigrants would first win legal status, then have the chance to apply for legal permanent residence (also known as a green card), and then for citizenship. House Republicans call that a “special path to citizenship” that is unavailable to those who followed the law.

House Republicans have been talking since last summer about a different approach, and Mr. Ryan laid it out on Wednesday in an interview with MSNBC’s “The Daily Rundown.”

First, illegal immigrants would be offered a “probationary” status, allowing them to work while the government tightened border security and interior enforcement. Officials have explained that this would allow people to work legally while they wait for permanent legal status. (Officials have explained that this group could revert to illegal status if enforcement benchmarks are not met.)

Mr. Ryan said it would make sure that the Obama administration went ahead with the enforcement provisions. “We want to make sure that we write a law that he can’t avoid,” Mr. Ryan said.

After that, they would be eligible for a “regular work permit,” he said.

“If those things are met, you satisfy the terms of your probation, you’re not on welfare, you pay a fine, you learn English and civics, and the border’s been secured and interior enforcement independently verified, then you can get a regular work permit,” he said.

At that point, this group could apply for green cards using the same system available to any newcomer.

“That’s the kind of process we envision,” he said. “Which is not a special pathway to citizenship and it’s not going to automatically in any way give an undocumented immigrant citizenship.”

Some Democrats and immigration advocates have signaled that they could accept this approach, depending on the details. It’s unclear whether enough Republicans would feel the same. The idea will get its first full airing on Thursday afternoon, when House Republicans are scheduled to discuss immigration at their retreat in Cambridge, Md.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/01/29/rep-ryan-gop-looking-at-legal-status-chance-for-citizenship/

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

President Obama’s State of the Union 2014 Address — The Young and The Jobless Betrayed By Obama — Videos

Posted on January 29, 2014. Filed under: Agriculture, American History, Babies, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Constitution, Crime, Culture, Demographics, Diasters, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Farming, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Food, Foreign Policy, Fraud, government, government spending, Health Care, history, History of Economic Thought, Illegal, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, IRS, Language, Law, Legal, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Macroeconomics, media, Narcissism, Obamacare, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Press, Private Sector, Psychology, Public Sector, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Religion, Resources, Reviews, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Terrorism, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 200: January 29, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 199: January 28, 2014 

Pronk Pops Show 198: January 27, 2014 

Pronk Pops Show 197: January 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 196: January 22, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 195: January 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 194: January 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 193: January 16, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 192: January 14, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 191: January 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 190: January 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 189: January 9, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 188: January 8, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 187: January 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 186: January 6, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 185: January 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 184: December 19, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 183: December 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 182: December 16, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 181: December 13, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 180: December 12, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 179: December 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 178: December 5, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 177: December 2, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 176: November 27, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 175: November 26, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 174: November 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 173: November 22, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 172: November 21, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 171: November 20, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 170: November 19, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 169: November 18, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 168: November 15, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 167: November 14, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 166: November 13, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 165: November 12, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 164: November 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 163: November 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 162: November 7, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 161: November 4, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 160: November 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 159: October 31, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 158: October 30, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 157: October 28, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 156: October 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 155: October 24, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 154: October 23, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 153: October 21, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 152: October 18, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 151: October 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 150: October 16, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 149: October 14, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 148: October 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 147: October 10, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 146: October 9, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 145: October 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 144: October 7, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 143: October 4 2013

Pronk Pops Show 142: October 3, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 141: October 2, 2013

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-200

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

unemployment_minimum_wage

illegal_immigration

2011-0318-origins

USA-Immigration-by-Decadeimmigration_against_population

Story 1: President Obama’s State of the Union 2014 Address — The Young and The Jobless Betrayed By Obama — Videos

Watch the State of the Union – 2014

State of the Union 2014 Address: President Obama’s Full Speech – New York Times

Obama Urges Immigration Reform | State of the Union 2014

STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS – OBAMA wants to REBUILD the PEOPLES TRUST

State of the Union 2014 Address: Obama on Raising the Minimum Wage – New York Times

Frank Luntz State of the Union Focus Group on The Kelly File – Jan. 28, 2014

Rand Paul Sotu Reaction. Rand Paul State Of The Union Reaction

Sen. Ted Cruz Reaction to the State of the Union Address

FULL SPEECH: Tea Party Response to 2014 State of the Union – Senator Mike Lee

Gohmert’s Reaction to The 2014 State of the Union

Watch the Republican Response to the 2014 State of the Union

Maximum Rage Over The Minimum Wage

Glenn Beck: Obama Became America’s First Dictator During State of the Union 2014

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Stupid Republican Party Leadership About To Commit Political Suicide By Supporting Legal Status For 40 Million Plus Illegal Aliens — The Party Will Split and Their Base Will Stay Home On Election Day 4 November 2014 — Videos

Posted on January 28, 2014. Filed under: American History, Business, College, Communications, Crime, Culture, Demographics, Diasters, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Illegal, Immigration, Investments, IRS, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Macroeconomics, media, Obamacare, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Press, Psychology, Raves, Regulations, Security, Talk Radio, Taxes, Technology, Unemployment, Video, War, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 199: January 28, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 198: January 27, 2014 

Pronk Pops Show 197: January 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 196: January 22, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 195: January 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 194: January 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 193: January 16, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 192: January 14, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 191: January 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 190: January 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 189: January 9, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 188: January 8, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 187: January 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 186: January 6, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 185: January 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 184: December 19, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 183: December 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 182: December 16, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 181: December 13, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 180: December 12, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 179: December 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 178: December 5, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 177: December 2, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 176: November 27, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 175: November 26, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 174: November 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 173: November 22, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 172: November 21, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 171: November 20, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 170: November 19, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 169: November 18, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 168: November 15, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 167: November 14, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 166: November 13, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 165: November 12, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 164: November 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 163: November 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 162: November 7, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 161: November 4, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 160: November 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 159: October 31, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 158: October 30, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 157: October 28, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 156: October 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 155: October 24, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 154: October 23, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 153: October 21, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 152: October 18, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 151: October 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 150: October 16, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 149: October 14, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 148: October 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 147: October 10, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 146: October 9, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 145: October 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 144: October 7, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 143: October 4 2013

Pronk Pops Show 142: October 3, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 141: October 2, 2013

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-199

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Story 1: The Stupid Republican Party Leadership About To Commit Political Suicide By Supporting Legal Status For 40 Million Plus Illegal Aliens — The Party Will Split and Their Base Will Stay Home On Election Day 4 November 2014 — Videos

Immigration Reform Bill May Offer Protections For Illegal Aliens Convicted Of Certain Crimes!

John Boehner’s Sad Excuses On Immigration Reform

Backing in G.O.P. for Legal Status for Immigrants

The House Republican leadership’s broad framework for overhauling the nation’s immigration laws will call this week for a path to legal status — but not citizenship — for many of the 11 million adult immigrants who are in the country illegally, according to aides who have seen the party’s statement of principles. For immigrants brought to the United States illegally as young children, the Republicans would offer a path to citizenship.

But even before the document is unveiled later, some of the party’s leading strategists and conservative voices are urging that the immigration push be abandoned, or delayed until next year, to avoid an internal party rupture before the midterm elections.

“It’s one of the few things that could actually disrupt what looks like a strong Republican year,” said William Kristol, editor of the conservative magazine The Weekly Standard, calling an immigration push “a recipe for disaster.”

At the same time, Republicans have seen their support from Latinos plummet precisely because of their stance on immigration, and the “statement of principles,” barely more than a page, is intended to try to reverse that trajectory.

The statement of principles criticizes the American higher education system for educating some of the world’s best and brightest students only to lose them to their home countries because they cannot obtain green cards; insists that Republicans demand that current immigration laws be enforced before illegal immigrants are granted legal status; and mentions that some kind of triggers must be included in an immigration overhaul to ensure that borders are secured first, said Republican officials who have seen the principles.

With concern already brewing among conservatives who call any form of legal status “amnesty,” the document has the feel more of an attempt to test the waters than a blueprint for action. House Republican leaders will circulate it at a three-day retreat for their members that begins Wednesday on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. Several pro-immigration organizations that have been briefed on the guidelines say they are not intended to serve as a conservative starting point for future negotiations, but as a gauge of how far to the left House Republicans are willing to move.

The principles say that Republicans do not support a “special path to citizenship,” but make an exception for the “Dreamers,” the immigrants brought into the country illegally as children, quoting a 2013 speech by Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the House majority leader. “One of the great founding principles of our country was that children would not be punished for the mistakes of their parents,” Mr. Cantor said at the time. “It is time to provide an opportunity for legal residence and citizenship for those who were brought to this country as children and who know no other home.”

Even ardent proponents of an immigration-law overhaul are, at best, cautiously optimistic. In June, a broad immigration overhaul — with a 13-year path to citizenship for the 11 million immigrants now in the country illegally, and stricter border security provisions that would have to be in place before the immigrants could gain legal status — passed the Senate with bipartisan support. But that legislation has largely stalled in the Republican-controlled House, where Mr. Boehner has rejected any negotiations with the Senate over its comprehensive bill.

“This is obviously a long, hard road,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, the No. 3 Democrat, who helped negotiate the Senate bill, “but I think since August, the number on the other side vehemently opposed has stayed the same, the number who think it should go forward has grown, and numbers in the wide middle are less opposed than they used to be. But that doesn’t guarantee an outcome one way or another.”

Republican Party leaders, backed strongly by business groups, have said an overhaul is critical if they are to repair their political position with Latino and other immigrant voters.

Barry Jackson, Mr. Boehner’s former chief of staff, is consulting for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which supports an overhaul that expands high-technology visas and guest worker programs.

But immigration is less of an issue during midterm elections, when immigrants are not as likely to vote and House members in safe districts are insulated somewhat from the wrath of more moderate swing voters. Often the biggest threats to Republicans are primary challenges from more conservative candidates who say that changing the immigration status of someone who is in the country illegally amounts to amnesty for a lawbreaker.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Report — TERRORIST ATTACKS ON U.S. FACILITIES IN BENGHAZI, LIBYA, SEPTEMBER 11-12, 2012 January 1, 2014 — General Carter Ham’s Testimony — Benghazi Was A Terrorist Attack — YouTube Video Story Was A Lie – The White House Is The Liars Lair — Videos

Posted on January 15, 2014. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, College, Communications, Constitution, Crime, Culture, Diasters, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Fraud, Genocide, government, government spending, history, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Monetary Policy, Money, Natural Gas, Oil, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Press, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Reviews, Talk Radio, Technology, Terrorism, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

general_carter_hamm

The head of the U.S. Africa Command, General Carter Ham, told the House Committee on Armed Services in June 2013, according to recently declassified testimony, that Benghazi was immediately considered an attack.

liar-obama-obamacare

Document

Senate Benghazi report

A Sen­ate in­tel­li­gence com­mit­tee re­port re­leased Wed­nes­day places the blame on State De­part­ment and in­tel­li­gence agen­cies for the 2012 ter­ror­ist at­tack in Benghazi.

Senator Intelligence Committee releases Benghazi attack report The Latest News

[youube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jF5VSfqyuCw]

Benghazi Attack New Senate CMTE Report Criticizes Obama Admin’s Response To Benghazi

Jay Carney Scolds Fox’s Ed Henry For ‘Coloring Outside the Lines’ On Benghazi: ‘Come On, Ed’

The Benghazi Transcripts Don’t Lie

General Carter Ham Quickly became clear, Benghazi a terrorist attack not a demonstration

The Truth About The Murders In Benghazi Attack NYT Under Pressure

Benghazi Scandal Told To Keep Quiet NDA Given To Benghazi Survivors At Memorial

Glenn Beck Why Obama Hid the Truth of Benghazi

Treason Exposed! Obama Used Benghazi Attack to Cover Up Arms Shipments to Muslim Brotherhood

SYRIA Geraldo Rivera: My Sources Say The US Running Libya Arms To Syrian Rebels

SYRIA CNBC: Benghazi Is Not About Libya But An Operation To Put Arms & Men In Syria

SYRIA Retired General Suspects A US Covert Operation For Running Libya Arms To Syria

Benghazi Scandal – Susan Rice Defends Benghazi Interviews; Has No Regrets – The Real Story

Fox O’Reilly: Obama Appointing Susan Rice Not Insult to Republicans but Defiance to All Americans

Labrador: Susan Rice Response to Benghazi Attack “Shameful”

Susan Rice Caught Lying About Benghazi – Rep. Trey Gowdy Whistleblower Questioning

R Mc Govern: Beyond Benghazi questioning Susan Rice

LIBYA No US Consulate In Benghazi But CIA Operation, Hired Militia Linked To Extremist

White House Knew at 6:07 PM EST That Ansar Al-Sharia Was Behind the Benghazi Attack

Obama Linked to Benghazi Attack

Obama blames the video in his UN speech

Pres. Obama Speech on 9/11/2012 Terrorist Attacks in Libya

Susan Rice on contending with crisis

Susan Rice Interview on Meet the Press – 9/16/12

Susan Rice ‘This Week’ Interview: U.S. Ambassador to UN Discusses Muslim Protest (09/2012)

Benghazi attack: New report shows the real scandal isn’t what Obama called it

By Ryan Teague Beckwith,

The fight over Benghazi isn’t going away, but the reason for the fight may be changing.

In the days after the deadly attack on a U.S. mission in Libya, the political fight centered on whether President Obama had called it terrorism and whether it was a planned or spontaneous attack.

A new bipartisan Senate report released Wednesday, however, focuses more on the failure of the State Department and U.S. intelligence agencies for not preventing the attack.

The report shows several major problems:

• The State Department did not increase security at its sites despite warnings of possible violence.

• The CIA did not share information about the existence of its outpost with the U.S. military.

• The CIA and the State Department were not working out of the same location.

• Libyans charged with protecting the compound did not do their job.

The report doesn’t touch on the more political aspects of the 2012 attack, which led to the death of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and two others. But six Republican senators added a separate note to the report criticizing the Obama administration for delaying the report and for not being transparent.

“Information has been withheld from the Committee because of the ‘ongoing criminal investigation’ into the attacks, in an apparent effort to shield certain government agencies from congressional oversight or potential embarrassment,” they wrote.

But the fact that their criticisms come up as an addendum to the report instead of in the report itself shows the controversy about what happened at Benghazi is shifting in D.C.

http://www.dailynews.com/general-news/20140115/benghazi-attack-new-report-shows-the-real-scandal-isnt-what-obama-called-it

Pentagon labeled Benghazi a terrorist attack as Obama administration wavered: newly declassified testimony

Gen. Carter Ham’s newly declassified testimony before the House suggests the prospect of an out-of-control demonstration was not raised by Defense officials and that they immediately considered the incident an attack.

By Leslie Larson

The Obama administration was wary to label the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi as an act of terrorism but declassified testimony from a top Pentagon official indicates there was little ambiguity among Defense Department players that terrorism was the likely motive.

Former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice represented the Obama administration in discussing the incident in the aftermath of the attack, suggesting the death of Ambassador Chris Stephens and three Americans came as the result of a protest over an incendiary viral video blasting the prophet Mohammad and was not a preplanned act of terrorism.

Rice appeared on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” CNN’s “State of the Union,” NBC’s “Meet The Press,” “Fox News Sunday” and ABC’s “This Week” on Sep. 16, 2012, to speak on behalf of the President and she repeated the belief that the incident was a “spontaneous” mob uprising and not “a preplanned, premeditated attack.”

“This is not an expression of hostility in the broadest sense toward the United States or to U.S. policy,” she stated.

Republicans pounced on Rice’s analysis, claiming she was placating extremists and not adequately representing the national security threat to the American people.

Now testimony by Gen. Carter Ham, head of AFRICOM at the time of attack, before the House Committee on Armed Services in June 2013 suggests that Defense officials did not raise the prospect of an out-of-control demonstration and immediately deemed the incident an attack.

Ham, whose partially redacted transcript was declassified by the House on Monday, said at the 2013 hearing that he was alerted to the incident 15 minutes after it erupted at 9:42 p.m. Libya Time (3:42 p.m. EST) on Sep. 11, 2012.

“When we saw a rocket-propelled grenade attack, what appeared to be pretty well aimed small arms fire — again, this is all coming second and third hand through unclassified, you know, commercial cellphones for the most part initially. To me, it started to become clear pretty quickly that this was certainly a terrorist attack and not just not something sporadic,” he stated.

Ham served as head of the United States Africa Command, which manages U.S. military operations in Africa. He served in that capacity from March 2011 to April 2013.

He describes how as soon as AFRICOM learned of the attack, the command control repositioned a drone to the consulate to gather intelligence on the ground movements. The unmanned, unarmed surveillance aircraft was ordered to be diverted to the Benghazi site at 9:59 p.m. Libya Time, 17 minutes after the attack.

According to the timeline, at 10:32 p.m. Libya Time, Ham briefed then Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, before they traveled to the White House for a pre-scheduled meeting with Obama, during which they briefed Obama on the situation.

During Ham’s briefing with Panetta and Dempsey, before they left for the White House, he said there was a “peripheral” discussion as to the cause but added, “We knew at that initial meeting, we knew that a U.S. facility had been attacked and was under attack.”

“I am not aware of (a demonstration), sir. It became pretty apparent to me, and I think to most at Africa Command pretty shortly after this attack began, that this was an attack,” he told Rep. Howard P. (Buck) McKeon (R-CA), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

“We knew at that point that we had two individuals, Ambassador Stevens and Mr. Smith (a Foreign Service information officer), unaccounted for. And so the focus of our effort at that point was gaining understanding of what the situation was. And then we started very quickly to think about, you know, the possibility of a U.S. ambassador being held hostage in a foreign land and what does that mean,” Ham said during his House testimony.

The testimony includes a reference to an Ops Alert announcing the attack that was received in the White House Situation Room at 10:05 p.m. Libya time, but Ham was not privy to what details the alert included.

Panetta’s testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee in February similarly stated the early belief that the episode was an attack.

“There was no question in my mind that this was a terrorist attack,” Panetta said of his early assessment of the situation on the ground in Benghazi.

Ham’s version of events could discredit the accounts from some Obama officials who were hesitant to state the security threat posed by the attack.

In particular, Rice has been accused of misleading the American public with her statements that the incident was a protest run amok rather than terrorism.

In May 2013, then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was also implicated in an ABC News report that claimed a State Department official urged the CIA and White House to avoid describing the event as an act of terrorism in public statements.

susan_rice

Susan Rice went on TV talk shows days after the Benghazi attack to speak on behalf of the President. She repeated the belief that the incident was a ‘spontaneous’ mob uprising and not ‘a preplanned, premeditated attack.’

RELATED: STASI: CBS PUTS LARA LOGAN ON LEAVE BUT FIRED RATHER FOR LESS

Leaked emails show that then State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland suggested that a CIA memo on Benghazi not include any reference of links to al-Qaeda and the intelligence warnings in the months preceding the attack.

Nuland wrote in protest to the CIA description, saying it “could be abused by members (of Congress) to beat up on the State Department for not paying attention to warnings,” in an email to the White House and the CIA, according to ABC.

The intelligence memo was the basis for Rice’s public statements in September 2012.

The PR spin to describe the attack as spontaneous rather than pre-planned was seen as a move to protect the State Department from being blamed for not adequately providing security and anticipating the attack.

RELATED: CBS ORDERS LOGAN, PRODUCER TO TAKE LEAVE

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney denied any wrongdoing in Rice’s description of the episode, telling the press in May that Rice didn’t have “hard, concrete evidence” to suggest terrorism.

“It was simply a reflection of we did not, and the intelligence community did not, and others within the administration did not, jump to conclusions about who was responsible before we had an investigation to find out the facts,” he said of Rice’s highly criticized assessment of the situation.

Her behavior in the aftermath of the tragedy displeased Congress and is largely to blame for her failure to be appointed Secretary of State after Clinton’s retirement in Obama’s second term.

Instead, Rice was appointed to the role of National Security adviser.

Clinton has defended Rice and said the root motive for the attack was not an important detail to focus on.

“We had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or because of guys out for a walk one night and decided to go kill some Americans? At this point what difference does it make, Senator?” Clinton said at a tense Senate hearing in January 2013.

Clinton, a likely contender in the 2016 White House bid, remains defensive as the “Benghazi stain” continues to haunt her legacy.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Downsize Federal Government — Eliminate The Department of Energy — Home Energy Score — Government Intervention Into The Private Sector — Videos

Posted on January 13, 2014. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, College, Communications, Constitution, Demographics, Economics, Education, Energy, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, history, Macroeconomics, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, Natural Gas, Nuclear Power, Oil, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Press, Programming, Psychology, Raves, Regulations, Science, Talk Radio, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

us-doe-logodoe-energyscore

home energy score timeline internachi energy rating ben gromicko

ScoreCard

DOE-logo

Our Ever Growing Dependence on Government

TAKE IT TO THE LIMITS: Milton Friedman on Libertarianism

Giving Away Money Costs More Than You Think

Downsizing the Federal Government

Downsize the Department of Energy

Can We Eliminate the Department of Education? (Charles Murray)

$5 Billion Loan for Solar Energy — Department of Energy

Phil Kerpen on Neil Cavuto to discuss the DOE loan program

Our Ever Growing Dependence on Government

Obamanomics: A Legacy of Wasteful Spending

Why Does Big Business Love Big Government? (Domhoff, Rothbard, and Evers)

G. William Domhoff is a research professor in psychology and sociology at the University of California, Santa Cruz. He is the author of Who Rules America? (1967), Bohemian Grove and Other Retreats: A Study in Ruling-Class Cohesiveness (1974), and other books.

A prolific author and Austrian economist, Murray Rothbard promoted a form of free market anarchism he called “anarcho-capitalism.”

Bill Evers was a resident scholar at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution (and is currently a research fellow there) and also served as Assistant Secretary for the Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development in the U.S. Department of Education from 2007-09.

In this lecture Domhoff, Rothbard, and Evers talk about the “interlocking overlappers” that get together to influence the government, in California and in the country generally. They each spend some time describing what it is that draws businesspeople to market-capturing and rent-seeking behaviors, and take questions from the audience.

Walter Block – Free-Market Environmentalism [Australian Mises Seminar 2012]

How Murray Rothbard Became a Libertarian

The tide is rising for America’s libertarians

By Edward Luce

The new spirit in a rising climate of anti-politics has become an attitude, rather than a movement

High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cc9a31b8-7928-11e3-b381-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz2qJAmizcR

Robert Nozick, the late US libertarian, smoked pot while he was writing Anarchy, State and Utopia. He would applaud the growth of libertarianism among today’s young Americans. Whether it is their enthusiasm for legalised marijuana and gay marriage – both spreading across the US at remarkable speed – or their scepticism of government, US millennials no longer follow President Barack Obama’s cue. Most of America’s youth revile the Tea Party, particularly its south-dominated nativist core. But they are not big-government activists either. If there is a new spirit in America’s rising climate of anti-politics, it is libertarian.

On the face of it this ought to pose a bigger challenge to the Republican party – at least for its social conservative wing. Mr Obama may have disappointed America’s young, particularly the millions of graduates who have failed to find good jobs during his presidency. But he is no dinosaur. In contrast, Republicans such as Rick Santorum, the former presidential hopeful, who once likened gay sex to “man on dog”, elicit pure derision. Even moderate Republicans, such as Chris Christie, who until last week was the early frontrunner for the party’s 2016 nomination, are considered irrelevant. Whether Mr Christie was telling the truth last week, when he denied knowledge of his staff’s role in orchestrating a punitive local traffic jam, is beside the point. Mr Christie’s Sopranos brand of New Jersey politics is not tailored to the Apple generation.

High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cc9a31b8-7928-11e3-b381-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz2qJAvkWVr

The opposite is true of Rand Paul, the Kentucky senator, whose chances of taking the 2016 prize rose with Mr Christie’s dented fortunes last week. Unlike Ron Paul, the senator’s father, who still managed to garner a large slice of the youth vote in 2008, Rand Paul eschews the more outlandish fringes of libertarian thought. Rather than promising an isolationist US withdrawal from the world, he touts a more moderate “non-interventionism”. Instead of pledging to end fiat money, he promises to audit the US Federal Reserve – “mend the Fed”, rather than “end the Fed”. Both find echo among the Y generation. So too does his alarmism about the US national debt. Far from being big spenders, millennials are more concerned about US debt than other generations, according to polls. They are also strongly in favour of free trade. More than a third of the Republican party now identifies as libertarian, according to the Cato Institute. Just under a quarter of Americans do so too, says Gallup.

All of which looks ominous for Ted Cruz, the Texan Republican whose lengthy filibuster against Obamacare last year lit the fuse for the US government shutdown. Mr Cruz, also a 2016 aspirant, leads the pugilistic wing of the Republican party that is prepared to burn the house down in order to save the ranch. Although also a Tea Partier, Mr Paul is cultivating a sunnier Reaganesque optimism that draws on the deep roots of US libertarianism. His brand of politics also strikes a chord with those who fear the growth of the US surveillance state – the types who view Edward Snowden (another millennial) as a hero rather than a traitor. Last year the US House of Representatives came within 12 votes of passing a bill to defund the National Security Agency. Mr Paul led the bill in the Senate. Next time they could succeed.

November 2012: While Obama lost ground among white male voters, his 2012 victory was the product of perhaps the most diverse electoral coalition in American history. Voters talk about how they interpret the president’s re-election

What does it mean for the Democrats? In terms of social values, libertarians are almost identical to liberals. Smoking pot and same-sex marriage both meet with big approval. The same is not necessarily true of guns. In spite of recent school massacres, 40 US states now have “concealed weapons” laws – many passed in the past 12 months. Again, millennials are surprisingly sceptical of gun control, say the polls. But it is on economic policy where they really part company with liberals. The Great Depression helped forge a generation of solid Democrats. The same does not appear to be true of the Great Recession. Franklin Roosevelt helped dig people out of misery in the 1930s by providing direct public employment. Mr Obama, on the other hand, has stuck largely to economic orthodoxy. He may have missed a golden opportunity to mould a generation of social democrats.

He has also inadvertently fuelled scepticism about the role of government. Mr Obama came to power in 2008 on a surge of voluntarism. He did so in part by appealing to youthful idealism about public service. That now feels like a long time ago. Distrust in public institutions has continued to rise during his presidency – most strongly among the youngest generation. The share of voters who identify as independents, rather than Democrats or Republicans, recently hit an all-time high of 42 per cent, according to Gallup. This is bad news for established figures in either party – and, indeed, in any walk of life. Hillary Clinton should beware. So should Jeb Bush.

On the minus side, libertarians have no real answer to many of America’s biggest problems – not least the challenges posed to US middle-class incomes by globalisation and technology. Nor are they coherent as a force. Libertarianism is an attitude, rather than an organisation. It is also potentially fickle. Young Americans disdain foreign entanglements. That could change overnight with a big terrorist attack on the homeland. They feel let down by Democrats and hostile to mainstream Republicans. Yet they could flock to an exciting new figure in either party. Theirs is a restless generation that disdains authority. Establishment figures should take note. Tomorrow belongs to them.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cc9a31b8-7928-11e3-b381-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2qJAO0w8t

DOE Plugs Energy Rating for Homes, Similar to MPG Rating for Cars

The Energy Department on Tuesday is rolling out new, improved software to help Americans measure the energy efficiency of their homes.

DOE says its energy-scoring software — called the Home Energy Scoring Tool – is like a vehicle’s mile-per-gallon rating because it allows homeowners to compare the energy performance of their homes to other homes nationwide. It also provides homeowners with suggestions for improving their homes’ efficiency.

The software is part of the government’s effort to reduce the nation’s energy consumption; but it’s also billed as a way to keep home-retrofitting going, at a time when stimulus funds for weather-proofing have run out.

The Home Energy Scoring Tool “can be a powerful motivator in getting homeowners to make energy efficiency improvements,” DOE says. “It’s also a great way to help trained workers enter the private sector energy improvement market as funding for weatherization efforts decline.”

DOE says its Home Energy Score is useful if you are a homeowner looking to renovate or remodel your home, lower your utility bills, improve the comfort of your home, or reduce your energy usage. Moreover, “the score serves as an official way to document these improvements and thereby enhance your home’s appeal when you’re ready to sell.”

Right now, getting your home scored is voluntary.

To produce a Home Energy Score, a trained, “qualified assessor” comes to your home — for a fee — and collects approximately 40 pieces of data about the home’s “envelope” (e.g., walls, windows, heating and cooling systems) during an hour-long walk-through.

Based on the home’s characteristics, the DOE software estimates the home’s annual energy use, assuming “typical homeowner behavior.” The software then converts the estimated energy use into a score, based on a 10-point scale (10 being the most energy-efficient). The 1-10 scale accounts for differences in weather conditions by using the zip code to assign the house to one of more than 1,000 weather stations.

In addition to showing the home’s current energy efficiency — or inefficiency — the score also shows where a home would rank if all of the energy-saving improvements identified during the home walk-through were made. That may prompt some homeowners to buy new windows or doors, for example, boosting the market for home retro-fitters.

DOE recommends getting a Home Energy Score “as soon as the program becomes available in your area.” The program launched in 2012, and at this time, only single-family homes and townhouses can be scored.

The scoring is available only through DOE’s participating partners, which include state and local governments, utilities, and non-profits. DOE does not determine how much an assessor charges to score a house. “It will depend on what the local market supports.” But DOE says its partners “have indicated plans to charge between $25 and $125 for the Home Energy Score.”

And yes, the size of the home matters because larger homes use more energy.

The Home Energy Score and the associated report is generated through DOE/Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory software. The 2014 version of DOE’s Home Energy Scoring Tool will be introduced at a webinar on Tuesday.

So far,

home energy scoreThe Home Energy Score is similar to a vehicle’s mile-per-gallon rating, says the U.S. Energy Department. (Graphic is from DOE website)

DOE says more than 8,500 homes have been scored by the Energy Department’s growing network of more than 25 partners and 175 qualified assessors.

The business and economic reporting of CNSNews.com is funded in part with a gift made in memory of Dr. Keith C. Wold.

- See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/doe-plugs-energy-rating-homes-similar-mpg-rating-cars#sthash.CQAafjhv.9gcKr0Ng.dpuf

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/doe-plugs-energy-rating-homes-similar-mpg-rating-cars

Home Energy Assessments

Cathy Zoi on the new Home Energy Score pilot program

Acting Under Secretary Cathy Zoi talks about the new Home Energy Score pilot program that was announced today by Vice President Biden and U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu. The Home Energy Score will offer homeowners straightforward, reliable information about their homes’ energy efficiency. A report provides consumers with a home energy score between 1 and 10, and shows them how their home compares to others in their region. The report also includes customized, cost-effective recommendations that will help to reduce their energy costs and improve the comfort of their homes.

200,000 homes weatherized under the Recovery Act

Home Energy Score Pilot Program Launched By DOE

Home Energy Score Qualified Assessor module 1 intro

Home Energy Score Qualified Assessor module 2

Home Energy Score Qualified Assessor module 3

Home Energy Score Qualified Assessor module 4

Home Energy Score Qualified Assessor module 5

Home Energy Score Qualified Assessor module 6

Home Energy Score Qualified Assessor module 7

Home Energy Score Qualified Assessor module 8

Home Energy Score Qualified Assessor module 9

Home Energy Score Qualified Assessor module 10

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Nelson Mandela Becomes The Good Terrorist Communist — Rest In Peace — Videos

Posted on December 10, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Books, Communications, Constitution, Demographics, Economics, Employment, Energy, European History, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Genocide, government spending, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Rants, Raves, Tax Policy, Technology, Terrorism, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

nelson-mandelanelsonmandelacommunistmandela_castromandelamandela_castro_arafatnelson-mandela-statesman-quote-communists-have-always-played-an-active-role-in-themandelaarafatmandela_friendfoto CORNEL VAN HEERDEN . .mandelaunravelsmandela_fistnelson-mandela-love-3waves_goodbye_mandela

Nelson Mandela Dies

Nelson Mandela Death: A Look at South Africa’s First Black President – Documentary

Nelson Mandela – Who was Madiba? Truthloader

Remembering South African leader Nelson Mandela

25 Things You Didn’t Know About Nelson Mandela And His Enduring Legacy

Randall Robinson on Nelson Mandela, U.S. Backing of Apartheid

A Tribute To Nelson Mandela (R.I.P) 1918-2013

The Right Wing Vs Nelson Mandela

Nelson Mandela & Fidel Castro: A Video You Won’t See on the Evening News

Desmond Tutu Blasts ANC South African Gov’t as Worse Than Apartheid

Mandela The Man and His Country

African National Congress Terrorists Captured (1988)

The Truth on the ANC and South Africa

Christopher Hitchens on the ANC, South African Apartheid, History, Desmond Tutu (1985)

100 Years of Struggle — Mandela’s ANC

Umkhonto we Sizwe(MK)

ANC – VIP’s of Violence Part 1 of 3

Part 1 of 3. A fully factual, well researched and presented documentary on the actions of the ANC that it was hoped would never surface in public – ANC – African National Congress, ruling party in South Africa. What was said in 1987 still applies today, most Black people have not seen a dramatic change in their circumstances……
Nelson Mandela never did renounce the use of violence.

ANC VIP’s of Violence Part 2 of 3

ANC – VIP’s of Violence Part 3 of 3

The Death Of Apartheid – The Whites Last Stand

Who is Nelson Mandela ?

Nelson Mandela Exposed: Communist ANC Ties & The Stupidity Of Black People

WATCH Bill O’Reilly Open Fire on Nelson Mandela: ” Great Man, But He Was a Communist “

Alex Jones: Nelson Mandela is “a horrible person”, “communist mass-bomber”

Racist songs of the ANC and Nelson Mandela- Part 1 of 2

Racist songs by the ANC and Nelson Mandela- Part 2 of 2

Nelson Mandela sings about killing whites

My tribute to vintage Nelson Mandela of South Africa.

NBC and ABC Bash Reagan as Pro-Apartheid During Mandela Coverage

South Africa Today: Did the Mandela Revolution Succeed?

November 30, 2010 | The relatively peaceful transition from apartheid to the beginning of democracy in 1994 was greeted around the world as the beginning of a new era in African politics. Professor Charles Villa-Vicencio, former national research director of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, offered an assessment of the positive momentum and the challenges facing his native South Africa sixteen years later. Assessing the tendency among some rulers of new democracies to resort to the authoritarian tendencies of the governments they have replaced, the question was asked as to what extent South Africa’s current rulers have consolidated and advanced the gains introduced by the Mandela administration. Special attention was given to the current political divisions within the ANC government and the economic challenges facing the country.

Charles Villa-Vicencio is a leading global authority in matters related to transitional justice and reconciliation. A distinguished theologian, he has published numerous works in various scholarly forums. His contributions extend beyond academics: from 1996-1998, he played a central role in South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, where he acted as national research director. Villa-Vicencio has used his insight and expertise to advise numerous countries dealing with the challenges of rebuilding their societies after periods of internal strife, including Peru and various African nations. Villa-Vicencio is the author of several books, including A Theology of Reconstruction: Nation-Building and Human Rights (1992) and Civil Disobedience and Beyond: Law, Resistance, and Religion in South Africa (1990). In addition, he has edited or co-edited various volumes, such as Looking Back, Reaching Forward: Reflections on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa (2000, with Wilhelm Verwoerd), and The Provocations of Amnesty: Memory, Justice, and Impunity (2003, with Erik Doxtader).

Former ANC Youth League President Julius Malema has officially formed a new political party.

Malema makes 360 since corruption charges

NELSON MANDELA the TRUTH IS REVEALED

The Life and Times of Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela

http://djausar.wordpress.com/2013/12/08/the-life-and-times-of-nelson-rolihlahla-mandela/

Background Articles and Videos

Nelson Mandela 1918-2013

by David Horowitz

mandela5

Mandela began as a terrorist and never turned his back on monsters like Arafat and Castro, whom he considered brothers in arms. When he was released from prison by deKlerk, he showed unexpected statesmanship, counseling reconciliation rather than revenge, no small achievement in a country in which the “liberation” movement (led by Mandela’s wife and party) placed oil filled inner tubes around the necks of former comrades and set them on fire.

But if a leader should be judged by his works, the country Mandela left behind is an indictment of his political career, not an achievement worthy of praise – let alone the unhinged adoration he is currently receiving across the political spectrum.

http://www.horowitzfreedomcenter.org/nelson_mandela_1918_2013

Mandela’s Economic Legacy Threatened by S. Africa Inequality

By Mike Cohen

Nelson Mandela emerged from 27 years in apartheid jails in 1990 pledging to seize South Africa’s mines and banks. Four years later, his government slashed spending and courted foreign investors, paving the way for the longest period of growth in the country’s history.

The former president and Nobel Laureate, who died yesterday at the age of 95, was instrumental in getting the African National Congress, which led the fight against apartheid and has ruled ever since, to embrace an open economy.

“Only a Mandela could have realigned the ANC’s economic policy from the mindset of the 1950s, with the development state, with socialism, with nationalization, to the world of the 1990s and beyond,” Robert Schrire, a politics professor at the University of Cape Town, said in an interview. “He recognized that for the poor to prosper, the rich had to feel they had a future in the country.”

Yet Mandela’s legacy of economic stability is beginning to come under attack as the country fails to slash unemployment and reduce inequality. The jobless rate remains 24.7 percent, while average earnings for black households are a sixth of their white counterparts. The ANC’s youth wing last year waged a campaign for the nationalization of banks and mines, the very policies ditched by Mandela in 1994, and poor communities have staged a series of protests against a lack of housing and basic services.

Photographer: Dean Hutton/Bloomberg

Mourners gather outside the home of former South African President Nelson Mandela in…Read More

The rand has plunged 19 percent against the dollar this year, the worst performer of 16 major currencies tracked by Bloomberg, and was trading at 10.4751 as of 1:32 p.m. in Johannesburg today.

White Hands

“We still have racial unemployment, racial poverty and racial inequality,” said Sidumo Dlamini, president of the 2.2-million-member Congress of South African Trade Unions, the country’s largest labor grouping and a member of the ruling alliance. “Our country is still in white hands.”

Mandela’s embrace of spending rigor and foreign capital allowed the economy to expand for 15 years, until the third quarter of 2008, when the global financial crisis pushed it into recession. That growth and rising tax receipts enabled the post-apartheid government to extend welfare grants to about 16 million people and give more than 85 percent of households access to electricity, up from 45 percent in 1996.

Pariah State

Instead of nationalizing companies, Mandela coaxed foreign investors into the country. His ideological shift laid the groundwork for Lakshmi Mittal’s LNM Group to buy Africa’s biggest steelmaker in 2004 and London-based Barclays Plc to take control of South Africa’s largest consumer bank in 2005. In 2011, Fayetteville, Arkansas-based Wal-Mart Stores Inc. bought a majority stake in the nation’s biggest general-goods wholesaler.

Photographer: Tom Stoddart/Getty Images

Then South African President Nelson Mandela addresses stock brokers at the Johannesburg…Read More

Restoring confidence in South Africa’s economy in 1994 was a significant achievement. Apartheid had turned South Africa into a pariah state, subjected to international sanctions and boycotts. The economy was hemorrhaging foreign capital, had only enough reserves to cover 10 days of imports and was running a budget deficit of 9.1 percent of gross domestic product.

Mandela asked Chris Liebenberg, who had just retired as chief executive officer of what is now Nedbank Group Ltd., the country’s fourth-largest bank, to become finance minister. He accepted the job on condition that South Africa would have a market-related economy and exercise fiscal discipline.

‘Steady Progress’

“Those were tough times,” Liebenberg said in an interview. “We were heading for bankruptcy. Mandela was very mindful that the ANC having not been in government would not be as astute in managing the economy as it should be. He came to me because I was a banker with lots of international contacts and experience.”

In his first budget, Liebenberg raised taxes, equalized the tax system for all racial groups and slashed the defense budget. Those measures helped the government to raise $750 million in 1994 in its first post-apartheid international bond sale, 50 percent more than originally planned. By 1999, the Finance Ministry had reduced the budget deficit to 2.3 percent of GDP.

Mandela also persuaded Chris Stals, the central bank governor, to postpone his retirement by five years to help manage the country’s transition.

Life in Prison

“We made steady progress from day one on for those first five years,” Stals said in an interview. “Our main task was to bring us back into the world economy. Mr. Mandela certainly made a major contribution to that. The trust people had in him and his policies certainly enabled us to lay a very good foundation.”

That trust was hard won.

Mandela was sentenced to life imprisonment after being convicted of treason in June 1964, serving much of his sentence on Robben Island near Cape Town. His economic thinking was framed in terms of the ANC’s 1955 Freedom Charter, which called for the country’s mineral wealth and banks to be transferred to the ownership of the people.

“The question of nationalization of mines is a fundamental policy of the ANC,” Mandela said shortly after his release. “I believe the ANC is quite correct in this attitude and we should support it.”

A year later, he assured foreign companies their investments were safe following talks with then-Chinese Premier Li Peng, who told him nationalization wasn’t viable and that China was considering selling state companies.

Broad Sweep

“The world had changed while Mandela was in jail,” said Iraj Abedian, an economist who helped craft the Mandela’s administration’s 1996 hallmark economic policy, which won praise from international investors. “His engagement with the role players in the political, economic and financial world brought that reality home.”

Mandela helped set the broad parameters of economic policy, while leaving formulation and execution to his subordinates, according to Liebenberg, who now helps manage charities established by the former president.

“Until Mandela set his stamp on a policy I think it would not have been possible to drive it through the ANC,” Liebenberg said. “It certainly would not have been possible to drive it through government.”

Abedian, now CEO of Pan-African Capital Holdings, a Johannesburg-based advisory service, was struck by the attention to detail that Mandela, a trained lawyer, gave to policy making.

Phone Calls

“He would go through every document word by word, line by line,” Abedian said. “It was a question of understanding the rationale for every step, weighing it up, questioning it in detail, far more than people would believe.”

Stals recounts how after Trevor Manuel was appointed finance minister in 1996 and the rand tumbled 8.8 percent in the space of a month, Mandela would phone him two or three times a day for market updates.

“He showed a great interest in what we did and he was always quite well-informed,” said Stals. “He liked to discuss the monetary policy issues. He never really interfered, he never really gave instructions.”

Still, the stability that Mandela engineered in those early years after apartheid never made South Africa an economic dynamo. Economic growth has averaged 3.5 percent since 2004, compared with 10.5 percent in China and 7.7 percent in India.

Economic Framework

Moreover, the Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality, has risen to 0.63 in 2009 from 0.59 in 1993, making South Africa one of the world’s most unequal societies. Poverty remains most prevalent among black South Africans, who make up 79 percent of the population of 53 million.

Mandela never tackled labor laws that companies say stifle investment, or turned around an education system that has left South Africa with labor shortages for skilled jobs.

A wave of violent labor unrest that swept the country in 2012 has continued this year, with workers in the mining, agriculture and transportation industries going on strike for higher wages. The unrest peaked on Aug. 16, when police killed 34 protesters at a Lonmin Plc platinum mine.

Labor unions and the South African Communist Party blame the 1996 economic framework, known as Growth, Employment and Redistribution, for entrenching apartheid-era inequity. The policy, which was spearheaded by Manuel and described by Mandela as “non-negotiable,” sought to trim state borrowing, contain inflation and gradually relax exchange controls.

Working Class

“Established capital benefited from stabilization and liberalization measures,” while the interests of the poor and working class were largely overlooked, said Blade Nzimande, the SACP’s general secretary.

The ANC’s Youth League revived calls for nationalization, saying drastic steps were needed to distribute the country’s wealth more equitably. The league has toned down its demands since its leader Julius Malema was expelled from the ANC last year.

Mandela did the best he could for the country under the circumstances, Abedian said.

“Very few people appreciated what unstable macroeconomic conditions apartheid had left behind,” he said. “In that type of environment what was critical was to have a credible, not necessarily an instant, solution. Mandela realized what steps had to be taken to normalize and stabilize the economy.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-06/mandela-free-market-legacy-imperiled-by-south-african-inequality.html

South Africa’s economy

Strangers will not always be so kind

A COSTLY strike by carworkers in South Africa was at last called off on October 6th. The production lost to the dispute cannot easily be made up as car plants often work around the clock. Worse, the country’s reputation as a place for foreign investment has suffered. BMW, a big German carmaker, says the damage caused by the strike will influence the company’sfuture investment plans.

That sobering statement came just days after the IMF’s anual health-check on the economy. It is a portrait of a country that increasingly relies on foreign creditors to plug the holes in its finances yet does little to ensure that this much-needed investment will keep flowing.

The IMF’s judgment could scarcely be more damning. The report says that South Africa’s economy has grown far more slowly than its peers. The misery in Europe, where a big chunk of South Africa’s exports usually go, has not helped. But it does not excuse troubles at home: “Although weak trading-partner growth contributed, domestic factors were an important reason why South Africa’s growth has been below that of other emerging markets,” the report notes.

It might beggar belief that carworkers can strike for big wage increases when South Africa’s economy is growing so slowly and its unemployment rate is a depressing 25%. Yet the crux of the country’s economic difficulties is an “insider-outsider” complex, says the IMF, which affects both jobs and goods markets. It is costly to fire workers even with good reason. The protections afforded to insiders with jobs leave employers less willing to hire in case they turn out to be work-shy or incompetent. Meanwhile outsiders, mostly the young, are locked out of work.

Business in South Africa is part of the racket. It feigns to loathe costly regulations but in fact red tape makes it harder for job-creating start-ups to challenge established businesses. The IMF notes that the rate of creation and survival of new companies is one of the lowest in the world. This is a sweet deal for incumbent firms, which are more profitable in South Africa than their peers in many emerging markets, including Brazil, China, India and Russia. The lack of competition imposes an additional cost (over forgone jobs) on poor households in the form of high prices.

The social problems related to joblessness are reason enough to shake things up. But reform is even more urgent because of South Africa’s reliance on the kindness of strangers. It runs a current-account deficit of more than 6% of GDP: this is how much it adds to its overdraft with foreigners each year. It would better if this was funded by foreign direct investment, the sort of long-term capital that a BMW plant represents. But the gap between what South Africa spends and what it earns has been bridged by foreign buying of government bonds. The proceeds have gone on public-sector wages rather than on infrastructure projects, such as roads, ports and power plants.

Such purchases cannot be relied on for ever. Interest rates will eventually return to more normal levels in America and Europe. When that happens, capital will flow less freely to emerging markets, such as South Africa. And foreign investors might take fright sooner than that. In the rush for the exits, long-term interest rates would rise and the currency would wilt, leaving the economy in even deeper trouble.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/baobab/2013/10/south-africa-s-economy?zid=304&ah=e5690753dc78ce91909083042ad12e30

Nelson Mandela

Page semi-protected
This is a good article. Click here for more information.
His Excellency
Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela
OM AC CC OJ GCStJ QC GCH BR RSO NPk
Nelson Mandela on the eve of his 90th birthday in Johannesburg in May 2008
Mandela in Johannesburg, on 13 May 2008
President of South Africa
In office
10 May 1994 – 14 June 1999
Deputy Thabo Mbeki
F. W. de Klerk
Preceded by F. W. de Klerk
Succeeded by Thabo Mbeki
Personal details
Born Rolihlahla Mandela
18 July 1918
MvezoCape Province
Union of South Africa
Died 5 December 2013 (aged 95)
JohannesburgGauteng
South Africa
Nationality South African
Political party African National CongressSouth African Communist Party
Spouse(s) Evelyn Ntoko Mase
(m. 1944–1957; divorced)
Winnie Madikizela
(m. 1958–1996; divorced)
Graça Machel
(m. 1998–2013; his death)
Children

step children

  • Josina Z. Machel
  • Samora M. Machel Jnr.
Alma mater University of Fort Hare
University of London External System
University of South Africa
University of the Witwatersrand
Profession
Signature Signature of Nelson Mandela
Website www.nelsonmandela.org

Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela (Xhosa pronunciation: [xoˈliːɬaɬa manˈdeːla]) (18 July 1918 – 5 December 2013) was a South African anti-apartheid revolutionarypolitician, and philanthropist who served as President of South Africa from 1994 to 1999. He was the first black South African to hold the office, and the first elected in a fully representative democratic election. His government focused on dismantling the legacy of apartheid through tackling institutionalised racism, poverty and inequality, and fostering racial reconciliation. Politically an African nationalist and democratic socialist, he served as President of the African National Congress (ANC) from 1991 to 1997. Internationally, Mandela was Secretary General of the Non-Aligned Movement from 1998 to 1999.

Xhosa born to the Thembu royal family, Mandela attended the Fort Hare University and the University of Witwatersrand, where he studied law. Living in Johannesburg, he became involved in anti-colonial politics, joining the ANC and becoming a founding member of its Youth League. After the South African National Party came to power in 1948, he rose to prominence in the ANC’s 1952 Defiance Campaign, was appointed superintendent of the organisation’s Transvaal chapter and presided over the 1955 Congress of the People. Working as a lawyer, he was repeatedly arrested for seditious activities and, with the ANC leadership, was unsuccessfully prosecuted in the Treason Trial from 1956 to 1961. Although initially committed to non-violent protest, he co-founded the militant Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK) in 1961 in association with the South African Communist Party, leading a sabotage campaign against the apartheid government. In 1962 he was arrested, convicted of conspiracy to overthrow the state, and sentenced to life imprisonment in the Rivonia Trial.

Mandela served over 27 years in prison, initially on Robben Island, and later in Pollsmoor Prison and Victor Verster Prison. An international campaign lobbied for his release. He was released in 1990, during a time of escalating civil strife. Mandela joined negotiations with President F. W. de Klerk to abolish apartheid and establish multiracial elections in 1994, in which he led the ANC to victory and became South Africa’s first black president. He published his autobiography in 1995. During his tenure in the Government of National Unity he invited several other political parties to join the cabinet. As agreed to during the negotiations to end apartheid in South Africa, he promulgated a new constitution. He also created the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to investigate past human rights abuses. While continuing the former government’s liberal economic policy, his administration also introduced measures to encourage land reform, combat poverty, and expand healthcare services. Internationally, he acted as mediator between Libya and the United Kingdom in the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial, and oversaw military intervention in Lesotho. He declined to run for a second term, and was succeeded by his deputy, Thabo Mbeki. Mandela became an elder statesman, focusing on charitable work in combating poverty and HIV/AIDS through the Nelson Mandela Foundation.

Mandela was a controversial figure for much of his life. Denounced as a Marxist terrorist by critics,[1][2] he nevertheless gained international acclaim for his activism, having received more than 250 honours, including the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize, the USPresidential Medal of Freedom, the Soviet Order of Lenin and the Bharat Ratna. He is held in deep respect within South Africa, where he is often referred to by his Xhosa clan nameMadiba, or as Tata (“Father”); he is often described as “the father of the nation”.

Childhood: 1918–1936

Mandela was born on 18 July 1918 in the village of Mvezo in Umtatu, then a part of South Africa’s Cape Province.[3] Given the forename Rolihlahla, a Xhosa term colloquially meaning “troublemaker”,[3] in later years he became known by his clan name, Madiba.[4] His patrilineal great-grandfather, Ngubengcuka, was ruler of the Thembu people in theTranskeian Territories of South Africa’s modern Eastern Cape province.[5] One of this king’s sons, named Mandela, became Nelson’s grandfather and the source of his surname.[6]Because Mandela was only the king’s child by a wife of the Ixhiba clan, a so-called “Left-Hand House”, the descendants of his cadet branch of the royal family were morganatic, ineligible to inherit the throne but recognized as hereditary royal councillors.[6] His father, Gadla Henry Mphakanyiswa, was a local chief and councillor to the monarch; he had been appointed to the position in 1915, after his predecessor was accused of corruption by a governing white magistrate.[7] In 1926, Gadla, too, was sacked for corruption, but Nelson was told that he had lost his job for standing up to the magistrate’s unreasonable demands.[8] A devotee of the god Qamata,[9] Gadla was a polygamist, having four wives, four sons and nine daughters, who lived in different villages. Nelson’s mother was Gadla’s third wife, Nosekeni Fanny, who was daughter of Nkedama of the Right Hand House and a member of the amaMpemvu clan of Xhosa.[10]

“No one in my family had ever attended school [...] On the first day of school my teacher, Miss Mdingane, gave each of us an English name. This was the custom among Africans in those days and was undoubtedly due to the British bias of our education. That day, Miss Mdingane told me that my new name was Nelson. Why this particular name I have no idea.”

— Mandela, 1994[11]

Later stating that his early life was dominated by “custom, ritual and taboo”,[12] Mandela grew up with two sisters in his mother’skraal in the village of Qunu, where he tended herds as a cattle-boy, spending much time outside with other boys.[13] Both his parents were illiterate, but being a devout Christian, his mother sent him to a local Methodist school when he was about seven. Baptised a Methodist, Mandela was given the English forename of “Nelson” by his teacher.[14] When Mandela was about nine, his father came to stay at Qunu, where he died of an undiagnosed ailment which Mandela believed to be lung disease.[15] Feeling “cut adrift”, he later said that he inherited his father’s “proud rebelliousness” and “stubborn sense of fairness”.[16]

His mother took Mandela to the “Great Place” palace at Mqhekezweni, where he was entrusted under the guardianship of Themburegent, Chief Jongintaba Dalindyebo. Although he did not see his mother again for many years, Mandela felt that Jongintaba and his wife Noengland treated him as their own child, raising him alongside their son Justice and daughter Nomafu.[17] As Mandela attended church services every Sunday with his guardians, Christianity became a significant part of his life.[18] He attended aMethodist mission school located next to the palace, studying English, Xhosa, history and geography.[19] He developed a love of African history, listening to the tales told by elderly visitors to the palace, and became influenced by the anti-imperialist rhetoric of Chief Joyi.[20] At the time he nevertheless considered the European colonialists as benefactors, not oppressors.[21] Aged 16, he, Justice and several other boys travelled to Tyhalarha to undergo the circumcision ritual that symbolically marked their transition from boys to men; the rite over, he was given the name Dalibunga.[22]

Clarkebury, Healdtown, and Fort Hare: 1936–1940

Mandela c. 1937

Intending to gain skills needed to become a privy councillor for the Thembu royal house, Mandela began his secondary education at Clarkebury Boarding Institute in Engcobo, a Western-style institution that was the largest school for black Africans in Thembuland.[23] Made to socialise with other students on an equal basis, he claimed that he lost his “stuck up” attitude, becoming best friends with a girl for the first time; he began playing sports and developed his lifelong love of gardening.[24] Completing his Junior Certificate in two years,[25] in 1937 he moved to Healdtown, the Methodist college in Fort Beaufort attended by most Thembu royalty, including Justice.[26] The headmaster emphasised the superiority of English culture and government, but Mandela became increasingly interested in native African culture, making his first non-Xhosa friend, a Sotho language-speaker, and coming under the influence of one of his favourite teachers, a Xhosa who broke taboo by marrying a Sotho.[27] Spending much of his spare time long-distance running and boxing, in his second year Mandela became a prefect.[28]

With Jongintaba’s backing, Mandela began work on a Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree at the University of Fort Hare, an elite black institution inAlice, Eastern Cape, with around 150 students. There he studied English, anthropology, politics, native administration, and Roman Dutch law in his first year, desiring to become an interpreter or clerk in the Native Affairs Department.[29] Mandela stayed in the Wesley House dormitory, befriending his own kinsman, K.D. Matanzima, as well as Oliver Tambo, who became a close friend and comrade for decades to come.[30]Continuing his interest in sport, Mandela took up ballroom dancing,[31] performed in a drama society play about Abraham Lincoln,[32] and gave Bible classes in the local community as part of the Students Christian Association.[33] Although having friends connected to the African National Congress (ANC) and the anti-imperialist movement who wanted an independent South Africa, Mandela avoided any involvement,[34] and became a vocal supporter of the British war effort when the Second World War broke out.[35] Helping found a first-year students’ house committee which challenged the dominance of the second-years,[36] at the end of his first year he became involved in a Students’ Representative Council (SRC) boycott against the quality of food, for which he was temporarily suspended from the university; he left without receiving a degree.[37]

Arriving in Johannesburg: 1941–1943

Returning to Mqhekezweni in December 1940, Mandela found that Jongintaba had arranged marriages for him and Justice; dismayed, they fled to Johannesburg via Queenstown, arriving in April 1941.[38] Mandela found work as a night watchman at Crown Mines, his “first sight of South African capitalism in action”, but was fired when the induna (headman) discovered he was a runaway.[39] Staying with a cousin in George Goch Township, Mandela was introduced to the realtor and ANC activist Walter Sisulu, who secured him a job as an articled clerk at law firm Witkin, Sidelsky and Eidelman. The company was run by a liberal Jew, Lazar Sidelsky, who was sympathetic to the ANC’s cause.[40] At the firm, Mandela befriended Gaur Redebe, a Xhosa member of the ANC and Communist Party, as well as Nat Bregman, a Jewish communist who became his first white friend.[41]Attending communist talks and parties, Mandela was impressed that EuropeansAfricansIndians and Coloureds were mixing as equals. He stated later that he did not join the Party because its atheism conflicted with his Christian faith, and because he saw the South African struggle as being racially based rather than class warfare.[42] Becoming increasingly politicised, in August 1943 Mandela marched in support of a successful bus boycott to reverse fare rises.[43] Continuing his higher education, Mandela signed up to aUniversity of South Africa correspondence course, working on his bachelor’s degree at night.[44]

Earning a small wage, Mandela rented a room in the house of the Xhoma family in the Alexandra township; although rife with poverty, crime and pollution, Alexandra always remained “a treasured place” for him.[45] Although embarrassed by his poverty, he briefly courted a Swazi woman before unsuccessfully courting his landlord’s daughter.[46] In order to save money and be closer to downtown Johannesburg, Mandela moved into the compound of the Witwatersrand Native Labour Association, living among miners of various tribes; as the compound was a “way station for visiting chiefs”, he once met the Queen Regent of Basutoland.[47] In late 1941, Jongintaba visited, forgiving Mandela for running away. On returning to Thembuland, the regent died in winter 1942; Mandela and Justice arrived a day late for the funeral.[48] After passing his BA exams in early 1943, Mandela returned to Johannesburg to follow a political path as a lawyer rather than become a privy councillor in Thembuland.[49] He later stated that he experienced no epiphany, but that he “simply found myself doing so, and could not do otherwise.”[50]

Revolutionary activity

Law studies and the ANC Youth League: 1943–1949

Beginning law studies at the University of Witwatersrand, Mandela was the only native African student, and though facing racism, he befriended liberal and communist European, Jewish, and Indian students, among them Joe SlovoHarry Schwarz and Ruth First.[51] Joining the ANC, Mandela was increasingly influenced by Sisulu, spending much time with other activists at Sisulu’s Orlando house, including old friend Oliver Tambo.[52] In 1943, Mandela met Anton Lembede, an African nationalist virulently opposed to a racially united front against colonialism and imperialism or to an alliance with the communists.[53] Despite his friendships with non-blacks and communists, Mandela supported Lembede’s views, believing that black Africans should be entirely independent in their struggle for political self-determination.[54] Deciding on the need for a youth wing to mass mobilise Africans in opposition to their subjugation, Mandela was among a delegation that approached ANC President Alfred Bitini Xuma on the subject at his home in Sophiatown; the African National Congress Youth League (ANCYL) was founded on Easter Sunday 1944 in the Bantu Men’s Social Centre in Eloff Street, with Lembede as President and Mandela as a member of the executive committee.[55]

Mandela and Evelyn in 1944

At Sisulu’s house, Mandela met Evelyn Mase, an ANC activist from EngcoboTranskei, who was training at the time to become a nurse. Married on 5 October 1944, after initially living with her relatives, they rented House no. 8115 in Orlando from early 1946.[56] Their first child, Madiba “Thembi” Thembekile, was born in February 1945,[57] and a daughter named Makaziwe was born in 1947, dying nine months later of meningitis.[58] Mandela enjoyed home life, welcoming his mother and sister Leabie to stay with him.[59] In early 1947, his three years of articles ended at Witkin, Sidelsky and Eidelman, and he decided to become a full-time student, subsisting on loans from the Bantu Welfare Trust.[60]

In July 1947, Mandela rushed Lembede to hospital, where he died; he was succeeded as ANCYL president by the more moderate Peter Mda, who agreed to co-operate with communists and non-blacks, appointing Mandela ANCYL secretary.[61] Mandela disagreed with Mda’s approach, in December 1947 supporting an unsuccessful measure to expel communists from the ANCYL, considering their ideology un-African.[62] In 1947, Mandela was elected to the executive committee of the Transvaal ANC, serving under regional president C.S. Ramohanoe. When Ramohanoe acted against the wishes of the Transvaal Executive Committee by co-operating with Indians and communists, Mandela was one of those who forced his resignation.[63]

In the South African general election, 1948, in which only whites were permitted to vote, the Afrikaner-dominated Herenigde Nasionale Party under Daniel François Malan took power, soon uniting with the Afrikaner Party to form the National Party. Openly racialist, the party codified and expanded racial segregation with the new apartheid legislation.[64] Gaining increasing influence in the ANC, Mandela and his cadres began advocating direct action against apartheid, such as boycotts and strikes, influenced by the tactics of South Africa’s Indian community. Xuma did not support these measures and was removed from the presidency in a vote of no confidence, replaced by James Moroka and a more militant cabinet containing Sisulu, Mda, Tambo and Godfrey Pitje; Mandela later related that “We had now guided the ANC to a more radical and revolutionary path.”[65] Having devoted his time to politics, Mandela failed his final year at Witwatersrand three times; he was ultimately denied his degree in December 1949.[66]

Defiance Campaign and Transvaal ANC Presidency: 1950–1954

Mandela took Xuma’s place on the ANC National Executive in March 1950.[67] That month, the Defend Free Speech Convention was held in Johannesburg, bringing together African, Indian and communist activists to call an anti-apartheid general strike. Mandela opposed the strike because it was not ANC-led, but a majority of black workers took part, resulting in increased police repression and the introduction of the Suppression of Communism Act, 1950, affecting the actions of all protest groups.[68] In 1950, Mandela was elected national president of the ANCYL; at the ANC national conference of December 1951, he continued arguing against a racially united front, but was outvoted.[69] Thenceforth, he altered his entire perspective, embracing such an approach; influenced by friends like Moses Kotane and by the Soviet Union‘s support for wars of independence, Mandela’s mistrust of communism also broke down. He became influenced by the texts of Karl MarxFriedrich EngelsVladimir LeninJoseph Stalin and Mao Zedong, and embraceddialectical materialism.[70] In April 1952, Mandela began work at the H.M. Basner law firm,[71] though his increasing commitment to work and activism meant he spent less time with his family.[72]

In 1952, the ANC began preparation for a joint Defiance Campaign against apartheid with Indian and communist groups, founding a National Voluntary Board to recruit volunteers. Deciding on a path of nonviolent resistance influenced by Mahatma Gandhi, some considered it the ethical option, but Mandela instead considered it pragmatic.[73] At a Durban rally on 22 June, Mandela addressed an assembled crowd of 10,000, initiating the campaign protests, for which he was arrested and briefly interned in Marshall Square prison.[74] With further protests, the ANC’s membership grew from 20,000 to 100,000; the government responded with mass arrests, introducing the Public Safety Act, 1953 to permit martial law.[75] In May, authorities banned Transvaal ANU President J. B. Marks from making public appearances; unable to maintain his position, he recommended Mandela as his successor. Although the ultra-Africanist Bafabegiya group opposed his candidacy, Mandela was elected regional president in October.[76] On 30 July 1952, Mandela was arrested under the Suppression of Communism Act and stood trial as a part of the 21 accused – among them Moroka, Sisulu and Dadoo – in Johannesburg. Found guilty of “statutory communism”, their sentence of nine months’ hard labour was suspended for two years.[77] In December, Mandela was given a six-month ban from attending meetings or talking to more than one individual at a time, making his Transvaal ANU presidency impractical. The Defiance Campaign petered out.[78] In September 1953, Andrew Kunene read out Mandela’s “No Easy Walk to Freedom” speech at a Transvaal ANC meeting; the title was taken from a quote by Indian independence leader Jawaharlal Nehru, a seminal influence on Mandela’s thought. The speech laid out a contingency plan for a scenario in which the ANC was banned. This Mandela Plan, or M-Plan, involved dividing the organisation into acell structure with a more centralised leadership.[79]

Mandela obtained work as an attorney for the firm Terblanche and Briggish, before moving to the liberal-run Helman and Michel, passing qualification exams to become a full-fledged attorney.[80] In August 1953, Mandela and Oliver Tambo opened their own law firm, Mandela and Tambo, operating in downtown Johannesburg. The only African-run law firm in the country, it was popular with aggrieved blacks, often dealing with cases of police brutality. Disliked by the authorities, the firm was forced to relocate to a remote location after their office permit was removed under the Group Areas Act; as a result, their custom dwindled.[81] Though a second daughter, Makaziwe Phumia, was born in May 1954, Mandela’s relationship with Evelyn became strained, and she accused him of adultery. Evidence has emerged indicating that he was having affairs with ANC member Lillian Ngoyi and secretary Ruth Mompati; persistent but unproven claims assert that the latter bore Mandela a child. Disgusted by her son’s behaviour, Nosekeni returned to Transkei, and Evelyn embraced the Jehovah’s Witnesses and rejected Mandela’s obsession with politics.[82]

Congress of the People and the Treason Trial: 1955–1961

Main article: Treason Trial

“We, the people of South Africa, declare for all our country and the world to know:
That South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white, and that no government can justly claim authority unless it is based on the will of the people.”

— Opening words of the Freedom Charter[83]

Mandela came to the opinion that the ANC “had no alternative to armed and violent resistance” after taking part in the unsuccessful protest to prevent the demolition of the all-black Sophiatown suburb of Johannesburg in February 1955.[84] He advised Sisulu to request weaponry from the People’s Republic of China, but though supporting the anti-apartheid struggle, China’s government believed the movement insufficiently prepared for guerilla warfare.[85] With the involvement of the South African Indian Congress, the Coloured People’s Congress, the South African Congress of Trade Unions and the Congress of Democrats, the ANC planned aCongress of the People, calling on all South Africans to send in proposals for a post-apartheid era. Based on the responses, a Freedom Charter was drafted by Rusty Bernstein, calling for the creation of a democratic, non-racialist state with the nationalisationof major industry. When the charter was adopted at a June 1955 conference in Kliptown attended by 3000 delegates, police cracked down on the event, but it remained a key part of Mandela’s ideology.[86]

Following the end of a second ban in September 1955, Mandela went on a working holiday to Transkei to discuss the implications of the Bantu Authorities Act, 1951 with local tribal leaders, also visiting his mother and Noengland before proceeding to Cape Town.[87] In March 1956 he received his third ban on public appearances, restricting him to Johannesburg for five years, but he often defied it.[88] His marriage broke down as Evelyn left Mandela, taking their children to live with her brother. Initiating divorce proceedings in May 1956, she claimed that Mandela had physically abused her; he denied the allegations, and fought for custody of their children. She withdrew her petition of separation in November, but Mandela filed for divorce in January 1958; the divorce was finalised in March, with the children placed in Evelyn’s care.[89] During the divorce proceedings, he began courting and politicising a social worker, Winnie Madikizela, who he married in Bizana on 14 June 1958. She later became involved in ANC activities, spending several weeks imprisoned.[90]

The apartheid system pervaded all areas of life.

On 5 December 1956, Mandela was arrested alongside most of the ANC Executive for “high treason” against the state. Held in Johannesburg Prison amid mass protests, they underwent a preparatory examination in Drill Hall on 19 December, before being granted bail.[91] The defence’s refutation began on 9 January 1957, overseen by defence lawyer Vernon Berrangé, and continued until adjourning in September. In January 1958, judge Oswald Pirow was appointed to the case, and in February he ruled that there was “sufficient reason” for the defendants to go on trial in the Transvaal Supreme Court.[92] The formal Treason Trial began in Pretoria in August 1958, with the defendants successfully applying to have the three judges – all linked to the governing National Party – replaced. In August, one charge was dropped, and in October the prosecution withdrew its indictment, submitting a reformulated version in November which argued that the ANC leadership committed high treason by advocating violent revolution, a charge the defendants denied.[93]

In April 1959, militant Africanists dissatisfied with the ANC’s united front approach founded the Pan-African Congress (PAC); Mandela’s friend Robert Sobukwe was elected president, though Mandela thought the group “immature”.[94] Both parties campaigned for an anti-pass campaign in May 1960, in which Africans burned the passes that they were legally obliged to carry. One of the PAC-organized demonstrations was fired upon by police, resulting in the deaths of 69 protesters in the Sharpeville massacre. In solidarity, Mandela publicly burned his pass as rioting broke out across South Africa, leading the government to proclaim martial law.[95] Under the State of Emergency measures, Mandela and other activists were arrested on 30 March, imprisoned without charge in the unsanitary conditions of the Pretoria Local prison, and the ANC and PAC were banned in April.[96] This made it difficult for their lawyers to reach them, and it was agreed that the defence team for the Treason Trial should withdraw in protest. Representing themselves in court, the accused were freed from prison when the state of emergency was lifted in late August.[97] Mandela used his free time to organise an All-In African Conference near PietermaritzburgNatal, in March, at which 1,400 anti-apartheid delegates met, agreeing on a stay-at home protest to mark 31 May, the day South Africa became a republic.[98] On 29 March 1961, after a six-year trial, the judges produced a verdict of not guilty, embarrassing the government.[99]

Umkhonto we Sizwe and African tour: 1961–1962

Thatched room at Liliesleaf Farm, where Mandela hid

Mandela House in the Johannesburg township of Soweto was Mandela’s home before his 27-year imprisonment, and his home immediately after being released from prison. The property is now a national museum.

Disguising himself as a chauffeur, Mandela travelled the country incognito, organising the ANC’s new cell structure and a mass stay-at-home strike for 29 May. Referred to as the “Black Pimpernel” in the press – a reference to Emma Orczy‘s 1905 novel The Scarlet Pimpernel – the police put out a warrant for his arrest.[100] Mandela held secret meetings with reporters, and after the government failed to prevent the strike, he warned them that many anti-apartheid activists would soon resort to violence through groups like the PAC’sPoqo.[101] He believed that the ANC should form an armed group to channel some of this violence, convincing both ANC leader Albert Luthuli – who was morally opposed to violence – and allied activist groups of its necessity.[102]

Inspired by Fidel Castro‘s 26th of July Movement in the Cuban Revolution, in 1961 Mandela co-founded Umkhonto we Sizwe (“Spear of the Nation”, abbreviated MK) with Sisulu and the communist Joe Slovo. Becoming chairman of the militant group, he gained ideas from illegal literature on guerilla warfare by Mao and Che Guevara. Officially separate from the ANC, in later years MK became the group’s armed wing.[103] Most early MK members were white communists; after hiding in communist Wolfie Kodesh’s flat in Berea, Mandela moved to the communist-owned Liliesleaf Farm in Rivonia, there joined by Raymond Mhlaba, Slovo and Bernstein, who put together the MK constitution.[104] Although Mandela himself denied ever being a Communist Party member, historical research has suggested that he might have been for a short period, starting from the late 1950s or early 1960s.[105] After his death, the Communist Party and the ANC confirmed that he was a Communist Party member when he was arrested in 1962.[106][107]

Operating through a cell structure, the MK agreed to acts of sabotage to exert maximum pressure on the government with minimum casualties, bombing military installations, power plants, telephone lines and transport links at night, when civilians were not present. Mandela himself stated that they chose sabotage not only because it was the least harmful action, but also “because it did not involve loss of life [and] it offered the best hope for reconciliation among the races afterward.” He noted that “strict instructions were given to members of MK that we would countenance no loss of life”, but should these tactics fail, MK would resort to “guerilla warfare and terrorism”.[108]

Soon after ANC leader Luthuli was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, the MK publicly announced its existence with 57 bombings onDingane’s Day (16 December) 1961, followed by further attacks on New Year’s Eve.[109]

The ANC agreed to send Mandela as a delegate to the February 1962 Pan-African Freedom Movement for East, Central and Southern Africa (PAFMECSA) meeting in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.[110] Traveling there in secret, Mandela met with Emperor Haile Selassie I, and gave his speech after Selassie’s at the conference.[111] After the conference, he travelled to Cairo, Egypt, admiring the political reforms of President Gamal Abdel Nasser, and then went to Tunis, Tunisia, where President Habib Bourguiba gave him £5000 for weaponry. He proceeded to Morocco, Mali, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia and Senegal, receiving funds from Liberian President William Tubman and Guinean President Ahmed Sékou Touré.[112]Leaving Africa for London, England, he met anti-apartheid activists, reporters and prominent leftist politicians.[113] Returning to Ethiopia, he began a six-month course in guerrilla warfare, but completed only two months before being recalled to South Africa.[114]

Imprisonment

Police shots of several accused in theRivonia Trial. The portrait at the top is of Mandela, the chief accused. The photograph in the lower right-hand corner is of Walter Sisulu.

Arrest and Rivonia trial: 1962–1964

Main article: Rivonia Trial

On 5 August 1962, police captured Mandela along with Cecil Williams near Howick.[115] A large number of groups have been accused of having tipped off the police about Mandela’s whereabouts including Mandela’s host in Durban GR Naidoo, white members of the South African Communist Party, and the CIA, but Mandela himself considers none of these connections to be credible and instead attributes his arrest to his own carelessness in concealing his movements.[116] Of the CIA link in particular, Mandela’s official biographer Anthony Sampson believes that “the claim cannot be substantiated.”[117] Jailed in Johannesburg’s Marshall Square prison, he was charged with inciting workers’ strikes and leaving the country without permission. Representing himself with Slovo as legal advisor, Mandela intended to use the trial to showcase “the ANC’s moral opposition to racism” while supporters demonstrated outside the court.[118] Moved to Pretoria, where Winnie could visit him, in his cell he began correspondence studies for a Bachelor of Laws (LLB) degree from theUniversity of London.[119] His hearing began on 15 October, but he disrupted proceedings by wearing a traditional kaross, refusing to call any witnesses, and turning his plea of mitigation into a political speech. Found guilty, he was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment; as he left the courtroom, supporters sang Nkosi Sikelel iAfrika.[120]

“I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die. “

“In a way I had never quite comprehended before, I realized the role I could play in court and the possibilities before me as a defendant. I was the symbol of justice in the court of the oppressor, the representative of the great ideals of freedom, fairness and democracy in a society that dishonoured those virtues. I realized then and there that I could carry on the fight even in the fortress of the enemy.”

— Mandela, 1994[122]

On 11 July 1963, police raided Liliesleaf Farm, arresting those they found there and uncovering paperwork documenting MK’s activities, some of which mentioned Mandela. The Rivonia Trial began at Pretoria Supreme Court on 9 October, with Mandela and his comrades charged with four counts of sabotage and conspiracy to violently overthrow the government. Their chief prosecutor wasPercy Yutar, who called for them to receive the death penalty.[123] Judge Quartus de Wet soon threw out the prosecution’s case for insufficient evidence, but Yutar reformulated the charges, presenting his new case from December until February 1964, calling 173 witnesses and bringing thousands of documents and photographs to the trial.[124]

With the exception of James Kantor, who was innocent of all charges, Mandela and the accused admitted sabotage but denied that they had ever agreed to initiate guerilla war against the government. They used the trial to highlight their political cause. At the opening of the defence’s proceedings Mandela gave a four hour long speech. That speech – which was inspired by Castro’s “History Will Absolve Me” speech – was widely reported in the press despite official censorship, and has been hailed as one of his greatest speeches.[125] The trial gained international attention, with global calls for the release of the accused from such institutions as the United Nations and World Peace Council. The University of London Union voted Mandela to its presidency, and nightly vigils for him were held in St. Paul’s Cathedral, London.[126] Deeming them to be violent communist agitators, South Africa’s government ignored all calls for clemency, and on 12 June 1964 de Wet found Mandela and two of his co-accused guilty on all four charges, sentencing them to life imprisonment rather than death.[127]

Robben Island: 1964–1982

Lime quarry on Robben Island where Mandela and other prisoners were subjected to hard labour

Mandela and his co-accused were transferred from Pretoria to the prison on Robben Island, remaining there for the next 18 years.[128] Isolated from non-political prisoners in Section B, Mandela was imprisoned in a damp concrete cell measuring 8 feet (2.4 m) by 7 feet (2.1 m), with a straw mat on which to sleep.[129] Verbally and physically harassed by several white prison wardens, the Rivonia Trial prisoners spent their days breaking rocks into gravel, until being reassigned in January 1965 to work in a lime quarry. Mandela was initially forbidden to wear sunglasses, and the glare from the lime permanently damaged his eyesight.[130] At night, he worked on his LLB degree, but newspapers were forbidden, and he was locked in solitary confinement on several occasions for possessing smuggled news clippings.[131] Classified as the lowest grade of prisoner, Class D, he was permitted one visit and one letter every six months, although all mail was heavily censored.[132]

The political prisoners took part in work and hunger strikes – the latter considered largely ineffective by Mandela – to improve prison conditions, viewing this as a microcosm of the anti-apartheid struggle.[133] ANC prisoners elected him to their four-man “High Organ” along with Sisulu, Govan Mbeki and Raymond Mhlaba, and he involved himself in a group representing all political prisoners on the island, Ulundi, through which he forged links with PAC and Yu Chi Chan Club members.[134] Initiating the “University of Robben Island”, whereby prisoners lectured on their own areas of expertise, he debated topics such as homosexuality and politics with his comrades, getting into fierce arguments on the latter with Marxists like Mbeki and Harry Gwala.[135] Though attending Christian Sunday services, Mandela studied Islam.[136] He also studied Afrikaans, hoping to build a mutual respect with the warders and convert them to his cause.[137] Various official visitors met with Mandela; most significant was the liberal parliamentary representative Helen Suzman of theProgressive Party, who championed Mandela’s cause outside prison.[138] In September 1970 he met British Labour Party MP Dennis Healey.[139] South African Minister of JusticeJimmy Kruger visited in December 1974, but he and Mandela did not get on.[140] His mother visited in 1968, dying shortly after, and his firstborn son Thembi died in a car accident the following year; Mandela was forbidden from attending either funeral.[141] His wife was rarely able to visit, being regularly imprisoned for political activity, and his daughters first visited in December 1975; Winnie got out of prison in 1977 but was forcibly settled in Brandfort, still unable to visit him.[142]

The inside of Mandela’s prison cell as it was when he was imprisoned in 1964 and his open cell window facing the prison yard on Robben Island, now a national andWorld Heritage Site. Mandela’s cell later contained more furniture, including a bed from around 1973.[143]

From 1967, prison conditions improved, with black prisoners given trousers rather than shorts, games being permitted, and food quality improving.[144] In a FIFA documentary, Mandela commented on howfootball gave hope to his fellow inmates; “the game made us feel alive and triumphant despite the situation we found ourselves in”.[145] In 1969, an escape plan for Mandela was developed by Gordon Bruce, but it was abandoned after being infiltrated by an agent of the South African Bureau of State Security (BOSS), who hoped to see Mandela shot during the escape.[146] In 1970, Commander Piet Badenhorst became commanding officer. Mandela, seeing an increase in the physical and mental abuse of prisoners, complained to visiting judges, who had Badenhorst reassigned.[147] He was replaced by Commander Willie Willemse, who developed a co-operative relationship with Mandela and was keen to improve prison standards.[148] By 1975, Mandela had become a Class A prisoner,[149] allowing greater numbers of visits and letters; he corresponded with anti-apartheid activists like Mangosuthu Buthelezi andDesmond Tutu.[150] That year, he began his autobiography, which was smuggled to London, but remained unpublished at the time; prison authorities discovered several pages, and his study privileges were stopped for four years.[151] Instead he devoted his spare time to gardening and reading until he resumed his LLB degree studies in 1980.[152]

By the late 1960s, Mandela’s fame had been eclipsed by Steve Biko and the Black Consciousness Movement (BCM). Seeing the ANC as ineffectual, the BCM called for militant action, but following the Soweto uprising of 1976, many BCM activists were imprisoned on Robben Island.[153] Mandela tried to build a relationship with these young radicals, although he was critical of their racialism and contempt for white anti-apartheid activists.[154] Renewed international interest in his plight came in July 1978, when he celebrated his 60th birthday.[155] He was awarded an honorary doctorate in Lesotho, the Jawaharlal Nehru Award for International Understanding in India in 1979, and the Freedom of the City ofGlasgow, Scotland in 1981.[156][157][158] In March 1980 the slogan “Free Mandela!” was developed by journalist Percy Qoboza, sparking an international campaign that led the UN Security Council to call for his release.[159] Despite increasing foreign pressure, the government refused, relying on powerful foreign Cold War allies in US President Ronald Reaganand UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher; both considered Mandela a communist terrorist and supported the suppression of the ANC.[160]

Pollsmoor Prison: 1982–1988

In April 1982 Mandela was transferred to Pollsmoor Prison in Tokai, Cape Town along with senior ANC leaders Walter Sisulu, Andrew Mlangeni, Ahmed Kathrada and Raymond Mhlaba; they believed that they were being isolated to remove their influence on younger activists.[161] Conditions at Pollsmoor were better than at Robben Island, although Mandela missed the camaraderie and scenery of the island.[162] Getting on well with Pollsmoor’s commanding officer, Brigadier Munro, Mandela was permitted to create a roof garden,[163]also reading voraciously and corresponding widely, now permitted 52 letters a year.[164] He was appointed patron of the multi-racial United Democratic Front (UDF), founded to combat reforms implemented by South African President P.W. Botha. Botha’s National Party government had permitted Coloured and Indian citizens to vote for their own parliaments which had control over education, health, and housing, but black Africans were excluded from the system; like Mandela, the UDF saw this as an attempt to divide the anti-apartheid movement on racial lines.[165]

Bust of Mandela erected on London’s Southbank by theGreater London Counciladministration of socialist Ken Livingstone in 1985

Violence across the country escalated, with many fearing civil war. Under pressure from an international lobby, multinational banks stopped investing in South Africa, resulting in economic stagnation. Numerous banks and Thatcher asked Botha to release Mandela – then at the height of his international fame – to defuse the volatile situation.[166] Although considering Mandela a dangerous “arch-Marxist”,[167] in February 1985 Botha offered him a release from prison on condition that he ‘”unconditionally rejected violence as a political weapon”. Mandela spurned the offer, releasing a statement through his daughter Zindzi stating “What freedom am I being offered while the organisation of the people [ANC] remains banned? Only free men can negotiate. A prisoner cannot enter into contracts.”[168]

In 1985 Mandela underwent surgery on an enlarged prostate gland, before being given new solitary quarters on the ground floor.[169] He was met by “seven eminent persons”, an international delegation sent to negotiate a settlement, but Botha’s government refused to co-operate, in June calling a state of emergency and initiating a police crackdown on unrest. The anti-apartheid resistance fought back, with the ANC committing 231 attacks in 1986 and 235 in 1987. Utilising the army and right-wing paramilitaries to combat the resistance, the government secretly funded Zulunationalist movement Inkatha to attack ANC members, furthering the violence.[170] Mandela requested talks with Botha but was denied, instead secretly meeting with Minister of Justice Kobie Coetsee in 1987, having a further 11 meetings over 3 years. Coetsee organised negotiations between Mandela and a team of four government figures starting in May 1988; the team agreed to the release of political prisoners and the legalisation of the ANC on the condition that they permanently renounce violence, break links with the Communist Party and not insist on majority rule. Mandela rejected these conditions, insisting that the ANC would only end the armed struggle when the government renounced violence.[171]

Mandela’s 70th birthday in July 1988 attracted international attention, notably with the Nelson Mandela 70th Birthday Tribute concert at London’sWembley Stadium.[172] Although presented globally as a heroic figure, he faced personal problems when ANC leaders informed him that Winnie had set herself up as head of a criminal gang, the “Mandela United Football Club”, who had been responsible for torturing and killing opponents – including children – in Soweto. Though some encouraged him to divorce her, he decided to remain loyal until she was found guilty by trial.[173]

Victor Verster Prison and release: 1988–1990

Mandela on a 1988 Sovietcommemorative stamp

Recovering from tuberculosis caused by dank conditions in his cell,[174] in December 1988 Mandela was moved to Victor Verster Prison nearPaarl. Here, he was housed in the relative comfort of a warder’s house with a personal cook, using the time to complete his LLB degree.[175]There he was permitted many visitors, such as anti-apartheid campaigner and longtime friend Harry Schwarz.[176][177] Mandela organised secret communications with exiled ANC leader Oliver Tambo.[178] In 1989, Botha suffered a stroke, retaining the state presidency but stepping down as leader of the National Party, to be replaced by the conservative F. W. de Klerk.[179] In a surprise move, Botha invited Mandela to a meeting over tea in July 1989, an invitation Mandela considered genial.[180] Botha was replaced as state president by de Klerk six weeks later; the new president believed that apartheid was unsustainable and unconditionally released all ANC prisoners except Mandela.[181] Following the fall of theBerlin Wall in November 1989, de Klerk called his cabinet together to debate legalising the ANC and freeing Mandela. Although some were deeply opposed to his plans, de Klerk met with Mandela in December to discuss the situation, a meeting both men considered friendly, before releasing Mandela unconditionally and legalising all formerly banned political parties on 2 February 1990.[182] The first photographs of Mandela were allowed to be published in South Africa for 20 years.[183]

Leaving Victor Verster on 11 February, Mandela held Winnie’s hand in front of amassed crowds and press; the event was broadcast live across the world.[184] Driven to Cape Town’s City Hall through crowds, he gave a speech declaring his commitment to peace and reconciliation with the white minority, but made it clear that the ANC’s armed struggle was not over, and would continue as “a purely defensive action against the violence of apartheid.” He expressed hope that the government would agree to negotiations, so that “there may no longer be the need for the armed struggle”, and insisted that his main focus was to bring peace to the black majority and give them the right to vote in national and local elections.[185] Staying at the home of Desmond Tutu, in the following days Mandela met with friends, activists, and press, giving a speech to 100,000 people at Johannesburg’sSoccer City.[186]

End of apartheid

Early negotiations: 1990–1991

Luthuli House in Johannesburg, which became the ANC headquarters in 1991

Mandela proceeded on an African tour, meeting supporters and politicians in Zambia, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Libya and Algeria, continuing to Sweden where he was reunited with Tambo, and then London, where he appeared at the Nelson Mandela: An International Tribute for a Free South Africa concert in Wembley Stadium.[187] Encouraging foreign countries to support sanctions against the apartheid government, in France he was welcomed by President François Mitterrand, in Vatican City by Pope John Paul II, and in the United Kingdom he met Margaret Thatcher. In the United States, he met President George H.W. Bush, addressed both Houses of Congress and visited eight cities, being particularly popular among the African-American community.[188] In Cuba he met President Fidel Castro, whom he had long admired, with the two becoming friends.[189] In Asia he met President R. Venkataraman in India, President Suharto in Indonesia and Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad in Malaysia, before visiting Australia to meet Prime Minister Bob Hawke and Japan; he notably did not visit the Soviet Union, a longtime ANC supporter.[190]

In May 1990, Mandela led a multiracial ANC delegation into preliminary negotiations with a government delegation of 11 Afrikaner men. Mandela impressed them with his discussions of Afrikaner history, and the negotiations led to the Groot Schuur Minute, in which the government lifted the state of emergency. In August Mandela – recognising the ANC’s severe military disadvantage – offered a ceasefire, the Pretoria Minute, for which he was widely criticised by MK activists.[191] He spent much time trying to unify and build the ANC, appearing at a Johannesburg conference in December attended by 1600 delegates, many of whom found him more moderate than expected.[192] At the ANC’s July 1991 national conference in Durban, Mandela admitted the party’s faults and announced his aim to build a “strong and well-oiled task force” for securing majority rule. At the conference, he was elected ANC President, replacing the ailing Tambo, and a 50-strong multiracial, mixed gendered national executive was elected.[193]

Mandela was given an office in the newly purchased ANC headquarters at Shell House, central Johannesburg, and moved with Winnie to her large Soweto home.[194] Their marriage was increasingly strained as he learned of her affair with Dali Mpofu, but he supported her during her trial for kidnapping and assault. He gained funding for her defence from the International Defence and Aid Fund for Southern Africa and from Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, but in June 1991 she was found guilty and sentenced to six years in prison, reduced to two on appeal. On 13 April 1992, Mandela publicly announced his separation from Winnie. The ANC forced her to step down from the national executive for misappropriating ANC funds; Mandela moved into the mostly white Johannesburg suburb of Houghton.[195] Mandela’s reputation was further damaged by the increase in “black-on-black” violence, particularly between ANC and Inkatha supporters in KwaZulu-Natal, in which thousands died. Mandela met with Inkatha leader Buthelezi, but the ANC prevented further negotiations on the issue. Mandela recognised that there was a “third force” within the state intelligence services fuelling the “slaughter of the people” and openly blamed de Klerk – whom he increasingly distrusted – for the Sebokeng massacre.[196] In September 1991 a national peace conference was held in Johannesburg in which Mandela, Buthelezi and de Klerk signed a peace accord, though the violence continued.[197]

CODESA talks: 1991–1992

The Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA) began in December 1991 at the Johannesburg World Trade Center, attended by 228 delegates from 19 political parties. Although Cyril Ramaphosa led the ANC’s delegation, Mandela remained a key figure, and after de Klerk used the closing speech to condemn the ANC’s violence, he took to the stage to denounce him as “head of an illegitimate, discredited minority regime”. Dominated by the National Party and ANC, little negotiation was achieved.[198] CODESA 2 was held in May 1992, in which de Klerk insisted that post-apartheid South Africa must use a federal system with a rotating presidency to ensure the protection of ethnic minorities; Mandela opposed this, demanding a unitary system governed by majority rule.[199] Following the Boipatong massacre of ANC activists by government-aided Inkatha militants, Mandela called off the negotiations, before attending a meeting of the Organisation of African Unity in Senegal, at which he called for a special session of the UN Security Council and proposed that a UN peacekeeping force be stationed in South Africa to prevent “state terrorism“. The UN sent special envoy Cyrus Vance to the country to aid negotiations.[200]Calling for domestic mass action, in August the ANC organised the largest-ever strike in South African history, and supporters marched on Pretoria.[201]

De Klerk and Mandela shake hands at the World Economic Forum, 1992

Following the Bisho massacre, in which 28 ANC supporters and one soldier were shot dead by the Ciskei Defence Force during a protest march, Mandela realised that mass action was leading to further violence and resumed negotiations in September. He agreed to do so on the conditions that all political prisoners be released, that Zulu traditional weapons be banned, and that Zulu hostels would be fenced off, the latter two measures to prevent further Inkatha attacks; under increasing pressure, de Klerk reluctantly agreed. The negotiations agreed that a multiracial general election would be held, resulting in a five-year coalition government of national unity and a constitutional assembly that gave the National Party continuing influence. The ANC also conceded to safeguarding the jobs of white civil servants; such concessions brought fierce internal criticism.[202] The duo agreed on an interim constitution, guaranteeing separation of powers, creating a constitutional court, and including a US-style bill of rights; it also divided the country into nine provinces, each with its own premier and civil service, a concession between de Klerk’s desire for federalism and Mandela’s for unitary government.[203]

The democratic process was threatened by the Concerned South Africans Group (COSAG), an alliance of far-right Afrikaner parties and black ethnic-secessionist groups like Inkatha; in June 1993 the white supremacist Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging (AWB) attacked the Kempton Park World Trade Centre.[204] Following the murder of ANC leader Chris Hani, Mandela made a publicised speech to calm rioting, soon after appearing at a mass funeral in Soweto for Tambo, who had died from a stroke.[205] In July 1993, both Mandela and de Klerk visited the US, independently meeting President Bill Clinton and each receiving the Liberty Medal.[206] Soon after, they were jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in Norway.[207] Influenced by young ANC leader Thabo Mbeki, Mandela began meeting with big business figures, and played down his support for nationalisation, fearing that he would scare away much-needed foreign investment. Although criticised by socialist ANC members, he was encouraged to embrace private enterprise by members of the Chinese and Vietnamese Communist parties at the January 1992 World Economic Forum in Switzerland.[208] Mandela also made a cameo appearance as a schoolteacher reciting one ofMalcolm X‘s speeches in the final scene of the 1992 film Malcolm X.[209]

General election: 1994

Mandela casting his vote in the1994 election

With the election set for 27 April 1994, the ANC began campaigning, opening 100 election offices and hiring advisor Stanley Greenberg. Greenberg orchestrated the foundation of People’s Forums across the country, at which Mandela could appear; though a poor public speaker, he was a popular figure with great status among black South Africans.[210] The ANC campaigned on a Reconstruction and Development Programme(RDP) to build a million houses in five years, introduce universal free education and extend access to water and electricity. The party’s slogan was “a better life for all”, although it was not explained how this development would be funded.[211] With the exception of the Weekly Mail and the New Nation, South Africa’s press opposed Mandela’s election, fearing continued ethnic strife, instead supporting the National or Democratic Party.[212]Mandela devoted much time to fundraising for the ANC, touring North America, Europe and Asia to meet wealthy donors, including former supporters of the apartheid regime.[213] He also urged a reduction in the voting age from 18 to 14; rejected by the ANC, this policy became the subject of ridicule.[214]

Concerned that COSAG would undermine the election, particularly in the wake of the Battle of Bop and Shell House Massacre – incidents of violence involving the AWB and Inkatha, respectively – Mandela met with Afrikaner politicians and generals, including P.W. Botha, Pik Botha andConstand Viljoen, persuading many to work within the democratic system, and with de Klerk convinced Inkatha’s Buthelezi to enter the elections rather than launch a war of secession.[215] As leaders of the two major parties, de Klerk and Mandela appeared on a televised debate; although de Klerk was widely considered the better speaker at the event, Mandela’s offer to shake his hand surprised him, leading some commentators to consider it a victory for Mandela.[216] The election went ahead with little violence, although an AWB cell killed 20 with car bombs. As widely expected, the ANC won a sweeping victory, taking 62 percent of the vote, just short of the two-thirds majority needed to unilaterally change the constitution. The ANC was also victorious in 7 provinces, with Inkatha and the National Party each taking another.[217] Mandela voted at theOhlange High School in Durban, and though the ANC’s victory assured his election as President, he publicly accepted that the election had been marred by instances of fraud and sabotage.[218]

Presidency of South Africa: 1994–1999

The newly elected National Assembly’s first act was to formally elect Mandela as South Africa’s first black chief executive. His inauguration took place in Pretoria on 10 May 1994, televised to a billion viewers globally. The event was attended by 4000 guests, including world leaders from disparate backgrounds.[219] Mandela headed a Government of National Unity dominated by the ANC – which alone had no experience of governance – but containing representatives from the National Party and Inkatha. Under the Interim Constitution, Inkatha and the NP were entitled to seats in the government by virtue of winning at least 20 seats. In keeping with earlier agreements, de Klerk became first Deputy President, and Thabo Mbeki was selected as second.[220] Although Mbeki had not been his first choice for the job, Mandela grew to rely heavily on him throughout his presidency, allowing him to organise policy details.[221] Moving into the presidential office at Tuynhuys in Cape Town, Mandela allowed de Klerk to retain the presidential residence in the Groote Schuur estate, instead settling into the nearby Westbrooke manor, which he renamed “Genadendal“, meaning “Valley of Mercy” in Afrikaans.[222] Retaining his Houghton home, he also had a house built in his home village of Qunu, which he visited regularly, walking around the area, meeting with locals, and judging tribal disputes.[223]

Mandela moved into the presidential office at Tuynhuys, Cape Town.

Aged 76, he faced various ailments, and although exhibiting continued energy, he felt isolated and lonely.[224] He often entertained celebrities, such as Michael JacksonWhoopi Goldberg, and the Spice Girls, and befriended ultra-rich businessmen, like Harry Oppenheimer of Anglo-American, as well as Queen Elizabeth II on her March 1995 state visit to South Africa, resulting in strong criticism from ANC anti-capitalists.[225] Despite his opulent surroundings, Mandela lived simply, donating a third of his 552,000 rand annual income to the Nelson Mandela Children’s Fund, which he had founded in 1995.[226] Although speaking out in favour of freedom of the press and befriending many journalists, Mandela was critical of much of the country’s media, noting that it was overwhelmingly owned and run by middle-class whites and believing that it focused too much on scaremongering around crime.[227] Changing clothes several times a day, after assuming the presidency, one of Mandela’s trademarks was his use of Batik shirts, known as “Madiba shirts“, even on formal occasions.[228]

In December 1994, Mandela’s autobiography, Long Walk to Freedom, was finally published.[229] In late 1994 he attended the 49th conference of the ANC in Bloemfontein, at which a more militant National Executive was elected, among them Winnie Mandela; although she expressed an interest in reconciling, Nelson initiated divorce proceedings in August 1995.[230] By 1995 he had entered into a relationship with Graça Machel, a Mozambican political activist 27 years his junior who was the widow of former president Samora Machel. They had first met in July 1990, when she was still in mourning, but their friendship grew into a partnership, with Machel accompanying him on many of his foreign visits. She turned down Mandela’s first marriage proposal, wanting to retain some independence and dividing her time between Mozambique and Johannesburg.[231]

National reconciliation

Presiding over the transition from apartheid minority rule to a multicultural democracy, Mandela saw national reconciliation as the primary task of his presidency.[232] Having seen other post-colonial African economies damaged by the departure of white elites, Mandela worked to reassure South Africa’s white population that they were protected and represented in “the Rainbow Nation“.[233] Mandela attempted to create the broadest possible coalition in his cabinet, with de Klerk as first Deputy President. Other National Party officials became ministers for Agriculture, Energy, Environment, and Minerals and Energy, and Buthelezi was named Minister for Home Affairs.[234] The other cabinet positions were taken by ANC members, many of whom – like Joe ModiseAlfred Nzo, Joe Slovo, Mac Maharaj and Dullah Omar – had long been comrades, although others, such as Tito Mboweni and Jeff Radebe, were much younger.[235] Mandela’s relationship with de Klerk was strained; Mandela thought that de Klerk was intentionally provocative, and de Klerk felt that he was being intentionally humiliated by the president. In January 1995, Mandela heavily chastised him for awarding amnesty to 3,500 police just before the election, and later criticised him for defending former Minister of Defence Magnus Malan when the latter was charged with murder.[236]

Mandela personally met with senior figures of the apartheid regime, including Hendrik Verwoerd‘s widow Betsie Schoombie and the lawyer Percy Yutar; emphasising personal forgiveness and reconciliation, he announced that “courageous people do not fear forgiving, for the sake of peace.”[237] He encouraged black South Africans to get behind the previously hated national rugby team, the Springboks, as South Africa hosted the 1995 Rugby World Cup. After the Springboks won an epic final over New Zealand, Mandela presented the trophy to captain Francois Pienaar, an Afrikaner, wearing a Springbok shirt with Pienaar’s own number 6 on the back. This was widely seen as a major step in the reconciliation of white and black South Africans; as de Klerk later put it, “Mandela won the hearts of millions of white rugby fans.”[238] Mandela’s efforts at reconciliation assuaged the fears of whites, but also drew criticism from more militant blacks. His estranged wife, Winnie, accused the ANC of being more interested in appeasing whites than in helping blacks.[239]

More controversially, Mandela oversaw the formation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to investigate crimes committed under apartheid by both the government and the ANC, appointing Desmond Tutu as its chair. To prevent the creation of martyrs, the Commission granted individual amnesties in exchange for testimony of crimes committed during the apartheid era. Dedicated in February 1996, it held two years of hearings detailing rapes, torture, bombings, and assassinations, before issuing its final report in October 1998. Both de Klerk and Mbeki appealed to have parts of the report suppressed, though only de Klerk’s appeal was successful.[240] Mandela praised the Commission’s work, stating that it “had helped us move away from the past to concentrate on the present and the future”.[241]

Domestic programmes

Mandela on a visit to Brazil in 1998

Mandela’s administration inherited a country with a huge disparity in wealth and services between white and black communities. Of a population of 40 million, around 23 million lacked electricity or adequate sanitation, 12 million lacked clean water supplies, with 2 million children not in school and a third of the population illiterate. There was 33% unemployment, and just under half of the population lived below the poverty line.[242]Government financial reserves were nearly depleted, with a fifth of the national budget being spent on debt repayment, meaning that the extent of the promised Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) was scaled back, with none of the proposed nationalisation or job creation.[243]Instead, the government adopted liberal economic policies designed to promote foreign investment, adhering to the “Washington consensus” advocated by the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.[244]

Under Mandela’s presidency, welfare spending increased by 13% in 1996/97, 13% in 1997/98, and 7% in 1998/99.[245] The government introduced parity in grants for communities, including disability grants, child maintenance grants, and old-age pensions, which had previously been set at different levels for South Africa’s different racial groups.[245] In 1994, free healthcare was introduced for children under six and pregnant women, a provision extended to all those using primary level public sector health care services in 1996.[246] By the 1999 election, the ANC could boast that due to their policies, 3 million people were connected to telephone lines, 1.5 million children were brought into the education system, 500 clinics were upgraded or constructed, 2 million people were connected to the electricity grid, water access was extended to 3 million people, and 750,000 houses were constructed, housing nearly 3 million people.[247]

The Land Restitution Act of 1994 enabled people who had lost their property as a result of the Natives Land Act, 1913 to claim back their land, leading to the settlement of tens of thousands of land claims.[248] The Land Reform Act 3 of 1996 safeguarded the rights of labour tenants who live and grow crops or graze livestock on farms. This legislation ensured that such tenants could not be evicted without a court order or if they were over the age of sixty-five.[249] The Skills Development Act of 1998 provided for the establishment of mechanisms to finance and promote skills development at the workplace.[250]The Labour Relations Act of 1995 promoted workplace democracy, orderly collective bargaining, and the effective resolution of labour disputes.[251] The Basic Conditions of Employment Act of 1997 improved enforcement mechanisms while extending a “floor” of rights to all workers;[251] the Employment Equity Act of 1998 was passed to put an end to unfair discrimination and ensure the implementation of affirmative action in the workplace.[251]

Many domestic problems remained. Critics like Edwin Cameron accused Mandela’s government of doing little to stem the HIV/AIDS pandemic in the country; by 1999, 10% of South Africa’s population were HIV positive. Mandela later admitted that he had personally neglected the issue, leaving it for Mbeki to deal with.[252] Mandela also received criticism for failing to sufficiently combat crime, South Africa having one of the world’s highest crime rates; this was a key reason cited by the 750,000 whites who emigrated in the late 1990s.[253] Mandela’s administration was mired in corruption scandals, with Mandela being perceived as “soft” on corruption and greed.[254]

Foreign affairs

Mandela with US President Bill Clinton. Despite publicly criticising him on several occasions, Mandela liked Clinton, and personally supported him during his impeachment proceedings.[255]

Following the South African example, Mandela encouraged other nations to resolve conflicts through diplomacy and reconciliation.[256] He echoed Mbeki’s calls for an “African Renaissance“, and was greatly concerned with issues on the continent; he took a soft diplomatic approach to removing Sani Abacha‘s military junta in Nigeria but later became a leading figure in calling for sanctions when Abacha’s regime increased human rights violations.[257] In 1996 he was appointed Chairman of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and initiated unsuccessful negotiations to end the First Congo War in Zaire.[258] In South Africa’s first post-apartheid military operation, Mandela ordered troops into Lesotho in September 1998 to protect the government of Prime Minister Pakalitha Mosisili after a disputed election prompted opposition uprisings.[259]

In September 1998, Mandela was appointed Secretary-General of the Non-Aligned Movement, who held their annual conference in Durban. He used the event to criticise the “narrow, chauvinistic interests” of the Israeli government in stalling negotiations to end theIsraeli-Palestinian conflict and urged India and Pakistan to negotiate to end the Kashmir conflict, for which he was criticised by both Israel and India.[260] Inspired by the region’s economic boom, Mandela sought greater economic relations with East Asia, in particular with Malaysia, although this was scuppered by the 1997 Asian financial crisis.[261] He attracted controversy for his close relationship with Indonesian President Suharto, whose regime was responsible for mass human rights abuses, although privately urged him to withdraw from the occupation of East Timor.[262]

Mandela faced similar criticism from the West for his personal friendships with Fidel Castro and Muammar Gaddafi. Castro visited in 1998, to widespread popular acclaim, and Mandela met Gaddafi in Libya to award him the Order of Good Hope.[263] When Western governments and media criticised these visits, Mandela lambasted the criticisms as having racist undertones.[264] Mandela hoped to resolve the long-running dispute between Libya and the US and Britain over bringing to trial the two Libyans, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi andLamin Khalifah Fhimah, who were indicted in November 1991 and accused of sabotaging Pan Am Flight 103. Mandela proposed that they be tried in a third country, which was agreed to by all parties; governed by Scots law, the trial was held at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands in April 1999, and found one of the two men guilty.[265]

Withdrawing from politics

The new Constitution of South Africa was agreed upon by parliament in May 1996, enshrining a series of institutions to check political and administrative authority within a constitutional democracy.[266] De Klerk opposed the implementation of this constitution, withdrawing from the coalition government in protest.[267] The ANC took over the cabinet positions formerly held by the National Party, with Mbeki becoming sole Deputy President.[268] When both Mandela and Mbeki were out of the country in one occasion, Buthelezi was appointed “Acting President”, marking an improvement in his relationship with Mandela.[269]

Mandela stepped down as ANC President at the December 1997 conference, and although hoping that Ramaphosa would replace him, the ANC elected Mbeki to the position; Mandela admitted that by then, Mbeki had become “de facto President of the country”. Replacing Mbeki as Deputy President, Mandela and the Executive supported the candidacy of Jacob Zuma, a Zulu who had been imprisoned on Robben Island, but he was challenged by Winnie, whose populist rhetoric had gained her a strong following within the party; Zuma defeated her in a landslide victory vote at the election.[270]

Mandela’s relationship with Machel had intensified; in February 1998 he publicly stated that “I’m in love with a remarkable lady”, and under pressure from his friend Desmond Tutu, who urged him to set an example for young people, he set a wedding for his 80th birthday, in July.[271] The following day he held a grand party with many foreign dignitaries.[272] The 1996 constitution limited the president to two consecutive five-year terms. Mandela did not attempt to amend the document to remove the two-term limit; indeed, he had never planned on standing for a second term in office. He gave his farewell speech on 29 March 1999, after which he retired.[273]

Retirement

Continued activism and philanthropy: 1999–2004

Mandela visiting the London School of Economics in 2000

Retiring in June 1999, Mandela sought a quiet family life, to be divided between Johannesburg and Qunu. He set about authoring a sequel to his first autobiography, to be titled The Presidential Years, but it was abandoned before publication.[274] Finding such seclusion difficult, he reverted to a busy public life with a daily programme of tasks, meeting with world leaders and celebrities, and when in Johannesburg worked with the Nelson Mandela Foundation, founded in 1999 to focus on combating HIV/AIDS, rural development and school construction.[275] Although he had been heavily criticised for failing to do enough to fight the pandemic during his presidency, he devoted much of his time to the issue following his retirement, describing it as “a war” that had killed more than “all previous wars”, and urged Mbeki’s government to ensure that HIV+ South Africans had access to retrovirals.[276] In 2000, the Nelson Mandela Invitationalcharity golf tournament was founded, hosted by Gary Player.[277] Mandela was successfully treated for prostate cancer in July 2001.[278]

In 2002, Mandela inaugurated the Nelson Mandela Annual Lecture, and in 2003 the Mandela Rhodes Foundation was created at Rhodes HouseUniversity of Oxford, to provide postgraduate scholarships to African students. These projects were followed by the Nelson Mandela Centre of Memory and the 46664 campaign against HIV/AIDS.[279] He gave the closing address at the XIII International AIDS Conference in Durban in 2000,[280] and in 2004, spoke at the XV International AIDS Conference in Bangkok, Thailand.[281]

Publicly, Mandela became more vocal in criticising Western powers. He strongly opposed the 1999 NATO intervention in Kosovo and called it an attempt by the world’s powerful nations to police the entire world.[282] In 2003 he spoke out against the plans for the US and UK to launch the War in Iraq, describing it as “a tragedy” and lambasting US PresidentGeorge W. Bush and UK Prime Minister Tony Blair for undermining the UN. “All that (Mr. Bush) wants is Iraqi oil,”.[283] He attacked the US more generally, asserting that it had committed more “unspeakable atrocities” across the world than any other nation, citing the atomic bombing of Japan; this attracted international controversy, although he later reconciled his relationship with Blair.[284] Retaining an interest in Libyan-UK relations, he visited Megrahi in Barlinnie prison and spoke out against the conditions of his treatment, referring to them as “psychological persecution”.[285]

“Retiring from retirement”, illness: 2004–2013

Nelson Mandela and President George W. Bush in the Oval Office, May 2005

In June 2004, aged 85 and amid failing health, Mandela announced that he was “retiring from retirement” and retreating from public life, remarking “Don’t call me, I will call you.”[286] Although continuing to meet with close friends and family, the Foundation discouraged invitations for him to appear at public events and denied most interview requests.[287]

He retained some involvement in international affairs. In 2005, he founded the Nelson Mandela Legacy Trust,[288] travelling to the U.S., to speak before the Brookings Institute and the NAACP on the need for economic assistance to Africa.[288][289] He spoke with U.S. SenatorHillary Clinton and President George W. Bush and first met then-U.S. Senator Barack Obama.[289] Mandela also encouraged Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe to resign over growing human rights abuses in the country. When this proved ineffective, he spoke out publicly against Mugabe in 2007, asking him to step down “with residual respect and a modicum of dignity.”[290] That year, Mandela, Machel, and Desmond Tutu convened a group of world leaders in Johannesburg to contribute their wisdom and independent leadership to some of the world’s toughest problems. Mandela announced the formation of this new group, The Elders, in a speech delivered on his 89th birthday.[291]

Mandela’s 90th birthday was marked across the country on 18 July 2008, with the main celebrations held at Qunu,[292] and a concert in his honour in Hyde Park, London.[293] In a speech marking the event, Mandela called for the rich to help the poor across the world.[292] Throughout Mbeki’s presidency, Mandela continued to support the ANC, although usually overshadowed Mbeki at any public events that the two attended. Mandela was more at ease with Mbeki’s successor Jacob Zuma, although the Nelson Mandela Foundation were upset when his grandson, Mandla Mandela, flew him out to the Eastern Cape to attend a pro-Zuma rally in the midst of a storm in 2009.[294]

In 2004, Mandela had successfully campaigned for South Africa to host the 2010 FIFA World Cup, declaring that there would be “few better gifts for us in the year” marking a decade since the fall of apartheid. Mandela emotionally raised the FIFA World Cup Trophy after South Africa was awarded host status.[295] Despite maintaining a low profile during the event due to ill-health, Mandela made his final public appearance during the World Cup closing ceremony, where he received a “rapturous reception”.[296][297] Between 2005 and 2013, Mandela, and later his family, were embroiled in a series of legal disputes regarding money held in family trusts for the benefit of his descendants.[298] In mid-2013, as Mandela was hospitalised for a lung infection in Pretoria, his descendants were involved in intra-family legal dispute relating to the burial place of Mandela’s children, and ultimately Mandela himself.[299][300][301]

Senator Barack Obama meets for the first time with Nelson Mandela, 17 May 2005

In February 2011, he was briefly hospitalised with a respiratory infection, attracting international attention,[302] before being re-hospitalised for a lung infection and gallstone removal in December 2012.[303] After a successful medical procedure in early March 2013,[304] his lung infection recurred, and he was briefly hospitalised in Pretoria.[305] On 8 June 2013, his lung infection worsened, and he was rehospitalised in Pretoria in a serious condition.[306] After four days, it was reported that he had stabilised and remained in a “serious, but stable condition”.[307] En route to the hospital, his ambulance broke down and was stranded on the roadside for 40 minutes. The government was criticised for the incident, but Zuma countered that throughout, Mandela was given “expert medical care.”[308]

On 22 June 2013, CBS News stated that he had not opened his eyes in days and was unresponsive, and the family was discussing how much medical intervention should be given.[309] Former bodyguard Shaun van Heerden, described by CBS News as “Mandela’s constant companion for the last 12 years”, had publicly asked the family to “set him free” a week prior.[310] On 23 June 2013, Zuma announced that Mandela’s condition had become “critical“.[311][312][313] Zuma, accompanied by the Deputy President of the ANC, Cyril Ramaphosa, met Mandela’s wife Graça Machel at the hospital in Pretoria and discussed his condition.[314] On 25 June Cape Town Archbishop Thabo Makgoba visited Mandela at the hospital and prayed with Graça Machel Mandela “at this hard time of watching and waiting”.[315] The next day, Zuma visited Mandela in the hospital and canceled a visit scheduled for the next day to Mozambique.[316] A relative of Mandela told The Daily Telegraph newspaper he was onlife support.[317]

On 4 July, it was reported that David Smith, a lawyer acting on behalf of Mandela family members, claimed in court on 26 June that Mandela was in a permanent vegetative state and life support should be withdrawn.[318][319][320] The South African Presidency stated that the doctors treating Mandela denied that he was in a vegetative state.[321][322] On 10 July, Zuma’s office announced that Mandela remained in critical but stable condition, and was responding to treatment.[323]

On 1 September 2013, Mandela was discharged from hospital[324] although his condition remained unstable.[325]

Death and funeral

Flowers laid outside Drakenstein Correctional Centre

Mandela died of a lung infection on 5 December 2013 at around 20:50 local time (UTC+2) at his home in HoughtonJohannesburg, surrounded by his family. He was 95.[326] His death was announced by President Jacob Zuma.[326][327]

On 6 December 2013, President Zuma announced a national mourning period of ten days, with the main event held at the FNB Stadiumin Johannesburg on 10 December 2013. He declared 8 December 2013 a national day of prayer and reflection: “We call upon all our people to gather in halls, churches, mosques, temples, synagogues and in their homes to pray and hold prayer services and meditation reflecting on the life of Madiba and his contribution to our country and the world.” Mandela’s body will lie in state from 11–13 December at the Union Buildings in Pretoria and a state funeral will be held on 15 December 2013 in Qunu, South Africa.[328][329]

Political ideology

“Free Mandela” protest in Berlin, 1986

Mandela was an African nationalist, an ideological position he held since joining the ANC,[330] also being “a democrat, and a socialist”.[331] Although he presented himself in an autocratic manner in several speeches, Mandela was a devout believer in democracy and abided by majority decisions even when deeply disagreeing with them.[332] He held a conviction that “inclusivity, accountability and freedom of speech” were the fundamentals of democracy,[333] and was driven by a belief in natural and human rights.[334] This belief drove him to not only pursue racial equality but also to promote gay rights as part of the post-apartheid reforms.[335]

democratic socialist, Mandela was “openly opposed to capitalism, private land-ownership and the power of big money”.[336] Influenced by Marxism, during the revolution Mandela advocated scientific socialism,[337] although he denied being a communist during the Treason Trial.[338] Biographer David James Smith thought this untrue, stating that Mandela “embraced communism and communists” in the late 1950s and early 1960s, though was a “fellow traveller” rather than a party member.[339] In the 1955 Freedom Charter, which Mandela had helped create, it called for the nationalisation of banks, gold mines, and land, believing it necessary to ensure equal distribution of wealth.[340] Despite these beliefs, Mandela nationalised nothing during his presidency, fearing that this would scare away foreign investors. This decision was in part influenced by the fall of the socialist states in the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc during the early 1990s.[341]

Personal life

Mandela was a private person who often concealed his emotions and confided in very few people.[342] Privately, he lived an austere life, refusing to drink alcohol or smoke, and even as President made his own bed,[343] although was also renowned for his mischievous sense of humour.[344] He was known for being both stubborn and loyal,[345] and at times exhibited a quick temper.[343] He was typically friendly and welcoming, and appeared relaxed in conversation with everyone, including his opponents.[346] Constantly polite and courteous, he was attentive to everyone, irrespective of their age or status, and often talked to children or servants.[347] In later life he always looked for the best in people, even defending political opponents to his allies, who sometimes thought him too trusting of others.[348] He was highly image conscious, and throughout his life always sought out fine quality clothes, with many commentators believing that he carried himself in a regal manner.[349] His official biographer Anthony Sampson commented that he was a “master of imagery and performance”, excelling at presenting himself well in press photographs and producing soundbites.[350] In describing his life, Mandela stated that “I was not a messiah, but an ordinary man who had become a leader because of extraordinary circumstances.”[351]

Mandela House museum, Soweto

Mandela was married three times, fathered six children, had 17 grandchildren,[352] and many great-grandchildren.[353] He could be stern and demanding of his children, although he was more affectionate with his grandchildren.[354] His first marriage was to Evelyn Ntoko Mase in October 1944;[56] they divorced after 13 years in 1957 under the multiple strains of his adultery and constant absences, devotion to revolutionary agitation, and the fact that she was a member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, a religion requiring political neutrality.[89] The couple had two sons whom Mandela survived, Madiba “Thembi” Thembekile (1945–1969) and Makgatho Mandela (1950–2005); his first son died in a car crash, and his second son died of AIDS. The couple had two daughters, both named Makaziwe Mandela (born 1947 and 1954); the first died at the age of nine months, the second, known as “Maki“, survived Mandela.[355] Makgatho’s son, Mandla Mandela, became chief of the Mvezo tribal council in 2007.[356]

Mandela’s second wife, Winnie Madikizela-Mandela, also came from the Transkei area, although they, too, met in Johannesburg, where she was the city’s first black social worker.[357] They had two daughters, Zenani (Zeni), born 4 February 1958, and Zindziswa (Zindzi) Mandela-Hlongwane, born 1960.[357] Zindzi was only 18 months old when her father was sent to Robben island. Later, Winnie was deeply torn by family discord which mirrored the country’s political strife; separation (April 1992) and divorce (March 1996), fuelled by political estrangement.[358] Mandela’s third wife was Graça Machel (née Simbine), whom he married on his 80th birthday in 1998.[359]

Influence and legacy

By the time of his death, Mandela had come to be widely considered “the father of the nation” within South Africa,[360] and “the founding father of democracy”,[361] being seen as “the national liberator, the saviour, its Washington and Lincoln rolled into one”.[362] Mandela’s biographer Anthony Sampson commented that even during his life, a myth had developed around him that turned him into “a secular saint” and which was “so powerful that it blurs the realities.”[363]Within a decade after the end of his Presidency, Mandela’s era was being widely thought of as “a golden age of hope and harmony”.[351] Across the world, Mandela earned international acclaim for his activism in overcoming apartheid and fostering racial reconciliation,[343] coming to be viewed as “a moral authority” with a great “concern for truth”.[364]

Throughout his life, Mandela had also faced criticism. Margaret Thatcher attracted international attention for describing the ANC as “a typical terrorist organisation” in 1987,;[365]she later called on Botha to release Mandela.[366] Mandela has also been criticised for his friendship with political leaders such as Fidel CastroMuammar GaddafiAkbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, and Suharto as well as his refusal to condemn their various human rights violations.[367][368]

Orders, decorations, and monuments

Nelson Mandela graffiti byThierry Ehrmann in the Abode of Chaos museum, France

In 2004, Johannesburg granted Mandela the freedom of the city,[369] and the Sandton Square shopping centre was renamed Nelson Mandela Square, after a Mandela statue was installed there.[370] In 2008, another Mandela statue was unveiled at Groot Drakenstein Correctional Centre, formerly Victor Verster Prison, near Cape Town, standing on the spot where Mandela was released from the prison.[371]

He has also received international acclaim. In 1993, he received the joint Nobel Peace Prize with de Klerk.[372] In November 2009, theUnited Nations General Assembly proclaimed Mandela’s birthday, 18 July, as “Mandela Day“, marking his contribution to the anti-apartheid struggle. It called on individuals to donate 67 minutes to doing something for others, commemorating the 67 years that Mandela had been a part of the movement.[373]

Awarded the US Presidential Medal of Freedom,[374] and the Order of Canada,[375] he was the first living person to be made an honorary Canadian citizen.[376] The last recipient of the Soviet Union’s Lenin Peace Prize from the Soviet Union,[377] and first recipient of the Al-Gaddafi International Prize for Human Rights,[378] in 1990 he received the Bharat Ratna Award from the government of India,[379] and in 1992 received Pakistan’s Nishan-e-Pakistan.[380] In 1992 he was awarded the Atatürk Peace Award by Turkey. He refused the award, citing human rights violations committed by Turkey at the time,[381] but later accepted the award in 1999.[377] Elizabeth II awarded him the Bailiff Grand Cross of the Order of St. John and the Order of Merit.[382]

Tributes by musicians

Many artists have dedicated songs to Mandela. One of the most popular was from The Special AKA who recorded the song “Free Nelson Mandela” in 1983, which Elvis Costello also recorded and had a hit with. Stevie Wonder dedicated his 1985 Oscar for the song “I Just Called to Say I Love You” to Mandela, resulting in his music being banned by the South African Broadcasting Corporation.[383] In 1985, Youssou N’Dour‘s album Nelson Mandela was the Senegalese artist’s first US release. Other artists who released songs or videos honouring Mandela includeJohnny Clegg,[384] Hugh Masekela,[385] Brenda Fassie,[386] Beyond,[387] Nickelback,[388] Raffi,[389] and Ampie du Preez and AB de Villiers.[390]South African songstress Zahara, who happens to be an ambassador of the Nelson Mandela Children’s Hospital, released Nelson Mandela, an extended play that pays tribute to Mandela whilst celebrating his lifetime accomplishments. The EP’s lead single titled “Nelson Mandela” was released at a time when Mandela was critically ill but stable at the Medi-Clinic Heart Hospital in Pretoria.[391][392]

Cinema and television

Mandela has been depicted in cinema and television on multiple occasions. He was portrayed by Danny Glover in the 1987 HBO telefilmMandela.[393] The 1997 film Mandela and de Klerk starred Sidney Poitier as Mandela,[394] and Dennis Haysbert played him in Goodbye Bafana(2007).[395] In the 2009 BBC telefilm Mrs Mandela, Mandela was portrayed by David Harewood,[396] and Morgan Freeman portrayed him inInvictus (2009).[397] Terrence Howard portrayed him in the 2011 film Winnie Mandela.[398] He is portrayed by Idris Elba in the 2013 film Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom.[399]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_Mandela

African National Congress

The African National Congress (ANC) is the Republic of South Africa’s governing political party, supported by its Tripartite Alliancewith the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) and the South African Communist Party (SACP), since the establishment of non-racial democracy in April 1994. It defines itself as a “disciplined force of the left”.[2] Members founded the organisation as theSouth African Native National Congress (SANNC) on 8 January 1912 at the Waaihoek Wesleyan Church in Bloemfontein to increase the rights of the black South African population. John Dube, its first president, and poet and author Sol Plaatje were among its founding members. The organisation became the ANC in 1923 and formed a military wing, the Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation) in 1961.

It has been the ruling party of post-apartheid South Africa on the national level since 1994. It increased its majority in the 1999 elections, and further increased it in 2004, with 69.7% of the votes. In 2009 its share of the vote reduced slightly, but it remained the dominant party with 65.9% of the votes.

History


The founding of the SANNC was in direct response to injustice against black South Africans at the hands of the government then in power. It can be said that the SANNC had its origins in a pronouncement by 
Pixley ka Isaka Seme who said in 1911, “Forget all the past differences among Africans and unite in one national organisation.” The SANNC was founded the following year on 8 January 1912.[3]

The government of the newly formed Union of South Africa began a systematic oppression of black people in South Africa. The Land Act was promulgated in 1913 forcing many non-whites from their farms into the cities and towns to work, and to restrict their movement within South Africa.

By 1919, the SANNC was leading a campaign against passes (an ID which non-whites had to posses). However, it then became dormant in the mid-1920s. During that time, black people were also represented by the ICU and the previously white-only Communist party. In 1923, the organisation became the African National Congress, and in 1929 the ANC supported a militant mineworkers’ strike.

By 1927, J.T. Gumede (president of the ANC) proposed co-operation with the Communists in a bid to revitalise the organisation, but he was voted out of power in the 1930s. This led to the ANC becoming largely ineffectual and inactive, until the mid-1940s when the ANC was remodelled as a mass movement.

The ANC responded militarily to attacks on the rights of black South Africans, as well as calling for strikes, boycotts, and defiance. This led to a later Defiance Campaign in the 1950s, a mass movement of resistance to apartheid. The government tried to stop the ANC by banning party leaders and enacting new laws to stop the ANC, however these measures ultimately proved to be ineffective.

In 1955, the Congress of the People officially adopted the Freedom Charter, stating the core principles of the South African Congress Alliance, which consisted of the African National Congress and its allies the South African Communist Party (SACP), the South African Indian Congress, the South African Congress of Democrats (COD) and the Coloured People’s Congress.[4] The government claimed that this was a communist document, and consequently leaders of the ANC and Congress were arrested. 1960 saw the Sharpeville massacre, in which 69 people were killed when police opened fire on anti-apartheid protesters.

Whites eventually joined the fight against apartheid, leading many Black nationalists to break away from the ANC.

During apartheid there was violence between the ANC and the Inkatha Freedom Party. For example between 1985 and 1989, 5,000 civilians were killed in fighting between the two parties.[5] Massacres by each of the other’s supporters included the Shell House massacre and the Boipatong massacre.

The ANC and its members were officially removed from the United States terrorism watch list in 2008.[6]

Umkhonto we Sizwe

Umkhonto we Sizwe (or MK), translated “Spear of the Nation”, was the military wing of the ANC. Partly in response to the Sharpeville massacre of 1960, individual members of the ANC found it necessary to consider violence to combat what passive protest had failed to quell. There was a significant portion of the ANC who therefore turned to violence to achieve their goals. A significant portion of ANC leadership agreed that this violence was needed to combat increasing backlash from the government. Some ANC members were upset by the actions of the MK, and refused to accept violence as necessary for the ending of apartheid, but these individuals became a minority as the militant leaders such asNelson Mandela gained significant popularity. Many consider their actions to be criminal, but the MK deemed the means justified by the end goal of ending apartheid. The MK committed terrorist acts to achieve their aims, and MK was responsible for the deaths of both civilians and members of the military. Acts of terrorism committed by the MK include the Church Street bombing and the Magoo’s Bar bombing. In co-operation with the South African Communist Party, MK was founded in 1961.[7]

Ideology

The ANC deems itself a force of national liberation in the post-apartheid era; it officially defines its agenda as the National Democratic Revolution. The ANC is a member of theSocialist International.[1] It also sets forth the redressing of socio-economic differences stemming from colonial- and apartheid-era policies as a central focus of ANC policy.

The National Democratic Revolution (NDR) is described as a process through which the National Democratic Society (NDS) is achieved; a society in which people are intellectually, socially, economically and politically empowered. The drivers of the NDR are also called the motive forces and are defined as the elements within society that gain from the success of the NDR. Using contour plots or concentric circles the centre represents the elements in society that gain the most out of the success of the NDR. Moving away from the centre results in the reduction of the gains that those elements derive. It is generally believed that the force that occupies the centre of those concentric circles in countries with low unemployment is the working class while in countries with higher levels of unemployment it is the unemployed. Some of the many theoreticians that have written about the NDR include Joe SlovoJoel Netshitenzhe and Tshilidzi Marwala.[8][9][10]

In 2004, the ANC declared itself to be a social democratic party.[11]

Tripartite Alliance

The ANC holds a historic alliance with the South African Communist Party (SACP) and Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU), known as the Tripartite Alliance. The SACP and COSATU have not contested any election in South Africa, but field candidates through the ANC, hold senior positions in the ANC, and influence party policy and dialogue. During Mbeki’s presidency, the government took a more pro-capitalist stance, often running counter to the demands of the SACP and COSATU.[12][13][14][15]

2008 schism

Following Zuma’s accession to the ANC leadership in 2007 and Mbeki’s resignation as president in 2008, the Mbeki faction of former ministers led by Mosiuoa Lekota split away from the ANC to form the Congress of the People.

ANC flag

The ANC flag is composed of three stripes – black, green and gold.[16] Black symbolises the native people of South Africa, green represents the land and gold represents the mineral and other natural wealth of South Africa. This flag was also the battle flag of the Umkhonto we Sizwe. The official party flag also has the emblem of the party incorporated onto the flag.

Party list

Politicians in the party win a place in parliament by being on the Party List, which is drawn up before the elections and enumerates, in order, the party’s preferred MPs. The number of seats allocated is proportional to the popular national vote, and this determines the cut-off point.

The ANC has also gained members through the controversial floor crossing process.

Although most South African parties announced their candidate list for provincial premierships in the 2009 election, the ANC did not, as it is not required for parties to do so.[17]

Election results

Proportion of votes cast for the ANC in the 2009 election, by ward.

  0–20%
  20–40%
  40–60%
  60–80%
  80–100%

Parliament[edit]

National Assembly
Election year # of
overall votes
 % of
overall vote
# of
overall seats won
+/– Government
1994 12,237,655 62.65
252 / 400
in coalition
1999 10,601,330 66.35
266 / 400
Increase 14 in coalition
2004 10,880,915 69.69
279 / 400
Increase 13 in coalition
2009 11,650,748 65.90
264 / 400
Decrease 15 in coalition
Senate / NCOP
Election year # of
overall seats won
+/–
1994
60 / 90
1999
63 / 90
Increase 3
2004
65 / 90
Increase 2
2009
62 / 90
Decrease 3

Municipal elections[edit]

Election Votes %
2011 16,548,826 62%
2006 17,466,948 66.3%
2000 59.4
1995-96 5,033,855 58%

Role of the ANC in resolving the conflict

The ANC represented the main opposition to the government during apartheid and therefore they played a major role in resolving the conflict through participating in the peacemaking and peace-building processes. Initially intelligence agents of the National Party met in secret with ANC leaders, including Nelson Mandela, to judge whether conflict resolution was possible.[18] Discussions and negotiations took place leading to the eventual unbanning of the ANC and other opposing political parties by then President de Klerkon 2 February 1990. These initial meetings were the first crucial steps towards resolution.

The next official step towards rebuilding South Africa was the Groote Schuur Minute where the government and the ANC agreed on a common commitment towards the resolution of the existing climate of violence and intimidation, as well as a commitment to stability and to a peaceful process of negotiations. The ANC negotiated the release of political prisoners and the indemnity from prosecution for returning exiles and moreover channels of communication were established between the Government and the ANC.

Later the Pretoria Minute represented another step towards resolution where agreements at Groote Schuur were reconsolidated and steps towards setting up an interim government and drafting a new constitution were established as well as suspension of the military wing of the ANC – the Umkhonto we Sizwe. This step helped end much of the violence within South Africa. Another agreement that came out of the Pretoria Minute was that both parties would try and raise awareness that a new way of governance was being created for South Africa, and that further violence would only hinder this process. However violence still continued in Kwazulu-Natal, which violated the trust between Mandela and de Klerk. Moreover, internal disputes in the ANC prolonged the war as consensus on peace was not reached.[19]

The next significant steps towards resolution were the Repeal of the Population Registration Act, the repeal of the Group Areas and the Native Land Acts and a catch-all Abolition of Racially Based Land Measures Act was passed.[19] These measures ensured no one could claim, or be deprived of, any land rights on the basis of race.

In December 1991 the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA) was held with the aim of establishing an interim government. However a few months later in June 1992 the Boipatong massacre occurred and all negotiations crumbled as the ANC pulled out. After this negotiations proceeded between two agents, Cyril Ramaphosa of the ANC, andRoelf Meyer of the National Party. In over 40 meetings the two men discussed and negotiated over many issues including the nature of the future political system, the fate of over 40,000 government employees and if/how the country would be divided. The result of these negotiations was an interim constitution that meant the transition from apartheid to democracy was a constitutional continuation and that the rule of law and state sovereignty remained intact during the transition, which was vital for stability within the country. A date was set for the first democratic elections on 27 April 1994.[19] The ANC won 62.5% of the votes and has been in power ever since.[20]

Criticism

Recentism.svg
This section may be slanted towards recent events. Please try to keep recent events in historical perspective. (June 2013)

Controversy over corrupt members

For more details on the arms deal, see South African Arms Deal.

The most prominent corruption case involving the ANC relates to a series of bribes paid to companies involved in the ongoing R55 billion Arms Deal saga, which resulted in a long term jail sentence to former Deputy President Jacob Zuma‘s legal adviser Schabir Shaik. Schabir Shaik was released after about two years on the basis that he was terminally ill. Zuma, now the State president, was charged with fraud, bribery and corruption in the Arms Deal, but the charges were subsequently withdrawn by the National Prosecuting Authority of South Africa due to their delay in prosecution.[21] The ANC has also been criticised for its subsequent abolition of the Scorpions, the multidisciplinary agency that investigated and prosecuted organised crime and corruption, and was heavily involved in the investigation into Zuma and Shaik.

Tony Yengeni, in his then position as chief whip of the ANC and also head of the Parliaments defence committee has recently been named as being involved in a R6 million bribe with the German company ThyssenKrupp over the purchase of four corvettes for the SANDF. German detectives raided the offices of the German company and found documentation linking Yengeni to the bribe

Other recent corruption issues include the sexual misconduct and criminal charges of Beaufort West municipal manager Truman Prince,[22] and the Oilgate scandal, in which millions of Rand in funds from a state-owned company were allegedly funnelled into ANC coffers.[23]

The ANC has also been accused of using government and civil society to fight its political battles against opposition parties such as the Democratic Alliance. The result has been a number of complaints and allegations that none of the political parties truly represent the interests of the poor.[24][25] This has resulted in the “No Land! No House! No Vote!” Campaign which becomes very prominent each time the country holds elections.[26][27]

Controversy over wasteful expenditure[edit]

The ANC spent over R1 billion of taxpayers’ money on luxury vehicles, expensive hotels, banquets, advertising and other “wasteful expenditure” between August 2009 and April 2010.[28][29][30] The main thrust behind this reporting is the official opposition in the country, the Democratic Alliance (DA), which kept a tally of the expenditure called “The Wasteful Expenditure Monitor”.[31]

According to the DA,[32] this money could have:

  • Built 18,574 new RDP houses
  • Funded 7775 teachers for a year

The ANC Northen Cape premier, Sylvia Lucas, in her first 10 weeks in office, spent R53,159.00 of taxpayers money on “fast food” in two and a half months at outlets such as Spur,NandosKFC and Wimpy.

Condemnation over Secrecy Bill[edit]

In late 2011 the ANC was heavily criticised over the passage of the Protection of State Information Bill, which opponents claimed would improperly restrict the freedom of the press.[33] Opposition to the bill included otherwise ANC-aligned groups such as COSATU. Notably, Nelson Mandela and other Nobel laureates Nadine Gordimer, ArchbishopDesmond Tutu, and F. W. de Klerk have expressed disappointment with the bill for not meeting standards of constitutionality and aspirations for freedom of information and expression.[34]

Role in the Marikana Massacre[edit]

Further information: Marikana miners’ strike

The ANC have been criticised for its role in failing to prevent the 16 August 2012 massacre of Lonmin miners at Marikana in the North West. Some allege that Police Commissioner Riah Phiyega and Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa, a close confidant of Jacob Zuma, may have given the go ahead for the police action against the miners on that day.[35]

Commissioner Phiyega of the ANC came under further criticism as being insensitive and uncaring when she was caught smiling and laughing during the Farlam Commission’s video playback of the ‘massacre’.[36] Archbishop Desmond Tutu has announced that he no longer can bring himself to exercise a vote for the ANC as it is no longer the party that he and Nelson Mandela fought for, and that the party has now lost its way, and is in danger of becoming a corrupt entity in power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_National_Congress

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization — The Quigley Formula — New World Order — World Government — Council of Foreign Relations — Videos

Posted on December 3, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Books, Business, College, Communications, Culture, Demographics, Diasters, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, European History, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, Health Care, history, History of Economic Thought, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Natural Gas, Non-Fiction, Nuclear Power, Oil, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Rants, Raves | Tags: , , , , , , , , |

Carroll_Quigley

Tragedyhopecarroll_quigley_tragedy_n_hope

anglo_american_establishment

carroll-quigley

The Quigley Formula – G. Edward Griffin lecture

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 1/7

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 2/7

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 3/7

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 4/7

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 5/7

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 6/7

Carroll Quigley on Western Civilization 7/7

Carroll Quigley on Tragedy And Hope

Rare Carroll Quigley interview – 1974 (Full Interview)

Professor Carroll Quigley, Bill Clinton’s mentor at Georgetown University, authored a massive volume entitled “Tragedy and Hope” in which he states: “There does exist and has existed for a generation, an international network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims, and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies, but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.”

“The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences…”

“The apex of the system was the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the worlds’ central banks which were themselves private corporations…”

“The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect injury of all other economic groups.” Tragedy and Hope: A History of The World in Our Time (Macmillan Company, 1966,) Professor Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University

“The Council on Foreign Relations is the American branch of a society which originated in England (RIIA) … [and] … believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established.” Dr. Carroll Quigley

“As a teenager, I heard John Kennedy’s summons to citizenship. And then, as a student, I heard that call clarified by a professor I had named Carroll Quigley.”President Clinton, in his acceptance speech for the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, 16 July 1992

Read the full book “Tragedy and Hope” here:
http://www.archive.org/stream/TragedyAndHope/TH_djvu.txt

The Quigley Formula – G. Edward Griffin lecture

“Quigley” is the late Carroll Quigley, a Council on Foreign Relations member and historian, as well as mentor to CFR and Trilateral Commission member Bill Clinton. The lecture is based around the following quote from his book Tragedy & Hope, pp. 1247-1248:

“The National parties and their presidential candidates, with the Eastern Establishment assiduously fostering the process behind the scenes, moved closer together and nearly met in the center with almost identical candidates and platforms, although the process was concealed as much as possible, by the revival of obsolescent or meaningless war cries and slogans (often going back to the Civil War)….The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy. … Either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.”

NWO, Secret Societies & Biblical Prophecy Vol 1 (Revised)

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Iran Accuses White House of Lying About Nuclear Deal — Right To Enrichment of Uranium — Videos

Posted on November 26, 2013. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Economics, Education, Energy, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Natural Gas, Nuclear Power, Oil | Tags: , , , |

Project_1

Pronk Pops Show 175: November 26, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 174: November 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 173: November 22, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 172: November 21, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 171: November 20, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 170: November 19, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 169: November 18, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 168: November 15, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 167: November 14, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 166: November 13, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 165: November 12, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 164: November 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 163: November 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 162: November 7, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 161: November 4, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 160: November 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 159: October 31, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 158: October 30, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 157: October 28, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 156: October 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 155: October 24, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 154: October 23, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 153: October 21, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 152: October 18, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 151: October 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 150: October 16, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 149: October 14, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 148: October 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 147: October 10, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 146: October 9, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 145: October 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 144: October 7, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 143: October 4 2013

Pronk Pops Show 142: October 3, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 141: October 2, 2013

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-175

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Segment 0: Iran Accuses White House of Lying About Nuclear Deal — Right To Enrich Uranium — Videos

1118-iran-Arak-nuclear-reactor_full_600

nuclear_enrichment

iran_enrichment_facility_natzantz

iran-uranium-enrichment-plant-at-natanz

FORDO-nuclear-enrichment-plant

Uranium enrichment explained

Policy Brief: Gary Samore on Iran’s “Right to Enrich” Uranium

Iran Nuclear Deal | Is the Iran Deal Scientifically Possible?

Daily English News ‘Iran has right to enrich uranium as NPT signatory’

Iranian official: Deal ’98 percent’ done, but uranium enrichment still a sticking point

Uranium enrichment ‘a red line’ for Iran

Making A Nuclear Weapon – Uranium vs Plutonium

In an address to Parliament in Tehran on Sunday, the Iranian President said the country made progress with world powers during talks over Tehran’s nuclear programme, but insisted the nation cannot be pushed to give up uranium enrichment.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran have not bowed to threats by any power and it will not do so,” he said.

Mr Rouhani repeated past declarations the country has a right to produce nuclear fuel, seeking to assure hard-line critics at home that Iran will not make sweeping concessions in the negotiations.

Talks ended without agreement in Geneva early on Sunday morning, but all sides said progress had been made and negotiations are scheduled to resume next week.
The West and its allies fear Iran’s uranium enrichment labs could one day produce weapons-grade material.

Iran insists it does not seek nuclear weapons and says its reactors are only for electricity and medical applications.

Mr Rouhani said asking Iran to end all uranium enrichment would be crossing a red line.
“National interests are our red line. Among those rights are nuclear rights within the framework of international law, including the right to enrich uranium on Iranian soil,” he said.

The US and others are considering easing economic sanctions in return for a possible suspension of 20 percent enrichment.

Rouhani said this proved sanctions had failed.

“They have come to the negotiating table to talk to us because they have realised that sanctions are not the answer,” he told Parliament.

The six powers party to the talks, especially France, expressed concern about a new reactor under construction that will make a plutonium by-product that could be used to build nuclear weapons, although Iran does not currently possess the technology required.

Source: APTN

Get the latest headlines http://www.telegraph.co.uk/

Subscribe to The Telegraphhttp://www.youtube.com/subscription_c…

Like us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/telegraph.co.uk
Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/telegraph
Follow us on Google+ https://plus.google.com/1028913550727…

Telegraph.co.uk and YouTube.com/TelegraphTV are websites of The Daily Telegraph, the UK’s best-selling quality daily newspaper providing news and analysis on UK and world events, business, sport, lifestyle and culture.

Iran: White House Lying About Details of Nuke Deal

Iranian officials say White House fact sheet is ‘invalid’

Iranian officials say that the White House is misleading the public about the details of an interim nuclear agreement reached over the weekend in Geneva.

Iran and Western nations including the United States came to an agreement on the framework for an interim deal late Saturday night in Geneva. The deal has yet to be implemented

The White House released a multi-page fact sheet containing details of the draft agreement shortly after the deal was announced.

However, Iranian foreign ministry official on Tuesday rejected the White House’s version of the deal as “invalid” and accused Washington of releasing a factually inaccurate primer that misleads the American public.

“What has been released by the website of the White House as a fact sheet is a one-sided interpretation of the agreed text in Geneva and some of the explanations and words in the sheet contradict the text of the Joint Plan of Action, and this fact sheet has unfortunately been translated and released in the name of the Geneva agreement by certain media, which is not true,” Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Marziyeh Afkhamtold the Iranian press on Tuesday.

Afkham and officials said that the White House has “modified” key details of the deal and released their own version of the agreement.

Iran’s right to enrich uranium, the key component in a nuclear weapon, is fully recognized under the draft released by Tehran.

“This comprehensive solution would enable Iran to fully enjoy its right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes under the relevant articles of the NPT in conformity with its obligations therein,” the agreement reads, according to a copy released to Iranian state-run media.

“This comprehensive solution would involve a mutually defined enrichment programme with practical limits and transparency measures to ensure the peaceful nature of the programme,” the Iranian draft reads. “This comprehensive solution would constitute an integrated whole where nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.”

Iran’s objection to the deal raises new concerns about final stage talks meant to ensure that the deal is implemented in the next few weeks.

The White House confirmed to the Washington Free Beacon on Monday that the final details of the plan have yet to be worked out, meaning that Iran is not yet beholden to a six month freeze its nuclear activities.

“Technical details to implement the Joint Plan of Action must be finalized before the terms of the Plan begin,” a senior administration official told the Free Beacon. “The P5+1 and Iran are working on what the timeframe is.”

The White House could not provide additional details on the timeframe when approached by the Free Beacon on Tuesday.

As the details are finalized, Iran will have the ability to continue its most controversial enrichment program. This drew criticism from proponents of tough nuclear restrictions.

“The six month clock should have started early Sunday morning,” said former Ambassador Mark Wallace, the CEO of United Against a Nuclear Iran (UANI). “If this is a serious agreement, the P5+1 must ensure that these negotiations do not become a tool for Iran to further increase its enrichment abilities.”

The White House said in its fact sheet on the deal that it could release up to $7 billion dollars to Iran during the first phase of the agreement.

The United States additionally agreed to suspend “certain sanctions on gold and precious metals, Iran’s auto sector, and Iran’s petrochemical exports, potentially providing Iran approximately $1.5 billion in revenue,” according to the now disputed fact sheet.

Iran could earn another $4.2 billion in oil revenue under the deal.

Another “$400 million in governmental tuition assistance” could also be “transferred from restricted Iranian funds directly to recognized educational institutions in third countries to defray the tuition costs of Iranian students,” according to the White House.

While Iranian foreign ministry officials did not specify their precise disagreements with the White House, they insisted that “the Iranian delegation was much rigid and laid much emphasis on the need for this accuracy.”

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

The Pronk Pops Show 175, November 26, 2013, Segment 1: Obama’s Credibility and Competence Crumbling — Democrats Damaged Goods — Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

U.S. Unfreezes $8 Billion in Iranian Assets — Iran Continues to Enrich Uranium Approaching Weapons Grade — Will Not Give Up Right to Enrich Uranium — Videos

Posted on November 25, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Culture, Diasters, Economics, Education, Energy, Enivornment, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, government spending, history, Islam, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Nuclear, Nuclear Power, Oil, People, Photos, Politics, Rants, Raves, Resources, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , |

Iran_enriched_uranium_stockpileUranium-enriched

percentofu235

countries_enriched_uranium

Uranium enrichment ‘a red line’ for Iran

In an address to Parliament in Tehran on Sunday, the Iranian President said the country made progress with world powers during talks over Tehran’s nuclear programme, but insisted the nation cannot be pushed to give up uranium enrichment.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran have not bowed to threats by any power and it will not do so,” he said.

Mr Rouhani repeated past declarations the country has a right to produce nuclear fuel, seeking to assure hard-line critics at home that Iran will not make sweeping concessions in the negotiations.

Talks ended without agreement in Geneva early on Sunday morning, but all sides said progress had been made and negotiations are scheduled to resume next week.
The West and its allies fear Iran’s uranium enrichment labs could one day produce weapons-grade material.

Iran insists it does not seek nuclear weapons and says its reactors are only for electricity and medical applications.

Mr Rouhani said asking Iran to end all uranium enrichment would be crossing a red line.
“National interests are our red line. Among those rights are nuclear rights within the framework of international law, including the right to enrich uranium on Iranian soil,” he said.

The US and others are considering easing economic sanctions in return for a possible suspension of 20 percent enrichment.

Rouhani said this proved sanctions had failed.

“They have come to the negotiating table to talk to us because they have realised that sanctions are not the answer,” he told Parliament.

The six powers party to the talks, especially France, expressed concern about a new reactor under construction that will make a plutonium by-product that could be used to build nuclear weapons, although Iran does not currently possess the technology required.

Making a nuclear weapon

How to enrich Uranium – Periodic Table of Videos

President Obama’s Statement on Iran Nuclear Program Deal: The World Will Be Safer

BREAKING: Deal Reached With Iran Halts Its Nuclear Program -

11/25/13 Former Amb. Bolton on the Obama’s Iran deal lies

Iran’s Arak heavy water nuclear reactor

Breaking: Explosion at Iran’s Nuclear Facility! Was it Israel?

UN Nuclear Watchdog says Iran can Double Uranium Enrichment

Iran’s ability to enrich Uranium in Qom to 20% doesn’t say anything about any nuclear bomb

Nuclear Power – Virtual Tour of Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility

Cold War Nuclear Factories [FULL VIDEO]

Reports: U.S. Unfreezes $8 Billion in Iranian Assets

Iranian officials praise ‘new path towards Iran’

The United States released $8 billion in frozen assets to Iran on Sunday in a move meant to ensure Tehran’s compliance with a nuclear pact signed over the weekend, according to top Iranian officials.

Iranian government spokesman Mohammad Baqer Nobakht confirmedon Monday morning that the U.S. government had unfrozen $8 billion in assets that had been previously blocked by the Obama administration.

The confirmation followed multiple reports of the release on Sunday in the Arab and Iranian news outlets.

Iran will be provided with about $7 billion in sanctions relief, gold, and oil sales under anuclear deal inked late Saturday in Geneva with Western nations.

Iranian officials lauded the deal as a path to opening up greater trade relations between Iran and the world.

“The agreement will open a new path towards Iran,” Alinaqi Khamoushi, the former head of Iran’s Chamber of Commerce said on Sunday as he announced the release by the United States of some $8 billion in assets, according to the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).

Nobakht confirmed the figure early Monday during a briefing with reporters in Tehran.

“The agreement will ease the anti-Iran sanctions, which will have significant impacts on the Iranian economy,” the state-run Fars News Agency quoted him as saying.

One senior GOP aide on Capitol Hill was not pleased with the reports.

“It’s pretty clear the White House and State Department have been lying to the American people since the beginning of this process so it wouldn’t shock me to learn they are lying about how much sanctions relief they’re giving Iran now,” said the aide.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) criticized the deal on Sunday, when he said to a Jewish audience that both Democrats and Republicans in the Senate were united in opposition.

“Democrats and Republicans are going to work to see that we don’t let up on these sanctions … until Iran gives up not only all of their weapons but all nuclear weapon capabilities,” Schumer said. “I want to leave you with that assurance.”

A State Department spokesman did not immediately respond to a Washington Free Beacon request for comment on the reported assets relief.

Additionally, Iran announced on Sunday that its nuclear work will continue despite the deal, which aimed to curb Tehran’s nuclear ambitions and enrichment of uranium, the key component in a nuclear weapon.

Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif, who helped ink the deal, praised it for recognizing Iran’s right to enrich uranium, a key sticking point that had delayed the deal until Saturday evening.

“The [nuclear] program has been recognized and the Iranian people’s right to use the peaceful nuclear technology based on the NPT [Non-Proliferation Treaty] and as an inalienable right has been recognized and countries are necessitated not to create any obstacle on its way,” Zarif told reporters over the weekend.

“The program will continue, and all the sanctions and violations against the Iranian nation under the pretext of the nuclear program will be removed gradually,” he added.

Iran’s most well-known nuclear sites will remain operational under the deal, according to Zarif, who presented a very different version of the agreement than that described by the White House on Saturday.

Over the next six months, Iran will see “the full removal of all [United Nations] Security Council, unilateral and multilateral sanctions, while the country’s enrichment program will be maintained,” Zarif said.

The Fordo and Natanz nuclear sites will also continue to run, he said.

“None of the enrichment centers will be closed and Fordo and Natanz will continue their work and the Arak heavy water [nuclear reactor] program will continue in its present form and no material [enriched uranium stockpiles] will be taken out of the country and all the enriched materials will remain inside the country,” Zarif said. “The current sanctions will move towards decrease, no sanctions will be imposed and Iran’s financial resources will return.”

America recognized Iran’s right to enrich uranium up to 5 percent under the deal, according to both the Iranians and a White House brief on the deal.

The United States agreed to suspend “certain sanctions on gold and precious metals, Iran’s auto sector, and Iran’s petrochemical exports, potentially providing Iran approximately $1.5 billion in revenue,” according to a fact sheet provided by the White House.

Iran could earn another $4.2 billion in oil revenue under the deal.

Another “$400 million in governmental tuition assistance” could also be “transferred from restricted Iranian funds directly to recognized educational institutions in third countries to defray the tuition costs of Iranian students,” according to the White House.

The State Department denied that sanctions have been altered since an interim deal with Iran was announced.

“This report is false. Sanctions today are same as they were last week,” a senior State Department official said in response to the Fars report. “We will be forthcoming with guidance on how the technical terms of the relief package are worked out once all that is determined.”

Iran nuclear deal: Saudi Arabia warns it will strike out on its own

Saudi Arabia claims they were kept in the dark by Western allies over Iran nuclear deal and says it will strike out on its own

By 

A senior advisor to the Saudi royal family has accused its Western allies of deceiving the oil rich kingdom in striking the nuclear accord withIran and said Riyadh would follow an independent foreign policy.

Nawaf Obaid told a think tank meeting in London that Saudi Arabia was determined to pursue its own foreign and policy goals. Having in the past been reactive to events, the leading Sunni Muslim nation was determined to be pro-active in future.

Mr Obaid said that while Saudi Arabia knew that the US was talking directly to Iran through a channel in the Gulf state of Oman, Washington had not directly briefed its ally.

“We were lied to, things were hidden from us,” he said. “The problem is not with the deal struck in Geneva but how it was done.”

In a statement the Saudi government gave a cautious welcome to the Geneva nuclear deal. It said “good intentions” could lead to a comprehensive agreement on Tehran’s atomic programme. “This agreement could be a first step towards a comprehensive solution for Iran’s nuclear programme, if there are good intentions,” the Saudi government said

But it warned that a comprehensive solution should lead to the “removal of all weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear, from the Middle East and the Gulf”.

A fellow of Harvard University’s Belfer Centre and adviser to Prince Mohammad, the Saudi ambassador to London, Mr Obaid said Saudi Arabia would continue to resist Iranian involvement in the Syrian civil war. In particular he pointed to Iranian Revolutionary Guards involvement in battles in Syria on behalf of the regime.

European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton (L) hugs French Foreign Affairs Minister Laurent Fabius

“[Saudi Arabia] will be there to stop them wherever they are in Arab countries,” he said. “We cannot accept Revolutionary Guards running round Homs.”

Saudi Arabia’s fury at the diplomatic detente with Iran is commonly held with Israel. While both countries are in the same posion Saudi Arabia disavows any suggestion of an open alliance. Until the Palestinians have a state, Saudi Arabia will not work with Israel.

Saudi Arabia is increasingly at odds with Washington over Syria. It rejected a seat on the UN Security Council in protest at the body’s failure to “save” Syria.

Qatar is the latest Gulf Arab state to welcome the nuclear deal between Iran and world powers, calling it a step toward greater stability in the region.

Saudi Arabia, has previously expressed unease about US overtures to Iran. The dialogue helped pushed along efforts by Washington and others to strike a deal with Iran seeking to ease Western concerns that Tehran could move toward nuclear weapons.

Qatar’s Foreign Ministry said the deal is an “important step toward safeguarding peace and stability in the region”.

Bahrain, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates have issued similar statements.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/10472538/Iran-nuclear-deal-Saudi-Arabia-warns-it-will-strike-out-on-its-own.html

Iran nuclear deal ‘loophole’ may allow off-site reactor work

Nuclear agreement bans “further advances” at Arak reactor but off-site component work not explicitly banned.

Sunday’s agreement to curb Iran’s nuclear program contains an apparent gap that could allow Tehran to build components off-site to install later in a nuclear reactor where it has promised to halt work, experts said.

They said any impact of the omission is likely to be small if Iran follows other undertakings in the interim accord, which is designed to restrain Tehran’s nuclear program for six months in return for limited sanctions relief.

But the gap, which one diplomat described as a potential “loophole”, could provide a test of Iran’s intentions, and demonstrates how difficult it will be to reach a final deal to resolve Iran’s nuclear standoff with the West once and for all.

Iran’s uncompleted heavy-water research reactor near the town of Arak emerged as one of the most important issues in marathon negotiations in Geneva last week that ended early on Sunday with a breakthrough deal.

Tehran has earlier said it could open the reactor as soon as next year. It says its purpose is only to make medical isotopes, but Western countries say it could also produce plutonium, one of two materials, along with enriched uranium, that can be used to make the fissile core of a nuclear bomb.

Much of the final day of negotiations was taken up with the major powers pressing hard for language that would stop Iran from completing the reactor.

In the deal, Iran agreed that it will “not make any further advances of its activities” at Arak, language that also covers its two big uranium enrichment plants, Fordow and Natanz.

Footnotes hammered out in the final hours of the talks set out a range of activities that would be forbidden at the reactor. For the half year covered by the agreement, Iran is barred from starting the reactor up, bringing fuel or heavy water to it, testing or producing more fuel for it, or installing any remaining components.

But no language explicitly prevents it from making components elsewhere, which could then be installed later.

Former chief UN nuclear inspector Olli Heinonen, now at Harvard university, said the measures were good, but could have been better: “I would have also included the manufacturing of key components,” he told Reuters in an e-mail.

“NOT FATAL”

One Western diplomat, who deals with nuclear issues but is not from one of the six world powers that negotiated the deal with Iran, said he did not see the gap as big.

While it was one of several possible “loopholes” in a very complicated agreement, the accord would still achieve its main aims, provided that Iran abides by it.

“If Iran is committed then none of these loopholes are fatal,” said the diplomat, who is based in Vienna, headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Agency which will play an expanded role monitoring Iran’s nuclear program.

Among other steps, Iran has agreed to the suspension of its most sensitive enrichment of uranium, to constraints on other atomic activities and to improved monitoring by the IAEA.

International inspectors say they are confident they can keep tabs on Iran’s declared nuclear activities at known sites, although without wider access they cannot rule out undeclared activity at secret locations.

The diplomat said the most important work to complete Arak is the work to be done at the plant which is barred by the accord, meaning that any manufacturing of components at another location may not be that significant for the timeline.

“The estimate of one to two years to actually get the thing going assumes everything required offsite is already procured and/or manufactured,” the diplomat said.

Mark Fitzpatrick, director of the non-proliferation program at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) think-tank, also noted the lack of prohibition on the manufacture of components but said most parts had probably already been built.

“I expect that most of the work on those components has already been completed, but no doubt some such work will continue,” he said. “Iran adheres to the principle that what is not prohibited is allowed.”

“DEVIL IN THE DETAIL”

Iran appears to have largely built the facility’s external structure in a valley among barren desert highlands, gradually installing key components over the years.

In May, UN nuclear inspectors observed that the reactor vessel had been delivered to the site.

But the IAEA’s latest quarterly report on Iran said other major parts – such as control room equipment, the refuelling machine and reactor cooling pumps – had yet to be put in place.

IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano told Reuters on Nov. 13 that Iran still had “quite a lot to do” to complete the plant, which the U.S. Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) said has been under construction since mid-2004.

While attention has long focused on Iran’s established uranium enrichment work, its progress at Arak also rang alarm bells, raising concern that Tehran could pursue both possible bomb core alternatives – uranium and plutonium – simultaneously.

To make a plutonium bomb, Iran would also need to build a reprocessing plant to extract the material, and it has no declared plans to do so.

Nuclear analyst Mark Hibbs of the Carnegie Endowment think-tank said Iran might be able to do some Arak-related work off-site under Sunday’s interim accord.

“But the agreement puts a firewall around the reactor, meaning that no equipment will be installed … and no fuel will be loaded,” Hibbs said.

Middle East expert Shashank Joshi of the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) said it could be argued that the deal also covers building components at another location.

“Of course, the fact that we are having this argument is itself acknowledgment of a possible loophole. Remember the US-DPRK ‘leap day’ deal? Devil in the detail,” Joshi said, referring to an ultimately failed agreement between North Korea and the United States early last year.

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Iran-nuclear-deal-loophole-may-allow-off-site-reactor-work-332975

Source: Netanyahu Scolded Obama in Phone Call on Iran Deal

by Joel B. Pollak

“The prime minister made it clear to the most powerful man on earth that if he intends to stay the most powerful man on earth, it’s important to make a change in American policy because the practical result of his current policy is liable to lead him to the same failure that the Americans absorbed in North Korea and Pakistan, and Iran could be next in line.”

That was the message conveyed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to President Barack Obama in a private telephone call Sunday to discuss the interim deal on Iran’s nuclear program, according to a senior Israeli lawmaker in Netanyahu’s ruling coalition, as reported by the Jerusalem Post.

The White House’s own official statement on the telephone call made no mention of any disagreement being aired, merely referring to “their shared goal of preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”

Meanwhile, Netanyahu said that he would send a high-level diplomatic team to the U.S. to lobby for a tough final agreement with Iran that sees that country’s entire nuclear enrichment program dismantled.

In a development that may be related, British Foreign Secretary William Hague warned Israel not to interfere with the emerging deal, perhaps voicing a sentiment shared by Obama and other diplomatic partners.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/11/25/Source-Netanyahu-Scolded-Obama-in-Phone-Call-on-Iran-Deal

Enriched uranium

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Proportions of uranium-238 (blue) and uranium-235 (red) found naturally versus enriched grades

Enriched uranium is a type of uranium in which the percent composition of uranium-235 has been increased through the process ofisotope separation. Natural uranium is 99.284% U238 isotope, with U235 only constituting about 0.711% of its weight. U235 is the onlynuclide existing in nature (in any appreciable amount) that is fissile with thermal neutrons.[1]

Enriched uranium is a critical component for both civil nuclear power generation and military nuclear weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency attempts to monitor and control enriched uranium supplies and processes in its efforts to ensure nuclear power generation safety and curb nuclear weapons proliferation.

During the Manhattan Project enriched uranium was given the codename oralloy, a shortened version of Oak Ridge alloy, after the location of the plants where the uranium was enriched.[citation needed] The term oralloy is still occasionally used to refer to enriched uranium. There are about 2,000 tonnes (t, Mg) of highly enriched uranium in the world,[2] produced mostly for nuclear weapons, naval propulsion, and smaller quantities for research reactors.

The U238 remaining after enrichment is known as depleted uranium (DU), and is considerably less radioactive than even natural uranium, though still very dense and extremely hazardous in granulated form – such granules are a natural by-product of the shearing action that makes it useful for armor-penetrating weapons and radiation shielding. At present, 95% of the world’s stocks of depleted uranium remain in secure storage.

Slightly enriched uranium (SEU)

A drum of yellowcake (a mixture of uranium precipitates)

Slightly enriched uranium (SEU) has a 235U concentration of 0.9% to 2%. This new grade can be used to replace natural uranium (NU) fuel in some heavy water reactors like the CANDU. Fuel designed with SEU could provide additional benefits such as safety improvements or operational flexibility, normally the benefits were considered in safety area while retaining the same operational envelope. Safety improvements could lower positive reactivity feedback such as reactivity void coefficient. Operational improvements would consist in increasing the fuel burnup allowing fuel costs reduction because less uranium and fewer bundles are needed to fuel the reactor. This in turn reduces the quantity of used fuel and its subsequent management costs.[citation needed]

Reprocessed uranium (RepU)

Main article: Reprocessed uranium

Reprocessed uranium (RepU) is a product of nuclear fuel cycles involving nuclear reprocessing of spent fuel. RepU recovered from light water reactor (LWR) spent fuel typically contains slightly more U-235 than natural uranium, and therefore could be used to fuel reactors that customarily use natural uranium as fuel, such as CANDU reactors. It also contains the undesirable isotope uranium-236 which undergoes neutron capture, wasting neutrons (and requiring higher U-235 enrichment) and creating neptunium-237 which would be one of the more mobile and troublesome radionuclides in deep geological repository disposal of nuclear waste.

Low-enriched uranium (LEU)

Low-enriched uranium (LEU) has a lower than 20% concentration of 235U. For use in commercial light water reactors (LWR), the most prevalent power reactors in the world, uranium is enriched to 3 to 5% 235U. Fresh LEU used in research reactors is usually enriched 12% to 19.75% U-235, the latter concentration being used to replace HEU fuels when converting to LEU.

Highly enriched uranium (HEU)

A billet of highly enriched uranium metal

Highly enriched uranium (HEU) has a greater than 20% concentration of 235U or 233U. The fissile uranium in nuclear weapons usually contains 85% or more of 235U known as weapon(s)-grade, though for a crude, inefficient weapon 20% is sufficient (called weapon(s)-usable);[3][4] in theory even lower enrichment is sufficient, but then the critical mass for unmoderated fast neutrons rapidly increases, approaching infinity at 6% 235U.[5] For criticality experiments, enrichment of uranium to over 97% has been accomplished.[6]

The very first uranium bomb, Little Boy dropped by the United States on Hiroshima in 1945, used 64 kilograms of 80% enriched uranium. Wrapping the weapon’s fissile core in a neutron reflector (which is standard on all nuclear explosives) can dramatically reduce the critical mass. Because the core was surrounded by a good neutron reflector, at explosion it comprised almost 2.5 critical masses. Neutron reflectors, compressing the fissile core via implosion, fusion boosting, and “tamping”, which slows the expansion of the fissioning core with inertia, allow nuclear weapon designs that use less than what would be one bare-sphere critical mass at normal density. The presence of too much of the 238U isotope inhibits the runaway nuclear chain reaction that is responsible for the weapon’s power. The critical mass for 85% highly enriched uranium is about 50 kilograms (110 lb), which at normal density would be a sphere about 17 centimetres (6.7 in) in diameter.

Later US nuclear weapons usually use plutonium-239 in the primary stage, but the secondary stage which is compressed by the primary nuclear explosion often uses HEU with enrichment between 40% and 80%[7] along with the fusion fuel lithium deuteride. For the secondary of a large nuclear weapon, the higher critical mass of less-enriched uranium can be an advantage as it allows the core at explosion time to contain a larger amount of fuel. The 238U is not fissile but still fissionable by fusion neutrons.

HEU is also used in fast neutron reactors, whose cores require about 20% or more of fissile material, as well as in naval reactors, where it often contains at least 50% 235U, but typically does not exceed 90%. The Fermi-1 commercial fast reactor prototype used HEU with 26.5% 235U. Significant quantities of HEU are used in the production of medical isotopes, for example molybdenum-99 for technetium-99m generators.[8]

Enrichment methods

Isotope separation is difficult because two isotopes of the same elements have very nearly identical chemical properties, and can only be separated gradually using small mass differences. (235U is only 1.26% lighter than 238U.) This problem is compounded by the fact that uranium is rarely separated in its atomic form, but instead as a compound (235UF6 is only 0.852% lighter than 238UF6.) A cascade of identical stages produces successively higher concentrations of 235U. Each stage passes a slightly more concentrated product to the next stage and returns a slightly less concentrated residue to the previous stage.

There are currently two generic commercial methods employed internationally for enrichment: gaseous diffusion (referred to as first generation) and gas centrifuge (second generation) which consumes only 2% to 2.5%[9] as much energy as gaseous diffusion. Later generation methods will become established because they will be more efficient in terms of the energy input for the same degree of enrichment and the next method of enrichment to be commercialized will be referred to as third generation. Some work is being done that would use nuclear resonance; however there is no reliable evidence that any nuclear resonance processes have been scaled up to production.

Diffusion techniques

Gaseous diffusion

Main article: Gaseous diffusion

Gaseous diffusion is a technology used to produce enriched uranium by forcing gaseous uranium hexafluoride (hex) through semi-permeable membranes. This produces a slight separation between the molecules containing 235U and 238U. Throughout the Cold War, gaseous diffusion played a major role as a uranium enrichment technique, and as of 2008 accounted for about 33% of enriched uranium production,[10] but is now an obsolete technology that is steadily being replaced by the later generations of technology as the diffusion plants reach their ends-of-life.[11]

Thermal diffusion

Thermal diffusion utilizes the transfer of heat across a thin liquid or gas to accomplish isotope separation. The process exploits the fact that the lighter 235U gas molecules will diffuse toward a hot surface, and the heavier 238U gas molecules will diffuse toward a cold surface. The S-50 plant at Oak Ridge, Tennessee was used during World War II to prepare feed material for the EMIS process. It was abandoned in favor of gaseous diffusion.

Centrifuge techniques

Gas centrifuge

Main article: Gas centrifuge

A cascade of gas centrifuges at a U.S. enrichment plant

The gas centrifuge process uses a large number of rotating cylinders in series and parallel formations. Each cylinder’s rotation creates a strong centrifugal force so that the heavier gas molecules containing 238U move toward the outside of the cylinder and the lighter gas molecules rich in 235U collect closer to the center. It requires much less energy to achieve the same separation than the older gaseous diffusion process, which it has largely replaced and so is the current method of choice and is termed second generation. It has a separation factor per stage of 1.3 relative to gaseous diffusion of 1.005,[10] which translates to about one-fiftieth of the energy requirements. Gas centrifuge techniques produce about 54% of the world’s enriched uranium.

Zippe centrifuge

Diagram of the principles of a Zippe-type gas centrifuge with U-238 represented in dark blue and U-235 represented in light blue

The Zippe centrifuge is an improvement on the standard gas centrifuge, the primary difference being the use of heat. The bottom of the rotating cylinder is heated, producing convection currents that move the 235U up the cylinder, where it can be collected by scoops. This improved centrifuge design is used commercially by Urenco to produce nuclear fuel and was used by Pakistan in their nuclear weapons program.

Laser techniques

Laser processes promise lower energy inputs, lower capital costs and lower tails assays, hence significant economic advantages. Several laser processes have been investigated or are under development. Separation of Isotopes by Laser Excitation (SILEX) is well advanced and licensed for commercial operation in 2012.

Atomic vapor laser isotope separation (AVLIS)

Atomic vapor laser isotope separation employs specially tuned lasers[12] to separate isotopes of uranium using selective ionization of hyperfine transitions. The technique uses lasers which are tuned to frequencies that ionize 235U atoms and no others. The positively charged 235U ions are then attracted to a negatively charged plate and collected.

Molecular laser isotope separation (MLIS)

Molecular laser isotope separation uses an infrared laser directed at UF6, exciting molecules that contain a 235U atom. A second laser frees a fluorine atom, leaving uranium pentafluoride which then precipitates out of the gas.

Separation of Isotopes by Laser Excitation (SILEX)

Separation of isotopes by laser excitation is an Australian development that also uses UF6. After a protracted development process involving U.S. enrichment company USEC acquiring and then relinquishing commercialization rights to the technology, GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) signed a commercialization agreement with Silex Systems in 2006.[13][dead link] GEH has since built a demonstration test loop and announced plans to build an initial commercial facility.[14] Details of the process are classified and restricted by intergovernmental agreements between United States, Australia, and the commercial entities. SILEX has been projected to be an order of magnitude more efficient than existing production techniques but again, the exact figure is classified.[10] In August, 2011 Global Laser Enrichment, a subsidiary of GEH, applied to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a permit to build a commercial plant.[15] In September 2012, the NRC issued a license for GEH to build and operate a commercial SILEX enrichment plant, although the company had not yet decided whether the project would be profitable enough to begin construction, and despite concerns that the technology could contribute to nuclear proliferation.[16]

Other techniques

Aerodynamic processes

Schematic diagram of an aerodynamic nozzle. Many thousands of these small foils would be combined in an enrichment unit.

Aerodynamic enrichment processes include the Becker jet nozzle techniques developed by E. W. Becker and associates using the LIGA process and the vortex tube separation process. These aerodynamic separation processes depend upon diffusion driven by pressure gradients, as does the gas centrifuge. They in general have the disadvantage of requiring complex systems of cascading of individual separating elements to minimize energy consumption. In effect, aerodynamic processes can be considered as non-rotating centrifuges. Enhancement of the centrifugal forces is achieved by dilution of UF6 with hydrogen or helium as a carrier gas achieving a much higher flow velocity for the gas than could be obtained using pure uranium hexafluoride. The Uranium Enrichment Corporation of South Africa (UCOR) developed and deployed the continuous Helikon vortex separation cascade for high production rate low enrichment and the substantially different semi-batch Pelsakon low production rate high enrichment cascade both using a particular vortex tube separator design, and both embodied in industrial plant.[17] A demonstration plant was built in Brazil by NUCLEI, a consortium led by Industrias Nucleares do Brasil that used the separation nozzle process. However all methods have high energy consumption and substantial requirements for removal of waste heat; none is currently still in use.

Electromagnetic isotope separation

Main article: Calutron

Schematic diagram of uranium isotope separation in a calutron shows how a strong magnetic field is used to redirect a stream of uranium ions to a target, resulting in a higher concentration of uranium-235 (represented here in dark blue) in the inner fringes of the stream.

In the electromagnetic isotope separation process (EMIS), metallic uranium is first vaporized, and then ionized to positively charged ions. The cations are then accelerated and subsequently deflected by magnetic fields onto their respective collection targets. A production-scale mass spectrometer named the Calutron was developed during World War II that provided some of the 235U used for the Little Boy nuclear bomb, which was dropped over Hiroshima in 1945. Properly the term ‘Calutron’ applies to a multistage device arranged in a large oval around a powerful electromagnet. Electromagnetic isotope separation has been largely abandoned in favour of more effective methods.

Chemical methods

One chemical process has been demonstrated to pilot plant stage but not used. The French CHEMEX process exploited a very slight difference in the two isotopes’ propensity to change valency in oxidation/reduction, utilising immiscible aqueous and organic phases. An ion-exchange process was developed by the Asahi Chemical Company in Japan which applies similar chemistry but effects separation on a proprietary resin ion-exchange column.

Plasma separation

Plasma separation process (PSP) describes a technique that makes use of superconducting magnets and plasma physics. In this process, the principle of ion cyclotron resonance is used to selectively energize the 235U isotope in a plasma containing a mix of ions. The French developed their own version of PSP, which they called RCI. Funding for RCI was drastically reduced in 1986, and the program was suspended around 1990, although RCI is still used for stable isotope separation.

Separative work unit

“Separative work” – the amount of separation done by an enrichment process – is a function of the concentrations of the feedstock, the enriched output, and the depleted tailings; and is expressed in units which are so calculated as to be proportional to the total input (energy / machine operation time) and to the mass processed. Separative work is not energy. The same amount of separative work will require different amounts of energy depending on the efficiency of the separation technology. Separative work is measured in Separative work units SWU, kg SW, or kg UTA (from the German Urantrennarbeit – literally uranium separation work)

  • 1 SWU = 1 kg SW = 1 kg UTA
  • 1 kSWU = 1 tSW = 1 t UTA
  • 1 MSWU = 1 ktSW = 1 kt UTA

The work W_\mathrm{SWU} necessary to separate a mass F of feed of assay x_{f} into a mass P of product assay x_{p}, and tails of mass T and assay x_{t} is given by the expression

W_\mathrm{SWU} = P \cdot V\left(x_{p}\right)+T \cdot V(x_{t})-F \cdot V(x_{f})

where V\left(x\right) is the value function, defined as

V(x) = (1 - 2x)  \ln \left(\frac{1 - x}{x}\right)

The feed to product ratio is given by the expression

\frac{F}{P} = \frac{x_{p} - x_{t}}{x_{f} - x_{t}}

whereas the tails to product ratio is given by the expression

\frac{T}{P} = \frac{x_{p} - x_{f}}{x_{f} - x_{t}}

For example, beginning with 102 kilograms (225 lb) of NU, it takes about 90 SWU to produce 10 kilograms (22 lb) of LEU in 235U content to 4.5%, at a tails assay of 0.3%.

The number of separative work units provided by an enrichment facility is directly related to the amount of energy that the facility consumes. Modern gaseous diffusion plants typically require 2,400 to 2,500 kilowatt-hours (kW·h), or 8.6–9 gigajoules, (GJ) of electricity per SWU while gas centrifuge plants require just 50 to 60 kW·h (180–220 MJ) of electricity per SWU.

Example:

A large nuclear power station with a net electrical capacity of 1300 MW requires about 25 tonnes per year (25 t/a) of LEU with a 235U concentration of 3.75%. This quantity is produced from about 210 t of NU using about 120 kSWU. An enrichment plant with a capacity of 1000 kSWU/a is, therefore, able to enrich the uranium needed to fuel about eight large nuclear power stations.

Cost issues

In addition to the separative work units provided by an enrichment facility, the other important parameter to be considered is the mass of natural uranium (NU) that is needed to yield a desired mass of enriched uranium. As with the number of SWUs, the amount of feed material required will also depend on the level of enrichment desired and upon the amount of 235U that ends up in the depleted uranium. However, unlike the number of SWUs required during enrichment which increases with decreasing levels of 235U in the depleted stream, the amount of NU needed will decrease with decreasing levels of 235U that end up in the DU.

For example, in the enrichment of LEU for use in a light water reactor it is typical for the enriched stream to contain 3.6% 235U (as compared to 0.7% in NU) while the depleted stream contains 0.2% to 0.3% 235U. In order to produce one kilogram of this LEU it would require approximately 8 kilograms of NU and 4.5 SWU if the DU stream was allowed to have 0.3% 235U. On the other hand, if the depleted stream had only 0.2% 235U, then it would require just 6.7 kilograms of NU, but nearly 5.7 SWU of enrichment. Because the amount of NU required and the number of SWUs required during enrichment change in opposite directions, if NU is cheap and enrichment services are more expensive, then the operators will typically choose to allow more 235U to be left in the DU stream whereas if NU is more expensive and enrichment is less so, then they would choose the opposite.

  • Uranium enrichment calculator designed by the WISE Uranium Project

Downblending

The opposite of enriching is downblending; surplus HEU can be downblended to LEU to make it suitable for use in commercial nuclear fuel.

The HEU feedstock can contain unwanted uranium isotopes: 234U is a minor isotope contained in natural uranium; during the enrichment process, its concentration increases but remains well below 1%. High concentrations of 236U are a byproduct from irradiation in a reactor and may be contained in the HEU, depending on its manufacturing history. HEU reprocessed from nuclear weapons material production reactors (with an 235U assay of approx. 50%) may contain 236U concentrations as high as 25%, resulting in concentrations of approximately 1.5% in the blended LEU product. 236U is a neutron poison; therefore the actual 235U concentration in the LEU product must be raised accordingly to compensate for the presence of 236U.

The blendstock can be NU, or DU, however depending on feedstock quality, SEU at typically 1.5 wt% 235U may used as a blendstock to dilute the unwanted byproducts that may be contained in the HEU feed. Concentrations of these isotopes in the LEU product in some cases could exceed ASTM specifications for nuclear fuel, if NU, or DU were used. So, the HEU downblending generally cannot contribute to the waste management problem posed by the existing large stockpiles of depleted uranium.

A major downblending undertaking called the Megatons to Megawatts Program converts ex-Soviet weapons-grade HEU to fuel for U.S. commercial power reactors. From 1995 through mid-2005, 250 tonnes of high-enriched uranium (enough for 10,000 warheads) was recycled into low-enriched-uranium. The goal is to recycle 500 tonnes by 2013. The decommissioning programme of Russian nuclear warheads accounted for about 13% of total world requirement for enriched uranium leading up to 2008.[10]

The United States Enrichment Corporation has been involved in the disposition of a portion of the 174.3 tonnes of highly enriched uranium (HEU) that the U.S. government declared as surplus military material in 1996. Through the U.S. HEU Downblending Program, this HEU material, taken primarily from dismantled U.S. nuclear warheads, was recycled into low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel, used by nuclear power plants to generate electricity.[18]

  • A uranium downblending calculator designed by the WISE Uranium Project

Global enrichment facilities

The following countries are known to operate enrichment facilities: Argentina, Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Iran, Japan, the Netherlands, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.[19] Belgium, Iran, Italy, and Spain hold an investment interest in the French Eurodif enrichment plant, with Iran’s holding entitling it to 10% of the enriched uranium output. Countries that had enrichment programs in the past include Libya and South Africa, although Libya’s facility was never operational.[20] Australia has developed a laser enrichment process known as SILEX, which it intends to pursue through financial investment in a U.S. commercial venture by General Electric.[21] It has also been claimed that Israel has a uranium enrichment program housed at the Negev Nuclear Research Center site near Dimona.[22]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Obama and Kerry Appease Iran — Netanyahu “Historic Mistake” — Bolton “Abject Surrender” — Peace in our Time or Time for Israel To Take Out Iran’s Nuclear Facilities Like It Did In Syria — Lessons of The Munich Agreement — Videos

Posted on November 24, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Communications, Diasters, Energy, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Nuclear Power, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Raves, Science, Technology, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

neville_chamberlain

Declaration-September-1938

Peace in our Time September 1938

Neville Chamberlain – Peace in our Time

The Munich Agreement | History Lessons

Iran Nuclear Deal Fox News Sunday Panel Chris Wallace 11 24 13

Sen Bob Corker (R-TN) Reacts To Iran Nuclear Deal On Fox News Sunday

Awful. Obama Has Not Called Israel Yet on Signed Nuclear Agreement With Iran

Obama: ‘Provide Iran with modest relief’

Diplomats strike deal in Iran talks Middle East

Bolton Obama’s Going to ‘Cram Iran Nuclear Deal Down Israel’s Throat’

(HD) Netanyahu: Agreement on Iran nuclear program bad deal

Senator Bob Corker We’re Dealing Away Our Leverage in Iran Negotiations

November 25 2013 Israeli Netanyahu speaks on Face the Nation against NWO Iran Nuclear on fisrt deal

‘Yellow light enough’ for Israel to attack Iran

Israel about to bomb iran?…. Iran simulates a Nuclear Counter attack on israel

October 1 2013 Breaking News Mounting evidence suggests Israeli strike on Iran approaching

Israel versus Iran – Capabilities of War Defense Technologies – A must see!!!

The Road to World War 3

Israel blasts Iran nuclear deal as ‘historic mistake’

By Hazel Ward

Israel on Sunday lashed out at the Geneva nuclear deal brokered by world powers as being heavily stacked in Iran’s favour, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calling it a “historic mistake.”

Following a months-long diplomatic campaign warning of the dangers of easing economic sanctions on Iran in exchange for steps to curb its contested nuclear programme, senior cabinet ministers chimed in, with one saying Israel reserved the right to strike Iran on its own.

Netanyahu told his cabinet on Sunday that “what was achieved yesterday in Geneva is not a historic agreement but rather a historic mistake,” according to a post on spokesman Ofir Gendelman’s Twitter account.

“This is a bad agreement,” said Netanyahu’s office in an earlier statement.

“It gives Iran exactly what it wanted — a significant easing of sanctions and allows it to keep hold of the most essential parts of its nuclear programme,” it said just hours after the historic accord was signed in Switzerland.

“The agreement allows Iran to continue enriching uranium and leaves all the centrifuges in place which allow it to create fissile material for nuclear weapons.

“Economic pressure on Iran could have produced a much better agreement that would have led to a dismantling of Iran’s nuclear capacities,” it concluded.

Israel …

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said the agreement conferred legitimacy on Iran’s uranium enrichment programme in what he described as a diplomatic coup for the Islamic republic.

“This agreement is the greatest diplomatic victory of Iran, which has gained recognition for its so-called legitimate right to enrich uranium,” he told public radio.

‘All options are on table’

The hawkish, blunt-talking chief diplomat, who returned to office earlier this month after seeing off graft charges, stressed that “all options are on the table”.

“The responsibility for the security of the Jewish people and the population of Israel remains the sole responsibility of the Israeli government,” Lieberman said.

“All decisions in this regard will be taken independently and responsibly,” he added.

View gallery.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (C) speaks …

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (C) speaks near Israeli Cabinet Secretary Avichai Mandelbl …

Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz said the agreement was likely to bring Iran “closer” rather than further away from building a bomb.

“The current deal … is more likely to bring Iran closer to having a bomb. Israel cannot participate in the international celebration, which is based on Iranian deception and world self-delusion,” he said in a statement from his office.

Economy Minister Naftali Bennett, leader of the far-right Jewish Home, said Israel was not bound by the Geneva deal and had a right to self-defence.

“Iran is threatening Israel and Israel has the right to defend itself,” he told army radio.

Israel and much of the West believe Iran’s nuclear programme is a front for a weapons drive, a charge which Iran has repeatedly denied saying it is only for civilian purposes.

Tehran has a long history of belligerent statements towards the Jewish state, notably under former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Israel has repeatedly warned that a nuclear Iran would pose an existential threat, refusing to rule out a preventative military strike on Iran’s atomic infrastructure.

The holocaust-denying Ahmadinejad, who was president for eight years, often questioned Israel’s right to exist, famously saying Israel should be “wiped from the page of time,” which was mistranslated as “wiped off the map”.

US Secretary of State John Kerry, a key player in the marathon talks that led to the interim deal, had earlier tried to head off criticism by saying the agreement would push back the threat and ultimately make the Jewish state more secure.

“This first step, I want to emphasise, actually rolls back the programme from where it is today, enlarges the breakout time, which would not have occurred unless this agreement existed.

“It will make our partners in the region safer. It will make our ally Israel safer,” Kerry told reporters.

Israel — widely assumed to be the Middle East’s only atomic-armed nation — has warned the West against being hoodwinked by Iran’s apparent newfound moderation since President Hassan Rouhani, himself a former nuclear negotiator, replaced Ahmadinejad in August.

Kerry said Netanyahu had been updated on progress in the talks and that any differences between the United States and Israel on the issue were cosmetic.

“There is no difference whatsoever between the US and Israel of what the end goal is — that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon,” he added.

http://news.yahoo.com/israel-pm-says-iran-deal-historic-mistake-093026133.html

Abject Surrender by the United States

What does Israel do now?

BY JOHN BOLTON

Negotiations for an “interim” arrangement over Iran’s nuclear weapons program finally succeeded this past weekend, as Security Council foreign ministers (plus Germany) flew to Geneva to meet their Iranian counterpart.  After raising expectations of a deal by first convening on November 8-10, it would have been beyond humiliating to gather again without result.  So agreement was struck despite solemn incantations earlier that “no deal is better than a bad deal.”

This interim agreement is badly skewed from America’s perspective.  Iran retains its full capacity to enrich uranium, thus abandoning a decade of Western insistence and Security Council resolutions that Iran stop all uranium-enrichment activities. Allowing Iran to continue enriching, and despite modest (indeed, utterly inadequate) measures to prevent it from increasing its enriched-uranium stockpiles and its overall nuclear infrastructure, lays the predicate for Iran fully enjoying its “right” to enrichment in any “final” agreement.  Indeed, the interim agreement itself acknowledges that a “comprehensive solution” will “involve a mutually defined enrichment program.”  This is not, as the Obama administration leaked before the deal became public, a “compromise” on Iran’s claimed “right” to enrichment. This is abject surrender by the United States.

In exchange for superficial concessions, Iran achieved three critical breakthroughs. First, it bought time to continue all aspects of its nuclear-weapons program the agreement does not cover (centrifuge manufacturing and testing; weaponization research and fabrication; and its entire ballistic missile program). Indeed, given that the interim agreement contemplates periodic renewals, Iran may have gained all of the time it needs to achieve weaponization not of simply a handful of nuclear weapons, but of dozens or more.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/abject-surrender-united-states_768140.html

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

United Nations Earth Summit Agenda 21 — Sustainable Development — Videos

Posted on November 5, 2013. Filed under: Agriculture, American History, Banking, Biology, Blogroll, Books, Business, Chemistry, Climate, College, Communications, Computers, Constitution, Culture, Demographics, Diasters, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Enivornment, European History, Farming, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Food, Foreign Policy, Genocide, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Homes, Illegal, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, Legal, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, media, Medicine, Monetary Policy, Money, Natural Gas, Nuclear Power, Oil, People, Philosophy, Photos, Physics, Politics, Press, Programming, Psychology, Quotations, Radio, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Religion, Resources, Science, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Unemployment, Video, War, Water, Wealth, Weather, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , |

9781482672770

Sustainability

Glenn Beck – Agenda 21 On O’Reilly

Glenn Beck Supports Agenda 21…His Book that is!

UN Agenda 21 ~ The End of Freedom

Agenda 21 EXPLAINED, full version

Agenda 21 -Progress 2/24/13

TrutherGirl Infiltrates NWO Conference!

Agenda 21- Codex- Fema Camps-80% Depopulation = New World Order (Terror Camps: The Global Agenda)

Honourable Ann Bressington Exposes UN Agenda 21 Club of Rome Population Control World Government

Whistleblower Scientist Exposing Secrets of Agenda 21 Part1

Whistleblower Scientist Exposing Secrets of Agenda 21 Part 2

H.A.A.R.P., Agenda 21 and Google’s Role In The Sinister DNA Plan – Mature Content

Agenda 21: Global Control Starts Here – An Interview with Glenn Beck

Agenda 21 The Depopulation Agenda For a New World Order

► Agenda 21, the NWO, Executive Order 13575, Sustainable Development, and Population Reduction

UN AGENDA 21 ” Sustainable Development “…..For Dummies. (Low).flv

Agenda 21 in Less Than 5 Minutes

Agenda 21 Sustainable Development States Block Communist Socialist Land Grab

United Nations Agenda 21

Nature of Sustainable Development / United Nations AGENDA 21

John Birch Society on Agenda 21

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Valerie Jarrett Leading From Behind Barack Obama — A Big Failure In Both Domestic and Foreign Policy — A Legacy of Failures — Videos

Posted on October 20, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Books, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, Illegal, Immigration, Inflation, IRS, Islam, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Macroeconomics, media, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Programming, Psychology, Public Sector, Rants, Regulations, Resources, Security, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Terrorism, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , |

valerie-jarrett

valerie_jarrett_obama_senior_adviser

val_jarrettvalerie-jarrett2Barack_Obama_and_Valerie_Jarrett_in_the_West_Wing_corridor

Who is Valerie Jarret?

Obama’s “Other Half”

Eye To Eye: Obama’s Key Advisor

Obama Admin Bad Blood? – Sources Cite Friction With Valerie Jarrett

In Conversation with Valerie Jarrett

Obama’s Wormy Brain Talks out of School: Valerie Jarrett

 

Valerie Jarrett’s battle plan for Obama’s second term

Valerie Jarrett Obama Knows What’s Best For America

Jonathan Alter rips Valerie Jarrett: ‘She’s not well-liked’

THE LATEST NEWS : Valerie Jarrett taking on White House complaints

Obama Admin Bad Blood? – Sources Cite Friction With Valerie Jarrett

Cornel West: Obama A ‘Rockefeller Republican In Blackface’

Professor Cornel West Discusses Obama’s Impact on African American Voters Part 1

Professor Cornel West Discusses Obama’s Impact on African American Voters Part 2

Tavis Smiley, Cornel West Slam Valerie Jarrett, Obama For Insincerity Toward African-Americans

Cornel West: Sharpton Sold Soul for Obama

Benghazi-Gate ‘Source’: “Obama Refused Clinton State Dept Request For Security in Benghazi”

Valerie Jarrett Truly Defines the “Culture of Corruption” – Michelle Malkin – Sean Hannity 8-1-12

Valerie Jarrett’s Stand Down Order

Valerie Jarrett Is The Other Power In The West Wing – The Other Half Of Obama Brain

Valerie Jarret Obama’s Senior Advisor l Obamas Position On The Public Option

Valerie Jarrett Recruited Van Jones

Valerie Jarrett’s Thoughts on Barack Obama

Valerie Jarrett Was Slum Lord in Obama’s State Senate District

Obama’s Valerie Jarrett: Often Whispered about, But Never Challenged

By John Fund

President Obama’s aides went to extraordinary lengths to uncover the identity of a senior official who was using Twitter to make snarky comments about White House staffers. Suspicion gradually centered on Jofi Joseph, the point man on nuclear nonproliferation at the National Security Council. So at a meeting in which everyone was in on the scam an inaccurate but innocuous news tidbit was revealed. When Joseph used his anonymous Twitter handle #natlsecwonk to broadcast the tidbit he was caught and promptly fired. He was not fired for revealing any secrets, but for making disparaging comments about thin-skinned administration players ranging from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel.

What apparently intensified the campaign to identify the “snarker” was a comment about Valerie Jarrett, the senior Obama adviser who has her own Secret Service detail and appears to exercise an inordinate amount of power behind the scenes. Joseph tweeted “I’m a fan of Obama, but his continuing reliance and dependence upon a vacuous cipher like Valerie Jarrett concerns me.”

Jarrett, an old Chicago friend of both Barack and Michelle Obama, appears to exercise such extraordinary influence she is sometimes quietly referred to as “Rasputin” on Capitol Hill, a reference to the mystical monk who held sway over Russia’s Czar Nicholas as he increasingly lost touch with reality during World War I.

Darrell Delamaide, a columnist for Dow Jones’s MarketWatch, says that “what has baffled many observers is how Jarrett, a former cog in the Chicago political machine and a real-estate executive, can exert such influence on policy despite her lack of qualifications in national security, foreign policy, economics, legislation or any of the other myriad specialties the president needs in an adviser.”

Delamaide believes the term “vacuous cipher” that was applied to Jarrett stung so much because it could be used as a metaphor for the administration in general. He writes that what “has remained consistent about the Obama administration is that vacuity — the slow response in a crisis, the hesitant and contradictory communication, a lack of conviction and engagement amid constant political calculation.” The stunning revelation that President Obama wasn’t kept properly apprised of problems with Obamacare’s website is just the latest example of how dysfunctional Obama World can be.

Whether Jarrett’s influence is all too real or exaggerated is unknowable. What is known is the extent to which she has long been a peerless enabler of Barack Obama’s inflated opinion of himself. Consider this quote from New Yorker editor David Remnick’s interview with her for his 2010 book The Bridge.

“I think Barack knew that he had God-given talents that were extraordinary. He knows exactly how smart he is. . . . He knows how perceptive he is. He knows what a good reader of people he is. And he knows that he has the ability — the extraordinary, uncanny ability — to take a thousand different perspectives, digest them and make sense out of them, and I think that he has never really been challenged intellectually. . . . So what I sensed in him was not just a restless spirit but somebody with such extraordinary talents that had to be really taxed in order for him to be happy. . . . He’s been bored to death his whole life. He’s just too talented to do what ordinary people do.”

Up against a court flatterer of that caliber it’s no surprise that Jarrett has outlasted almost everyone who was in Obama’s original White House team — from chief of staff Rahm Emanuel to political guru David Axelrod to Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. All are known to have crossed her, and all are gone. As one former Obama aide once told me: “Valerie is ‘She Who Must Not be Challenged.’”

When the revealing histories of the Obama White House are written it will be fascinating to learn just how extensive her role in the key decisions of the Obama years was.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/362203/obamas-valerie-jarrett-often-whispered-about-never-challenged-john-fund

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

James Hamilton — Oil Prices, Exhaustible Resources and Economic Growth — Videos

Posted on October 6, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Books, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Energy, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, government spending, history, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Natural Gas, Oil, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Regulations, Video, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , |

James_Hamilton

James Hamilton, Oil Prices, Exhaustible Resources and Economic Growth

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Benghazi Scandal Update — Videos

Posted on September 19, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Communications, Constitution, Crime, Demographics, Diasters, Economics, Education, Energy, European History, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government spending, history, Islam, Islam, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Press, Psychology, Raves, Strategy, Tax Policy, Technology, Video, War, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , |

Benghazi, Victims’ Families & Investigators Testify At House Hearing On Benghazi – Lou Dobbs

9-19-2013 “Reviews of the Benghazi Attack and

Unanswered Questions” Part I

9-19-2013 “Reviews of the Benghazi Attack and Unanswered Questions” Part II

Benghazi Scandal Review Of The Benghazi Attack & Questions That Remain Unanswered

No solution for Benghazi until 2016 election

Rep. Gowdy Talks Obamacare and Benghazi with Lou Dobbs

Chairman Issa’s Opening Statement Benghazi

Chaffetz Questions Adm. Mullen About Military Capability During Attack In Benghazi

Chaffetz to Families of Benghazi Victims: “We have a duty to find out the truth.”

Benghazi Victim’s Mother ‘Why Isn’t Hillary Out Here’

Congressman Mica questions Administration on Benghazi

In an exchange with witnesses during our Congressional Oversight Hearing, Congressman John Mica explains to Administration officials that most Americans believe the State Department report on responsibility for the Bengazhi attack was a “whitewash”. Those conducting the review were appointed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who they failed to interview along with other top State and Administration officials. Mica stated that this looks like an inside job where no one was held accountable, fired and none of the killers captured or brought to justice.

Benghazi Scandal It Was Clear Pretty Quickly General Benghazi Was No Demonstration!

Independent Benghazi Review Briefed Clinton, Mills on Report Before Released

House Of Scandals Obama Gives Speech To Distract Americans Rand Paul R KY) Hannity

The Benghazi Testimony Fox Doesn t Want You To See

Rep. Meehan Questions Officials Responses to Location of Embassy in Benghazi

DC Scandals – Time To Testify? – Issa: We Call Hillary Clinton Back! – Benghazi Scandal

Benghazi Scandal Investigation Widening Lawmakers Seek Interviews Of 13 Top Officials

Benghazi Scandal Is Obama Admin Trying To Hide Something! Force Into Silence! OReilly

Complete News – General Petraeus leaked secret info on Benghazi attack to his mistress?

Military Action In Syria Is Designed To Cover Up Benghazi – Glenn Beck

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Former Communist KGB Lt. Colonel Putin Pleas for International Collectivism Not American Individual Exceptionalism — Obama Agrees! — Videos

Posted on September 12, 2013. Filed under: Agriculture, American History, Blogroll, College, Communications, Constitution, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, European History, Farming, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Food, Foreign Policy, Genocide, government, government spending, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Natural Gas, Nuclear Power, Oil, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Press, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Religion, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Collectivism

Collectivism

Collectivist in Chief

collectivism4

black_hand

Totalitarianism_01

To achieve world government it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism loyalty to family traditions national patriotism and religious dogmas

Individualism

Milton Friedman – Collectivism

Collectivism and Individualism – Edward Griffin

What We Believe, Part 7: American Exceptionalism

Individualism vs. Collectivism

G. Edward Griffin – The Collectivist Conspiracy

President Collectivist: Will Obama’s Statist, Class Warfare Mantra Resonate with Voters?

Newsmax Now (09/12/13)

Understanding Putin’s “remarkable” editorial

‘Plea for Caution’: Putin warns against diminishing intl law

Edward Griffin : United Nations One World Government? Collectivism (Control) Dec 2012

The UNITED NATIONS exposed by G Edward Griffin

G. Edward Griffin in Toronto: The New World Order and the UN – 11.16.2012

Background Articles and Videos

What We Believe, Part 1: Small Government and Free Enterprise

What We Believe, Part 2: The Problem with Elitism

What We Believe, Part 3: Wealth Creation

What We Believe, Part 4: Natural Law

What We Believe, Part 5: Gun Rights

What We Believe, Part 6: Immigration

What We Believe, Part 7: American Exceptionalism

Why Obama Is Snubbing Putin | WSJ Opinion

A Plea for Caution From Russia

What Putin Has to Say to Americans About Syria

By VLADIMIR V. PUTIN

MOSCOW — RECENT events surrounding Syria have prompted me to speak directly to the American people and their political leaders. It is important to do so at a time of insufficient communication between our societies.

Relations between us have passed through different stages. We stood against each other during the cold war. But we were also allies once, and defeated the Nazis together. The universal international organization — the United Nations — was then established to prevent such devastation from ever happening again.

The United Nations’ founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with America’s consent the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.

No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorization.

The potential strike by the United States against Syria, despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders, including the pope, will result in more innocent victims and escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syria’s borders. A strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. It could undermine multilateral efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further destabilize the Middle East and North Africa. It could throw the entire system of international law and order out of balance.

Syria is not witnessing a battle for democracy, but an armed conflict between government and opposition in a multireligious country. There are few champions of democracy in Syria. But there are more than enough Qaeda fighters and extremists of all stripes battling the government. The United States State Department has designated Al Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, fighting with the opposition, as terrorist organizations. This internal conflict, fueled by foreign weapons supplied to the opposition, is one of the bloodiest in the world.

Mercenaries from Arab countries fighting there, and hundreds of militants from Western countries and even Russia, are an issue of our deep concern. Might they not return to our countries with experience acquired in Syria? After all, after fighting in Libya, extremists moved on to Mali. This threatens us all.

From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future. We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law. We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not. Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression.

No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with the fundamentalists. Reports that militants are preparing another attack — this time against Israel — cannot be ignored.

It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan “you’re either with us or against us.”

But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces withdraw. Libya is divided into tribes and clans. In Iraq the civil war continues, with dozens killed each day. In the United States, many draw an analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to repeat recent mistakes.

No matter how targeted the strikes or how sophisticated the weapons, civilian casualties are inevitable, including the elderly and children, whom the strikes are meant to protect.

The world reacts by asking: if you cannot count on international law, then you must find other ways to ensure your security. Thus a growing number of countries seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. This is logical: if you have the bomb, no one will touch you. We are left with talk of the need to strengthen nonproliferation, when in reality this is being eroded.

We must stop using the language of force and return to the path of civilized diplomatic and political settlement.

A new opportunity to avoid military action has emerged in the past few days. The United States, Russia and all members of the international community must take advantage of the Syrian government’s willingness to place its chemical arsenal under international control for