New York Times Publishes Hit Piece Against US Constitution As FBI Demonizes Everyday Americans As Possible Terrorists

Source: The Intel Hub

In a move that has shocked many Americans, the New York Times has published a hit piece against the US Constitution and its “outdated” ways.

The hit piece comes on the heels of a sitting justice of the Supreme Court recommending multiple other constitutions and human rights charters to Egypt over the very constitution she is tasked to protect.

Joe Joseph, speaking during an emotionally charged Intel Hub News Brief Podcast, outlined this disgusting attack on the very foundation of this country and the ridiculous examples and excuses used to demonize the Constitution.

In the hit piece, the author actually claims that the US Constitution guarantees “relatively few rights."

There are lots of possible reasons. The United States Constitution is terse and old, and it guarantees relatively few rights.

The commitment of some members of the Supreme Court to interpreting the Constitution according to its original meaning in the 18th century may send the signal that it is of little current use to, say, a new African nation.

And the Constitution’s waning influence may be part of a general decline in American power and prestige.

Relatively few rights? Interpreting the Constitution in its original form a bad thing? America losing its prestige because we follow our Constitution?

These absurd statements and type of thinking actually make sense coming from the New York Times, especially when you consider their devout worship of globalization and any war the military industrial complex wishes to wage.

Bogus Tales of Iran's Nukes Used to Feed US Militarism

Source: Global Research
Ben Schreiner

With seemingly each passing day, the tensions between the US and Iran over the latter’s nascent nuclear program mount.  And with the voices clamoring for conflict growing ever louder, the clouds of war darken.  

As Mark Helprin warns in a January 18 Wall Street Journal op-ed, the Iranian nuclear program poses “a mortal threat” to the US.  As he explains, “we cannot dismiss the possibility of Iranian nuclear charges of 500 pounds or less ending up in Manhattan or Pennsylvania Avenue.”

Jamie Fly and Gary Schmitt, meanwhile, argue in a January 17 Foreign Affairs piece for outright regime change.  As they state: “After all, Iran’s nuclear program is a symptom of a larger illness—the revolutionary fundamentalist regime in Tehran.”  (An anonymous US official was quoted in the Washington Post on January 10 to hold regime change aspirations as well, before the paper later "clarified" the official’s remarks.)

Such frenzied and war hungry rhetoric, however, has not been limited to the standard purveyors of neoconservative drivel.  In fact, dramatically escalating the tensions and sense of fear amongst the American public has been the nation’s mainstream press corps, which has readily abandoned any and all pretensions of journalistic integrity in the service of propaganda.  

Indicative of this is the fact that it is now a common occurrence to have dire warnings of an Iranian nuclear weapons program splashed across the pages of the nation’s preeminent newspapers.  This endless chorus, though, comes despite the fact that an Iranian nuclear weapons program—as does its purported desire to even develop such a program—currently exists only in one’s imagination.  This much we know from the latest US National Intelligence Estimate.  

Nonetheless, the sheer and utter invention of an Iranian nuclear weapons program has increasingly come to be held by the American press as fact.  For as Joseph Goebbels would have it: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”

Illustrative of this dark axiom at work, we read in a January 12 Los Angeles Times editorial that: “Iran’s development of nuclear weapons [emphasis added] poses a grave threat to world stability and possibly an existential threat to this country’s Middle Eastern ally, Israel.”  In a January 10 Washington Post editorial we read that, “Iran may be feeling some economic pain, and it may be isolated.  But its drive for nuclear weapons continues [emphasis added].”  And in a January 4 New York Times piece we learn that, “The threats from Iran, aimed both at the West and at Israel, combined with a recent assessment by the International Atomic Energy Agency that Iran's nuclear program has a military objective [emphasis added], is becoming an important issue in the American presidential campaign.”

Of course, the hysteria over a hypothetical Iranian nuclear weapons program has by no means been limited to US print media.  The cable broadcast network CNN (i.e., “the most trusted name in news”) has also reported the fictitious claim that Iran's nuclear program has a military objective as fact.