"The Future Belongs To Those Who Believe In The Beauty Of Their Dreams."

Eleanor Roosevelt


Watching as the Cuban flag was raised at the Cuban Embassy in Washington D.C. presents a mixed blessing for those who are from Cuban heritage, as I am. My mom escaped from Cuba in 1961. She barely got out when Fidel Castro took over. And while my mom and I are happy to see relations normalizing with Cuba, something seems missing. What is missing is the story of those who escaped and lost everything due to the revolution. This happened to the many people who were not rich but rather middle class, like most people here in America.

Everything was taken from them. Their personal belongings and homes were taken. They were then moved to the country from Havana to work on farms. How strange it must have been for my mother, an office worker, and my grandmother, a teacher, to be moved from their home as all of their belongings were taken over, and then they were bused to the countryside.

What is eerie to watch are the numerous socialists and others lauding only the advancement of the people of Cuba. This happened on the backs of many middle class people who found themselves lucky enough to escape Cuba with one suitcase and a hidden photo or two.

Castro and the rest of the revolutionaries were given license to steal by both the poor and potentially the same corrupt elite which they claimed to be against. They have controlled those poor into their present reality. And while the socialist system has yielded lots of benefits including health care, education, housing, etc., there is little of free enterprise with the exception of the black market which is used to supplement the average Cuban's income. There is no freedom to speak against the system, freedom of expression is limited and the revolutionaries needed to push common people down to achieve their goal which they now say is justified based on the results.

There is a much better solution than this manufactured socialist system, which is being lauded. It is found in the true and enforced meaning of the Bill of Rights in the US and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

What if the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion really failed on purpose? One thing that my mom could never understand is how Castro managed to stay in power all of those years. She never understood how the world's most powerful government could not remove the dictator and free the Cuban people. It seemed so clear and easy to do, and yet it never made sense that this was not done. So, perhaps the blockade was intentional to show the “benefits” of socialism. All the while, the corrupt version of  the “free enterprise system” was operating in the background with visits to Cuba from prominent, well financed Americans including Mitt Romney.

Powered by SEM
Ann Diener Wednesday, 01 April 2015 17:35 PDF Print E-mail

When one of my friends on Facebook posted a quote by a Russian Think Tank Strategist, Konstantin Sivkov, who said that “The best way for Russia to solve its problem with America would be to trigger a nuclear weapon at Yellowstone National Park and hope it would set off a supervolcano, destroying the continent,” according to several articles including this one, I had to wonder – do they think they have nothing to do with the American foreign policy situation? Could they have put an end to the Bush Administration with the evidence they have about 9/11/2001? Steel buildings do not collapse because of fire even when jet fuel is added. The temperature does not get hot enough.

This reminded me when I was working at the Taste of Encino during the 2004 election cycle. At the time Mikhail Khodorkovsky was a big topic in Russia, and I was talking with a Republican campaign chair about the democracy movement in Russia and what was happening to Khodorkovsky. At the time, I felt like we were being listened to. Well, within about 15 minutes of our conversation, two guys with Russian accents show up and come in between our conversation. One goes with the Republican chair and purchases the largest Bush/Cheney sign I have ever seen.

The other guy stays and talks with me while their campaign contribution is made. When thinking about the Russian strategy through out the Bush Administration, it has been one of watch the Administration make global mistakes and potentially allow criminal actions to happen for later use. Currently my views on Khodorkovsky have changed because of Ukraine, but this does not eliminate Russian culpability with the foreign policy that is currently affecting them – NATO's encroachment.

If Russia had stood against the US and offered evidence on 9/11/2001 – satellite photos, scientific reports and analysis regarding who the culprits were, would there be NATO encroachment today? Why suggest killing thousands of Americans, Canadians and Mexicans because of what is a continuation of a potentially unfairly elected leader's fault (the Supreme Court made Bush President), yes, but if Russia as a country had the power to stop imperialism based on lies many years ago, why did they not? Could there be a benefit to watching America fail – financially and diplomatically – launching false wars and committing financial crimes? Are the citizens to blame when no one in the world seems to be able to stop what seems to be organized crime operating within a country's boarders? And no one internationally – or rather very few- are willing to stand up and speak against it.

It was interesting when Gordon Duff asked President Vladimir Putin for evidence connecting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Soviet Intelligence in an article titled, “We Demand: President Putin Release Documents Vital to World Peace.”

He asked for, “Full information on Netanyahu’s role in running Jonathan Pollard as a Soviet agent,” and “Full information on Netanyahu’s role as a Soviet agent in the theft of American cryptographic units from the UNTSO in 1990 and the nature of the data, NATO military secrets, US State Department correspondence and US Naval codes that Netanyahu passed on to Moscow.”

Thinking about the Bolsheviks, their origins and the Khazarian mafia there is a possible reason no one spoke about 9/11/2001. They all potentially benefited. Previously, one could give them a pass because globally the narrative against speaking out has been so strong and looking at Think Tanks, they are typically hot heads, hawks and war profiteers, so that may be why there was little interest in bringing organized crime on trial for possibly committing one of the largest terror incidents that led to countless wars, killing well over one million people. Now looking at Mr. Sivkov's statement, one would also have to wonder as he was present in Russia during the Soviet Union, could he also be aware of the Khazarian mafia? Why threaten us and not them, as it is possible that they are the basis for the situation in Ukraine?

Perhaps it is a Think Tank problem similar to the Bomb, Bomb Iran crowd here in the US – they refuse to see themselves as the problem. The other side of the coin is the American Think Tanks providing wonderful opinion pieces to the New York Times, especial the one written by Former Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, now Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, entitled, “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran.”

With the painstaking work done by the Obama Administration to secure a nuclear deal with Iran, words of Mr. Bolton are not constructive. They are detrimental.

“The inconvenient truth is that only military action like Israel’s 1981 attack on Saddam Hussein’s Osirak reactor in Iraq or its 2007 destruction of a Syrian reactor, designed and built by North Korea, can accomplish what is required,” said Bolton. What would that accomplish? The Apocalypse? Inspections over Armageddon for all including Israel is a better choice until the world reaches a point where nuclear power is no longer a profitable, viable form of power – which could be very soon if E-cat, hydrogen power and other alternatives were allowed to take the stage.

Notice how this is not ever brought up. Rather to bomb, destroy or nuke the planet rather than create solutions that are viable and solid. Perhaps we should change the name Think Tanks to Nuke Tanks, perhaps then and only then would we be clear of what these fools are after.

Powered by SEM

The US and Russia should go after the 3rd party, out them and bring peace and stability back. This morning I watched a very informative interview with Stephen Cohen on Democracy Now! Watch a clip of it here.

Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University. He brought up an interesting point about President Barack Obama's weekend statement regarding the situation in Ukraine.

"Mr. Putin made this decision around Crimea and Ukraine, not because of some grand strategy, but essentially because he was caught off balance by the protests in the Maidan and Yanukovych then fleeing after we had brokered a deal to transition power in Ukraine," said Obama.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov then responded, "I have two comments which are important. There has been confirmation that the United States was directly involved, from the very beginning, in this anti-government coup d’état. And President Obama literally called it 'the transition of power.' Secondly, I would like to note that Obama’s rhetoric shows Washington’s intention to continue doing everything possible to unconditionally support Ukraine’s authorities, who have apparently taken a course toward a military solution to the conflict."

What is most interesting is that Cohen went onto explain that what President Obama was referring to was the brokered deal for Yanukovych to form a coalition government and to hold elections in December. This is where the 3rd party potentially interfered, created chaos in the streets the next day and the coup.

"Here’s what happened," said Cohen. "And he’s right about Crimea. He just let the cat out of the bag here. An agreement was brokered in February. Everybody think back. It’s only one year ago. Foreign ministers of Europe, as violence raged in the streets of Kiev, rushed to Kiev and brokered a deal between the sitting president and the opposition leaders—Yanukovych—that he would form a coalition government and call new elections in December. And everybody thought, 'Wow, violence averted. We’re back on a democratic track.' And what happened? The next day, mobs took to the streets, stormed the presidential palace; Yanukovych, the president, fled to Russia.

"But we now know that when that deal was struck by the European ministers, Putin and Obama spoke on the phone, and Putin said to Obama, 'Are you behind this?' And Obama says, 'I am. Let’s get back on peaceful track.' And then he asks Putin, 'Are you behind it?' And Putin said, 'A hundred percent.' And the next day, this happened. So, something happened overnight. Obama lost control of the situation. He didn’t know what was going on. But when he says that they negotiated a peaceful transition to power, he’s not referring to the overthrow of Yanukovych; he’s referring to the deal he signed onto to keep the Ukrainian president in office for another eight or nine months until national elections.

"So, he has now confirmed the Russia dark suspicions that the CIA or somebody carried out a coup."

If Obama and Lavrov could speak on the phone today and acknowledge the third party influence on the situation, one that has been stoking the conflict, they could stop playing their roles in this "theater" and focus collaboratively to out the third party once and for all. This will restore peace and progress. Why are the US and Russia continuing to be played by the third party? It is time both work together to expose this group that has been attacking peace on all fronts and fomenting conflict for personal gain and against the interests of millions of people.

Here is a full link to the Democracy Now interview:

Powered by SEM

I just sent this letter to both Senators Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinsten. Feel free to copy this letter or any portion and send it to your representatives. The three laws we are asking our American government to follow are The Arms Export Control Act which stipulates that US-supplied weapons can be used only for “legitimate self-defense”. The US Foreign Assistance Act prohibits military assistance to any country “which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights”. And the Proxmire Amendment bans military assistance to any government that, like Israel, refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty or prevents inspection of its nuclear facilities. If we followed these laws we would not be complicit in potential war crimes and there would be a lot less violence in Gaza. 

Dear Senator Boxer,

I am petitioning you to follow American law in regards to Israel. As Israel is currently being investigated by the UN Human Rights Council, it is our duty as a country to suspend arms shipments and military aid to Israel. Although we were the lone country voting against the resolution to "establish an independent, international commission of inquiry to investigate all violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law in the Occupied Palestinian Territory," this does not absolve us from being an accomplice to war crimes, should those be found by the Council.

We should therefore follow The Arms Export Control Act which stipulates that US-supplied weapons can be used only for “legitimate self-defense”. In the case of Gaza, if it is found that Israel is committing acts of ethnic cleansing to take over territory as was said even by the deputy speaker of the Knesset, Moshe Feiglin, we are in violation of that law.

He said, "After the IDF completes the "softening" of the targets with its fire-power, the IDF will conquer the entire Gaza, using all the means necessary to minimize any harm to our soldiers, with no other considerations. ( )

"Gaza is part of our Land and we will remain there forever. Liberation of parts of our land forever is the only thing that justifies endangering our soldiers in battle to capture land. Subsequent to the elimination of terror from Gaza, it will become part of sovereign Israel and will be populated by Jews. This will also serve to ease the housing crisis in Israel. The coastal train line will be extended, as soon as possible, to reach the entire length of Gaza."

The US Foreign Assistance Act prohibits military assistance to any country “which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights”. As we have witnessed the same patten of violence by Israel including Cast Lead, etc. it is clear that this violence has been ongoing.

And the Proxmire Amendment bans military assistance to any government that, like Israel, refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty or prevents inspection of its nuclear facilities.

Three laws which I am petitioning you to follow by stopping all military aide to Israel until the completion of the independent investigation by the UN Human Rights Council.

President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry have proposed over and over a two state solution. If Israel is really the aggressor and by its own words is the party refusing, we should not be complicit in possible war crimes.

I also ask you to watch this: former executive director of the American Jewish Congress, Rabbi Henry Siegman was interviewed on Democracy Now ( He detailed the terrorism, and he called it that, that was done by Israelis to force 700,000 Palestinians to leave. Siegman has also met with Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal - who everyone says is not prepared to recognize Israel as a Jewish state- said it would be his government that would recognize Israel. People do not recognize states - governments do and he would work for such a government that recognizes Israel.

It is up to us to say no to terrorism and ethnic cleansing that is potentially being done by Israel. Are we to be standing on the sidelines co-opting a Palestinian holocaust? Please encourage our government to follow its laws through stopping all military aid to Israel.


Ann Diener

Powered by SEM

With the recent strikes on civilians in Gaza and ISIS attacks in Iraq, the violence happening in the world against innocent people is staggering. What is strange is that when you look at these two atrocities, they are based on false religion meaning ther actions violate their groups' own teachings not to harm, kill and steal from people. Officials and the media can say otherwise, that it is defense or aggression in retaliation but the sheer civilian toll and destruction of homes and personal property is not connected to any religious text - it is against them all.

When you think about Israel, a country that has been attacked by rockets which are not acceptable either, why would they destroy hospitals, buildings, UN refugee centers in schools, power plants - because there are rockets hiding there? The rockets have been there for a long time. Wasn't the basis for this new "operation" the kidnapping of 3 Israeli youths? Hasn't blame for this crime been admitted by an ISIS affiliate?

So is ISIS operating in Gaza? The level of force against the Palestinians seems disproportionate and with the amount of destruction in Gaza. I wonder if there is a group, perhaps the same group that kidnapped the 3 Israeli teens, which was not Hamas - that is hiding rockets to assist with the targeting of badly needed infrastructure, powerful political people who may help to build Palestine as a strong nation and to scare the people of Gaza into leaving the area? Gaza is a valuable piece of coastline.

So when looking at this further, at the very roots of the conflict, neither Judaism nor Islam would encourage the killing of innocent civilians to take their land. Both faiths have protested against the situation in Gaza and to a lesser extent Iraq.

Israel's cause in Gaza is potentially rooted in extremism and removing Palestinians from their land.

According to many far right - now main stream - politicians inside Israel including Moshe Feiglin, Deputy Speaker of the Knesset who said, "Gaza is part of our Land and we will remain there forever. Liberation of parts of our land forever is the only thing that justifies endangering our soldiers in battle to capture land"

So it is clear from his words what their intent is. It is not to just eliminate danger to Israel, but to take Palestinian land. He goes on to say Palestinians will be removed or can stay and be given permanent resident status- not citizenship.  So the people who's land it is, Palestinians, will no longer be citizens on their own land? It is pretty clear why the situation is going on in Gaza right now is happening - goals, objectives, intent, reasoning behind, etc. have all been written about. It is not rockets.

Powered by SEM
Ann Diener Sunday, 13 July 2014 09:38 PDF Print E-mail

Glenn Greenwald interview – nothing new to see here. Nothing to do? How do we convene a Truth Commission or Congressional hearing? Germany's doing it.

After watching yesterday's interview with Glenn Greenwald on Democracy Now about the Muslim lawyers and civil rights leaders that were spied upon,(1) I was glad to see that new documents had been brought forward to the public for all to see, finally. I emailed a friend about the information. He encouraged me to look further because he said Greenwald and his information were a waste of time.

By looking further, it is interesting what I found out. This is more than controlled opposition, it seems to be psychologically controlled opposition or ‘cognitive infiltration’ to prevent action and real law enforcement investigation on crimes that have been committed within the United States, internationally and on American people, as well as on people residing in many countries. If we follow their story line, no wonder no law gets changed and no one gets arrested for breaking the law by violating the Constitution, committing war crimes and perjuring themselves before Congress, as James Clapper did. There is too much blocking through bickering and nonsense debate for a law enforcement action to occur. This blocking is not happening in Germany currently, and some day the American public may wake up very surprised when the information is presented without the cognitive infiltrator in between.

Think about the latest Greenwald story, we knew Muslim groups were being targeted by the NYPD and other agencies, as there have been hundreds of articles written about this. Is any of the information here surprising in the Democracy Now interview? What is surprising is that there is no action being taken at the core of the story, to end this invasive, illegal surveillance. It is like through the reporting of the story, everyone can say, “see I knew that was happening” and no one has to do anything about it. They can argue about the characters and circumstances, never prosecute the real crime.

Powered by SEM
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next > End >>
Page 3 of 5