US will “absolutely” continue drone war on Iran
RT | 14 December, 2011
Even with the loss of not one, but two multi-million-dollar drones in recent weeks, the head of the US Defense Department says that America will “absolutely” continue stealth jets missions over Iran.
Despite these losses, the US Department of Defense is showing no signs of retreat, even if Tehran has insisted that they are well on their well to decoding the top-secret technologies under the hood of the recovered Sentinel. Speaking to Fox News this week, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said that stealth missions into Iran will continue “absolutely,” despite ongoing opposition from overseas.
The first in a new fleet of drones departing air bases to patrol the international skies is the Avenger, a state-of-the-art stealth craft that serves as an updated edition to the arsenal of Predators and Reapers currently in America’s repertoire. With the ability to elude radar detection and bomb enemy targets with the help of internal weapons bays on each wing, the Pentagon will be sending the first new Avenger over to Afghanistan.
Given that the Taliban’s technology does not necessitate America to put in its skies an aircraft with the technologies as advanced as the Avenger, the decision to deploy the United States’ newest toy over Afghanistan is raising questions about the exact intentions of the craft.
America recently put a Sentinel drone over the skies of Afghanistan — or at least said they did — as part of a reconnaissance mission. The US lost contact with the craft, however, only later to deny its existence, eventually prompting the government of Iran to release footage of the craft they recovered after it was seen over its own skies. The US would later say that the drone must have wavered outside of its intended [path] and into Iranian territory by mistake, though officials out of Tehran said the craft was intercepted around 140 miles from their border with Afghanistan.
Less than two weeks after Iran managed to hijack the craft and bring it down unscathed, the United States lost a second drone, as RT reported on Tuesday this week. Both attacks befell advanced machinery that are valued in the tens-of-millions of dollars apiece.
Any conflict on Iran is a direct threat to Russia’s security – Rogozin
RT | 13 January, 2012
The escalating conflict around Iran should be contained by common effort, otherwise the promising Arab Spring will grow into a “scorching Arab Summer,” says Dmitry Rogozin, Russia’s deputy prime minister and former envoy to NATO.
“Iran is our close neighbor, just south of the Caucasus. Should anything happen to Iran, should Iran get drawn into any political or military hardships, this will be a direct threat to our national security,” stressed Rogozin.
Dmitry Rogozin, who served as Russia’s special envoy to NATO in 2008-2011, was appointed deputy prime minister by Vladimir Putin in December. On Friday he was bidding farewell to his NATO colleagues in the alliance’s headquarters in Brussels.
As for Syria, if NATO persists in interfering in its affairs, a catastrophe will be hard to avoid, said Rogozin, talking to journalists on the premises of the Russian mission to the alliance.
“The example of Libya should have cooled everybody down in matters dealing with foreign civil wars,” he said, stressing that this is his personal point of view.
“Syria must be left alone and the sides to the conflict must be assisted in breaking the stand-off and starting negotiations. No one must interfere with Syria. This is dangerous,” added Rogozin.
The West’s attempts to improve democracy in the Middle East and North Africa have resulted in Islamists coming to power. It is now up to the West to decide how comfortable they feel with neighbors who determine their politics with Sharia law, says Rogozin.
“If we add the escalating tensions around Iran to the situation in Syria and the consequences of the Libyan war, then the upcoming ‘scorching’ Arab Summer, which is following the Arab Spring, will hardly be to anyone’s taste.”
Russia’s response will make AMD ‘a waste of money’
Despite his recent promotion, Rogozin is still in charge of Russia-NATO discussions on anti-missile defense (AMD) issues.
A legal binding that the European and American missile defense systems will not target Russia has not been taken off the table, Rogozin pointed out.
“It seems strange that it is Russia who is required to show flexibility. This is not our project. If an architect is building a house, it is up to him to offer a design which would not violate property rights, area design and neighbors’ interests. So it is our US colleagues who should demonstrate miraculous flexibility to ensure that their AMD system does not violate the interests of other countries if it is to be located in Europe.”
Rogozin also called on European leaders to stop being “political puppets” in the AMD game, adding that everyone should stand for their own interests, not for some “Atlantic solidarity.”
If Moscow’s position is ignored and the range of the US anti-missile defense system covers the European part of Russia, this will be considered a situation requiring defensive action.
“I will certainly ensure Russia will give a corresponding technical response if the AMD system endangers our national interests. This will result in the American AMD being considered a waste of money,” said Rogozin.
Russia has everything needed to annihilate any attempt “to strip” its strategic potential, he added. This also means the era of imported weapons is coming to an end.
In a farewell gesture, Rogozin said he was considering planting a tree in the alliance’s headquarters. Symbolically enough, this would be a poplar, or “topol” in Russian, which brings up associations with Russia’s modern intercontinental ballistic missiles Topol-M.
But NATO replied that planting a tree within the headquarters perimeter “is not possible,” so the tree will have to be planted nearby.
US drone strike kills 6 in NW Pakistan
Press TV – January 12, 2012
At least six people have been killed in the latest non-UN-sanctioned US assassination drone strike in the northwestern tribal belt of Pakistan near the border with Afghanistan.
Intelligence officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the US unmanned aircraft fired two missiles at two cars in the Dogga area of North Waziristan tribal region, killing six.
“The missiles hit two cars that were heading towards the border. Several foreigners were in the cars, but we have no information on their nationalities yet,” an unnamed intelligence source said.
The strike comes two days after a similar attack killed four people in the North Waziristan tribal region.
Tuesday’s incident marked the resumption of the non-UN-sanctioned US drone campaign in Pakistan, which was paused after a NATO cross-border attack killed 24 Pakistani troops on November 26, 2011.
Meanwhile, Pakistan said on Thursday it can never condone violation of its sovereignty by the US drone strikes.
“Our position on drone attacks has always been very clear. We are of the view that strategic disadvantages outweigh tactical advantages of drone strikes,” Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesman Abdul Basit said.
He added that winning the hearts and minds of the people is crucial to win against violent extremism and this cannot happen if the collateral damage continues.
“Then there is the issue of violation of our sovereignty which we can never condone,” Basit said.
The US regularly carries out attacks by unmanned aircraft on Pakistan’s tribal regions, claiming the airstrikes target pro-Taliban militants. But locals say civilians are the main victims of the non-UN-sanctioned US strikes.
The aerial attacks, initiated by former US President George W. Bush, have escalated under President Barack Obama.
While the US government has always declined to publicly discuss its aerial attacks in Pakistan, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta admitted last October the US is fighting a war in Pakistan by using the drones.
AMD talks with US crumble; Russia beefs up early-warning radar
RT | 11 January, 2012
The Russian Defense Ministry announces plans for extensive new early-warning radar system as talks with US and NATO over the controversial European missile defense system hit the wall.
The announcement comes on the heels of President Dmitry Medvedev’s pledge to fortify national defense.
In addition to a newly inaugurated radar system located in Kaliningrad, several more radar stations will be placed on combat duty in 2012, Alexei Zolotukhin, an official with the Russian Defense Ministry press service for Aerospace Defense Troops, told reporters on Sunday.
“The new radar station Voronezh-DM, located in the Kaliningrad region, became part of the missile attack warning system in late 2011,” Zolotukhin said. “A radar station is fully ready to be put on combat duty in the Leningrad region. Another radar station has been launched in the Krasnodar Territory.”
A new generation radar station will also be launched in the Irkutsk Region, he revealed.
The spokesman said the new radar will go online following a series of state tests to be conducted this year.
Responding to Washington’s reluctance to cooperate with Moscow in a US missile defense system in Eastern Europe, President Medvedev in November said Russia would deploy strike systems in the west and south of the country and deploy Iskander missiles in the Kaliningrad Region. Russia has repeatedly warned that without its full participation in the system, situated just miles from the Russian border, it will be forced to respond to what it perceives as a threat to national security.
The Russian leader also reminded his American colleagues that Russia reserves the right to withdrawal from New START if the two sides fail to reach agreement over missile defense in Europe.
“In the event of unfavorable developments, Russia reserves the right to halt further steps in the disarmament sphere and, respectively, weapons control,” Medvedev said. “Besides, given the inseparable interconnection between the strategic offensive and defensive weapons, grounds may appear for our country’s withdrawal from the New START treaty.”
This was not the first time Moscow warned the US and NATO over the missile defense system, which Russia views as a potential threat to its national security. At the G-8 Summit in Deauville, France, in May, Medvedev warned that the world was heading toward another arms race.
“After 2020, if we do not come to terms, a real arms race will begin,” Medvedev warned.
Despite repeated warnings, the US and NATO seem determined to push ahead with missile defense without Russia’s cooperation, and despite the fact such a decision could sink the “reset” in relations forged between Medvedev and US President Barack Obama.
On April 8, 2009, Medvedev and Obama met at Prague Castle signed the biggest nuclear arms pact in a generation, which promised to shrink the limit of nuclear warheads to 1,550 per country.
Robert Bridge, RT
‘US builds hospitals in Georgia, readies for war with Iran’
RIA Novosti | 10 January, 2012
The United States is sponsoring the construction of facilities in Georgia on the threshold of a military conflict in Iran, a member of Georgian opposition movement Public Assembly, Elizbar Javelidze has stated.
According to the academician, that explains why President Mikhail Saakashvili is roaming the republic opening new hospitals in its regions.
“These are 20-bed hospitals…It’s an American project. A big war between the US and Iran is beginning in the Persian Gulf. $5 billion was allocated for the construction of these 20-bed military hospitals,” Javelidze said in an interview with Georgian paper Kviris Kronika (News of the Week), as cited by Newsgeorgia website.
The opposition member stated that the construction is mainly paid from the American pocket.
In addition, airports are being briskly built in Georgia and there are talks of constructing a port for underwater vessels in Kulevi on the eastern Black Sea coast in Georgia.
Javelidze believes that it is all linked to the deployment of US military bases on the Georgian soil. Lazika – one of Saakashvili’s mega-projects, a new city that will be built from a scratch – will be “an American military town”. According to the politician, “a secret airdrome” has already been erected in the town of Marneuli, southern Georgia.
The opposition member wondered who would protect Georgia in case if Iran fires its missiles against US military facilities on the territory of the Caucasian state.
All in all, about 30 new hospitals and medical centers were opened in the former Soviet republic in December last year. The plan is to build over a hundred more.
As for Lazika, the Georgian president announced his ambitious idea to build a second-largest city in Georgia, its western economic and trade center, at the end of 2011. According to the plan – which was slammed by his opponents and many analysts – Saakashvili’s dream-town will become home to at least half a million people within a decade.
Twisted Logic of Using Violence to Achieve Peace
By Ramzy Baroud | Palestine Chronicle | January 4, 2012
‘Sooner or later, there will be no escape from conducting a significant operation [in Gaza],’ said Israeli army Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Benny Gantz on December 27, the third anniversary of Operation Cast Lead.
Gantz’s chillingly casual remarks were cited as just another nonchalant declaration of war against a besieged, impoverished, overcrowded and routinely bombarded stretch of land. From the Israeli military and political point of view, Gaza merely exists as an opportunity for the Israeli army to test its latest weapon technology and send political messages to Israel’s foes in the region.
As if to validate Gantz’s logic, the ardently right-wing Israeli Jerusalem Post elaborated on December 28: “The Israel Air Force, working with the Shin Bet [Israel Security Agency], fired a missile at Gaza terrorists [fighters] involved in recent attacks on Israel, killing one and injuring two others.” They were ‘terrorists’ because Israel has designated them so. There was no due process and none was expected. When it comes to reporting on Israel/Palestine, corporate media largely relies on Israeli lies and propaganda. And one moral crisis begets another. The Israeli propaganda is predicated mostly on racism, not just in its view of Palestinians in Gaza, but of all Arabs.
Let’s examine the curious logic of Yuli Edelstein, Israel’s Propaganda and Diaspora Minister. In a recent talk in Or Yehuda, the man laid out his understanding of how peace can be achieved. “As long as the Arab nation continues to be a deplorable nation, which continues investing in infrastructure for terrorism, education to hate, and welfare for the families of shaheeds [martyrs], there will be no peace,” he said, according to Yossi Gurvitz in +972 online magazine.
Gurvitz further wrote: “I phoned the minister’s office for comment, and asked his spokesman: ‘Are you aware of the fact there are some 80 million Arabs in the world, from Sudan to Syria?’ He replied: ‘Yes, there are — and the minister meant them all.'”
I must admit that cogent political analysis becomes difficult when a country’s foreign policy and military strategy are constructed on unabashed racism, ignorance and a reproduction of 19th century Orientalism. How is one to forecast the possibilities of a just peace in Palestine when a well-regarded Israeli minister places a condition on the ‘Arab nation’ to become less deplorable? How can Gaza avoid another ‘Operation Cast Lead’ if its fate has already been sealed, with the ambiguous time frame of ‘sooner or later’?
It is particularly frustrating to hear Israeli politicians berating Palestinians for not being a deserving ‘peace partner’ when all that the Israeli government has to offer is one war of choice after another. Israel is increasingly ruled by the kind of fundamentalism and militancy that would not be tolerated anywhere else in the world. It is telling that Gantz’s ‘sooner or later’ remarks were followed by another interesting statement: “Gantz said that in certain circumstances and during non-official military events, the Israeli army would be prepared to exempt religious soldiers from participation if they are uncomfortable hearing women sing” (Jerusalem Post).
Such tolerance of religious fanaticism in Israel is a reflection of the growing role of religious extremism in the country. For the Israeli government to win favour among its constituents, all it needs to do is to blitz Gaza, rob more West Bank land, carry out more ethnic cleansing in occupied east Jerusalem or push a few more racist legislation against Israel’s Arab minority. Somehow, this seems to bring about a sense of serenity in Israel. The military emerges as the defender of the troubled borders, and a temporary political unity prevails.
Of course, the obvious truth regarding Israel’s ill-intentions will always find its way through the cracks of mainstream media. This was the case in the unprecedented report issued by European Union ambassadors in Israel. It read in part: “While the international community is focused predominantly on restarting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, we should see Israel’s treatment of its minorities as a core issue, not second tier to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” The report added, “Israel’s Arab population is measurably worse off than its non-Arab majority in terms of income, education, housing and access to land..
In other words, no Palestinian anywhere is immune. Indeed, in every aspect of its relations with Palestinians — in Gaza, in the West Bank and occupied Jerusalem, and in Israel itself — Israel’s attitude towards all Palestinians is defined by violence, ethnic cleansing and racial discrimination. Even minister Edelstein, who repudiated Arabs for being “deplorable”, himself reportedly lives in the illegal Jewish colony of Neve Daniel, constructed atop stolen Palestinian land (as reported by Stuart Littlewood, Redress).
It is odd that Israel demands security and peace from the very Palestinians who are deprived of every sense of peace, security, and freedom itself. And yet it is the ‘Arab nation’ that is ‘deplorable’ and deserving of endless war.
Three years after the Israeli war on Gaza, which killed over 1,400 and wounded over 5,500, there are few indications that Israel has in any way altered its attitude. To the contrary, it continues to exact further punishment, while the Israeli Knesset, media and public officials continue to dehumanise Palestinians and Arabs.
True, and sadly so, Gaza will “sooner or later” be the target of another ‘significant operation’ under the pretext of more excuses. But also true is the fact that Israeli crimes against Palestinians will continue to be exposed for the whole world to see. And ‘sooner or later’, this perpetual war against innocent people will have to stop.
~
Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an internationally-syndicated columnist and the editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story – Pluto Press, London. (This article was originally published in Gulf News)
Glenn Greenwald presents 25 reasons to register as a Republican
Glenn Greenwald:
The candidate supported by progressives — President Obama … holds heinous views on a slew of critical issues and himself has done heinous things with the power he has been vested. He has slaughtered civilians — Muslim children by the dozens — not once or twice, but continuously in numerous nations with drones, cluster bombs and other forms of attack. He has sought to overturn a global ban on cluster bombs. He has institutionalized the power of Presidents — in secret and with no checks — to target American citizens for assassination-by-CIA, far from any battlefield. He has waged an unprecedented war against whistleblowers, the protection of which was once a liberal shibboleth. He rendered permanently irrelevant the War Powers Resolution, a crown jewel in the list of post-Vietnam liberal accomplishments, and thus enshrined the power of Presidents to wage war even in the face of a Congressional vote against it. His obsession with secrecy is so extreme that it has become darkly laughable in its manifestations, and he even worked to amend the Freedom of Information Act (another crown jewel of liberal legislative successes) when compliance became inconvenient.
He has entrenched for a generation the once-reviled, once-radical Bush/Cheney Terrorism powers of indefinite detention, military commissions, and the state secret privilege as a weapon to immunize political leaders from the rule of law. He has shielded Bush era criminals from every last form of accountability. He has vigorously prosecuted the cruel and supremely racist War on Drugs, including those parts he vowed during the campaign to relinquish — a war which devastates minority communities and encages and converts into felons huge numbers of minority youth for no good reason. He has empowered thieving bankers through the Wall Street bailout, Fed secrecy, efforts to shield mortgage defrauders from prosecution, and the appointment of an endless roster of former Goldman, Sachs executives and lobbyists. He’s brought the nation to a full-on Cold War and a covert hot war with Iran, on the brink of far greater hostilities. He has made the U.S. as subservient as ever to the destructive agenda of the right-wing Israeli government. His support for some of the Arab world’s most repressive regimes is as strong as ever.
Most of all, America’s National Security State, its Surveillance State, and its posture of endless war is more robust than ever before. The nation suffers from what National Journal‘s Michael Hirsh just christened “Obama’s Romance with the CIA.” He has created what The Washington Post just dubbed “a vast drone/killing operation,” all behind an impenetrable wall of secrecy and without a shred of oversight. Obama’s steadfast devotion to what Dana Priest and William Arkin called “Top Secret America” has severe domestic repercussions as well, building up vast debt and deficits in the name of militarism that create the pretext for the “austerity” measures which the Washington class (including Obama) is plotting to impose on America’s middle and lower classes… Full article at Salon.com
~
In almost half of all states the only way that you can voice your opposition to these despicable policies is to register as a Republican 30 days (in some states less) prior to the primary election. As a registered Republican you have the privilege of voting for the candidate that has taken a contrary position on all of these issues, Ron Paul.
You can also help send Romney or Gingrich packing as an added perk. But be sure to re-register as a Republican in time.
From The Center for Voting and Democracy:
Here are the types of Primaries in the states
Open primary:
Voters of any affiliation may vote for the candidate of whatever party they choose. Some of these open primary states may not have party registration at all; however open primary states do prohibit voters in X primary from going on to participate in Y’s primary or runoff. Yet, this prohibition can be difficult to enforce.
The crucial issue in open primary states is “crossover” voting, which can contribute to the victory of a nominee closer to the center or radically further away. It most often involves members of Party Y (either in an area dominated by Party X or when Party Y’s nominee is a foregone conclusion) voting for the Party X candidate whose views are the most reconciliable with their own. Though this brings the race closer to the center, Democratic and Republican party establishments generally dislike open primaries.
Occasionally, there are concerns about sabotage, or “party crashing,” which involves voting for the most polarizing candidate in the other party’s primary to bolster the chances that it will nominate someone “unelectable” to general election voters in November. An example is Republicans voting for Hillary Clinton in the 2008 presidential primary.
Closed primary:
Only voters registered with a given party can vote in the primary. Parties may have the option to invite unaffiliated voters to participate. Typically, however, independent voters are left out of the process entirely unless they choose to sacrifice their freedom of association for the opportunity to have their say in who represents them. Closed primaries may also exacerbate the radicalization that often occurs at the primary stage, when candidates must cater to the “base,” yet the “fringe” of the party are typically more motivated to turn out.
In a few states, independent voters may register with a party on Election Day. However, they must remain registered with that party until they change their affiliation again. A couple of states even allow voters registered with one party to switch their registration at the polls to vote in another party’s primary. In these rare instances, a closed primary can more closely resemble open or semi-closed primaries than the closed primaries of other states.
Semi-closed primary:
Independents may choose which party primary to vote in, but voters registered with a party may only vote in that party’s primary. The middle ground between the exclusion of independents in a closed primary and the free-for-all of open primaries, the semi-closed, primary mostly eliminates the concern about members registered to other parties “raiding” another’s election.
Of course people who align with Party X may theoretically still vote in Party Y’s primary if they just register as independent, but it appears most voters do not think that way. Moreover, the potential for sabotage through tactical party registration is also present in the strictest of closed primaries.
Top Two/ non-partisan primary:
This method puts all candidates, regardless of party affiliation, on the same ballot. The top two vote-getters then face off in the general election. This type of system is used in California, Louisiana, and Washington, as well as in Nebraska for non-partisan election such as for the state’s legislature.
Note on terminology: “Top Two” primaries are often referred to as “open primaries,” but that terminology has long been used in reference to the type of party primaries in which all voters may choose in which party’s primary to participate. By contrast, the “Top Two” system eliminates party primaries altogether. It is more accurately described as “nonpartisan primaries.” It would be more precise and less confusing to at least call them “nonpartisan open primaries.”
The following is a running list of states by types of party primary, updated December 2011:
Here are the individual state rules
| State | Closed | Open | Semi-Closed | Source | Remarks | Presidential Primary or Caucus |
| Alabama | x | Ala. Code § 17-13- 7 | Open | |||
| Alaska | R | D | Alaska Stat. §§ 15.25.014, 15.25.060 | Parties select who may vote in their primaries. To vote in the GOP primary, a voter must be registered as a Republican 30 days before Election Day. | Open | |
| Arizona | x | Ariz. Att’y Gen. Op. No. I99-025 (R99-049) | Arizona uses a “Presidential Preference” system instead of a traditional primary system. Voters must be registered for a party in order to receive a ballot. | Closed | ||
| Arkansas | x | Ark. Code Ann. § § 7-7-306- 308 | Open | |||
| California | N/A | N/A | N/A | Proposition 14; CA S.B. 28 | California uses the “Top Two” Plan. On June 8, 2010 voters passed Prop. 14 to create a nonpartisan blanket primary system in which all candidates are listed on the same primary ballot and the top two vote recipients face off in the general election. | R: Closed; D: Semi-Closed |
| Colorado | x | Colo. Rev. Stat. § 1-7-201 | Closed, but unaffiliated voters may, however, change their party registration up until Election Day. Affiliated voters must change affiliation 29 days prior to the election. | Closed | ||
| Connecticut | x | Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 9-431, 9-59 | Parties may choose to allow for semi-closed elections if they make a change to their party rules; however, as of now, the primaries remain closed. | Closed | ||
| District of Columbia | x | D.C. Code Ann. § 1-1001.09(g)(1); 1-1001.05(b)(1) | Closed primary for D.C. elected officials such as Delegate, Mayor, Chairman, members of Council, and Board of Education. | Closed | ||
| Delaware | x | Del. Code Ann. § 3110 | Closed | |||
| Florida | x | Fla. Stat. Ann. § 101.021 | Closed | |||
| Georgia | x | R: Semi-Closed; D: Open | ||||
| Hawaii | x | Haw. Rev. Stat § 12-31 | No party affiliation at registration. | Open | ||
| Idaho | R | D | Idaho Code Ann. § 34-904A | Until 2011, all Idaho primaries were open. After the GOP obtained a declaratory judgment that mandating open primaries violated freedom of association and was thus unconstitutional in Idaho Republican Party v. Ysura, the legislature passed a bill allowing parties to choose which type of primary they use. Democrats have chosen a semi-closed primary; unaffiliated voters may register a party at the polls on election day, but they are bound to that party affiliation at the next election. | R: Closed; D: Semi-Closed | |
| Illinois | x | 10 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/7-43, -45 | Voters declare their party affiliation at the polling place to a judge who must then announce it “in a distinct tone of voice, sufficiently loud to be heard by all persons in the polling place.” If there is no “challenge,” the voter is given the primary ballot for his or her declared party. | Semi-Closed | ||
| Indiana | x | Ind. Code §§ 3-10- 1-6, 1-9 | Classified as a “modified open” primary.” A voter must have voted in the last general election for a majority of the nominees of the party holding the primary, or if that voter did not vote in the last general election, that voter must vote for a majority of the nominees of that party who is holding the primary. However, there is really no way to enforce this, and cross-over occurs often. The same modified open primary is used for the presidential primary. | Open | ||
| Iowa | x | Voters may change party on the day of the primary election. | Closed | |||
| Kansas | R | D | Kan. Stat. Ann. §§ 25-3301 | Federal courts declared KS law unconstitutional and now the parties decide who will vote in their primaries. In 2012, Republicans will hold closed primaries; however, they will allow unaffiliated voters to register Republican on election day. Democrats will allow both affiliated and unaffiliated voters to vote. | Closed | |
| Kentucky | x | Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 116.055 | Closed | |||
| Louisiana | x | Act 570 | The congressional primaries changed from a closed system to an open system with the passage of Act 570, effective January 1, 2011 | Closed | ||
| Maine | x | Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, §§ 111, 340 | Closed | |||
| Maryland | x | Md. Code Ann., Elec. Law §§ 3- 303, 8-202 | Parties may choose to hold open primaries, but must notify the State Board of Elections 6 months prior. | Closed | ||
| Massachusetts | x | Mass. Gen. Laws ch.53 §37 | Semi-Closed | |||
| Michigan | x | Mich. Comp. Laws § 168.575; Public Act 163 | Voters do not have to declare a political party to vote; but must vote for all one party once they enter the voting booth. | Closed | ||
| Minnesota | x | Minn. Stat. § 204D.08 | Open | |||
| Mississippi | x | Miss. Code Ann. § 23-15-575 | No registration by party affiliation. However, in order to participate in the primary, a voter must support the nominations made in that primary. | Open | ||
| Missouri | x | Mo. Rev. Stat. § 115.397 | R: Semi-Closed; D: Open | |||
| Montana | x | Mont. Code Ann. § 13-10-301 | No party registration in MT. Each voter has the choice which ballot to use on Election Day. | Open | ||
| Nebraska | x | Neb. Rev. Stat. § 32-702 | Partisan primaires are closed, meaning congressional primaries are closed; however unaffiliated voters may vote for a candidate of a particular party. | Semi-Closed | ||
| Nevada | x | Nev. Rev. Stat. §§ 293.287, 293.518 | Closed | |||
| New Hampshire | x | N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann § 659:14 | Closed primaries in effect; but the statute allows for semi-closed primary if that party’s rules allow for it. | Semi-Closed | ||
| New Jersey | x | N.J. Stat. Ann. § 19:31-13.2 | Closed | |||
| New Mexico | x | N.M. Stat. §1-12-7.2 | Parties may choose to allow for semi-closed elections if they make a change to their party rules; however, as of now, the primaries remain closed. | Closed | ||
| New York | x | N.Y. Elec. Law § 5-304 | Closed | |||
| North Carolina | x | N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 163-59, -119 | State law provides for closed primaries, but both parties have opened them up to unaffiliated voters, who may choose on Election Day. | Semi-Closed | ||
| North Dakota | x | N.D. Cent. Code, § 40-21-06 | No party registration. | R: Closed; D: Open | ||
| Ohio | x | Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 3513.19 | Voters’ right to vote in the primary may be challenged on the basis that they are not affiliated with the party for whom they are voting in the primary. | Closed | ||
| Oklahoma | x | Okla. Stat. §26-1-104 | Closed | |||
| Oregon | x | Or. Rev. Stat. §§ 247.203, 254.365 | Closed | |||
| Pennsylvania | x | 25 Pa. Stat. Ann. § 2812 | Closed | |||
| Rhode Island | x | R.I. Gen. Laws §§ 17-9.1-23 | An unaffiliated voter for the past 90 days may designate his or her party affiliation on election day by voting for that party in the primary. | Semi-Closed | ||
| South Carolina | x | S.C.Code Ann. §§ 7-11-10 | A U.S. District Court judge ruled inGreenville County Republican Party Executive Committee v. South Carolina, that South Carolina’s open primary is constitutional. | Open | ||
| South Dakota | R | D | S.D. Codified Laws § 12-6-26 | Parties may choose to allow for semi-closed elections. Democrats have opened up their primaries to allow unaffiliated voters to vote. | R: Closed; D: Open | |
| Tennessee | x | Tenn. Code Ann. § 2-7-115 | Voters must affiliate with a party, but may choose to affiliate with that party on the election day. In Tennessee, voters are not registered with party affiliations. | Closed | ||
| Texas | x | Tex Elec. Code Ann. § 172.086 | No registration by party; voters are not held to affilation of past election. Each year, voters have a clean slate and must choose on primary day whether to vote by a party affilation or as unaffiliated; voters are held to that affiliation in the runoff. For the presidential primary, it is the same system as of December 19, 2011. | Open | ||
| Utah | R | D | Utah Code Ann. §§ 20A-2-107.5 | Parties may choose to open up the primary. Currently, Republicans have a closed primary while Democrats have opened up the primary. | R: Closed; D: Open | |
| Vermont | x | Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 17, § 2363 | No registration by party. For presidential primary, voters must declare which ballots they want. | Open | ||
| Virginia | x | Va. Code Ann. § 24.2-530 | If a primary is called, it will be open. | Open | ||
| Washington | N/A | N/A | N/A | Wash. Rev. Code § 29A.52.112, 29A.36.171 | Similar to California’s Top Two system. | R: Closed; D: Semi-Closed |
| West Virginia | x | W. Va. Code § 3-5- 4 | Technically a closed system, but all parties allow any voter who is not registered with an official party to request their ballot for the Primary Election. | Semi-Closed | ||
| Wisconsin | x | Wis. Stat. § 6.80 | Voters may vote for only one party, but do not have to be affiliated with any party before coming into vote on Election Day. | Open | ||
| Wyoming | x | Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 22-5-212 | A voter can change his or her party affiliation on election day. |
It’s Sick to Depend on War for Economic Health
By Debbie Harbeson | The Suburban Voluntaryist | October 27, 2011
SELLERSBURG — During World War I, Randolph Bourne wrote, “War is the health of the state.” Bourne was referring to nation-states of course, but considering what I’ve learned recently, it seems appropriate to say “war is the health of the state of Indiana.”
According to a 2011 Indiana University report, back in 2001, Indiana received $1.8 billion from the federal government in the form of defense contracts. This number grew to more than $4 billion over the next decade. We all know why the growth occurred: War.
This report, titled “Building National Security: The Economic Impact of Indiana’s Defense Industry,” explains that the ability to attract federal defense spending is of great benefit to Indiana. The introductory letter signed by the lieutenant governor and the IU president says, “… it is critical to the state of Indiana and its work force that the defense industry continues to flourish here.”
I don’t agree. It’s extremely unwise to develop an economy based not only on government spending, which requires taxation and/or debt, but which also depends on death and destruction for growth.
As a result of their desire for continued and increased federal defense spending, a private-public partnership firm, Conexus Indiana, and the Indiana Economic Development Corp. have created the Indiana Aerospace and Defense Council for the specific purpose of promoting Indiana as a great place for the federal government to spend its defense budget.
It’s bad enough that state government uses the euphemism “economic development” in an attempt to centrally plan an economy by spending tax money in ways that favor some industries and businesses over others, but using funds to lobby for increased federal spending that supports war attacks the sensibilities of all peace-loving individuals.
But those who directly benefit don’t see it this way. The groups involved — the politicians, the state universities and the corporations — all benefit from the business that results when the nation-state participates in war. No one wants to acknowledge the horrible truth embedded in the fact that pushing the defense industry encourages the development of businesses that are healthiest during wartime — in other words, peace makes them sick.
This council also wants to increase the number of companies involved, but any business owner should be cautious about such a move. Besides the more obvious concerns when businesses get involved in war, there can also be plenty of unanticipated costs.
For example, as I was browsing around the website of CACI, the newest business to locate in New Albany’s Purdue Research Park, I was amazed at how much time, money and energy this company is spending as it works to disassociate itself from the abuse and torture controversy at Abu-Ghraib prison in Iraq. I wonder if they think the contract was worth it.
Indiana is already receiving fewer defense dollars as the federal government’s involvement in the current wars change. However, instead of seeing this as a warning, signaling a need to gain freedom from such dependency, officials are making decisions that will only suck Indiana in even deeper.
Should the businesses in this state increase their dependency on an “industry” that experiences its best growth when the federal government gets involved in nasty wars far from the actual soil they claim to be defending?
Or would it be better to spend energy working to create products and services that enrich lives, thereby encouraging mutually beneficial peaceful trade and friendly relationships?
I am concerned, and even mourning, this realization of where human energy and resources have been focused, because I do not want war to be the health of the state of Indiana.
— Clark County resident Debbie Harbeson is sick of government interference.
Israeli airstrike destroys Gaza training base
Ma’an – 29/12/2011
GAZA CITY – Israeli war planes bombed central and northern Gaza Strip early Thursday, with no injuries reported.
Israeli forces struck a training site of Islamic Jihad armed wing the Al-Quds Brigades in Al-Zahra district of central Gaza, flattening the compound and damaging nearby houses.
Another airstrike hit a location in the northern Gaza Strip.
A statement from the Israeli army said it hit a “terror activity site” and “terror tunnels.”
“The targeting of these sites was in response to the firing of rockets at Israel on Wednesday,” the statement said.
Rockets fired by Gaza militant groups have hit southern Israel in recent days, without causing injuries or damage.
An Israeli airstrike on the Gaza Strip on Tuesday killed one person and wounded ten others, as the coastal enclave commemorated the third anniversary of Israel’s large-scale ground invasion of the coastal strip.
On Wednesday, an Israeli tank fired an artillery shell which landed in an open area in the north of Gaza, without causing damage or injuries.
Israel launched an unprecedented three week war on the Gaza Strip on Dec. 27, 2008 which killed nearly 1,400 Palestinians were killed in the military assault, including over 300 children. The majority of those killed were civilians and over 5,000 people were wounded.
Hamas vowed on Tuesday that it would not be intimidated by Israel’s threats to launch a new invasion, as Israel’s army chief called Operation Cast Lead an “excellent” operation and said any repeat attack must be “swift and painful.”
Featured Video
False Flags and the Dawn of Bioterrorism
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
How 1960’s French Nuclear Tests Are Still Claiming Lives in Algeria
Sputnik – 15.02.2018
On February 13, 1960, France carried out its first nuclear test in Algeria’s southern Reggane region. According to official statistics, 17 nuclear tests were carried out in total over the next 6 years. The area remains affected, and local scientists say that radioactive contamination has caused genetic mutations and irreversibly changed the region.
There are no official statistics on the number of victims. The only figures can be found in the records kept by the French representative of the local church, which lists 42,000 victims of nuclear tests. Three years ago, the French Ministry of Defense issued a statement, putting the number at 27,000 people. The victims include French soldiers as well as local Algerians who lived in the surrounding areas. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Using nuclear weapons, the US-Israeli alliance still can’t beat Iran
- Sunset on the Quality of Western Propaganda: Arrival of the Dr Strangelove Moment
- Ukrainian general accused of protecting crime bosses
- US-‘Israel’ alliance faces growing rupture after midterms
- GOP’s Crushing Midterm Loss Could Reshape US Political Landscape – Analyst
- Midterm loss gives Congress power to rein in US war on Iran
- Midterms Were ‘Vote of No Confidence’ in GOP, But Iran Has No Illusions About Democrats – Marandi
- Israeli Soldiers Inadvertently Prove Their Own Genocidal Guilt
- Ukraine arrests woman who exposed Azov battalion’s ‘torture chamber’
- Did Israel lose the midterms?
- If Americans Knew
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: The Net Fossil Fuel Contribution To Rising Atmospheric CO2 Has Been Zero For 500 Years
- Germany’s Green Energy Transition Becoming Increasingly Expensive…Another 6 Trillion Euros!
- Sudden Stratospheric Warming, Powerful El Niño Combination May Lead To Extreme Europe Cold, Energy Crisis!
- Two New Studies Find Thwaites Glacier Melt Cannot Be Driven By Human Activity Or A Warming Ocean
- E-Cars Reduce CO2 Emissions By Only 41% Compared To Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles
- Predictions Made By Renowned Climate Professor Over Past Decades Have Been Proven To Be Poor
- New Study Suggests Large Regions Of The Pacific Ocean Have Been Cooling For The Last 80 Years
- Germany’s Green Energy Debacle: High Energy Costs Force Kahla Porzellan to Close After 182 Years!
- New Study: 50 Years Of The Most Aggressive ‘Net Zero’ Policies Can Only Affect The Global Climate By 0.03°C
- US September “Heat” Was No Record…Many Records Set Decades Ago
