Bernie Sanders is going all the way to the Convention. He’s a fighter with a past dedicated to the civil rights movement!

Bernie Sanders is going all the way to the Convention!

The corrupt Clinton has the billionaires, but Bernie Sanders has The People!

We The People, his supporters, will continue supporting Bernie. He’s honest and delivers. We were at the rally in Prospect Park and it was amazing seeing how many people attended the rally, including children. Everybody was happy: african-americans, asians, moslems, jews, and white people all stay together to show our support for Bernie.

I can’t believe the New York Times endorsed Hillary Clinton knowing her failures [that go beyond Benghazi] as secretary state, approving and selling arms for terrorist enemies of America.

Filmmaker Oliver Stone recently wrote on menace posed by Hillary Clinton. “Endless wars are certain no matter who succeeds Obama. Clinton’s finger on the nuclear trigger should terrify everyone.

Fresh off wins in Kansas and Nebraska caucuses, Vermont senator unfazed by Hillary Clinton and maintains, ‘I still think we have that path toward victory’.

Bernie Sanders has vowed again to fight until the Democratic convention in July, a day after the presidential campaign’s “Super Saturday” saw him win two states and lose one to Hillary Clinton.

“I still think we have that path toward victory,” he said. Death of Nancy Reagan casts shadow on 2016 presidential race – as it happened Cruz claims victories in Kansas and Maine, Trump wins two others; Maine and Puerto Rico vote ahead of Democrat debate

Sanders’ wins helped him bounce back from a tough Super Tuesday, although by winning Saturday’s Louisiana primary, Clinton took more delegates than Sanders on the day. According to the Associated Press, Clinton now has 1,121 delegates pledged to support her at the convention, compared with 481 for Sanders. The threshold for securing the nomination is 2,383.

Speaking on CNN on Sunday, Sanders was asked if he would fight to the convention if Clinton reached the delegate threshold before that.

“We have made enormous progress over the last 10 months,” Sanders said in an appearance on CNN, listing successes that, as well as wins in Kansas and Nebraska on Saturday, include New Hampshire, Colorado, Minnesota, Vermont and Oklahoma.

“We are going to stay in the campaign until the convention in July.”

After host Dana Bash repeated her question, Sanders did not offer a yes or no answer. He said: “Dana, you are speculating, I don’t think [Clinton reaching the threshold] is going to happen.”

Sanders said he could win in big, urban states – New York, for example – and on the west coast.

“We think we have momentum and we think we’re going to do just fine,” he said.

Speaking to CNN from Michigan, where he was due to debate Clinton in Flint on Sunday night, Sanders was also asked about his problem in attracting African American voters, who have sided with Clinton in large numbers in southern states and who will be influential in Michigan’s primary on Tuesday.

The Vermont senator admitted his struggles in the south but said there was also a “generational divide” in the Democratic race, with his campaign attracting support from youths regardless of race.

“We have now won seven primaries and caucuses across the country all with double-digit leads,” he said, predicting a strong performance in Maine on Sunday “if the turnout is high”.

He later told ABC: “In every primary and caucus that we have won, we have won by double-digit numbers. I still think we have that path toward victory.”

A CBS poll released on Sunday gave Clinton a 55%-44% lead over Sanders in Michigan. Donald Trump led the Republican field there, 39%-24% over Ted Cruz.

Sanders also said he was the strongest candidate to beat Donald Trump.

“We are going to stay in the campaign until the convention in July.”

After host Dana Bash repeated her question, Sanders did not offer a yes or no answer. He said: “Dana, you are speculating, I don’t think [Clinton reaching the threshold] is going to happen.”

Sanders said he could win in big, urban states – New York, for example – and on the west coast.

“We think we have momentum and we think we’re going to do just fine,” he said.

Speaking to CNN from Michigan, where he was due to debate Clinton in Flint on Sunday night, Sanders was also asked about his problem in attracting African American voters, who have sided with Clinton in large numbers in southern states and who will be influential in Michigan’s primary on Tuesday.

The Vermont senator admitted his struggles in the south but said there was also a “generational divide” in the Democratic race, with his campaign attracting support from youths regardless of race.

“We have now won seven primaries and caucuses across the country all with double-digit leads,” he said, predicting a strong performance in Maine on Sunday “if the turnout is high”.

He later told ABC: “In every primary and caucus that we have won, we have won by double-digit numbers. I still think we have that path toward victory.”

A CBS poll released on Sunday gave Clinton a 55%-44% lead over Sanders in Michigan. Donald Trump led the Republican field there, 39%-24% over Ted Cruz.

Sanders also said he was the strongest candidate to beat Donald Trump.

Posted by Ainhoa Aristizabal — Unruly Hearts editor

Obama Is Privately Telling Democratic Donors Time Is Running Out for Sanders

“The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe
that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional
and a violation of your sovereign rights,
does not absolve you of adherence to it.”

MOTHER JONES

[SOVEREIGNTY OF THE PEOPLE]

By Ainhoa Aristizabal

 

On Wednesday President Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland, a highly qualified, dedicated public servant, for the Supreme Court.

And as expected, Republicans on the Judiciary Committee doubled down on their pledge to refuse to do their jobs and give the President’s nominee a fair hearing.

Their pledge is based on nothing but partisan politics. Some of these same senators have praised Judge Garland in the past. Some even voted to put him in his current seat as a federal appeals court judge.

For example, in 2010, Senator Orrin Hatch described Judge Garland as a “consensus nominee,” and that there was “no question” that he would win Senate confirmation with bipartisan support.

The American people deserve better than this kind of obstruction from our leaders. Our Supreme Court should never be subjected to the day-to-day partisan politics of Washington, and it’s up to us to demand better.

Join the thousands of OFA supporters who are speaking up to call for a fair, timely hearing for Judge Merrick Garland.

This is the same kind of obstruction that’s stood in the way of President Obama’s legislative agenda his entire term in office. It’s the same obstruction that shut down the government and threatened to default on our nation’s credit. And it’s the same obstruction that has repeatedly questioned the President’s legitimacy.

If these Senate leaders are successful, they may permanently damage the Supreme Court nomination process.

In the first 24 hours since the President announced Judge Garland’s nomination, over 100,000 people spoke up with OFA and called for a fair hearing. They spoke up because our Supreme Court is important — they rule on the issues OFA supporters care about, rulings that could impact our country for generations.
The purpose of government is to enable the people of a nation to live in safety and happiness. Government exists for the interests of the governed, not for the governors. As Benjamin Franklin wrote, “In free governments the rulers are the servants and the people their superiors and sovereigns.” The ultimate powers in a society, therefore, rest in the people themselves, and they should exercise those powers, either directly or through representatives, in every way they are competent and that is practicable.

 

“The whole body of the nation is the sovereign legislative, judiciary, and executive power for itself. The inconvenience of meeting to exercise these powers in person, and their inaptitude to exercise them, induce them to appoint special organs to declare their legislative will, to judge and to execute it. It is the will of the nation which makes the law obligatory; it is their will which creates or annihilates the organ which is to declare and announce it. They may do it by a single person, as an emperor of Russia (constituting his declarations evidence of their will), or by a few persons, as the aristocracy of Venice, or by a complication of councils, as in our former regal government or our present republican one. The law being law because it is the will of the nation, is not changed by their changing the organ through which they choose to announce their future will; no more than the acts I have done by one attorney lose their obligation by my changing or discontinuing that attorney.” –Thomas Jefferson to Edmund Randolph, 1799. ME 10:126

“Every nation has a right to govern itself internally under what forms it pleases, and to change these forms at its own will; and externally to transact business with other nations through whatever organ it chooses, whether that be a King, Convention, Assembly, Committee, President, or whatever it be. The only thing essential is, the will of the nation.” –Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Pinckney, 1792. ME 9:7

“[The people] are in truth the only legitimate proprietors of the soil and government.” –Thomas Jefferson to Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1813. ME 19:197

“[It is] the people, to whom all authority belongs.” –Thomas Jefferson to Spencer Roane, 1821. ME 15:328

“The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves in all cases to which they think themselves competent (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved), or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. ME 16:45

“We think experience has proved it safer for the mass of individuals composing the society to reserve to themselves personally the exercise of all rightful powers to which they are competent and to delegate those to which they are not competent to deputies named and removable for unfaithful conduct by themselves immediately.” –Thomas Jefferson to Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1816. ME 14:487

“The ultimate arbiter is the people of the Union.” –Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 1823. ME 15:451

Sovereignty Unaffected by Change in Government

“I consider the people who constitute a society or nation as the source of all authority in that nation; as free to transact their common concerns by any agents they think proper; to change these agents individually, or the organization of them in form or function whenever they please; that all the acts done by these agents under the authority of the nation are the acts of the nation, are obligatory on them and enure to their use, and can in no wise be annulled of affected by any change in the form of the government or of the persons administering it.” –Thomas Jefferson: Opinion on French Treaties, 1793. ME 3:227

“When, by the Declaration of Independence, [the nation of Virginia] chose to abolish their former organs of declaring their will, the acts of will already formally and constitutionally declared, remained untouched. For the nation was not dissolved, was not annihilated; its will, therefore, remained in full vigor; and on the establishing the new organs, first of a convention, and afterwards a more complicated legislature, the old acts of national will continued in force, until the nation should, by its new organs, declare its will changed.” –Thomas Jefferson to Edmund Randolph, 1799. ME 10:126

“Louis XIV, having established the Coutumes de Paris as the law of Louisiana, this was not changed by the mere act of transfer; on the contrary, the laws of France continued and continues to be the law of the land, except where specially altered by some subsequent edict of Spain or act of Congress.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1808. ME 12:58

“Indeed in no case are the laws of a nation changed, of natural right, by their passage from one to another denomination. The soil, the inhabitants, their property, and the laws by which they are protected go together. Their laws are subject to be changed only in the case, and extent which their new legislature shall will.” –Thomas Jefferson: Batture at New Orleans, 1812. ME 18:31

“When a question arises, whether any particular law or appointment is still in force, we are to examine, not whether it was pronounced by the ancient or present organ, but whether it has been at any time revoked by the authority of the nation, expressed by the organ competent at the time.” –Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1792. ME 8:302

The Powers of Legislation

“From the nature of things, every society must at all times possess within itself the sovereign powers of legislation.” –Thomas Jefferson: Rights of British America, 1774. Papers 1:132

“[If the] representative houses [are dissolved,]… the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, [return] to the people at large for their exercise.” –Thomas Jefferson: Declaration of Independence, 1776. ME 1:31, Papers 1:430

“Necessities which dissolve a government do not convey its authority to an oligarchy or a monarchy. They throw back into the hands of the people the powers they had delegated, and leave them as individuals to shift for themselves.” –Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XIII, 1782. ME 2:175

“There is an error into which most of the speculators on government have fallen, and which the well-known state of society of our Indians ought, before now, to have corrected. In their hypothesis of the origin of government, they suppose it to have commenced in the patriarchal or monarchical form. Our Indians are evidently in that state of nature which has passed the association of a single family… The Cherokees, the only tribe I know to be contemplating the establishment of regular laws, magistrates, and government, propose a government of representatives, elected from every town. But of all things, they least think of subjecting themselves to the will of one man.” –Thomas Jefferson to Francis W. Gilmer, 1816. ME 15:25

Government Receives its Powers from the People

“Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” –Thomas Jefferson: Declaration of Independence, 1776. ME 1:29, Papers 1:429

“I consider the source of authority with us to be the Nation. Their will, declared through its proper organ, is valid till revoked by their will declared through its proper organ again also.” –Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1792. ME 8:301

“Independence of the will of the nation is a solecism, at least in a republican government.” –Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Ritchie, 1820. ME 15:298

“What government [a nation] can bear depends not on the state of science, however exalted, in a select band of enlightened men, but on the condition of the general mind.” –Thomas Jefferson to Lafayette, 1817. (*) ME 15:114

“The government of a nation may be usurped by the forcible intrusion of an individual into the throne. But to conquer its will so as to rest the right on that, the only legitimate basis, requires long acquiescence and cessation of all opposition.” –Thomas Jefferson to —-, 1825. ME 16:127

The People are Capable of Exercising Sovereign Powers

“Independence can be trusted nowhere but with the people in mass. They are inherently independent of all but moral law.” –Thomas Jefferson to Spencer Roane, 1819.

“I have such reliance on the good sense of the body of the people and the honesty of their leaders that I am not afraid of their letting things go wrong to any length in any cause.” –Thomas Jefferson to C. W. F. Dumas, 1788. ME 6:430

“Whenever our affairs go obviously wrong, the good sense of the people will interpose and set them to rights.” –Thomas Jefferson to David Humphreys, 1789. ME 7:322

“Our fellow citizens have been led hoodwinked from their principles by a most extraordinary combination of circumstances. But the band is removed, and they now see for themselves.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Dickinson, 1801. ME 10:217

“Reflection,… with information, is all which our countrymen need, to bring themselves and their affairs to rights.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Lewis, Jr., 1798. ME 10:37

“The revolution of 1800… was as real a revolution in the principles of our government as that of 1776 was in its form; not effected indeed by the sword, as that, but by the rational and peaceable instrument of reform, the suffrage of the people.” –Thomas Jefferson to Spencer Roane, 1819. ME 15:212

“There is a steady, good sense in the Legislature, and in the body of the nation, joined with good intentions, which will lead them to discern and to pursue the public good under all circumstances which can arise, and… no ignis fatuus [misleading ideal] will be able to lead them long astray.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1806. ME 11:108

“I am sensible that there are defects in our federal government, yet they are so much lighter than those of monarchies, that I view them with much indulgence. I rely, too, on the good sense of the people for remedy, whereas the evils of monarchical government are beyond remedy.” –Thomas Jefferson to David Ramsay, 1787. ME 6:226

“Time alone [will] bring round an order of things more correspondent to the sentiments of our constituents.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1798. ME 10:45

“My confidence is that there will for a long time be virtue and good sense enough in our countrymen to correct abuses.” –Thomas Jefferson to Edward Rutledge, 1788. ME 7:81

“Manfully maintain our good old principle of cherishing and fortifying the rights and authorities of the people in opposition to those who fear them, who wish to take all power from them and to transfer all to Washington.” –Thomas Jefferson to Nathaniel Macon, 1826. FE 10:378

The Power of Public Opinion

“The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to.” –Thomas Jefferson to Lafayette, 1823. ME 15:491

“Ministers… cannot in any country be uninfluenced by the voice of the people.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Jay, 1786. ME 5:452

“A court has no affections; but those of the people whom they govern influence their decisions, even in the most arbitrary governments.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1785. ME 5:12, Papers 8:228

“Public opinion… [is] a censor before which the most exalted tremble for their future as well as present fame.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1816. ME 14:393

“Public opinion [is the] lord of the universe.” –Thomas Jefferson to William Short, 1820. ME 15:246

“More attention should be paid to the general opinion.” –Thomas Jefferson to George Mason, 1791.

“The advantage of public opinion is like that of the weather-gauge in a naval action.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1815. ME 14:226

“When public opinion changes, it is with the rapidity of thought.” –Thomas Jefferson to Charles Yancey, 1816. ME 14:382

“The opinions and dispositions of our people in general, which, in governments like ours, must be the foundation of measures, will always be interesting to me.” –Thomas Jefferson to Richard Henry Lee, 1786. ME 5:294

“Government being founded on opinion, the opinion of the public, even when it is wrong, ought to be respected to a certain degree.” –Thomas Jefferson to Nicholas Lewis, 1791. FE 5:282

“Opinions… constitute, indeed, moral facts, as important as physical ones to the attention of the public functionary.” –Thomas Jefferson to Richard Rush, 1820. ME 15:284

“The people cannot be all, and always, well-informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.” –Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:372, Papers 12:356

“The people have a right to petition, but not to use that right to cover calumniating insinuations.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1808. ME 12:166

“I like to see the people awake and alert. The good sense of the people will soon lead them back if they have erred in a moment of surprise.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1786.

The Spirit of Resistance

“What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them.” –Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356

“Governments, wherein the will of every one has a just influence… has its evils,… the principal of which is the turbulence to which it is subject. But weigh this against the oppressions of monarchy, and it becomes nothing. Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem. [I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.] Even this evil is productive of good. It prevents the degeneracy of government, and nourishes a general attention to the public affairs.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. ME 6:64

“The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the atmosphere.” –Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, 1787.

“God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion… We have had thirteen States independent for eleven years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half, for each State. What country before ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion?” –Thomas Jefferson to William S. Smith, 1787. ME 6:372

“Most codes extend their definitions of treason to acts not really against one’s country. They do not distinguish between acts against the government, and acts against the oppressions of the government. The latter are virtues, yet have furnished more victims to the executioner than the former, because real treasons are rare; oppressions frequent. The unsuccessful strugglers against tyranny have been the chief martyrs of treason laws in all countries.” –Thomas Jefferson: Report on Spanish Convention, 1792.

“If our country, when pressed with wrongs at the point of the bayonet, had been governed by its heads instead of its hearts, where should we have been now? Hanging on a gallows as high as Haman’s.” –Thomas Jefferson to Maria Cosway, 1786. ME 5:444

“The commotions that have taken place in America, as far as they are yet known to me, offer nothing threatening. They are a proof that the people have liberty enough, and I could not wish them less than they have. If the happiness of the mass of the people can be secured at the expense of a little tempest now and then, or even of a little blood, it will be a precious purchase. ‘Malo libertatem periculosam quam quietem servitutem.’ Let common sense and common honesty have fair play, and they will soon set things to rights.” –Thomas Jefferson to Ezra Stiles, 1786. ME 6:25

“The tumults in America I expected would have produced in Europe an unfavorable opinion of our political state. But it has not. On the contrary, the small effect of these tumults seems to have given more confidence in the firmness of our governments. The interposition of the people themselves on the side of government has had a great effect on the opinion here [in Europe].” –Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 1787. ME 6:57

“The late rebellion in Massachusetts has given more alarm than I think it should have done. Calculate that one rebellion in thirteen states in the course of eleven years, is but one for each state in a century and a half. No country should be so long without one. Nor will any degree of power in the hands of government prevent insurrections.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. ME 6:391

“[An occasional insurrection] will not weigh against the inconveniences of a government of force, such as are monarchies and aristocracies.” –Thomas Jefferson to T. B. Hollis, July 2, 1787. (*) ME 6:155

“Cherish… the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. Do not be too severe upon their errors, but reclaim them by enlightening them.” –Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 1787. ME 6:58

Misdirected Resistance

“There are extraordinary situations which require extraordinary interposition. An exasperated people who feel that they possess power are not easily restrained within limits strictly regular.” –Thomas Jefferson: Rights of British America, 1774. ME 1:196, Papers 1:127

“[The] uneasiness [of the people] has produced acts absolutely unjustifiable; but I hope they will provoke no severities from their governments. A consciousness of those in power that their administration of the public affairs has been honest may, perhaps, produce too great a degree of indignation; and those characters wherein fear predominates over hope, may apprehend too much from these instances of irregularity. They may conclude too hastily, that nature has formed man insusceptible of any other government than that of force, a conclusion not founded in truth nor experience.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, Jan. 30, 1787. ME 6:64

“The arm of the people [is] a machine not quite so blind as balls and bombs, but blind to a certain degree.” –Thomas Jefferson to William Short, 1793. ME 9:10

“I hold it that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms are in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people, which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much. It is medicine necessary for the sound health of government.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. ME 6:65

“[No] degree of power in the hands of government [will] prevent insurrections.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. Papers 12:442.

“The boisterous sea of liberty is never without a wave.” –Thomas Jefferson to Richard Rush, 1820. ME 15:283

“What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” –Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356

Rebellion, Right and Wrong

“Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends [i.e., securing inherent and inalienable rights, with powers derived from the consent of the governed], it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” –Thomas Jefferson: Declaration of Independence, 1776. ME 1:29, Papers 1:315

“In no country on earth is [a disposition to oppose the law by force] so impracticable as in one where every man feels a vital interest in maintaining the authority of the laws, and instantly engages in it as in his own personal cause.” –Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Smith, 1808. ME 12:62

“In a country whose constitution is derived from the will of the people directly expressed by their free suffrages, where the principal executive functionaries and those of the legislature are renewed by them at short periods, where under the character of jurors they exercise in person the greatest portion of the judiciary powers, where the laws are consequently so formed and administered as to bear with equal weight and favor on all, restraining no man in the pursuits of honest industry and securing to every one the property which that acquires, it would not be supposed that any safeguards could be needed against insurrection or enterprise on the public peace or authority. The laws, however, aware that these should not be trusted to moral restraints only, have wisely provided punishments for these crimes when committed.” –Thomas Jefferson: 6th Annual Message, 1806. ME 3:418

“As revolutionary instruments (when nothing but revolution will cure the evils of the State) [secret societies] are necessary and indispensable, and the right to use them is inalienable by the people; but to admit them as ordinary and habitual instruments as a part of the machinery of the Constitution, would be to change that machinery by introducing moving powers foreign to it, and to an extent depending solely on local views, and, therefore, incalculable.” –Thomas Jefferson to William Duane, 1803. FE 8:256

“The paradox with me is how any friend to the union of our country can, in conscience, contribute a cent to the maintenance of anyone who perverts the sanctity of his desk to the open inculcation of rebellion, civil war, dissolution of government, and the miseries of anarchy.” –Thomas Jefferson to William Plumer, 1815. ME 14:235

Dangerous Associations

“I acknowledge the right of voluntary associations for laudable purposes and in moderate numbers. I acknowledge, too, the expediency for revolutionary purposes of general associations coextensive with the nation. But where, as in our case, no abuses call for revolution, voluntary associations so extensive as to grapple with and control the government, should such be or become their purpose, are dangerous machines and should be frowned down in every well regulated government.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1822.

“Private associations… whose magnitude may rivalize and jeopardize the march of regular government [may become] necessary [in] the case where the regular authorities of the government [combine] against the rights of the people, and no means of correction [remains] to them but to organize a collateral power which, with their support, might rescue and secure their violated rights. But such is not the case with our government. We need hazard no collateral power which, by a change of its original views and assumption of others we know not how virtuous or how mischievous, would be ready organized and in force sufficient to shake the established foundations of society and endanger its peace and the principles on which it is based.” –Thomas Jefferson to Jedediah Morse, 1822. ME 15:357

“Military assemblies will not only keep alive the jealousies and fears of the civil government, but give ground for these fears and jealousies. For when men meet together, they will make business if they have none; they will collate their grievances, some real, some imaginary, all highly painted; they will communicate to each other the sparks of discontent; and these may engender a flame which will consume their particular, as well as the general happiness.” –Thomas Jefferson: Answers to de Meusnier Questions, 1786. ME 17:90

“Where an enterprise is meditated by private individuals against a foreign nation in amity with the United States, powers of prevention to a certain extent are given by the laws; would they not be as reasonable and useful were the enterprise preparing against the United States?” –Thomas Jefferson: 6th Annual Message, 1806. ME 3:419

“The framers of our constitution certainly supposed they had guarded, as well their government against destruction by treason, as their citizens against oppression under pretence of it; and if these ends are not attained, it is of importance to inquire by what means, more effectual, they may be secured.” –Thomas Jefferson: 7th Annual Message, 1807. ME 3:452

“Looking forward with anxiety to [the] future destinies [of my fellow citizens], I trust that, in their steady character unshaken by difficulties, in their love of liberty, obedience to law, and support of the public authorities, I see a sure guaranty of the permanence of our republic.” –Thomas Jefferson: 8th Annual Message, 1808. ME 3:485

 

THE PRINCIPLE OF THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE PEOPLE OF AMERICA


IT DOMINATES the whole society in America–Application made of this principle by the Americans even before their Revolution–Development given to it by that Revolution–Gradual and irresistible extension of the elective qualification.

The political laws of the United States are to be discussed, it is with the doctrine of the sovereignty of the people that we must begin.

The principle of the sovereignty of the people, which is always to be found, more or less, at the bottom of almost all human institutions, generally remains there concealed from view. It is obeyed without being recognized, or if for a moment it is brought to light, it is hastily cast back into the gloom of the sanctuary.

“The will of the nation” is one of those phrases, that have been most largely abused by the wily and the despotic of every age. Some have seen the expression of it in the purchased suffrages of a few of the satellites of power; others, in the votes of a timid or an interested minority; and some have even discovered it in the silence of a people, on the supposition that the fact of submission established the right to command.

In America the principle of the sovereignty of the people is NEIther barren nor concealed, as it is with some other nations; it is recognized by the customs and proclaimed by the laws; it spreads freely, and arrives without impediment at its most remote consequences If there is a country in the world where the doctrine of the sovereignty of the people can be fairly appreciated, where it an be studied in its application to the affairs of society, and where its dangers and its advantages may be judged, that country is assuredly America.

I have already observed that, from their origin, the sovereignty of the people was the fundamental principle of most of the British . colonies in America. It was far, however, from then exercising as much influence on the government of society as it now does. Two obstacles, the one external, the other internal, checked its invasive progress.

It could not ostensibly disclose itself in the laws of colonies which were still forced to obey the mother country; it was therefore obliged to rule secretly in the provincial assemblies, and especially in the townships.

American society at that time was not yet prepared to adopt it with all its consequences. Intelligence in New England and wealth in the country to the south of the Hudson (as I have shown in the preceding chapter) long exercised a sort of aristocratic influence, which tended to keep the exercise of social power in the hands of a few. Not all the public functionaries were chosen by popular vote, nor were all the citizens voters. The electoral franchise was everywhere somewhat restricted and made dependent on a certain qualification, which was very low in the North and more considerable in the South.

The American Revolution broke out, and the doctrine of the sovereignty of the people came out of the townships and took possession of the state. Every class was enlisted in its cause; battles were fought and victories obtained for it; it became the law of laws.

A change almost as rapid was effected in the interior of society, where the law of inheritance completed the abolition of local influences.

As soon as this effect of the laws and of the Revolution became apparent to every eye, victory was irrevocably pronounced in favor of the democratic cause. All power was, in fact, in its hands, and resistance was no longer possible. The higher orders submitted without a murmur and without a struggle to an evil that was thenceforth inevitable. The ordinary fate of falling powers awaited them: each of their members followed his own interest; and as it was impossible to wring the power from the hands of a people whom they did not detest sufficiently to brave, their only aim was to secure its goodwill at any price. The most democratic laws were consequently voted by the very men whose interests they impaired: and thus, although the higher classes did not excite the passions of the people against their order, they themselves accelerated . the triumph of the new state of things; so that, by a singular change, the democratic impulse was found to be most irresistible in the very states where the aristocracy had the firmest hold. The state of Maryland, which had been founded by men of rank, was the first to proclaim universal suffrage 1 and to introduce the most democratic forms into the whole of its government.

When a nation begins to modify the elective qualification, it may easily be foreseen that, sooner or later, that qualification will be entirely abolished. There is no more invariable rule in the history of society: the further electoral rights are extended, the greater is the need of extending them; for after each concession the strength of the democracy increases, and its demands increase with its strength. The ambition of those who are below the appointed rate is irritated in exact proportion to the great number of those who are above it. The exception at last becomes the rule, concession follows concession, and no stop can be made short of universal suffrage.

At the present day the principle of the sovereignty of the people has acquired in the United States all the practical development that the imagination can conceive. It is unencumbered by those fictions that are thrown over it in other countries, and it appears in every possible form, according to the exigency of the occasion. Sometimes the laws are made by the people in a body, as at Athens; and sometimes its representatives, chosen by universal suffrage, transact business in its name and under its immediate supervision.

In some countries a power exists which, though it is in a degree foreign to the social body, directs it, and forces it to pursue a certain track. In others the ruling force is divided, being partly within and partly without the ranks of the people. But nothing of the kind is to be seen in the United States; there society governs itself for itself. All power centers in its bosom, and scarcely an individual is to be met with who would venture to conceive or, still less, to express the idea of seeking it elsewhere. The nation participates in the making of its laws by the choice of its legislators, and in the execution of them by the choice of the agents of the executive government; it may almost be said to govern itself, so feeble and so restricted is the share left to the administration, so little . do the authorities forget their popular origin and the power from which they emanate. The people reign in the American political world as the Deity does in the universe. They are the cause and the aim of all things; everything comes from them, and everything is absorbed in them.

The War of Western Failures: Hopes for Syria Fall with Aleppo

epa04741424 German Chancellor Angela Merkel (R) and Russian President Vladimir Putin (L) meet for a wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Moscow, Russia, 10 May 2015. Russia continues to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the victory of the Soviet Union and its Allies over Nazi Germany in WWII, with Angela Merkel arriving in Moscow to commemorate the victims of the war, even as other world leaders chose to stay away for the massive victory parade 09 May. EPA/SERGEI CHIRIKOV +++(c) dpa - Bildfunk+++

epa04741424 German Chancellor Angela Merkel (R) and Russian President Vladimir Putin (L) meet for a wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Moscow, Russia, 10 May 2015. Russia continues to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the victory of the Soviet Union and its Allies over Nazi Germany in WWII, with Angela Merkel arriving in Moscow to commemorate the victims of the war, even as other world leaders chose to stay away for the massive victory parade 09 May. EPA/SERGEI CHIRIKOV +++(c) dpa – Bildfunk+++

The Hybrid War: Russia’s Propaganda WAR Against Germany

Russia gives the West a taste of their own medicine:  Propaganda against Russia

The siege of Aleppo is a humanitarian catastrophe on a dramatic scale — and a victory for Russian President Vladimir Putin. He has seized on the Syrian civil war to expose an impotent West and show his own geopolitical muscle.

The brief disappearance of a girl in Germany recently become an international political issue. Russia is exploiting the case for propaganda purposes as part of its strategy of a hybrid war aimed at destabilizing the West and dividing Europe.

Svetlana F. is sitting at the kitchen table in her duplex home in the Berlin district of Marzahn-Hellersdorf. A slim, 39-year-old woman, she wrings her hands as she relates what happened to her daughter more than three weeks ago. The conversation stops each time she is unable to hold back her tears. This will be her only interview with the media.

“My daughter,” says the mother, “is not doing well.” When SPIEGEL and SPIEGEL TV met the family a week ago last Thursday, the girl was in the hospital. “She has been in the psychiatric ward since Monday.”Nothing has been the same for the family since the 13-year-old girl disappeared one morning on her way to school. The case has become an international political issue since it was picked up by Russian media and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov attacked the German authorities investigating it.

As the saying goes, truth is the first casualty of war. This is especially true of the propaganda war Moscow has been waging against the West and its open societies since the crisis in Ukraine began. The 13-year-old girl and her disappearance have become a weapon in this war. According to the Russian version of the story, the case has all the necessary ingredients: the rape of a teenage girl, violent refugees, police that use political correctness as an excuse not to investigate and politicians who are afraid of the truth. This is the story Moscow is telling, regardless of the facts.

Russia Accuses Germany of ‘Cover-Up’  –  Russia gives the West a taste of his own medicine

The Kremlin is now portraying itself as an advocate for the girl. The Russian Embassy in Berlin sent a verbal note to the German Foreign Ministry at the beginning of last week. The letter, with one page written in Russian, contains the usual pleasantries, but the overall tone is aggressive. The Russian diplomats demanded that the case be fully investigated, adding that they did not understand why the matter was being kept quiet.

On Tuesday, Lavrov publicly accused the German authorities of a “cover-up,” saying they were “whitewashing reality to make it politically correct.” German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier reacted sharply, calling Moscow’s reaction “political propaganda.” On Wednesday, Russian Ambassador Vladimir Grinin was summoned and lectured on the status of the investigation.

Nevertheless, as the propaganda battle continued, the version in which the girl was allegedly raped still circulated on the Internet. Security experts believe that Russia has greatly expanded its propaganda campaigns against the West, including Germany, in recent years. They represent the Kremlin’s attempt to manipulate public opinion in the West, stir up conflict and destabilize Western societies. President Vladimir Putin, a former KGB agent, and his team are using tricks from the intelligence agency’s playbook to conduct foreign policy. The “old methods” of the KGB — disinformation and destabilization — are blatantly on display once again, says Hans-Georg Maassen, president of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), Germany’s domestic intelligence service.

These methods were already evident in the Ukraine crisis, as Russia deployed television stations and so-called trolls to spread propaganda on the Internet and cast aspersions on Western media for being kept on a tight leash. Russian propaganda falls on fertile ground in the West, where distrust of politicians and the media is widespread. Many believe that the established media, disparaged as the Lügenpresse, or “lying press,” are withholding the truth. In Germany, 44 percent of the population harbors such reservations, according to a survey by the polling company Forsa.

US-Led Coalition Must Pay War Reparations to Syria

 

Syrian Foreign Ministry: Syria Reserves Its Right in Demanding US-Led Coalition to Pay Compensations for Deliberate Destruction of Economic Facilities

 

 

Syria affirmed that the US-led coalition’s warplanes have launched tens of raids on the Syrian economic facilities instead of raiding the Islamic State (ISIS) organization and its tanks that transport the stolen Syrian oil into Turkey.

“The US-led coalition’s shelling of the economic facilities and infrastructure, and the unilateral coercive measures adopted by some countries on the Syrian people are the reason behind the mounting difficult conditions Syria is passing through,” Foreign and Expatriates Ministry said in two identical letters sent Wednesday to the UN Secretary General and President of Security Council.

It added that in light of this deliberate destruction of the oil and economic establishments, the Syrian Arab Republic reserves its right in demanding the US-led coalition’s countries to pay compensations to Syria in return for this destruction as it is a right guaranteed by the international law.

On December 8th and 13th, the international coalition shelled a number of oil and gas stations in Deir Ezzor under the pretext of hunting the ISIS, causing losses estimated at hundreds of millions USD.

“The US-led coalition has launched scores of raids on the Syrian economic installations instead of bombarding the ISIS tanks which transport the stolen Syrian petroleum and it didn’t present any information about the shelling to the UN according to the UN charter,” the two letters reiterated.

The letters added “In this regard, the armed terrorist organizations don’t loot the Syrian oil directly from the stations, but they steal the oil from places neighboring the oil wells which spread in the Syrian oil fields, then they sell the petroleum through Turkish channels.

The original source of this article is SANA
Copyright © Mazen Eyon, SANA, 2015

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). Unruly Hearts will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article.

Estimated war dead World War II

 

AXIS MILITARY CIVILIAN TOTAL
GERMANY

3,500,000

700,000 4,200,000
JAPAN 2,000,000 350,000 2,350,000
ROMANIA 300,000 160,000 460,000
HUNGARY 140,000 290,000 430,000
ITALY 330,000 80,000 410,000
AUSTRIA 230,000 104,000 334,000
FINLAND 82,000 2,000 84,000
AXIS TOTAL 6,582,000 1,686,000 8,268,000
ALLIED MILITARY CIVILIAN TOTAL
SOVIET UNION 10,000,000 10,000,000 * 20,000,000
CHINA 2,500,000 7,500,00 10,000,000
POLAND 100,00 5,700,000 5,800,000
YUGOSLAVIA 300,000 1,400,000 1,700,000
FRANCE 250,000 350,000 600,000
CZECHOSLOVAKIA 200,000 215,000 415,000
UNITED STATES 400,000 400,000
UNITED KINGDOM (ENGLAND, SCOTLAND, WALES, AND  NORTHERN IRELAND) 326,000 62,000 388,000
NETHERLANDS 12,000 198,000 210,000
GREECE 20,000 140,000 160,000
BELGIUM 12,000 76,000 88,000
CANADA 37,000 37,000
INDIA 24,000 13,000 37,000
AUSTRALIA 23,000 12,000 35,000
ALBANIA 28,000 2,000 30,000
BULGARIA 10,000 10,000 20,000
NEW ZEALAND 10,000 2,000 12,000
NORWAY 6,400 3,900 10,300
SOUTH AFRICA 7,000
ETHIOPIA 5,000 5,000
LUXEMBOURG 5,000 5,000
MALTA 2,000 2,000
DENMARK 400 1,000 1,400
BRAZIL 1,000 1,000
ALLIED TOTAL 14,276,800 25,686,900 39,963,700
EST. TOTAL 20,858,800 27,372,900 48,231,700

* The majority of Soviet Union civilian casualties were Ukrainian.

Sources

Gregory Frumkin, Population Changes in Europe Since 1939 (European estimates)

B. Urlanis, Wars and Population (Soviet Union and the Far East)

Singer and Small, Wages of War (the Americas and Ethiopia)

I.C.B. Dear, editor, The Oxford Companion to World War II (British Commonwealth)

Why Obama’s assurance of ‘no boots on the ground’ isn’t so reassuring

PHAFGHAN13_10_0_163384204

A U.S. Marine on patrol. (Rebecca Sell/For The Washington Post)

Rosa Brooks, a law professor at Georgetown University and a senior fellow at the New America Foundation, was an Obama administration appointee at the Defense Department from 2009 to 2011. She is married to an Army Special Forces officer.

Each time I hear President Obama assure us that there will be “no boots on the ground” in Iraq or Syria, I think of my husband’s Army boots, lying in a heap in the corner of the downstairs study. They’re covered in fine dust from his latest Middle East deployment, one that came nail-bitingly close to being extended by an unplanned stint in Iraq.

In the end, he wasn’t sent back to Iraq. He came home in July, though a last-minute change in assignments left most of his civilian clothes stranded in some Army transport netherworld. Deprived of his sneakers and sandals, he wore his Army boots pretty much everywhere this summer, even on playground outings with the kids. Watching grass stains from the local park gradually displace nine months of Kuwaiti dust gave me more happiness than I can say.

Even so, I can’t help feeling queasy every time I hear the president pledge that there will be “no boots on the ground” in America’s newest war. I wonder what that pledge really means — and just why we’re supposed to find it reassuring. It’s a pledge that seems to have everything to do with politics and little to do with the imperatives of strategy or security.

Here’s what “no boots on the ground” apparently doesn’t mean: It doesn’t mean that no U.S. troops will be sent to Iraq or Syria. Reportedly there are already 1,600 U.S. military personnel in Iraq. True, they’re present in an “advisory” role, not in a combat role — but surely one lesson of Iraq and Afghanistan is that combat has a habit of finding its way to noncombat personnel. Enemy snipers and IEDs don’t much care about a soldier’s mission or occupational specialty, and you can bet that fighters of the self-proclaimed Islamic State would be content with the heads of a few American advisers.

It’s also hard to know what publicly reported troop numbers really mean. When the Pentagon issues a Boots on the Ground report (known colloquially as a “BOG report”), it often excludes military personnel on “temporary duty” in combat areas, even though temporary duty may mean an assignment spanning five or six months. Similarly, Special Operations personnel assigned to work under CIA auspices are often left out of the BOG numbers. This makes it hard to know just who’s being counted when officials say there are 1,600 military personnel in Iraq.

“No boots on the ground” also ignores the many nonmilitary American boots (and shoes and sandals) present in Iraq and Syria. Our Baghdad embassy personnel presumably wear some kind of footwear, as do thousands more civilians working as U.S. government contractors in Iraq. In both Iraq and Syria, scores of American civilians also work for nongovernmental organizations and humanitarian aid groups.

The Pentagon keeps careful count of dead and wounded U.S. troops, but the government doesn’t systematically track dead or injured civilians or contractors (many of whom, of course, are U.S. military veterans). Though few Americans know it, there were often more contractors working for the U.S. government on the ground than there were U.S. troops at the height of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and some estimates suggest that there were as many U.S.-employed contractors who died in those conflicts as there were U.S. troops killed.

Cynics might even suspect that this heavy reliance on contractors was part of an effort to keep those BOG numbers down while outsourcing military risk. After all, no one likes high BOG numbers — the very acronym is suggestive of that most dreaded military outcome, the “quagmire.”

If “no boots on the ground” means playing games with numbers and offloading military risk onto U.S. government civilians and contractors, we should take little solace in presidential reassurances.

And we should feel even less comfort if “no boots on the ground” ends up putting vulnerable local civilians at risk. Remember Kosovo? President Bill Clinton’s refusal in 1999 to put U.S. troops on the ground forced us to rely solely on airstrikes to prevent Serbian ethnic cleansing. To further minimize any risk to U.S. military personnel, we mainly flew sorties at a safe 15,000 feet above the ground. This worked out well for us: Aside from two Americans killed in a helicopter accident in Albania, there were no U.S. fatalities in the 78-day air campaign. It worked out less well for some of the civilians we were trying to protect; in several cases, for instance, NATO pilots mistook convoys of refugees for troop transports, causing scores of civilian deaths.

The primary goal of the current U.S. airstrikes in Syria and Iraq isn’t civilian protection, but Obama has suggested that this is at least a secondary motivation. In his speech this past week to the U.N. General Assembly, for instance, he asserted that the Islamic State “has terrorized all who they come across in Iraq and Syria. Mothers, sisters and daughters have been subjected to rape as a weapon of war. Innocent children have been gunned down. . . . Religious minorities have been starved to death. In the most horrific crimes imaginable, innocent human beings have been beheaded. . . . The only language understood by killers like this is the language of force. So the United States of America will work with a broad coalition to dismantle this network of death.”

It’s hard to argue with the importance of dismantling a “network of death,” but no matter how careful we are, U.S. airstrikes in Syria and Iraq will also end up killing some innocent civilians. Without eyes and ears on the ground, we’re more likely to make tragic targeting mistakes. We have to hope we’ll do more good than harm, but it’s hard to feel confident of that.

Numerous respected military and defense leaders — from Army Gen. Martin Dempsey , current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to retired defense secretary Robert Gates — have argued in recent weeks that ground troops will probably be required if our strategy is to be effective. So far, events seem to be proving them right: In Iraq, seven weeks of airstrikes have done little to push Islamic State fighters out of the territories they control, despite close U.S. coordination with Iraqi army units. In Syria, we have no similar local force with which to coordinate, creating a risk that U.S. airstrikes will increase the chaos without fundamentally reducing the threat to local civilians — or, in the longer term, to the United States.And that’s most worrisome of all — the possibility that our insistence on “no boots on the ground” also offloads present risks onto the future. Relying on airstrikes alone may merely prolong a bloody and inconclusive conflict, or strengthen other actors who are just as brutal as Islamic State fighters, from the regime of Bashar al-Assad to the al-Qaeda-linked rebels of Jabhat al-Nusra.Insisting that we’ll never commit U.S. troops to this fight plays right into every jihadist narrative, reinforcing America’s image as an arrogant but cowardly nation — happy to drop bombs from a distance but unwilling to risk the lives of our troops. Each time we reinforce that narrative, we give jihadist recruiting another big boost.

 

For a decade, we’ve relied on drone strikes as a top counterterrorism tool in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, but a few thousand dead terrorism suspects later, it’s far from clear that we’ve made ourselves safer. If anything, the global jihadist movement appears to have gained strength. As a former Defense Intelligence Agency director, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, recently noted: “In 2004, there were 21 total Islamic terrorist groups spread out in 18 countries. Today, there are 41 Islamic terrorist groups spread out in 24 countries.” Ultimately, our efforts to destroy the Islamic State from afar may similarly spark the creation of even more jihadist groups.

“I will not commit you . . . to fighting another ground war in Iraq,” Obama told troops at Central Command headquarters this month. I appreciate his desire to do right by America’s military personnel: My husband’s boots, like those of so many other members of the armed forces, have already gathered too much dust in too many dangerous places, over too many years. Right now, I want those boots to stay exactly where they are: here, at home.

But I don’t want to trade the safety of U.S. troops today for the safety of our children tomorrow. If Obama’s promise of “no boots on the ground” means we’ll be fighting a war of half-measures — a war that won’t achieve our objectives and that may increase the long-term threat — I’m not sure, in the end, that it’s a promise I want him to keep.

Putin: Downing of Russian jet over Syria stab in the back by terrorist accomplices

2713698 10/07/2015 A Russian Sukhoi Su-24 lands at the Hmeimim air base in Syria. Dmitriy Vinogradov/Sputnik

2713698 10/07/2015 A Russian Sukhoi Su-24 lands at the Hmeimim air base in Syria. Dmitriy Vinogradov/Sputnik

 

Turkey backstabbed Russia by downing the Russian warplane and acted as accomplices of the terrorists, Russian President Vladimir Putin said.

“This incident stands out against the usual fight against terrorism. Our troops are fighting heroically against terrorists, risking their lives. But the loss we suffered today came from a stab in the back delivered by accomplices of the terrorists,” Putin said.

Objective monitoring data confirmed no attempts of Turkish plane to establish communication or visual contact with Rus crew

 

Жители столицы провели митинг протеста у посольства Турции в Москве

 

Follow LIVE UPDATES on Russian warplane shot down at Syria-Turkey border

Putin said the plane was hit by a Turkish warplane as it was traveling at an altitude of 6000 meters about a kilometer from the Turkish border. It was hit by an air-to-air missile launched by a Turkish F-16 jet. The crash site is four kilometers from the border. The plane posed no threat to Turkish national security, he stressed.

Putin said the plane was targeting terrorist targets in the Latakia province of Syria, many of whom came from Russia.

Russia has for a long time been aware of oil going from Syria under the control of terrorists to Turkey, Putin said. The money finances terrorist groups.

IS has big money, hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars, from selling oil. In addition they are protected by the military of an entire nation. One can understand why they are acting so boldly and blatantly. Why they kill people in such atrocious ways. Why they commit terrorist acts across the world, including in the heart of Europe,” the Russian leader said.

The downing of the Russian warplane happened despite Russia signing an agreement with the US to prevent such incidents in Syria, Putin stressed. Turkey claims to be part of the US-led coalition fighting against IS in Syria, he added.

The incident will have grave consequences for Russia’s relations with Turkey, Putin warned.

We have always treated Turkey as not only a close neighbor, but also as a friendly nation,” he said. “I don’t know who has an interest in what happened today, but we certainly don’t.”

The fact that Turkey did not try to contact Russia in the wake of the incident and rushed to call a NATO meeting instead is worrisome, Putin said. It appears that Turkey want NATO to serve the interests of IS, he added.