Coming Soon A Global Central Bank, Global Currency and World Government

02/28/2015

http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/Article/A_Global_Central_Bank_Global_Currency_World_Government.html

© BY ANDREW MARSHALL

Following the 2009 G20 summit, plans were announced for implementing the creation of a new global currency to replace the US dollar’s role as the world reserve currency. Point 19 of the communiqué released by the G20 at the end of the Summit stated, “We have agreed to support a general SDR allocation which will inject $250 billion into the world economy and increase global liquidity.” SDRs, or Special Drawing Rights, are “a synthetic paper currency issued by the International Monetary Fund.”

As the Telegraph reported, “the G20 leaders have activated the IMF’s power to create money and begin global ‘quantitative easing’. In doing so, they are putting a de facto world currency into play. It is outside the control of any sovereign body. Conspiracy theorists will love it.”1
The article continued in stating that, “there is now a world currency in waiting. In time, SDRs are likely to evolve into a parking place for the foreign holdings of central banks, led by the People’s Bank of China.” Further, “the creation of a Financial Stability Board looks like the first step towards a global financial regulator,” or, in other words, a global central bank.
It is important to take a closer look at these “solutions” being proposed and implemented in the midst of the current global financial crisis. These are not new suggestions, as they have been in the plans of the global elite for a long time. However, in the midst of the current crisis, the elite have fast-tracked their agenda of forging a New World Order in finance. It is important to address the background to these proposed and imposed “solutions” and what effects they will have on the International Monetary System (IMS) and the global political economy as a whole.

A New Bretton-Woods

In October of 2008, Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of the UK, said that we “must have a new Bretton Woods – building a new international financial architecture for the years ahead.” He continued in saying that, “we must now reform the international financial system,” and that he would want “to see the IMF reformed to become a ‘global central bank’ closely monitoring the international economy and financial system.”2
On October 17, 2008, Gordon Brown wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post in which he said that this ‘new Bretton-Woods’ should work towards “global governance,” and implementing “shared global standards for accounting and regulation,” and “the renewal of our international institutions to make them effective early-warning systems for the world economy.”3
In early October 2008, it was reported that, “as the world’s central bankers gather this week in Washington DC for an IMF-World Bank conference to discuss the crisis, the big question they face is whether it is time to establish a global economic ‘policeman’ to ensure the crash of 2008 can never be repeated.” Further, “any organisation with the power to police the global economy would have to include representatives of every major country – a United Nations of economic regulation.” A former governor of the Bank of England suggested that, “the answer might already be staring us in the face, in the form of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS),” however, “the problem is that it has no teeth. The IMF tends to couch its warnings about economic problems in very diplomatic language, but the BIS is more independent and much better placed to deal with this if it is given the power to do so.”4

Emergence of Regional Currencies

On January 1, 1999, the European Union established the Euro as its regional currency. The Euro has grown in prominence over the past several years. However, it is not to be the only regional currency in the world. There are moves and calls for other regional currencies throughout the world.
In 2007, Foreign Affairs, the journal of the Council on Foreign Relations, ran an article titled, ‘The End of National Currency’, in which it began by discussing the volatility of international currency markets, and that very few “real” solutions have been proposed to address successive currency crises.
The author poses the question, “Will restoring lost sovereignty to governments put an end to financial instability?” He answers by stating that, “this is a dangerous misdiagnosis,” and that, “the right course is not to return to a mythical past of monetary sovereignty, with governments controlling local interest and exchange rates in blissful ignorance of the rest of the world. Governments must let go of the fatal notion that nationhood requires them to make and control the money used in their territory. National currencies and global markets simply do not mix; together they make a deadly brew of currency crises and geopolitical tension and create ready pretexts for damaging protectionism. In order to globalise safely, countries should abandon monetary nationalism and abolish unwanted currencies, the source of much of today’s instability.”
The author explains that, “monetary nationalism is simply incompatible with globalisation. It has always been, even if this has only become apparent since the 1970s, when all the world’s governments rendered their currencies intrinsically worthless.” The author states that, “since economic development outside the process of globalisation is no longer possible, countries should abandon monetary nationalism. Governments should replace national currencies with the dollar or the euro or, in the case of Asia, collaborate to produce a new multinational currency over a comparably large and economically diversified area.” Essentially, according to the author, the solution lies in regional currencies.5
In October of 2008, “European Central Bank council member Ewald Nowotny said a ‘tri-polar’ global currency system is developing between Asia, Europe and the US and that he’s skeptical the US dollar’s centrality can be revived.”6
In South America, there are moves to create a regional currency and central bank under the Union of South American Nations, which was established in May of 2008.7,8The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), a regional trade bloc of Arabic Gulf nations, has also been making moves towards creating a regional central bank and common currency for its member nations, following the example of Europe, and even being advised by the European Central Bank.9-12
From the time of the East Asian financial crisis in the late 1990s, there have been calls for the creation of a regional currency for East Asia among the ten member nations of the ASEAN bloc, as well as China, Japan and South Korea. In 2008, ASEAN central bank officials and financial ministers met to discuss monetary integration in the region.13-19
Within Africa, there are already certain regional monetary unions, and within the framework of the African Union, there are moves being implemented to create an African currency under the control of an African Central Bank (ACB), which is to be located in Nigeria.20-24
In North America, there are moves, coinciding with the deepening economic and political integration of the continent under NAFTA and the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), to create a regional currency for North America, aptly given the current designation as the Amero, and even the then-Governor of the Central Bank of Canada, David Dodge, in 2007, said that a regional currency was “possible.”25-33

A Global Currency

In 1988, The Economist ran an article titled, ‘Get Ready for the Phoenix’, in which they wrote, “thirty years from now, Americans, Japanese, Europeans, and people in many other rich countries and some relatively poor ones will probably be paying for their shopping with the same currency. Prices will be quoted not in dollars, yen or D-marks but in, let’s say, the phoenix. The phoenix will be favoured by companies and shoppers because it will be more convenient than today’s national currencies, which by then will seem a quaint cause of much disruption to economic life in the late twentieth century.”
The article stated that, “The market crash [of 1987] taught [governments] that the pretence of policy cooperation can be worse than nothing, and that until real co-operation is feasible (ie, until governments surrender some economic sovereignty) further attempts to peg currencies will flounder.”
Amazingly the author of the article adds that, “Several more big exchange-rate upsets, a few more stockmarket crashes and probably a slump or two will be needed before politicians are willing to face squarely up to that choice. This points to a muddled sequence of emergency followed by patch-up followed by emergency, stretching out far beyond 2018 – except for two things. As time passes, the damage caused by currency instability is gradually going to mount; and the very trends that will make it mount are making the utopia of monetary union feasible.”
The article advocated the formation of a global central bank, perhaps through the IMF, and “this means a big loss of economic sovereignty, but the trends that make the phoenix so appealing are taking that sovereignty away in any case.”
The article concludes in stating that, “The phoenix would probably start as a cocktail of national currencies, just as the Special Drawing Right is today. In time, though, its value against national currencies would cease to matter, because people would choose it for its convenience and the stability of its purchasing power.” The last sentence says, “Pencil in the phoenix for around 2018, and welcome it when it comes.”34
Former US Federal Reserve Governor Paul Volcker has said that, “if we are to have a truly global economy, a single world currency makes sense.” A European Central Bank executive stated that, “we might one day have a single world currency,” in “a step towards the ideal situation of a fully integrated world.”35
The IMF held a conference in 2000 discussing how the world was segmenting into regional currency blocs and that a single world currency was possible, and that it is, in fact, preferable.36 Nobel Prize winning economist Robert Mundell has long advocated the creation of a global currency, and that it “would restore a needed coherence to the international monetary system, give the International Monetary Fund a function that would help it to promote stability, and be a catalyst for international harmony.”37 
In March 2009, Russia suggested that the G20 meeting in April should “consider the possibility of creating a supra-national reserve currency or a ‘super-reserve currency’,” and to consider the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) in this capacity.38 A week later, China’s central bank governor proposed the creation of a global currency controlled by the IMF, replacing the US dollar as the world reserve currency, also using the IMF’s SDRs as the reserve currency basket against which all other currencies would be fixed.39 
Days after this proposal, the US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, former President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, told the Council on Foreign Relations that, in response to a question about the Chinese proposal, “we’re actually quite open to that suggestion. But you should think of it as rather evolutionary, building on the current architectures, than – rather than – rather than moving us to global monetary union.”40 
In late March a UN panel of economists recommended the creation of a new global currency reserve that would replace the US dollar, and that it would be an “independently administered reserve currency.”41

Creating a World Central Bank

In 1998, Jeffrey Garten wrote an article for the New York Times advocating a “global Fed.” Garten was former Dean of the Yale School of Management, former Undersecretary of Commerce for International Trade in the Clinton administration, previously served on the White House Council on International Economic Policy under the Nixon administration and on the policy planning staffs of Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and Cyrus Vance of the Ford and Carter administrations, former Managing Director at Lehman Brothers, and is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
In his article written in 1998, he stated that, “over time the United States set up crucial central institutions – the Securities and Exchange Commission (1933), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (1934) and, most important, the Federal Reserve (1913). In so doing, America became a managed national economy. These organisations were created to make capitalism work, to prevent destructive business cycles and to moderate the harsh, invisible hand of Adam Smith.” He stated that, “this is what now must occur on a global scale. The world needs an institution that has a hand on the economic rudder when the seas become stormy. It needs a global central bank.”
Interestingly, Garten states that, “one thing that would not be acceptable would be for the bank to be at the mercy of short-term-oriented legislatures.” In essence, it is not to be accountable to the people of the world. So, he asks the question, “To whom would a global central bank be accountable? It would have too much power to be governed only by technocrats, although it must be led by the best of them. One possibility would be to link the new bank to an enlarged Group of Seven – perhaps a ‘G-15’ [or in today’s context, the G20] that would include the G-7 plus rotating members like Mexico, Brazil, South Africa, Poland, India, China and South Korea.” He further states that, “There would have to be very close collaboration” between the global bank and the Fed.42
In September of 2008, Jeffrey Garten wrote an article for the Financial Times in which he stated that, “Even if the US’s massive financial rescue operation succeeds, it should be followed by something even more far-reaching – the establishment of a Global Monetary Authority to oversee markets that have become borderless.”
In late October of 2008, Garten wrote an article for Newsweek in which he stated that, “leaders should begin laying the groundwork for establishing a global central bank.” He explained that, “there was a time when the US Federal Reserve played this role [as governing financial authority of the world], as the prime financial institution of the world’s most powerful economy, overseeing the one global currency. But with the growth of capital markets, the rise of currencies like the euro and the emergence of powerful players such as China, the shift of wealth to Asia and the Persian Gulf and, of course, the deep-seated problems in the American economy itself, the Fed no longer has the capability to lead single-handedly.”43
In January of 2009, it was reported that, “one clear solution to avoid a repeat of the problems would be the establishment of a ‘global central bank’ – with the IMF and World Bank being unable to prevent the financial meltdown.” Dr. William Overholt, senior research fellow at Harvard’s Kennedy School, formerly with the Rand Institute, gave a speech in Dubai in which he said that, “To avoid another crisis, we need an ability to manage global liquidity. Theoretically that could be achieved through some kind of global central bank, or through the creation of a global currency, or through global acceptance of a set of rules with sanctions and a dispute settlement mechanism.”44

A “New World Order” in Banking

In June of 2008, before he was Treasury Secretary in the Obama administration, Timothy Geithner, as head of the New York Federal Reserve, wrote an article for theFinancial Times following his attendance at the 2008 Bilderberg conference, in which he said that, “banks and investment banks whose health is crucial to the global financial system should operate under a unified regulatory framework,” and that, “the US Federal Reserve should play a ‘central role’ in the new regulatory framework, working closely with supervisors in the US and around the world.”45
In November of 2008, The National, a prominent United Arab Emirates newspaper, reported on Baron David de Rothschild accompanying UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown on a visit to the Middle East, although not as a “part of the official party” accompanying Brown. Following an interview with the Baron, it was reported that, “Rothschild shares most people’s view that there is a new world order. In his opinion, banks will deleverage and there will be a new form of global governance.”46
In February of 2009, the Times Online reported that a “new world order in banking [is] necessary,” and that, “it is increasingly evident that the world needs a new banking system and that it should not bear much resemblance to the one that has failed so spectacularly.”47
But of course, the elites that are shaping this new banking system are the champions of the previous banking system. The solutions that will follow are simply the extensions of the current system, only sped up through the necessity posed by the current crisis.

An Emerging Global Government

An April 3, 2009 article in the Toronto Star, reported that the G20 “confab constitutes the first great get-together of the new world order. This geopolitical order may follow a number of directions, by no means all of them pleasant. But its defining characteristic is already unchangeable.” Further, “An uncomfortable characteristic of the new world order may well turn out to be that global income gaps will widen because the rising powers, such as China, India and Brazil, regard those below them on the ladder as potential rivals.” The author further states that, “The new world order thus won’t necessarily be any better than the old one,” and that, “what is certain, though, is that global affairs are going to be considerably different from now on.”48
David Rothkopf, a scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, former Deputy Undersecretary of Commerce for International Trade in the Clinton administration, and former managing director of Kissinger and Associates, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, recently wrote a book titled, Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They are Making, of which he is certainly a member. When discussing the role and agenda of the global “superclass,” he states that, “in a world of global movements and threats that don’t present their passports at national borders, it is no longer possible for a nation-state acting alone to fulfil its portion of the social contract.”49
He writes that “the international organisations and alliances we have today,” are evolving and achieving great things, despite certain flaws, and that he is “optimistic that progress will continue to be made,” but it will be difficult, because it “undercuts many national and local power structures and cultural concepts that have foundations deep in the bedrock of human civilisation, namely the notion of sovereignty.”50 He further notes that, “mechanisms of global governance are more achievable in today’s environment,” and that these mechanisms “are often creative with temporary solutions to urgent problems that cannot wait for the world to embrace a bigger and more controversial idea like real global government.”51
In December of 2008, the Financial Times ran an article written by Gideon Rachman, a past Bilderberg attendee, who wrote that, “for the first time in my life, I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible,” and that, “a ‘world government’ would involve much more than co-operation between nations. It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws. The European Union has already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability to deploy military force.” Asking if the European model could “go global,” he states that it can, and that this is made possible through an awakening “change in the political atmosphere,” as “the financial crisis and climate change are pushing national governments towards global solutions, even in countries such as China and the US that are traditionally fierce guardians of national sovereignty.”
He quoted an adviser to French President Nicolas Sarkozy as saying, “global governance is just a euphemism for global government,” and that the “core of the international financial crisis is that we have global financial markets and no global rule of law.” However, Rachman states that any push towards a global government “will be a painful, slow process.” He then states that a key problem in this push can be explained with an example from the EU, which “has suffered a series of humiliating defeats in referendums, when plans for ‘ever closer union’ have been referred to the voters. In general, the Union has progressed fastest when far-reaching deals have been agreed by technocrats and politicians – and then pushed through without direct reference to the voters. International governance tends to be effective, only when it is anti-democratic. [Emphasis added]”52
In November of 2008, the United States National Intelligence Council (NIC), the US intelligence community’s “centre for midterm and long-term strategic thinking,” released a report that it produced in collaboration with numerous think tanks, consulting firms, academic institutions and hundreds of other experts, among them are the Atlantic Council of the United States, the Wilson Center, RAND Corporation, the Brookings Institution, American Enterprise Institute, Texas A&M University, the Council on Foreign Relations and Chatham House in London.53
The report, titled Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World, outlines the current global political and economic trends that the world may be going through by the year 2025. In terms of the financial crisis, it states that solving this “will require long-term efforts to establish a new international system.”54 It suggests that as the “China-model” for development becomes increasingly attractive, there may be a “decline in democratisation” for emerging economies, authoritarian regimes, and “weak democracies frustrated by years of economic underperformance.” Further, the dollar will cease to be the global reserve currency, as there would likely be a “move away from the dollar.”55
It states that the dollar will become “something of a first among equals in a basket of currencies by 2025. This could occur suddenly in the wake of a crisis, or gradually with global rebalancing.”56 The report elaborates on the construction of a new international system, stating that, “by 2025, nation-states will no longer be the only – and often not the most important – actors on the world stage and the ‘international system’ will have morphed to accommodate the new reality. But the transformation will be incomplete and uneven.” It also notes that, “most of the pressing transnational problems – including climate change, regulation of globalised financial markets, migration, failing states, crime networks, etc. – are unlikely to be effectively resolved by the actions of individual nation-states. The need for effective global governance will increase faster than existing mechanisms can respond.”57
The report discusses the topic of regionalism, stating that, “Asian regionalism would have global implications, possibly sparking or reinforcing a trend toward three trade and financial clusters that could become quasi-blocs (North America, Europe, and East Asia).” These blocs “would have implications for the ability to achieve future global World Trade Organisation agreements and regional clusters could compete in the setting of trans-regional product standards for IT, biotech, nanotech, intellectual property rights, and other ‘new economy’ products.”58
Reflecting similar assumptions made by Rachman in his article advocating a world government is the topic of democratisation, on which the report says, “advances are likely to slow and globalisation will subject many recently democratised countries to increasing social and economic pressures that could undermine liberal institutions.” This is largely because “the better economic performance of many authoritarian governments could sow doubts among some about democracy as the best form of government. The surveys we consulted indicated that many East Asians put greater emphasis on good management, including increasing standards of livings, than democracy.” Further, “even in many well-established democracies, surveys show growing frustration with the current workings of democratic government and questioning among elites over the ability of democratic governments to take the bold actions necessary to deal rapidly and effectively with the growing number of transnational challenges.”59

The Creation of a New World Order

Ultimately, what this implies is that the future of the global political economy is one of increasing moves toward a global system of governance, or a world government, with a world central bank and global currency; and that, concurrently, these developments are likely to materialise in the face of and as a result of a decline in democracy around the world, and thus, a rise in authoritarianism. What we are witnessing is the creation of a New World Order, controlled by a totalitarian global government structure.
In fact, the very concept of a global currency and global central bank is authoritarian in its very nature, as it removes any vestiges of oversight and accountability away from the people of the world, and toward a small, increasingly interconnected group of international elites.
As Carroll Quigley explained in his monumental book, Tragedy and Hope, “[T]he powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations.”60
Indeed, the current “solutions” being proposed to the global financial crisis benefit those that caused the crisis over those that are poised to suffer the most as a result of the crisis: the disappearing middle classes, the world’s dispossessed, poor, indebted people. The proposed solutions to this crisis represent the manifestations and actualisation of the ultimate generational goals of the global elite; and thus, represent the least favourable conditions for the vast majority of the world’s people.
It is imperative that the world’s people throw their weight against these “solutions” and usher in a new era of world order, one of the People’s World Order; with the solution lying in local governance and local economies, so that the people have greater roles in determining the future and structure of their own political-economy, and thus, their own society. With this alternative of localised political economies, in conjunction with an unprecedented global population and international democratisation of communication through the internet, we have the means and possibility before us to forge the most diverse manifestation of cultures and societies that humanity has ever known.
The answer lies in the individual’s internalisation of human power and destination, and a rejection of the externalisation of power and human destiny to a global authority of which all but a select few people have access to. To internalise human power and destiny is to realise the gift of a human mind, which has the ability to engage in thought beyond the material, such as food and shelter, and venture into the realm of the conceptual. Each individual possesses – within themselves – the ability to think critically about themselves and their own life; now is the time to utilise this ability with the aim of internalising the concepts and questions of human power and destiny: Why are we here? Where are we going? Where should we be going? How do we get there?
The supposed answers to these questions are offered to us by a tiny global elite who fear the repercussions of what would take place if the people of the world were to begin to answer these questions themselves. I do not know the answers to these questions, but I do know that the answers lie in the human mind and spirit, that which has overcome and will continue to overcome the greatest of challenges to humanity, and will, without doubt, triumph over the New World Order.

Footnotes:

  1. Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, ‘The G20 moves the world a step closer to a global currency’, The Telegraph, April 3, 2009, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/5096524/The-G20-moves-the-world-a-step-closer-to-a-global-currency.html
    2. Robert Winnett, ‘Financial Crisis: Gordon Brown calls for “new Bretton Woods”,’ The Telegraph, October 13, 2008, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/3189517/Financial-Crisis-Gordon-Brown-calls-for-new-Bretton-Woods.html
    3. Gordon Brown, ‘Out of the Ashes’, The Washington Post, October 17, 2008, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/16/AR2008101603179.html
    4. Gordon Rayner, ‘Global financial crisis: does the world need a new banking “policeman”?’, The Telegraph, October 8, 2008, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/3155563/Global-financial-crisis-does-the-world-need-a-new-banking-policeman.html
    5. Benn Steil, ‘The End of National Currency’, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 86, Issue 3, May/June 2007, pp.83-96
    6. Jonathan Tirone, ‘ECB’s Nowotny Sees Global “Tri-Polar” Currency System Evolving’, Bloomberg, October 19, 2008, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=apjqJKKQvfDc&refer=home
    7. BBC, ‘South America nations found union’, BBC News, May 23, 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7417896.stm
    8. CNews, ‘South American nations to seek common currency’, China View, May 26, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-05/27/content_8260847.htm
    9. AME Info, ‘GCC: Full steam ahead to monetary union’, September 19, 2005, http://www.ameinfo.com/67925.html
    10. John Irish, ‘GCC Agrees on Monetary Union but Signals Delay in Common Currency’, Reuters, June 10, 2008, http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6&section=0&article=110727&d=10&m=6&y=2008
    11. TIMELINE-Gulf single currency deadline delayed beyond 2010’, Forbes, March 23, 2009, http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2009/03/24/afx6204462.html
    12. Agencies, ‘GCC need not rush to form single currency’, Business 24/7, March 26, 2009, http://www.business24-7.ae/articles/2009/3/pages/25032009/03262009_4e19de908b174f04bfb3c37aec2f17b3.aspx
    13. Barry Eichengreen, ‘International Monetary Arrangements: Is There a Monetary Union in Asia’s Future?’, The Brookings Institution, Spring 1997, http://www.brookings.edu/articles/1997/spring_globaleconomics_eichengreen.aspx
    14. ‘After European now Asian Monetary Union?’, Asia Times Online, September 8, 2001, http://www.atimes.com/editor/CI08Ba01.html
    15. ‘ASEAN Makes Moves for Asian Monetary Fund’, Association of Southeast Asian Nations, May 6, 2005, http://www.aseansec.org/afp/115.htm
    16. Reuven Glick, ‘Does Europe’s Path to Monetary Union Provide Lessons for East Asia?’, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, August 12, 2005, http://www.frbsf.org/publications/economics/letter/2005/el2005-19.html
    17. AFP, ‘Asian Monetary Fund may be needed to deal with future shocks’, Channel News Asia, July 2, 2007, http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_world_business/view/285700/1/.html
    18. AFX News Limited, ‘East Asia monetary union “feasible” but political will lacking – ADB’, Forbes, September 19, 2007, http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2007/09/19/afx4133743.html
    19. Lin Li, ‘ASEAN discusses financial, monetary integration’, China View, April 2, 2008, http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-04/02/content_7906391.htm
    20. Paul De Grauwe, Economics of Monetary Union, Oxford University Press, 2007, pp.109-110
    21. Heather Milkiewicz & Paul R. Masson, ‘Africa’s Economic Morass—Will a Common Currency Help?’, The Brookings Institution, July 2003, http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2003/07africa_masson.aspx
    22. John Gahamanyi, ‘Rwanda: African Central Bank Governors Discuss AU Financial Institutions’, The New Times, August 23, 2008, http://allafrica.com/stories/200808230124.html
    23. Eric Ombok, ‘African Union, Nigeria Plan Accord on Central Bank’, Bloomberg, March 2, 2009, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601116&sid=afoY1vOnEMLA&refer=africa
    24. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ‘Africa in the Quest for a Common Currency’, Republic of Kenya, March 2009, http://www.mfa.go.ke/mfacms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=346&Itemid=62
    25. Herbert Grubel, ‘The Case for the Amero’, The Fraser Institute, September 1, 1999, p.4, http://www.fraserinstitute.org/Commerce.Web/publication_details.aspx?pubID=2512
    26. Ibid, p.17
    27. Thomas Courchene & Richard Harris, ‘From Fixing to Monetary Union: Options for North American Currency Integration’, C.D. Howe Institute, June 1999, p.22, http://www.cdhowe.org/display.cfm?page=research-fiscal&year=1999
    28. Ibid, p.23
    29. Barrie McKenna, ‘Dodge Says Single Currency “Possible”‘, The Globe and Mail, May 21, 2007
    30. ‘Consider a Continental Currency, Jarislowsky Says’, The Globe and Mail, November 23, 2007, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20071123.RDOLLAR23/TPStory/?query=%22Steven%2BChase%22b
    31. CNN, Larry King Live, Transcripts, October 8, 2007, http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0710/08/lkl.01.html
    32. Herbert Grubel, ‘Fix the Loonie’, The Financial Post, January 18, 2008, http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=245165
    33. Todd Harrison, ‘How realistic is a North American currency?’, Market Watch, January 28, 2009, http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Do-we-need-a-North/story.aspx?guid={D10536AF-F929-4AF9-AD10-250B4057A907}
    34. ‘Get ready for the phoenix’, The Economist, Vol. 306, January 9, 1988, pp.9-10
    35. ECB, ‘The euro and the dollar – new imperatives for policy co-ordination’, Speeches and Interviews, September 18, 2000, http://www.ecb.int/press/key/date/2000/html/sp000918.en.html
    36. IMF, ‘One World, One Currency: Destination or Delusion?’, Economic Forums and International Seminars, November 8, 2000, http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/ecforums/110800.htm
    37. Robert A. Mundell, ‘World Currency’, The Works of Robert A. Mundell, http://www.robertmundell.net/Menu/Main.asp?Type=5&Cat=09&ThemeName=World%20Currency
    38. Itar-Tass, ‘Russia proposes creation of global super-reserve currency’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, March 16, 2009, http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=13682035&PageNum=0
    39. Jamil Anderlini, ‘China calls for new reserve currency’, The Financial Times, March 23, 2009, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7851925a-17a2-11de-8c9d-0000779fd2ac.html
    40. CFR, A Conversation with Timothy F. Geithner, Council on Foreign Relations Transcripts, March 25, 2009, http://www.cfr.org/publication/18925/
    41. ‘UN backs new global currency reserve’, The Sunday Telegraph, March 29, 2009, http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,27753,25255091-462,00.html
    42. Jeffrey E. Garten, ‘Needed: A Fed for the World’, The New York Times, September 23, 1998, http://www.nytimes.com/1998/09/23/opinion/needed-a-fed-for-the-world.html
    43. Jeffrey Garten, ‘We Need a Bank Of the World’, Newsweek, October 25, 2008, http://www.newsweek.com/id/165772
    44. Sean Davidson, ‘Global central bank could prevent future crisis’, Business 24/7, January 10, 2009, http://www.business24-7.ae/articles/2009/1/pages/01102009_350bc822e4ee4508b724e55b0f1393df.aspx
    45. James Politi & Gillian Tett, ‘NY Fed chief in push for global bank framework’, The Financial Times, June 8, 2008, http://us.ft.com/ftgateway/superpage.ft?news_id=fto060820081850443845
    46. Rupert Wright, ‘The first barons of banking’, The National, November 6, 2008, http://www.thenational.ae/article/20081106/BUSINESS/167536298/1005
    47. Michael Lafferty, ‘New world order in banking necessary after abject failure of present model’, The TimesOnline, February 24, 2009, http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/management/article5792585.ece
    48. Richard Gwyn, ‘Change not necessarily for the better’, The Toronto Star, April 3, 2009, http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/612822
    49. David Rothkopf, Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They are Making, Toronto: Penguin Books, 2008, p.315
    50. Ibid, pp.315-316
    51. Ibid, p.316
    52. Gideon Rachman, ‘And now for a world government’, The Financial Times, December 8, 2008, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7a03e5b6-c541-11dd-b516-000077b07658.html
    53. NIC, Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World, The National Intelligence Council’s 2025 Project, November, 2008, http://www.dni.gov/nic/NIC_2025_project.html
    54. Ibid, p.11
    55. Ibid, pp.11-12
    56. Ibid, p.94
    57. Ibid, p.81
    58. Ibid, p.83
    59. Ibid, p.87
    60. Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, New York: Macmillan Company, 1966, p.324

 

ANDREW MARSHALL is a Research Associate with the Centre for Research on Globalization based out of Montreal, Canada (www.globalresearch.ca). He has written extensively on issues imperialism in the Middle East and Africa, the environment, Homeland Security, war, terrorism and the global economy. He is currently studying Global Political Economy and the History of the Middle East and Africa at Simon Fraser University (Canada).

 2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM


Washington Has Destroyed Trust Between Nuclear Powers Thus Raising The Specter Of War

02/27/2015

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/02/25/washington-destroyed-trust-nuclear-powers-thus-raising-specter-war-paul-craig-roberts/

Paul Craig Roberts

February 25, 2015
Ambassador Jack Matlock made an important speech at the National Press Club on February 11. Matlock served as US ambassador to the Soviet Union during 1987-91. In his speech he describes how President Reagan won the trust of the Soviet leadership in order to bring to an end the Cold War and its risk of nuclear armageddon. http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2015/2015_1-9/2015-08/pdf/10-14_4208.pdf

Reagan’s meeting with Gorbachev did not rely on position papers written by staff. It relied on a hand-written memo by Reagan himself that stressed respect for the Soviet leadership and a clear realization that negotiation must not expect the Soviet leaders to do something that is not in the true interest of their country. The way to end the conflict, Reagan wrote, is to cooperate toward a common goal. Matlock said that Reagan refused to personalize disagreements or to speak derogatorily of any Soviet leader.

Matlock makes the point that Reagan’s successors have done a thorough job of destroying this trust. In the last two years the destruction of trust has been total.

How can the Russian government trust Washington when Washington violates the word of President George H.W. Bush and takes NATO into Eastern Europe and places military bases on Russia’s border?

How can the Russian government trust Washington when Washington pulls out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and places Anti-Ballistic Missiles on Russia’s border?

How can the Russian government trust Washington when Washington overthrows in a coup the elected government of Ukraine and installs a puppet regime that immediately expresses hostility toward Russia and the Russian-speaking population in Ukraine and destroys Soviet war memorials commemorating the Red Army’s liberation of Ukraine from Nazi Germany?

How can the Russian government trust Washington when the President of Russia is called every name in the book, including “the new Hitler,” and gratuitously accused of every sort of crime and personal failing?

Washington and its neoconservative monsters have destroyed trust with demonization and blame of Russia for violence in Ukraine for which Washington is responsible.

Washington has forced Europe to impose economic sanctions on Russia that are based entirely on lies and false accusations. The Russians know this. They recognize the blatant hostility, the blatant lies, the never-ending crude propaganda, the hypocritical double-standards, the push toward war.

Simultaneously China is experiencing hostile encirclement with Washington’s “pivot to Asia.”

By destroying trust, Washington has resurrected the threat of nuclear armageddon. Washington’s destruction of trust between nuclear powers is the crime of the century.

On February 24, I held accountable Alexander J. Motyl and the Council on Foreign Relations for publishing on February 5 a large collection of blatant lies in order to create a false reality with which to demonize the Russian government. http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/02/24/washington-resurrected-threat-nuclear-war-paul-craig-roberts/ I observed that the publication of ignorant nonsense in what is supposed to be a respectable foreign policy journal indicated the degradation of the Western political and media elite.

I did not think things could get any worse, but one day later I came across Andrew S. Weiss’ article in the Wall Street Journal. http://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-the-improviser-1424473405

Weiss’ article is the most amazing collection of misrepresentations imaginable. It is impossible to believe that the vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment could possible be so totally misinformed. The false reality that Weiss creates precludes any diplomatic resolution of the conflict that Washington has created with Russia.

What is the explanation for Weiss’ misrepresentations of Putin, the origin of the conflict and the cause of its continuation?

Recalling the confession of Udo Ulfkotte, an editor at the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, that he published under his name articles handed to him by the CIA and that the entire European press does the same, was Weiss handed the disinformation by the CIA, or by Victoria Nuland, or is the answer simply that Weiss worked on Russian, Ukrainian and Eurasian affairs at the National Security Council, the State Department and the Defense Department and is one of Washington’s propaganda operatives currently operating out of a think-tank?

The more important question is: What is the purpose behind Washington’s cause and misrepresentation of the conflict? Was the destruction of trust between nuclear powers intentional or a consequence of other purposes? Is Washington simply using its ability to control explanations in order to cover up its involvement in the overthrow of a democratically elected government, an outcome that has gone bad? Or is the answer merely that Washington is peeved that it failed to get its hands on Russia’s Black Sea naval base in Crimea and has had to give up, at least for now, on getting Russia out of the Mediterranean and out of the Russian naval base at Tartus, Syria?

As I explained today to an international conference hosted by institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences and Moscow State Institute of International Relations, the neoconservative ideology of US world hegemony requires the prevention of “the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere” with sufficient resources and power to be able to serve as a check on unilateral action by Washington.

When Russian diplomacy blocked Washington’s planned invasion of Syria and planned bombing of Iran, the neoconservatives realized that they had failed in their “first objective” and were now faced with a check on unilateral action. The attack on Russia instantly began. The $5 billion Washington had spent funding NGOs in Ukraine and cultivating Ukrainian politicians produced the overthrow of the elected Ukrainian government. Washington imposed a puppet government that instantly employed violent words and deeds against the Russian population, resulting in the secession of Crimea and the formation of other break-away provinces.

With English as the world language and the compliant media or presstitutes in Washington’s service, Washington has been able to control the explanation, blame Putin for the crisis, and force Europe to breakup its economic and political relations with Russia by imposing economic sanctions.

In a vain and failed attempt to keep the US as the Uni-power capable of dictating to the world, the neoconservatives have recklessly and irresponsibly resurrected the threat of nuclear armageddon. The neoconservative dominance of US foreign policy makes impossible any restoration of trust. Washington’s propaganda is driving the situation toward war. As neither Washington nor the Russian/Chinese alliance can afford to lose the war, the war will be nuclear. Any survivors will be doomed by nuclear winter.

The entire world must quickly become aware of the danger and confront the evil regime that the neoconservatives–the Sauron of our world–have created in Washington. To do otherwise is to risk life on earth.

 2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM


Ptech and the 9/11 Software

02/26/2015

https://www.corbettreport.com/ptech-and-the-911-software/

2-25-2015 1-38-39 PM

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

All of you air heads that still believe 9/11 was done by 19 ignorant rag-heads, sit down, kick back and IF you have the self control to read more than one page, you just might learn something. Like, your government wants’ to kill you.

2-25-2015 7-24-24 AM

[Editor’s Note: Following is a transcription of Episode 045 of The Corbett Report podcast, Ptech and the 9/11 Software. To listen to the episode, and for links to all of the articles and documents mentioned in this episode please CLICK HERE.]

[Introduction and News]

[0:07:45:00]

James Corbett: Welcome, my friends. Welcome to Episode 45 of The Corbett Report: “PTech and the 9/11 Software.” Today’s episode features information that comes from corporate whistleblower, Indira Singh. Regular listeners to The Corbett Report might remember Indira Singh from Episode 31: Welcome to 9/11 Truth.

In that audio documentary, we featured a clip from Indira Singh’s presentation to the Citizens Commission on 9/11. If you want to refresh yourself with that information, please listen to Episode 31 of The Corbett Report, starting at [0:16:31] and ending at [0:27:36]. That clip, which we featured in that earlier episode of The Corbett Report, featured some of Indira Singh’s startling testimony about the information that she gleaned when she was working at J.P. Morgan-Chase.

Singh was hired as a consultant for J.P. Morgan-Chase to develop the next generation of business architecture enterprise software. The software she was seeking to implement at J.P. Morgan-Chase, one of the largest financial institutions in the world, was specialized, cutting-edge risk architecture software, that would essentially be artificially intelligent and capable of scanning through the millions of transactions taking place across the J.P. Morgan-Chase institution in real time, monitoring these transactions for suspicious activity such as rogue trading; and would then be able to alert the proper people within the J.P. Morgan institution to the problem; and potentially even stop the transactions from taking place.

The importance, sensitivity, and sophistication of any such software necessarily led Ms. Singh to seek out the true leaders in the enterprise architecture software industry. Her research and due diligence into the issue, led her to a company called PTech.

As the senior risk-management consultant for one of the largest financial institutions in the world, Ms. Singh knew to trust credible, proven sources of third-party software. That is why PTech’s roster of clients immediately put them in the top echelon of software providers.

PTech’s clients included some of the most sensitive organizations and agencies in the United States government, including NATO, The U.S. Armed Forces, Congress, The Department of Energy, The Department of Justice, The FBI, Customs, The FAA, The IRS, The Secret Service, and the White House.

This sterling roster of clients made Indira Singh very eager to take a look at PTech software. However, when the PTech representatives arrived at the J.P. Morgan-Chase offices to display and present their software, Ms. Singh knew there was something wrong right away.

Today, we are going to do something we have not done since Episode 20 ofThe Corbett Report, which featured a presentation by Webster Tarpley on the 9/11 drills.

Regular listeners to The Corbett Report will remember Webster Tarpley’s lecture from Episode 20, on the 26 war games and drills that Webster Tarpley has identified as taking place on, or around, 9/11 that directly affected the U.S. Air Force’s ability to counteract the hijackings that day

That was one of the key talks to get people into the deep research through which they can come to a more informed understanding of the operational aspects of 9/11 as an inside job.

Likewise, the interview that we are about to present with Indira Singh gives a more informed, more detailed, account of what was really taking place on 9/11, and the software that was used to help bring that about. This is an extremely important interview for anyone interested in the serious, deep research into 9/11, and is an excellent starting point from which to begin a deeper investigation of that day.

I heartily recommend that my listeners check out this interview in its entirety. And, again, please go to the Documentation list on corbettreport.com for a link to the original source file of this audio interview, so you can listen to it in its entirety.

Today, I present an extended audio extract from this interview, conducted by Bonnie Faulkner of KPFA’s “Guns and Butter” in 2005. This extract begins with Indira Singh explaining what happened when PTech arrived in her office.

[begin audio: [0:12:37:5]]

Indira Singh: Well, they came a little late. Immediately there were some issues with how the day would proceed. For instance, they showed up without the agreed-on software in hand. The most important thing about it is that their chief scientist, Dr. Hussein Ibrahim, came. He is an Egyptian-American and he had a very good reputation in the field, very bright; someone you would like working with, very knowledgeable. But they had showed up without the software.

What I had done was I slated a work station to get off the net. After all, we were testing whether this software would meet our criteria, and if I had said it did, then that would be a big deal if it subsequently could not. So, I needed to start with an out-of-the-box version of PTech.

They did not bring that, and Dr. Ibrahim said that is not a problem. We can develop the demo on his laptop. If you know anything about these things, that is a No-no because at the end of the day he is walking out the door and I do not have anything; and he is walking away with enough of our thinking about doing operational risk.

Operational risk is about how to spot bad things that are going on in a financial institution; things like rogue trading, money laundering, and so on and so forth. It is very subtle. Our intellectual property, at least what J.P. Morgan was hiring me for, was to think, innovatively out-of-the-box in the next generation, how do you proactively design a blueprint to spot these things? That is pretty big.

These people are definitely smart enough to get an idea: “Oh, they are thinking of going down this road.” That is a big deal. I was your “risk” person so I am very aware of not to expose our intellectual property or that of the company I am consulting for. I am very protective of that.

So, they showed up without the software and that was a huge enough red flag that I began paying attention to them. A couple of the things went on and within half an hour I just walked over to the same people who had recommended them and began calling.

I said to one of them, I have the PTech people here, and the reaction was not the reaction I would have ever expected. It was, “What are they doing onsite?”

I said, you recommended them, and they said, “No, you should have come through an American distributor.”

I said, no, J.P. Morgan reserves the right to work directly with the company. And, besides which, they are a preferred vendor of IBM: their preferred vendor program. That is the way we work. We do not work for small distributors. If we are going to go with this software as a standard, we are going to go right to the source and make the agreements there.

So, I said, what is the problem? Basically, this person said, “Do not let them out of your sight.” That is when my stomach sank.

You have to understand how all of a sudden I am beginning to see these people in a different way, because when they said, “Do not let them out of your sight,” I have a Middle Eastern company there and we are taught not to discriminate and that was not something I was about to do – and to prove that they were there being evaluated, so that is never going to be a bone of contention. Although later, people made that an issue.

But if I had a problem working with a Middle Eastern company, they would have never been there in the first place, much less before Ground Zero closed. I had no problem whatsoever having them up there. I liked the idea.

Bonnie Faulkner: What do you mean PTech was a Middle Eastern company?

Indira: That is what, subsequently, was revealed in the phone call: that their financier, their funders, their investors were all Saudis. And I said, so what?

They said, “One Saudi has been placed on the U.S. terror list October 12, 2001.”

It got very quiet, and I said, you better have proof of that because having thrown that into my lap now, this is not something that I can ignore. I have to follow up on it. This is not something I can ignore, pretend would go away, or have someone else handle. This is risk management; the highest levels of one of the largest banks in the world. It is my responsibility to deal with this and I said, how can I get proof of this?

That is when they started saying, “You need to talk to a Jeff Goins,” who was one of the only three people in PTech who knew of this relationship, as he was that well-hidden within PTech. So I subsequently called Jeff Goins and I said if this is true, did you not report this? PTech is a private company so this relationship would have been privy only to those on the inside.

I said, did you report it anywhere, that someone who has been placed on the U.S. terror list is key funder – angel investor – to a company whose software is utilized at the highest levels of almost every government and military and defense organization in this country, including the Secret Service, the FBI, the Department of Defense, the House of Representatives, the Treasury Department, the IRS, the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Air Force, and last but not least, the Federal Aviation Administration?

Bonnie: Are you saying these were all PTech clients?

Indira: These were all PTech clients. When I was evaluating them I was pretty impressed. Why not PTech? Exactly. They are being used at the highest levels of all of these organizations. So I was very excited about using them, and having their software be able to be a part of what I wanted to develop.

I had no reason to believe that if they were in use everywhere at that caliber that I would have a problem. And they were also used in Enron. Perhaps I should have thought twice about that, but they were at use in IBM, of course, and the top accounting firms and even in the FBI. In MITRE. . .

Bonnie: What is MITRE?

Indira: MITRE is a large company that does specialized technology for defense and intelligent. You would not expect to have an exposure with the company that was so well entrenched and imbedded in these kinds of organizations.

Bonnie: So what about the meeting? Did they leave? What happened?

Indira: No, because, basically my position was until I had proof, I could not react. That would have been very unprofessional of me. I thought of a number of scenarios that could be going on at that point. I thought it might have been competitiveness out of control, distributors wanting the J.P. Morgan account. It could have been anything.

However, the one thing that was true is that the chief investor, Sheikh Yassin al-Qadi, was indeed placed on the U.S. terror list because while I was talking to them, while they were still there, I checked out a website that had a list of everyone who had been placed on the terror list.

The missing piece was, of course, proving that Sheikh Yassin al-Qadi was indeed affiliated with PTech, was an owner of PTech. Because it was a private company, you could say that anybody was an investor, any bad guy or good guy was an investor. Proving it was another thing, so I let everything ride but I kept an eye on things.

In fact, we did we have a presentation that went very, very well because in no way, shape, or form was I going to jeopardize that.

Bonnie: What happened next? Did you go on working with them, or did you start to investigate PTech?

Indira: I continued multi-tasking. I was working with them. I placed a few phone calls and people got back to me later that day while they were still on the premises. So, I was able to separate the concerns, accomplish the task, evaluate the software anyway, start the phone calls to start getting more information. Then my report would have been: This is the software. It is used everywhere. It can do what we want it to do, however we have this issue with the company. And present that to my superiors and let them decide.

Bonnie: Then did you start investigating the company?

Indira: Yes. What happened next was I spoke with Jeff Goins and he told me that, basically, not only was Yassin al-Qadi an investor, but that a Yaqub Mirzawas on the Board of Directors, and he had been the subject of Operation Green Quest. Many of his Herndon, Virginia vehicles and companies and financing companies had been raided in March 2002.

Again, that Mirza was on the Board of Directors. As we spoke, other names started to come out. My head was spinning at this point, and I said, have you reported any of this to the FBI? The answer came back, “Yes, I wrote a report to the FBI.”

I said, if the boss and FBI has been told, I need to speak with people there because it is not just my group that is evaluating them. There are so many other groups. But I could not believe that, if this was all true, PTech was still being used by the Department of Defense. There is something a little bizarre about all of this.

Really, I was beginning to understand, unwillingly, that the world was not the way we thought of it.

Bonnie: This person that you were discussing this with, Jeff Goins?

Indira: Goins. Yes.

Bonnie: Was he an employee of PTech?

Indira: Yes, he was. He was one of the key people at PTech. He held several important positions. He had traveled to Saudi Arabia. And he had met with Yassin al-Qadi and he had met with most of the investors. His last position was Vice President of Sales which, for a small company, is pretty significant.

He worked with PTech, helping build the company, for five years. He was the one that was based in Virginia, who was responsible for getting a lot of the government accounts with, of course, Oussama Ziadewho was the president. Oussama Ziadeis a Lebanese-American who, according to Jeff, got his citizenship under very questionable circumstances which involves the INS.

This is all according to Jeff, so at some point, later in the week I had decided to go down to Virginia and meet with not only Jeff, but a number of other PTech and ex-PTech employees because this was beginning to sound like a Tom Clancy novel and I needed proof.

I told them I needed emails, I needed documents, I needed hard evidence. But in the meantime, within a day or two, I had contacted my rep at IBM. I said I need to walk outside with you and talk to you about something. If you guys are thinking of getting seriously in bed with this company, I would suggest that you do some background investigation so that your clients like J.P. Morgan and myself do not end up in this situation. His name was Kyle Hiligoss.

Kyle told me that he “wrote a book report” and sent it to his legal department. He was told to just back off the whole thing. In fact, he did not even want to have anything to do with me as I continued investigating.

Jeff did get the agents at the Boston FBI office to call me back. And with Kyle listening in, so it was not just me reporting on what Jeff had said, we spoke to the FBI agent who had picked up the information that Jeff had reported on PTech when Yassin al-Qadi was placed on the terror list in October 2001. Remember, this is eight or nine months later.

My question to him is: If you have an investigation that is ongoing, that is fine. We do not want to get involved with it or impede it in anyway, but in the meantime, this country’s infrastructure is seriously exposed and I can not, if any of this is true, can not. I need some evidence, something that you can give me to hang my hat on when I report this, that this is true; that this is not just someone making a terrorism report; that you know that this is true.

Basically, what he said is, Indira you are in a better position, on the outside, to get the proof that’s needed than I am. I asked him to check with the supervisor. I said do you understand how serious this is, to have a company with this alleged terrorism connection in the highest levels of corporate America and the U.S. infrastructure? I said, if you do not know, we need to make you aware of this.

He apparently went to his supervisor. The supervisor said that the position would not change. The Boston FBI office, you can check this out, was rated as one of the worst in terms of corruption. I believe the Whitey Bolger incident – the connections between the FBI and the Mafia – has been (how should I put it?) extremely well-explored.

Anyway, this mob character, Whitey Bolger’s brother, was in a very high level political position in Boston, MA. In fact, if people were to read Peter Lance’s book, Cover Up, he explores it very well and backs up a lot of what I have found here: the interaction between organized crime and the FBI.

When they said they were not going to proceed, I. . .

Bonnie: And by “they” you are talking about the FBI?

Indira: The FBI. I said I need something to hang my hat on, so he sent me a video tape. The substance of the video tape, which I have here, was a news clip. It was a news clip of a CBS affiliate based in Boston, called WBZ-TV. Their investigative reporting team – the I-Team – which was led by investigative reporter, Joe Bergantino, had investigated a number of Middle Eastern men who were sought after 9/11. They were affiliated with Muslim-Islamic terrorism-financing charities.

He had created this clip to show the connection between the 9/11 terror attack and the financial vehicles that were supposedly used to fund it. What he did was very interesting. The I-Team connected Care International – not the big Care International, but something called Care International – that was based in Boston all the way back to al-Keefah which was the financing vehicle at the center of the World Trade Center bombing in 1993; all the way back to something calledMaktab al-qeedah-mad, which means “the office”, which was a financing vehicle that was set up by the CIA for the Pakistani ISI back in the days when Osama Bin Laden was America’s fair-haired boy and was on our side fighting with the Mujahidin, fighting the Soviet Union.

My goodness! The question to me, when I saw the video tape, was: What is Maktab al-qeedah-mad doing being run out of PTech on 9/11? And the reason I say “being run out of PTech “is that the faces in the video tape were the faces of core employees at PTech.

Now remember, this is a small company. There were only one or two people who had access to the source code in PTech. That is a very trusted position, and he was one of them. His name is Suheil Laher. The people who started Care International; some of them were actually on an FBI terror watch list prior to 9/11 in Boston.

Bonnie: What do you mean by “the source code”?

Indira: All software products have some group or organization or person write code that is then packaged up. For instance, the word processor in your desk, the spread sheet, the browser, and so on and so forth. It is all written in some sort of code. Those are the keys to it and if you wanted to improve it, add new functionality, you would change the original code and add new functionality, and then repackage it and send it out there.

Whoever had access to the source code of PTech, that was where the value was. If you lost the source code, you essentially lost product for all intents and purposes from a marketing point of view. So, only one or two people would have access to the source code. It would be like having the formula for Coca-Cola, basically.

Bonnie: Let’s go over that a little bit again. You were talking about Care International and some other funding groups that have been what? Funding international terrorism. . .?

Indira: That is correct.

Bonnie: . . .and also have been funded by what? The CIA . . .?

Indira: The roots of al-Keefah and Care International, if you look at it, were way back in the late 80s around the time of Iran Contra, for instance.Maktab al-qeedah-mad was set up so that monies could be passed to Osama Ben Laden and the Mujahidin when they were fighting the Soviet.

I will not go into a lot of detail, but it ended up that Osama Ben laden took that over and was running al-Qaeda through that. The connections to the Pakistani ISI still stood. The connections to the CIA still stood. Not in the way that was originally set up, but through a black or a gray operation. That had been later confirmed to me.

At the end of the day, when I was finished with certain parts of the investigation, it was clear to me that there was no way PTech could have done all of this without a lot of inside help. That is what I began focusing on: that it was a cutout, that it was a front. Was it a regular CIA front? Was it a clandestine front? What was it? There are walls within the FBI, walls within the CIA, behind which these operations take place. Who is behind those operations is a key question.

People might say, “Oh, this is all conspiracy theory,” but I would like to remind people that conspiracy is very much recognized by the United States Federal Code and it is called RICO Racketeering and Influence. It is very much recognized because there is so much power in these organizations that they have rules in place. For instance, the DCIA – the Director of CIA – cannot, after his term of DCIA, subsequently run for Vice President or President, which is what happened with George Herbert Walker Bush. That rule was bent for him. He went on from being the DCIA to running for Vice President. That is a No-no.

[music in background]

Bonnie: I am speaking with 9/11 whistleblower and risk technology architect, Indira Singh. Today’s show: Ground Zero 9/11: Blueprint for Terror, Part 2.

I am Bonnie Faulkner. This is “Guns and Butter”.

[music stops]

It sounds like you are describing an interlocking relationship, then, between this software company funded by Saudis and funded by whomever: the United States government, U.S. corporations, and then-known groups, globally, that are accused of staging terrorist attacks. This is all of a piece.

Indira: Yes. Absolutely. One of the things I want to say is, maybe those organizations do not fully know who their masters are. PTech is the one golden thread you pull on. All of this is unraveled because it goes into the corporations, it goes into these government entities, it goes into the terrorism financing entities. None of which have been, oh, by the way, taken to task.

There are just so many questions about what does this all mean? As we investigated further, we found that the origins of PTech were very interesting. Where did this company come from, obviously, is the first question. And how did they get to be so powerful? Who were the people or the organizations that brought them in? Who knew? Who gave them the power? Who, for instance, signed off Ziade’s U.S. citizenship without doing background checks? Who said that they had a bad feeling doing that?

I remember that PTech’s competitors, U.S. companies, were extremely annoyed at the fact that they could not get equal time. All the plum contracts were going to a foreign-owned company. I said, did you know they were foreign-owned, and if they are foreign owned, they could not get certain classified projects? And he said, “Indira , everyone knew some of them.”

Some of the competitors said everyone knew that they were Saudi-owned, and that meant that they got favorable treatment on Capitol Hill. I said, are you saying that they just got favor treatment or was there something more going on? They would not answer. Their lawyers instructed them not to answer. So, they knew a lot of what was going on.

Bonnie: Who were you talking to about this?

Indira: In one particular case, I was talking to one of their competitors, Popkin Software. I have no problem naming names because I think that in the memory of 3,000 U.S. and worldwide civilians who were murdered, if we are going to wage wars and spill blood around the world, we ought to take a look at this, and just have the truth come out, because the truth has not come out. There has been a lot of speculation. There has been a lot of innuendo, but there has not been hard proof.

PTech is the one situation where you can get hard proof. When we investigated PTech and the people behind it, where they came from, we found out that one of the founding members was a man by the name of Soliman Biheiri, who was one of the founding directors. He had put together a vehicle called BMI, which stands for bitol mal (?)[34:48:6].

BMI was identified as being involved with terror financing, but this is just not going to be “The Muslims hate America”. That is not what it is. There is something else going on here. They are being used as a tool, just as the good people of the United States are being used, are being misled and frightened and terrorized. And if we do not wage these horrific wars our way of life will be over. Who benefits from that?

Bonnie: What else did your investigation of PTech turn up? Didn’t you meet with several employees or former employees of PTech?

Indira: Yes. It goes back to when all of this was being revealed to me. This is the last week of May, 2002 – the last day, or June 1 or so of 2002 – and low and behold out of nowhere the Chicago FBI enters the picture. We have Agent Robert Wright, of the Chicago FBI, who was giving Congressional testimony. He stands on the steps of the Capitol and bursts into tears, apologizes to the 9/11 families’ victims that he did not do everything he could to prevent 9/11 from happening; that his investigations were repeatedly shut down.

I almost fell over because he announced that his investigation was investigation into Yassin al-Qadi, the same Sheikh Yassin all-Qadi who was the money-man behind PTech. You could not ask for a more direct connection to 9/11 than that. I will even discount the fact that some ex-PTech employees – when I went to see them, I presented all the terrorists’ faces – had indicated that they had seen some pass through PTech.

In fact, one or two had mentioned that they thought one of the hijackers had actually passed through PTech, and I said, did you report this to the FBI? Can you tell me when? Can you get evidence of that? Can you get litigation-quality evidence, something that would stand up? Whatever you can get, give it to me. Make copies. Give it to the FBI. I still thought they were on our side.

Bonnie: The FBI, you mean?

Indira: The FBI. In fact, and this has to be made very clear, there are some extraordinarily real patriotic Americans and good people in the FBI. As has been said by, I believe, Agent Colleen Rowley, one of the FBI whistleblower’s bosses, that there is a wall in the FBI. This has been validated to me by various attorneys in Houston who are very close to the power bases, and are pretty ticked off at what is happening to this country and they are speaking out. As are many CIA agents who are very concerned that it has gone too far. As are many NSA agents who are concerned that it has gone too far. And, FBI agents. So, we have a lot of people who are speaking out. They have kept quiet too long.

They are afraid. They are afraid of what is happening to this country. When I say the Third Reich, what is happening to this country, they say – and I will indentify “they” if pressed – we will make the Third Reich look like a tea party. I guess we have that many more billion people to control on this planet.

Bonnie: And when you say “they say” are you referring to people that you have spoken with in the FBI?

Indira: Absolutely, within the FBI, within the CIA. One of the things I did not want to have happen is that when PTech was finally raided in December 2002 – something that took all of six months- a tremendous amount of agony to have happen – the White House, AriFleischer, spun it to fine sugar that day. He said there’s nothing wrong; nothing here; not a thing to see here; everything is fine.

They did a token raid and that was basically it. Everything that I have done since that time has been for one reason and one reason only: that there may come a time that people will find the trail to PTech and it will not be hidden or buried. I have kept it alive. Whether they rename their company and move on, I want to keep the names, the details, everything alive, no matter what I have to do, so that should there come a time for justice and accounting for 9/11 and for what is happening in the world today, it makes it easier for other people to unravel the truth.

I have gone to the mainstream press. I have gone to people on the left, on the left of left, on the right, on the right of right, and I have talked to them face to face and said this is wrong. Whatever your political inclinations, this is wrong; this is criminal; this is murder; this is worldwide atrocity. And I have reached some very good people on the left and on the right who are willing to speak out about PTech.

I have contacted the alternative press. The alternative press, very much like the nine blind men and the elephant, touch a piece of PTech, they understand it and they say, “This fits my theory of how things went wrong.”

I have no problem with that because the facts are the facts. If someone wants to spin it to fit their particular viewpoint, for instance, From the Wilderness has said that this software that is in PTech is very much like PROMIS, the Prosecutor’s Management Information System, that has a whole cargo cult behind it of these legendary capabilities. Maybe back in the 80s and 90s it was legendary, but today you can do pretty amazing things with software. It is not a big deal.

Anyway, From the Wilderness and Mike Ruppert for instance, thesis was that Dick Cheney was running an alternate command and control center that day confusing everyone. And, in fact, there were four war games that were going on, on 9/11. Who knows why the fighters weren’t scrambled in time? Who knows all this?

In fact, the fighter to Pennsylvania was scrambled in time because we have first-hand proof – whistleblowers within the correct organizations – that that was shot down. It is just that “Let’s roll” was a better story; perhaps a story that the American people could handle. But, no, I was told at Ground Zero that day. We heard them go over and we knew they were shot down. We were told. It was just later that we were told the passengers brought it down.

If you are running a country and you are really under a terrorist attack that might be the way to go. Empower people by saying if this bad thing happens to you, get up and do something, and have a story. I really do not have such a big problem with that. But the fact of the matter is that it was shot down.

Bonnie: Oh, that is interesting. And you heard that on the day of September 11?

Indira: Yes, I did. And it was corroborated a couple of weeks ago by people who were in a particular situation room.

Bonnie: Did you want to say anything more about that?

Indira: It is possible that there was an alternate command and control system. Could you technically use PTech software to do surveillance and intervention? Well, gosh, yes. That is exactly what I was planning on using it for in one of the largest banks in the world. It is not a problem.

So, if someone wants to make it their thesis, I have no problem with that. However, I cannot say for sure that that was going on because I do not have direct first-hand knowledge of that and no one has told me and offered me proof of that. But could I state that it could happen? Absolutely, it could have happened.

Was it necessary for it to have happened in order for us to have a 9/11? I do not know. I do not think so. Maybe. Maybe not. That is not my point. The Towers came down. Three thousand people were killed. And what I know is the characters behind the funding of it were totally in bed with characters in the United States. Not only just for 9/11, but going on throughout our nation’s history. And the big question is why? What are they up to?

Bonnie: Could you describe the relationship of PTech with the FAA? PTech worked with the FAA for several years, didn’t they?

Indira: Yes. It was a joint project between PTech and MITRE. It is interesting. They were looking at, basically, holes in the FAA’s interoperability with responding with other agencies – law enforcement – in the case of an emergency such as a hijacking.

They were looking for the escalation process – what people would do, how they would respond in case of an emergency – and find the holes and make recommendations to fix it. Now if anyone was in a position to understand where the holes were, PTech was, and that is exactly the point: if anybody was in a position to write software to take advantage of those holes, it would have been PTech.

Bonnie: Was there a reference to PTech having operated in the basement out of the FAA?

Indira: Yes. Typically, because the scope of such projects are so over-arching and wide-ranging, when you are doing an enterprise architecture project, you have access to how anything in the organization is being done, where it is being done, on what systems, what the information is. You have carte blanche.

If it is a major project that spends several years, the team that comes in has, literally, access to almost anything that they want because you are operating on a blueprint level, on a massive scale. So, yes, they were everywhere, and I was told that they were in places that required clearances. I was told that they had log-on access to FAA flight control computers. I was told that they had passwords to many computers that you may not, on the surface, think has anything to do with finding out holes in the system, but let’s say you isolated part of a notification process that was mediated by computer and you wanted to investigate it further, then you would typically get log-on access to that computer. From that, back upstream or downstream. So, who knows?

From my own experience I could have access to almost anything I wanted to in J.P. Morgan-Chase. And, did not, for the reason that if anything went wrong, I did not want to have the access. But if you were up to no good as an enterprise architect with such a mandate, you typically could have access to anything.

Bonnie: What do you think of the claim by the so-called 9/11 Independent Commission and the testimony before it, in their report: intelligence agencies did not talk to each other? What did you think of their so-called report?

Indira: Completely flawed. Governor Kaine was the second choice for the head of the commission. I believe Henry Kissinger was the first. Governor Kaine had, oh, by the way, done business deals with BMI, Soliman Biheiri, PTech. None of which came out, which he should have volunteered and either recused himself as being had or have it out there in the open. There were three other members of the commission who had similar kinds of relationships in the past. They were all on the team.

But their findings were so flawed. They are using an excuse. Yes, there are interoperability communication issues in any organization. Yes, there are, but in a case of an emergency, it does not get that bollixed up.

Unless, of course, Roberta is right and Cheney was running interference somewhere. Or, someone was running interference. Or, whoever. We do not know.

There were four war games, four simulations, going on the morning of 9/11, and I just want people to remember that MITRE – they also develop software for intelligence, which includes the CIA – and PTech, if they were going to test whether they had fixed these holes, would have probably run a simulation. I do not know that they did, but that is how we do things. But there were four of them going on. So was there room for confusion? I do not think these people are stupid. I think they were deliberately confused, if anything.

Bonnie: We know very well that there was a simulation of the very event taking place during the event, right?

Indira: Yes, there was. I believe there is proof there was more than one just in case the first one did not confuse people enough. What does this say? I can be very objective about this and say the terrorists knew that there were war games scheduled for this day, and they took advantage of it and called 9/11 the particular day.

However, we do know that 9/11 had been selected prior. OK, so then maybe the war games were set many weeks prior for 9/11. You can play this game over and over and over. Yes, it was the perfect day. And, yes, you needed inside knowledge. And, yes, PTech, with all its myriad associations would have had the inside knowledge. And, yes, PTech was a CIA front. And, yes, PTech was protected.

So, was it an inside job? You do not have to look at this indirectly. This is direct. This requires direct investigation.

[end of audio: [0:48:06:0]]

James: Again, that is a stunning interview, jam packed with incredible information that goes to the very heart of 9/11, and I suggest that people who find this information important and find the controlled corporate media’s complete blackout on this information reprehensible, do their own part to get this word out by spreading the word about Indira Singh and this breakthrough interview.

Remarkably enough, considering the bombshell information provided by this corporate whistleblower, Indira Singh, about this company which actually operated in the basement of the FAA with complete and total access to every operational detail including their management of interoperability systems with NORAD, that could have directly affected the response of NORAD on 9/11. Absolutely nothing has resulted from the FBI investigation of this company and its links to terror.

One of the ridiculous PR pieces put out by the Mass High Tech Business Journal comes from Friday, August 22, 2003. It is entitled Ware-Withal: Wrongly Suspected Ptech CEO Bounce Back Slowly. The article reads in part:

“Oussama Ziade’s business has suffered millions in losses this year, none of which can be attributed to a limp economy. His lost millions can be attributed to his devastated professional reputation due to a bogus tip to Federal investigators and ensuing bad press. Really bad press.

“On December 4th, Ziade’s business, PTech, had been recognized as one of the top ten companies that matter by KMWorld for three years running, as well as one of the fastest growing tech companies in New England by Deloitte and Touch.

“PTech is a global supplier of software that helps clients visualize and analyze tech infrastructure and builds models for business planning. Clients include governmental agencies such as the FBI, the IRS, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the Secret Service.

“Business was good until December 5th when PTech was visited by Federal investigators acting on a tip that a company investor had links to al-Qaeda, and that PTech may have designed a backdoor in its software allowing terrorists entry to the above named clients’ databases.

“Ziade cooperated, saying he had nothing to hide, while the government took measures to comelate at night in the hope that its visit would be stealthy. It wasn’t. The following day Ziade opened the newspaper and saw his photo next to a story describing a raid on PTech to investigate possible terrorist links. He became really scared.

“’It was a nightmare. I took my family out of the house immediately,’ he says. ‘I thought what if someone comes to my house. I was in a bad situation.’

“It would be 30 days before he would sleep through the night. In the meantime, he had to lay off a dozen employees because in the following two months business fell off by $3 million. It seemed many customers didn’t want to do business with a perceived terrorist sympathizer, while those who knew PTech and its founder extended kindness.

“By March, things started to get a little better. Word came directly from the White House, making official what the Feds thought all along, that there is no terrorist connection to PTech, nor was there ever any backdoor in the software.”

Again, that incredible mindless whitewash article, which provides no evidence whatsoever about the very real links of top PTech investors to terrorist organizations, was run in Mass High Tech Business Journal in 2003.

Just how ridiculous that whitewash is becomes clear in an excellent article from FrontPageMag.com, called “The Business of Terror,” by Dr. Rachael Ehrenfeld. This article comes from June 17, 2005, and reads in part:

“On May 11, 2005 Muhamed Mubayyid was arrested and charged in Boston’s district court for filing false tax returns on behalf of Care International for which he acted as Treasurer. Mubayyid was also the Customer Services Manager of the company known as PTech, a privately owned technology company based in Quincy, MA.

“Ptech, which recently changed its name to Go Agile, developed a software also called PTech that was used primarily to develop enterprise blueprints that held every important functional, operational, and technical detail of the given enterprise. Mubayyid is only the latest of PTech’s top investors and managers to run afoul with the law. Mubiad personifies the interlinks of the complex infrastructure which were established by al-Qaeda and other Islamist organizations in the U.S.

“Mubayyid was not arrested for his connection with al-Qaeda. Rather [he] was charged for making false statements and conspiring to defraud the U.S. by misrepresenting Care’s activities which involved ‘the solicitation and expenditure of funds to support and promote the Mujahidin and Jihad, including the distribution of pro-Jihad publications.’

“Care International is the now-defunct Muslim charity that was originally the Boston branch office of the al-Kifah Refugee Center in Brooklyn, N.Y., from which Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman funded and plotted the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Care International was already publicly identified as supporting al-Qaeda back in 2002, yet it remained open, and several of its employees worked and/or were affiliated with Ptech. Ptech was raided by the FBI on December 6, 2002, following a tip from an employee who suspected that the company was connected to the 9/11 attacks.

“Indeed, on October 12, 2001, Yassin al-Qadi, Ptech’s top investor at that time, was listed by the US government as a specially designated global terrorist for his support of al-Qaeda. al-Qadi invested at least $18 million directly in Ptech, $5 million through the Isle of Man, and $9 million indirectly through BMI, a now-defunct New Jersey-based Islamic investment firm with connections to other members on Ptech’s management and investors. al-Qadi also transferred $2 million USD to Ptech from Switzerland between 1997 and 2000, according to Swiss investigators.. .

“al-Qadi’s businesses extend throughout the world, and included banking, diamonds, chemicals, construction, transportation, and real estate. It would be hard to find a more strategically placed individual to advance the agenda of al-Qaeda, or any other terrorist organization. al-Qadi is still at large, and according to recent media reports, expanding his business in Asia. The identities and connections of some other Ptech investors and managers should have also raised a red flag.

“Even Ptech removed from its website the names of several board members and/or their affiliations after a WSJ expose on December 6, 2002.”

All of that carefully researched article is backed up by another article, also incredibly well-researched and definitely worth looking into, from TheAmericanMonitor.com. This article is from January 16, 2007, and is  headlined: “Ptech Owner’s Assets Confiscated in Albania.” It reads in part:

“The Albanian government has seized the assets of a wealthy Saudi that for several years reportedly maintained simultaneous connections to both al-Qaeda and the U.S. government while serving the interests of the CIA.

“’The Finance Ministry said it ordered authorities to block four apartments, a house, four bars and shops, and more than two hectares (about five acres) of land belonging to Yassin al-Qadi,’ the Associated Press reports, citing the Official Gazette.

“Yasin al-Qadi, the owner of the property, according to the U.S. Treasury Department, ‘heads the Saudi-based Muwafaq Foundation…an al-Qaeda front that receives funding from wealthy Saudi businessmen.’ The Treasury has thus identified the prominent entrepreneur as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT).

“Despite his alleged affiliations to terrorism, al-Qadi has maintained concurrent contacts within influential Washington circles.  In fact, prior to being publicly connected to money laundering and terrorist financing, al-Qadi regularly spoke of his relationship with Vice President Dick Cheney.

“al-Qadi, who has been identified as one of Osama bin Laden’s ‘chief money launderers,’ owned a prominent U.S. technology firm and alleged CIA front known as Ptech. He also escorted U.S. officials around during their visits to Saudi Arabia.

“As reported by the Associated Press, al-Qadi ‘allegedly worked with Osama bin Laden to provide support to terror networks in Albania,’ prompting the recent confiscation of his assets in that country.

“According to the Associated Press, al-Qadi used six different names for the recently seized assets, all of which were in the Tirana area, Albania’s capital city.

“One charity to allegedly launder money in Albania for the al-Qaeda network was Yasin al-Qadi’s Muwafaq Foundation.

“Khalid bin Mahfouz, an extremely influential and wealthy Saudi who ‘established and funded’ the Muwafaq Foundation, was once the principal shareholder and director of BCCI, a criminal enterprise used by the CIA during the 1980s to funnel cash to Osama bin Laden for the anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan.

“As former DEA undercover agent Michael Levine explained to The New American in 1999, the U.S. armed and funded “the worst elements of the Mujahidin in Afghanistan — drug traffickers, arms smugglers, anti-American terrorists. We later paid the price when the World Trade Center was bombed [in 1993], and we learned that some of those responsible had been trained by us. Now we’re doing the same thing with the KLA.”

“’These guys,’ Levine said, referring to the KLA, ‘have a network that’s active on the streets of this country. … They’re the worst elements of society that you can imagine, and now, according to my sources in drug enforcement, they’re politically protected.’

“According to Yossef Bodansky, Director of Research of the International Strategic Studies Association, ‘The role of the Albanian Mafia, which is tightly connected to the KLA, is laundering money, providing technology, safe houses, and other support to terrorists within this country.’

“’In any case,’ Bodansky told The New American, ‘a serious investigation of the Albanian mob isn’t going to happen, because they’re ‘our boys’ — they’re protected.’

“This may help explain why, according to FBI whistleblower Robert Wright, his investigation into Yasin al-Qadi during the 1990s was “intentionally and repeatedly thwarted and obstructed” by higher ups at the FBI.

“According to Agent Wright, who seized $1.4 million directly linked to al-Qadi in 1998, ‘FBI intelligence agents lied and hid vital records from criminal agents for the purpose of obstructing his criminal investigation of the terrorists in order to protect their ‘subjects,’ and prolong their intelligence operations,’ as reported by the group representing Wright, Judicial Watch.

“”The supervisor who was there from headquarters was right straight across from me and started yelling at me: ‘You will not open criminal investigations. I forbid any of you. You will not open criminal investigations against any of these intelligence subjects,’” Agent Wright told ABC News in 2002.

“According to Agent Wright and other members of his former unit, the money trails of the 1998 African embassy bombings led back to al-Qadi, but even after the bombings, FBI headquarters wanted no arrests.

“According to Agent Wright, it is very likely that 9/11 would have been prevented if he had simply been allowed to do his job.”

Again, the importance of all of this information cannot be underestimated. Special Agent Robert Wright said he was investigating a company with 26 subsidiaries and when he was referring to that, he was referring to BMI, the large organization which had PTech as one the jewels in its crown. It later came out that the head of the 9/11 Commission, Governor Kaine, actually sold the piece of property in New Jersey through BMI, Inc.

What does it mean that Robert Wright’s investigation into BMI and PTech and the global terrorist financiers was “shut down”? And that the person who was appointed to head the 9/11 Commission, after Kissinger did not make the grade with the 9/11 victims’ family members, actually had dealings with that company?

For more information on that, please look into FBI agent Robert Wright, and the claims that he made in September 2002; that the FBI was continuing to protect terrorists from criminal investigations.

And for even more information on the cover-up, I suggest an article entitled “Michael Chertoff and the Sabotage of the PTech Investigation,” which details how Chertoff was involved in a turf-war with the FBI for control over Operation Green Quest, the special customs investigation force which Indira Singh cited in that interview with Bonnie Faulkner, that was charged with finding and tracking down international sources of funding for global terrorists.

Perhaps it is no surprise and no coincidence that after Chertoff gained control of Operation Green Quest, it became completely ineffectual, as evidenced by an article on the Counterterrorism Blog by Christopher Heffelfinger, called “Operation Green Quest Unresolved,” which notes that this massive multi-agency initiative has not yet yielded any convictions, and that was as of October 2007.

For those wondering what has happened to Indira Singh since 2005, you might want to join the club. She has gone underground in the last three years, presumably as a way of staying safe while she continues to research and write her book about the PTech investigation and the various links that she has uncovered through that investigation.

She has recently resurfaced, however, to write a memorial to Michael Corbin, a radio talk-show host, who has interviewed Indira Singh before, and who died under mysterious circumstances in March of this year.

I direct listeners, again, to the Documentation list for this episode from which they can find a link to Indira Singh’s memorial to Michael Corbin, and also to the interviews that Michael Corbin conducted with Indira Singh in which she goes even further into naming the names behind PTech, and her investigations into the global terrorist financing ring.

Again, this is the deep research which really will expose those people who had a hand in not only perpetrating, but in then covering up the attacks of 9/11, and this sophisticated enterprise architecture, the software, that they used to help bring those attacks about.

It is my hope that this episode of The Corbett Report does not present all of the answers to what happened on 9/11 in one neat little package, but I do hope that it presents enough information to get you thinking and get you started on your own research. It is only by the collective efforts of a community united in a common cause of exposing the real culprits of 9/11 that we can ever hope to achieve 9/11 justice.

Please get out there and use these articles and this interview as a basis for your own deep research. And please keep The Corbett Report updated on your research. Again, I invite all my listeners to submit articles to The Corbett Report through the Contact function of the corbettreport.com Home page.

[music begins]

That is it for today. Thank you for joining me. And join me again next week for another edition ofThe Corbett Report.

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM


Forced Blood Draws, DNA Collection and Biometric Scans: What Country Is This?

02/25/2015

http://us4.campaign-archive1.com/?u=f6eb78f457b7b82887b643445&id=2e34971080&e=84f74f6a6a


By John W. Whitehead
February 24, 2015

The Fourth Amendment was designed to stand between us and arbitrary governmental authority. For all practical purposes, that shield has been shattered, leaving our liberty and personal integrity subject to the whim of every cop on the beat, trooper on the highway and jail official. The framers would be appalled.”—Herman Schwartz, The Nation

Our freedoms—especially the Fourth Amendment—are being choked out by a prevailing view among government bureaucrats that they have the right to search, seize, strip, scan, spy on, probe, pat down, taser, and arrest any individual at any time and for the slightest provocation.

Forced cavity searches, forced colonoscopies, forced blood draws, forced breath-alcohol tests, forced DNA extractions, forced eye scans, forced inclusion in biometric databases—these are just a few ways in which Americans are being forced to accept that we have no control over what happens to our bodies during an encounter with government officials.

Worse, on a daily basis, Americans are being made to relinquish the most intimate details of who we are—our biological makeup, our genetic blueprints, and our biometrics (facial characteristics and structure, fingerprints, iris scans, etc.)—in order to clear the nearly insurmountable hurdle that increasingly defines life in the United States: we are all guilty until proven innocent.

Thus far, the courts have done little to preserve our Fourth Amendment rights, let alone what shreds of bodily integrity remain to us.

For example, David Eckert was forced to undergo an anal cavity search, three enemas, and a colonoscopy after allegedly failing to yield to a stop sign at a Wal-Mart parking lot. Cops justified the searches on the grounds that they suspected Eckert was carrying drugs because his “posture [was] erect” and “he kept his legs together.” No drugs were found. During a routine traffic stop, Leila Tarantino was subjected to two roadside strip searches in plain view of passing traffic, during which a female officer “forcibly removed” a tampon from Tarantino. Nothing illegal was found. Nevertheless, such searches have been sanctioned by the courts, especially if accompanied by a search warrant (which is easily procured), as justified in the government’s pursuit of drugs and weapons.

Close to 600 motorists leaving Penn State University one Friday night were stopped by police and, without their knowledge or consent, subjected to a breathalyzer test using flashlights that can detect the presence of alcohol on a person’s breath. These passive alcohol sensors are being hailed as a new weapon in the fight against DUIs. However, because they cannot be used as the basis for arrest, breathalyzer tests are still required. And for those who refuse to submit to a breathalyzer, there are forced blood draws. One such person is Michael Chorosky, who was surrounded by police, strapped to a gurney and then had his blood forcibly drawn after refusing to submit to a breathalyzer test. “What country is this? What country is this?” cried Chorosky during the forced blood draw. Thirty states presently allow police to do forced blood draws on drivers as part of a nationwide “No Refusal” initiative funded by the federal government.

Not even court rulings declaring such practices to be unconstitutional in the absence of a warrant have slowed down the process. Now the police simply keep a magistrate on call to rubber stamp the procedure over the phone. That’s what is called an end-run around the law, and we’re seeing more and more of these take place under the rubric of “safety.”

The National Highway Safety Administration, the same government agency that funds the “No Refusal” DUI checkpoints and forcible blood draws, is also funding nationwide roadblocks aimed at getting drivers to “voluntarily” provide police with DNA derived from saliva and blood samples, reportedly to study inebriation patterns. When faced with a request for a DNA sample by police during a mandatory roadblock, most participants understandably fail to appreciate the “voluntary” nature of such a request. Unfortunately, in at least 28 states, there’s nothing voluntary about having one’s DNA collected by police In instances where you’ve been arrested, whether or not you’re actually convicted of a crime. The remaining states collect DNA on conviction. All of this DNA data is being fed to the federal government. Indeed, the United States has the largest DNA database in the world, CODIS, which is managed by the FBI and is growing at an alarming rate.

Airline passengers, already subjected to virtual strip searches, are now being scrutinized even more closely, with the Customs and Border Protection agency tasking airport officials with monitoring the bowel movements of passengers suspected of ingesting drugs. They even have a special hi-tech toilet designed to filter through a person’s fecal waste.

Iris scans, an essential part of the U.S. military’s boots-on-the-ground approach to keeping track of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan, are becoming a de facto method of building the government’s already mammoth biometrics database. Funded by the Dept. of Justice, along with other federal agencies, the iris scan technology is being incorporated into police precincts, jails, immigration checkpoints, airports and even schools. School officials—from elementary to college—have begun using iris scans in place of traditional ID cards. As for parents wanting to pick their kids up from school, they have to first submit to an iris scan.

As for those endless pictures everyone so cheerfully uploads to Facebook (which has the largest facial recognition database in the world) or anywhere else on the internet, they’re all being accessed by the police, filtered with facial recognition software, uploaded into the government’s mammoth biometrics database and cross-checked against its criminal files. With good reason, civil libertarians fear these databases could “someday be used for monitoring political rallies, sporting events or even busy downtown areas.”

As these police practices and data collections become more widespread and routine, there will be no one who is spared from the indignity of DNA sampling, blood draws, and roadside strip and/or rectal or vaginal searches, whether or not they’ve done anything wrong. We’re little more than economic units, branded like cattle, marked for easy identification, and then assured that it’s all for our “benefit,” to weed us out from the “real” criminals, and help the police keep our communities “safe” and secure.

What a bunch of hokum. As I point out in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, these databases, forced extractions and searches are not for our benefit. They will not keep us safe. What they will do is keep us mapped, trapped, targeted and controlled.

Moreover, what if you don’t want to be forced to trust the government with your most intimate information? What if you don’t trust the government to look out for your best interests in the first place? How do you protect yourself against having your blood forcibly drawn, your DNA extracted, your biometrics scanned and the most intimate details of who you are—your biological footprint—uploaded into a government database?

What recourse do you have when that information, taken against your will, is shared, stolen, sold or compromised, as it inevitably will be in this age of hackers? We know that databases can be compromised. We’ve seen it happen to databases kept by health care companies, motor vehicle agencies, financial institutions, retailers and intelligence agencies such as the NSA. In fact, 2014 was dubbed the Year of the Hack in light of the fact that over a billion personal data records were breached, leaving those unlucky enough to have their data stolen vulnerable to identity theft, credit card fraud and all manner of criminal activities carried out in their names.

Banks now offer services —for a fee—to help you in the event that your credit card information is compromised and stolen. You can also pay for services to protect against identity theft in the likely event that your social security information is compromised and misused. But what happens when your DNA profile is compromised? And how do you defend yourself against charges of criminal wrongdoing in the face of erroneous technological evidence—DNA, biometrics, etc., are not infallible—that place you at the scene of a crime you didn’t commit? 

“Identity theft could lead to the opening of new fraudulent credit accounts, creating false identities for criminal enterprises, or a host of other serious crimes, ”said Jason Hart, vice president of cloud services, identity and data protection at the digital security company Gemalto. “As data breaches become more personal, we’re starting to see that the universe of risk exposure for the average person is expanding.”

It’s not just yourself you have to worry about, either. It’s also anyone related to you—who can be connected by DNA. These genetic fingerprints, as they’re called, do more than just single out a person. They also show who you’re related to and how. As the Associated Press reports, “DNA samples that can help solve robberies and murders could also, in theory, be used to track down our relatives, scan us for susceptibility to disease, or monitor our movements.”

Capitalizing on this, police in California, Colorado, Virginia and Texas use DNA found at crime scenes to identify and target family members for possible clues to a suspect’s whereabouts. Who will protect your family from being singled out for “special treatment” simply because they’re related to you? As biomedical researcher Yaniv Erlich warns, “If it’s not regulated and the police can do whatever they want … they can use your DNA to infer things about your health, your ancestry, whether your kids are your kids.”

These are just a few of the questions we should be asking before these technologies and programs become too entrenched and irreversible.

While the Fourth Amendment was created to prevent government officials from searching an individual’s person or property without a warrant and probable cause—evidence that some kind of criminal activity was afoot—the founders could scarcely have imagined a world in which we needed protection against widespread government breaches of our privacy on a cellular level. Yet that’s exactly what we are lacking.

Once again, technology has outdistanced both our understanding of it and our ability to adequately manage the consequences of unleashing it on an unsuspecting populace. As for all of those databases being sold to you for your safety and benefit, whether or not they’re actually effective in catching criminals, you can be assured that they will definitely be snatching up innocent citizens, as well.

In the end, what all of this amounts to is a carefully crafted campaign designed to give the government access to and control over what it really wants: you.

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

There is only one reason this situation exist in America, and that is the citizens don’t have the balls to stop it!

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM


Congress faces five day deadline for funding Homeland Security

02/24/2015

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/233369-congress-faces-five-day-deadline-for-funding-homeland-security

By Rebecca Shabad

Lawmakers will begin returning to Washington on Monday with only five days left to prevent a shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Legislation funding the agency is at an impasse over provisions demanded by House Republicans that would overturn President Obama’s executive actions on immigration that shield millions from deportation.

recess, both sides dug in, with many Republicans arguing that there is no reason for their party to bend now that a federal court has ruled in their favor by blocking Obama’s most recent actions.

The Senate is scheduled to vote Monday evening for the fourth time on a motion to open debate on the House-passed DHS funding bill.

The motion will certainly fail, leaving a decision on what comes next to Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

McConnell has publicly said that the House-approved bill cannot be passed by the Senate, but Boehner has shown no interest in moving away from legislation reversing Obama’s executive actions.

“The House passed a bill weeks ago to fund the Department of Homeland Security. Now, Senate Democrats need to stop filibustering to block debate on that bill,” Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) spokesman Michael Steel told The Hill late last week.

As a result, Senate Republicans are considering a strategy in which the immigration riders would be separated from the DHS funding bill, but it’s unclear whether conservatives would back that plan.

Boehner could lay out his next play when the House GOP conference meets on Wednesday morning, which would leave him just 72 hours to prevent a shutdown.

One option being floated is a short-term spending bill known as a continuing resolution (CR), but it is not clear whether this would pass muster.

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson has been lobbying Republicans and Democrats on the agency’s need for new funding, which he says would bring the kind of stability that a CR cannot provide.

“When you’re on a continuing resolution, it is a little like trying to drive cross-country with no more than five gallons of gas at a time, and you don’t know when the next gas station is,” Johnson said on Fox News last week. “You can’t plan except days and weeks at a time.”

Over the weekend, Johnson emphasized that a new threat by terrorist group al-Shabaab to attack shopping malls in the U.S. and United Kingdom demonstrates why the DHS needs a new budget.

“It’s absurd that we’re even having this conversation about Congress’s inability to fund Homeland Security in these challenging times,” he said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

Centrist Republicans have openly worried that their party could take a significant political hit by shutting down the DHS, while more conservative members have downplayed that threat. The Republican brand was badly damaged by the 16-day government shutdown in 2013, though the party had recovered by the 2014 midterm elections.

After last week’s court ruling, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) argued it could be best for the GOP to let the fight play out in the courts, where he said Republicans are winning.

“”We now have an exit sign,” he said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “And that is the federal court decision saying that the president’s actions unilaterally are unconstitutional. And I think we’ve got a great argument to hand to the Supreme Court, where it will go.”

Other GOP senators, including Bob Corker (Tenn.) and Lindsey Graham (S.C.), echoed McCain’s comment on the Sunday morning political talk shows about courts handling the constitutionality of Obama’s actions.

“I hope Republicans will come together and back the court case, file a friend of the court brief with the court and fund DHS. I am willing and ready to pass a DHS funding bill and let this play out in court,” Graham said on ABC News’s “This Week.”

Republican Tom Ridge, who served as the first secretary of Homeland Security under President George W. Bush, said Sunday on CNN that the GOP should send Obama a clean spending bill. Instead, the judicial branch can handle immigration, and Republicans can send immigration reform bills to the White House, Ridge added.

Johnson has warned a DHS shutdown would trigger the furlough of 30,000 employees and force 80 percent of the department’s workforce to come to work without pay.

Polls have indicated that voters would largely hold the GOP responsible for the DHS shuttering, just as Republicans were blamed in 2013.

Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) recently said a shutdown would reflect poorly on the GOP.

“It’s not livable. It’s not acceptable. When you’re in the majority, you have to govern. You have to govern responsibly. And shutdowns are not responsible.”

 2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM


General Douglas MacArthur’s Prophetic Warning to the American People

02/23/2015

http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/02/general-douglas-macarthurs-prophetic-warning-american-people/

By Timothy A. Pope

Love him or hate him, the indomitable General of the Army, Douglas MacArthur (1880-1964), an indelible military genius, was a great American—perhaps one of the greatest. He was a patriot, a warrior, a statesman, a rebel, a leader, a brilliant commander, and a poet who never minced words nor failed to accomplish the mission at hand. He excelled at everything he put his hand to, and set the bar high and lofty for all men and women who are desirous to be actively engaged in the animating contest of Freedom. MacArthur lived in tumultuous times and presided over great struggles and battles fought for reasons up to and including the preservation of Liberty in every clime and place.

“You couldn’t shrug your shoulders at Douglas MacArthur,” observed historian David McCullough. “There was nothing bland about him, nothing passive about him, nothing dull about him. There’s no question about his patriotism, there’s no question about his courage, and there’s no question, it seems to me, about his importance as one of the protagonists of the 20th century.”

Once again, our nation and world finds ourselves on the brink of regional and global war and conflict which defined MacArthur’s time—the pre-staging of a third global conflagration with its preceding economic sanctions, currency wars and monetary realignments. With that in mind, the words in his farewell memoir could have been written today, because if you study the cycles of human nature, sociology, economics, weather, solar activity, civil unrest and war, history not only repeats itself, but also rhymes.

“There is no present or future—only the past,” wrote Eugene O’Neill, in A Moon for the Misbegotten, (1952), “happening over and over again…” And so it is in our day likewise recurring, the age-old cycles of plenty-to-poverty, peace-to-war, of which King Solomon hinted at in Ecclesiastes 1:9, “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.”

Written in his own hand and finished only weeks before his death, General Douglas MacArthur’s memoir, Reminiscences (1964), spans more than half a century of modern history. The following excerpt is, in my opinion, the most important words he ever penned and at the same time the greatest warning he ever recorded on behalf of the benefit of the American people and our posterity regarding what he came to acknowledge as the treacherous domestic threat infiltrating our American way of life—a warning which has all but fallen on deaf ears.

I’ll let his own words speak for themselves, and then enumerate my thoughts below.

Sourced from my own personal copy of Reminiscences by Douglas MacArthur, (McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, NY, 1964), First Edition, Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 64-22955, pp. 414-418:

Great changes have taken place in our military establishment, some good, some not so good. Materially the improvement has been spectacular, psychologically yet to be proven. The men in the ranks are largely citizen soldiers, sailors or airmen—men from the farm, the city, from school, from the college campus—men not dedicated to the profession of arms; men not primarily skilled in the art of war; men most amazingly like the men you know and see and meet each day of your life.

If hostilities come, these men will know the endless tramp of marching feet, the incessant whine of sniper bullets, the ceaseless rustle of sputtering machine guns, the sinister wail of air combat, the deafening blast of crashing bombs, the stealthy stroke of hidden torpedoes, the amphibious lurch over perilous waves, the dark majesty of fighting ships, the mad din of battle and all the tense and ghastly horror and savage destruction of a stricken area of war.

These men will suffer hunger and thirst, broiling suns and frozen reaches, but they must go on and on and on when everything within them seems to stop and die. They will grow old in youth burned out in searing minutes, even though life owes them many tranquil years. In these troubled times of confused and bewildered international sophistication, let no man misunderstand why they must do that which they must do. These men will fight, and, perchance die, for one reason only—for their country—for America. No complex philosophies of world intrigue and conspiracy dominate their thoughts. No exploitation or extravagance of propaganda dims their sensibilities. Just the simple fact, their country called.

But now strange voices are heard across the land, decrying this old and proven concept of patriotism. Seductive murmurs are arising that it is now outmoded by some more comprehensive and all-embracing philosophy, that we are provincial and immature or reactionary and stupid when we idealize our own country; that there is a higher destiny for us under another and more general flag [the United Nations]; that no longer when we send our sons and daughters to the battlefields must we see them through all the way to victory; that we can call upon them to fight and even to die in some halfhearted and indecisive war; that we can plunge them recklessly into war and then suddenly decide that it is a wrong war or in a wrong place or in a wrong time, or even that we can call it not a war at all by using some more euphemistic and gentler name [humanitarianism]; that we can treat them as expendable, although they are our own flesh and blood; that we, the strongest military nation in the world, have suddenly become dependent on others for our security and even our welfare.

Listen not to these voices, be they from the one political party or from the other. Be they from the high and the mighty or the lowly and forgotten. Heed them not. Visit upon them a righteous scorn, born of the past sacrifices of your fighting sons and daughters. Repudiate them in the market place, on platforms, from the pulpit. The highest encomium [praise] you can still receive is to be called a patriot, if it means you love your country above all else and will place your life, if need be, at the service of your Flag.

Great changes, even more comprehensive than in the military field, have taken place in industry. In its massive and almost limitless potential, the rugged determination of its leaders, the skill and energy of its workers, here has been welded an industrial supremacy such as the world has never before known. It comprises not only a power in being but a reserve power capable of being quickly mounted to meet and overcome any eventuality that might arise. This not only ensures a continuity of human progress but imposes an almost impassable barrier against any who would threaten the security of the American continent. It has thus become a leavening influence in a world where war and the threat and fear of war would otherwise so distort the minds of men as to threaten the progress of the human race.

It represents a condition of preparedness born of American enterprise and vision, nurtured upon American energy and incentive, and depending for its ultimate strength upon American will and determination. It is the result and fruition of the capitalistic system—a system embracing every segment of American society—the owners of industry, the workers in industry, the public served by industry. This free enterprise based upon the right to work and the right to possess the fruits of that work has created an economic freedom which is the basis of all other freedoms.

But this very success has created its own perils and harassments, both from without and from within. For from one end of the world to the other there is a titanic struggle to seize control of industry and of the economics. Whether this be in the masquerade of Communism or Socialism or Fascism the purpose is the same—to destroy a primary element of Freedom and preempt it for the State.

The capitalistic system has hence become the great target, although it has never failed to provide the resource for an ever increasing standard for human life, has never failed to maximize the fruits of human energy and creative enterprise, has never failed to provide the sinews for victory in war. It has built this nation far beyond the wildest dreams of its architects; it has through the scientific means of communication closed the international geographic gap to permit rapid and effective trade and commerce among the people of the world, has elevated the laborer, the farmer and the tradesmen to their rightful station of dignity and relative prosperity, and has established the pattern for modern industrialization and scientific development.

The first prominent component of capitalism was Karl Marx who shunned the use of violence and sought the voluntary acceptance of the principle of communal ownership of the sources and means of production. The innate common sense of the human race, however, rejected this principle and the element of force was injected by the Bolshevik after the close of the First World War Then was combined the theory of Karl Marx with the principle of Nihilism [anarchy; revolutionary insurgency] under which the control of public policy was sought through terrorism and violence. This combination known as Communism has had many successes. The minority, the Communist Party, in many sectors of the globe has been able to establish its rule over the majority. Only where the concept of human liberty was most deeply rooted and greatly advanced were such minority pressures decisively thrown back.

Such was the case in this nation where our economy, built upon the principle of private capitalism, became recognized as the great barrier to the universal enforcement of the theories of modern Communism. There followed repeated and diversified efforts to reduce and destroy it. Resort was had to the control of private profit by the Marxism-inspired device of confiscatory taxation and the levies upon privately accumulated resources.

It began in this country with the Federal Income Tax Law of 1914 which gave unlimited access to the people’s wealth, and the power for the first time to levy taxes not for revenue only but for social purposes. [The Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels, 1848, Chapter II, Proletarians and Communists, plank #2: “A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.”] Since then the sphere of government has increased with a kind of explosive force.

Karl Marx, while planning the destruction of all constitutional government, said: “The surest way to overturn the social order is to debauch the currency.” And the Russian dictator, Lenin, that implacable foe of the free enterprise system, predicted as early as 1920 that the United States would eventually spend itself into bankruptcy.

Karl Marx referred, of course, to the process of inflation, induced by extreme taxation; the process of “planned economy” [known today as social engineering]; the process of controlling economic conditions and thereby controlling the lives of individuals—a control of fiscal, monetary and general economic forces which produce higher prices and a gradual devitalizing of the purchasing power of money. The continuing rise in the cost of living is due to our drift deeper and deeper into inflation [the hidden tax] until today our whole economic, social and political system is infected by an inflationary mentality. “Taxation with its offspring inflation,” said Lenin, in support of the basic thesis of Karl Marx, “is the vital weapon to displace the system of free enterprise.”—the system on which our nation was founded—the system which has made us the most prosperous people of all history—the system which enabled us to produce over half of the world’s goods with less than one-seventeenth of the world’s area and population—the system which gave our people more liberty, privileges and opportunities than any other nation ever gave its people in the long history of the world. To destroy it is the sure road to Socialism. And by Socialism is meant the forcing of a centrally controlled economic life upon all persons in the nation under an authoritarian monopoly that is politically managed. Actually, there has been through the direction of our own public policy an incessant encroachment on the capitalistic system. Most officials of our government over the past years will deny, and justifiably, any intent to establish in this nation the basis for the emergence of a Socialistic, much less a Communistic State, but the course of fiscal policy has done just that. The fact is unmistakable and clear that if the capitalistic system—free enterprise—is to be preserved to the future generations of our people, the course of government must be oriented to foster and preserve adequate incentive to encourage the thrift, the industry and the adventure which brought our nation to its present pre-eminence among all of the other nations of the earth and which alone can carry it forward in peace and security and progress.

I realize full well that the restless spirit of the times seeks change. But change should not be made for the sake of change alone. It should be sought only to adapt time tested principles which have been proven in the crucible of human experience to the new requirements of an expanding society. To do otherwise is not true liberalism. The Constitution is not to be treated as an instrument of political expediency. Every move that is made to circumvent its spirit, every move that is made to over-centralize political power, every move that is made to curtail individual liberty is reaction in its most extreme form. For the framers of the Constitution were the most liberal thinkers of all the ages and the Charter they produced out of the liberal revolution of their time has never been and is not now surpassed in liberal thought.

The object and practice of liberty lies in the limitation of governmental power. Through the ages the constantly expanding grasp of government has been liberty’s greatest threat. Daniel Webster once said on the floor of the Senate:

“Our security is our watchfulness of executive power. It was the Constitution of this department, which as infinitely the most difficult part in the great work of creating our present government; to give the executive department such power as should make it useful, and yet not such as should render it dangerous; to make it efficient, independent and strong, and yet to prevent it from sweeping away everything by its union of military and civil authority, by the influence of patronage, and office, and force. . . . I do not wish to impair the power of the President as it stands written down in the Constitution. But, I will not blindly confide, where all experience admonished me to be jealous; I will not trust executive power, vested in the hands of a single magistrate, to keep the vigils of liberty.”

He spoke those words 129 years ago; but they could as well have been spoken but yesterday.

There are many who have lost faith in this early American ideal and believe in a form of socialistic, totalitarian rule, a sort of big brother deity to run our lives for us. They no longer believe that free men can successfully manage their own affairs. Their thesis is that a handful of men, centered in government, largely bureaucratic not elected, can utilize the proceeds of our toil and labor to greater advantage than those who create it. Nowhere in the history of the human race is there justification for this reckless faith in political power. It is the oldest, most reactionary of all forms of social organization. It was tried out in ancient Babylon, ancient Greece and ancient Rome; in Mussolini’s Italy, in Hitler’s Germany, and in all communist countries. Wherever and whenever it has been attempted, it has failed utterly to provide economic security, and has generally ended in national disaster. It embraces an essential idiocy, that individuals who, as private citizens, are not to manage the disposition of their own earnings, become in public office supermen who can manage the affairs of the world.

The fundamental and ultimate issue at stake is liberty, itself—liberty verses the creeping socialization in every domestic field. Freedom to live under the minimum of restraint! A least common denominator of mediocrity against the proven progress of pioneering individualism! The free enterprise system or the cult of conformity! The result will determine the future of civilization. It will be felt on every human life. It will be etched in blazing rainbow colors on the very arch of the sky.

And here we are; the social engineering minority MacArthur spoke of, having been able to firmly establish its rule over the majority in this country and in most other countries throughout the world. At the time of the writing of this book, the U.S. federal government’s national debt was $312 billion, and in contrast stands today (at the time of this writing) at $18 trillion, with the future prosperity of our children replaced by indentured servitude and debt slavery.

How have they been able to accomplish this? If you think about it and critically analyze the players and the agenda, you will arrive at the answer of your own volition. If not, you need to turn the television off and stop going to the movies. Stop buying the newspapers and magazines of perception management, and watching the controlled mainstream news “programming” by pathologically lying “anchors” such as NBC’s CFR member, Brian Williams and others in the Communist News Networks.

Read your history and research the principles and ideals upon which this great nation was founded. Then you will know how it was possible for the minority to establish its rule over the majority, because those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it, and those who George Orwell predicted were “without general ideas,” whose “activities were without importance” and would allow petty distractions to “fill up the horizon of their minds” are very easy to control.

English philosopher, John Locke, known as the “Father of Classical Liberalism,” espoused the view that government is morally obligated to serve the whole of the people, namely by protecting life, liberty, and property. John Adams wrote in A Defense of the American Constitutions (1787): “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.” In Essay on Property (1792), James Madison wrote that the end of government was “to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals,” and “that alone is a just government which impartially secures to every man whatever is his own.” And in his first inaugural address in 1801, Thomas Jefferson said: “A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned—this is the sum of good government.”

What fools these mortals be who have forgotten the fundamental conventions of our forebears.

Regarding the perpetual war scenario, MacArthur’s nearly prophetic book was written shortly after the Truman-era Korean War and sandwiched between the botched Bay of Pigs invasion—co-sponsored by the CIA—which led directly to the Communist revolution in Cuba, the dissolving of Cuba’s capitalist system and persecution of Christians at the hands of Castro’s ruthless 26 July army. Then came the ensuing Kennedy-era missile crisis and that terrible decade of the second Indochina War.

A couple years after publication of MacArthur’s Reminiscences, in 1967, the USS Liberty was bombed in Israel, killing 34 and wounding more than 170 U.S. crew members. The book predates the bloody Nixon-era campaigns in Laos and Cambodia in 1968, the war in Vietnam from 1970-1975, Lebanon in 1976, and Zaire in 1978.

It predates the Carter-era Operation Eagle Claw in Iran and Operation Bright Star in Sinai in 1980, the El Salvadorian offensive and the Libyan incident in ’81.

It foreshadowed the Reagan-era Multinational Force on Lebanon from 1982-83, Operation Urgent Fury in Grenada in ’83, the indefinite Persian Gulf War beginning in ’84 and lasting until the present day.

It heralded the Bush-era siege of Panama from 1988-90, which resulted in the deaths of 2,000-3,000 unarmed civilians according to the Commission for the Defense of Human Rights in Central America (CODEHUCA); Operation Desert Shield beginning in 1990, and the ensuing oil wars in Iraq and Kuwait.

It portended the Clinton-era Bosnia invasion, the 1993 deployment of the U.S. military’s Combat Applications Group (known in certain circles as Delta Force) to a Seventh Day Adventist church near Waco Texas where 76 men, women and children were massacred; Liberia in ’96; Albania, Sierra Leone, Cambodia, the Congo and Gabon in ’97; Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Tanzania, Afghanistan, Sudan and Monrovia in ’98; Kissinger’s East Timor genocide and Serbia in ’99, and Nigeria and Yemen in 2000.

It anticipated the second Bush-era’s never-ending war in Afghanistan and the so-called “War on Terror” beginning in 2001, the Philippines and Côte d’Ivoire in ’02, the war in Iraq beginning in 2003 and helping the nation to fall to Islamic terrorist regimes by 2011, counterterrorism wars in Georgia and Djibouti in ’03, the Haitian coup d’état and U.S. intelligence anti-terror war underway in Georgia, Djibouti, Kenya, Ethiopia, Yemen and Eritreain; and drone strikes in Pakistan in ’04, Lebanon again in 2006, and Mogadishu and Somalia in ’07.

It envisioned the Obama-era rise of the drones, Yemen again in 2010, Operation New Dawn in Iraq from 2010-11, Uganda and Libya and Somalia again in 2011; Jordan, Turkey, Chad and Benghazi in 2012; Mali, Somalia, Libya and Korea again in 2013; and Uganda and Iraq yet again in 2014.

And all of these foreign entanglements, invasions and incursions are that which account for involvement only by U.S. federal military forces, not including wars and aggressions initiated or lead by other nations.

The Gospel of Matthew chapter 24, verses 6-8 says: “And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom . . . All these are the beginning of sorrows.”

At present, considering the words of social critic, Randolph Bourne, that “War is the health of the State,” we have the staging of “humanitarian interventions” (crisis-initiations) in Syria, Iran, Ukraine, Egypt, Yemen, Iraq and Afghanistan, the rising of the Islamic sword and the submission to the tyrannical Sharīʿah Law in countless nations, with players such as the Israeli Secret Intelligence Service (ISIS), the Mossad, CIA and British MI6 pitting Sunni against Shia Muslim factions (ethos against ethos) along the way.

We have the Eastern bloc coalition of BRICS nations—which represent about 3 billion people, approximately 40% of world population and a combined GDP of 20% of gross world product—uniting to form a world reserve currency to replace the 100-year global monopoly of the Rothschild-owned Bank of England and its American Federal Reserve branch. We have the United States, Britain and Germany involved in war-time economic sanctions against Russia and its allies, and Russia’s many nuclear incursion threat responses into U.S. airspace heating up and increasing.

Remember that the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor IN RESPONSE to economic sanctions the United States was inflicting upon them; keeping them from acquiring essential commodities such as oil and gas, which was an act of war.

Remember also as you see and read what is currently being done with the words “Patriot,” “Patriotism,” and “Nationalism”; the active corruption, dishonoring and psychopolitical re-branding of these terms to associate all Freedom-loving American citizens who understand the Creator-endowed founding principles and ideals this great nation was founded upon—who teach and inspire others as to the lawful precedent and essential role of the unorganized militias of the several states—with extremism and domestic terrorism.

Maj. Gen. Smedley D. Butler, the most decorated U.S. Marine in history, said, “I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country’s most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high-class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers.” And, like General Butler, General MacArthur had also come to understand that he too was being used as the muscle for Marxist International Socialists who were employing the military might of the United States—through engineered wars and aggressions—for the subversion of our free enterprise capitalistic system, the overturning of our prosperous social order, the maintaining of authorized economic agreements and models, and the establishment of a global Socialistic planned economy to the benefit of its architects.

Today, “Democracy” is the code word for Socialism, and we often hear that term bandied about to describe our nation’s system of government. Whereas, the United States was from the very beginning guaranteed a Constitutional Republican form of government. James Madison wrote in the Federalist #10, 1787: “Pure democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.” Vladimir Lenin, who MacArthur described as the “implacable foe of the free enterprise system,” gave form and function to the modern socialist doctrine, and said of the principle, “Democracy is indispensable to socialism.”

For a taste of what Socialism looks like in its purest form, recall the Nazi regime. The National Socialist German Workers’ Party (in German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP)—commonly referred to in English as the Nazi Party—transformed the representative federal German Weimar Republic into a totalitarian social democracy from 1920-1945.

So, never again be deceived regarding what “democracy” means. It is the code word for socialism, was anathema to our founders and everyone from your local school teacher to the President of the United States of America is using it to refer to the socialist “planned economy” that is being erected upon the ashes of America’s once-free Republic.

It was for the uncooperativeness of these incremental anti-American transformations and the subversive actions of internationalism and socialism sanctioned by our own government which he was not willing to go along with anymore, and for other disagreements, that the “insubordinate” MacArthur was dubbed “The Most Dangerous Man In America“. This is why he was asked to resign by the 33rd President of the United States of America and 33rd degree Freemason and Grandmaster of the Grand Lodge of Missouri of the Scottish Rite of the Southern Jurisdiction of Freemasonry, Harry S. Truman, who unlawfully replaced the Constitution for the United States of America (on paper) with the Charter of the United Nations, the United Nations Treaty and the UN Participation Act, and who thanked the U.S. military for being an essential force of arms working not on behalf of American interests during the Korean War, but on behalf of the United Nations.

On April 19, 1951, General Douglas MacArthur gave his now famous farewell address before the U.S. Congress, which was rather unceremoniously but lovingly interrupted by fifty ovations. He closed his nostalgic and eloquent speech with the following:

I am closing my 52 years of military service. When I joined the Army, even before the turn of the century, it was the fulfillment of all of my boyish hopes and dreams. The world has turned over many times since I took the oath on the plain at West Point, and the hopes and dreams have long since vanished, but I still remember the refrain of one of the most popular barrack ballads of that day which proclaimed most proudly, “old soldiers never die; they just fade away.”

And like the old soldier of that ballad, I now close my military career and just fade away, an old soldier who tried to do his duty as God gave him the light to see that duty. 

Good Bye.

And like the old soldier of that ballad, this writer now closes this particular chapter of my online journal, a Marine who is likewise trying to do my duty as God gave me the will, the fortitude and the means; to keep this legacy of American patriotism alive to the preservation of Freedom for all people. Because as goes America, so goes the world.

Source

Don’t forget to Like Freedom Outpost on FacebookGoogle PlusTea Party Community & Twitter.

You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

About Timothy A. Pope

image: http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/5389bb5d55b872ca4269886ff11d21ec?s=90&d=http%3A%2F%2F1.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D90&r=G

Timothy A. Pope is the author of AmericaTheBattlefield.blogspot.com, a thoroughly-documented online resource of suppressed information cited with extensive official government and military documentation, with analysis and correlation of the current domestic and foreign policy of the United States of America. The goal of America the Battlefield is to confirm that the agenda for the establishment of a new international order and a world totalitarian socialist government is not a “conspiracy theory,” but in fact a carefully-crafted long-term plan brought about by the people and organizations with the patience, purpose, vision and resources to see it to fruition. It is also this author’s attempt to shed light upon the conspiratorial nature of history, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that none of this plan was constructed in a vacuum or in secret, but is all documented in the law, the Congressional Record, the Federal Register, treaties, military training manuals, presidential decision directives, executive orders, NSC memorandums, and other classified and non-classified documentation. He is a former Sergeant of Marines, a husband, father, patriot, defender of Freedom, and follower of Jesus Christ. He lives in Florida and is currently writing a book compiling important research that all Americans need to know about.
Website: http://americathebattlefield.blogspot.com/ 
TimothyAPope has written 12 articles so far, you can find them below.
Read more at Home » Archives for Timothy A. Pope
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/author/timothyapope/#szjiPfIAqPQUUUbB.99

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM


Lenovo admits to putting tracking software on your PC

02/21/2015

http://www.sovereignman.com/personal-privacy/we-messed-up-badly-here-lenovo-admits-to-putting-tracking-software-on-your-pc-16144/

BE CAREFULL WHO YOU TRUST!!!

February 20, 2015
Los Angeles, California

File this under ‘you can’t make this stuff up.’

Lenovo Group, the largest computer manufacturer in the world, has made a rather stunning admission that they have been pre-installing tracking software on their PCs.

The tracking software is made by a company called Superfish, which apparently paid some “very minor compensation” to Lenovo for putting the software on people’s computers.

The Superfish program is a total disaster.

It has image recognition algorithms which essentially monitor what a user is looking at… then suggests relevant ads based on what it thinks you might like.

This is not only REALLY high up on the creepy scale, it also completely destroys Internet security.

Whether you’re buying something online or accessing Internet banking, the Superfish program essentially cuts the secure link between you and sensitive websites that you’re trying to access.

According to the first user who found the vulnerability a few weeks ago, “[Superfish] will hijack ALL your secure web connections (SSL/TLS) by using self-signed root certificate authority, making it look legitimate to the browser.”

This means that the tracking software basically fools a web browser into believing that a connection is secure when it’s not… all for the purpose of pushing more ads in your face.

This scheme is so powerful that even if users uninstall the Superfish software, the security breach still remains.

This is so flagrant I have to imagine that even the NSA is shocked.

After its initial approach of being completely unapologetic and dismissal, Lenovo is now groveling for forgiveness.

The company’s Chief Technology Officer now says, “We messed up badly here,” and “We made a mistake.”

Duh. But untold amounts of consumers out there have been totally violated.

There are a few interesting points to make here–

1) Privacy isn’t dead. But it’s extremely difficult to maintain. There are so many forces out there trying to pry whatever little privacy remains from us, one has to fight tooth and nail to preserve it.

2) There’s no transparency in the system; we never really know what’s going on behind the scenes with big institutions.

Governments and politicians will lie to our faces. They’ll tell us to be excited and that everything is fine; then behind the scenes they’ll plan for capital controls and huge tax increases.

No one has any idea what kind of toxic crap banks have on their balance sheets. They’ll post record profits and tell us how successful they are. But internally they know that it’s only a matter of time before they collapse (as we saw in 2008).

Even major tech brands are betraying the public in the dark of night with crazy spyware or selling us all out to government agencies.

There are very few, if any, big institutions out there that we can trust anymore.

And maybe that’s how it should be.

It’s a shark-filled world with bad people who do bad things. Perhaps it’s all the better that a trusted brand becomes the poster child for betrayal.

Because if Lenovo is doing this, are we supposed to be so naïve to presume that Google, Apple, AT&T, etc. are not?

Question everything.

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM


David Stockman: The Global Economy Has Entered The Crack-Up Phase

02/20/2015

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-15/david-stockman-global-economy-has-entered-crack-phase

 Submitted by Tyler Durden

Submitted by Adam Taggart via Peak Prosperity,

Few people understand the global economy and its (mis)management better than David Stockman — former director of the OMB under President Reagan, former US Representative, best-selling author of The Great Deformation, and veteran financier.

David is now loudly warning that events have entered the crack-up phase, which he predicts will be defined by the following 4 developments:

  • Increasingly desperate moves by the world’s central banks
  • Increased market volatility and losses
  • Deflation in industrial and commodity prices
  • Decreasing demand due to Peak Debt

As the crack-up phase gains momentum, he predicts an increasing number of “financial breaks” that will add to the unpredictability and instability of the environment for investors. Even ‘dancing close to the door’ sounds excessively risky at this point.

We’re in the crack-up phase. I think there are four big characteristics of that which are going to shape the way the economy and the markets unfold as we go forward.

You’re going to see increasing desperation and extreme central bank financial repression because they have gotten themselves painted so deep into the corner that they’re lost and desperate. Almost week by week, we have another central bank – this week, it was Sweden – lowering their money market rates into negative territory. The Swiss Bank is already there, the Denmark Bank is there, the ECB is there on the deposit rate, the Bank of

Japan’s there. All of the central banks of the world now are desperately driving interest rates into negative territory. I believe that they’re lost; they’re in a race to the bottom whether they acknowledge it or not. The central bank of China can’t sit still much longer when the reminbi has appreciated something like 30% against the Japanese yet because of the massive bubble of monetary expansion that’s being created there. So that’s the first thing going on. Central banks out of control in a race to the bottom, sliding by the seat of their pants, making up really incoherent theories as they go.

The second thing is increasing market disorder and volatility. In the last three months, the stock market has behaved like a drunken sailor. But it’s really just a bunch of robots and day traders that have traded chart points until somebody can figure out what is happening directionally in the world. It has nothing to do with information or incoming data about the real world. We have today the 10-year German bond trading at 29.5 basis points. Well, the German economy’s been reasonably strong, fueling the Chinese boom. That export boom is over. The Chinese economy is faltering. Germany is going to have its own problems. But clearly, 29 basis points on a 10-year is irrational, even in the case of Germany, to say nothing of the 160 available today on the 10-year for Spain and Italy.

Both of those countries are in deep, deep fiscal decline. There is no obvious way for them to dig out of the debt trap that they’re in. It’s going to get worse over time. There’s huge risk in those bonds, especially because there’s no guarantee that the EU will remain intact or the euro will survive. Why in the world would anybody in their right mind be owning Italian debt at 160 other than the fact that they’re front-running the massive purchases that Draghi has promised and the Germans have acquiesced to over the next year or two. But that only kicks the can down the road. One of these days, the central banks are going to falter and the market is going to reset violently to prices that reflect the true risk on all this sovereign debt and the pretty cloudy outlook that’s ahead for the world market.

We now have something like four trillion worth of sovereign debt spread over Japanese issues, the major European countries that are trading at negative yields. Obviously, that is one, irrational and second, completely unsustainable. And yet, it’s another characteristic of what I call these disorderly markets. Investment is now coming home to roost. It will be driving a huge deflation of commodity and industrial prices worldwide. You can see that in iron ore, now barely holding $60 from a peak of $200. Obviously, it’s seen in the whole oil patch. Look at the Baltic Dry Index. That is a measure, one, of faltering demand for shipments and, two, massive overbuilding of bulk carrier capacity as a result of this central bank driven boom that we’ve had in the last 10 to 20 years. So that is going to be ripping through the financial system, the global economy, in ways that we’ve never before experienced. And so therefore, in ways that are hard to predict what all, you know, the ramifications and cascading effects will be. But clearly, it’s something that we haven’t seen in modern times or ever before – the degree of over investment, excess capacity, and everything from iron ore mines to dry vault carriers, aluminum plants, steel mills, and on down the line.

And then, finally, clearly, demand has run smack up against peak debt — I think that’s the right word for it. We had a tremendous study come out in the last week or so from McKinsey, who do a pretty good job of trying to calculate, track and total up the amount of credit outstanding, public and private, in the world. We’re now at the $200 Trillion threshold. That’s up from only about $140 Trillion at the time of the crisis. So we’ve had a $60 Trillion expansion worldwide of debt just since 2008. During that same period, though, the GDP of the world saw a little more than $15 trillion from $55 or mid-$50s, roughly, to $70 Trillion. So we’ve generated, because of central bank money printing and all of this unprecedented monetary stimulus, we’ve generated something like $60 Trillion of new debt in the world and have barely gotten $15-17 billion of new GDP for all of that effort. And I think that is a measure of why the fundamental era is changing. That the boom is over and the crackup is under way when you see that kind of minimal yield from the vast amount of new debt that has been generated.

Now I’d only wrap this up by calling attention to the fact that within that global total of $200 billion, the numbers from China are even more startling. At the time of the crisis, let’s go back to 2000, China had $2 Trillion of credit outstanding. It’s now $28 Trillion. So we’ve had just massive 14X growth in 14 years. There’s nothing like that in recorded history, nor is there any plausible reason to believe that an economy, which is basically under a command-and-control system that is run from the top down to the party cadres, could possibly create $26 Trillion in new debt in that period of time without massive inefficiencies in waste and mistakes everywhere within the systems, especially since they have no markets. They have no feedback mechanisms. It all comes cascading down from the top and everybody lies to the next party above them. And I think the system is irrationally out of control.

In any event, my point was that at the time of the 2008 crisis, China had allegedly – if you believe their numbers, which no one really should – but as reported, they had $5 Trillion worth of GDP. It’s now $10. So they’ve gained $5 Trillion of GDP. Their debt at the time of the crisis was $7 Trillion, now it’s $28. So the debt is up more than $20 Trillion while the GDP is up just $5 Trillion. These are extreme unsustainable deformations, if I can use that word, that just scream out, “Danger ahead. Mayhem has happened.” And the unwinding of this and the resolution of this is not going to be pretty.

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

 


Department Of Homeland What? Not What You Think!

02/19/2015

http://blog.hogwashington.com/department-of-homeland-what-not-what-you-think/

2-19-2015 12-36-36 PM

By bcroberts@hogwashington.com

“Your Security” has been one of the big headline issues promoted by HOGWASHINGTON since 9-11-2001 and each year following, the push for your “Security Mind Set” has become louder and stronger.
Who could be against Homeland Security? The name was well-chosen for its’ unimpeachable implication of your need to feel safe. Fear of harm is a powerful emotion. We favor and support the Police because they make it “safer” for us to go about our daily lives and by extension we would favor Homeland Security. Combine “Security with “Homeland” and you have an emotional winner from which can be hung anything else that you chose. That “else” can be good or bad but the fact is, everyone will support it because the big assumption and implication is “the safety of something or someone we love is in the balance”. No one will ever look behind the curtain. This has become a useful form of brainwashing the masses and a springboard for propaganda. Think of Hitler and the Fatherland.

When you think of the FBI what comes to your mind, agents scurrying about hard at work searching the country for bad guys, doing the yeomen’s work of keeping the Country safe? We trust the FBI just like a family member.
Now, if you exploited someone’s trust for nefarious reasons you would be called a con man. You would be guilty of duping, swindling, or persuading by deception. A good con job has a lot to do with perceived intent. If someone thinks the intent is good they want to believe it. The name Homeland Security has built-in acceptance by treading on perceived good intent.

This is the deception that Homeland Security is.

In the name of Homeland Security you have been labeled an extremist and by extension a “possible terrorist. Behind the curtain there is an organization called The Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute. (DEOMI) is a U.S. Department of Defense joint services school located at Patrick Air Force Base, Florida. This is where Military and Police organizations from around the County are taught as part of Homeland Security training.

Some of this training consists of teaching students to be able to recognize potential terrorists by their “extreme” behavior.

From DEOMI:
(U//FOUO) This product is one of a series of intelligence assessments published by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch to facilitate a greater understanding of the phenomenon of violent radicalization in the United States. The information is provided to federal, state, local, and tribal counterterrorism and law enforcement officials so they may effectively deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States. Federal efforts to influence domestic public opinion must be conducted in an overt and transparent manner, clearly identifying United States Government sponsorship

DEOMI EOAC STUDENT GUIDE 366 Tuskegee Airmen Dr. January 2013Patrick AFB, FL 32925EOAC – 3150EXTREMISMFOR TRAINING PURPOSES ONLY DO NOT USE ON THE JOB
LESSON EMPHASIS
This lesson will focus on awareness and current issues requiring the attention of future Equal Opportunity Advisors. It will also provide information that describes sources of extremism information, definitions, recruitment of DoD personnel, common themes in extremist ideologies, common characteristics of extremist organizations, DoD policies, and command functions regarding extremist activities.

Nowadays, instead of dressing in sheets or publicly espousing hate messages, many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights, and how to make the world a better place
The standard hate message has not changed, but it has been packaged differently. Modern extremist groups run the gamut from the politically astute and subtle to the openly violent. Emphasis on emotional responses, less so on reasoning and logical analysis
Extremists have an unspoken reverence for propaganda, which they may call education or consciousness-raising. Symbolism plays an exaggerated role in their thinking, and they tend to think imprecisely and metaphorically. Effective extremists tend to be effective propagandists. Propaganda differs from education in that the former teaches one what to think, and the latter teaches one how to think clearly.

This is a partial list of people to be considered possible threats to The Homeland. See the full list of 72 at and Courtesy of the economic collapse blog.com

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/obama-declares-war-extremisme-extrmist-according-definition

A great number on the list are sourced on a pdf document found herehttp://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf

1. Those that talk about “individual liberties”
4. “The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”
5. Those that are interested in “defeating the Communists”
6. Those that believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations”
10. “Anti-Gay”
11. “Anti-Immigrant”
12. “Anti-Muslim”
13. “The Patriot Movement”
18. Members of the American Border Patrol/American Patrol
19. Members of the Federation for American Immigration Reform
20. Members of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition
21. Members of the Christian Action Network
22. Anyone that is “opposed to the New World Order”
24. Anyone that is opposed to Agenda 21
25. Anyone that is concerned about FEMA camps
26. Anyone that “fears impending gun control or weapons confiscations”
42. Citizens that have “bumper stickers” that are patriotic or anti-U.N.
43. Those that refer to an “Army of God”
44. Those that are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”
45. Those that are “anti-global”
46. Those that are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”

Who would have ever believed that our Department Of Homeland Security would teach the Military and Police students that everyday American citizens are potential terrorists?
By any measure of common sense this should not be a part of the teachings of the Federal Government. In my mind this is about propaganda and brainwashing of controlled students with the implied “good intent” of Homeland Security.

Folks, this is putting a target on the back of the American citizenry at large and we are supposed to swallow it as part of Homeland security? There is no reaction from the media or Congress.
Why is this being done? There has to be a reason for this outrages development from our Government. Has the security of the Country been threatened by everyday Americans? Maybe the security we think they are talking about turns out to be the security of HOGWASHINGTON and not our nation.

In other odd and unexplained actions, DHS has purchased in the range of 2 billion rounds of ammo and refuses to say why. The video below makes a cogent case for concern. Watch.

If all this is the case, DHS becomes the Department Of Homeland What? Certainly not our security.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPO4GLDZ8Lk

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM


Is America Still on F. A. Hayek’s Road to Serfdom?

02/18/2015

http://www.thedailybell.com/editorials/36089/Richard-Ebeling-Is-America-Still-on-

F-A-Hayeks-Road-to-Serfdom/?uuid=6F80FACC-5056-9627-3C224900D5600C65

 By Richard Ebeling

A little more than seventy years ago, on March 10, 1944, there appeared in Great Britain one of the most amazing and influential political books of the twentieth century, The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich A. Hayek, which forewarned of socialist trends in Britain and America that ran the danger of leading to tyranny if taken to their logical conclusions.

Written during the Second World War, Hayek’s main and crucial thesis was that many of the ideological and economic trends that had culminated in the triumph and tragedy of German Nazism could be seen developing and taking hold in Great Britain, where Hayek was then living, and also in the United States.

Hayek did not argue that either Great Britain or America were inevitably and irretrievably heading for a totalitarian state exactly like the National Socialist regime then existing in Hitler’s Germany, and against which the combined economic and military strength of Great Britain and the United States were at that moment in mortal combat.

But as I shall try to explain, the threat against which Hayek was warning was that there were certain underlying political philosophical and economic policy currents at work in these two bulwarks of Western civilization that if continued ran the risk of moving these countries further away from being societies of freedom.

A little more than seventy years ago, on March 10, 1944, there appeared in Great Britain one of the most amazing and influential political books of the twentieth century, The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich A. Hayek, which forewarned of socialist trends in Britain and America that ran the danger of leading to tyranny if taken to their logical conclusions.

Written during the Second World War, Hayek’s main and crucial thesis was that many of the ideological and economic trends that had culminated in the triumph and tragedy of German Nazism could be seen developing and taking hold in Great Britain, where Hayek was then living, and also in the United States.

Hayek did not argue that either Great Britain or America were inevitably and irretrievably heading for a totalitarian state exactly like the National Socialist regime then existing in Hitler’s Germany, and against which the combined economic and military strength of Great Britain and the United States were at that moment in mortal combat.

But as I shall try to explain, the threat against which Hayek was warning was that there were certain underlying political philosophical and economic policy currents at work in these two bulwarks of Western civilization that if continued ran the risk of moving these countries further away from being societies of freedom.

Great Britain and the United States, Hayek argued, were increasingly becoming politically controlled and managed states in which the individual human being faced the danger of being reduced to a cog in the machine of governmental planning. Individual liberty would be lost in societies of socialist paternalism and centralized economic direction of human affairs.

The Life and Contributions of F. A. Hayek

Friedrich August von Hayek was born on May 8, 1899 in Vienna, in the now long gone Hapsburg Empire of Austria-Hungary. While still a teenager he served in the Austro-Hungarian Army during the First World War, seeing military action on the Italian front. When released from military service shortly after the end of the war in November 1918, he entered the University of Vienna in an accelerated program that enabled him to earn a doctorial degree in jurisprudence in 1921. Two years later in 1923, he earned a second doctoral degree in political economy from the University of Vienna.

Hayek’s first international reputation was as one of the most highly regarded economists of the 1920s and 1930s, the years between the two World Wars. With the assistance and support of his mentor and friend, the well-known Austrian economist, Ludwig von Mises, Hayek became the founding director of the Austrian Institute for Business Cycle Research in 1927, a position that he held until the summer of 1931.

Hayek was invited to deliver a series of lectures at the London School of Economics in January 1931 on what has become known as the Austrian theory of money and the business cycle, which resulted in his being offered a professorship at the London School, a position that he accepted and took up in the autumn of 1931.

His lectures were published shortly after under the title, Prices and Production. Along with his other writings during this period of the 1930s, he was soon recognized as one of the foremost monetary and business cycle theorists in the English-speaking world, and as a leading critic of the emerging new Macroeconomics of the Cambridge University economist, John Maynard Keynes.

Also in the 1930s and 1940s, Hayek was an outspoken critic of socialism and government central planning, editing and contributing to a collection of essays on Collectivist Economic Planning (1935); his two most famous writings on this theme during this period were his book, The Road to Serfdom (1944) and an article on “The Use of Knowledge in Society” (1945).

At the beginning of the 1950s, Hayek moved to the University of Chicago here in the United States. But his attention had turned from economic theory and policy in the narrow sense to the broader problems of social and political philosophy and the nature of societal order and the competitive market system. These interests culminated in two major works, The Constitution of Liberty (1960) and Law, Legislation, and Liberty that appeared in 3-volumes between 1976 and 1979.

In recognition for his work on monetary and business cycle theory and his analysis of social evolution and the institutional structures of human society, he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1974. Friedrich Hayek died on March 23, 1992, at the age of 92.

Growing Collectivism in Great Britain and America

As I pointed out, when The Road to Serfdom was published Great Britain and the United States were engulfed in a global war, with Nazi Germany as the primary enemy and Soviet Russia as their primary ally. In 1944 the British had a wartime coalition government of both Conservative and Labor Party members, with Winston Churchill as its head. During these war years plans were being designed within the government for a postwar socialist Britain, including nationalized health care, nationalized industries, and detailed economic planning of both industry and agriculture.

For the eight years before America’s entry into the war Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal had transformed the United States through levels of government spending, taxing, regulation, and redistribution the likes of which had never before been experienced in the nation’s history. Many of the early New Deal programs had even imposed a network of fascist-style economic controls on private industry and agriculture; the only thing that prevented them from being permanently in place were a series of decisions by the Supreme Court that declared most of these controls unconstitutional in 1935.

At the same time, the Soviet Union was frequently portrayed as a model – however one rather rough around the edges – of an ideal socialist society, freeing “the masses” from poverty and exploitation. The Nazi regime, on the other hand, was usually depicted as a brutal dictatorship designed to maintain the power and control of aristocratic and capitalist elites that surrounded Hitler.

Nazism an Outcome of Bismarck’s Welfare State

Hayek’s challenge in The Road to Serfdom was to argue that German Nazism was not an aberrant “right-wing” perversion growing out of the “contradictions” of capitalism, as Marxists and many other socialists insisted.

Instead, Hayek documented, the Nazi movement had developed out of the “enlightened” and “progressive” socialist and collectivist ideas of the pre-World War I era in Imperial Germany, ideas that many intellectuals in England and the United States had praised and propagandized for in their own countries in the years before the beginning of the First World War in 1914.

Large numbers of American graduate students went off to study at German universities in the 1880s, the 1890s, and the first decade of the 20th century.

They returned to the United States and spoke and wrote about a new and higher freedom observed in Germany, a “positive” freedom provided through government welfare state paternalism rather than the mere “negative” freedom of individual liberty in the form of absence of coercion in human relationships as practiced in America.

It was in Bismarck‘s Germany during the last decades of the 19th century, after all, that there had been born the modern welfare state – national health insurance, government pension plans, regulations of industry and the workplace – and a philosophy that the national good took precedence over the interests of the “mere” individual. In this political environment Germans came to take it for granted that the paternalistic state was meant to care for them from “cradle to grave,” a phrase that was coined in Imperial Germany.

Two generations of Germans accepted that they needed to be disciplined by and obedient to the enlightened political “leadership” that guided the affairs of state for their presumed benefit. Beliefs in the right to private property and freedom of exchange were undermined as the regulatory and redistributive state increasingly managed the economic activities of the society for the greater “national interest” of the German fatherland.

The German government restricted competition and fostered the creation of monopolies and business cartels under the rationale of directing private enterprise into those avenues serving the higher interests of the German nation as a whole.

Germany’s trade with the rest of the world was hampered by taxes and tariffs designed to shift German industry and agriculture into those forms the government considered most useful to prepare the nation for greater self-sufficiency during the war that was expected to come, and which finally broke out in 1914.

By 1933, Hayek argued, fifteen years after Germany’s defeat in the First World War, when Adolf Hitler came to power during the Great Depression, the German people not only accepted the idea of the “führer principle,” – the belief that people should follow and obey the commands of the political leaders of the nation – but many in German society now wanted it and believed they needed it. Notions about individual freedom and personal responsibility had been destroyed by the philosophy of collectivism and the ideologies of nationalism and socialism.

But Hayek’s main point was that this tragic history was not unique or special to the German people. The institutional changes that accompanied the implementation of socialist and interventionist welfare-state policies potentially carried within them the seeds of political tyranny and economic servitude in any country that might follow a similar path.

Government Planning Means Control Over People

The more government takes over responsibility for and control over the economic activities of a society, the more it diminishes the autonomy and independence of the individual. Government planning, by necessity, makes the political authority the ultimate monopoly, with the power to determine what is produced and how the resulting output shall be distributed among all the members of the society.

Belief in and expectation of government paternal care from the everyday vicissitudes of life, employment, and enterprise, Hayek insisted, weakens the spirit of self-reliance and independence. It makes for a more passive people who lose any sense of a loss of personal freedom and autonomy, as they increasingly cannot imagine a world in which government does not guaranteed many if not most of the necessities and amenities of human existence.

But it is not only economic independence that is lost as the government extends the safety nets of welfare statism and expands regulatory and planning control over society.

What personal and intellectual freedom is left to people, Hayek asked, when the government ownership of industry or heavy-handed regulation of business has the ability to determine or influence what books will be printed or movies will be shown or plays will be performed? What escape does the individual have from the power of the state when the government controls everyone’s education, employment, and consumption?

He also warned that the more that government plans production and consumption, the more the diverse values and preferences of the citizenry must be homogenized and made to conform to an overarching “social” scale of values that mirrors that hierarchy of ends captured in the central plan.

Each Free Man an End in Himself and a Means to Others’ Ends

One of the hallmarks of a free society in which people associate and cooperate through the networks and institutions of the market economy is that each individual is at liberty to peacefully pursue those interests, inclinations, and desires that suggest themselves as a source of personal meaning and happiness for him.

The more developed and complex the market society becomes with a growing population, the more there will emerge and develop diverse conceptions of the good life among people.

In the competitive market order there is no need or necessity for society-wide agreement about desired ends and goals among its members. In the division of labor of the market order, individuals earn the living that enables them to have the financial wherewithal to pursue the self-interested purposes that give value and meaning to their own lives by specializing in the production and sale of goods and services that serve as the means to the desired ends of others.

Thus, in the liberal, free market society, every man is an end in himself with his own chosen scale of values reflecting what he considers important and worthwhile. And each can try to attain those values by producing and supplying others in trade with the goods and services that serve as the means for trying to achieve their respectively chosen ends.

Fulfilling the Government Plan Requires Obedience by All

One of Hayek’s central points was the fact that a comprehensive system of socialist central planning would require the construction and imposition of a detailed system of relative values to which and within which all in the society would have to conform, if “the plan” imposed by the government was to succeed.

This was the origin of Hayek’s warning that government central planning ran the danger of becoming tyranny and a new form of “serfdom,” since any meaningful dissent in word or deed could not be permitted without threatening the fulfillment of the goals of the government’s plan. All would have to be assigned to their work, and be tied to it to assure that “the plan” met its targets.

Even dissent, Hayek warned, becomes a threat to the achievement of the plan and its related redistributive policies. How can the plan be achieved if critics attempt to undermine people’s dedication to its triumph? Politically incorrect thoughts and actions must be repressed and supplanted with propaganda and “progressive” education for all.

Thus unrestricted freedom of speech and the press, or opposition politicking, or even observed lack of enthusiasm for the purposes of the state becomes viewed as unpatriotic and potentially subversive.

Rule of Law or Unequal Treatment for Equal Outcomes

In addition, the classical liberal conception of an impartial rule of law, under which individuals possess equal rights to life, liberty, and the peaceful acquisition and use of private property, would have to be replaced by unequal treatment of individuals imposed by the political authorities to assure an ideologically preferred redistributive outcome.

In the free society, equality of individual rights under rule of law inevitably means an inequality of economic outcomes. Men widely differ in how they use and take advantage of their equal rights to life, liberty and property. We all know that people are far from being the same in terms of inherited traits and potentials, as well as attitudes and inclinations concerning acquiring an education, working hard, and being willing to make personal sacrifices in the present for some hoped for and possible greater benefits in the future.

In addition, our fellow men value more highly some things than others and are willing to pay more to get them. This means that some of us, as a result of intelligent forethought in deciding what occupations and trades to undertake, the education and skilled talents to acquire, as well as general circumstances and even a bit of luck, will earn higher salaries than those who market less valued goods and services in the eyes of the buying public.

To make people more “equal” in terms of the economic outcomes that emerge in the marketplace requires people to be treated very differently by the political authority responsible for that equalization.

In the foot race of life, it is inevitable that some will speed ahead of others in terms of financial and other forms of social success. But if the government is assigned the task to reduce these disparities, then it must place weights on the ankles of some in the form of taxes and regulations to slow down their outdistancing the others, while those others must be allowed to cut across the field in the form of wealth transfers, subsidies or other special treats provided by the government so they can catch up with or get ahead of those in front of them on the racecourse of society.

But, asked Hayek, by what benchmark, other than prejudice, caprice, or the influence of interest groups, would or could the planners make their decisions concerning who would be treated better and who worse in the form of government interventions, regulations, redistributions and controls? How will it be found out who is more deserving or meritorious for government differential benefits at the expense of others?

Who is more deserving? The man to whom things such as learning and luck often seem to come easily but who has eight children, a sick wife and an elderly mother to care for? Or a man to whom luck never comes, has to work hard for everything he finally gets but has only himself and a one high school honors student daughter to take care of?

And if it is replied that the answer to that requires detailed gradations of evaluation and judgment, then in whose evaluating and judging eyes and on what standard or benchmark of relative merit, deservedness and neediness shall the decisions be made by those in government?

The means available are always insufficient to attain all our desired ends, and some in the society will invariably consider any politically decided trade-offs in these matters to be unfair, unjust, and uncaring.

Whether a dictatorial minority or a democratic majority makes such decisions, there is no escape from the imposition of advantages and disadvantages given to or imposed on different members of the society by those in political authority, and upon whom the individual becomes dependent and subservient for the social and material fortunes and misfortunes of much if not all of his life.

Why the Worst Get on Top

Finally, in one of the most insightful chapters in the book, Hayek explained why, in the politicized society, there is a tendency for “the worst to get on top.” Fulfillment of the government’s plans and policies requires the leaders to have the power to use any means necessary to get the job done.

Thus those with the least conscience or fewest moral scruples are likely to rise highest in the hierarchy of control. The bureaucracies of the planned and regulated society attract those who are most likely to enjoy the use and abuse of power over others.

One form of this in Hitler’s Nazi Germany was known as what was called “working towards the Fuhrer.” In 1934, a senior Nazi government official told his subordinates, “It is the duty of every single person to attempt, in the spirit of the Fuhrer, to work towards him.” And, “the one who works correctly towards the Fuhrer along his lines and toward his aim will in future as previously have the finest reward . . . ”

As historian Ian Kershaw explained in his biography, Hitler, 1889-1936 – Hubris (1998), “The way to power and advancement [in the Nazi regime] was through anticipating the ‘Fuhrer’s will’, and, without waiting for directives, taking initiatives to promote what were presumed to be Hitler’s aims and wishes.”

As Kershaw continues, “Through ‘working towards the Fuhrer’, initiatives were taken, pressures created, legislation instigated — all in ways which fell in line with what were taken to be Hitler’s aims and without the dictator necessarily having to dictate.”

In this instance, the government bureaucrat was stimulated by his superiors to anticipate Hitler’s will in instituting policies and actions in the hope for material gain and promotion within the Nazi hierarchy, and to do so with often brutal ruthlessness to the misfortune of many helpless victims.

Those who pursue such careers and who are willing to introduce and implement whatever policies necessary in the name of explicit or implicit government goals will be those who often care little about the unethical and immoral conduct that holding such political positions will require of them.

But there are others who may be led to do things in their government role and position that as a private individual in their personal life they would consider immoral or unethical behavior. This often is due to a person’s confidence of patriotic purpose and belief in his superior understanding of what must be done regardless of the violation of other people’s rights or the sacrifices imposed on other members of society to attain the greater “national” or “social” good.

With the realization that it is a controversial subject, let me suggest that a type of person who searches out employment and specialized surveillance work in the National Security Agency because he truly believes that there are potential “enemies” everywhere threatening harm to the “homeland” is highly likely to be a person who gives few second thoughts about whether intruding into the privacy of ordinary people’s emails, phone conversations, text messages, and private computer documents is unethical, illegal or even simply “bad manners.”

Indeed, the more zealous among such types of individuals will at the end of their workday not lose sleep due to a guilty conscience that a human being’s privacy rights have been violated. He is more likely to be thinking of tomorrow’s day of work and how he can find ways to do it even more effectively, regardless of high much more other people’s rights and privacy might have to be abridged in the attempt to attain the highly allusive goal of “national security.”

Indeed, way back in 1776, the famous Scottish economist, Adam Smith, warned about such people in government, when he said that nowhere would such political power “be so dangerous as in the hands of a man who had folly and presumption enough to fancy himself fit to exercise it.”

Men are easily subject to arrogance and hubris, and never is that human weakness so to be feared as when government has the power that allows such individuals to practice their pretensions of superior knowledge and wisdom over their fellow human beings.

The Continuing Relevance of The Road to Serfdom

It may be asked how relevant remains Hayek’s arguments and warnings more than seventy years after the appearance of The Road to Serfdom? After all, Nazi- and Soviet-style totalitarian socialism, with their attempts to comprehensively control and plan every facet of human life, and with a ruthlessness and violence unsurpassed in any period of modern history, are now things of past. They are closed chapters in the history of the 20th century.

First, as I said earlier, Hayek never claimed and went out of his way to insist that he was not forecasting that Western nations like Great Britain or the United States would become carbon copies of either Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.

What he did say was that the more governments extended their power and control over the personal, social and especially economic affairs of the private individuals of society, the less freedom of choice and decision-making would the individual continue to retain in his own hands.

The less flexible and dynamic would become the society, with the greater the direction of production, investment and employment under the influencing hand of government agencies, bureaus and departments.

The wider the net of welfare state dependency and guarantees for the circumstances of everyday life, the weaker would become the sense of initiative, self-reliance, and risk-taking to improve one’s own life.

The type of serfdom that has increasingly enveloped parts of human life in the Western world was, in fact, anticipated with concern and fear by the 19th century French social philosopher, Alexis de Tocqueville, in his study of Democracy in America published in the 1830s:

After having thus taken each individual one by one into its powerful hands, and having molded him as it pleases, the sovereign power extends its arms over the entire society; it covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated, minute, and uniform rules, which the most original minds and the most vigorous souls cannot break through to go beyond the crowd; it does not break wills, but it softens them, bends them and directs them; it rarely forces action, but it constantly opposes your acting; it does not destroy, it prevents birth; it does not tyrannize, it hinders, it represses, it enervates, it extinguishes, it stupefies, and finally it reduces each nation to being nothing more than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

I have always believed that this sort of servitude, regulated, mild and peaceful, of which I have just done the portrait, could be combined better than we imagine with some of the external forms of liberty, and that it would not be impossible for it to be established in the very shadow of the sovereignty of the people.

The Freedom We have Lost

Ask yourself, what corners of your daily life, in its most mundane and important aspects, are not controlled, regulated, planned, and overseen by the guiding hand of government?

Americans are free to say whatever they want – as long as it does not offend any ethnic, gender or racial group. They can pursue any career they choose – as long as they have been certified or licensed and have successfully passed inspection by an army of state regulators.

Americans may come and go as they please – as long as they have been approved for a government-issued international passport, declared whether they are carrying more than $10,000 in currency, reported all taxable or forbidden items they wish to bring into the country, and have not attempted to visit any foreign lands declared off-limits by the state.

They may buy whatever satisfies their fancy – as long as it has been manufactured, packaged, and priced according to government standards of safety, quality, and fairness, and as long as it has not been produced by a foreign supplier who exceeds his import quota or who offers to sell it below the state-mandated “fair market price.”

Americans may go about their own affairs – as long as they send their children to government schools or private schools approved by the state; as long as they do not attempt to employ too many of a particular ethic, gender, or racial group; as long as they do not attempt to plan fully for their own old age rather than pay into a mandatory government social security system.

They may enter into market relations with others – as long as they do not pay an employee less than the government-imposed minimum wage; as long as they do not attempt to construct on their own property a home or a business in violation of zoning and building ordinances; that is, as long as they do not try to live their lives outside the permissible edicts of the state.

And Americans freely take responsibility for their own actions and pay their own way – except whey they want the state to guarantee them a job or a “living wage”; except when they want to state to protect their industry or profession from competition either at home or from abroad; except when they want the state to subsidize their children’s education or their favorite art or the preservation of some wildlife area, or the medical research into the cure of some hated disease or illness; or except when they want the state to ban some books, movies, or peaceful acts between consenting adults rather than trying to change the behavior of their fellow men through peaceful persuasion or by personal example.

That many who read such a list of lost freedoms in the United States will be shocked that anyone should suggest that the state should not be concerned with many or all of these matters shows, I would suggest, just how far we have come and are continuing to go down a road to serfdom.

Restoring a Philosophy of Individual Rights

Yet, a hundred years ago before the First World War, when the citizens of the United States still lived under the influence of 19th century classical liberalism with its emphasis on individual liberty, free enterprise, limited government and voluntary association to service and solve many of the “social problems” of modern society, most people would have strongly opposed anyone who suggested that the government should envelope society with such a vast spider’s web of paternalistic plans, regulations, controls and redistributions.

It would have been considered “socialistic” and “un-American,” and not only by some supposed “right-wing fringe group” but by a wide consensus of the American people as a whole.

If we are to find a way to get off this road to paternalistic serfdom that has been weakening an understanding and draining existence out of the free society, the first task is to appreciate how this came about and what its implications can be.

Most importantly, the immorality of collectivism, with its insistence that the individual must live and sacrifice his life for “the tribe, “the nation,” “the society” must be wholeheartedly challenged and rejected. And in its place we must recover a sound and rational philosophy of individual rights that defends and respects the right of every human being to live his own life for himself as the core ethical concept in all human relationships.

As part of undertaking this task, Friedrich Hayek’s Road to Serfdom still serves an invaluable role in explaining how this road was first entered upon, what it led to in the middle decades of the 20th century and why government planning and regulation carries within it a loss of personal freedom and choice, and undermines the human spirit of creative thought and self-responsibility from which have come all the great accomplishments of mankind.

This is why The Road to Serfdom remains a classic of political and economic ideas that still speaks to us in our own time, and why anyone who values liberty and fears for its diminishment and loss can do no better than to open its pages and absorb its lessons.

(The text is based on a talk delivered at the College of Coastal Georgia, St. Simon Island, Georgia, February 12, 2015.)

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM


DHS Is Positioning to Secretly Arrest American Dissidents In Preparation for World War III

02/17/2015

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2015/02/13/dhs-positioning-secretly

-arrest-american-dissidents-preparation-world-war-iii/

2-16-2015 8-48-19 AM

By Dave Hodges

 

In my article this morning, I stated that Americans are war weary and when the anger related to the tragic death of Kayla Mueller subsides, Americans will resist supporting the commitment that World War III will require of all us in terms of labor, capital and the sacrifice of personal liberties. And make no mistake about it, the coming war is not about Kayla Mueller as a war is never about the death of one person.

2-16-2015 8-48-48 AM

When American forces pursue ISIS into SyriaPutin will respond in force. Putin has previously threatened to nuke the United States if it invaded Syria in violation of international law. Syria is critical to the Russians on a number of fronts.  For a complete explanation of the dynamics related to Putin’s threat and the Federal Reserve’s overt strategy to invade Iran and how Syria factors into this equation, please click here. This is the beginning of World War III.

America Jails War Protesters

Through the 20th century, America has been a nation which has jailed war protesters in ever-increasing numbers (e.g. World War I, internment of Japanese-American CITIZENS in World War II, and of course during the Vietnam where deadly force was even used at Kent State in 1970). Even Lincoln jailed citizens and journalists who have dared to object to the draft during the Civil War.

History Will Soon Repeat Itself

America is about to engage in the same behavior of citizen subjugation in preparation for a coming war. Only this time, protesting will not be permitted and protesters will be “dealt with”. Along these lines, I am in receipt of the following which is very troublesome:

“SAN FRANCISCO — President Obama will announce a new executive order on the sharing of cybersecurity threats and information at Friday’s cybersecurity summit at Stanford University, the White House said.

Most importantly to Silicon Valley, the president’s proposal is expected to cement the role of the Department of Homeland Security, rather than the National Security Agency, as the government lead for information-sharing with the private sector.”   

 

One of my colleagues in the media sent me the press release. Within 15 minutes, I had two very high level confirmations of what this meant. One of the sources is a high ranking government official with oversight responsibilities and the other is an ex-military intelligence asset with multiple and strong connections to dissident military types serving today. However, this is a story that writes itself. I really do not need unnamed sources in order to demonstrate where this is likely headed. The President’s intention to transfer intelligence information on American citizens from the NSA to the DHS is both ominous and the purpose is self-evident. My sources simply serve to reinforce the obvious intent. Also, this information is beginning to leak out in the independent media.

Anyone who has read my articles over the past two years knows that I have obtained information that the NSA’s massive data mining of every person is inextricably tied to creating a Threat Matrix Score for each and every American based on key word analyses of their cell phone conversations, emails, social mediastatements, etc. Also, a “known associates” file is maintained to determine the amount social reach a potential dissident has. For example, the bigger their reading audience or listening audience or Facebook following, the higher a person’s Threat Matrix Score.

This is Old News

Visionaries such as Steve Quayle and Doug Hagmann have been warning us for decades about the creation of a so-called “Red List”. The Red List is a modern-day interpretation of Nixon “Enemies list”. However, what is happening today is much more nefarious. The “Red List” is a “dissident removal list” and it will be conducted with extreme prejudice.

The people who have referred to such lists and those brave enough to expose them, as “fear-mongers”, may soon change their tune. After reading this article, these people are going to have a little harder time sleeping tonight.

Why Is Obama Transferring Intelligence Gathering on American Citizens from the NSA to the DHS?

This is the $64 million dollar question. When the NSA gathers information on Dave Hodges, the information may be shared with the Fusion Threat Centers and various domestic law enforcement agencies. However, the NSA’s intelligence is not immediately actionable. For NSA intelligence to be acted upon, a second generation set of agencies have to be involved. This is cumbersome and slow.

2-16-2015 8-49-39 AM

Who has the ability to oversee intelligence gathering and simultaneously act upon the intelligence? It is none other than the Department of Homeland Security. It is also the DHS that has, in the past two years, acquired 2.2 billion rounds of ammunition as well as 2700 armored personnel carriers, not the NSA. It is clear that DHS is the army of the central bankers who have hijacked our government and they are preparing to remove dissidents.

Keep in mind that this coming war is a war to preserve the Petrodollar and it will be waged at all costs. All opposition will be eliminated.

The optimistic part of me would like to believe that this transfer of power is only about streamlining our war on terror, then I am reminded who started al Qaeda and ISIS.

Dissident Roundups Are Coming

Through several conversations I have had in the 45 minutes prior to writing this article, I have learned the following:

There are two programs designed to round up people who are viewed as a danger to the status quo. The two operations are labeled “Operation BOA”, as in boa constrictor, and “Operation Lightening”. I have some operational details, but at this point they are still sketchy. Suffice it to say that Operation Lightening is the 3AM round up of all perceived dissident journalists and even some local politicians. This will be accomplished on a single night of terror. Operation BOA is a more deliberate process and will focus on more non-media threats such as outspoken veterans, gun rights activists, etc.

There Will Be No Martial Law Declaration

Martial law will not be called martial law, it will be labeled as “Continuity of Government”. The announcement of the procedures designed to enhance the “Continuity of Government” policies will be made by a four star General from NORTHCOM.

There is no definitive timeframe for this announcement. Logic would dictate that it will come in close proximity to launching new ground operations in the Middle East against the CIA created ISIS.

What Can Be Done?

There is no need for you to be concerned about what you say on Twitter, Facebook, on the phone or in print, that ship has already sailed. You already have a Threat Matrix Score and that score could eventually hold very significant consequences for you and your family.

Can anything be done? Probably not. However, the only thing that I think that may actually back up the enforcement of this plan is if enough people express awareness and outrage as to these violations of our 4th and 5th Amendment rights. As I wrote about in this morning’s article, this actionable intelligence will be supported by the NDAA and Executive Order 13603 which involves civilian round-ups (NDAA) and civilian conscription (EO 13603).

In the interest of self-preservation, it would be a good idea to circulate this article and the dozens that will certainly follow on this topic.

 2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM


As Opposition Gains Victories World Elite Prepare Response

02/16/2015

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/02/as-opposition-gains-victories-world.html

2-15-2015 2-28-02 PMAnthony Freda Art

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post

With the recent victories by the Syrian Army on the battlefield, the open response to Israel by Hezbollah, the success of the anti-Austerity SYRIZA party in Greece, and the Russian-brokered ceasefire in Ukraine, the Anglo-American establishment is obviously unhappy. However, the Atlanticists are clearly not going to sit idly by while their best laid plans are put awry.

Indeed, NATO military and political forces already seem to be preparing to douse even the mere spark of a multi-polar world that rejects the policies dictated from international bankers and the NATO headquarters.

Hezbollah Challenge to Israeli Lawlessness

Although part of a much larger resilience of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad to the destabilization campaign and foreign invasion of Western-backed terrorists, Hezbollah’s recent response to Israeli aggression in Syria – against Syria, Hezbollah, and Iran – was the first publicly visible and physical counterattack against NATO and the “new Ulster” settler state of Israel since the Syrian crisis began.

The Hezbollah response came after an Israeli airstrike in Syria that killed a number of Hezbollah fighters and a top commander as well as a top Iranian commander. The attack also claimed the life of Jihad Mughniyeh. Mughniyeh was the son of top Hezbollah military commander, Imad Mughniyeh, who was himself assassinated in Damascus in 2008, an incident that is widely attributed to Israel.

As a response, it was reported by the Syrian Perspective website, which maintains close contacts with the Syrian military, that Hezbollah struck an Israeli military convoy traveling along the Lebanese/Israeli border. It was reported by Mehr News that 17 Israeli soldiers were killed and that 1 Israeli soldier was taken prisoner. The event was reported virtually nowhere else.

Western media, of course, reported that only two Israeli soldiers were killed in the clash as a result of anti-tank weaponry. The fighting took place in the Shee’bah Farms area.

The killing of the Israeli soldiers was an important and bold statement for Hezbollah since it was a clear message to Israel that, while it may seek to act with impunity in foreign countries like war-stricken Syria, it would not be allowed to do so to Hezbollah. The lack of an Israeli response to Hezbollah’s own retaliation was telling as was the apparent downplaying of the event on the part of the Western media.

Syria Victory

The Syrian resilience to the Anglo-American onslaught has been quite remarkable in its own right. Yet it has engendered an uncontrollable hatred for Assad and the Syrian people on behalf of the world oligarchy inasmuch as NATO has been forced to resort to an array of dirty political and propaganda-based tricks, albeit more desperate ones as time progresses.

It was soon after the Syrian Army was able to adjust to fighting an insurgency as opposed to a direct military assault that Assad’s forces began to turn the tide against the death squads backed by NATO. Ever since then, the fight has been a back and forth with the Syrian military slowly gaining ground across the country. Recently, however, the SAA has made some very sizable gains in terms of territory and strategic victories. The essential recapture of Deir el-Zour, the liberation of Homs, the encirclement of Aleppo, and the elimination of terrorist supply routes in Damascus, Qunaytra, and Der’ah over the past several months to recent days have begun to accelerate the speed in which the SAA is wiping Syria clean of foreign-backed jihadists.

Most notably, it appears that NATO, in coordination with Israel, was attempting to direct their terrorist proxies from the Occupied Golan Heights area where they are in constant contact and tutelage of the Israeli intelligence services, on a charge towards Damascus. The plan was apparently to overwhelm Assad’s physical seat of power and thus threaten the elected government as well as provide the perception of inevitability of the downfall of Assad. The SAA thwarted that plan, however, with the closing of the supply routes, the elimination of the intended forward operating bases, and the current advancement toward the border of the occupied Golan.

SYRIZA Victory

With the recent victory of SYRIZA in Greece, opponents of austerity the world over have been rejoicing. The news from a country crushed by austerity policies, the European Central Bank, the IMF, and corrupt oligarchs is now heralding a shift in direction toward a “third way” that does not simply involve trading one austerity oligarch and his party for another.

For many in Greece, the signal is clear – help seems to be on the way.

For those watching the developments from afar, the hope is that the spark in Greece will light the brushfire across Europe and the rest of the world that says “No!” to austerity and banker domination of national economies.

SYRIZA’s steadfast refusal to engage in the further emiseration of Greek living standards, firing of workers, and cutting of social safety net programs as well as refusing to knuckle under to the dictates of Germany, the IMF, European Union, or the European Central Bank is indeed a breath of fresh air. Add to this the possibility that Greece is now standing in opposition to NATO provocations against Russia and the recent SYRIZA victory seems a relatively large fly in the Anglo-American ointment.

In truth, while there are problems with the SYRIZA platform, there are undoubtedly direct contradictions to the NATO, IMF, and Anglo-American agenda. It should thus be remembered that an individual leader or a group of individuals (party, activist organization, etc.) need not oppose each and every aspect of the Atlanticist plan, but merely enough of that plan to cause himself or themselves to be a stumbling block to the implementation of that agenda.

One need only read the original SYRIZA 40 point plan to see that there are a numerous areas in which the NATO agenda is directly contradicted.

  • Audit of the public debt and renegotiation of interest due and suspension of payments until the economy has revived and growth and employment return. 
  • Demand the European Union to change the role of the European Central Bank so that it finances States and programs of public investment. 
  • Raise income tax to 75% for all incomes over 500,000 euros.
  • Change the election laws to a proportional system.
  • Increase taxes on big companies to that of the European average. 

Adoption of a tax on financial transactions and a special tax on luxury goods. 

  • Prohibition of speculative financial derivatives. 
  • Abolition of financial privileges for the Church and shipbuilding industry. 
  • Combat the banks’ secret [measures] and the flight of capital abroad. 
  • Cut drastically military expenditures.
  • Raise minimum salary to the pre-cut level, 750 euros per month. 
  • Use buildings of the government, banks and the Church for the homeless
  • Open dining rooms in public schools to offer free breakfast and lunch to children.
  • Free health benefits to the unemployed, homeless and those with low salaries. 
  • Subvention up to 30% of mortgage payments for poor families who cannot meet payments. 
  • Increase of subsidies for the unemployed. Increase social protection for one-parent families, the aged, disabled, and families with no income.
  • Fiscal reductions for goods of primary necessity. 
  • Nationalization of banks. 
  • Nationalization of ex-public (service & utilities) companies in strategic sectors for the growth of the country (railroads, airports, mail, water). 
  • Preference for renewable energy and defence of the environment. 
  • Equal salaries for men and women.
  • Limitation of precarious hiring and support for contracts for indeterminate time.
  • Extension of the protection of labor and salaries of part-time workers. 
  • Recovery of collective (labor) contracts. 
  • Increase inspections of labor and requirements for companies making bids for public contracts.
  • Constitutional reforms to guarantee separation of Church and State and protection of the right to education, health care and the environment. 
  • Referendums on treaties and other accords with Europe.
  • Abolition of privileges for parliamentary deputies. Removal of special juridical protection for ministers and permission for the courts to proceed against members of the government. 
  • Demilitarization of the Coast Guard and anti-insurrectional special troops. Prohibition for police to wear masks or use fire arms during demonstrations. Change training courses for police so as to underline social themes such as immigration, drugs and social factors.
  • Guarantee human rights in immigrant detention centers. 
  • Facilitate the reunion of immigrant families.
  • Depenalization of consumption of drugs in favor of battle against drug traffic. 
  • Increase funding for drug rehab centers. 
  • Regulate the right of conscientious objection in draft laws.
  • Increase funding for public health up to the average European level.(The European average is 6% of GDP; in Greece 3%.) 
  • Elimination of payments by citizens for national health services.
  • Nationalization of private hospitals. Elimination of private participation in the national health system.
  • Withdrawal of Greek troops from Afghanistan and the Balkans. No Greek soldiers beyond our own borders. 
  • Abolition of military cooperation with Israel. Support for creation of a Palestinian State within the 1967 borders. 
  • Negotiation of a stable accord with Turkey.
  • Closure of all foreign bases in Greece and withdrawal from NATO.

[emphasis added]

Having only been in office a number of days, SYRIZA has already made a few populist moves – firing a number of highly paid parasites operating under the guise of being “consultants” from the IMF and European Central Bank in order to re-hire a number of previously fired government cleaning staff, for instance. SYRIZA has already taken a firm and public stance against austerity measures suggesting that the holders of Greek bonds should take a 50% haircut, Greek debt should be reduced by half, and that Greece is categorically finished with the implementation of austerity measures and the slicing of its living standards. Tsipras’ Finance Ministry has also essentially stated through its rhetoric that Germany will not dictate Greek economic policy.

In addition, SYRIZA has invited and welcomed the Russian Foreign Ministry as its first foreign diplomatic guest and has expressed great aversion to the idea of supporting any further sanctions on Russia. The concept of greater economic cooperation between the two countries has likewise been entertained much to the chagrin of the United States and a large portion of the EU.

Russia-Ukraine Ceasefire

The recent Russian-brokered peace deal between Eastern separatists and Western-backed Kiev fascists is yet another blow to Anglo-American plans. As the United States “mulled” the possibility of providing “lethal weapons” and assistance to the Kiev fascists, the Russians once again stepped in and used the rabid warmongering rhetoric of Washington against the U.S. by brokering a peace deal with the help of France and Germany. If the ceasefire deal stands, the U.S. would find it difficult (but not impossible) to publicly provide lethal arms for a conflict that is currently defused.

The plan involves the following platforms:

  • Ceasefire to begin at 00:01 local time on 15 February
  • Heavy weapons to be withdrawn, beginning on 16 February and completed in two weeks
  • All prisoners to be released; amnesty for those involved in fighting
  • Withdrawal of all foreign troops and weapons from Ukrainian territory. Disarmament of all illegal groups
  • Ukraine to allow resumption of normal life in rebel areas, by lifting restrictions
  • Constitutional reform to enable decentralisation for rebel regions by the end of 2015
  • Ukraine to control border with Russia if conditions met by the end of 2015

While there are unresolved issues surrounding Debaltseve, a town “held” by government troops but surrounded by separatists, and the question of self-rule for Donetsk or Lugansk, the ceasefire deal is an example of last minute diplomacy designed to jerk the rug out from under the feet of the Americans’ ability to justify public war policies in Ukraine as well as to provide some modicum of stability on Russia’s borders.

Syria

The string of victories by the SAA, without a doubt, has drawn the ire of the Anglo-Americans. Indeed, there is every reason to expect a renewed and hurried effort – complete with all the bells and whistles – to directly involve NATO, particularly the United States, militarily in Syria. Already, mainstream news headlines read as if the SAA’s assault on terrorist havens inside its own territory is an advance on Israel. One need only read the headlines like Yahoo! News’ “Fresh Offensive, Hezbollah Troops Fast Approaching Israeli Border From Syrian Side,” Jerusalem Posts’ “Hezbollah, Syrian Forces, and Iranian Officers Approach Israeli Border In Fight Against Rebels,” YNetNews’ “Syrian, Hezbollah Troops Advancing Toward Israeli Golan,” to see that the reports are being skewed as to suggest an impending Iranian, Syrian, and Hezbollah invasion of Israel. If the reports continue to be presented in this manner, it will surely be enough to goad the sizable portion of American Zionists into supporting a war to “protect” Israel.

In addition, US President Barack Obama has asked Congress for the Authorization To Use Military Force to “combat ISIL” that includes no geographic limit in its proposal. Although Obama claims that the AUMF will limit the number of ground troops that will be able to be dedicated to these combat operations, it is also clear that Obama is submitting the request for approval of the AUMF with limits in an effort to hold a bargaining chip for the Republican Congress. Already, Republicans like John Boehner and John McCain – engaged in a perpetual war froth – are claiming that the limits on ground troops are tying the hands of military commanders and that the limits are “unconstitutional.”

Notably, the resolution proposed by Obama already contains “blank check” language in that it allows the president “to use the armed forces of the United States as the president determines to be necessary and appropriate against [the Islamic State] or associated persons or forces.”

Still, Obama claims that he will propose language that would limit the number of troops to be used in these combat operations. While Obama’s claims themselves are suspect, it is clear that the Republican-controlled Congress will argue for the removal of these limitations. Thus, it is likely that we will witness some brief Washington theatre involving a faux debate between Republicans, Democrats, and the White House regarding the limitations on troops in any future operations under this AUMF, if it passes.

Obama is clearly willing to sacrifice the lives of countless American soldiers and civilians for his own narcissistic purposes and, more importantly, the wishes of the oligarchical elite that control him. However, it is also clear that Obama is occasionally concerned for his own political life. For that reason, one would be justified in wondering whether or not the AUMF and the invasion of Iraq (again) and Syria is already a done deal, providing that the Republicans are willing to take the lead in pushing for unlimited troop deployment and the quagmire that will result from it.

In other words, if the Republicans will sign their names to it along with the President, the mission is a go.

Greece

While the signs coming out of Greece may seem positive at first, there is an ominous cloud approaching – the cloud of George Soros and his color revolution apparatus.

If SYRIZA is truly as anti-austerity, anti-banker, and anti-troika as its rhetoric and even its first actions seem to indicate, then the Greek oligarchs, international bankers, corporate boards, and secret societies will undoubtedly respond as soon as they are able to mount a calculated strategy.

George Soros and his color revolution networks may just be the response these oligarchs are ready to mount.

Indeed, Soros has been founding and opening his infamous “Solidarity Centres” in Greece since January, 2014 using philanthropy and economic relief as justification for the opening of the centers. Because of Soros’ track record, one would be justified in wondering whether or not Soros’ Solidarity Centres’ grand openings were for the purposes of misdirecting the growing Greek discontent with austerity policies or if it was more in anticipation of a SYRIZA victory in the coming elections.

Regardless, the places are already being set. Alexis Tsipras had better start watching his back.

Indeed, the knives are already being sharpened by the color revolution apparatus and history has clearly shown that those who control it are willing to stab their target in the front as well as the back.

As The Guardian reported in January, 2014

George Soros has extended his financial support for Greece by establishing the first in a series of “solidarity centres” for those worst-hit by the country’s economic crisis.

The opening of the centre in the northern city of Thessaloniki comes as ever more Greeks are forced to turn to charities for help.

“Greece, to a great degree, has become a failed state,” said Aliki Mouriki, a sociologist at the National Centre for Social Research. “It is unable to provide basic facilities for its citizens because of budget cuts.

“In the absence of public welfare, and with around one and a half million officially unemployed, growing numbers are looking for substitutes elsewhere.”

The centre – a hub for NGOs offering health care and legal counsel – has been deluged with requests only days after opening its doors.

Soros committed $1m for heating oil last year after local mayors, unable to heat schools, appealed for help. Among them was Tassos Karabatos, mayor of Naoussa, also in northern Greece, who turned to the US investor after taking the unprecedented step of shutting down all 54 schools in his municipality when he saw that oil tanks were running dry.

While Soros’ donations may seem at first to be an act of incredible generosity, it would take gross naivete and ignorance of the billionaire’s history across the world to believe that he has anything remotely resembling good intentions for Greece.

Notice that, while Soros has bought some watery-eyed loyalty with his donations, it is also true that his “Solidarity Centres” are also “a hub for NGOs,” a necessary part of any color revolution. In fact, the currency speculator Soros has funded a number of color revolutions through his “democracy” and “civil society” NGOs in Europe and even the United States.

Of course, some Greeks were not as foolish as to look toward the Soros machine for help. A number of school parents’ associations refused to endorse any of the Soros funds. The presence of mind of the Greek people earned them condemnation from many of their local leaders, however.

Indeed, Soros is most well-known for playing a major role in the funding and facilitating of the “Bulldozer Revolution” in Serbia that overthrew Slobodan Milosevic in 2000, Georgia’s “Rose Revolution” of 2003, the 2006 push to move Turkey toward a more Islamist governing structure, and even the Occupy movement in the United States among a great many others.

Ukraine

Already the NATO powers are working overdrive in order to further exacerbate the crisis in Ukraine, despite and because of the Russian-brokered ceasefire. Again, from reading the headlines floating around in the mainstream media, one can see the idea that the Russian-brokered ceasefire is “useless” is a foregone conclusion and one that is being pushed heavily.

In addition, ever since the deadline was set for a ceasefire to take place on February 15, fighting has raged across Ukraine in an effort to gain as much territory and victories as possible before the ceasefire terms come into effect. It is also possible that Kiev forces are intentionally trying to wreck any potential success of the ceasefire agreement before it ever begins. Indeed, there is little doubt that Kiev forces are working on the orders of NATO (see hereherehere, and here) and CIA commanders (see here and here) .

Parties to the ceasefire agreement, particularly the separatists, are already becoming tired of ceasefire agreements that are repeatedly violated by Kiev forces conveniently at times where separatists are close to making significant gains on the ground. If Washington decides to go ahead openly with its plan to arm Kiev with “lethal” weapons, the position of the West will be clear to all – war with Russia is not only possible, it is desired.

Conclusion

While much of what is considered “world affairs” is nothing more than well-scripted theatre, it is also true that there are often events beyond the control of the world oligarchy as well as individuals that occasionally slip out of their complete control. It is also true that there are those individuals who willing refuse to accept the dictates of the oligarchy.

Whether the oligarchs are able to regain control through usurpation, bribery, or deceit or whether they are forced to act forcibly in an open and physical manner all depends upon the acts and the individuals involved. The resistance need not be devoid of flaws to be the resistance. It need only stand in the way of the will of the world oligarchy to find itself in its crosshairs.

With that in mind, however, it must be the goal of us all to resist and obstruct the will of the oligarchy. Regardless of the details of our preferences, we must never let an oligarch attack us on his own terms. Resistance may not necessarily equal victory but it is certainly not futile.

This oligarchy is clearly preparing to respond on a number of fronts. We must be prepared to resist it every step of the way.

Recently from Brandon Turbeville:

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor’s Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of six books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom7 Real ConspiraciesFive Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1and volume 2, and The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria. Turbeville has published over 300 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV.  He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com. 

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

 


EUGENICS THEY WANT US DEAD! – Red Level Alert America

02/14/2015

PDF of Article – Small Font, 5 pages
PDF of Article – Large Font, 10 pages 

While we are all focusing on the coming financial collapse, as bad as that is something much more sinister is in the works.  It’s very subtle if you are not paying attention.  But, to the aware, it’s blatant, insidious, and just as horrific as Hitler’s Germany.

There is a small group of the world’s banking elite who have worked for a few hundred years with ingenious precision and unlimited money, to corral, coerce, and conquer every country of value on earth.  For people who are normal and not rabidly greedy, it’s hard to fathom the idea of anyone trying to get control of the whole world, and taking a chunk of every measure of value traded between its people.  What’s even harder to grasp is that they will stop at nothing to do it.  And I mean nothing!  Look around you!  Look at the millions of people slaughtered in just the last 10 years.  Their leaders may have resisted the Cabal, but many if not all of those dead people were innocents.  We have actually become numb to the idea of genocide, even when it’s right under our nose!!!  And we are sadly mistaken if we think we are somehow immune to the wrath of the most evil people on earth.  They want us dead!They would love nothing better than to use our own military against us by goading us into revolting.  They have really upped the ante lately too.  Swat teaming everyday Americans on a regular basis and making sure it’s in the news, and in our face.  If we finally snap, then they will have their pretext to kill us off en mass.  They love the cover of war for murdering millions. Don’t you think that our trick CIA could have found and destroyed Hussain or Gaddafi without dropping a single bomb?  Smedley Butler was right, war is a racket.  But I get the distinct feeling that it’s just not quite as much fun for this group of psychopaths if there’s not total Mad Max destruction.

If after pondering and researching these facts and events, you come to any other conclusion; you are in need of a serious wake up call.  The Powers That Be (TPTB) have even carved in stone their desire to eliminate 80% plus of the population of the world.  They need a much smaller herd if they are going to be able to steer and control everyone for a One World Government, under their control.  A theme emerges when you look at the big picture. They find the things that we all need to survive or use, then put their agenda in motion.

If you still want to believe your government loves you, let me count for you the ways they don’t.

  1. ASPARTAME (renamed AMINO SWEET or NEOTAME to thwart growing awareness)- Named commercially Equal/Sweet ‘n Low, aspartame has now found its way into 5000-6000 food products.  This artificial sweetener was denied approval three times.  That is, until Mr. Donald Rumsfeld was hired as the new president of the Searl Co.  The company has since been sold to Monsanto.  This chemical literally turns into wood alcohol in your body, by-passing the blood brain barrier.  Tests show it causes brain tumors and cancer, reduces fertility, can be addictive, and cause many other serious health problems.  The incidence of brain tumors and cancer has risen dramatically since it was introduced.  The test monkeys were trying to tell us something.  A quick read on how they make it and you’ll realize why it’s so toxic. Instead of a “WARNING” on food labels, most products just say ‘sugar free’.
  2. GMO CROPS- Since these crops are patented; no one really knows exactly what types of genes are spliced into their DNA.  They call them terminator seeds, meaning they do not produce seeds for future planting and must be purchased by farmers every year.  The original theory was to blend Monsanto’s herbicide Round-Up into the gene of the plant so the crops could be sprayed with Monsanto’s Round-up without killing the plant.  Way back in the 1980?s president G.H.W. Bush declared that if Genetically Modified crops looked like regular foods, then they were foods, and the government would not spend federal money on testing or researching their safety or efficacy.

It has since been a battle royal for independent scientists to show that these foods are indeed questionable as to their safety for human or animal  consumption.  Obvious evidence from around the world shows that farm animals, as well as mice and hamsters in laboratory tests, have a high incidence of death and deformity in second and third generation offspring, spontaneous abortion and sterility.  These plants have infiltrated growing fields around the world and their derivatives are in nearly all our foods. Problems are arising in spite of the hyped ‘improved crop yield’.  Complete fields are collapsing, new ‘super weeds’ are growing, and the over spraying of pesticides and Round-up are destroying the biology of growing soil. GMO crops were never tested over the long haul, and now the very worm the farmers wanted to avoid are developing a resistance to the GM corn. Monsanto’s answer? Plant up to 20% of the fields with NON-GMO to lure the worms over there!  And, now they’ll try splicing two kinds of pesticides into the corn seed.  Last summer Monsanto had to pay GMO farmers to use their competitor’s herbicide, since Round-up was not working anymore.

Organically grown crops are being contaminated by wind and cross pollination, and farmers are being sued for ‘stealing’ Monsanto’s property.  If they can’t afford to fight the monster company, they are losing their farms and lifetime investments. Monsanto hires private thugs to secretly inspect organic farms in order to accomplish these take downs.  The predatory Big Ag companies have declared war on smaller farmers and us.  Scientists believe that once the distorted DNA of these plants go into our bodies, that our own DNA is invaded and that our intestines can literally become pesticide factories. Monsanto has put up vicious attacks on scientists who try to warn about GMO dangers. Recently the USDA ignored an urgent letter from a Purdue scientist about a newly discovered pathogen in GMOs, pleading with them not to approve Monsanto’s new GM alfalfa.  The USDA has even defied an appeals court order not to approve it until an environmental impact study was conducted, but they approved it anyway. What ever happened to the truth that “you can’t fool mother nature”?  If GMO’s are not stopped now, indigenous seeds, organic foods, age old farming methods, clean and normal healthy foods will be destroyed forever. Since Monsanto lobbied against their ‘Franken Foods’ being labeled, and won, we have become the de facto ‘environmental impact study’.  There are already red warning lights flashing, but hell, who cares?  Full steam ahead!

3.COREXIT- During the Gulf Oil Disaster, BP defied the EPA’s ‘order’ not to apply this highly toxic deadly poison into the sea water.  A ‘no fly zone’ was, and still is in force, so the public will not see that the spraying continues to this day.  There has been a news black out imposed on scientists, researchers, doctors who are trying to diagnose and treat the many illnesses that the Gulf residents are sick and dying from.  Plants and humans are being affected far, far inland, but no one knows the extent of the damage. The Corexit has produced new and deadly bacteria, one is known as Blue Plague, but that’s where the story dead ends.  Has anyone heard the numbers of the premature deaths on the Gulf Coast, compared with the normal death rates?  No, I didn’t think so. Somehow the news did leak out though, that the ‘spill’ has blown open and is gushing oil again, although it’s questionable that it ever stopped.  Gee, if oil drilling expert Matt Simmons was still here, maybe we could find out.  He gave very good reports on TV.  He died alone in his hot tub one night from what they said was a ‘heart attack’.  I sure miss him.

  1. VACCINES- Does it seem to you that every day some new vaccine pops up that we must have?  Shingles?  HPV?  In my 33 years of working with the public on an intimate level, I’ve never known anyone who died of cervical cancer.  Hmmm.  Each year they guess which flu bug mightcome around, and we’re all supposed to line up.  A couple years ago they said ‘oops, we were wrong, come in for another stab’ of a different brew.  Two winters ago they said we were all going to die a quick horrible death if we didn’t get the ‘human, pig, bird’ flu shot.  I didn’t even see anyone sick, let alone die, did you?  Many got sick and died from the vaccine though.  Is it any wonder the drug companies paid off congress some years ago to exempt them from any damage liability for their vaccines?  We’ve all heard the horror stories about what these shots can do to people.  Squalene, mercury, and lord knows what else is in these formulas, or how they are cultured. Since we aren’t told, I’m not allowed to repeat rumors here.  I did read last year that 83% of the people in California who ‘contracted’ whooping cough had been vaccinated for it though. Hmmm

Unfortunately, the government has admitted that ‘some’ vaccines had cancers cells in them, that they infected thousands of children in other countries with polio, and conducted illegal experiments on people with syphilis bacteria in Alabama and Guatemala.  What a good way to hurt a lot of people at once; figure out what a whole lot of people think they need or want, then shoot it straight into their veins.  But just as people are finally wising up to the dangers of vaccines, Big Pharma pushes harder and harder for vaccines to be mandatory for when they decide to create another fake pandemic or illness.

  1. FALSE PANDEMIC PANIC- An investigation into the World Health Organization’s (WHO) proclamation that the world was in a bonafide pandemic (after changing the criteria for that level 6 classification), it was discovered that there were unscrupulous and conflict of interest ties to the pharmaceutical companies. Wow!  What a surprise!  And yes, what was the payoff going to be?  Billions of flu shots sold.  Sometimes I think they need to float a trial balloon just to see how many people are still buying their scary propaganda, inflamed and enabled by the corporate owned mainstream media.  Pharmaceutical companies, with the governments’ help, have already accomplished blackmailing parents into shooting up their children with a plethora of vaccines if they want to send them to school.  The Powers That Be are hell bent on finding some way to force their poisons into all of us. Keep in mind that whatever the TV is trying to sell you, whatever story they go hyperbolic over, it means one of 2 things.  It is either to promote TPTB’s agenda, or to divert your attention awayfrom TPTB’s agenda.  And when they omit news that’s important to your life, it’s so you don’t think there’s an agenda at all.
  1. PHARMACEUTICAL DRUGS- I think the number of deaths caused by prescription drugs each year is up to 200,000 if I’m not mistaken.  And that’s not even the mistakes.  That’s the number for properly prescribed meds!  The drug companies trump up a crisis, like cholesterol numbers that are too high, restless legs, hyperactive kids, whatever, just when they are ready to release their shiny new pill for exactly that problem.  They lie and fudge in their testing, hide the flaws in the results, push for fast track approval, and wala! Billions more pour into their coffers, while people start keeling over in droves.  By the time the FDA decides to even ‘study’ the issue, thousands have died.  Don’t you just love being the real test subjects for them?  And you didn’t even get paid to be in a clinical trial!  Even if the hungry lawyers get the class action suits going, the award damages are far, far smaller than what the company has already raked in.  Oh well, there’s always ‘collateral damage’ with these things, you know?  Haven’t I heard those words somewhere before, like when the government is making excuses for killing ‘innocent civilians’ during war?
  2. FLUORIDATED CITY WATER- This is a little trick they stole from the Hitler playbook. It’s just so expensive to dispose of the waste from aluminum manufacturing, hmmm, what could we drum up as a good use for it?  Never mind that it actually causes brain damage, or makes your teeth mottled and discolored, or corrodes your bones, we’ll just put that skull and crossbones on the 55 gallon drums to warn people.  But they’ll still think it’s good for them because we said so, right?  Then we’ll pay the dentists to agree.  Gee, another thing a whole lot of people need, water!  Now, one of President Obama’s czars suggests adding in lithium to keep people calm, along with the other pharmaceuticals that have been found in our water supplies.  No matter what we learn after the factabout what’s been done wrong, it just continues on anyway, doesn’t it?  Why is that?
  3. AEROSOL SPRAYING- Have you noticed all those pretty streams planes make in the sky over your head?  I have.  They can turn a clear Arizona deep blue sky cloudy, in just about an hour.  Sometimes they make puff clouds that have streamers draping off of them.  Cool!  But maybe in a short time, you find you can’t breath so well, or you find these cobweb like things on your plants, or it can look like it’s snowing when it’s 100 degrees! More cool!  But it’s a different story when you read about the testing of what’s been collected in air samples, or in people’s blood and saliva.  Micro particles of aluminum, barium, strontium, arsenic, zinc, and too many to list other heavy metals, along with strange bacteria and fibers.

Have you ever heard of Morgellon’s disease?  It’s where people develop moving fibers under their skin.  It’s one of the most horrible, unimaginable, creepy and disgusting skin ailments I’ve ever seen.  Look it up. Dr. Clifford Carnicom has been researching aerosol spraying, otherwise known as chemtrails, for over 12 years and has discovered the Morgellons fibers in the fallen debris and in the saliva of 99% of the people he’s tested.  What do you know?  One more thing we all like, breathing the air!  By the way, it’s not legal for the government to experiment on us without our permission, “UNLESS it’s for medical, therapeutic, pharmaceutical, agricultural, industrial purposes, or for research in general, or for protection against, or for law enforcement purposes, including riot control”. (Section 1520a Chapter 32 of U.S. Code Title 50).  No wonder our ‘representatives’ scurry like rats when approached about this subject!  They must have their own special air to breathe.

  1. FDA- How many words are the limit for regular articles?  Some doctors have been known to call this the Federal Death Agency.  There are countless detrimental to life additives, fillers, chemicals, artificial extenders, dyes, poison in plastic food containers, and even radiation that are just fine with the FDA for us to eat.  But don’t you dareconsume organic raw milk!  Oh no no no.  They just won’t have any of that!  If you report adverse effects from one of their approved elements, you may not hear back from them for years.  You won’t even be noticed if you’re already a statistic!  It just depends on what made you sick.  If it was something a huge corporation makes, forget it.  If you got sick from a peach you bought at a local roadside stand, or some lemonade from your neighbors little girls stand down the street, well its curtains for them.  They’ll get 10+ years in the slammer.

Just beware while you’re shopping at your favorite organic fresh food grocer. Those black Suburban cars, swat team ninja cops, and big AK-47 rifles can be quite startling.  Oh, I forgot about all the toxic chemicals that are allowed to go into our skin and hair products too.  Boys and girls, don’t forget to use your (cancer causing) sunscreen now.  Remember to be careful in that bad sun!  P.S.  Watch out for domestic home grown terrorists like John McCain and Dick Durbin, they’ve been trying to outlaw your vitamin and mineral diet supplements, and they just won’t quit.

  1. VITAMIN SUPPLEMENT DEMONIZATION- The Pharmaceutical companies have a jealousy problem.  They don’t like all the money you’ve been spending on vitamins to stay healthy.  It’s just driving them crazy.  So they got our government to sign onto some UN treaty called Codex Alimentarius.  This multi country UN gig wants to judge just how little nutrition you actually need in your vitamin pills, something like what wouldn’t be enough for your pet fly.  Then they want to give the rights to BigPharma to make the pills, with only slightly more milligrams at one thousand times the cost.  What the heck took them so long?  And to make it even better, you’ll have to go to your doctor (IF you can find one after ObamaCare kicks in) for a prescription for your vitamin A, B, C, D, Etc.  So now, we won’t have to worry at all about maintaining good health, because our loving government will do it all for us, right?  So, when all the diseases that are caused by nutritional deficiencies return, all the pharmaceutical companies will be lined up waiting to fix us.

Are you getting the picture yet?  Foods that are loaded up with chemicals, pesticides and herbicides, hormones and anti-biotics to counteract e.coli and staff bacteria; severely depleted in nutrients and minerals, and shipped in from all over the world with scant oversight.  Yet they want to deny us the only means we have to counteract the industrialization and over processing of our foods.  The deal is to keep us very sick, slowly dying, and drain our purses drybefore we die.  Speaking of dying, how many people are killed by vitamins each year?  None, or one?  From the way the FDA is reacting, and Sen. Durbin’s new bill, you might think there was a holocaust in progress.  Well, there is….. But it’s not caused by vitamins!!

  1. EPA-Natural gas fracking (flaming tap water).  5 year Naval war exercises on all US coasts with every horrible kind of toxin, bomb, or chemical warfare germ you can think of.  They even admit this endeavor will “take” (read ‘kill’) up to 11 million sea mammals.  Nuclear leakage and fallout.  Every imaginable chemical, pesticide, and herbicide.  Chemtrails. Oil spills and gushers.  Aerosol spraying of deadly toxins on oceans.  Ocean trash dumping by corporations.  Neglected toxic Superfund sites. Overflowing spent nuclear fuel pools all over the country.  Electro Magnetic Frequencies (EMF).  Let’s see.  What am I forgetting?  It doesn’t matter. Anything is OK by the EPA apparently.

12.USDA- Let me give you a clue.  All these alphabet soup agencies are head fakes.  They were put in place by TPTB to make us think the government was protecting us and our country.  And maybe for awhile, to get us believing in them, they were.  But folks, the worm has turned.  Look out.  They are all there to enable the move to consolidate the elites’ plan for total control over our lives!

Here’s a line from a recent article: ‘The USDA lied to farmers and ranchers about federal drought insurance.  The government has refused to pay up during the worst drought in US history’.  More farmers down the drain.  The USDA is an enemy of the country.  The FDA is an enemy of people.  The SEC is an enemy of investors.  The EPA is an enemy of the earth.  I could go on if you like.  Nothing is logical. Nothing makes sense.  What’s love got to do with it?  Nothing.  TPTB are brutal, evil, and diabolical.  They delight in death and destruction, and enjoy watching us suffer.

  1. FUKUSHIMA-What is Fukushima?  I think I’ve heard of that somewhere before.  Was that the name of a country somewhere near Japan or something?  Oh that’s right, there was a tsunami, and I think I heard something about a nuclear power plant.  Boy, that CNN just jumps from one story to the next.  Things are moving so fast these days it’s hard to keep up. But I think somebody from England said something about not going out in the rain, or eating green leafy vegetables.  But everything must be OK now, because I haven’t heard any more about it.

Nothing is more despicable than to have our government order a news black-out about what is very possibly a life extinction event of mass proportion.

  1. THE FOOD SAFETY AND MODERNIZATION ACT- Better known as ‘The End of Small Farms and Don’t Bother Looking For Roadside Fruit and Vegetable Stands Act’.  Those small time farmers are going to be too busy complying with new draconian paperwork and regulations to worry about the safety of their organic crops.  While they are busy paying the piper, the crops will die of neglect anyway.  But don’t get all huffy and think you’ll just grow some food of your own.  The Garden Police will show up with their AK-47s, and God knows what will happen if you don’t have your permit!  And don’t even think about sharing your extra tomatoes with the neighbor.  That is against the law now.  They’ll work best thrown onto the compost pile for next years planting.

Our loyal representatives twisted themselves into pretzels to get this bill passed.  The lame duck congress even worked till the wee hours of the morning so no one would see what they were doing on the last day they were in office.  Many who may have voted ‘no’ had gone home to bed.  They got about 6 million letters, calls, and e-mails from the suckers who voted for them, begging them not to pass this dangerous bill!  But they just couldn’t resist giving us a parting gift, because they couldn’t resist the parting gifts they got for passing this disgusting bill.  In case you haven’t picked up on it, every new bill in this Orwellian world we live in, has a name the exact opposite of what its underlying purpose is.

  1. SMART GRID and SMART METERS- As if electro magnetic frequencies (EMF) from cell phones, cell towers, microwave ovens, HD TVs, wi-fi signals, medical CT scans, X-rays, and airport scanners, aren’t enough to fry us, we now get to have the new and improved electrical grid along with the deadly ‘smart meters’ that go with them.  Here’s another gift from TPTB money grabbers who have nothing but their own agenda in mind.  Even all the corporations who are going to be bidding for a piece of the action dare not bring up the issue of safety.  Not a word!  This may finallybe the wake-up call for all the people who refused to believe their government has anything but their best interests at heart.  Once again, our dependence on electricity will be used to hold us hostage, and to make us comply with something that may very well kill us!  Not to mention that ‘smart meters’ are a complete invasion of your privacy and a way for Big Brother to keep track of your every move and even control your appliances remotely if they want.  Please read up on this subject beforethey come to your town and alert your neighbors!  The meters will be spewing strong pulses of microwave energy all through the environment, your home and everybody in it, then returning the signal to a receiver up to 2 miles away. Even if you didn’t have one, don’t worry, you’ll be treated to all your neighbors signals as well, right through your walls.

Your utility’s talking point will be that ‘they are no more dangerous than a
cell phone’, or that it only pulses twice a day.  Outright lies!  Apparently, they haven’t been keeping up on their propaganda scheme.  Even the WHO is finally admitting that cell phones do cause cancer tumors!  Another case of hiding the health risks for the benefit of big corporations.  And, according to Dr. Bill Deagle, who has been testing the smart meter, it’s been putting out 100 times the EMF of a cell phone!  I wonder how long it will take to kill people who are unfortunate enough to live in multi-family dwellings, or live with a meter bank containing hundreds of meters a short distance from their home?  Don’t think our government knows exactly what they’re doing to us?  The military has studied this technology extensively!  The meters have not even been approved by UL, and you need a subpoena to get safety rating records from the utility co.  How would you like to die?  Cooked by microwaves, or fried in a fire?  The meters have been catching on fire and may have been the cause of the gas line explosion in San Diego that took 8 lives and 47 homes a few months ago.  Federal “investigators” said they were not going to investigate if the meter was the cause “because the meter did not cause the explosion”.  They don’t look for things they don’t want to find.

The utility commissions and the utility companies are playing extreme hardball with people who do not want to be microwaved in their homes.  If you try to ‘opt out’, you will pay dearly to protect your health, while they are happy to place your life on the black jack table for that first winning hand.  Judging by Dr. Deagle’s own testing of his smart meter, it’s obvious that any test results provided by the industry claiming the meters are completely safe are fraudulent!  Further, they do admit that there has been no long term testing, but you’ll need a subpoena to see their safety data.  So just like cell phones, how can they dare to make any safety claims?  “The meters are within the FCC’s guidelines” they say. (Another alphabet agency)  I guess cell phones are too, although the radio frequency levels they put out have by law, but if you refuse them permission to install the meter, they will come back and install it anyway and say you have no choice.  Or they’ll threaten to turn your power off!  They thought they could pass this one off by saying it will save us money, conserve energy, and save the earth!   But people are catching on to this one, and the lawsuits are already under way.  (Good luck with that.  How many judges do you trust these days?)  Act now and get your city to ban them, please!  And don’t forget to educate your doctor.  He’ll need the info to treat your addled brain and confused bodily systems, if the Cabal gets their way.  Every cell in our body has an electrical biology, and unless you aren’t human, you will be damaged.  It’s the modern day version of a gas chamber.  The chamber this time happens to be your own home,  If this isn’t our line in the sand, nothing is.

  1. UNENDING WARS- Mothers, don’t let your babies grow up to be soldiers.  If they make it back home, they’ll never be the same.  Look up Gulf War Syndrome. They are guinea pigs for every imaginable vaccine, and unwitting victims of America’s own weapon of mass destruction called
    depleted uranium.  You could also become the proud grandparents of a grandchild with 2 heads and 4 legs.  It has become very obvious that our government, our military, and our country have been the subjects of a coup ‘d tat.  The next time someone says our sons and daughters are defending our freedom,remind them of the black SUVs and swat team raids on the beautiful Amish farmers, or the 630 citizen deaths by cop tasers, or the no warrant, no knock raids on homes of innocent people, or the sexual assault by the airport TSA because people just want to visit their family in another state.

I know our young people sign up out of financial desperation and perceived patriotism.  Once they sign they are compelled to follow orders, but

it is now apparent to the entire world that they are not fighting for our country, but for the agenda of the cabal of elites who want to own it all, including you.  The military standing down is our only hope for saving the country.  We need them to defend us, right here at homefrom the enemies within, and the outside enemies who are fomented by our government’s lies.   I hate to say it, but right at this moment, our military is aiding and abetting the enemy to destroy our dreams, our freedoms, and our country.   Is there not a single commander who has the guts to loudly and publicly just say NO MORE?!  just been listed as carcinogens.  Once again, the people who will get rich off this boondoggle will be sailing away on their yachts, while you lie in a hospital bed dying of cancer.  You can bet they won’t have smart meters ontheir homes!

The government has offered bribe money to the states, utilities and the utility commissions (which came from us in the form of ‘stimulus money’) to institute this program.  Then we’ll pay for it again ‘to reimburse the utility along with a ‘fair’ profit’, by paying much higher rates.  It is NOT mandated

  1. OBAMA”CARE”- Written by the insurance companies, it will be the perfect covert plan to eliminate all the ‘useless eaters’ and save the government from paying all of us pesky Baby Boomers our social security. It won’t be hard, since while they are adding 30 million people into the system, 60% of the doctors we have now will be long gone.  They want nothing to do with it.  Everyone knows that the medical system is in melt down as we speak anyway.  One of my favorite parts of this travesty is the rule that if you are ‘not up to date on your vaccines’, you won’t get care.  It’s such a fabulous law that the scum who voted for it made themselves and their staff exempt from it!  Make your doctor appointments now!  It may be a few years wait.  Ask him if he makes house calls to jails, since that’s where you’ll be if you can’t afford ObamaCare.  By the way…. when your doctor (if he hasn’t left the country) asks, by law, if you have any firearms in your home, tell him ‘absolutely not’!  Then ask him why he wants to know.
  2. WEATHER MODIFICATION- Scientists say the technology certainly exists.  I’m sure the ruling Cabal has unlimited funds to invest in it, and the Navy says they’ll own the weather by 2025.  We keep having rare, deadly, ‘once every 100 years’ droughts, floods, earthquakes, temperatures, and snowfalls, so I’m really suspicious about this.  I think they own the weather now!  It seems to add up to broke farmers, food shortages and sky high prices.  Our government signed on to a UN treaty that prohibits all countries from using weather weapons.  So, our leaders promptly privatized the U.S. weather bureau, and created numerous front companies that carry out their plans for them anyway.  It’s similar to hiring that company Blackwater in Iraq.  They did such a good job for the U.S. in Iraq, and they’re so proud that they changed their name to XE, as if that makes them seem any less dark.
  3. FINANCIAL COLLAPSE/DEPRESSION- I forget.  How many people died during the 1930s depression?  One of the most telling discoveries were the thousands of coffins piled up that Jessie Ventura showed on one of his TruTV shows.  That show was never aired again, and was removed altogether from the TruTV website and the internet.  Are the coffins for the masses of people who will starve during the new great depression?  Why did the government order them?  If they are there in case of a big natural disaster, wouldn’t the government just say so?  Instead they removed the evidence from view.  In detective terms, they call that consciousness of guilt.

Will someone please wake me up after I’m dead, and let me know if any of the psychopathic, demonic, control freak maniacs, who have gutted our country and our lives, are ever held accountable and banished from this world?  I’d appreciate it.  Thank You!

Please print out this article and give it to the people you care about.  If they are still sleeping, but have any survival instinct left, maybe this will shake them awake.  We are NOT in Kansas anymore my fellow Americans.

They would love nothing better than to use our own military against us by goading us into revolting. They have really upped the ante lately too. Swat teaming everyday Americans on a regular basis and making sure it’s in the news, and in our face. If we finally snap, then they will have their pretext to kill us off en mass. They love the cover of war for murdering millions. Don’t you think that our trick CIA could have found and destroyed Hussain or Gaddafi without dropping a single bomb? Smedley Butler was right, war is a racket. But I get the distinct feeling that it’s just not quite as much fun for this group of psychopaths if there’s not total Mad Max destruction.

If after pondering and researching these facts and events, you come to any other conclusion; you are in need of a serious wake up call. The Powers That Be (TPTB) have even carved in stone their desire to eliminate 80% plus of the population of the world. They need a much smaller herd if they are going to be able to steer and control everyone for a One World Government, under their control. A theme emerges when you look at the big picture. They find the things that we all need to survive or use, then put their agenda in motion.

If you still want to believe your government loves you, let me count for you the ways they don’t.

  1. ASPARTAME (renamed AMINO SWEET or NEOTAME to thwart growing awareness)- Named commercially Equal/Sweet ‘n Low, aspartame has now found its way into 5000-6000 food products. This artificial sweetener was denied approval three times. That is, until Mr. Donald Rumsfeld was hired as the new president of the Searl Co. The company has since been sold to Monsanto. This chemical literally turns into wood alcohol in your body, by-passing the blood brain barrier. Tests show it causes brain tumors and cancer, reduces fertility, can be addictive, and cause many other serious health problems. The incidence of brain tumors and cancer has risen dramatically since it was introduced. The test monkeys were trying to tell us something. A quick read on how they make it and you’ll realize why it’s so toxic. Instead of a “WARNING” on food labels, most products just say ‘sugar free’.
  1. GMO CROPS- Since these crops are patented; no one really knows exactly what types of genes are spliced into their DNA. They call them terminator seeds, meaning they do not produce seeds for future planting and must be purchased by farmers every year. The original theory was to blend Monsanto’s herbicide Round-Up into the gene of the plant so the crops could be sprayed with Monsanto’s Round-up without killing the plant. Way back in the 1980′s president G.H.W. Bush declared that if Genetically Modified crops looked like regular foods, then they were foods, and the government would not spend federal money on testing or researching their safety or efficacy.

It has since been a battle royal for independent scientists to show that these foods are indeed questionable as to their safety for human or animal consumption. Obvious evidence from around the world shows that farm animals, as well as mice and hamsters in laboratory tests, have a high incidence of death and deformity in second and third generation offspring, spontaneous abortion and sterility. These plants have infiltrated growing fields around the world and their derivatives are in nearly all our foods. Problems are arising in spite of the hyped ‘improved crop yield’. Complete fields are collapsing, new ‘super weeds’ are growing, and the over spraying of pesticides and Round-up are destroying the biology of growing soil. GMO crops were never tested over the long haul, and now the very worm the farmers wanted to avoid are developing a resistance to the GM corn. Monsanto’s answer? Plant up to 20% of the fields with NON-GMO to lure the worms over there! And, now they’ll try splicing two kinds of pesticides into the corn seed. Last summer Monsanto had to pay GMO farmers to use their competitor’s herbicide, since Round-up was not working anymore.

Organically grown crops are being contaminated by wind and cross pollination, and farmers are being sued for ‘stealing’ Monsanto’s property. If they can’t afford to fight the monster company, they are losing their farms and lifetime investments. Monsanto hires privatethugs to secretly inspect organic farms in order to accomplish these take downs. The predatory Big Ag companies have declared war on smaller farmers and us. Scientists believe that once the distorted DNA of these plants go into our bodies, that our own DNA is invaded and that our intestines can literally become pesticide factories. Monsanto has put up vicious attacks on scientists who try to warn about GMO dangers. Recently the USDA ignored an urgent letter from a Purdue scientist about a newly discovered pathogen in GMOs, pleading with them not to approve Monsanto’s new GM alfalfa. The USDA has even defied an appeals court order not to approve it until an environmental impact study was conducted, but they approved it anyway. What ever happened to the truth that “you can’t fool mother nature”? If GMO’s are not stopped now, indigenous seeds, organic foods, age old farming methods, clean and normal healthy foods will be destroyed forever. Since Monsanto lobbied against their ‘Franken Foods’ being labeled, and won, we have become the de facto ‘environmental impact study’. There are already red warning lights flashing, but hell, who cares? Full steam ahead!

3.COREXIT- During the Gulf Oil Disaster, BP defied the EPA’s ‘order’ not to apply this highly toxic deadly poison into the sea water. A ‘no fly zone’ was, and still is in force, so the public will not see that the spraying continues to this day. There has been a news black out imposed on scientists, researchers, doctors who are trying to diagnose and treat the many illnesses that the Gulf residents are sick and dying from. Plants and humans are being affected far, far inland, but no one knows the extent of the damage. The Corexit has produced new and deadly bacteria, one is known as Blue Plague, but that’s where the story dead ends. Has anyone heard the numbers of the premature deaths on the Gulf Coast, compared with the normal death rates? No, I didn’t think so. Somehow the news did leak out though, that the ‘spill’ has blown open and is gushing oil again, although it’s questionable that it ever stopped. Gee, if oil drilling expert Matt Simmons was still here, maybe we could find out. He gave very good reports on TV. He died alone in his hot tub one night from what they said was a ‘heart attack’. I sure miss him.

  1. VACCINES- Does it seem to you that every day some new vaccine pops up that we must have? Shingles? HPV? In my 33 years of working with the public on an intimate level, I’ve never known anyone who died of cervical cancer. Hmmm. Each year they guess which flu bug might come around, and we’re all supposed to line up. A couple years ago they said ‘oops, we were wrong, come in for another stab’ of a different brew. Two winters ago they said we were all going to die a quick horrible death if we didn’t get the ‘human, pig, bird’ flu shot. I didn’t even see anyone sick, let alone die, did you? Many got sick and died from the vaccine though. Is it any wonder the drug companies paid off congress some years ago to exempt them from any damage liability for their vaccines? We’ve all heard the horror stories about what these shots can do to people. Squalene, mercury, and lord knows what else is in these formulas, or how they are cultured. Since we aren’t told, I’m not allowed to repeat rumors here. I did read last year that 83% of the people in California who ‘contracted’ whooping cough had been vaccinated for it though. Hmmm

Unfortunately, the government has admitted that ‘some’ vaccines had cancers cells in them, that they infected thousands of children in other countries with polio, and conducted illegal experiments on people with syphilis bacteria in Alabama and Guatemala. What a good way to hurt a lot of people at once; figure out what a whole lot of people think they need or want, then shoot it straight into their veins. But just as people are finally wising up to the dangers of vaccines, Big Pharma pushes harder and harder for vaccines to be mandatory for when they decide to create another fake pandemic or illness.

  1. FALSE PANDEMIC PANIC- An investigation into the World Health Organization’s (WHO) proclamation that the world was in a bonafide pandemic (after changing the criteria for that level 6 classification), it was discovered that there were unscrupulous and conflict of interest ties to the pharmaceutical companies. Wow! What a surprise! And yes, what was the payoff going to be? Billions of flu shot sold. Sometimes I think they need to float a trial balloon just to see how many people are still buying their scary propaganda, inflamed and enabled by the corporate owned mainstream media. Pharmaceutical companies, with the governments’ help, have already accomplished blackmailing parents into shooting up their children with a plethora of vaccines if they want to send them to school. The Powers That Be are hell bent on finding some way to force their poisons into all of us. Keep in mind that whatever the TV is trying to sell you, whatever story they go hyperbolic over, it means one of 2 things. It is either to promote TPTB’s agenda, or to divert your attention away from TPTB’s agenda. And when they omit news that’s important to your life, it’s so you don’t think there’s an agenda at all.
  1. PHARMACEUTICAL DRUGS- I think the number of deaths caused by prescription drugs each year is up to 200,000 if I’m not mistaken. And that’s not even the mistakes. That’s the number for properly prescribed meds! The drug companies trump up a crisis, like cholesterol numbers that are too high, restless legs, hyperactive kids, whatever, just when they are ready to release their shiny new pill for exactly that problem. They lie and fudge in their testing, hide the flaws in the results, push for fast track approval, and wala! Billions more pour into their coffers, while people start keeling over in droves. By the time the FDA decides to even ‘study’ the issue, thousands have died. Don’t you just love being the real test subjects for them? And you didn’t even get paid to be in a clinical trial! Even if the hungry lawyers get the class action suits going, the award damages are far, far smaller than what the company has already raked in. Oh well, there’s always ‘collateral damage’ with these things, you know? Haven’t I heard those words somewhere before, like when the government is making excuses for killing ‘innocent civilians’ during war?
  1. FLUORIDATED CITY WATER- This is a little trick they stole from the Hitler playbook. It’s just so expensive to dispose of the waste from aluminum manufacturing, hmmm, what could we drum up as a good use for it? Never mind that it actually causes brain damage, or makes your teeth mottled and discolored, or corrodes your bones, we’ll just put that skull and crossbones on the 55 gallon drums to warn people. But they’ll still think it’s good for them because we said so, right? Then we’ll pay the dentists to agree. Gee, another thing a whole lot of people need, water! Now, one of President Obama’s czars suggests adding in lithium to keep people calm, along with the other pharmaceuticals that have been found in our water supplies. No matter what we learn after the fact about what’s been done wrong, it just continues on anyway, doesn’t it? Why is that?
  1. AEROSOL SPRAYING- Have you noticed all those pretty streams planes make in the sky over your head? I have. They can turn a clear Arizona deep blue sky cloudy, in just about an hour. Sometimes they make puff clouds that have streamers draping off of them. Cool! But maybe in a short time, you find you can’t breath so well, or you find these cobweb like things on your plants, or it can look like it’s snowing when it’s 100 degrees! More cool! But it’s a different story when you read about the testing of what’s been collected in air samples, or in people’s blood and saliva. Micro particles of aluminum, barium, strontium, arsenic, zinc, and too many to list other heavy metals, along with strange bacteria and fibers. Have you ever heard of Morgellon’s disease? It’s where people develop moving fibers under their skin. It’s one of the most horrible, unimaginable, creepy and disgusting skin ailments I’ve ever seen. Look it up. Dr. Clifford Carnicom has been researching aerosol spraying, otherwise known as chemtrails, for over 12 years and has discovered the Morgellons fibers in the fallen debris and in the saliva of 99% of the people he’s tested. What do you know? One more thing we all like, breathing the air! By the way, it’s not legal for the government to experiment on us without our permission, “UNLESS it’s for medical, therapeutic, pharmaceutical, agricultural, industrial purposes, or for research in general, or for protection against, or for law enforcement purposes, including riot control”. (Section 1520a

Chapter 32 of U.S. Code Title 50). No wonder our ‘representatives’ scurry like rats when approached about this subject! They must have their own special air to breathe.

  1. FDA- How many words are the limit for regular articles? Some doctors have been known to call this the Federal Death Agency. There are countless detrimental to life additives, fillers, chemicals, artificial extenders, dyes, poison in plastic food containers, and even radiation that are just fine with the FDA for us to eat. But don’t you dare consume organic raw milk! Oh no no no. They just won’t have any of that! If you report adverse effects from one of their approved elements, you may not hear back from them for years. You won’t even be noticed if you’re already a statistic! It just depends on what made you sick. If it was something a huge corporation makes, forget
  1. If you got sick from a peach you bought at a local roadside stand, or some lemonade from your neighbors little girls stand down the street, well its curtains for them. They’ll get 10+ years in the slammer. Just beware while you’re shopping at your favorite organic fresh food grocer. Those black Suburban cars, swat team ninja cops, and big AK-47 rifles can be quite startling. Oh, I forgot about all the toxic chemicals that are allowed to go into our skin and hair products too. Boys and girls, don’t forget to use your (cancer causing) sunscreen now. Remember to be careful in that bad sun! P.S. Watch out for domestic home grown terrorists like John McCain and Dick Durbin, they’ve been trying to outlaw your vitamin and mineral diet supplements, and they just won’t quit.
  1. VITAMIN SUPPLEMENT DEMONIZATION- The Pharmaceutical companies have a jealousy problem. They don’t like all the money you’ve been spending on vitamins to stay healthy. It’s just driving them crazy. So they got our government to sign onto some UN treaty called Codex Alimentarius. This multi country UN gig wants to judge just how little nutrition you actually need in your vitamin pills, something like what wouldn’t be enough for your pet fly. Then they want to give the rights to Big Pharma to make the pills, with only slightly more milligrams at one thousand times the cost. What the heck took them so long? And to make it even better, you’ll have to go to your doctor (IF you can find one after ObamaCare kicks in) for a prescription for your vitamin A, B, C, D, Etc. So now, we won’t have to worry at all about maintaining good health, because our loving government will do it all for us, right? So, when all the diseases that are caused by nutritional deficiencies return, all the pharmaceutical companies will be lined up waiting to fix us.

Are you getting the picture yet? Foods that are loaded up with chemicals, pesticides and herbicides, hormones and anti-biotics to counteract e.coli and staff bacteria; severely depleted in nutrients and minerals, and shipped in from all over the world with scant oversight. Yet they want to deny us the only means we have to counteract the industrialization and over processing of our foods. The deal is to keep us very sick, slowly dying, and drain our purses dry, before we die. Speaking of dying, how many people are killed by vitamins each year? None, or one? From the way the FDA is reacting, and Sen. Durbin’s new bill, you might think there was a holocaust in progress. Well, there is….. But it’s not caused by vitamins!!

  1. EPA-Natural gas fracking (flaming tap water). 5 year Naval war exercises on all US coasts with every horrible kind of toxin, bomb, or chemical warfare germ you can think of. They even admit this endeavor will “take” (read ‘kill’) up to 11 million sea mammals. Nuclear leakage and fallout. Every imaginable chemical, pesticide, and herbicide. Chemtrails. Oil spills and gushers. Aerosol spraying of deadly toxins on oceans. Ocean trash dumping by corporations. Neglected toxic Superfund sites. Overflowing spent nuclear fuel pools all over the country. Electro Magnetic Frequencies (EMF). Let’s see. What am I forgetting? It doesn’t matter. Anything is OK by the EPA apparently.
  1. USDA- Let me give you a clue. All these alphabet soup agencies are head fakes. They were put in place by TPTB to make us think the government was protecting us and our country. And maybe for awhile, to get us believing in them, they were. But folks, the worm has turned. Look out. They are all there to enable the move to consolidate the elites’ plan for total control over our lives! Here’s a line from a recent article: ‘The USDA lied to farmers and ranchers about federal drought insurance. The government has refused to pay up during the worst drought in US history’. More farmers down the drain. The USDA is an enemy of the country. The FDA is an enemy of people. The SEC is an enemy of investors. The EPA is an enemy of the earth. I could go on if you like. Nothing is logical. Nothing makes sense. What’s love got to do with it? Nothing. TPTB are brutal, evil, and diabolical. They delight in death and destruction, and enjoy watching us suffer.
  1. FUKUSHIMA- What is Fukushima? I think I’ve heard of that somewhere before. Was that the name of a country somewhere near Japan or something? Oh that’s right, there was a tsunami, and I think I heard something about a nuclear power plant. Boy, that CNN just jumps from one story to the next. Things are moving so fast these days it’s hard to keep up. But I think somebody from England said something about not going out in the rain, or eating green leafy vegetables. But everything must be OK now, because I haven’t heard any more about it. Nothing is more despicable than to have our government order a news black-out about what is very possibly a life extinction event of mass proportion.
  1. THE FOOD SAFETY AND MODERNIZATION ACT- Better known as ‘The End of Small Farms and Don’t Bother Looking For Roadside Fruit and Vegetable Stands Act’. Those small time farmers are going to be too busy complying with new draconian paperwork and regulations to worry about the safety of their organic crops. While they are busy paying the piper, the crops will die of neglect anyway. But don’t get all huffy and think you’ll just grow some food of your own. The Garden Police will show up with their AK-47s, and God knows what will happen if you don’t have your permit! And don’t even think about sharing your extra tomatoes with the neighbor. That is against the law now. They’ll work best thrown onto the compost pile for next years planting. Our loyal representatives twisted themselves into pretzels to get this bill passed. The lame duck congress even worked till the wee hours of the morning so no one would see what they were doing on the last day they were in office. Many who may have voted ‘no’ had gone home to bed. They got about 6 million letters, calls, and e-mails from the suckers who voted for them, begging them not to pass this dangerous bill! But they just couldn’t resist giving us a parting gift, because they couldn’t resist the parting gifts they got for passing this disgusting bill. In case you haven’t picked up on it, every new bill in this Orwellian world we live in, has a name the exact opposite of what its underlying purpose is.
  1. SMART GRID and SMART METERS- As if electro magnetic frequencies (EMF) from cell phones, cell towers, microwave ovens, HD TVs, wi-fi signals, medical CT scans, X-rays, and airport scanners, aren’t enough to fry us, we now get to have the new and improved electrical grid along with the deadly ‘smart meters’ that go with them. Here’s another gift from TPTB money grabbers who have nothing but their own agenda in mind. Even all the corporations who are going to be bidding for a piece of the action dare not bring up the issue of safety. Not a word! This may finally be the wake-up call for all the people who refused to believe their government has anything but their best interests at heart. Once again, our dependence on electricity will be used to hold us hostage, and to make us comply with something that may very well kill us! Not to mention that ‘smart meters’ are a complete invasion of your privacy and a way for Big Brother to keep track of your every move and even control your appliances remotely if they want. Please read up on this subject before they come to your town and alert your neighbors! The meters will be spewing strong pulses of microwave energy all through the environment, your home and everybody in it, then returning the signal to a receiver up to 2 miles away. Even if you didn’t have one, don’t worry, you’ll be treated to all your neighbors signals as well, right through your walls.

Your utility’s talking point will be that ‘they are no more dangerous than a cell phone’, or that it only pulses twice a day. Outright lies! Apparently, they haven’t been keeping up on their propaganda scheme. Even the WHO is finally admitting that cell phones do cause cancer tumors! Another case of hiding the health risks for the benefit of big corporations. And, according to Dr. Bill Deagle, who has been testing the smart meter, it’s been putting out 100 times the EMF of a cell phone! I wonder how long it will take to kill people who are unfortunate enough to live in multi-family dwellings, or live with a meter bank containing hundreds of meters a short distance from their home? Don’t think our government knows exactly what they’re doing to us? The military has studied this technology extensively! The meters have not even been approved by UL, and you need a subpoena to get safety rating records from the utility co. How would you like to die? Cooked by microwaves, or fried in a fire? The meters have been catching on fire and may have been the cause of the gas line explosion in San Diego that took 8 lives and 47 homes a few months ago. Federal “investigators” said they were not going to investigate if the meter was the cause “because the meter did not cause the explosion”. They don’t look for things they don’t want to find.

The utility commissions and the utility companies are playing extreme hardball with people who do not want to be microwaved in their homes. If you try to ‘opt out’, you will pay dearly to protect your health, while they are happy to place your life on the black jack table for that first winning hand. Judging by Dr. Deagle’s own testing of his smart meter, it’s obvious that any test results provided by the industry claiming the meters are completely safe are fraudulent! Further, they do admit that there has been no long term testing, but you’ll need a subpoena to see their safety data. So just like cell phones, how can they dare to make any safety claims? “The meters are within the FCC’s guidelines” they say. (Another alphabet agency) I guess cell phones are too, although the radio frequency levels theyput out have by law, but if you refuse them permission to install the meter, they will come back and install it anyway and say you have no choice. Or they’ll threaten to turn your power off! They thought they could pass this one off by saying it will save us money, conserve energy, and save the earth! But people are catching on to this one, and the lawsuits are already under way. (Good luck with that. How many judges do you trust these days?) Act now and get your city to ban them, please! And don’t forget to educate your doctor. He’ll need the info to treat your addled brain and confused bodily systems, if the Cabal gets their way. Every cell in our body has an electrica biology, and unless you aren’t human, you will be damaged. It’s the modern day version of a gas chamber. The chamber this time happens to be your own home, If this isn’t our line in the sand, nothing is.

  1. UNENDING WARS- Mothers, don’t let your babies grow up to be soldiers. If they make it back home, they’ll never be the same. Look up Gulf War Syndrome. They are guinea pigs for every imaginable vaccine, and unwitting victims of America’s own weapon of mass destruction called depleted uranium. You could also become the proud grandparents of a grandchild with 2 heads and 4 legs. It has become very obvious that our government, our military, and our country have been the subjects of a coup ‘d tat. The next time someone says our sons and daughters are defending our freedom, remind them of the black SUVs and swat team raids on the beautiful Amish farmers, or the 630 citizen deaths by cop tasers, or the no warrant, no knock raids on homes of innocent people, or the sexual assault by the airport TSA because people just want to visit their family in another state.

I know our young people sign up out of financial desperation and perceived patriotism. Once they sign they are compelled to follow

orders, but it is now apparent to the entire world that they are not fighting for our country, but for the agenda of the cabal of elites who want to own it all, including you. The military standing down is our only hope for saving the country. We need them to defend us, right here at home, from the enemies within, and the outside enemies who are fomented by our government’s lies. I hate to say it, but right at this moment, our military is aiding and abetting the enemy to destroy our dreams, our freedoms, and our country. Is there not a single commander who has the guts to loudly and publicly just say NO MORE?! just been listed as carcinogens. Once again, the people who will get rich off this boondoggle will be sailing away on their yachts, while you lie in a hospital bed dying of cancer. You can bet they won’t have smart meters on their homes!

The government has offered bribe money to the states, utilities and the utility commissions (which came from us in the form of ‘stimulus money’) to institute this program. Then we’ll pay for it again ‘to reimburse the utility along with a ‘fair’ profit’, by paying much higher rates. It is NOT mandated

  1. OBAMA”CARE”- Written by the insurance companies, it will be the perfect covert plan to eliminate all the ‘useless eaters’ and save the government from paying all of us pesky Baby Boomers our social security. It won’t be hard, since while they are adding 30 million people into the system, 60% of the doctors we have now will be long gone. They want nothing to do with it. Everyone knows that the medical system is in melt down as we speak anyway. One of my favorite parts of this travesty is the rule that if you are ‘not up to date on your vaccines’, you won’t get care. It’s such a fabulous law that the scum who voted for it made themselves and their staff exempt from it! Make your doctor appointments now! It may be a few years wait. Ask him if he makes house calls to jails, since that’s where you’ll be if you can’t afford ObamaCare. By the way…. when your doctor (if he hasn’t left the country) asks, by law, if you have any firearms in your home, tell him ‘absolutely not’! Then ask him why he wants to know.
  1. WEATHER MODIFICATION- Scientists say the technology certainly exists. I’m sure the ruling Cabal has unlimited funds to invest in it, and the Navy says they’ll own the weather by 2025. We keep having rare, deadly, ‘once every 100 years’ droughts, floods, earthquakes, temperatures, and snowfalls, so I’m really suspicious about this. I think they own the weather now! It seems to add up to broke farmers, food shortages and sky high prices. Our government signed on to a UN treaty that prohibits all countries from using weather weapons. So, our leaders promptly privatized the U.S. weather bureau, and created numerous front companies that carry out their plans for them anyway. It’s similar to hiring that company Blackwater in Iraq. They did such a good job for the U.S. in Iraq, and they’re so proud that they changed their name to XE, as if that makes them seem any less dark.
  1. FINANCIAL COLLAPSE/DEPRESSION- I forget. How many people died during the 1930s depression? One of the most telling discoveries were the thousands of coffins piled up that Jessie Ventura showed on one of his TruTV shows. That show was never aired again, and was removed altogether from the TruTV website and the internet. Are the coffins for the masses of people who will starve during the new great depression? Why did the government order them? If they are there in case of a big natural disaster, wouldn’t the government just say so? Instead they removed the evidence from view. In detective terms, they call that consciousness of guilt. Will someone please wake me up after I’m dead, and let me know if any of the psychopathic, demonic control freak maniacs, who have gutted our country and our lives, are ever held accountable and banished from this world? I’d appreciate it. Thank You!
  2. Please print out this article and give it to the people you care about. If they are still sleeping, but have any survival instinct left, maybe this will shake them awake. We are NOT in Kansas anymore my fellow Americans.

WeAreChangeTV.us FederalJack.com BlacklistedNews.co

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM


THE GREATEST DANGER AMERICA FACES

02/13/2015

 http://www.newswithviews.com/RonEdwards/ron114.htm

By Ron Edwards

February 13, 2015
NewsWithViews.com

What is the greatest danger America faces? The list of dangers faced by our beleaguered republic is long and varied. Amongst the most obvious are the over twenty terrorist training camps strategically ensconced throughout America. The funny thing is that the only reason the terrorist camps pose any danger is that the federal government refuses to go after them and shut them down. I truly wish that federal government officials, would recognize and follow constitutional guidelines to protect our nation from enemies, both foreign and domestic. If they did, perhaps we would not be facing the huge possibility of yet another major terrorist attack within our extremely porous borders.

To put it as plainly as I possibly can, it is without a doubt, that the federal government has gone rogue. Many elected officials in both the Senate and the House are along with president Obama, more loyal to the United Nations and Agenda 21 than the United States and the Constitution. Why else would a sitting president and his Department of Justice leader threaten to take action against the governor of Arizona for seeking to protect the citizenry from murderous illegal immigrants?

On to yet another danger facing our nation. The preponderance of statistical data which reveals the overwhelming number of criminal acts perpetrated by Black Americans against other Black Americans, including murder is staggering. It has been noted that if Black on Black crime in America were reduced to the percentage levels of the general population, the United States would statistically be the fourth safest nation on earth. Whew!! Tragically, the only time certain populations become upset over violent acts is if a thug who picks a fight with a police officer, loses his life. Yet rarely a peep about the thousands of Blacks who are either gunned down or murdered in the womb, year in and year out.

Right now, America is listed at number twelve amongst nations of the world as a nation of economic opportunity, according to a recent Heritage Foundation observation. Just six years ago, she was number six. Not great, but respectable. America’s continued over taxation, (for example the world’s highest corporate tax rate) and over regulation against economic activity and prosperity will not reverse the trend. Another economic burden, Obamacare is designed to be one of the greatest dangers to our economic, personal and medical freedom. If unchecked it will open the door to direct government control over you and I. Potentially, from cradle to grave.

Also, amongst the greatest dangers threatening our republic turned mob rule democracy, is the bull headed determination of President Obama to spend and tax America into oblivion. His proposed record breaking four trillion-plus dollar budget along with desired tax increases could permanently flat line our economy and chances for opportunities. But then again, that is the written goal, among others to bring America down to her knees and under the control of certain international elements.

Have you noticed how in a majority of cases where government intervention occurs, the quality of whatever the government has intruded upon either gradually or quickly deteriorates? Yet the cost goes way up? The medical industry is the most recent major example. Almost everywhere, whether the medical industry, housing, energy production, etc. the danger here is that eventually, if left unchecked, government intervention will kill off the incentive for superior private sector investment and involvement altogether. But of course that is the goal of the progressives. If you think I am exaggerating, just simply ask the increasing number of Americans who can no longer receive needed treatments for numerous chronic ailments. That is all courtesy to the government intervention of Obamacare.

Another great danger to America is government big wigs in the nation’s capital exhibiting more loyalty to enemy nations and groups than trusted allies like Israel, the United Kingdom, Chad and Kurdistan among others. It has been obvious that President Obama is willing to work out a deal with Iran, that could enable that nation to quickly secure atomic weapons. This is despite the fact that the Iranians have numerous times expressed their goal of firing nuclear warheads, at both Israel and the United States. Another clear and present danger indeed.

So far, fifteen and counting Democrat party lawmakers have stated they will not attend the March third joint session of Congress, where Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is slated to speak. So much, for those all inclusive tolerant liberal progressives. The before mentioned dangers to America are formidable indeed. But none of them rate as the greatest danger to our beloved republic. That distinction belongs to our nation’s three pronged road to destruction. Number one has to be the government school system.

For generations, government school educators have been indoctrinating students against everything that is good. They have been so masterful, so now for the first time ever, graduating students prefer communism over the blessings of free market economics. Next on the trilogy of danger to America is the government’s refusal to secure our borders so that illegal immigrants can be used as a voter base for the democrat party. Or even worse, the Muslim terrorists they are letting in can blow something up. Last but not least, is the very dangerous societal turning away from God, who was recognized by the Founding Fathers as the source of our national blessings and strength. If this unwise trend is not soon reversed, America could end up as Ronald Reagan predicted decades ago as simply, one nation under.

© 2015 Ron Edwards – All Rights ReservedRon Edwards, producer and host of The Edwards Notebook, a syndicated radio commentary, is a talented and gifted commentator with over two decades of experience. Ron Edwards is a well versed journalist with a fiery delivery of information, thought provoking conversation, and humor. The Edwards Notebook delivers a wealth of knowledge in an entertaining and educational format. Ron Edwards brings to the airwaves unapologetic truth sure to keep his listening audience tuned in every time. He is respected by friends and foe alike for is consistency of conviction and originality in commentary.

Visit at: twitter@theronedwards, Facebook Ron at Friends of The Edwards Notebook.

Website: www.theronedwards.com

E-Mail: ronedwards@edwardsnotebook.com

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

While Mr. Edwards does an admirable job of describing the METHOD being used to destroy America, he misses the real reason its working and why voting won’t change anything. NOT UNTIL enough Americans do the research and determine that WE DO NOT have a sovereign constitutional government, but WE ARE surreptitiously owned by a FOR PROFIT CORPORATION, AND OUR SO CALLED ELECTED REPRESENATIVES ARE EMPLOY’S UNDER STRICK CONTROL BY THE INTERNATIONAL BANKING CARTEL, will we ever have the courage from rage to fight back. OUR REAL PROBLEM IS FROM HAVING SO MANY LAZY, STUPID, BRAIN WASHED CITIZENS, CONTENT WITH BEING TOLD WHAT TO DO, SAY, AND THINK.

WAKE THE HELL UP AMERICA!

2-12-2015 9-29-40 AM

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

 

 


Crisis Investing: Americans Are Not Prepared For The Collapse Of The Dollar: “There Will Be Riots”

02/12/2015

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/crisis-investing-americans-are-not-prepared-for-collapse-of-dollar-there-will-be-riots_02102015

2-12-2015 9-29-40 AM

By Mac Slavo

The majority of the American people think the economy is stable and the world is at peace. But even a precursory review of geo-political news makes it clear that there is a major power struggle and paradigm shift taking place. According to New York Times best-selling author Marin Katusa, the chief global strategist at Casey Research, it is only a matter of time before China and Russia exchange and deploy their dollar reserves, at which point the U.S. dollar will come crashing down.

Watch the following incredibly insightful interview from one of the few people in the world who really understands how current geo-political machinations will lead to economic and financial consequences that will reverberate for decades to come. Moreover, Katusa explains how to prepare yourself for nothing short of a financial apocalypse when confidence in the U.S. dollar is lost. On that fateful day Americans will be in shock because they could well see the price of their cost of living triple in a very short period of time – that means food, energy and other essential resources will become unattainable for many almost overnight.

“I ask you, what would the average American be doing if the cost of their standard of living just tripled? There’ll be riots.”

There is a vicious correction coming for the dollar and other financial instruments. Time for action is limited, but there are numerous strategies you can implement to not only preserve your wealth, but grow it in the midst of crisis:

(Watch this interview at Future Money Trends)

That a currency collapse is coming should be a foregone conclusion, yet most people simply don’t want to believe it. But, even if there were another financial emergency most Americans think that the government will be there to help them. Of course, this notion is simply unrealistic, which means that America will very quickly devolve into an environment plagued with riots, violence and looting.

As Katusa notes, the Russians are going through their own currency collapse right now and many of them understand that the collapse of their economy has been engineered by western bankers. What’s different between Russia in crisis and America in crisis is that the Russians have spent the last three decades dealing with one problem after another, so they are much more resilient when it comes to mitigating the immediate impact. Americans, however, have enjoyed decades of booming stock markets and prosperity, so when the inevitable meltdown finally does occur most won’t be ready for it.

In his book The Colder War, as well as in the interview above, Marin Katusa notes that the world is already involved in a major conflict. Americans simply haven’t realized it. But the Russians get it.

The average Russian in Russia truly is behind Putin and believes they are at a war… a different type of war… both a physical war, a traditional war, and a currency war, an economic war. With not just NATO and the EU, but also catalysts, driven, pushed, motivated by the U.S

As I state in my book, the Russian people are used to difficult, difficult times. Look what they’ve gone through in just the last 25 years. They’ve seen the collapse of the Soviet Union. In 1998 they’ve seen an absolute default. They’ve seen horrible conditions. And today, as bad as that is, it’s nowhere as bad as it was during the collapse of the Soviet Union…

So has the average Russian bought gold? No, but I will say this: has the average American bought gold? No.

But the Russian people are much more resilient in times of crisis than I would say the average American would be. If the tables were turned, I ask you, what would the average American be doing if the cost of their standard of living just tripled? There’d be riot.

Not just riots, but complete pandemonium as people scramble to acquire critical resources before they run out. And as evidenced by recent actions by Russia and China, and continued efforts by our central bank, this is the likely end-game.

Crisis investing first requires admitting and accepting that there is a problem. Next we need to understand the problem, something Marin Katusa explains succinctly in his interview. Finally, we need to know what action to take and how to deploy our existing assets so that we are not wiped out when the winds shift.

And be assured, the winds are shifting. Are you ready for the storm?

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

 


If You Listen Carefully The Bankers Are Actually Telling Us What Is Going To Happen Next

02/11/2015

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/02/if-you-listen-carefully-bankers-are.html

2-11-2015 8-56-58 AM

Michael Snyder
Activist Post

Are we on the verge of a major worldwide economic downturn?  Well, if recent warnings from prominent bankers all over the world are to be believed, that may be precisely what we are facing in the months ahead.  As you will read about below, the big banks are warning that the price of oil could soon drop as low as 20 dollars a barrel, that a Greek exit from the eurozone could push the EUR/USD down to 0.90, and that the global economy could shrink by more than 2 trillion dollars in 2015.  Most of the time, very few people ever actually read the things that the big banks write for their clients.

But in recent months, a lot of these bankers are issuing such ominous warnings that you would think that they have started to write for The Economic Collapse Blog.  Of course we have seen this happen before.  Just before the financial crisis of 2008, a lot of people at the big banks started to get spooked, and now we are beginning to see an atmosphere of fear spread on Wall Street once again.  Nobody is quite sure what is going to happen next, but an increasing number of experts are starting to agree that it won’t be good.

Let’s start with oil.  Over the past couple of weeks, we have seen a nice rally for the price of oil.  It has bounced back into the low 50s, which is still a catastrophically low level, but it has many hoping for a rebound to a range that will be healthy for the global economy.

Unfortunately, many of the experts at the big banks are now anticipating that the exact opposite will happen instead.  For example, Citibank says that we could see the price of oil go as low as 20 dollars this year…

The recent rally in crude prices looks more like a head-fake than a sustainable turning point — The drop in US rig count, continuing cuts in upstream capex, the reading of technical charts, and investor short position-covering sustained the end-January 8.1% jump in Brent and 5.8% jump in WTI into the first week of February.

Short-term market factors are more bearish, pointing to more price pressure for the next couple of months and beyond — Not only is the market oversupplied, but the consequent inventory build looks likely to continue toward storage tank tops. As on-land storage fills and covers the carry of the monthly spreads at ~$0.75/bbl, the forward curve has to steepen to accommodate a monthly carry closer to $1.20, putting downward pressure on prompt prices. As floating storage reaches its limits, there should be downward price pressure to shut in production.

The oil market should bottom sometime between the end of Q1 and beginning of Q2 at a significantly lower price level in the $40 range — after which markets should start to balance, first with an end to inventory builds and later on with a period of sustained inventory draws. It’s impossible to call a bottom point, which could, as a result of oversupply and the economics of storage, fall well below $40 a barrel for WTI, perhaps as low as the $20 range for a while.

Even though rigs are shutting down at a pace that we have not seen since the last recession, overall global supply still significantly exceeds overall global demand.  Barclays analyst Michael Cohenrecently told CNBC that at this point the total amount of excess supply is still in the neighborhood of a million barrels per day…

“What we saw in the last couple weeks is rig count falling pretty precipitously by about 80 or 90 rigs per week, but we think there are more important things to be focused on and that rig count doesn’t tell the whole story.”

He expects to see some weakness going into the shoulder season for demand. In addition, there is an excess supply of about a million barrels of oil a day, he said.

And the truth is that many firms simply cannot afford to shut down their rigs.  Many are leveraged to the hilt and are really struggling just to service their debt payments.  They have to keep pumping so that they can have revenue to meet their financial obligations.  The following comes directly from the Bank for International Settlements

“Against this background of high debt, a fall in the price of oil weakens the balance sheets of producers and tightens credit conditions, potentially exacerbating the price drop as a result of sales of oil assets, for example, more production is sold forward,” BIS said.

“Second, in flow terms, a lower price of oil reduces cash flows and increases the risk of liquidity shortfalls in which firms are unable to meet interest payments. Debt service requirements may induce continued physical production of oil to maintain cash flows, delaying the reduction in supply in the market.”

In the end, a lot of these energy companies are going to go belly up if the price of oil does not rise significantly this year.  And any financial institutions that are exposed to the debt of these companies or to energy derivatives will likely be in a great deal of distress as well.

Meanwhile, the overall global economy continues to slow down.

On Monday, we learned that the Baltic Dry Index has dropped to the lowest level ever.  Not even during the darkest depths of the last recession did it drop this low.

And there are some at the big banks that are warning that this might just be the beginning.  For instance, David Kostin of Goldman Sachs is projecting that sales growth for S&P 500 companies will be zero percent for all of 2015…

Consensus now forecasts 0% S&P 500 sales growth in 2015 following a 5% cut in revenue forecasts since October. Low oil prices along with FX headwinds and pension charges have weighed on 4Q EPS results and expectations for 2015.

Others are even more pessimistic than that.  According to Bank of America, the global economy will actually shrink by 2.3 trillion dollars in 2015.

One thing that could greatly accelerate our economic problems is the crisis in Greece.  If there is no compromise and a new Greek debt deal is not reached, there is a very real possibility that Greececould leave the eurozone.

If Greece does leave the eurozone, the continued existence of the monetary union will be thrown into doubt and the euro will utterly collapse.

Of course I am not the only one saying these things.  Analysts at Morgan Stanley are even projecting that the EUR/USD could plummet to 0.90 if there is a “Grexit”…

The Greek Prime Minister has reaffirmed his government’s rejection of the country’s international bailout programme two days before an emergency meeting with the euro area’s finance ministers on Wednesday. His declaration suggested increasing minimum wages, restoring the income tax-free threshold and halting infrastructure privatisations.

Should Greece stay firm on its current anti-bailout course and with the ECB not accepting Greek T-bills as collateral, the position of ex-Fed Chairman Greenspan will gain increasing credibility. He forecast the eurozone to break as private investors will withdraw from providing short-term funding to Greece. Greece leaving the currency union would convert the union into a club of fixed exchange rates, a type of ERM III, leading to further fragmentation. Greek Fin Min Varoufakis said the euro will collapse if Greece exits, calling Italian debt unsustainable. Markets may gain the impression that Greece may not opt for a compromise, instead opting for an all or nothing approach when negotiating on Wednesday. It seems the risk premium of Greece leaving EMU is rising. Our scenario analysis suggests a Greek exit taking EURUSD down to 0.90.

If that happens, we could see a massive implosion of the 26 trillion dollars in derivatives that are directly tied to the value of the euro.

We are moving into a time of great peril for global financial markets, and there are a whole host of signs that we are slowly heading into another major global economic crisis.

So don’t be fooled by all of the happy talk in the mainstream media.  They did not see the last crisis coming either.

This article first appeared here at the Economic Collapse Blog.  Michael Snyder is a writer, speaker and activist who writes and edits his own blogs The American Dream and Economic Collapse Blog. Follow him on Twitter here.

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

 


New Video Evidence of America’s Coup in Ukraine, and What it Means

02/10/2015

http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-video-evidence-of-americas-coup-in-ukraine-and-what-it-means/5430316

2-10-2015 12-21-48 PM

By Eric Zuesse

New video evidence has been added to the already-conclusive video evidence which shows that the U.S. Government was the controlling power behind the extremely violent and illegal 18-27 February 2014 Ukrainian coup, which overthrew the democratically elected and never legally removed-from-power Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych.

This new evidence proves, even more than before (if that were even possible to do), that the current regime in Ukraine is definitely illegal — but that’s not all. Even after fake ‘democratic’ elections, it’s the same illegal regime in Ukraine that the U.S. imposed at its February 2014 coup, because no nationwide vote has occurred in Ukraine throughout that country’s expanse after the American coup; it’s still just a rump-Ukrainian Government, not one representing the residents either in Crimea or in Ukraine’s far east (neither of which regions participated in Ukrainian elections after the coup) — and yet this illegal violent coup-imposed Ukrainian regime (and the U.S. that imposed it, and even the EU that sheepishly backed it) nonetheless demand (against all legalities) that this blatantly illegal U.S.-imposed Ukrainian Government must control those areas, which reject this nazi imposed Government — that the residents in the regions that had voted overwhelmingly for Yanukovych don’t have the right to self-determination, but must instead accept a coup that goes exactly against, and even has gone so far as to overthrow, the Government for which the residents in those regions had overwhelmingly voted.

This was a violent takeover of the Ukrainian Government, by profoundly racist anti-Russian nationalist Ukrainians, who were in the pay of the U.S. Government. And, it sparked such terror into the hearts of Russians and of Ukraine’s minorities (who were especially large a proportion of the Crimean population), so that, first, Crimea broke away and declared its no longer being a part of Ukraine (it would return to Russia, of which it had been a part from 1783-1954, almost its entire modern existence); and, then, starting on May 9th of 2014, a Ukrainian civil war broke out when the U.S.-installed Government of Ukraine actually invaded the regions (other than Crimea) that rejected it; and the United States oversaw and sent even more mercenaries to this extremely bloody ethnic cleansing campaign to get rid of the residents in the specific region (called “Donbass” and shown in dark purple on this map) of Ukraine that had voted 90% for Yanukovych.

This was the first outright nazi action ever undertaken by any American President. Ever. That’s how bad it is, as a historical precedent for this country. It is being carried out by proud racist fascists (nazis), who are specifically admirers and followers of Adolf Hitler’s Nazis, which were the first, the original, nazi political party, and which are the pattern for Obama’s operatives in Ukraine — the perpetrators of this coup and its subsequent (also totally illegal) ethnic-cleansing campaign. (For examples: all these firebombings that Obama’s forces are doing to the residents in Donbass are against international law.) These Ukrainian nazis even send their children to nazi schools where kids are trained to hate Russians.

Obama uses these people; he found this extermination of pro-Russians in Ukraine to be necessary; so as to get rid of the voters whose votes had made Yanukovych President. In Donbass, 90% of the voters had voted for Yanukovych; so, this was the prime area to be ethnically cleansed (and sometimes they’re driven at night to the countryside and shot at the edge of a ditch). If those voters were ever again allowed to vote in Ukraine, then a pro-Russian government could again be elected in Ukraine, and Obama’s action in that country (his turning it rabidly anti-Russian in its policies) could thus turn out to have been a mere waste for him — just a temporary matter. The strategy here is carefully thought-out, and this is also one reason why it has the support of almost every member of the U.S. House and Senate (even though 67% of the American public oppose it). A similar strategy would be as if Obama were to firebomb and otherwise lay waste Utah because it had voted in the 2012 election 73% for Romney and only 25% for Obama, and so killing the residents there would increase the future chances of electing a Democratic President in the U.S. But in Donbass, Yanukovych had actually won 90% of the vote, not a mere 73%; and, besides, nobody in the U.S. and its allies is even so much as criticizing Obama’s exterminations of the residents in Donbass (the people that Obama’s Ukrainian Government calls “terrorists” for simply living there), but instead Vladimir Putin is being criticized in the West for his “Russian aggression,” because he helps those forlorn people defend themselves from the Obama team’s firebombs, clusterbombs, bullets, and other killing-machines. (And here’s one of the Obama team’s firebombings of the city of Donetsk just a few days ago.)

The nazi United States Government today is ideologically, by its nazi actions, at war against the democratic United States that, by its democratic actions, had fought and shed blood to defeat Hitler’s Nazis in World War II. (And — unlike the firebombing of Nazi Dresden in February 1945 — Donetsk and the Obama team’s other Donbass targets are anti-nazi; the U.S. is this time the nazi invader, via its local Ukrainian surrogates. This is not to say that any firebombing should be allowed, but just to say that America has ideologically switched sides since then, which is atrocious.) Of course, there have been nazis in America even before Hitler came to power in Germany; but they were not running the U.S. Government until now; and, now, for the first time ever, the U.S. has itself a nazi Government, which is backed up by nazi American think tanks and media, etc., the entire panoply of political horror. The chief difference from Hitler’s (other than that this nazi government hasn’t yet gone as far toward its ultimate objectives as Hitler’s did) is that this one hates and seeks to destroy mainly Russians, whereas Hitler’s focused mainly against Jews. However, this one seems to be just about as obsessive about eliminating Russians as Hitler’s was about eliminating Jews. In fact, Obama’s hatred of Russia explains not only his Ukrainian policy but also his Syrian policy. Furthermore, Iran is also allied with Russia, and American policy there too might partly be a reflection of Obama’s bigotry against Russia — it should instead be a reflection of strictly U.S.-Iranian issues. Understanding Obama’s foreign policies without recognizing his vicious (and until fairly recently, secret) anti-Russian obsession, which is proven by his actions (not his rhetoric, which is basically dishonest and should simply be ignored except as his PR) can’t be done: it produces only misunderstanding (which is the real purpose behind most of his rhetoric).

So, this new item of evidence, which was posted to youtube on 27 January 2015, shows a courageous member of the “Rada” or Ukraine’s parliament, Oleg Tsarev, on 20 November 2013, and you can see the video’s (broken) English translation transcript, by clicking there on “More.” This is a parliamentary speech, in which he says (and I’ve cleaned up the translation here, only to make it easier to understand):

In my role as a representative of the Ukrainian people, activists from the Volya Public Organization turned to me, providing clear evidence that within our country, with support and direct participation of the US Embassy in Kiev, a “TechCamp” project is under way in which preparations are being made for a civil war in Ukraine. The “TechCamp” project prepares specialists for information warfare and for the discrediting of state institutions [the Government] using modern media — potential revolutionaries for organizing protests and the toppling of the Government. This project is overseen by and currently under the responsibility of the US Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt. After the conversation with the Volya Organization, I learned that they actually succeeded to access facilities in the “TechCamp” project [they had hacked into it] disguised as a team of IT specialists. To their surprise, were found briefings that were held on peculiarities of modern media. American instructors explained there how social networks and Internet technologies can be used for targeted manipulation of public opinion as well as to activate potential protest to provoke violent unrest on the territory of Ukraine — radicalization of the population, and triggering of infighting. American instructors show examples of successful use of social networks to organize protests in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. “Tech Camp” representatives currently hold conferences throughout Ukraine. A total of five events have been held so far. About 300 people have been trained as operatives, who are now active throughout Ukraine. The last conference took place on 14 and 14 November 2013, in the heart of Kiev, inside the US Embassy! You tell me which country in the world would allow an NGO to operate out of the US Embassy? This is disrespectful to the Ukrainian Government, and against the Ukrainian people! I thus appeal to the constitutional authorities of Ukraine with the following question: Is it conceivable that representatives of the US Embassy who organize the “TechCamp” conferences misuse their diplomatic immunity? [Someone tries to interrupt him.] A UN Resolution of 21 December 1965 regulates inadmissibility of interference in the internal “affairs of any State, and protects its independence and sovereignty. I urge that there be an official investigation into this matter.

Wikipedia’s “Timeline of the Euromaidan” starts on 21 November 2013, the day after Tsarev’s speech. It says there:

Euromaidan started in the night of 21 November 2013 when up to 2,000 protesters gathered at Kiev’s Maidan Nezalezhnosti and began to organize themselves with the help of social networks.[7] After he heard of the Ukrainian government decree to Yatsenyuk government,”suspend preparations for signing of the Association Agreement on 21 November 2013,[8][9] opposition party Batkivshchyna faction leader Arseniy Yatsenyuk called, via Twitter, for protests (which he dubbed as #Euromaidan) on Maidan Nezalezhnosti.[10]

Of course, Yatsenyuk was the person who, in a 4 February 2014 phone-conversation between Victoria Nuland of Obama’s State Department and Mr. Pyatt of her Kiev Embassy, she told Pyatt was to be selected by him, as the head of the coup-Government that would become installed during the coup, which extended from 18-27 February 2014. (In other words: the coup started two weeks after that phone-conversation in which the new leader had already been selected.)

The CIA edits wikipedia articles, and so the title of the wikipedia article on the coup is “2014 Ukrainian revolution,”not “2014 Ukrainian coup.” Also because of the CIA’s editing, the date of Yatsenyuk’s official appointment to head the Government is buried, instead of being featured in that article (as it should be). The day-by-day account given there starts on 18 February, and ends on 21 February. Then comes: “Deal’s Aftermath.” Then, after yet 9 more such sections, comes “Lustration,” which mentions the new leader’s appointment only in passing: “On 26 February 2014, Ehor Sobolev was nominated to lead the ‘Committee on Lustration’ in the new Yatsenyuk Government.” In other words: the appointment, and the official installation, of “Yats” to run the new Government, isn’t even so much as mentioned in that article. If one clicks there on “Yatsenyuk government,” then one comes to an article that opens: “The first government headed by Arseniy Yatsenyuk was created in Ukraine on 27 February 2014 in the aftermath of the Ukrainian revolution.[1] The cabinet was formed as a coalition of the parties Batkivschyna, UDAR and Svoboda and the parliamentary factions Economic Development and Sovereign European Ukraine and other independent MPs.[1]” Nothing is said there about the new Government’s domination by nazis (who were selected by Victoria Nuland’s man “Yats”). The rest of the article is just as deceptive, in the standard way: by avoiding to state the things that are the most important to state in order for a reader to be able to understand or interpret the given matter accurately. In other words: It’s written for deception.

The time when this speech was delivered by Tsarev is also extremely significant: The very next day, Yanukovych rejected the EU’s deal. On 21 November 2013, the reporter for Britain’s Guardian headlined online, “Ukraine suspends talks on EU trade pact as Putin wins tug of war,” and he reported that “Ukraine has abruptly ditched its plans to sign a historic pact with the European Union aimed at shifting the country out of the Kremlin’s orbit.” What Tsareve was saying on November 20th was that the U.S. had geared up long before that decision by Yanukovych, to overthrow him if he didn’t cave to the pressures from the U.S. and its allies, and that the “Euromaidan” demonstrations which immediately thereafter became stage-setting for America’s coup against him, were extremely well planned in advance, and constituted only the ‘democratic’ cover for the coup and would be nothing more than that — which turned out to be the case.

Oleg Tsarev, the man who warned parliament one day prior to the start of the Euromaidan demonstrations, was subsequently, in mid-May of 2014, phoned by the oligarch Ihor Kolomoysky, a friend of the Obama White House, and he was told to leave Ukraine or else he would be killed because some unnamed individual(s) had placed a million-dollar price on his head. Tsarev didn’t comply. (His courage was remarkable: he had already survived a beating by a nazi crowd on 15 April 2014. Speaking truth to power was his characteristic way.) Instead, Tsarev became elected to the parliament in one of the two breakaway new republics constituting Donbass. On 19 December 2014, Tsarev wrote that the Ukrainian Government was failing miserably all Ukrainians, not only in the areas that had left Ukraine; and he also mentioned, in passing, that, in one of Kolomoysky’s businesses,“Kolomoysky delivers cheesy vests for the price of gold chain mail.” Here’s what that passing reference meant: On 11 August 2014, “Life News” in Russia had headlined, “Ukrainian Ministry of Defense spent $ 3.5 million on substandard body armor” and reported that, in a no-bid deal with Ukraine’s army, the insider Kolomoysky had sold to the army substandard fake bulletproof vests, which they couldn’t use, and which were moreover priced at twice the going rate for real bulletproof vests. Kolomoysky then stole one of the Tsarev family’s own businesses, but there was no legal recourse, because Kolomoysky had been appointed by Obama’s people as the local governor in the region where that business happened to be located.

So: Obama is treated as if he is a respectable person, while Putin is treated as if he had been the aggressor in all this. But there was once a time when the differences between the U.S. and U.S.S.R. were ideological, and the U.S. was an authentic democratic nation, and the U.S.S.R. was an authentic communist dictatorship; and, in that time, and specifically back in 1962, it was the U.S.S.R. that was seeking to place nuclear missiles near to us (in Cuba), not like now, when the dictatorial U.S. is instead trying to place nuclear missiles near to democratic Russia (inside Ukraine). Did America’s major news media, back at that earlier time, think that what the U.S.S.R. was trying to do to us was tolerable, and should be permitted? Of course not! So: why their double standard now? Or is today’s U.S. instead a totally different country, an outright nazi one now, against Russia? Even if Russia were a dictatorship (and it’s probably less so than the U.S. now is), what America is trying to do to it is disgraceful. And what the U.S. Government is trying to do to the residents in Donbass is absolutely outrageous, and should be presented to the International Criminal Court for war-crimes trials. (Maybe that’s why the U.S. has refused to sign to the Court’s jurisdiction; maybe G.W. Bush and Obama were intending to commit international war crimes.)

America (and its client Ukraine) is the aggressor; Russia (and its client Donbass) is doing what it needs to do in order to defend themselves from the U.S. and its allies: there are 27 of those other nations in the U.S.-run Russia-hating club; it’s called NATO, and it needs to be disbanded immediately, because its constructive function ended when the Soviet Union did; and, afterwards, it’s just nazi, and is a huge threat against the entire world.

This new evidence from Tsarev, piled on top of all the other evidence that already proved the assertion by the founder of the “private CIA” firm Stratfor, that the overthrow of Yanukovych was “the most blatant coup in history,”simply cements the reality, that all of the sanctions against Russia, and all of the “me too” statements supporting Obama’s coup and ethnic cleansing in Ukraine, by David Cameron, Stephen Harper, and Obama’s other co-nazis, are abominations, which should be loudly condemned by all decent persons in all countries. The aggressor here is Obama, not Putin; and NATO must end, now: all decent nations should quit it ASAP. (War crimes trials against Obama and his agents should follow. After all: these people are bringing the world closer to a nuclear war than has been the case since 1962, and there is no decent reason for it.)

Here was Professor Francis Boyle, the most internationally prestigious authority on such matters, summing it all up:

Boyle told RIA Novosti on May 8: ’The Ukrainian crisis had been planned as well as the war. There was a war plan, there was a war game. Then it was revised and implemented. … We are seeing steps now being taken that were planned in advance,’ Boyle said, adding, ‘This is all being used as a pretext to bring NATO military forces, as Rasmussen said, by air, sea, and land right up to the borders of the Russian Federation. They are clearly going ahead with this.’

Boyle extolled Russia for trying to exhaust all diplomatic means possible to resolve the Ukrainian crisis, and accused the United States and NATO of deliberate escalation.

‘So that the US won’t be provided with any more pretexts for hostile provocative maneuvers that they are going to take in any event,’ Boyle asserted, … Russian President Vladimir Putin is in a very difficult and dangerous situation and needs to be very careful. ‘The US has already resumed the Cold War with the neo-Nazi coup d’état in Ukraine that the United States sponsored, controlled, and directed,’ he said.

It’s still not too late for the condemnation by the entire decent world to come down upon the leading nazis and force them to stop, before they blow the entire habitable world up with their evil.

Never before in the history of the world have the proofs of perfidy come so voluminously and so much in current time, as has now happened here, in the Age of the Internet. One doesn’t have to wait for places like Auschwitz to open up to the world before the evil is laid bare for all to see: it already has been, well before things get that far. Thus, what’s desperately needed now is action: the condemnation, by the publics, in all countries, against those nazis.

The time for the collecting of evidence is already past. The evidence is already here. There are already international war crimes enough, and so no need exists for us to await the ultimate one — a totally unnecessary nuclear war — before finally acting.

To start with: the sanctions against Russia must end — immediately. They are crimes that can end fast. And they must, in order for the prosecutions against the perpetrators to start, and in order for this nazi cancer upon humanity to be removed before it’s too late to be able to do that. The patient might already be in the emergency room.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

Copyright © 2015 Global Research

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

 


Truth? We Don’t Need No “Stinkin Truth”

02/09/2015

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/02/07/truth-dont-need-stinkin-truth-paul-craig-roberts/

Paul Craig Roberts

In the previous posting, The Grand Manipulation, I again wrote about the false reality that government manipulation of information and control over explanations creates for Americans and others who have subordinated themselves to Washington.

Consider the “war on terror.” According to a Nobel economist and a Harvard University budget expert, Washington’s 14 years of war on terror has cost Americans a minimum of $6 trillion. That’s 6,000 billion dollars. This sum, together with the current Payroll tax revenues is enough to keep Social Security and Medicare in the black for years to come. Without the vast sum wasted on the war on terror, Republicans would not have an excuse to be trying to cut Social Security and Medicare for budget reasons and to privatize the old age pensions and health care of people, thus turning Medicare and Social Security pensions into fee income for Wall Street.

Combating terrorism is the excuse for squandering a minimum of $6,000 billion dollars.
What were the terrorist events that serve as a basis for this expenditure?

There are five: 9/11, the London transport system bombings, the Spanish train bombing, the Boston Marathon Bombing, and the French Charlie Hebdo rifle attack.

In other words, 5 events in 14 years.

The loss of life in all these events combined is minuscule compared to the loss of life in the war on terror. Even the deaths of our own soldiers is greater. Washington’s wars against terror have caused more deaths of Americans than the alleged terrorist events themselves.

But were they terrorist events?

There are many reasons to suspect these “terrorist attacks.” Governments have always resorted to false flag events in order to serve secret agendas. The Czar’s secret police set off bombs in order to create grounds for arresting labor agitators. We know from Operation Gladio that Western intelligence services did the same thing in order to blame European communist parties and block their electoral gains. Washington lived in fear that a communist party would gain executive power in some European country.

The 9/11 Truth movement, consisting of 2,300 architects and engineers, physicists, nano-chemists, military and airline pilots, first responders, and former government officials, have blown the official 9/11 story out of the water. No person with a brain believes the official story. The chairman, co-chairman, and legal counsel of the 9/11 Commission have written books stating that information was withheld from the commission, that the military lied to the commission, and that the commission “was set up to fail.”

Now we have claims from an imprisoned Al Qaeda member that Saudi Arabia financed 9/11. There is a secret government document, whose 28 pages allegedly point to Saudi involvement, that some lawmakers think should be released. At this point we have no way of knowing whether this is another layer of cover, another red herring to divert attention from the collapsing 9/11 story to the Saudis, whose country is also on the neoconservative list of Middle Eastern countries to be overthrown. When Washington lies and withholds information, the American people cannot know what the truth is.

There are peculiarities and contradictory evidence with regard to the London transport bombings and the Spanish train bombing. Moreover, these bombings arrived at the right time to serve Washington’s propaganda and purposes, while what terrorists had to gain from them is unclear and ambiguous. The Boston Marathon Bombing and the Paris Charlie Hebdo attack have many characteristics of false flag attacks, but the media have not asked a single question. Instead, the media hypes the official explanations. When questions cannot be asked or answered, it is a reasonable suspicion that something is wrong with the story.

Myself and a large number of observant and astute persons have asked questions about the Boston and Paris events. Our reward, of course, has been ad hominem attacks. For example, a non-entity of whom no one has ever heard used Salon, known as A Voice For The Government, to call me a series of names for asking the obvious questions that every journalist should be asking.

The only reason to read Salon is to continue your brainwashing experience as a good patriotic American should. I mean, how dare you contemplate disbelieving your honest, caring, loving, humane, moral, life-preserving, truth-telling government, which takes special care to spare human life everywhere, as in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and Ukraine.

You can take it as a general rule that anytime you see an ad hominem attack on someone who raises questions that the questions are dangerous and that the government is using its well-paid trolls to discredit the skeptic who raised the questions.

The Charlie Hebdo and Boston bombing have in common that the police decided to kill the alleged perpetuators rather than capture them–just as a person alleged to be Osama bin Laden was gratuitously murdered in the raid on the “mastermind’s compound” in Pakistan. Dead men tell no tales. They can’t contradict the story.

The obvious question is, like the question about Osama bin Laden’s alleged murder by a Seal in Abbottabad, Pakistan, why were such valuable intelligence resources killed rather than captured? But the Western print and TV media have not made a point of this obvious question. One of the alleged suspects in the Charlie Hebdo affair, Hamyd Mourad, when he heard via social media that he was the driver of the getaway car of the Charlie Hebdo killers, had the wits to quickly turn himself into the French police before he could be murdered as a terrorist. The frame-up of this intended victim failed. http://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/looking-mourad-hamyd

I have seen nothing in the news questioning how the official story can be so wrong about Hamyd Mourad and still be right about the alleged brothers who conducted the attack. The evidence connecting the brothers to the attack is the claim that they left their ID in the get-away car. This reminds me of the passport initially said to have been found in the ruble of the twin towers that was used to establish the identity of the alleged perpetrators of 9/11.

Hamyd Mourad is like the surviving Tsamaev brother. Neither were supposed to survive, because their stories, if we ever hear them, will not fit the official explanation.

We are only two months short of two years since the Marathon bombing and the surviving brother Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has still not been brought to trial. Nor has he or his attorney been heard from. http://whowhatwhy.org/2015/01/06/boston-marathon-bombing-suspect-silent/

According to the official story, Dzhokhar wrote his confession on the side of a boat in which the severely wounded, unarmed 19-year old was hiding from execution. That such an unlikely story could become part of American reality demonstrates the stupidity of both the authorities and the American public.

It is entirely possible that Dzhokhar’s attorney has learned from the Lynne Steward case that any lawyer who defends his Muslim client will be himself sentenced to federal prison for not cooperating with the government’s agenda.

But these are speculations. What facts do we have? None, of course, from Washington. Washington needs no facts. Washington is the Imperial Power. Washington’s word rules, the facts be damned. The print and TV media do not dare to contradict Washington on any important point or raise any embarrassing questions.

Concerning facts, we have the non-investigated report that a high-ranked French police official, for reasons unknown, killed himself in police headquarters while writing a report on the Charlie Hebdo affair based on his investigation.

Police officials spend their lives hoping for a major, big time case, participation in which makes their career memorable. No police official benefitting from such an opportunity would deny himself of it by committing suicide. Did the investigation not support the official story? Was the police official Helric Fredou not compliant with cover-up orders? The media has not asked these questions, and I have seen no reports about the content of Fredou’s report. What does his report, finished or unfinished, say? Why isn’t this of media interest?

Moreover, the family of Helric Fredou is unable to get the autopsy report of Helric’s “suicide” from the French government. I have seen no news reports of this fact in the US print and TV media. Here is the only report that I can find: from Kevin Barrett on Veterans Today: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/01/26/fredou/

Let’s turn now to one of the last remaining investigative reporters, Russ Baker. In an interview with Lew Rockwell on January 30, 2015, investigative reporter Russ Baker points out that no evidence has ever been presented that the Tsarnave brothers killed a MIT campus cop or highjacked a motorist. He points out that these stories helped to inflame the situation and to firmly place in the public’s mind that the brothers were dangerous and guilty of the bombing, while launching the police on a revenge killing.

There are many anomalies in the case against the Tsarnave brothers. I won’t go into them. The Internet is full of skeptical information about the official story, and you can look into it to your heart’s content. At the time, the main evidence against the brothers was a video of them walking with packs on their backs. Yet there is an abundance of videos available showing large numbers of people with backpacks, including a number of men dressed identically as if in uniform, and there are reports that a terrorist bombing drill was being held at the site complete with crisis actors. To my knowledge, none of this was ever examined or explained by the TV and print media.

One aspect that suggests pre-planning is the quick appearance of 10,000 heavily armed militarized units from a number of police and federal agencies. How (and why) was this varied force so quickly and easily assembled? The complete lockdown of Boston and its suburbs, and the eviction of people from their homes at gunpoint in order to conduct house by house searches for the one wounded brother still alive, is a response so outside of the normal range of responses as to raise questions that the media avoided asking.

Another suspicious incident is the “spontaneous” street party giving thanks to the militarized forces for saving Boston from the 19-year old kid found bleeding to death under a boat by a local resident. This party took place within a very short time just after the kid was found and seems inconsistent with lead times for organizing street parties, especially coming out of a locked-down situation when so much is disorganized.

Lew Rockwell has given me permission to repost his January 30, 2015, transcription of his June 4, 2013 podcast interview with Russ Baker, “Suppressing the Truth About the Boston Bombings.” I have edited the long interview for length, but here is the link to the full interview: http://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/01/no_author/suppressing-the-truth-about-the-boston-bombing/

ROCKWELL:  Well, good morning.  This is the Lew Rockwell Show.  And it’s great to have as our guest this morning, Mr. Russ Baker.  Russ is an award-winning investigative reporter.  I mean, an actual investigative reporter.  I think that’s, unfortunately, a dying breed.  He’s written for The New Yorker, Vanity Fair, The Nation, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Village Voice, Esquire, and many, many others publications.  To me, most importantly, he’s the author of a great book called Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, the Powerful Forces that Put It in the White House and What Their Influence Means for America, and an updated paperback under the title of Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, America’s Invisible Government and the Hidden History of the Last Fifty Years.  Russ has his own site, of course, RussBaker.com, also WhoWhatWhy.com, which continues his investigative reporting outside of the mainstream media.

Russ, is anybody, but you questioning the information shutdown that’s taken place in Boston?

BAKER:  We are looking at the actual facts of the case.   And in the information that has come out, we’re seeing tremendous anomalies, inconsistencies, out-right falsehoods, reversals by these agencies, and we are troubled by them.   And so I and other members of our team have been working this story now for more than a month, and we’re going to stay at it for a few more months.

We saw the clamp down on the freedom of movement.  We’ve seen the increasing encroachment of military troops into our American cities.  We see the public getting softened up and being made to become more and more comfortable with living in kind of a military state almost.

ROCKWELL:  Now, you’ve actually been on the ground in Boston?

BAKER:    I spent the last two weeks there.  I’ll be going back again.  I can’t stay there full time.  I’m based in New York now, not in Boston.  But I did spend two weeks there, and it was very, very instructive and I got a sense of a bunch of things.  I met with and even drove around with journalists from major newspapers and radio shows; some good people, but I could see the limitations.  There really is almost nobody there digging deeply into these problematical issues.  And when I say problematical issues, what I mean is it is the job of the media to just find out what happened.  It is not our job to pass along what somebody else says happened.  That’s not our job.  And the media there, the major newspapers, the TV and the radio, by and large, just said what the authorities told them.  In a few cases, places like “The Boston Globe,” they do more than that, a little bit more than that; they’ve tried to talk to people.  But I can tell you from my own experience that a lot of this stuff is being controlled.

We’ve done four pieces.  We have another one coming up in a few days.  That’s going to be about this carjacking victim, which is a very, very important piece of this story that has not been investigated by the media.  Another one we just did recently is about the shooting of an MIT police officer named Sean Collier.  That story was treated — it was not examined, Lew, in the context of what that story was.  That story was actually a kind of a propagandistic moment.  And those of us who study and read history remember that back in the Nazi era, there was the killing of a police officer, a Horst Wessel, and they even created a song for the Nazi movement, the “Horst Wessel” song.  Killings of police officers that are magnified like this — and if you go to WhoWhatWhy.com and read that article, there’s a photo of all of these baseball players at a stadium standing with their hats off and their heads bent in a giant projection of this one police officer.  And what is that for?  Because, tragically, police officers are killed in the line of duty all the time.  Why all of the focus on this one police officer?  I have never, Lew, seen a news organization ask that question.  Why are we focusing on this police officer?  And more importantly, what actually happened with this police officer that would make us interested in him?

ROCKWELL:  Well, of course, it’s clearly become an unexamined assumption that police are worth more than regular people.  So the killing of a cop is far worse than the killing of an old lady or a young father or whatever else, which happens all the time.  And in fact, there actually are not that many police killed in the line of duty.  You can actually find out that figure.  It’s far more dangerous to be a commercial fisherman or a logger or a farmer or many other occupations than to be a cop.  So it’s not actually true that they’re always being killed.

But absolutely, it’s made into a huge political deal, as Will Grigg puts it, with a Brezhnev-style funeral any time a cop is killed, whereas,  if some poor store owner or whatever is killed in the line of duty, his family cares and that’s about it.

BAKER:  I agree with you, that’s true.  I guess what my point was that even in agreeing with you that there are not that many police officers killed, there still are nationally probably some.

ROCKWELL:  Oh, sure.  Actually, about 40 to 50, which is terrible.

BAKER:  But what interests me here is this particular police officer.
By the way, there were two police officers shot; one died and one almost died.  And they’re both very strange cases.  And so, first of all, I was struck by the fact that they wanted to make it a big deal about this police officer’s death.  Biden flew in and addressed his funeral.  It’s literally said that thousands of law enforcement people came from all over the country to attend the funeral of this man they didn’t know.  Now, it is logical to ask, “Why would people attend a funeral of a person they didn’t know?”  It’s for some reason.  And what it really comes down to is it’s propagandistic.  And what this is, is this is focusing the public and it’s very strongly sending out a message that the system is taking care of you and you have to honor the system.  “This person died for you.”

And what’s very interesting was, if you go into that article and you read all the detail of what I investigated — and we’ll be doing more on this — first of all, when Officer Collier was killed, we were essentially told either explicitly or implicitly that he had been killed by these two brothers.  Now what’s very interesting is, at the time that he was killed, all we knew was that these two brothers, whose names were not even public yet, were pictures from a video, wearing backpacks, walking along with dozens, hundreds of other people wearing backpacks and walking.  And so it was the death of this police officer that set everything into motion.

And as soon as I heard about the death of this police officer, I thought, OK, when an officer is down, when that is announced, I can tell you this — and I know a lot of police officers and many of them are very, very fine people, but they act with a kind of a pack mentality — and it suddenly turbo charges.  You know, there’s a whole tradition, the Blue Wall of Silence and all this, and when anything happens to a police officer in any instance, immediately, all the other police respond in a very, very aggressive way.  And so what you saw was, the second he had been shot, boy, whatever the police officers were doing, they were all going to get whoever did this.  And so this became the justification for that shootout on the street in Watertown; later, going after the younger brother, the Tsarnaev brother, and peppering that boat with gunshots when he wasn’t even armed.  This was essentially a kind of retribution for their fellow officer.  Except for one thing, and that is that about a week later, when they were doing this whole big memorial service with Biden and everything, they rather quietly announced that, oh, you know what, actually, the original story that he had maybe tried to stop these brothers and they had killed him was not right.  It turns out, they don’t know who shot this man.  He didn’t confront anybody.  And he was assassinated.  And do you know where he was assassinated, Lew?  He was sitting in his patrol car.  Just sitting there.  Somebody came up behind him for no apparent reason and killed him in cold blood.  We have no evidence right now that those brothers even did it.  But that was the precipitating event that then unleashed all of this fire power.

The next thing that happened is this carjacking.  And an unknown person, whose name is still not public, has said that he was carjacked by these brothers and that they told him, “We planted the bomb and we killed that cop.”  Now, those are two things that there is no hard evidence that they did either of them, but now you’ve got killed the cop and then you have a carjacking with an unnamed person saying these guys told me they did it.  And then one of them is killed; the other one, I believe, they attempted to murder him.  So what you would have had, Lew, is you would have had a situation where both of these suspects would be dead, an unknown witness would connect them to both of the things, the whole thing would be over; and that military, that huge military police response would have been accepted, and we would be used to the idea that there will be more of these things.

ROCKWELL:  Well, that’s right.  And of course, then we had the younger brother writing out his confession on the side of the boat in the dark.

BAKER:  Well, in the dark, but this guy was basically gravely injured. According to the story, which is a little bit strange, of the man who owned that boat, when he went out to check, he saw blood there.  I mean, this guy was already in a pool of blood before they called the cops.  Because we know he’s gravely injured in the hospital.  So the likelihood that he was in any shape, you know, to sort of heroically prop himself up and go to these incredible lengths to scrawl out a confession virtually with his dying breath is a little bit hard to believe.

At the end, I think the notion was that they thought this guy was going to die.  With those shots that they fired, given the fact that he hadn’t fired a single shot at them, you have to assume that at least one person in that group, whether it was local police or it was the FBI people on the scene, was shooting to kill.  That was the intent, it seems.  And so this confession, if it’s even real — and we haven’t seen that in that confession.  And other thing we’ve been reporting is that that confession was reported to us by John Miller, a senior correspondent at CBS News.  It’s very, very important to remember that John Miller’s last major job was that he was a top official of the FBI.  He was a lead spokesman for the FBI.  He loves the FBI.  He’s very, very close with them.  And this is the man who is now back in journalism telling us this story.  He also has been a key figure throughout.  He got one of those so-called exclusive interviews with the unknown carjacking victim.  So in other words, this entire narrative is being constructed essentially by the FBI or its allies.

ROCKWELL:  I always think of the FBI as the American secret police.  And if you called them that, then when you see this sort of thing going on, it seems to me you ought to take things with maybe not a grain of salt but a cup of salt.

BAKER:  You know, I’ve reported all over the world.  I was one of the first reporters into East Germany before the wall came down; Romania when Ceausescu was overthrown.  I’ve been in so many societies where there was totalitarianism or authoritarianism.  And these kinds of organizations — you do need police, you do need investigative agencies but, unfortunately, the abuses are just rampant.  And anybody who is listening to this who thinks that that is unfair, I invite you to read any of dozens, maybe scores of books about J. Edgar Hoover, who ran the FBI for half a century, and to see that he ran it like a personal fiefdom, basically, like a mobster, and everybody in the agency was terrified of him.  There were constant cover-ups in there.  You understood you could lose your job in a second if you asked any questions at all.  Some of these books are by scholars.  Others are by people who worked in the FBI itself.

And so I have to agree with you.  I mean, in some respect, of course, one wants an agency like the FBI to be there, but that doesn’t mean we have to apologize for the grave structural, philosophical and other problems with it.  The FBI, the CIA, the Secret Service, local police, all of these institutions are absolutely riddled with problems.  And, you know, my attitude as a journalist is many institutions are riddled with problems, many aspects of the federal government, but also private industry, big corporations, riddled with problems, abuses and so forth.  And it is not our job as journalists, and I don’t think it’s our jobs as citizens, to just accept what anybody tells us and to just blindly trust when they say, whether it’s the FBI or it’s your bank.

ROCKWELL:  tell us what happened in the alleged fire or bomb or whatever the heck it was at the Kennedy Presidential Library in Boston.

BAKER:  You know, that’s a strange one, because we were told that that happened almost at the same time of the marathon bombing, within a short time of that, on the same day.  We still haven’t gotten a straight answer on what happened.  I’ve been doing a little bit in the way of inquiries and, I have to say, I have questions about that.  I don’t think that the authorities are being forthcoming.  And even more disturbing than the bombing itself, the potential damage there or attempted damage to priceless research materials that people like I need to continue to investigate what happened to John F. Kennedy, what happened to American 50 years ago, and how it’s impacting us today, which I believe it is.  The past certainly is prologue.  But not only am I concerned about that but, you know, there was no coverage — the media dropped it.    Go and Google this thing, you’ll see zero, almost.  I mean, nothing from the local Boston media or the national media.  I mean, WhoWhatWhy is a little, tiny non-profit and we’re looking into it.  And these giant news organizations have nobody asking these questions.

I find the Boston bombing story absolutely rife with weird messaging.  And it could all be coincidental; it may be coincidental; probably a lot of it is.  I’ll give you an example.  The shooting of Officer Collier was almost a dead ringer for the shooting of Officer Tippet in the Lee Harvey Oswald/John F. Kennedy saga.  Lee Harvey Oswald wouldn’t even have been a real suspect in the Kennedy assassination had not a police officer been shot shortly after Kennedy was killed, because Oswald was just one of many people who worked in that building.  Nobody said that they saw him with a rifle.  He only became really a suspect when this police officer was shot and then the description of the man who shot him matched Oswald.  So here you see a very, very similar thing where it’s a police officer goes down right after this other event and plays a role essentially in tying them, making these non-suspects suspects, and making them very, very guilty.  So that was one thing.

The second thing is this thing at the library on the 50th anniversary of the Kennedy assassination.  There are many, many disturbing parallels.  You’ve got, in both of those stories, the suspects had recently been in Russia.  Remember that?  They both had been in Russia.
[LAUGHTER]

Strange families.  Both the Tsarnaevs and Lee Harvey Oswald had been being monitored by the FBI.  Both of them had relatives, or other people they were associated, with ties to the CIA.  I mean, is this all coincidental?  Does somebody have a particularly sophisticated and sick sense of humor?  I mean, what are we looking at here?  Of course, you’re not even allowed to ask these questions.

Another story going up probably today is how The New York Times, instead of investigating any of these things, they quickly have somebody roll out a story talking about conspiracy theorists and how anybody who has questions about things basically is sort of mentally ill, which is a very, very important contradiction.  If you ask any questions and you don’t accept the conventional narrative that everything is just fine, there is something really, really wrong with you.

But, you know, my continuing efforts to look into these giant traumas, what happened to Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy and Walter Reuther, you know, union leaders who died in a strange plane crashes and so on, there’s so much of this, and it is disproportionately reformers who get taken out.  Very, very few corporate-cozy conservative politicians, who also, by the way, fly in private planes all the time, never seem to have an accident.  But this stuff we need to look at.

Now, you were talking about the KGB and putting people into mental hospitals but, you know, that happens in the United States all the time.  And just one example is there was an Army sergeant by the name of Dinkin, who was intercepting cables and big top-secret stuff at a military base in 1963, and he divined from his own monitoring of cable traffic that there was an assassination plot against JFK.  And he divined that that assassination plot was going to involve right wingers and members of the military and some foreign assassins, and that it was going to take place in Dallas in November of 1963.  And when he tried to say what he knew, they put him into a mental hospital and they began injections and they began essentially doing mind-control things with him.  And eventually, he was forced to say, oh, no, the reason I said those things — and he gave some other explanation that was totally benign.  And that was the only way that this man could get out of basically the gulag.  So if you think that these things only go on in the Soviet Union, you’re wrong.

ROCKWELL:  Russ, before we go, I want you, to the extent you can, tell us about the book you’re working on now.

BAKER:  Well, you know, I generally don’t talk too much about what I’m working on.  But I will say this.  In terms of subjects and major interests to me, I continue to be very interested in the John F. Kennedy assassination.  Would have loved to have something out on the 50th anniversary of his assassination, but that story is so layered and so complicated, some people believe we could never get to the bottom of it.  I think we can.  I think we can put enough pieces of the things together to figure out what happened.  And I think that solving that is absolutely essential for us to understand what kind of society we really live in, to kind of wake up.  And you know, people say, though, “This is so depressing, I don’t want to hear about it,” but that is not a way to empower yourself.  You empower yourself by educating yourself, by having your eyes open, by understanding how things work.  And that is really the beginning to go about and correct these things, because this country has always — and Franklin Roosevelt said this and Woodrow Wilson said it.  They always warned us that they didn’t really run the country.  Franklin Roosevelt very famously said in a letter to somebody, he said, as you and I both know, the real power in this country resides in the financial circles on Wall Street.  And that’s true.  And I’m continuing to look at Obama and how people like that get to the top and people like Hillary Clinton, and who are behind them, and why it is that, whether we have a Democrat or a Republican, even though there are real substantive differences, primarily on social issues, when it comes to the big global issues and the big financial issues, essentially, we see very, very similar policies and appointments made.  What is really going on in this country?  Why is it that we actually seem to live under a kind of a one-party state?  And that is what my continuing efforts, my books, and, most importantly, my work at WhoWhatWhy.com, which really is the main focus of my efforts in my life today.  It’s to build a meaningful journalistic institution that can train a whole new generation of journalists, funded entirely by the public, with no corporate influence or government influence, asking questions with neither fear, nor favor, and doing what we’re supposed to be doing, really, as journalists.

Dear Readers: If we expect to regain the liberty bestowed upon us by the Bill of Rights, we must turn a deaf ear to Washington’s lies. Washington’s agenda is divorced from the agendas of the American people. Washington’s agenda is war and more debt for taxpayers to service even though a majority cannot pay their bills except with mounting credit card debt, and a police state in place to control the population as jobs off-shoring eliminates the middle class buffer that suppresses class war between the poor and the rich.

Any American who has read Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States knows that government in America has not served the interests of the people but the agendas of the rich and powerful.

War and “security” make large claims on the US budget and on civil liberties. Having established the precedent of locking down a major city in order to search for one suspect, this power was used recently to lock down New York because of a snow storm. People in northeastern US certainly know how to deal with snow, but suddenly they are told they cannot leave their homes or be on the streets because of snow.

What has changed that suddenly a snow storm produces a political response comparable to a declaration of martial law?

What will the next excuse be?

Are Americans being trained to accept arbitrary curtailments on their freedom of movement?

Pay attention. The likelihood is that you are being conditioned for narrowing the dimensions of your freedom.

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

 


Is Russia Planning a Gold Based Currency?

02/07/2015

http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=bf16b152ccc444bdbbcc229e4&id=fb63eaf63c&e=ba977b782f

Marcia Christoff-Kurapovna

The “perfect-storm” of geopolitical instability, diplomatic isolation, severe currency depreciation, and economic decline now confronting Russia has profoundly damaged Moscow’s international standing, and possibly for the long-term. Yet, it is precisely such conditions that may push the country’s leadership into taking the radical step that will secure its world-player status once and for all: the adoption of a gold-exchange standard.

Though a far-fetched idea at first glance, many factors suggest that demonetization in gold may be a logical next step for Moscow.

First, for years Moscow has been expressing its unwillingness to remain at the monetary mercy of the US and its NATO allies and this view has been most vehemently expressed by President Putin’s long-time economic advisor, Sergei Glazyev. Russia is prepared to play strategic hardball with the West on the issue: the governor of Russia’s central bank took the unusual step last November of presenting to the international media details of the bank’s zealous gold-buying spree. The announcement, in sharp contrast to that institution’s more taciturn traditions, underscores Moscow’s outspoken dismay with dollar hegemony; its timing suggests coordination with the top rungs of government to present gold as a possible currency-war weapon.

Second, despite international pressure, Russia has been very wary of the sell-off policies that led the UK, France, Spain, and Italy to unload gold over the past decade during unsuccessful attempts to prop up their respective ailing economies — in particular, of then-Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s sell-off of 400 metric tons of the country’s reserves at stunningly low prices. Moscow’s surprise decision upon the onset of the ruble’s swift decline in early December 2014 to not tap into the country’s gold reserves, now the world’s sixth largest, highlights the ambitiousness of Russia’s stance on the gold issue. By the end of December, Russia added another 20.73 tons, according to the IMF in late January, capping a nine-month buying spree.

Third, while the Russian economy is structurally weak, enough of the country’s monetary fundamentals are sound, such that the timing of a move to gold, geopolitically and domestically, may be ideal. Russia is not a debtor nation. At this writing in January, Russia’s debt to GDP ratio is low and most of its external debt is private. Physical gold accounts for 10 percent of Russia’s foreign currency reserves. The budget deficit, as of a November 2014 projection, is likely to be around $10 billion, much less than 1 percent of GDP. The poverty rate fell from 35 percent in 2001 to 10 percent in 2010, while the middle class was projected in 2013 to reach 86 percent of the population by 2020.

Collapsing oil prices serve only to intensify the monetary attractiveness of gold. Given that oil exports, along with the rest of the energy sector, account for 45 percent of GDP, the depreciation of the ruble will continue; newly unstable fiscal conditions have devastated banks, and higher inflation looms, expected to reach 10 percent by the end of 2015. As Russia remains (for the foreseeable future) mainly a resource-based economy, only a move to gold, arguably, can make the currency stronger, even if it does limit Russia’s available currency.

In buying as much gold as it has, the country is, in part, ensuring that it will have enough money in circulation in the event of such fundamental transformation. In terms of re-establishing post-oil shock international prestige, a move to gold will allow the country to be seen as a more reliable and trustworthy trading partner.

The repercussions of Russia on a gold-exchange standard would be immense. Above all, it would mean the first major schism in the world’s monetary order. China would quite likely follow suit. It could mean the threat of a severe inflation in the United States should rafts of unwanted dollars make their way back across the Atlantic — the Fed’s ultimate nightmare. Above all, the country will avoid the extreme debt leverages which would not have happened had Western capitals remained on gold.

“A gold standard would be politically appealing, transforming the ruble to a formidable currency and reducing outflows significantly,” writes Dr. Enrico Colombatto, economics professor at the University of Turin, Italy.

He notes that the only major drawback would be that the imposed discipline of a gold standard would deprive authorities of discretionary political power. The other threat would be that of a new generation of Russian central bankers becoming too heavily influenced by the monetary mindset of the European Central Bank (ECB) and the Fed.

As Alisdair MacLeod, a two-decade veteran of off-shore banking consulting based in the UK, recently wrote, Russia (and China) will “hold all the aces” by moving away from any possible currency wars of the future into the physical gold market. In his article, he adds that there is currently a low appetite for physical gold in Western capital markets and longer-term foreign holders of rubles would be unlikely to exchange them for gold, preferring to sell them for other fiat currencies.

Mr. Macleod cites John Butler, CIO at Atom Capital in London, who sees great potential in a gold-exchange standard for Russia. With the establishment of a sound gold-exchange rate, he argues, the Central Bank of Russia would no longer be confined to buying and selling gold to maintain the rate of exchange. The bank could freely manage the liquidity of the ruble and be able to issue coupon-bearing bonds to the Russian public, allowing it a yield linked to gold rates. As the ruble stabilizes, the rate of the cost of living would drop; savings would grow, spurred on by long term stability and lower taxes.

Foreign exchange also would be favorable, Mr. Butler maintains. Owing to the Ukraine crises and commodities crises, rubles have been dumped for dollar/euro currencies. Upon the announcement of a gold-exchange, demand for the ruble would increase. London and New York markets would in turn be countered by provisions restricting gold-to-ruble exchanges of imports and exports.

The geopolitics of gold also figure into Russia’s increasingly close relations with China, a country that also has made clear its preference for gold over the dollar. (Russia recently edged out China as the world’s top buyer of the metal.) In the aftermath of the $400 billion, 30-year deal signed between Russian gas giant Gazprom and the China National Petroleum Company in November 2014, China turned its focus to the internationalization of its own gold market. On January 15, 2015, the Shanghai Gold Exchange, the largest physical gold exchange worldwide, and the World Gold Council, concluded a strategic cooperation deal to expand the Chinese gold market through the new Shanghai Free Trade Zone.

This is not the first time the gold standard has been seen as the ultimate cure for Russia’s economic problems. In September 1998, the noted economist Jude Wanninski predicted in a far-sighted essay for The Wall Street Journal that only a gold ruble would get the the country out of its then-debt crises. It was upon taking office about two years later, in May 2000, that President Putin embarked upon the country’s massive gold-buying campaign. At the time, it took twenty-eight barrels of crude just to buy an ounce of gold. The gold-backed ruble policy of those years was adopted to successfully pay down the country’s external debt.

As a pro-gold stance is, essentially, anti-dollar, speculation about how the US would react raises the question of whether an all-out currency war would follow. The West would have to keep Russia regionally and militarily marginalized, not to mention kept within the confines of the Fed, the ECB, and the Bank of England (BOE).

Nor is that prospect too far-fetched. As Dutch author Willem Middelkoop has written in his 2014 book The Big Reset: War on Gold and the Financial Endgame,

A system reset is imminent. Even before 2020 the world’s financial system will need to find a different anchor. … In a desperate attempt to maintain this dollar system, the United States waged a secret war on gold since the 1960s. China and Russia have pierced through the American smokescreen around gold and the dollar and are no longer willing to continue lending to the United States. Both countries have been accumulating enormous amounts of gold, positioning themselves for the next phase of the global financial system.

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM


What is a Conspiracy Theory, What is the Truth?

02/06/2015

http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-is-a-conspiracy-theory-what-is-the-truth/5429344

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research

Obama is on a hot war footing. Western civilization is threatened by the Islamic State.

The “Global War on Terrorism” is heralded as a humanitarian endeavor.

We have a “Responsibility to Protect”. Humanitarian warfare is the solution.

Evil folks are lurking. ‘Take ‘em out”, said George W. Bush.

The Western media is beating the drums of war. Obama’s military agenda is supported by a vast propaganda apparatus.

One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to “fabricate an enemy” . As the political legitimacy the Obama Administration falters, doubts regarding the existence of this “outside enemy”, namely Al Qaeda and its network of (CIA sponsored) affiliates must be dispelled.

The purpose is to tacitly instil, through repeated media reports, ad nauseam, within people’s inner consciousness, the notion that Muslims constitute a threat to the security of the Western World.

Humanitarian warfare is waged on several fronts: Russia, China and the Middle East are currently the main targets.

Xenophobia and the Military Agenda

The wave of xenophobia directed against Muslims which has swept across Western Europe is tied into geopolitics. It is part of a military agenda. It consists in demonizing the enemy.

Muslim countries possess more than 60 percent of total oil reserves. In contrast, the United States of America has barely 2 percent of total oil reserves. Iraq has five times more oil than the United States. (See Michel Chossudovsky, The “Demonization” of Muslims and the Battle for Oil, Global Research, Jannuary 4, 2007).

The “Demonization” of Muslims and the Battle for Oil

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-demonization-of-muslims-and-the-battle-for-oil/4347

2-6-2015 9-46-11 AM

Throughout history, “wars of religion” have served to obscure the economic and strategic interests behind the conquest and invasion of foreign lands. “Wars of religion” were invariably fought with a view to securing control over trading routes and natural resources.

The Crusades extending from the 11th to the 14th Century are often presented by historians as  “a continuous series of military-religious expeditions made by European Christians in the hope of wresting the Holy Land from the infidel Turks.” The objective of the Crusades, however, had little to do with religion. The Crusades largely consisted, through military action, in challenging the dominion of the Muslim merchant societies, which controlled the Eastern trade routes.

The “Just War” supported the Crusades. War was waged with the support of the Catholic Church, acting as an instrument of religious propaganda and indoctrination, which was used in the enlistment throughout Europe of thousands of peasants, serfs and urban vagabonds.

America’s Crusade in Central Asia and the Middle East

In the eyes of public opinion, possessing a “just cause” for waging war is central. A war is said to be Just if it is waged on moral, religious or ethical grounds.

America’s Crusade in Central Asia and the Middle East is no exception. The “war on terrorism” purports to defend the American Homeland and protect the “civilized world”. It is upheld as a “war of religion”, a “clash of civilizations”, when in fact the main objective of this war is to secure control and corporate ownership over the region’s extensive oil wealth, while also imposing under the helm of the IMF and the World Bank (now under the leadership of Paul Wolfowitz), the privatization of State enterprises and the transfer of  the countries’ economic assets into the hands of foreign capital. .

The Just War theory upholds war as a “humanitarian operation”. It serves to camouflage the real objectives of the military operation, while providing a moral and principled image to the invaders. In its contemporary version, it calls for military intervention on ethical and moral grounds against “rogue states” and “Islamic terrorists”, which are threatening the Homeland.

Possessing a “just cause” for waging war is central to the Bush administration’s justification for invading and occupying both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Taught in US military academies, a modern-day version of the “Just War” theory has been embodied into US military doctrine. The “war on terrorism” and the notion of “preemption” are predicated on the right to “self defense.” They define “when it is permissible to wage war”: jus ad bellum.

Jus ad bellum serves to build a consensus within the Armed Forces command structures. It also serves to convince the troops that the enemy is “evil” and that they are fighting for a “just cause”. More generally, the Just War theory in its modern day version is an integral part of war propaganda and media disinformation, applied to gain public support for a war agenda.

The Battle for Oil. Demonization of the Enemy

War builds a humanitarian agenda. Throughout history, vilification of the enemy has been applied time and again. The Crusades consisted in demonizing the Turks as infidels and heretics, with a view to justifying military action.

Demonization serves geopolitical and economic objectives. Likewise, the campaign against “Islamic terrorism” (which is supported covertly by US intelligence) supports the conquest of oil wealth. The term “Islamo-fascism,” serves to degrade the policies, institutions, values and social fabric of Muslim countries, while also upholding the tenets of “Western democracy” and the “free market” as the only alternative for these countries.

The US led war in the broader Middle East Central Asian region consists in gaining control over more than sixty percent of the world’s reserves of oil and natural gas. The Anglo-American oil giants also seek to gain control over oil and gas pipeline routes out of the region. (See table and maps below).

Muslim countries including Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Yemen, Libya, Nigeria, Algeria, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, possess between 66.2 and 75.9 percent of total oil reserves, depending on the source and methodology of the estimate. (See table below).

In contrast, the United States of America has barely 2 percent of total oil reserves. Western countries including its major oil producers ( Canada, the US, Norway, the UK, Denmark and Australia) control approximately 4 percent of total oil reserves. (In the alternative estimate of the Oil and Gas Journal which includes Canada’s oil sands, this percentage would be of the the order of 16.5%. See table below).

The largest share of the World’s oil reserves lies in a region extending (North) from the tip of Yemen to the Caspian sea basin and (East) from the Eastern Mediterranean coastline to the Persian Gulf. This broader Middle East- Central Asian region, which is the theater of the US-led “war on terrorism” encompasses according to the estimates of World Oil, more than sixty percent of the World’s oil reserves. (See table below).

Iraq has five times more oil than the United States.

Muslim countries possess at least 16 times more oil than the Western countries.

The major non-Muslim oil reserve countries are Venezuela, Russia, Mexico, China and Brazil. (See table)

Demonization is applied to an enemy, which possesses three quarters of the world’s oil reserves. “Axis of evil”, “rogue States”, “failed nations”, “Islamic terrorists”: demonization and vilification are the ideological pillars of America’s “war on terror”. They serve as a casus belli for waging the battle for oil.

The Battle for Oil requires the demonization of those who possess the oil. The enemy is characterized as evil, with a view to justifying military action including the mass killing of civilians. The Middle East Central Asian region is heavily militarized. (See map). The oil fields are encircled: NATO war ships stationed in the Eastern Mediterranean (as part of a UN “peace keeping” operation), US Carrier Strike Groups and Destroyer Squadrons in the Persian Gulf and the Arabian deployed as part of the “war on terrorism”.

USS Enterprise Strike Group

The ultimate objective, combining military action, covert intelligence operations and war propaganda, is to break down the national fabric and transform sovereign countries into open economic territories, where natural resources can be plundered and confiscated  under “free market” supervision. This control also extends to strategic oil and gas pipeline corridors (e.g. Afghanistan).

Demonization is a PSYOP, used to sway public opinion and build a consensus in favor of war. Psychological warfare is directly sponsored by the Pentagon and the US intelligence apparatus. It is not limited to assassinating or executing the rulers of Muslim countries,  it extends to entire populations. It also targets Muslims in Western Europe and North America. It purports to break national consciousness and the ability to resist the invader. It denigrates Islam. It creates social divisions. It is intended to divide national societies and ultimately trigger “civil war”. While it creates an environment which facilitates the outright appropriation of the countries’ resources, at the same time, it potentially backlashes, creates a new national consciousness, develops inter-ethnic solidarity, brings people together in confronting the invaders.

It is worth noting that the triggering of  sectarian divisions and “civil wars” is contemplated in the process of redrawing of the map of the Middle East, where countries are slated to be broken up and transformed into territories.  The map of the New Middle East, although not official, has been used by the US National War Academy. It was recently published in the Armed Forces Journal (June 2006). In this map, nation states are broken up, international borders are redefined along sectarian-ethnic lines, broadly in accordance with the interests of the Anglo-American oil giants (See Map below). The map has also been used in a training program at NATO’s Defense College for senior military officers.

MAP OF THE NEW MIDDLE EAST

2-6-2015 9-47-44 AM

Note: The following map was prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. It was published in the Armed Forces Journal in June 2006, Peters is a retired colonel of the U.S. National War Academy. (Map Copyright Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters 2006).

The Oil Lies in Muslim Lands

The oil lies in Muslim lands. Vilification of the enemy is part and parcel of Eurasia energy geopolitics. It is a direct function of the geographic distribution of the World’s oil and gas reserves. If the oil were in countries occupied predominantly by Buddhists or Hindus, one would expect that US foreign policy would be directed against Buddhists and Hindus, who would also be the object of vilification..

In the Middle East  war theater, Iran and Syria, which are part of the “axis of evil”, are the next targets according to official US statements.

US sponsored “civil wars” have also been conducted in several other strategic oil and gas regions including Nigeria, the Sudan, Colombia, Somalia, Yemen, Angola, not to mention Chechnya and several republics of the former Soviet Union. Ongoing US sponsored “civil wars”, which often include the channelling of covert support to paramilitary groups, have been triggered in the Darfur region of Sudan as well as in Somalia, Darfur possesses extensive oil reserves. In Somalia, lucrative concessions have already been granted to four Anglo-American oil giants.

“According to documents obtained by The Times, nearly two-thirds of Somalia was allocated to the American oil giants Conoco, Amoco [now part of BP], Chevron and Phillips in the final years before Somalia’s pro-U.S. President Mohamed Siad Barre was overthrown and the nation plunged into chaos in January, 1991. Industry sources said the companies holding the rights to the most promising concessions are hoping that the Bush Administration’s decision to send U.S. troops to safeguard aid shipments to Somalia will also help protect their multimillion-dollar investments there.” (America’s Interests in Somalia, Global Research, 2002)

Globalization and the Conquest of the World’s Energy Resources

The collective demonization of Muslims, including the vilification of Islam, applied Worldwide, constitutes at the ideological level, an instrument of conquest of the World’s energy resources. It is part of the broader economic, political mechanisms underlying the New World Order.


Michel Chossudovsky is the author of the international best seller “The Globalization of Poverty ” published in eleven languages. He is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Center for Research on Globalization, at   
www.globalresearch.ca . He is also a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica.  His most recent book is entitled: America’s “War on Terrorism”, Global Research, 2005. 

Oil Reserves by Country

(Proven reserves in billions of barrels)

Rank

Country

Percent of World Reserves

World Oil, December 2004

Percent of World Reserves

Oil & Gas Journal, January 2006

1.

Saudi Arabia

24.2

262.1

20.6

266.8

2.

Canada*

0.4

4.7

13.8

178.8

3.

Iran

12.1

130.8

10.3

132.5

4.

Iraq

10.6

115.0

 8.9

115.0

5.

Kuwait

9.2

99.7

 7.9

101.5

6.

United Arab Emirates

6.5

69.9

 7.6

97.8

7.

Venezuela*

4.8

52.4

6.1

79.7

8.

Russia

6.2

67.1

4.6

60.0

9.

Libya

3.2

33.6

 3.0

39.1

10.

Nigeria

3.4

36.6

 2.7

35.9

11.

United States

2.0

21.4

1.7

21.4

12.

China

1.4

15.4

1.4

18.3

13.

Qatar

1.8

20

 1.2

15.2

14.

Mexico

1.4

14.8

1.0

12.9

15.

Algeria

1.4

15.3

 0.9

11.4

16.

Brazil

1.0

11.2

0.9

11.2

17.

Kazakhstan

0.8

9.0

 0.7

  9.0

18.

Norway

0.9

9.9

0.6

7.7

19.

Azerbaijan

0.6

7.0

 0.5

  7.0

20.

India

0.5

4.9

0.4

5.8

21

Oman

0.4.

4.8

 0.4

  5.5

22

Angola

0.8.

9.0

0.4

5.4

23

Ecuador

0.5

5.5

0.4

4.6

24

Indonesia

0.5

5.3

 0.3

  4.3

25

UK

0.4

3.9

0.3

4.0

26

Yemen

0.3

3.0

 0.3

  4.0

27

Egypt

0.3

3.6

 0.3

  3.7

28

Malaysia

0.3

3.0

 0.2

  3.0

29

Gabon

0.2

2.2

0.2

2.5

30

Syria

0.2

2.3

 0.2

  2.5

31

Argentina

0.2

2.3

0.2

2.3

32

Equatorial Guinea

0.2

1,8

0.0

0.0

32

Colombia

0.1

1.5

0.1

1.5

33

Vietnam

0.1

1,3

  0.6

34

Chad

0.0

0.0

 0.1

  1.5

35

Australia

0.3

3.6

0.1

1.4

36

Brunei

0.1

1.1

 0.1

  1.4

37

Denmark

0.1

1.3

0.1

1.3

38

Peru

0.1

0.9

0.1

1.0

Total Muslim Countries**

75.9

822.1

66.2

 855.6

Total Western World (EU, North America, Australia)

4.1

44.8

16.5

213.3

Other Countries
20.6
214.9
17.3
223.6

World Total
100.0
1,081.8
100.0
1,292.5

Source: EIO: Energy Information Administration (Scroll down for explanatory notes on the table)

2-6-2015 9-51-45 AM

2-6-2015 9-54-30 AM

NOTES  PERTAINING TO THE TABLE ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF OIL RESERVES

Indicated are the world’s main oil reserve countries. Countries with less than 0.1 % of total reserves are not indicated.

The Oil and Gas Journal figures indicated above are based on proven oil reserves including the bituminous oil fields (oil sands or tar sands). The World Oil figures indicate oil reserves without the tar sands. The difference between the two sets of figures largely pertains to the position of Canada and Venezuela. The tar-sands are considered by some experts as not recoverable with present technology and prices, although this issue is the object of heated debate.

Muslim countries are indicated in bold. Percentages are rounded up to first decimal.

*Canada appears according to this estimate as the Second Country in terms of the size of proven reserves, due to the size of its bituminous oil fields. The Oil & Gas Journal’s oil reserve estimate above for Canada includes 4.7 billion barrels of conventional crude oil and condensate reserves and 174.1 billion barrels of oil sands reserves.

In other recognized estimates, where the oil sands are not accounted for, Canada’s reserves are much lower (in billions of barrels):

BP Statistical Review 16.802

Oil & Gas Journal 178.792

World Oil 4.700

BP notes that “the figure for Canadian oil reserves includes an official estimate of Canadian oil sands “under active development”.” BP says of its data sources for oil reserves that “the estimates in this table have been compiled using a combination of primary official sources, third-party data from the OPEC Secretariat, World Oil, Oil & Gas Journal and an independent estimate of Russian reserves based on information in the public domain.

World Oil’s Canadian oil reserve estimate “does not include 174 billion bbl [barrels] of oil sands reserves.”

 2-6-2015 9-57-07 AM

NOTES  PERTAINING TO THE TABLE ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF OIL RESERVES

Indicated are the world’s main oil reserve countries. Countries with less than 0.1 % of total reserves are not indicated.

The Oil and Gas Journal figures indicated above are based on proven oil reserves including the bituminous oil fields (oil sands or tar sands). The World Oil figures indicate oil reserves without the tar sands. The difference between the two sets of figures largely pertains to the position of Canada and Venezuela. The tar-sands are considered by some experts as not recoverable with present technology and prices, although this issue is the object of heated debate.

Muslim countries are indicated in bold. Percentages are rounded up to first decimal.

*Canada appears according to this estimate as the Second Country in terms of the size of proven reserves, due to the size of its bituminous oil fields. The Oil & Gas Journal’s oil reserve estimate above for Canada includes 4.7 billion barrels of conventional crude oil and condensate reserves and 174.1 billion barrels of oil sands reserves.

In other recognized estimates, where the oil sands are not accounted for, Canada’s reserves are much lower (in billions of barrels):

BP Statistical Review 16.802

Oil & Gas Journal 178.792

World Oil 4.700

BP notes that “the figure for Canadian oil reserves includes an official estimate of Canadian oil sands “under active development”.” BP says of its data sources for oil reserves that “the estimates in this table have been compiled using a combination of primary official sources, third-party data from the OPEC Secretariat, World Oil, Oil & Gas Journal and an independent estimate of Russian reserves based on information in the public domain.

World Oil’s Canadian oil reserve estimate “does not include 174 billion bbl [barrels] of oil sands reserves.”

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM