Fathers Canada

Mac Slavo
SHTF Plan
December 27, 2011

While Muslims the world over may argue that Islam is a religion of peace, one simply can’t ignore that teachings of mid-east leaders, whether in mosques or schools, tend to shy away from the idea of co-existence and the right of an individual to live as they choose.

Barbaric textbooks handed out in Saudi Arabian schools teach children how to cut off a thief’s hands and feet under Sharia law, it has emerged.

The shocking books, paid for and printed by the Saudi government, also tell teenagers that Jews need to be exterminated and homosexuals should be ‘put to death’.

Recent editions were obtained by the Institute for Gulf Affairs in Washington, D.C., which says they should raise fears in the West over the use of jihadist language.

The books were published and handed out to 9th and 10th-graders despite Saudi Arabia’s promises to clean up textbooks in the kingdom.

Ali Al-Ahmed, director of the Institute for Gulf Affairs, told Fox News: ’This is where terrorism starts, in the education system.

‘They show students how to cut (the) hand and the feet of a thief,’ he said.

The textbooks were printed for the 2010-2011 academic year and translated from Arabic by the institute.

In one, for ninth-graders, students are taught the annihilation of the Jewish people is imperative.

One text reads in part: ‘The hour (of judgment) will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them. There is a Jew behind me come and kill him.’

According to the translations, women are described as weak and irresponsible.

Mr Al-Ahmed said the textbooks also call for homosexuals to be put to death ‘because they pose a danger at society, as the Saudi school books teaches’.

Mr Al-Ahmed said: ‘If you teach six million children in these important years of their lives, if you install that in their brain, no wonder we have so many Saudi suicide bombers.’

Source: Daily Mail

Christian leaders, past and present, have had their own barbaric delusions on a historical basis as well, so we’re not attempting to elevate one religion above another, but it’s clear that something just isn’t right about theocracies and monarchies that claim to come in peace, while at the same time educating children from a young age to hate, to the point of annihilation, anyone who is not of the same religion or those who have a different sexual orientation.

Our own government officials justify hundreds of billions of dollars in expenditures and the lives of thousands of Americans on wars that they claim will spread democracy, yet it is clear that our ideologies of individuality, freedom of expression and freedom of religion are completely lost on these societies. Secretary Clinton et. al. told the American public that we should support Egyptian and Libyan rioters as it would result in democracy and more freedom for the people of these countries. The reality is that no such system will be established in Egypt and Libya, or Iraq and Afghanistan for that matter. Rather, these countries will instill leaders (probably with the help of Western powers) that will further push the very agendas and ideas set forth in Saudi Arabian text books.

Armies have tried to conquer these regions and institute secular political systems in the past. They have failed repeatedly – for thousands of years. Our attempts to spread democracy there are akin to implementing and spreading Sharia law in the United States. It will be rejected, through violence if necessary.

The point is that we should stop pretending like we can make any significant progress in the middle east peace process. There will be no peace between Israel and Muslim nations. There will be no peace between, or mutual respect among, Muslim countries and the United States, because according to many teachers of Islam, the only good non-muslim is a dead non-muslim. There is simply no way to convince certain Islamic sects otherwise.

WYFF 4
October 31, 2011

SPARTANBURG COUNTY, S.C. — The Spartanburg County Sheriff is known for speaking his mind, and at a news conference on Monday, he didn’t hold back his anger and frustration after a woman was attacked in a park over the weekend.

Investigators said 46-year-old Walter Lance grabbed a woman who was walking her dog in Milliken Park on Sunday afternoon. They said Lance choked the woman, made her take off her clothing and tried to rape her.

Sheriff Chuck Wright opened his news conference by saying, “Our form of justice is not making it,” and he said, “I’m really aggravated.”

He said, “Carry a concealed weapon. That’ll fix it.”

Read full article

John P. Holdren’s job looks safe if Romney gets GOP nod

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
October 17, 2011

An interesting piece from Investors.com notes that the corporate media darling GOP frontrunner, Mitt Romney, previously sought advice from White House science czar John P. Holdren when crafting carbon tax legislation for Massachusetts five years ago.

Under Romney’s leadership, Massachusetts became the first state in the country to pass legislation to regulate carbon emissions, in 2006. This is “something the Obama administration is trying to do to all states through the Environmental Protection Agency’s draconian job-killing regulations and mandates.” notes the Investors editorial.

Indeed, while other GOP candidates have expressed doubts about the effectiveness and legitimacy of carbon taxes, Romney has managed to attract the praise of Al Gore who stated in June that “While other Republicans are running from the truth, he is sticking to his guns in the face of the anti-science wing of the Republican Party.”

Romney’s position on Global warming is clear, in a June 3rd speech he stated “I don’t speak for the scientific community, of course, but I believe the world’s getting warmer. I can’t prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that.”

It is Romney’s association with John P. Holdren that should be most concerning for Americans, however.

In 2005, a memo from the Massachusetts governor’s office noted that the new policy on carbon emissions had been in part drawn up with advice and input from “environmental and policy experts” including “John Holdren, professor of environmental policy at Harvard University.”

As we have exhaustively documented, Holdren infamously co-wrote a 1977 textbook in which he advocated the formation of a “planetary regime” that would use a “global police force” to enforce totalitarian measures of population control, including forced abortions, mass sterilization programs conducted via the food and water supply, as well as mandatory bodily implants that would prevent couples from having children.

Holdren is a Malthusian fanatic in the tradition of the arcane anti-human ideology that originated amongst British aristocracy in the 19th century… and both Obama and Romney have looked to him to form their policies.

Climate change isn’t the only scientific policy area that Romney and Obama share near identical views on. It is a well established fact that the Obama healthcare plan, declared unconstitutional by multiple federal courts, was modelled directly on Romneycare.

M.I.T. economist John Gruber, the architect of Romneycare in Massachusetts recently confirmed this, noting ”The White House wanted to lean a lot on what we’d done in Massachusetts.”

“They really wanted to know how we can take that same approach we used in Massachusetts and turn that into a national model.” Gruber added.

Investors.com also notes that a feature of ObamaCare “is its inclusion of contraceptives as a covered expense and its designation of pregnancy as a ‘preventable’ condition, as if it were a disease.” Once more John P. Holdren’s influence is evident.

The piece also notes that “Romney was pro-choice when he ran for governor but shifted his position as he entered the national stage.”

One candidate who has consistently made his stance on this matter clear is Dr Ron Paul, who stamped his pro-life credentials on to his latest ad campaign, airing in the early primary states ahead of tomorrow’s debate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MkAsLPrnJGc

Scientists call for new investigation into bio-terror event

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
October 10, 2011

Three leading scientists, one a world authority on the composition of Anthrax, have produced a paper that presents evidence that directly calls into question the FBI’s version of events surrounding the 2001 anthrax mail attacks.

The paper by Coordinator of the World Health Organization (WHO) Working Group on Anthrax Research and Control, Martin E. Hugh-Jones, biologist Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, and chemist Stuart Jacobsen is to be published in the peer reviewed Journal of Bioterrorism & Biodefense.

“three scientists argue that distinctive chemicals found in the dried anthrax spores — including the unexpected presence of tin — point to a high degree of manufacturing skill, contrary to federal reassurances that the attack germs were unsophisticated.” reports the New York Times.

“…bureau scientists focused on tin early in their eight-year investigation, calling it an “element of interest” and a potentially critical clue to the criminal case. They later dropped their lengthy inquiry, never mentioned tin publicly and never offered any detailed account of how they thought the powder had been made.” The report continues.

Dr. Hugh-Jones said that the presence of tine “indicates a very special processing, and expertise,” directly contradicting the FBI’s assertion that microbiologist Bruce Ivins acted as the lone perpetrator of the attacks that killed five people and infected 17 others in the weeks immediately following 9/11.

The paper contends that the tin may have been used as a chemical catalyst in a specialized silicon coating on the anthrax germs, in order to kill any other micro-organisms. This would indicate that whoever prepared the anthrax spores did so with a very high level of sophistication.

All three authors of the paper have commented in interviews that they believe Ivins may have been innocent and that there should be a new investigation.

One of the world’s foremost authorities on Anthrax, Dr. Hugh-Jones participated in the investigation of the 1979 anthrax outbreak in Sverdlovsk (now known as Yekaterinburg) in the former USSR. In 1992, the Russian government admitted the source of the outbreak was an accidental spore emission from one of their own biological warfare facilities.

In addition, both the director of a new review by the Government Accountability Office and the chairwoman of a National Academy of Science panel that spent a year and a half reviewing the F.B.I.’s scientific work stated that the paper’s findings raise questions that should be further explored.

Chemical engineer Alice P. Gast of the National Academy of Science panel specifically suggested that any future investigations of the attacks should examine the government’s classified work on anthrax.

A spokesman for the Justice Department said that the paper represented speculation only and that the government stands by its findings.

The DOJ was recently embroiled in controversy surrounding the Anthrax case when it quickly retracted court papers that called into serious question a key pillar of the criminal case against Ivins.

A filing by Justice Department civil lawyers in July that noted that the Army’s biodefense center at Fort Detrick, Md., where Ivins worked, “did not have the specialized equipment in a containment laboratory that would be required to prepare the dried spore preparations that were used in the letters.”

In other words, the filing noted that Ivins’ lab, often referred to as the “hot suite”, did not contain the equipment needed to turn liquid anthrax into the refined powder that ended up being mailed to members of the Senate and reporters in the fall of 2001.

The FBI based it’s entire case against Ivins on the fact that the microbiologist had access to the necessary equipment in the government lab at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases where he worked.

When the Justice Department realized that its recent court filing cast serious doubt on these claims, following media coverage, it did a 180 flip flop and sent the court a “list of corrections” to conform with the FBI’s conclusion that Ivins did have equipment available to do the job.

The turn of events prompted ranking Republican Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa to write Attorney General Eric Holder and FBI Director Robert Mueller for an explanation.

In his letter, Sen Grassley noted that this turn of events “produced a new set of questions regarding this unsolved crime.”

“My concern is accentuated by the apparent contradiction of the DOJ court documents to the original FBI investigation, the subsequent attempt to retract that information and the federal judge’s ruling that the DOJ Civil Division “show good cause” to justify a modification to the original court filing.” Grassley wrote.

“The DOJ original court filing seemingly eliminated the FBI’s previous circumstantial evidence associated with Dr. Ivins without providing any additional insight as to the means and methodology he may have used to create the anthrax powder.” The Senator added.

Grassley, the most senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, also called for a briefing to “determine why it appears, at the least, that the right hand and left hand of the (Justice Department) do not know what the other is doing.”

The July court filing was made as part of a government defense against a lawsuit brought by the family of Robert Stevens, Photo Editor of The Sun in Florida and the first victim who died as a result of the Anthrax attack. The court papers containing the Justice Department contradiction were discovered and reported by a researcher for the PBS program Frontline, which is working on a forthcoming documentary on the case with McClatchy Newspapers and ProPublica.

What the filing should have said, the department wrote in its retraction, was that while the Army lab did not have a lyophilizer, a freeze-drying machine, in the space where Dr. Ivins usually worked, there was a lyophilizer and other equipment in the building that he could have used to dry the anthrax into powder.

Even if this was the case, which is still highly questionable, it still significantly weakens the case against Ivins as the lone assailant, because it means he would have had to have access different areas of the building and use the equipment in those areas for some time without being noticed.

It also means that the fact that others who worked in the lab were not sickened becomes even more of a key indicator that Ivins did not prepare the anthrax spores as the FBI and the government has claimed he did.

Paul Kemp, Ivins’ lead defense attorney, noted that the department’s concession that the equipment wasn’t available “is at direct variance to the assertions of the government on July 29, 2008,” the day Ivins died, thus “invalidating one of the chief theories of their prosecution case.”

The contradiction is just one of the voluminous unanswered questions and instances of contradictory evidence surrounding the case.

Earlier this year a report produced by a panel of independent scientists asserted that there was not enough scientific evidence for the FBI to convict Ivins, vindicating those who have consistently pointed to a deeper conspiracy behind the case.

The $1.1 million report, commissioned by the FBI and produced by The National Academies of Sciences, concluded that the FBI overstated the science in its investigation into the microbiologist.

The report cast doubt on the supposed link between a flask of anthrax found in Ivins’ office and letters containing the bacterial spores that were mailed to NBC News, the New York Post, and the offices of then-Sen. Tom Daschle and Sen. Patrick Leahy.

“The scientific link between the letter material and flask number RMR-1029 is not as conclusive as stated in the DOJ Investigative Summary,” the 190 page report stated.

“Although the scientific evidence was supportive of a link between the letters and that flask, it did not definitively demonstrate such a relationship, for a number of reasons,” said Dr. David Relman, a bioterrorism expert at Stanford University School of Medicine who served as vice chair of the review committee. “Our overarching finding was that it is not possible to reach a definitive conclusion about the origins of the B. anthracis in the mailings based on the available scientific evidence alone.”

“This shows what we’ve been saying all along: that it was all supposition based on conjecture based on guesswork, without any proof whatsoever,” lawyer Paul Kemp told The Washington Post.

“For years, the FBI has claimed scientific evidence for its conclusion that anthrax spores found in the letters were linked to the anthrax bacteria found in Dr. Ivins’s lab,” said Sen. Grassley. The report “shows that the science is not necessarily a slam-dunk. There are no more excuses for avoiding an independent review.”

Of course, there will not be an independent review any time in the near future because, as Glenn Greenwald of Salon has pointed out, all efforts to move in that direction have been aggressively blocked by the Obama Administration:

President Obama — in what I think is one his most indefensible acts — actually threatened to veto the entire intelligence authorization bill if it included a proposed bipartisan amendment (passed by the House) that would have mandated an independent inquiry into the FBI’s anthrax investigation.

Indeed, the veto threat issued by the Obama White House was refreshingly (albeit unintentionally) candid about why it was so eager to block any independent inquiry: ”The commencement of a fresh investigation would undermine public confidence in the criminal investigation and unfairly cast doubt on its conclusions.”

Ivins’ death provided a neat tie up to the case, which was officially closed last year by The Justice Department. However, a clear motive was never determined, and no one ever reported seeing Ivins prepare anthrax spores or mail the supposed letters.

Previous assertions by a former colleague and friend of Bruce Ivins, and the original suspect in the FBI’s investigation into the attacks, have also raised serious questions.

Shortly after Ivins’ death, Dr. Ayaad Assaad, an Egyptian-born toxicologist at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, declared that Ivins did not kill himself and was not behind the attack at all.

Assaad made the comments in an interview with a local Fort Detrick newspaper in September 2008.

The Frederick News Post reported:

Assaad, who worked in a U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease lab at Fort Detrick from 1989 to 1997 developing a vaccine for ricin, said in an interview Saturday he does not believe Ivins was guilty.

“He’s a great man. He’s honorable, sincere, honest and most important, he didn’t kill five people and he didn’t kill himself,” Assaad told the newspaper.

Assaad knew Ivins well, not only were they colleagues but their four children were all classmates In Frederick.

Assaad was extensively questioned by the FBI On October 1, 2001, a fortnight after the first anthrax letters were mailed. It later emerged that the FBI’s lead, a letter from an unidentified person who claimed Assaad was planning a biological terrorist attack, was false.

The mystery letter identified Assaad as a former USAMRIID microbiologist and also pinpointed his time at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense at Aberdeen Proving Ground in Harford County, indicating that whoever sent it had access to detailed army records.

The anonymous letter was sent shortly after 9/11 but before anyone knew about the anthrax-laced letters. On October 5, 2001, about 10 days after the anonymous letter was mailed, Robert Stevens became the first of five individuals to die from an anthrax infection, indicating that someone had wanted to frame Assaad for the attacks.

“This anthrax issue is part of a much bigger issue,” Assaad also commented. “The roots of corruption are so deep in (USAMRIID), and this is the thing that the people in Frederick don’t understand.”

Former government biological weapons legislator Dr Francis Boyle shares Assaad’s view that Ivins has been used as a patsy in a larger cover up.

“Ivins is only the latest dead microbiologist.” Boyle has previously stated, “You also have to tie into this the large numbers of dead microbiologists that have appeared since around the summer before these events, when the New York Times revealed the existence of the covert anthrax weapons programs run by the CIA, and that too is in the public record.”

In September 2007, Ivins sent an e-mail to himself, in which he said he knew of the identity of the anthrax killer, without actually stating who he believed it to be. It is not known why he did this. Prior to his death in 2008, he told friends that government agents were hounding him and his family.

Related Reading:

Government Biological Weapons Legislator: Anthrax Inside Job Cover Up Continuing

Demand that the FBI Reveal How Much of Ivins’ Anthrax Sample was Taken by Other People

Insights Into the Question of Whether the Anthrax was Weaponized

The Anthrax Attack Was a Classic False Flag Operation Targeting Arabs

Hair Samples in Anthrax Case Don’t Match

Proof that Ivins Couldn’t Have Done It (At Least Not Alone)

Handwriting Analysis Fails to Tie Ivins to Anthrax Letters

The Killer Anthrax Did Not Even Originate at Fort Detrick

FBI said to have stalked Ivins’ family

Colonel Anderson Refutes False Allegations Against Dr. Ivins

Explained: Why The Anthrax Strain Was Found in Ivins’ Office

Questions about the Anthrax Suspect and His Interactions with Mental Health Professionals

Inside the tent, the best bioterrorist money could buy?

Olbermann Countdown: Anthrax Attacks Inside Job?

Scientists Question FBI Probe On Anthrax: Ivins Could Not Have Been Attacker, Some Say

Anthrax Suspect Was Involuntarily Committed to Psychiatric Hospital Shortly Before His Death

The FBI Admits It Has No Case Against Ivins

CIA Had Killer Anthrax

Anthrax Attack Was State-Sponsored Terror (But the State Was America)

My Conversation With a Ft. Detrick Scientist

Ivins Can Defend Himself in Court and Obtain Justice Against the FBI

Attorney: Ivins never knew he was ‘the suspect’

Ivins Could Not Have Applied High-Tech Coating to the Killer Anthrax

The Anthrax Cover-Up

The Biowar Story Not Told In The Aftermath Of A Scientist’s Suicide

Related video: Prof. Francis Boyle on The Alex Jones Show August 21, 2008 – Anthrax “Inside Job”

France 24
October 8, 2011

This video, published October 5th on YouTube, shows dozens of Syrian soldiers dancing and singing an anti-regime song. The title of this video implies that they are deserters who joined the “Free Syrian Army.” The song is a hymn to the Syrian province of Deraa as well as a stinging attack on President Bashar Al-Assad, whom they call “Syria’s traitor.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqFiAtVQVBU

The US government has for some time pushing the idea that domestic terrorism is on the rise by it's own american people, so what better way for the government to prepare and put marial law into place is to hold terrorist drills in case the american people take back their own country with mass rioting.

Denver Terror Drill: Infowars Reporters On The Scene - TheAlexJonesChannel | Infowars reporters are on the scene in Denver where a “security exercise” police state showcase is underway.

Martial Law Drill Commences as Economy Begins Descent - Kurt Nimmo | More than 100 government agencies are taking part in Operation Mountain Guardian.

Infowars Covers Operation Mountain Guardian - Kurt Nimmo | Darrin McBreen and Aaron Dykes are on the ground in Denver, Colorado, covering a massive martial law take-over drill now underway.

Mountain Guardian Exercise Takes School Children to Sports Stadium

Kurt Haskell
Kurt Haskell’s Blog
September 20, 2011

With jury selection set to begin in the Underwear Bomber Trial tomorrow, I’ve spent the evening reminiscing about Christmas Day 2009 and the 21 months since. The Underwear Bomber attack has fundamentally changed my life. Not in the way most would think, but it has destroyed any faith I’ve had in the U.S. Government, the media and this country as a whole.

To say that I believe the government is corrupt and the media is complicit doesn’t fully explain my beliefs. Not only have I come to those conclusions, but I’ve witnessed that an ordinary person who sees something important can be silenced despite his efforts to spread the truth. Such is the Underwear Bomber case. I can do nothing but laugh at the TSA’s new policy of “If you see something say something.” That is exactly what I did, and not only did the U.S. Government not want to hear what I had to say, but it actively lied about it, attempted to get me to change my story, and hid, by withholding (secret government) evidence or putting a protective order on the evidence and nearly everything that would support my eyewitness account.

Where are we now? We now have The Underwear Bomber (Umar) representing himself with the help of standby attorney Chambers. Attorney Chambers has indicated to me that if he were Umar’s attorney, that the defense would be entrapment and that I would be a key witness. Of course, such a defense would expose the U.S. Government’s involvement in the plot. It is much too convenient to have Umar represent himself and be in charge of what the defense will be, what evidence is presented, what witnesses are called and what questions each witness is asked. A trial with Umar representing himself will leave the relevant facts of this case unknown for generations.

I can’t help but think that Umar fired his attorneys for a reason other than he is a crazy terrorist. It is much too convenient that the entity that staged the event, also controls the evidence, what information is leaked to the media, who the prosecutors are, and the prison where Umar has sbeen staying at for the last 21 months. Let’s not overlook the fact that the U.S. Government has admitted to waterboarding and torturing terrorists. Do you see the pieces of the puzzle forming a clear picture yet?

Make no mistake that Umar did in fact attempt to detonate a device (although it was a defective device) on Flight 253. He is not innocent. It remains to be discovered whether my belief that Umar is complicit with the “theatre” going on before our eyes came about before or after the event of Christmas Day 2009. It really is not important except that you must understand that he is now complicit in covering up the true story of Christmas Day 2009. There is no other explanation as to why Umar is representing himself and rejecting the entrapment defense (Which I have discovered he will do).

For those that are still skeptical of my claims, please realize that I do not make my claims without a great deal of thought and research. My firm belief is that Umar was escorted around security and given an intentionally defective bomb by a U.S. intelligence agent. The bomb was never intended to detonate, but merely intended to create a “simulated terrorist attack” or a “false flag attack” if you will. In December of 2009, the U.S. Government hadn’t seen a terrorist attack in 8 years, It was getting more and more difficult to spend hundreds of billions a year on terrorism and to continue to fight two fraudulent wars based on terrorism. Those making their livings off of the war on terror didn’t want to lose their cash cow. Enter Umar the Underwear Bomber. A second benefit of a failed bomb being found in Umar’s underwear, was to enable body scanning machines to be placed in every airport. How convenient for Michael Chertoff , a former head of the DHS, to have ties to the body scanning companies. I doubt that this was any coincidence. Once again, billions of dollars would flow from the U.S. Government for body scanning machines that were needed to protect us.

What we are now left with are the bits and pieces of the Underwear Bomber case that can form a clear picture of what happened that day. For those of you attempting to put it all together, please take your time and think about the evidence instead of glossing over it and continuing to remain in denial. The truth is that your U.S. Government staged a false terrorist attack in order to steal your tax dollars and your 4th Amendment Rights to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures. Please thoroughly consider the following with an open mind and think about why this sort of behavior must stop now:

My thoughts on this case and the list of anomalies that differ from the official version of events were made through: (a) numerous discussions with other passengers, (b) my own eyewitness account, (c) discussions with Umar’s standby attorney, (d) hundreds of articles on the story (e) evidence provided to me by others “in the know” or just other concerned citizens, and (f) from the official record at hearings I attended.

Anomalies of the case in no particular order:

1. In December 2010, Chambers told the Detroit Free Press that the Government’s own explosives experts indicate that the bomb was impossibly defective. The Free Press later erased this article from its online site, but did not erase earlier underwear bomber stories.

2. The FBI has admitted to supplying the Portland Christmas Tree Bomber and the Wrigley Field Bomber with intentionally defective bombs shortly after the underwear bomber event.

3. Janet Napolitano’s comment that “the system worked” was a Freudian slip.

4. The plane taxied to the gate. The passengers were not allowed off of the plane for 20-30 minutes (Was the bomb still on the plane?). There was bomb material that was supposedly explosive all over the cabin of the plane. Nobody took any action to make sure the passengers were safe or that the “explosives” were of no danger to the passengers. This is evidence of foreknowledge that there was no danger to the passengers.

5. TSA admitted knowledge of the threat while the flight was over Canada/Atlantic Ocean. No measures were taken to notify the pilot or to divert the flight for an emergency landing elsewhere.

6. My eyewitness account of the sharp dressed man and the related evidence as to this man. There is no other likely explanation for this man except for government involvement. The airport video has never been released and remains under protective order of the court.

7. The government’s continued release of Umar’s passport picture through the media. This was done for no other reason that to attempt to discredit me. Why such an effort to show a passport picture all over the media? In no other case has a passport picture been shown in the media. A copy of the supposed “passport” of Umar, however, was not released to Chambers until June 2011. The release of the passport to standby defense counsel was delayed 19 months in order to limit the amount of time Chambers would need to have experts verify its authenticity.

8. The explanation for the cameraman is near unbelieveable. He started filming the sky just before the attack started and then he turned to film the entire attack from beginning to end. We all thought we were going to die. The last thing on anyone’s mind at that time was to film something.

9. On 1-5-10 Breibart posted an article that indicated the Government had viewed over 200 hours of video from the airport and it showed no evidence of an accomplice. This article is contradicted by the 1-22-10 article of ABC News by Brian Ross that indicated that “The government is looking into the identity of a man that helped Umar at Schiphol.” The article fails to mention that this “sharp dressed man” escorted Umar through security without a passpot and instead tries to paint this man as Al Qaeda. The government is contradicting itself in both of these stories and is attemptin weak coverups in each story.

10. Umar is charged with conspiracy. The accomplices names or contributions are never mentioned. They are not listed as wanted and they are never discussed. This is because they are U.S. Intelligence agents.

11. Customs spokeperson Ron Smith changed the official story about the 2nd man taken into custody in Detroit 5 times. Then he sent a half hearted apoogetic email to the media. My story as to this man has never changed. Ron Smith eventually gave up lying and quit talking about this man who was witnessed by nearly all of the passengers.

12. Why were pictures of Umar’s underwear constantly released to the media? These pictures show Umar’s underwear is largely intact. I have information from a credible source that due to this incident, Umar “Will never have any kids”. This fact is not in line with undamaged underwear. The continued release of the underwear was used as a propaganda piece to reinforce the deceit.

13. The prosecution has continued to block evidence from Umar’s standby attorney and in some cases, has provided it late. Why? If Umar was a terrorist nut, what is it that the government does not want the defense to see? It seems to me that if the official story is true, then this is an open and shut case. It appears that the government feels a need to insulate itself from civil cases filed by the passengers.

14. Why has Chambers repeatedly indicated that Umar has a very valid defense? The answer is the entrapment defense.

15. Portions of the Patriot Act were set to expire just before Christmas Day 2009. The Congressional vote to extend them was delayed until February. Body scanning machines were already built and sitting in warehouses. Michael Chertoff, the former head of the Department of Homeland Security has ties to the body scanning manufacturers. The U.S. had no terrorist attacks from 2001 until Christmas Day 2009. A new terrorist attack was needed to get the body scanning machines in the airports.

16. If flight 253 had crashed, nobody would know that the bomb was in Umar’s underwear. An unsuccesful staged attack was necessary to show where the bomb was held. This was needed to sell the American public that body scanners were needed to prevent similar future attacks.

17. The story of Umar obtaining his bomb in another country and wearing it to Schiphol is not logical. It is much more likely that he was given the defective bomb at or near the airport. It is likely that the second man taken into custody in Detroit gave him the bomb at Schiphol. My theory is that the bomb sniffing dog (which we witnessed) in Detroit sniffed bomb residue in his bag after we landed.

18. Umar could have been stopped in Amsterdam after boarding and been charged with various charges that would have resulted in a life sentence. Instead he was allowed to fly into U.S. airspace and light his bomb there, over Detroit, on Christmas Day in order to make this a MUCH large media story to usher in the body scanners.

19. How did Umar pick his window seat over the gas tank when he paid cash for his ticket? (You must buy your ticket with credit in order to pick your seat).

20. Other terrorist attack videos are released within hours. The relevant video in this case has never been released. Note that Schiphol airport has more cameras than any airport in the world.

21. The bomb was lit in the cabin and not in the bathroom so that it could be filmed and make more of a media event than a dud bomb lit in a bathroom.

22. Obama’s “failed to connect the dots speech” is discredited by the Congressional testimony of Patrick Kennedy of the State Department. Kennedy indicated that, in so many words, that the government was tracking Umar and did not revoke his visa in order to track him into the U.S. This is almost, but not quite an admission that he was let into the U.S. on purpose.

23. The Congressional testimony of Michael Leiter indicated that the U.S. Government frequently lets terrorists into the U.S.

24. In early 2010, a Mr. Wolf appeared on the Keith Olberman Show and indicated that the Obama administration was looking into the possibility that this was an intentional plot by a U.S. intelligence agency.

25. Watch the Congressional testimony of Patrick Kennedy (available on the internet) and watch how he does vocabulary gymnastics to avoid saying that this was an intentional plot by U.S. intelligence.

26. Dutch military police initially indicated that Umar did not go through normal security measures. This was only reported once.

27. Why did a passenger call me in early January 2010 and attempt to convince me that I did not see Umar being escorted around security, but I instead witnessed a minor child being taken through security. This was untrue. I later found out that such passenger works for a contractor that receives a great deal of business from the Department of Defense.

28. Why does the mainstream media continue to not investigate this story and continue to not report my eyewitness account?

29. A second passenger contacted me and confirmed my acount of the Sharp Dressed Man. She is scared and refuses to come forward.

30. Why have nearly all of the passengers refused to talk about this case?

31. Why were a great deal of the passengers, military personnel, government workers and government contractors?

32. Why did the prosecution indicate at a recent hearing that it was still withholding some evidence that was deemed to be secret (top seret?). What could be so secret if the government was not involved in the plot?

33. Why has the online Detroit Free Press site erased all underwear bomber articles that support my theory on the case, but retained older articles that support the official story?

It is unfortunate that the upcoming trial will be nothing but a farce and deceitful theatre to imbed lies in the minds of the sheeple.

“In America Respect for Truth is Dead”

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
Infowars.com
September 12, 2011

In the US on September 11, 2011, the tenth anniversary of 9/11, politicians and their presstitute media presented Americans with “A Day of Remembrance,” a propaganda exercise that hardened the 9/11 lies into dogma. Meanwhile, in Toronto, Canada, at Ryerson University the four-day International Hearings on the Events of September 11, 2001, came to a close at 5pm.

During the four days of hearings, distinguished scientists and scholars and professional architects and engineers presented the results of years of their independent research into all aspects of 9/11 to a distinguished panel consisting of the honorary president of the Italian Supreme Court who was an investigative judge who presided over terrorism cases and three distinguished scholars of high renown and judgment. The distinguished panel’s task is to produce a report with their judgment of the evidence presented by the expert witnesses.

The Toronto Hearings were streamed live over the Internet. I was able to watch many of the presentations over the four days. I was impressed that the extremely high level of intelligence and scientific competence of the witnesses was matched by a high level of integrity, a quality rare in US politics and totally absent in the American media.

As I stressed in my recent interview about 9/11 with James Corbett and Global Research, I am a reporter, not an independent researcher into 9/11. I pay attention when the fact-based community finds problems with the official propaganda. Perhaps this reflects my age. My generation was raised to believe in evidence and the scientific method. George Orwell and other writers warned us of the consequence of succumbing to government propaganda as a result of disinterest in the truth or government manipulation of one’s patriotism.

My ability to serve as a reporter of scientific evidence is enhanced by my having a Bachelor of Science from Georgia Tech, a Ph.D. from the University of Virginia, and post-graduate education at the University of California, Berkeley, and Oxford University, where my professor was the distinguished physical chemist and philosopher, Michael Polanyi. In the 1960s, I was appointed Visiting Assistant Professor of Chemical Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, in order to provide together with Polanyi to the science students at Berkeley a course in Polanyi’s unique contributions to knowledge. Polanyi’s illness prevented the course from happening and condemned me to being a mere economist.

This does not mean that I am infallible or that my reporting is correct. If my reporting stimulates you, go to the presentations, which I believe will continue to be available online, and if not, some edited CD will be available. Try http://www.ustream.tv/channel/thetorontohearings

As one whose own contributions to economics, now belatedly recognized, are “outside the box,” I am responsive to those who can escape peer pressure in order to advance truth. Here are some of the important things I learned from the Toronto Hearings.

The NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology, a government agency) reports on the twin towers and building 7 are fraudulent. Witnesses at the Toronto Hearings proved that building 7 was a standard controlled demolition and that incendiaries and explosives brought down the twin towers. There is no doubt whatsoever about this. Anyone who declares the contrary has no scientific basis upon which to stand. Those who defend the official story believe in miracles that defy the laws of physics.

A nano-chemist from the University of Copenhagen, who together with a scientific team spent 18 months investigating the chemical and physical properties of dust from the towers, found evidence of nano-termite in the dust and quantities of particles not naturally formed by office or normal building fires that indicate another explosive was also present.

These findings explain the extreme high temperatures that produced the molten steel for which indisputable evidence exists. In the orchestrated cover-up, NIST denies that molten steel is present as its presence is inconsistent with the low temperatures that NIST acknowledges building fires can produce.

Physicist David Chandler proved beyond all doubt that building 7 fell over its visible part (other buildings obscure the bottom floors) at free fall speed, an unambiguous indication that explosives had removed all supporting columns simultaneously.There is no possibility whatsoever according to the laws of physics that building 7 fell for the reasons NIST provides. The NIST account is a total denial of known laws of physics.

Many other powerful points were made at the conference that I will not report, at least not at this time, because the revelation of malevolence is so powerful that most readers will find it a challenge to their emotional and mental strength.

Psychologists explained that there are two kinds of authority to which people submit. One is to the authority of people in high positions in the government. The belief that “our government wouldn’t lie to us” is pervasive, especially among patriots. The other source of authority is experts. However, to believe experts a person has to be educated and open-minded and to trust scientific, professional, and scholarly integrity.

In recent years in America, scientific and scholarly authority has come into disrepute among Christian evangelicals who object to evolution and among anti-intellectual Tea Party adherents who object to “elitists,” that is, objection to knowledge-based persons whose knowledge does not support Tea Party emotions.

In other words, qualified, knowledgeable people who tell people what they do not want to hear are dismissed as “the enemy.” Much of the American population is set up to believe government propaganda. Without an independent media, which the US no longer has, people are taught that only “conspiracy kooks” challenge the government’s story. Even on the Internet, this is a main theme on Antiwar.com and on CounterPunch.org, two sites that protest America’s wars but accept the 9/11 propaganda that justifies the wars.

This is the reason that I think that the US is moving into an era where the emotional needs of the population produced by government propaganda overwhelms science, evidence, and facts. It means the abolition of accountable government and the rule of law, because protection from terrorists is more important.

The fact-based world in which “we are not afraid to follow the truth wherever it may lead” is being displaced by dogma. Anyone who doubts “our government” is an anti-American, Muslim-loving, pinko-liberal commie, who should be arrested and waterboarded until the culprit confesses that he is a terrorist.

The event of 9/11 is now outside the realm of fact, science, and evidence. It is a dogma that justifies the Bush/Cheney/Obama war crimes against Muslims and their countries.

Obama regime appointee Cass Sunstein, a Chicago and Harvard Law School professor, thinks the 9/11 movement, for challenging the official “truth”, should be infiltrated by US intelligence agents in order to shut down the fact-based doubters of government propaganda.

When a law professor at our two most prestigious law schools wants to suppress scientific evidence that challenges government veracity, we know that in America respect for truth is dead.

The notion that a country in which truth is dead is a “light unto the world” is an absurdity.

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
Sept 8, 2011

Alex Jones Comment: Ron Paul’s campaign needs to make a public statement on this incident. Perry’s thuggish behavior is identical to how he confronted me in a Mexican restaurant several years ago.

Pictures taken during a commercial break in last night’s GOP debate at the Reagan Presidential Library document how Texas Governor Rick Perry attempted to physically intimidate Congressman Ron Paul, prompting Paul’s security to intervene.

Photographs published by the AP and Reuters show a stern looking Perry holding Paul’s wrist and waving a finger in his face.

Reports by Fox News and International Business Times state that during the break Perry “walked up to Paul’s podium, physically grabbed Paul’s wrist, and pointed at Paul’s face with his other hand.”

A third man, said to be Paul’s security guard, is seen approaching the podium in the picture.

Another photo shows Perry with arms outstretched, leaning in towards Paul engaging in what may be considered lively conversation to say the least. Some Paul supporters have suggested that the shot shows that Perry physically forced Paul away from his own podium during the commercial.

The two candidates were situated directly next to each other during the firey televised debate.

Before the exchange took place, Paul and Perry locked horns in a sharp exchange of words, with the Congressman calling out Perry on his support for ‘HillaryCare’ and his issuance of an executive order to forcibly vaccinate 12-year-old girls against HPV.

Ron Paul’s latest campaign ad, which ran during the debate commercials, also targeted Perry, exposing his previous record as a Democrat and his intimate links to Al Gore’s 1988 Presidential campaign.

The images clearly indicate that Perry tried to physically intimidate the Congressman. The two campaigns have been asked to clarify what actually occurred during the exchange.

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Tuesday, September 6, 2011

“We don’t need no education….we don’t need no thought control.”

In a week where the establishment is desperate to reinforce the official 9/11 fable, a government-supported charity group has embarked on a mission to include the state-approved version of events on the school curriculum in the UK as part of a bid to “demolish conspiracy theories” surrounding the attacks.

As we reported yesterday, the launch of the project was timed to coincide with the unveiling of a macabre 9/11 “memorial” in Battersea Park, London, after which Mayor Boris Johnson resolved to carry out a “controlled demolition” of conspiracy theories to “remind people of the tragedy of what really happened”.

A website for the “9/11 London project” has been launched which includes downloadable lesson plans for teachers. The program is designed “to teach schoolchildren in Britain about the events of 9/11 and “demolish conspiracy theories” surrounding the attacks,” reports AFP.

The project is supported by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, as well as establishment figures in Britain such as Common Purpose member Maqsood Ahmed, Lord West, Lord Carey, and Lord Fink, CEO of International Standard Asset Management (ISAM) and Treasurer of the Conservative Party.

“A lot of the children… didn’t know much about the event, some had only heard a lot about the conspiracy theories, so it’s great to have another insight,” 26-year-old history teacher Nat Ogborn told AFP.

In explaining the need for such an educational program, the website for the project states the goal is to develop the critical thinking of students who are “confused about the actual events of the day.”

However, in announcing its purpose is to “demolish conspiracy theories,” ie any evidence that contradicts the state-approved version of events, the program has already ‘demolished’ any notion that it will encourage critical thinking. It will only pursue the exact opposite.

This is brainwashing 101. It’s about indoctrinating children with the pseudo-science that giant steel-framed buildings like WTC 7 collapse into their own footprint at near free fall speed from fire damage alone. Any real educational inquiry into the events of 9/11 would uncover clear evidence of controlled demolition, and would provide as a resource the thousands of architects and engineers who are on record asserting that the official story is impossible, not to mention six of the 9/11 commissioners themselves, along with thousands of other credible individuals, who have all rejected the official story.

It’s not the first time the state has relied on using the power of the curriculum to brainwash British schoolchildren into accepting the official narrative about a subject.

A controversy ensued in 2007 after the government sent Al Gore’s global warming polemic An Inconvenient Truth to schools in England, Wales and Scotland, advising that teachers make the documentary part of the curriculum.

A parents group later brought the case the court, complaining that the government’s circulation of the film amounted to “political indoctrination” and was in breach of the Education Act 2002.

Assessing whether it should be shown to school children, a British High Court judge later ruled that the documentary contained nine significant errors, that claims in the film were made in “the context of alarmism and exaggeration,” and that the documentary was of a political and not scientific nature, therefore should not be used in school curriculums without the material also including opposing arguments.

Along similar lines, a University Professor in the United Kingdom recently conducted a comparative analysis of a BBC documentary on 7/7 “conspiracy theories” and an independent documentary in which the official story behind the London bombings is questioned. The Professor concluded that the documentary produced by “conspiracy theorists” was more accurate and more likely to be a truthful representation of the events of 7/7.

You can be certain that the evidence contained in the video below will not be part of the 9/11 school curriculum, primarily because it actually encourages critical thinking, unlike the “911 London Project,” which only encourages children to blithely regurgitate what they are told by the authorities.

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, September 5, 2011

The Mayor of London Boris Johnson, a man who has turned looking like an idiot into an art form, made some bizarre comments today about hoping for a “controlled demolition” of the “weird conspiracy theories” surrounding 9/11.

While unveiling a somewhat macabre “memorial” to the victims of the attack which consists of a sculpture made out of remains of the World Trade Center, Johnson stated, “The key thing is 10 years on from 9/11, people still believe a load of tripe about this thing.”

“There’s lot of stuff on the Internet, lots of weird conspiracy theories that people believe – we’ve got to have a controlled demolition if you like of those misconceptions, remind people of the tragedy of what really happened,” he added.

Of course, the bizarre context of the comments is that in deriding so-called “conspiracy theories” about the attack, Johnson’s use of the term “controlled demolition” is a tongue-in-cheek nod to the fact that is obviously aware of research concerning the planned implosions of the twin towers and WTC 7, which wasn’t hit by a plane.

Unfortunately for Boris, people far more credible than him have questioned the official 9/11 story, including the majority of the 9/11 commissioners tasked by the U.S. government with investigating the attacks.

Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland called the investigation on which the official story is based a “national scandal,” while his colleague John Farmer, Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission, said the truth was “a radically different story from had been told to…the public.”

9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton said “I don’t believe for a minute we got everything right”, that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, that the 9/11 debate should continue, and that the 9/11 Commission report was only “the first draft” of history.

In addition, thousands of engineers and structural architects have gone public to express their contention that the collapses of both twin towers and Building 7 were consistent with a “controlled demolition,” exactly as Johnson terms it.

As we have discussed, this week we will be bombarded with a blitz of mainstream network “specials” about 9/11 which will all serve the universal purpose of reinforcing the myth of the official fable.

So flimsy and discredited is the government version of events that the likes of the BBC, The History Channel (which loves to denigrate 9/11 “conspiracies” while simultaneously broadcasting programs sympathetic to the view that aliens from outer space are visiting us on a regular basis), and National Geographic constantly have to air and rebroadcast hit pieces against 9/11 truth to try and psychologically hammer home the approved explanation into the minds of the public.

This weekend’s official 9/11 memorial event in New York will be absent ground zero heroes – many of whom are dying as a result of the government’s lie in the days after 9/11 that the air was safe to breathe – because 9/11 first responders are not invited to proceedings as a result of a directive out of Mayor Bloomberg’s office.

RELATED: Highly Credible People Question 9/11

Gibson.com
August 29, 2011

Henry Juszkiewicz, Chairman and CEO of Gibson Guitar Corp., has responded to the August 24 raid of Gibson facilities in Nashville and Memphis by the Federal Government. In a press release, Juszkiewicz said: “Gibson is innocent and will fight to protect its rights. Gibson has complied with foreign laws and believes it is innocent of ANY wrong doing. We will fight aggressively to prove our innocence.”

Media from around the world picked up on Thursday’s press conference in which Gibson Guitar Chairman and CEO Henry Juszkiewicz spoke out defiantly against recent federal raids at Gibson’s Memphis and Nashville facilities.

Juszkiewicz said at the press conference outside the Gibson USA factory in Nashville:

“We believe the arrogance of federal power is impacting me personally, our company personally and the employees here in Tennessee, and it’s just plain wrong.”

Today, Juszkiewicz said that he was, “very gratified at the media’s overwhelmingly supportive coverage of the issue this week and especially encouraged by the huge number of positive comments on various social media platforms.”

He also added, noting the volume of attention the story has received, “perhaps our good friends in the media can use their investigative skills to help us to get the bottom of exactly why the government has singled out Gibson for harassment.”

To read Juszkiewicz’s press release in response to the raids, click here.

See also: Gov’t says wood is illegal if U.S. workers produce it

TheAlexJonesChannel
August 26, 2011

The modern environmental movement is nothing more than organized crime bent on harassing businesses while redirecting public sentiment towards petty issues rather than real enviro-catastrophes like genetic modification.

From the Wall Street Journal:

Federal agents swooped in on Gibson Guitar Wednesday, raiding factories and offices in Memphis and Nashville, seizing several pallets of wood, electronic files and guitars. The Feds are keeping mum, but in a statement yesterday Gibson’s chairman and CEO, Henry Juszkiewicz, defended his company’s manufacturing policies, accusing the Justice Department of bullying the company. “The wood the government seized Wednesday is from a Forest Stewardship Council certified supplier,” he said, suggesting the Feds are using the aggressive enforcement of overly broad laws to make the company cry uncle.

An Italian radio program’s story about Iceland’s on-going revolution is a stunning example of how little our media tells us about the rest of the world. Americans may remember that at the start of the 2008 financial crisis, Iceland literally went bankrupt. The reasons were mentioned only in passing, and since then, this little-known member of the European Union fell back into oblivion.

As one European country after another fails or risks failing, imperiling the Euro, with repercussions for the entire world, the last thing the powers that be want is for Iceland to become an example. Here’s why:

Five years of a pure neo-liberal regime had made Iceland, (population 320 thousand, no army), one of the richest countries in the world. In 2003 all the country’s banks were privatized, and in an effort to attract foreign investors, they offered on-line banking whose minimal costs allowed them to offer relatively high rates of return. The accounts, called IceSave, attracted many English and Dutch small investors. But as investments grew, so did the banks’ foreign debt. In 2003 Iceland’s debt was equal to 200 times its GNP, but in 2007, it was 900 percent. The 2008 world financial crisis was the coup de grace. The three main Icelandic banks, Landbanki, Kapthing and Glitnir, went belly up and were nationalized, while the Kroner lost 85% of its value with respect to the Euro. At the end of the year Iceland declared bankruptcy…

What happened next was extraordinary. The belief that citizens had to pay for the mistakes of a financial monopoly, that an entire nation must be taxed to pay off private debts was shattered, transforming the relationship between citizens and their political institutions and eventually driving Iceland’s leaders to the side of their constituents. The Head of State, Olafur Ragnar Grimsson, refused to ratify the law that would have made Iceland’s citizens responsible for its bankers’ debts, and accepted calls for a referendum.

Of course the international community only increased the pressure on Iceland. Great Britain and Holland threatened dire reprisals that would isolate the country…

In the March 2010 referendum, 93% voted against repayment of the debt. The IMF immediately froze its loan. But the revolution (though not televised in the United States), would not be intimidated. With the support of a furious citizenry, the government launched civil and penal investigations into those responsible for the financial crisis. Interpol put out an international arrest warrant for the ex-president of Kaupthing, Sigurdur Einarsson, as the other bankers implicated in the crash fled the country.

But Icelanders didn’t stop there: they decided to draft a new constitution that would free the country from the exaggerated power of international finance and virtual money.

To write the new constitution, the people of Iceland elected twenty-five citizens from among 522 adults not belonging to any political party but recommended by at least thirty citizens. This document was not the work of a handful of politicians, but was written on the internet.

Refusing to bow to foreign interests, that small country stated loud and clear that the people are sovereign.

That’s why it is not in the news anymore.

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
August 17, 2011

During an NPR interview of New York Times veteran reporter Thom Shanker, who co-authored Counterstrike: The Untold Story of America’s Secret Campaign Against Al Qaeda, we learn that the Pentagon routinely pretends to be al-Qaeda:

“What the American military intelligence can do is forge the watermarks or certification of official al-Qaida postings,” says Shanker. “American cyber technology is so advanced that they can have a near perfect re-creation of an al-Qaida message — and what they’re doing from time to time is going on jihadi websites and posting conflicting and contradictory orders, statements that raise doubt about who the jihadis should follow and who is really in charge … and the goal is to really disrupt the entire network by sowing dissent and confusion. We’ve been told they’ve had some great success at that.”

In other words, we have no way of discerning between the “real” al-Qaeda and the facsimile created by the Pentagon and the CIA.

Claims that al-Qaeda videos are fake and the discrepancy of “fat” and “Grecian formula” Osama bin Ladens are usually ignored by the corporate media or dismissed as conspiracy theories. Shanker’s report from the Pentagon lends credence to skeptics who insist al-Qaeda is not what the government says it is.

This denial persisted even after the CIA admitted faking al-Qaeda videos and having its employees dress up and act like the dead Osama bin Laden.

Not that it matters. For instance, the New Osama, Anwar al-Awlaki, dined at the Pentagon – a fact reported by Fox News – but this did not jive with the official Pentagon generated narrative, so it was ignored.

This new information will either be ignored or the professional script-readers who pretend to be journalists will fail to connect the dots, as usual.

The essence of Doublethink, after all, is the act of simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct. Normally, such information creates cognitive dissonance – the uncomfortable feeling caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously – but in the bizarro world that is the forever war of manufactured terror, this no longer applies.

The Pentagon can now brazenly admit it creates terrorism and we are expected to assimilate this without question or further intellectual processing. If we point out the obvious, we are either ignored, dismissed as insane – a favorite tactic of neocons such as Newt Gingrich – or accused of aiding and abetting the enemies of freedom.

Britain saw its third consecutive night of widespread burning of properties and looting as riot police failed to contain gangs of masked youths marauding several parts of the capital, London.

There were reports too of violence fanning out to other cities across Britain. And some commentators were even suggesting that the British Army might have to be redeployed from Northern Ireland to help restore order. Armoured police vehicles are now patrolling London streets amid calls in the media for the use of water cannons and plastic bullets.

Politicians, police chiefs and the media have reacted to the chaos by labelling it as the result of “mindless criminality” that has seemingly sprung from nowhere. ‘The Rule of the Mob’ declared the rightwing Daily Telegraph. ‘Mob Rule’ is how the more liberal Independent put it.

Home Secretary Theresa May stridently denounced “unacceptable thuggery”. London Metropolitan Police Commissioner Tim Godwin vowed that culprits would be tracked down and brought before the courts. He appealed to Londoners to identify individuals caught on CCTV and amateur video footage.

Nearly 500 arrests have been made so far and police numbers in the capital have been tripled overnight to 16,000, with officers being drawn in from other parts of the country.

Although the arson attacks on commercial and residential premises do have an element of criminal spontaneity by disparate groups of youths, it is simply delusional for Britain’s political leaders, police forces and the media to claim that it is all a matter of law and order.

The burning issues that need to be addressed to explain the outburst of arson, looting and rioting are endemic racism endured by Britain’s black community and, more generally, the deepening poverty that is increasingly racking British society.

Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron cut short his summer holiday in Italy by flying home to London to hold a special “emergency security” meeting with other Cabinet members.

Speaking outside Downing Street today and visibly vexed by the unfolding chaos, Cameron condemned “pure and simple criminality that must be defeated”. The government, he said, stands with “all law-abiding citizens”.

Opposition Labour party leader Ed Milliband and the Conservative Mayor of London Boris Johnson are also making hasty returns to the capital from abroad to deal with a crisis that seems to be spiralling out of control. The British Parliament is to be recalled from its summer recess later this week so that “all parliamentarians can stand to together” to face down the sudden disorder.

The disturbances – the worst in almost 30 years – began last Saturday in the rundown north London inner-city area of Tottenham. That followed the shooting dead two days earlier of a young black man by police officers.

Mark Duggan was fatally shot by an armed police unit as he sat in his car. Police claimed that the man was threatening to use a gun. However, family and friends of the 29-year-old victim strongly denied that he was armed or involved in any criminal activity. The death is the subject of a police inquiry, but it has emerged that only two shots were fired in the incident, both by police officers.

Sinisterly, BBC news reports on the killing have invariably showed what appeared to be a family photo of Duggan taken before his death in which he is seen holding up his hand up in mock gangster style.

Angered by what they saw as a gratuitous police shooting and lack of immediate answers from authorities, the mixed black and white community in Tottenham held a vigil for the victim on Saturday. With tensions running high in the area, the peaceful rally turned into a riot against police, and several properties, including police cars, were attacked and set alight.

Since then, similar disturbances have now spread to other parts of the capital, including Peckham, Brixton, Hackney, Lewisham and Clapham. A Sony factory was reduced to a charred shell in Enfield in north London. In the outer south London district of Croydon – several miles from Tottenham – there was a huge blaze last night after a large commercial property was torched. Even the affluent, leafy borough of Ealing in west London saw upmarket boutiques and residences attacked and destroyed by fire.

The distraught owner of the razed family business in Croydon struggled to comprehend why his 150-year-old furniture shop had been targeted. Nevertheless his few words of disbelief had a ring of truth that the politicians and media commentators seem oblivious to. “There must be something deeply wrong about the [political] system,” he said.

Police forces are seen to be struggling to contain the upsurge in street violence, with groups of youths appearing to go on the rampage at will, breaking into shop fronts and stealing goods. A real fear among the authorities is the spreading of disorder and violence to other cities, with reports emerging of similar disturbances in the centre of Birmingham in the British midlands, and further north in Nottingham, Liverpool and Manchester.

Inner-city deprived black communities in Britain complain of routine heavy-handed policing that is openly racist. Community leaders tell of aggressive stop-and-search methods by police that target black youths. The community leaders say that racist policing is as bad as it was during the 1980s when riots broke out in 1985 after a black woman, Cynthia Jarrett, died in a police raid on her home in Broadwater Farm, London.

In the latest spate of violence – on a much greater scale than in the 1980s – there is no suggestion that subsequent street disturbances to the initial Tottenham riots are racially motivated. The growing number of areas and youths involved in arson, rioting and looting do not appear to be driven merely out of solidarity for the young black victim of police violence last week, although that may be a factor for some. Many of the disturbances in London and elsewhere seem to be caused by white and black youths together and separately.

But there is one common factor in all of this that the politicians and media are studiously ignoring: the massive poverty, unemployment and social deprivation that are now the lot for so many of Britain’s communities.

Britain’s social decay has been seething over several decades, overseen by Conservative and Labour governments alike. As with other European countries and the United States, the social fabric of Britain has been torn asunder by economic policies that have deliberately widened the gap between rich and poor.

The collapse of manufacturing bases, the spawning of low-paid menial jobs, unemployment and cuts in public services and facilities have all been accompanied by systematic lowering of taxation on the rich elite. Britain’s national debt, as with that of the Europe and the US, can be attributed in large part to decades of pursuing neoliberal policies of prosperity for the rich and austerity for the poor – the burden of which is felt most keenly in inner-city neighbourhoods.

David Cameron’s Conservative-Liberal Coalition government has greatly magnified this debt burden on the poor with its swingeing austerity cuts since coming to office last year. Ironically, only days before the latest burnings and riots, British government spokesmen were congratulating themselves for “making the right decision” in driving through crippling economic austerity measures that have so far spared the United Kingdom from the overt fiscal woes seen elsewhere in Europe.

But as thousands of Britain’s youths now lash out at symbols of authority/austerity, breaking into shops to loot clothes and other consumer goods that they wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford, the social eruption may be just a sign of even greater woes to come for the Disunited Kingdom.

Finian Cunningham
Prisonplanet.com
Aug 2, 2011

If there is one thing that the office of President Barack Obama demonstrates it is that democracy does not exist in the United States. This may seem a rather outlandish statement. For many people, the fact that the 44th president is the first black man to preside over the White House – with its American colonial-style architecture – is a tribute to the triumph of US democracy.

But many other more telling facts indicate that Obama is but a figurehead of an unelected government in the US. This unelected power of corporate elites – commercial, financial, military – governs with the same core policies regardless of who is sitting in the White House. Whether these policies are on social, economic or foreign matters, the elected president must obey the direction ordained by the unelected elite. That kind of untrammeled power structure conforms more closely in practice to dictatorship, not democracy.

As Michael Hudson and Ellen Brown reveal in their analyses of the US budget debacle, Obama is pathetically doing the bidding of Wall Street – much like an errand boy [1] [2].

Brown writes: “The debt crisis was created, not by a social safety net bought and paid for by the taxpayers, but by a banking system taken over by Wall Street gamblers. The gamblers lost their bets and were bailed out at the expense of the taxpayers; and if anyone should be held to account, it is these gamblers.

“The debt ceiling crisis is a manufactured one, engineered to extort concessions that will lock the middle class in debt peonage for decades to come. Congress is empowered by the Constitution to issue the money it needs to pay its debts.”

Obama’s servile toeing of Wall Street’s line is not the behavior of a free leader boldly defending the interests of the people and the greater good. Rather, his behaviour is that of one doing what he is told to do – and doing it with grateful deference.

In this way, of course, Obama is hardly different from his predecessors. But of difference is just how blatant the White House is now appearing to function as a mere tool of the rich and powerful elite.

The irony is that Obama’s election was presented as a potent symbol of American democracy; the truth is that the two-party system has become a threadbare cover for immense feebleness when it comes to serving the diktat of elite power as opposed to the good of the people. “The most powerful office in the world” would be more accurately referenced as “the most feeble purveyor of elite interests”.

Obama’s presence in the White House indulges a superficial moral/political correctness while the masters whip us all into austere servitude.

The US “war on terror” is another illustration of America’s dictatorship of the elite – and Obama’s pathetic servile role of carrying out the masters’ orders in defiance of the will of the people.

Recall that Obama’s bid for presidential election in 2008 was avowedly based on ending the US-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. He also denounced his incumbent rival George W Bush over the use of special powers that enabled such aberrations as the Guantanamo Bay concentration camp and a host of draconian home security policies infringing on civil rights

Obama also signaled in his inaugural speech – reiterated again soon after in Cairo – that under his watch the US was resetting foreign policy – turning away from the militarist policies of Bush to a more enlightened approach for settling conflicts with the Muslim World and Iran in particular. “If they unclench their fist, we will extend our hand,” Obama declared with seemingly heartfelt eloquence.

But on every count, Obama has reneged on his supposed opposition to the US “war on terror”. Indeed, under his watch, the US has expanded its militarist foreign policy – which is apparently predicated on the belief that “western democracy is threatened by Islamic extremism”. Obama has done nothing to roll back draconian home security policies, indeed appears to have extended them. And he continues his predecessor’s deception of conflating Iran and its alleged nuclear ambitions as part of this phony “Islamic extremists” narrative.

To perform such a disgraceful U-turn on so many election promises, the presidency of Barack Obama is clear proof that the holder of office in the White House is not the one who is setting policy – rather, he is following policy that is set by unelected others.

When news broke about the massacre in Norway where more than 70 people were killed in a twin bomb and gun attack, Obama reacted like an automaton of the unelected power system, instead of like an independent, reasonable political leader. Even though it was clear within hours of the atrocity that the perpetrator was a blond-haired Norwegian with fascist and deeply Islamophobic views, nevertheless Obama reacted immediately to present it as an act of Islamic terrorism.

Speaking from the White House, Obama said: “It’s a reminder that the entire international community has a stake in preventing this kind of terror from occurring, and that we have to work co-operatively together both on intelligence and in terms of prevention of these kinds of horrible attacks.”

The president may not have used the words “Islamic terrorism” but it is clear that he was invoking the massacre as part of the “war on terror” which is predicated on the notion of Islamic terrorism.

In this mindset, Obama was not alone. British Prime Minister David Cameron moved into action stations, saying that British intelligence would help their Norwegian counterparts to track down the culprits – again implying that the perpetrators were part of an international organization – which in war on terror code means an Islamic organization.

The US and British news media also jumped to the conclusion that the Norwegian attacks must have something to with Al Qaeda or some other “Jihadist” group.

That such a widespread and erroneous reflex response from Western political leaders and news media – the so-called free press – can be elicited so uncritically shows how trenchantly the war on terror and its Islamophobic mindset are embedded.

The consequences of this are deeply disturbing. For a start, such a mindset of the Western political and media establishment can only lead to further Islamophobia in these societies. There were reports of hate attacks against ordinary Muslims across Europe immediately after the Norway atrocity, no doubt caused by the malign and erroneous way that politicians and the media attributed the incident to Islamists.

Even more disturbing is that the war on terror mindset fomented by Western governments and media over the past 10 years has led to the creation of lunatic fascist psychopaths like Anders Behring Breivik who carried out the Norway mass murder. Breivik and others like him think that Europe and the US must be defended from some kind of Muslim threat. This kind of logic does not conjure from thin air. It is rather the logical conclusion of the war on terror mindset that Western governments and news media have pushed down the throats of their citizens for a decade.

The sad part is that the majority of Western citizens are not convinced by the phony crusading of their governments and media, nor of the alleged threat of Islamic extremists. Most people realize that whatever Islamic extremists operate, they are either a creation of Western intelligence or a backlash against Western imperialism. That is why Obama’s avowed election promises to end America’s criminal wars and reset foreign policy on a more reasonable, democratic footing got him elected.

The even sadder part is that as Obama’s ineffectual election shows, the US (and its Western lackeys) is being driven further and further into bankrupting, criminal wars of aggression that will cause more victims of violence and social mayhem at home and abroad. And it’s all because democracy in the US (and elsewhere in the West) is non-existent. The US is a dictatorship. And Mr Obama is too ineffectual (save for the masters) and irrelevant to be even loosely called its dictator.

Global Research Articles by Finian Cunningham

Outrage over the revelation that Chinese authorities have been installing spying devices on all dual-plate Chinese-Hong Kong vehicles is nothing compared to the fact that Americans and European have had all their communications tracked for at least two decades.

Echelon program has tracked “every international telephone call, fax, e-mail, or radio transmission” since early 90′s

Image: Wikipedia Commons

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Outrage over the revelation that Chinese authorities have been installing spying devices on all dual-plate Chinese-Hong Kong vehicles is nothing compared to the fact that Americans and European have had all their communications tracked for at least two decades.

“For years now Chinese authorities have been installing spying devices on all dual-plate Chinese-Hong Kong vehicles, enabling a vast network of eavesdropping across the archipelago,” reports the Epoch Times.

However, the modern era of high-tech surveillance really began with the Echelon program in the early 90′s.

In 1999 the Australian government admitted that it was part of an NSA-led global intercept and surveillance grid in alliance with the US and Britain that could listen to “every international telephone call, fax, e-mail, or radio transmission,” using keywords to allow “powerful computers capable of voice recognition” to eavesdrop globally.

Furthermore, a 2001 European Parliament report stated that “within Europe all e-mail, telephone and fax communications are routinely intercepted” by the NSA.

As we reported back in 2006, Google announced that it would be using in-built microphones on personal computers to listen for “background noise,” which would then be used to tailor invasive Minority Report-style advertising.

“The idea is to use the existing PC microphone to listen to whatever is heard in the background, be it music, your phone going off or the TV turned down. The PC then identifies it, using fingerprinting, and then shows you relevant content, whether that’s adverts or search results, or a chat room on the subject,” reported the Register.

The report touched upon the inevitability that the use and abuse of this technology will eventually be taken over by the state.

“Pretty soon the security industry is going to find a way to hijack the Google feed and use it for full on espionage.”

We are now surrounded by high-tech devices that serve a dual use purpose, one of which is spying on and keeping a record of our communications and other information to build psychological profiles. These include cell phones, two-way cable TV boxes, satellite navigation devices, so-called “smart home” products, as well as services like OnStar and Google Street View.

The U.S. government is now moving forward with a program to install mandatory chips in cell phones in the name of alerting Americans to terror threats. The announcement came shortly after the admission that cell phone companies were building location databases of where their users had traveled.

Indeed, over a year ago Apple admitted to the fact that it “intermittently” collects location data, including GPS coordinates, of many iPhone users and nearby Wi-Fi networks and transmits that data to itself every 12 hours, according to a letter the company sent to U.S. Reps. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Joe Barton (R-Texas),” reports the WSJ.

Google’s HTC Android phones collect location data every few minutes and transmit that information directly to Google several times an hour, including the unique phone identifier, meaning that Google can keep tabs on the movement of a known individual almost constantly. Since people now ubiquitously carry their cell phones everywhere they go, this is akin to having a tracking microchip implanted in your forehead.

We have gradually been indoctrinated into accepting the fact that corporations and governments spying on our every activity is normal and tolerable. While our lives are now a completely open book to any authority figure that wishes to create a psychological profile of us, governments are increasingly moving into the shadows and becoming immune to accountability and transparency.

The Economic Collapse
June 8, 2011

Tens of millions of American families are about to go through economic hell and most of them don’t even realize it. Most Americans don’t spend a whole lot of time thinking about things like “monetary policy” or “economic cycles”. The vast majority of people just want to be able to get up in the morning, go to work and provide for their families. Most Americans realize that things seem “harder” these days, but most of them also have faith that things will eventually get better. Unfortunately, things aren’t going to get any better. The number of good jobs continues to decline, the number of Americans losing their homes continues to go up, people are having a much more difficult time paying their bills and our federal government is drowning in debt. Sadly, this is only just the beginning.

Since the financial collapse of 2008, the Federal Reserve and the U.S. government have taken unprecedented steps to stimulate the economy. But even with all of those efforts, we are still living in an economic wasteland.

So what is going to happen when the next wave of the economic crisis hits?

During one recent interview, Peter Schiff made the following statement….

If you look at the economic relapse that’s going on right now, look at Friday’s abysmal job numbers, look at the housing numbers, understand that all of this is taking place with record monetary and fiscal stimulus. What happens if we remove those supports?

At the end of June, the Federal Reserve’s quantitative easing program is slated to end. The U.S. Congress and state legislatures from coast to coast are talking about budget cuts. The amount of borrowing and spending that has been going on is clearly unsustainable, but will the U.S. economy start shrinking again once the current “financial sugar high” has worn off?

Already, all sorts of bad economic news has been coming out and all kinds of economic indicators are turning south. The American people are becoming increasingly restless. One new poll has found that 59 percent of the American people disapprove of Barack Obama’s handling of the economy (which is a new high). According to another recent poll, 63% of Americans say that they feel “not good” or “bad” about how the U.S. economy is performing.

If most Americans had good jobs, could afford their mortgages and could pay their bills, the economy would not be such a big issue.

Unfortunately, times are really tough for American families right now and they are about to get a lot tougher.

*Jobs*

The official unemployment rate just went up to 9.1 percent, but that figure only tells part of the picture.

There are some areas of the country where it seems nearly impossible to find a decent job. Millions of Americans have fallen into depression as they find themselves unable to provide for their families.

According to CBS News, 45.1 percent of all unemployed Americans have been out of work for at least six months. That is a higher percentage than at any point during the Great Depression.

Just two years ago, the number of “long-term unemployed” in the United States was only 2.6 million. Today, that number is up to 6.2 million.

Can you imagine being out of work for 6 months or more?

How would you survive?

Just look at the chart below. What we are going through now is really unprecedented. The average duration of unemployment in this country is now close to 40 weeks….

So will things get any better soon? Well, there were only about 3 million job openings in the United States during the month of April. Normally there should be about 4.5 million job openings. The economy is slowing down once again. Good jobs are going to become even more rare.

There are millions of other Americans that are “underemployed”. All over the United States you will find hard working Americans that are flipping burgers or working in retail stores because that is all they can get right now.

Most temp jobs and most part-time jobs don’t pay enough to be able to provide for a family. But there are not nearly enough full-time jobs for everyone.

Sadly, the number of “middle class jobs” is about 10 percent lower than a decade ago. There are simply less tickets to the “good life” than there used to be.

*Homes*

But without good jobs, the American people cannot afford to buy homes.

Without good jobs, the American people cannot even afford the homes that they are in now.

U.S. home prices have fallen 33 percent since the peak of the housing bubble. That is more than they fell during the Great Depression.

This decline in housing prices has caused a lot of problems.

28 percent of all homes with a mortgage in the United States are in negative equity at this point. There are millions of American families that are now paying on mortgages that are for far more than their homes are worth.

Millions of American families literally feel trapped in their homes. They can’t afford to sell their homes, and if they simply walk away nobody will approve them for new home loans for many years to come.

Many Americans are sticking it out and are staying in their homes until they simply can’t pay for them anymore.

As the number of good jobs continues to decline, the number of Americans that are losing their homes continues to rise.

For the first time ever, more than a million U.S. families lost their homes to foreclosure in a single year during 2010.

If the economy slows down once again and millions more Americans lose their jobs this problem is going to get a lot worse.

*Bills*

Even if they aren’t losing their homes yet, millions of other Americans families are finding it increasingly difficult to pay the bills.

Wages have been very flat over the past few years and yet the cost of most of the basics just seems to keep going up and up.

According to Brent Meyer, a senior economic analyst at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, the cost of food and the cost of energy have risen at an annualized rate of 17 percent over the past six months.

Have your wages gone up by 17 percent over the past six months?

As 2009 began, the average price of a gallon of gasoline in the United States was $1.83. Todayit is $3.77.

American families are finding that their paychecks are going a lot less farther than they used to, but Ben Bernanke keeps insisting that we have very little inflation in 2011.

Most Americans don’t care much about economic statistics – they just want to be able to do basic things like take their children to the doctor.

According to one recent survey, 26 percent of Americans have put off doctor visits because of the economy.

Sadly, soon a lot more American families will not be able to afford to go to the doctor.

According to one recent survey, 30 percent of all U.S. employers will “definitely or probably” quit offering employer-sponsored health coverage once Obamacare is fully implemented in 2014.

As the economic situation has unraveled, an increasing number of people are being forced to turn to the federal government for assistance.

One out of every six Americans is now enrolled in at least one anti-poverty program run by the federal government.

Some of the hardest hit members of our society have been our children. Today, one out of every four American children is on food stamps.

Back in the old days, a large percentage of American families were self-sufficient, but that is no longer the case.

Back in 1850, approximately 50 percent of all Americans worked on farms.

Today, less than 2 percent of Americans do.

So these days when American families can’t feed themselves what do they do?

They turn to the federal government of course.

At the moment, approximately 44 million Americans are on food stamps.

But our federal government cannot afford to spend money like this forever.

According to a recent USA Today analysis, the U.S. federal government took on $5.3 trillion in new financial obligations during 2010. USA Today says that the U.S. government now has $61.6 trillion in financial obligations that have not been paid for yet.

Wow!

Who is going to end up paying that bill?

So with so much bad news, are our leaders alarmed?

Not really.

According to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, “growth seems likely to pick up somewhat in the second half of the year.”

Yeah, we’ll see how that prediction works out.

Others are not so sure that everything is going to turn out okay.

Recently, James Carville warned that we could literally see rioting in the streets if the economic situation does not turn around soon. Just check out the last part of the video below….

The truth is that America is in decline. Just like with all of the great empires of the past, our empire is starting to crumble too.

A recent article in the Guardian touched on some of the reasons for America’s decline….

The experience of both Rome and Britain suggests that it is hard to stop the rot once it has set in, so here are the a few of the warning signs of trouble ahead: military overstretch, a widening gulf between rich and poor, a hollowed-out economy, citizens using debt to live beyond their means, and once-effective policies no longer working. The high levels of violent crime, epidemic of obesity, addiction to pornography and excessive use of energy may be telling us something: the US is in an advanced state of cultural decadence.

The economic news is only part of the puzzle. This country has rejected the ancient wisdom that was passed down to us and we have rejected the principles of our founding fathers.

We have piled up the biggest mountain of debt in the history of the world and yet somehow we expected that everything would turn out okay.

Well, everything is not going to turn out okay.

All of this debt is going to come down on us like a ton of bricks and the U.S. economy is going to continue to fall apart. Millions of American families are going to lose their jobs and their homes.

Economic hell is coming.

You better get ready.

The Excavator
June 4, 2011

Whenever any government in any country is taken over by lawless and power mad traitors they naturally demonize the people and the defenders of individuals freedoms as “terrorists,” and “extremists” to divide and rule the nation. This is the case in America today, where armed agents of the state have been brainwashed to be on the lookout for “domestic terrorists” and “right wing extremists” in the guise of groups like the Oath Keepers.

The Oath Keepers is a non-partisan, apolitical group of current soldiers, veterans, fire fighters, and police officers who have pledged to honor their oath to defend the Constitution of the United States and disobey officials orders that are clearly in violation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Oath Keepers is considered dangerous and treated like terrorists by the tyrants who have hijacked the U.S. government because they have promised to protect the rights of American people and keep their oaths to the Constitution. Oath keeping is frowned upon by the mainstream media and the political establishment because in the twisted world of these traitors and rats to do good is evil and to do evil is good.

It is a sad age when nobility is demonized as terrorism and oath keeping is cynically called a “looney” act and a product of “paranoid conspiracy theories.” This is what the world has come to. This shows how far America has fallen. Treasonous tyrants in Washington feel free to throw dirt on true warriors like the Oath Keepers while they deceive tens of thousands of other warriors to fight in pointless, criminal and unending wars overseas that are based on total lies.

I just finished watching the war documentary ‘Restrepo’ and I am pissed that soldiers who signed up to defend their country are killing and dying for a lie. They are being wasted and ruined.

The war profiteers and devilish traitors who staged the 9/11 attacks couldn’t care less about the deaths of thousands of soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent people. They have no honor or conscience. An oath means nothing to these heartless freaks. Human life is not precious to them. All they care about is power and control. They are the real lunatic fringe of modern society, not the people who question the 9/11 attacks or the people who believe following your conscience and keeping your oath is a sacred duty.

John R. Holmes, author of an essay called ‘Oaths & Oath Breaking: Analogues of Old English Comitatus in Tolkien’s Myth,’ that appears in the book “Tolkien and the Invention of Myth: A Reader,” says that making and keeping an oath is “central to the heroic code.”

The last thing that the tyrants in Washington want is a new age of heroes. Individuals who are serious about protecting individual rights and defending freedom are threats to the rotten establishment. That is why Oath Keepers and defenders of the Constitution are being accused of treason and denigrated in the media. They are promising to fulfill an oath that the political leadership of both parties and Congress abandoned long ago. Obama and Bush would rather see America perish from the Earth than be prosecuted for their crimes against the Constitution, and crimes against humanity.

I think the Oath Keepers is one of the best things to happen to America since the American revolution. There are two camps of critics of Oath Keepers: the ignorant people who believe everything they read, and the cunning tyrants who want the treasonous and lawless federal government to march ahead unopposed by patriots who swore an oath to defend America and its constitution from its enemies.

Who would you rather stand beside on the battlefield come Judgment Day – men who keep their word, or men who will stab you in the back the day you are no longer useful to them? Hell was created for traitors and backstabbers. Hell is where Obama and Bush belong, not the White House.

Holmes says that oath breaking was regarded as a serious sin by people in England in the eleventh century, writing, “to the Old English mind, or at least to Wulfstan’s eleventh-century Old English mind, the making (and breaking) of oaths is an everyday moral concern not limited to the heroic age.” Wulfstan was the author of ‘The Sermon of the Wolf to the English,’ written in 1014. Holmes writes:

Tara Green
NaturalNews
May 24, 2011

The highly controversial and potentially lethal anthrax vaccine may be tested on US children if the federal government gets its way. Although adverse event reports related to the vaccine among adult test subjects have included hospitalization, disability and even death, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) is exploring the possibility of testing the vaccine on children.

Nicole Lurie, the assistant secretary for preparedness and response at the DHHS, recently requested that the National Biodefense Science Board submit an evaluation of safety issues related to testing the anthrax vaccine on children. The DHHS frames the possible testing as an issue of biodefense preparedness. However, the possibility of pediatric testing of the vaccine both ignores the vaccine’s dangers, and raises the specter of class- and/or race-based selection of medical test subjects which has haunted US health agencies for over a century.

Even in the months in 2001 when letters containing anthrax were mailed to several congressional leaders, heightening national fears during the post-9/11 period, Bill First, a physician and then-Senate Majority Leader, urged caution in use of the anthrax vaccine. He told CNN: “There are very real and potentially serious side effects from the vaccine and anyone who elects to receive the vaccine needs to be made aware of that. I do not recommend widespread inoculation. There are too many side effects and if there is limited chance of exposure- the side effects would far outweigh any potential advantage.”

A 2007 report by the CDC, along with the Vaccine Healthcare Centers of the Department of Defense and the watchdog group Government Accountability estimated that “between 1 and 2 percent” of vaccinated military personnel, experienced “severe adverse events, which could result in disability or death.”

If a vaccine with this kind of reputation is to be tested on children, one has to wonder which children. It is fairly certain those young test subjects won’t be the offspring of high-ranking government officials or corporate vice presidents and CEOs.

The history of medical testing carries a taint of racism, classism and opportunism, as health officials select those with less education and fewer choices to be unwitting guinea pigs in medical experiments supposedly in the name of scientific advancement.

You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist or history professor to have heard of the notorious 40-year long Tuskegee experiments in which the US Public Health Service withheld syphilis treatment from infected black men to measure the effects of the disease.

In October of 2010, President Obama apologized to Guatemala for tests during the 1940s when the US Public Health Service used prostitutes deliberately infect 700 prisoners, soldiers and patients with emotional and mental problems with syphilis both through visits with prostitutes and pouring bacteria for the disease onto skin abrasions on the subjects’ bodies.

Vaccine testing has its own special place in the annals of this kind of integrity-free medical research. In the early 1960s, mentally disabled children at a residential state school in New York were deliberately infected with viral hepatitis so that they could be test subjects for the disease.

A 1978 CDC test for a hepatitis B vaccine which sought “promiscuous homosexual male” volunteers has some interesting connections to both HIV and the previously rare opportunistic diseases associated with the AIDS virus. As recently as 1990, the CDC and Kaiser Pharmaceuticals gave 1,500 black and Hispanic 6-month old infants an unlicensed measles vaccine without the approval and consent of their parents. (For more detail of these stories and other true-life medical experimentation horror stories, see http://www.naturalnews.com/022383.html).

Joe Plummer
Infowars.com
April 20, 2011

On Friday April 15th, the U.S. government showed again just how easily it can completely “shut down” any website it wants. By seizing a domain name, the Department of “Justice” can cut the public off from access to products, services or information in the blink of an eye. Case in point: Today, the DOJ seized FullTiltPoker.com, PokerStars.com and AbsolutePoker.com.



No doubt, everyone in America can rest more easily now knowing that that the government is “protecting them” from the unspeakable dangers of online gambling. (An “unspeakable danger” that nobody asked to be protected from. In fact, the legislation that made this possible was so unpopular that, after years of failing, Congress rammed it through under a PORT SECURITY bill!)

As a result of the government’s actions, these enormously popular multi-billion dollar companies, and the millions of customers they served, are now met with the DOJ message below when they try to access the former websites. (Note: The FBI / DOJ message has not propagated across all U.S. servers yet. The screencapture below was taken from megaproxy.com where the “shut down” of all sites is visible.)

I was asked earlier today: “What’s the story with the government seizing these gambling sites?” My reply, more or less, went like this:

No story really. It’s just the government doing what it does. (Using its “regulatory power” to destroy businesses and people engaged in non-violent and voluntary activities while ignoring enormous REAL crimes. …Using its power to benefit the “few” at the expense of the many.)

Not to worry. After they’re done destroying all the competition, they’ll launch their own profitable “legal” online gambling sites. (Or, they’ll dole out licenses to the well-connected for a nice fee and a slice of the action.) Either way, once they’re in a position to get their cut, the horrible “dangers of online gambling” will scarcely be heard of again.

Cynical? Yes. But sadly, it’s par for the course.

Now, the bigger problem is this: What happens when, instead of creating unasked-for and unwanted “internet gambling laws,” the government starts passing “unlawful news” or “unlicensed information” laws? Today they’re seizing and shutting down those evil poker players. Tomorrow, it could very well be the evil “alternative media” that’s “giving aid and comfort to the enemy.”

I regularly make backup copies of important documents, audio and video that I find online. Hopefully everyone else is doing this too.

Kurt Nimmo
Prisonplanet.com
April 13, 2011

Democrat Nancy Pelosi, the former Speaker of the House, has spoken her mind on the nature of government and the farce we call elections. She says the latter don’t matter.

Madame Pelosi made her comment during a speech at Tufts University in Massachusetts. She addressed establishment Republicans directly and told them to take back their party from upstart Tea Party activists. She said:

To my Republican friends: take back your party. So that it doesn’t matter so much who wins the election, because we have shared values about the education of our children, the growth of our economy, how we defend our country, our security and civil liberties, how we respect our seniors. Because there are so many things at risk right now — perhaps in another question I’ll go into them, if you want. But the fact is that elections shouldn’t matter as much as they do… But when it comes to a place where there doesn’t seem to be shared values then that can be problematic for the country, as I think you can see right now. (Emphasis added.)

See a video of Pelosi’s comments here.

Pelosi basically said the will of the people should not be allowed to get in the way of the mandates of the state and the elite that own and control it. Republicans need to take control of the party and put an end to the growing calls for fiscal sanity in government. The very existence of the warfare-welfare state is at stake.

Arsenic and toxic metals found in baby foods - Baby foods used to wean infants off milk have been found to contain “alarming” levels of toxic contaminants including arsenic, lead and cadmium.

Sperm counts continue to plummet, say researchers - Environmental pollution, plastic chemicals, pharmaceutical drugs, pesticides, unhealthy diets, radiation-emitting technologies — these and many other factors are contributing to an epidemic decline in sperm counts among modern men, say researchers.

Enough equipment stolen from UK military for ‘small coup’: official - Items such as night vision goggles, pistols, field kits, boots, body armor, machinery and rations have gone missing around British military bases in the past year, and officials there say the disappearances are starting to add up.

Industry’s war on nature: ‘What are the bees telling us?’ - Rady Ananda | A sure way to collapse an ecosystem is to decimate a keystone species.

TSA gives invasive pat down to 6-year-old girl - A video appeared on the Internet Saturday of a female TSA agent allegedly giving an invasive pat down to a 6-year-old girl.

Playing the Lyre of Budget Madness as the Empire Burns - Sartre | A mere drop in the bucket reduction in a historic deficit is lauded as the great achievement of compromised negotiations.

The Daily Caller is reporting that two crown jewels in the CIA’s long-standing corporate media propaganda effort – the Washington Post and CBS – are receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars each from hoodwinked taxpayers in order to twist coverage of Obamacare.

“Two mainstream news organizations are receiving hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars from Obamacare’s Early Retiree Reinsurance Program (ERRP) — a $5 billion grant program that’s doling out cash to companies, states and labor unions in what the Obama administration considers an effort to pay for health insurance for early retirees. The Washington Post Company raked in $573,217 in taxpayer subsidies and CBS Corporation secured $722,388 worth of Americans’ money,” writes Matthew Boyle for The Daily Caller.

“When NBC used to cover energy issues, they identified themselves as a subsidiary of General Electric. CBS and Washington Post just have to disclose that they are subsidiaries of the Obama Administration,” quipped Rep. Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican.

It’s a bit more sinister than that. The Obama administration is owned by Goldman Sachs and the banksters on Wall Street. CBS, the Washington Post, and the rest of the corporate media is controlled by the CIA, which was created by Wall Street and other establishment insiders.

“This program is providing ‘free’ money to corporations, states, unions, and pension plans. In addition, the Washington Post and CBS received funding under this program. How can the Washington Post and CBS be impartial on the issue of health care when they received funding under the health care law?” asked Rep. Cliff Stearns, a Florida Republican.

Is the Washington political class uniformly clueless? Obviously, with a few notable exceptions. The Washington Post and CBS have never been impartial, it is not in their vocabulary. They are propaganda feeder units for the establishment and the banksters who own them.

Preferred minions and useful idiots always receive “free money” confiscated at gunpoint from beleaguered tax payers. Socialism for corporations is hardly a unique concept – this form of theft has been going on for decades.

Nothing happening here. Please move along.

Infowars.com
April 1, 2011

Three of the six nuclear reactors at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant have partially melted down and highly toxic plutonium is seeping into the soil outside. Plutonium is less volatile than other radioactive elements like iodine or cesium, but it’s also more deadly. According to Businessweek, “When plutonium decays, it emits what is known as an alpha particle, a relatively big particle that carries a lot of energy. When an alpha particle hits body tissue, it can damage the DNA of a cell and lead to a cancer-causing mutation.” If plutonium leaches into groundwater or pristine aquifers, the threat to public health and the environment will be extreme. This is an excerpt from an article in the Guardian:

“The radioactive core in a reactor at the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant appears to have melted through the bottom of its containment vessel and on to a concrete floor, experts say, raising fears of a major release of radiation at the site. The warning follows an analysis by a leading US expert of radiation levels at the plant….

Richard Lahey, who was head of safety research for boiling-water reactors at General Electric when the company installed the units at Fukushima, told the Guardian workers at the site appeared to have “lost the race” to save the reactor…” (“Japan may have lost race to save nuclear reactor”, The Guardian)

It also appears that underground tunnels at the facility have been flooded with radioactive water that contains high-concentrations of caesium-137. A considerable amount of the water has made its way to the sea where samples show the levels of contamination steadily rising. This is from the Wall Street Journal:

“Levels of radiation in the ocean next to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant have surged to record highs, the government said Wednesday, as operators try to deal with large amounts of radioactive water—the unwanted byproduct of operations to cool the reactors.

The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said water taken Tuesday afternoon from the monitoring location for the troubled reactors Nos. 1 to 4 had 3,355 times the permitted concentration of iodine-131. That is the highest yet recorded at the sampling location, which is 330 meters south of the reactors’ discharge outlet.” (“Seawater Radiation Level Soars Near Plant”, Wall Street Journal) All fishing has been banned in the vicinity as the toxins pose a danger to human health.

The Japanese government’s chief spokesman, Yukio Edano, issued a public statement admitting that the situation at Fukushima is progressively getting worse with no end in sight. “We are not yet in a situation where we can say when we will have this under control,” said Edano. In other words, the emergency effort is failing.

The fact that Japan is experiencing the biggest environmental catastrophe in history explains why the media has been trying so hard to divert the public’s attention to Obama’s military adventure in Libya. But it hasn’t worked; all eyes are locked on Fukushima where the crisis continues to get more precarious by the day. News anchors assure their viewers that they are only being exposed to “safe levels of radioactivity”, but people aren’t buying it. They’ve seen the comparisons to Chernobyl and made their own judgements. Here’s an excerpt from an article in Counterpunch by Chris Busby that gives a thumbnail sketch of the human costs of the meltdown at Chernobyl:

“The health effects of the Chernobyl accident are massive and demonstrable. They have been studied by many research groups in Russia, Belarus and the Ukraine, in the USA, Greece, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland and Japan. The scientific peer reviewed literature is enormous. Hundreds of papers report the effects, increases in cancer and a range of other diseases. My colleague Alexey Yablokov of the Russian Academy of Sciences, published a review of these studies in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (2009). Earlier in 2006 he and I collected together reviews of the Russian literature by a group of eminent radiation scientists and published these in the book Chernobyl, 20 Years After. The result: more than a million people have died between 1986 and 2004 as a direct result of Chernobyl.” (“Deconstructing Nuclear Experts, Chris Busby, Counterpunch)

One million dead, that’s the bottom line. And, according to Busby, “we can already calculate that the contamination (at Fukushima) is actually worse than Chernobyl.”

That’s certain, but don’t expect to read it in the MSM. Or this, which is also from Busby:

Since the official International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) figures for the Fukushima contamination are from 200 to 900kBq.sq metre out to 78km from the site, we can expect between 22% and 90% increases in cancer in people living in these places in the next 10 years.”

There’s a large body of research on the effects of radiation on humans. In fact, scientists conducted a series of studies on the people living on the Marshall Islands following nuclear weapons tests at Bikini and Enewetak atolls. This is where the US exploded more than 60 atomic bombs between 1946-58. Here’s an excerpt from an article in Counterpunch titled “Radiation, Japan and the Marshall Islands; Living and dying downwind”:

“The legacy of latent radiogenic diseases from hydrogen bomb testing in the Marshall Islands provides some clues about what ill-health mysteries await the affected Japanese in the decades ahead…..Traces of I-131 have been discovered in Tokyo drinking water and in seawater offshore from the reactors. It took nine years for the first thyroid tumor to appear among the exposed Marshallese and hypothyroidism and cancer continued to appear decades later……

o Plutonium-239 has a half life of 24,000 years, is considered one of the most toxic substances on Earth, and if absorbed is a potent alpha emitter that can induce cancer. This isotope too is found in the soils and groundwater of the downwind atolls from the Bikini and Enewetak H-bomb tests…

Radioactive Iodine-129 with a half-life of 15 million years and a well-documented capacity to bioaccumulate in the foodchain, will also remain as a persistent problem for the affected Japanese…

The sociocultural and psychological effects [e.g., PTSD] of the Fukushima nuclear disaster will be long-lasting, given the uncertainty surrounding the contamination of their prefecture and beyond.” (“Radiation, Japan and the Marshall Islands; Living and dying downwind”, Glenn Alcalay, Counterpunch)

It’s all bad, which is why the nuclear industry needs stooges in the media to soft-peddle the news. Because, in truth, what they’re selling is a noxious stew of irradiated poison that kills and maims people while causing incalculable damage to the environment. That’s why industry bigwigs have turned to their friends at the EPA to loosen regulations so that the radioactive material that’s presently showering-down on the US falls within EPA safety standards. Here’s a clip from Washington’s Blog that explains what’s going on behind the public’s back:

“….the EPA is considering drastically raising the amount of allowable radiation in food, water and the environment.
As Michael Kane writes:

In the wake of the continuing nuclear tragedy in Japan, the United States government is still moving quickly to increase the amounts of radiation the population can “safely” absorb by raising the safe zone for exposure to levels designed to protect the government and nuclear industry more than human life. It’s all about cutting costs now as the infinite-growth paradigm sputters and moves towards extinction. As has been demonstrated by government conduct in the Gulf of Mexico in the wake of Deepwater Horizon and in Japan, life has taken a back seat to cost-cutting and public relations posturing. The game plan now appears to be to protect government and the nuclear industry from “excessive costs”… at any cost.” (Washington’s Blog)

The radioactive toxins that are now oozing into the soil and water-table or flowing into Japan’s coastal waters or lofting skyward into the jet-stream where they will spread across continents, will continue to wreak havoc long after this generation has passed its mortal coil. Easing EPA safety standards won’t change a thing. Where goes radiation, there too goes cancer and death. The disaster in Japan merely buys a little time for us to rethink our own policies before a similar crisis strikes here. And, it will strike here; it’s only a matter of time. Consider the comments of Dave Lochbaum, Director of UCS’s Nuclear Safety Project, who testified on Wednesday before the Senate Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee. Here’s what he said:

“Today, tens of thousands of tons of irradiated fuel sits in spent fuel pools across America. At many sites, there is nearly ten times as much irradiated fuel in the spent fuel pools as in the reactor cores. The spent fuel pools are not cooled by an array of highly reliable emergency cooling systems capable of being powered from the grid, diesel generators, or batteries. Instead, the pools are cooled by one regular system sometimes backed up by an alternate makeup system.

The spent fuel pools are not housed within robust concrete containment structures designed to protect the public from the radioactivity released from damaged irradiated fuel. Instead, the pools are often housed in buildings with sheet metal siding like that in a Sears storage shed. I have nothing against the quality or utility of Sears’ storage sheds, but they are not suitable for nuclear waste storage.

The irrefutable bottom line is that we have utterly failed to properly manage the risk from irradiated fuel stored at our nation’s nuclear power plants. We can and must do better.” (The Union of Concerned Scientists)

Nuclear energy is a ticking-timebomb. There are safer ways to keep the lights on.

Ethan A. Huff,
Natural News
March 31, 2011

Radioactive isotopes unique to the Fukushima disaster are now being detected in at least 15 US states, according to recent reports from CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/03/2…). And the Associated Press (AP) has issued a report claiming that milk samples taken in Washington state have tested positive for low levels of the same radioactive component, Iodine-131, raising concerns about the true widespread effects of the Fukushima nuclear fallout (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic…).

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and various state and local authorities continue to repeat the same empty reassurances that all detected levels of radiation — whether they be in air, water, or food — are far below levels of concern, and that people do not need to worry or do anything in response. But is this sound advice?

Earlier in the week, several nuclear facilities in North and South Carolina, as well as in Florida, reportedly detected low levels of Iodine-131 in the air (http://www.naturalnews.com/031881_r…). That same radiation has also been detected across the West Coast, as well as in northeastern states like Pennsylvania and Massachusetts, which clearly indicates that Fukushima radiation has made its way throughout the US, at least in very low levels.

But now, reports have been issued claiming that milk samples from Washington state have also turned up contaminated with Iodine-131. The levels were allegedly far lower than the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) concern limits for the radioactive particles, but they are not necessarily safe even at the levels being detected.

According to the FDA “Radiation Safety” website, the Derived Intervention Level (DIL) for Iodine-131 is 170 becquerels per kilogram (Bq/kg) (http://www.fda.gov/newsevents/publi…). AWall Street Journalreport of the milk incident explains that the Washington samples contained only 0.8 picocuries per liter (pCi/l), or 0.03 Bq/kg. That level is clearly far lower than the FDA’s DIL for Iodine-131, but is any level of this radiation actually “safe”? And what about the other more serious types of radioactive particles being emitted from Fukushima that authorities appear to not even be looking for?

Based on Japanese guidelines for radiation safety, Iodine-131 is the least of our worries. Cesium, uranium, and plutonium all have much lower maximum “concern” thresholds, with plutonium being the most serious. A Bloomberg report explains that just one Bq/kg of plutonium is enough to cause major concern if found in water or milk (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-…). Are authorities testing for plutonium and the other serious radioactive particles that we know have escaped from the Fukushima plant?

The mainstream media has mostly abandoned the Fukushima incident in favor of the newly-instigated war in Libya. And yet reports are still continuing to trickle in — though mostly without much fanfare — concerning Japan radiation popping up across the US in air, water, and now food. But all the while, the EPA and others repeatedly dismiss the situation as being no big deal, despite the fact that conditions at Fukushima have basically reached a frightening dead end (http://www.naturalnews.com/031894_F…).

As we keep saying here at NaturalNews, preparedness is key. And preparedness, of course, does not involve panic. It does, however, involve using your critical thinking skills to evaluate the seriousness of the situation, consider the anomalies surrounding the official US government position on it, and take appropriate steps to prepare you and your family for whatever may soon come as a result.

Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/031909_radiation_milk.html#ixzz1IAzW6g16

Washington’s Blog
March 30, 2011

When the economy imploded in 2008, how did the government respond?

Did it crack down on fraud? Force bankrupt companies to admit that their speculative gambling with our money had failed? Rein in the funny business?

Of course not!

The government just helped cover up how bad things were, used claims of national security to keep everything in the dark, and changed basic rules and definitions to allow the game to continue. See this, this, this and this.

When BP – through criminal negligence – blew out the Deepwater Horizon oil well, the government helped cover it up (the cover up is ongoing).

The government also changed the testing standards for seafood to pretend that higher levels of toxic PAHs in our food was business-as-usual.

So now that Japan is suffering the worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl – if not of all time – is the government riding to the rescue to help fix the problem, or at least to provide accurate information to its citizens so they can make informed decisions?

Of course not!

The EPA is closing ranks with the nuclear power industry:

EPA officials, however, refused to answer questions or make staff members available to explain the exact location and number of monitors, or the levels of radiation, if any, being recorded at existing monitors in California. Margot Perez-Sullivan, a spokeswoman at the EPA’s regional headquarters in San Francisco, said the agency’s written statement would stand on its own.

Critics said the public needs more information.

“It’s disappointing,” said Bill Magavern, director of Sierra Club California. “I have a strong suspicion that EPA is being silenced by those in the federal government who don’t want anything to stand in the way of a nuclear power expansion in this country, heavily subsidized by taxpayer money.”

The EPA has pulled 8 of its 18 radiation monitors in California, Oregon and Washington because (by implication) they are giving readings which seem too high.

Remember, for the sake of context, that the government has covered up nuclear meltdowns for fifty years to protect the nuclear power industry.

And now, the EPA is considering drastically raising the amount of allowable radiation in food, water and the environment.

As Michael Kane writes:

In the wake of the continuing nuclear tragedy in Japan, the United States government is still moving quickly to increase the amounts of radiation the population can “safely” absorb by raising the safe zone for exposure to levels designed to protect the government and nuclear industry more than human life. It’s all about cutting costs now as the infinite-growth paradigm sputters and moves towards extinction. As has been demonstrated by government conduct in the Gulf of Mexico in the wake of Deepwater Horizon and in Japan, life has taken a back seat to cost-cutting and public relations posturing.The game plan now appears to be to protect government and the nuclear industry from “excessive costs”… at any cost.

***

In 1992, the EPA produced a PAGs manual that answers many of these questions. But now an update to the 1992 manual is being planned, and if the “Dr. Strangelove” wing of the EPA has its way, here is what it means (brace yourself for these ludicrous increases):

• A nearly 1000-fold increase for exposure to strontium-90;
• A 3000 to 100,000-fold hike for exposure to iodine-131; and
• An almost 25,000 rise for exposure to radioactive nickel-63.

The new radiation guidelines would also allow long-term cleanup thresholds thousands of times more lax than anything EPA has ever judged safe in the past.

And see this.

Indeed, some government scientists and media shills are now “reexamining” old studies that show that radioactive substances like plutonium cause cancer to argue that prevent cancer.

It is not just bubbleheads like Ann Coulter saying this. Government scientists from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratories and pro-nuclear hacks like Lawrence Solomon are saying this.

In other words, this is a concerted propaganda campaign to cover up the severity of a major nuclear accident by raising acceptable levels of radiation and saying that a little radiation is good for us.

Note: Environmentalists might naively assume that the EPA is always on the side of the environment and human health. However, the EPA has become thoroughly politicized, and has been instrumental in many recent cover ups. For example, as Newsday noted in 2003:

In the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attack on the World Trade Center, the White House instructed the Environmental Protection Agency to give the public misleading information, telling New Yorkers it was safe to breathe when reliable information on air quality was not available.That finding is included in a report released Friday by the Office of the Inspector General of the EPA.

The senior policy analyst at the EPA’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, and former the EPA ombudsman’s chief investigator accused the EPA of “doing a cover up” regarding the use of dispersants in the Gulf of Mexico, and said government agencies such as the EPA have been “sock puppets” for BP in this cover up”.

And see this.

Press Association
March 29, 2011

Extremely low levels of radioactive iodine from the tsunami-hit Japanese nuclear plant have been detected in parts of the UK.

A statement from the Health Protection Agency said the “minutest traces of iodine” were being seen in the UK, with low levels detected at monitoring stations in Oxfordshire and Glasgow.

The agency said there was no public health risk posed by the iodine, as the radiation dose received from inhaling air with the levels recorded in the past few days would be minuscule and much less than the annual background dose.

While levels may rise in the coming days and weeks, they will be “significantly below any level which could cause harm to public health”, the HPA said.

Full article here

Tyler Durden
Zero Hedge
March 22, 2011

With much confusion over just which radioactive isotopes are considered dangerous following the Fukushima explosions, Reuters has compiled a handy overview of the key actors: iodine-131, caesium-134 and caesium-137. For the time being only the far more inert and shorter half-life elements such as Xenon have been dispersed globally, while the more dangerous isotopes have been relatively localized, and their dispersion is limited to wind direction. Furthermore, metrics such as halflife are relatively irrelevant for now since the release of radiation continues mostly unabated thereby producing a constant source of freshly radioactive substances. This is all the more validated by the just released NHK data indicating a surge in radioactivity as far away as 40 kms from the plant: “Japan’s science ministry says radiation exceeding 400 times the normal level was detected in soil about 40 kilometers from the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. The ministry surveyed radioactive substances in soil about 5 centimeters below the surface at roadsides on Monday. The ministry found 43,000 becquerels of radioactive iodine-131 per kilogram of soil, and 4,700 becquerels of radioactive cesium-137 per kilogram about 40 kilometers west-northwest of the plant. Gunma University Professor Keigo Endo says radiation released by the iodine is 430 times the level normally detected in soil in Japan and that released by the cesium is 47 times the norm.”

From Reuters:

Experts are most worried about three radioactive substances — iodine-131, caesium-134 and caesium-137 — all of which can cause various types of cancer years later.

Caesium-137 is of particular concern as it can stay in the environment and potentially cause havoc for hundreds of years. It takes 30 years for this contaminant to lose its power by half — what experts refer to as a “half life”.

At this rate, it would take at least 240 years for the contaminant to exhaust all its radioactivity.

“Caesium-137 can last for hundreds of years. If exposed, one can get spasms, involuntary muscular contractions and may lose the ability to walk. It also causes infertility. High doses will also damage a person’s DNA and cause cancer later,” said Lee Tin-lap, an associate professor at the Chinese University’s School of Biomedical Sciences in Hong Kong.

But a few experts stressed there was no need for panic yet.

Levels of caesium-137 detected in spinach in Japan over the weekend stood at an average of 350 becquerels per kilogram, well below the European Union’s limit of 1,000 becquerels for dairy produce and 1,250 for all other food items.

“Becquerels are like atoms,” said Pradip Deb, senior lecturer in Medical Radiations at the School of Medical Sciences, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology University.

“A litre of milk has billions and billions of atoms … and this is just 350.”

Caesium-134 has a half-life of 2 years, which will take about 20 years for it to become harmless.

The radioactive spill has prompted food checks in the Philippines, Hong Kong, South Korea, China, Singapore and Malaysia, with Taiwan’s government extending surveillance to include even electronics and tech items, chemicals and machinery. In addition to iodine and caesium, Thailand is also looking out for Strontium 90.

Milk samples in Japan, however, have been found to contain an average of 1,210 becquerels of iodine-131 per kilogram, well over the limit of 500 becquerels imposed in the EU.

Japanese spinach has also been found with an average of 10,450 becquerels of iodine-131 per kilogram, more than 5 times the EU limit.

One mitigating factor though is that iodine-131 has a half life of 8 days, which means it will take 80 days to lose all its radioactivity — assuming there is no fresh radioactive spillage.

“You can’t control radiation. It’s already there, but you can take preventive action (by not consuming any radioactive food that is tainted with iodine-131 for 80 days),” Deb said.

Radioactive material is carried by tiny moisture droplets in the air. It can then be directly inhaled into the lungs, get washed down by rain into the sea and into soil and eventually contaminate crops, marine life and drinking water.

Radioactive substances are dangerous because they can cause changes or mutations in DNA, which may then go on to cause cancer. While the human body can repair DNA changes or damage, a person is only safe if the repair process happens faster than the time it takes for the damaged or mutated DNA material to replicate.

Experts agree that children and fetuses are most at risk because their cells divide at a faster rate than adults. They also consume more milk, which puts them at greater risk.

Reuters
March 22, 2011

Miniscule numbers of radioactive particles believed to have come from Japan’s crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant have been detected as far away as Iceland, diplomatic sources said on Tuesday.

They stressed the tiny traces, measured by a network of international monitoring stations as they spread eastwards from Japan across the Pacific, North America, the Atlantic and to Europe, were far too low to cause any harm to humans.

“It’s only a matter of days before it disperses in the entire northern hemisphere,” Andreas Stohl, a senior scientist at the Norwegian Institute for Air Research, said. “Over Europe there would be no concern about human health.”

The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organisation (CTBTO), a Vienna-based U.N. body for monitoring possible breaches of the atom bomb test ban, has 63 stations worldwide for observing such particles, including one in the Icelandic capital Reykjavik.

view MULTIPLE readouts of Xenon, Cesuim fallout via air current dispersion… surface concentrations AND total column data:

http://transport.nilu.no/products/fukushima

the effects of XE-133 MSDS :

http://pharmaceuticals.covidien.com/imageServer.aspx/doc168825.pdf?contentID=…

The french forecast I spoke about in the video:

http://www.irsn.fr/FR/popup/Pages/irsn-meteo-france_19mars.aspx

The austrian forecast i spoke about in the video:

http://www.zamg.ac.at/aktuell/?ts=1300758541 

The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organisation (CTBTO), a Vienna-based U.N. body for monitoring possible breaches of the atom bomb test ban, has 63 stations worldwide for observing such particles, including one in Reykjavik, the Icelandic capital.

The CTBTO continuously provides data to its member states, but does not make the details public.

Another source said about 15 CTBTO stations had so far detected particles believed to originate from Fukushima.

"Reykjavik is the first in Europe," the source added.

David Edwards
Raw Story
Saturday, March 12, 2011

Comment: How long before we discover that the whole affair was a set up provocateured by feds? Remember the Hutaree Militia?

Five members or associates of a militia group were arrested in Fairbanks, Alaska Thursday in connection with a plot to kidnap or kill state trooper and judges.

Francis “Schaeffer” Cox, Lonnie Vernon, Karen Vernon, Coleman Barney and Michael Anderson were all charged with conspiracy to conspiracy to commit murder, conspiracy to commit kidnapping, conspiracy to commit arson, third-degree misconduct involving weapons, first-degree hindering prosecution and tampering with evidence, according to KTUU.

Cox is known to be the leader of the Alaska Peacemakers Militia.

An investigation into the militia “revealed extensive plans to kidnap or kill Alaska State Troopers and a Fairbanks Judge,” according to an Alaska Department of Public Safety statement.

“Cox et. al. had conspired a plan to launch an attack on Alaska State Troopers and Court Judges. Investigation also revealed that extensive surveillance on troopers in the Fairbanks area had occurred, specifically on the locations of the homes for two Alaska State Troopers. Furthermore, Cox et. al. had acquired a large cache of weapons in order to carry out attacks against their targeted victims. Some of the weapons known to be in the cache are prohibited by state or federal law.”

An arrest warrant had previously been issued for Cox on a weapons charge.

In March, the militia leader had responded to an online “distress call,” where a fellow conspiracy theorist had claimed the police were conducting an illegal search of his house, according to Anchorage Press’ David Holthouse.

Cox, a self-declared "sovereign citizen," had been charged with failing to notify law enforcement that he was carrying a concealed weapon upon arriving on the scene.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) explains that sovereign citizens believe that "hey -- not judges, juries, law enforcement or elected officials -- get to decide which laws to obey and which to ignore."

While establishing his militia last March, Cox reportedly told a crowd of about 150 members that they had a duty to spill blood to protect their rights.

"[The government] doesn't operate under the rule of law, they operate under the rule of force," Cox said. "My greatest fear is the only time they are going to hear us is when we speak their language."

"If there was a gun ban in the city of Fairbanks, that's an act of war. And it would have to be met with war. And we are prepared to do that, we won't back down on that principal. We would spill blood before we let that happen."

Rick Gedeon
Infowars.com
March 8, 2011

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a blatant admission during a U.S. Foreign Policy Priorities committee meeting by arguing that the State Department needs more money because the US military-industrial complex is losing the information war to the likes of Russia Today and Al Jazeera. This loss of course is due to the US corporate media having completely abandoned real news.

This holds true especially with the propaganda war being waged in the United States that specifically targets the American public. Why is it that Hillary thinks she’s losing the infowar? Perhaps because people are now becoming more skeptical to the recent string of FBI entrapment cases deceitfully called “sting operations,” by which young Muslim men have been caught trying to use “weapons of mass destruction” and were directed to plant bombs on synagogues by their FBI handlers. A clear onslaught of disinformation, half-truths, and especially the paralyzing appeal to fear and prejudice have gripped the American psyche.

Even the supposed parcel bomb, which originated from Yemen, caught the controlled media with their pants down when it turned out to be a complete and utter farce. Synagogues have insidiously and deliberately been chosen as targets by the government in order to bring about tensions between the Jewish and Muslim communities in the United States. Divide and conquer is an old COINTELPRO tactic. Take for example the case that involved FBI informant, Shahed Hussain, who lured 4 men to plant bombs at synagogues. Shahed became a government informant after being caught “scamming illegal immigrants trying to get driver’s licenses” according to reports. Disgustingly enough, Shahed became the prosecution’s top witnesses in the trial of the Newburgh four.

The following is perhaps the greatest analysis of the recent synthetic terror gripping this nation. It concerns the latest government orchestrated terror propaganda entitled the “Christmas Tree Bomber,” christened by the news media:

As the United States slowly erodes into

third world status, the police state apparatus tightens its grip on the increasingly ignorant, poorer and jobless people of America. Tyranny is marketed in different ways, but this time it’s not packaged as “fighting communism” or “the war on drugs,” rather it is vernacular first used by Reagan, when he declared a “war on terror.” McCarthyism continues under the name of fighting terror, as Muslims are juxtaposed with 911 truthers and have become the new radicals and extremists plaguing society. The new communist today is: The Muslims!

In a recent interview with Max Keiser, Gerald Celente accurately states that “when the money stops flowing to mainstream the blood starts flowing on the streets” and “they [the government] know that things are getting out of control and they’re going to try to stop it before it spreads.” It is a clear attempt to shift the current “crisis” from an issue of finacial terrorism to a religious one.

As Wall Street continues to rot and Main Street continues to starve, the controlled press has and will continue distracting people from the disaster they have created. It is really a sign of the times that they’ll go as far as to outsource the investigation as to how or why the economy is collapsing, then have the audacity to blame it on foreign terrorists.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts said it best when he wrote:

Americans are too gullible, too uneducated, and too jingoistic to remain a free people. As another Nazi leader Herman Goering said, ‘The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. Tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peace-makers for lack of patriotism and for exposing the country to danger.’

This is precisely what the Bush and Obama regimes have done. America, as people of my generation knew it, no longer exists.

Other sources for this article:
Paul Craig Roberts Video Interview — FBI Creating Police State

Rick Gedeon is graduate from USAF Air University, amateur historian, and anti-imperial/anti-police brutality activist. Rick Gedeon has traveled extensively throughout the US and Asia. A political marketeer, routinely bringing together and forging alliances with different political organizations that share similar goals. He considers himself a Political Atheist and sympathizes with many Libertarian causes. He can be reached at rick_gedeon@hushmail.com. This post first appeared on the Activist Post website. 

Eric Blair
Infowars.com
March 8, 2011

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had been exhaustively in front of cameras promoting the right for people to protest in Egypt, Bahrain, Iran, and Libya. She’s been touting the freedom to use social networking sites as a way for Arab people to organize against their oppressive regimes. Now, the Administration is even considering arming the opposition in Libya.

Clinton’s perpetual propaganda efforts exposed her blatant hypocrisy when a silent peaceful protester was violently removed from one of her recent speeches on the very subject. However, the hypocrisy now seems to go much deeper in her deafening silence over the prospect for protests in Saudi Arabia.

After Human Rights Watch revealed that a nationwide “Day of Rage” protest had been planned in Saudi Arabia for this week, March 11th, Bloomberg reported that the Saudi government claims that demonstrations and marches are “strictly” prohibited by law. A Saudi Interior Ministry official said protests “contradict Islamic values” and “They harm public interest, infringe on the rights of others, spread chaos and lead to bloodshed.”

This prohibition of popular dissent proves beyond a shadow of doubt that Saudi Arabia is indeed the most tyrannical authoritarian regime in the Arab world. Yet, U.S. Administration officials have been strangely silent about supporting the people’s uprising there.

Perhaps they think the protests won’t be large enough to warrant a response. Well, that certainly did stop their best propaganda push to stoke the puny protests in Iran, so the size or ferocity of unrest shouldn’t matter to their exploits of supposedly backing human freedom. And one would think that given what has happened to oil prices due to the unrest in Libya and Egypt, even a minor protest in the largest oil-producing dictatorship in the world would draw more public response from the White House.

Or perhaps the Administration believes that the hastily-crafted $35 billion social aid package ordered by King Abdullah will be enough to tamp down escalating tensions in Saudi Arabia. So far, there have only been reports of small Shiite protests in Saudi Arabia, mostly demanding the release of political prisoners held by the Sunni monarchy.

These protests would seem to be very minor in comparison to the sea of people revolting in Cairo. However, the revolutionary whispers must clearly be getting louder as the Saudi stock market plummeted 11% in just two days of wild trading to its 7-year low on fears of civil unrest. It’s noteworthy that the plunge was reportedly led by large banks and insurers.

If Clinton is to stand by her new-found rhetoric, certainly she’ll call for restraint on the part of the Saudi government should a protest erupt, right? And surely she’ll demand that the kings of Internet censorship in the Arab world, Saudi Arabia, will open communication channels so the people can freely unite, right? And if push comes to shove in Saudi Arabia, she’ll definitely support arming the people’s opposition to the royal family, right? Eh hum . . . don’t count on it.

Regardless, many analysts believe the Saudi regime is the next to fall with or without the prodding of the U.S.

A computer expert at the influential TED Conference in California has confirmed what the New York Times already admitted in January – that the same governments calling for draconian cybersecurity powers in order to protect against cyber warfare were themselves the culprits behind an act of cyber warfare that could have triggered a new Chernobyl disaster in launching the Stuxnet worm attack against Iran.

Ralph Langner, dubbed by his peers as “one of the best technical minds working in the field of industrial control system security,” said that the Stuxnet virus, which was used to attack Iranian computer systems that controlled water supplies, oil rigs, power plants and other critical infrastructure at the Bushehr nuclear reactor plant, was created by the United States with assistance from Israel.

“My opinion is that the Mossad is involved,” Langner said while discussing his in-depth Stuxnet analysis at a prestigious TED conference in the Southern California city of Long Beach,” reports AFP.

“But, the leading source is not Israel… There is only one leading source, and that is the United States,” explained Langner.

Langner’s conclusion only confirms what the New York Times already admitted in January, that the worm was created by the US and Israel as a weapon with which to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program.

The fact that the effectiveness of the Stuxnet worm was tested at Israel’s Dimona nuclear facility strongly indicates “that the virus was designed as an American-Israeli project to sabotage the Iranian program,” the Times reported on January 15.

At the height of the Stuxnet attack last year, many cybersecurity advocates were citing the virus as a justification for giving President Obama a kill switch to shut down the Internet, despite the fact that the worm could only have infected computer systems by being inserted physically via a USB flash drive.

The fact that the virus was created by the United States and Israel renders obsolete the entire cybersecurity agenda. Here we have the very culprits behind acts of cyber warfare telling us that we need to give them more power to counter the threat of cyber warfare.

But this goes further than the Iranian nuclear program or cybersecurity. After it became apparent that the US and Israel were behind he virus, Russian officials called on NATO to launch a full investigation into Stuxnet, warning that the attack had caused centrifuges at the Bushehr to spin out of control, which could have triggered a new Chernobyl disaster.

“Langner said the Stuxnet code was designed to trick human operators by showing them recorded readings indicating machinery is running normally while behind the scenes they are heading for destruction.”

“It’s definitely hard-core sabotage,” Langner said of Stuxnet. “It’s like in the movies where during a heist the security camera is running pre-recorded video showing nothing is wrong.”

Back in September 2010, we wrote several articles in which we identified “Israel and the United States….as the prime suspects behind the Stuxnet worm attack,” following the revelation that the virus was “created by experts working for a country or a well-funded private group.”

At the time, debunkers labeled the claim that the US and Israel had launched the worm attack as a “ridiculous” conspiracy theory.

- In an article entitled Debunking the Bunk of Stuxnet, the popular About.com website claimed that “none of the evidence” had “any direct connection” to Israel being behind the attack.

- The Economist reported that there was “no specific evidence” Stuxnet was an Israeli cyber-missile aimed at Iran.

- In an October 5 piece entitled Stuxnet: Fact vs. theory, CNet’s Elinor Mills wrote that there was “no hard evidence” behind the claim that, “The malware was distributed by Israel or the United States in an attempt to interfere with Iran’s nuclear program.”

- A Reddit piece submitted by “conspiracy debunker” entitled, “I would just to take this opportunity to debunk the conspiracy theory that Stuxnet was made by Israeli hackers,” blamed “low educated Iranians from poor backgrounds” for the theory that Israel was behind the attack.

- The Judeosphere blog labeled the charge “convoluted mental gymnastics”.

- A Jewish Chronicle article written by Miriam Shaviv labeled the claim a “ridiculous” conspiracy theory.

That “ridiculous conspiracy theory” was a very real fact, and one that could have caused an environmental catastrophe that would have plagued the planet for decades to come.

If we allow cybersecurity legislation to pass, we will be empowering the very cyber terrorists, the US military-industrial complex, who launched the most devastating and potentially dangerous cyber attack to date, handing them carte blanche to exploit more acts of cyber warfare to exalt themselves as the saviors when they are the very culprits behind the attacks.



“Ridiculous conspiracy theory”: The Alex Jones Show from September 27, 2010, in which Israel and the United States were identified as being behind the Stuxnet attack.

Other information

JIHAN HAFIZ, BENGHAZI, LIBYA, (VOICE-OVER): There is already talk of US military intervention in Libya. Here in Benghazi, Libyans overwhelmingly reject this possibility.

UNIDENTIFIED (SUBTITLED TRANSLATION): You need to understand there are political issues going on in Libya now. The entire Libyan population is insisting against US intervention or any involvement of foreign powers within Libya.

HAFIZ: Rebels in Benghazi are also rejecting calls from US senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman to send the liberated territory weapons to fight Gaddafi’s forces. They insist they defeated the security forces of Muammar al-Gaddafi in Benghazi without the use of weapons and without the support of a foreign government. Their victory in the bloody battle for Benghazi has engendered a strong sense of unity and nationhood in a country known for tribal divisions.

UNIDENTIFIED (SUBTITLED TRANSLATION): Neither a European nor an American military should intervene in the country, but we want to put pressure on Gaddafi’s regime to fall. The free Libyan youth will, God willing, oust this criminal dictator from Libya. We only want them to stand strong with us and prevent Gaddafi from bringing mercenaries from other African countries.

HAFIZ: The residents of Benghazi criticized leaders who have maintained good relations with Gaddafi even after the bloodshed, from Europe to Latin America.

TEXT ON SCREEN: Berlusconi, your friend is a tyrant dictator.

UNIDENTIFIED: South America actually know probably even more than the Middle East and North Africa what dictatorship is, so we advised them to really be cautious about what they hear from their leader.

HAFIZ: Meanwhile, the rebels celebrated a new-found unity with Arab nations. They raised the flags of Egypt, Tunisia, and Palestine.

UNIDENTIFIED (SUBTITLED TRANSLATION): It makes me proud. I am proud to be Egyptian, and I’m proud to be an Arab. Lift your head up high! We are Arabs!

TEXT ON SCREEN: We support the Libyan people and the 17th of February Revolution. Long live a free and independent Libya!

HAFIZ: This truck coming from Egypt is loaded with donated food, 16 tons of pasta, rice, oil, and sugar. Inspired by Arab revolts in neighboring Egypt and Tunisia, the Libyan people here are welcoming this food convoy from Egypt.

CROWD: The Egyptians have arrived!

HAFIZ: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed concern over food shortages, but food is still being given out for free in these streets as donations keep pouring in from Libya’s neighbors. Jihan Hafiz for The Real News in Benghazi, Libya.

Tyler Durden
Zero Hedge
March 3, 2011

As we speculated last week, the LHD 3 Kearsarge deftly left the treacherous waters of the Red Sea a few days ago, and after crossing the Suez is now well on its way to the shores of Tripoli (where it is set to meet Canadian, Korean and Dutch warships). Yet to those who argue that the US military is a well-oiled machine, look no further than the schizophrenic moves the CVN 65 Enterprise has had to endure in the past two weeks: after it was just off the coast of Libya as recently as February 9, and rushing into the Red Sea in direction Straits of Hormuz two weeks ago, the storied aircraft carrier was halted dead in its tracks en route, and ordered to do a 180. It is now hot on the heels of the Kearsarge and we believe will also cross the Suez within 48 hours as it moves in to provide air support to Libya by the weekend. And with air coverage, the no fly zone will likely be instituted by Monday of next week, which, as Robert Gates telegraphed earlier, is the codeword for a “NATO” invasion. Which means this weekend will likely be do or die in terms of game theory defection choices for the Gaddafi family: will he defect peacefully and spend the rest of his days with his friend Robert Mugabe, the world’s second best performing stock market after the NYSE Borse, and a few hundred pounds of gold, or will he set fire to the Libyan oil infrastructure as he leaves the scene kicking and screaming.

David Kramer
LRC Blog
March 2, 2011

My kind of women. (Shhh. Don’t tell the feminazis at NOW that a real feminist wants to have empowerment to protect herself with a gun rather than waiting for a Keystone Kop to show up to “protect” her with his gun after the crime has already been committed against her because she wasn’t armed. By the way, I’m sure the feminazis at NOW fully support a woman’s equal right to join the U.S. military and use a gun in order to protect “our freedoms.” But to protect herself? Naaah.)

 

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
March 2, 2011

Rolling Stone’s profile of Alex Jones is a largely positive and accurate exploration of Jones’ personal history and the factors that continue to drive and motivate his work today. However, in attempting to denigrate Jones’ political stance, the piece oversimplifies several issues in an effort to dismiss his concerns as “paranoid” exaggerations.

One such example is where the author, Alexander Zaitchik, confines the whole subject of population control and eugenics into his personal interpretation of a “Henry Kissinger memo,” presumably referring to National Security Memorandum 200, in which Kissinger outlines the plan to use food scarcity as a weapon in order to achieve population reduction in lesser-developed countries.

Despite the fact that the memo directly states Kissinger’s goal to use food as a weapon in the interests of “curbing the numbers of LDC people,” (lesser-developed countries), Zaitchik defines this as “little more than government officials beginning to grapple with the strategic implications of runaway population growth.”

In actual fact, as we have exhaustively proven, the population reduction agenda is deeply rooted in the eugenics movement which began amongst the aristocracy in 19th century Britain and later manifested itself under the banner of Hitler’s Third Reich. As is documented in Alex Jones’ seminal film Endgame, Rockefeller’s father, John D. Rockefeller, exported eugenics to Germany from its origins in Britain by bankrolling the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute which later would form a central pillar in the Third Reich’s ideology of the Nazi super race.

After falling out of favor as a consequence of Hitler’s embrace of the pseudo-science, eugenics was then reborn in the United States in the 1950′s under the umbrella of “family planning”.

All this is documented in our article, The Population Reduction Agenda For Dummies.

Despite such oversights, the Rolling Stone Magazine profile is a generally good insight into Alex’s personal character and how he sees his own role in standing up against tyranny.

“My life is a love letter to humanity. What the globalists do is a hate letter, a curse.”
Alex Jones

Read excerpts from the article below and click on the link for the full piece.

———————————————————–

Talk Radio’s Alex Jones, the Most Paranoid Man in America

Alexander Zaitchik
Rolling Stone Magazine
Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Excerpts:

It’s just past 9 a.m. when Alex Jones pulls his Dodge Charger into a desolate parking lot in Austin. From the outside, the squat, single-story office complex that Jones calls his “command center” resembles a moon base surrounded by fields of dying grass. But inside, blinking banks of high-tech recording gear fill the studio where he broadcasts The Alex Jones Show, a daily talk show that airs on 63 stations nationwide. Jones draws a bigger audience online than Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck combined — and his conspiracy-laced rants make the two hosts sound like tea-sipping NPR hosts on Zoloft.

Jones has been yelling into microphones and bullhorns more or less continuously, and often at violent volumes, for the past 16 years. Since launching his broadcast career, he has become a multiplatform prophet of paranoia who sees diabolical plots in every turn of the news cycle. In his Manichaean melodrama, nodes of private and state power share an ugly face and a demonic brain intent on a single, shared goal: creating the New World Order. To Jones, the New World Order is a blanketing presence, a wicked beast for which he has endless pet names: the “demonic high-tech tyranny” or the “absurdist 1984 regime of control-freak sadists.” Jones, who loves to draw analogies to sci-fi classics like Dune and Star Wars, sees the 21st century as a kind of fanboy-fantasy landscape populated by three groups: a rebel alliance of liberty-loving patriots (his fans); masses of consumerist sheep (those who ignore him); and a sadistic elite (global bankers and their agents), forever tightening the screws on the imperiled remnants of human freedom.

For such an angry guy, the barrel-chested Jones is a surprisingly jolly presence. Off-air, his gravel-pit voice softens to crack jokes with his young staff, dote on his wife and three kids, and take chatty calls from his 86-year-old grandmother. Jones is always talking about how boring and conventional his life is. He attends a Methodist church on Sunday, blushes at profanity and likes to take his family hiking on the 193 miles of trails that crisscross Austin. Any rage left over from his show appears reserved for the black Dodge Charger he guns down Austin’s highways, 450-horsepower engine roaring, speakers pumping old-school rap, heavy metal and classic country.

“People think I’m depressive and angry, but it’s the opposite,” Jones tells me over margaritas at his favorite Mexican joint. “My life is a love letter to humanity. What the globalists do is a hate letter, a curse.”

It was in high school that Jones discovered a corrupt, Blue Velvet underbelly to his town. At weekend parties, he watched as off-duty cops dealt pot, Ecstasy and cocaine to his friends. “A truck would appear, sometimes with a guy still in uniform inside,” Jones recalls. “Then, on Monday, they’d have D.A.R.E. and drug-test us for football.” Jones, a young var­sity lineman, did not appreciate the irony. “I was like, ‘You want to drug-test me, when I know you’re selling the stuff?’ I called them the mafia to their face. At the time, I didn’t know anything about CIA drug-dealing.”

Ray McGovern | Already well under way is creeping curtailment of our rights at home.

Ray McGovern
Infowars.com
February 25, 2011

It was not until Secretary of State Hillary Clinton walked to the George Washington University podium last week to enthusiastic applause that I decided I had to dissociate myself from the obsequious adulation of a person responsible for so much death, suffering and destruction.

I was reminded of a spring day in Atlanta almost five years earlier when then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld strutted onto a similar stage to loud acclaim from another enraptured audience.

Introducing Rumsfeld on May 4, 2006, the president of the Southern Center for International Policy in Atlanta highlighted his “honesty.” I had just reviewed my notes for an address I was scheduled to give that evening in Atlanta and, alas, the notes demonstrated his dishonesty.

I thought to myself, if there’s an opportunity for Q & A after his speech I might try to stand and ask a question, which is what happened. I engaged in a four-minute impromptu debate with Rumsfeld on Iraq War lies, an exchange that was carried on live TV.

That experience leaped to mind on Feb. 15, as Secretary Clinton strode onstage amid similar adulation.

The fulsome praise for Clinton from GWU’s president and the loud, sustained applause also brought to mind a phrase that – as a former Soviet analyst at CIA – I often read in Pravda. When reprinting the text of speeches by high Soviet officials, the Communist Party newspaper would regularly insert, in italicized parentheses: “Burniye applaudismenti; vce stoyat” — Stormy applause; all rise.

With the others at Clinton’s talk, I stood. I even clapped politely. But as the applause dragged on, I began to feel like a real phony. So, when the others finally sat down, I remained standing silently, motionless, with my eyes fixed narrowly on the rear of the auditorium and my back to the Secretary.

I did not expect what followed: a violent assault in full view of Secretary Clinton by what in Soviet parlance were called the “organs of state security.” The rest is history, as they say. A short account of the incident can be found here.

Callous Aplomb

As the video of the event shows, Secretary Clinton did not miss a beat in her speech as she called for authoritarian governments to show respect for dissent and to refrain from violence. She spoke with what seemed to be an especially chilly sang froid, as she ignored my silent witness and the violent assault that took place right in front of her.

The experience gave me personal confirmation of the impression that I had reluctantly drawn from watching her behavior and its consequences over the past decade. The incident was a kind of metaphor of the much worse violence that Secretary Clinton has coolly countenanced against others.

Again and again, Hillary Clinton – both as a U.S. senator and as Secretary of State – has demonstrated a nonchalant readiness to unleash the vast destructiveness of American military power. The charitable explanation, I suppose, is that she knows nothing of war from direct personal experience.

And that is also true of her husband, her colleague Robert Gates at the Defense Department, President Barack Obama, and most of the White House functionaries blithely making decisions to squander the lives and limbs of young soldiers in foreign adventures — conflicts that even the top brass admit cannot be won with weapons.

The analogy to Vietnam is inescapable. As White House tapes from the 1960s show, President Lyndon Johnson knew that the Vietnam War could not be “won” in any meaningful way. Nonetheless, he kept throwing hundreds of thousands into the battle lest someone accuse him of being soft on communism.

I had an inside seat watching Johnson do that. And I did nothing.

Now, with an even more jittery president, a hawkish Secretary of State, General David they-injure-their-own-children-to-make-us-look-bad Petraeus, and various Republican presidential hopefuls – all jockeying for political position as the 2012 election draws near – the country is in even deeper trouble today.

No one on this political merry-go-round can afford to appear weak on terrorism. So, they all have covered their bets. And we all know who pays the price for these political calculations.

This time, I would NOT do nothing.

My colleagues in Veterans for Peace and I have known far too many comrades-in-arms and families whose lives have been shattered or ended as a result of such crass political maneuvering. Many of us know far more than we wish to know about war and killing. But — try as we may with letters and other appeals — we cannot get through to President Obama. And Secretary Clinton turns her own deaf ear to our entreaties and those of others who oppose unnecessary warfare. It is a pattern that she also followed in her days as a U.S. senator from New York.

See No Evil

In the summer of 2002, as the Senate was preparing to conduct hearings about alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq and the possibility of war, former Chief Weapons Inspector in Iraq and U.S. Marine Major, Scott Ritter, came down to Washington from his home in upstate New York to share his first-hand knowledge with as many senators as possible.

To those that let him in the door, he showed that the “intelligence” adduced to support U.S. claims that Iraq still had WMD was fatally flawed. This was the same “intelligence” that Senate Intelligence Committee chair Jay Rockefeller later branded “unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent.”

Sen. Hillary Clinton would not let Ritter in her door. Despite his unique insights as a U.N. inspector and his status as a constituent, Sen. Clinton gave him the royal run-around. Her message was clear: “Don’t bother me with the facts.” She had already made up her mind. I had a direct line into her inner circle at the time, and was assured that several of my op-eds and other commentaries skeptical of George W. Bush’s planned invasion were given personally to Clinton, but no matter.

Sen. Clinton reportedly was not among the handful of legislators who took the trouble to read the National Intelligence Estimate on WMD in Iraq that was issued on Oct. 1, 2002, just ten days before the she voted to authorize war.

In short, she chose not to perform the due diligence required prior to making a decision having life-or-death consequences for thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. She knew whom she needed to cater to, and what she felt she had to do.

But, bright as she is, Hillary Clinton is prone to willful mistakes — political, as well as strategic. In dissing those of us who were trying to warn her that an attack on Iraq would have catastrophic consequences, she simply willed us to be wrong. Clearly, her calculation was that she had to appear super-strong on defense in order to win the Democratic nomination and then the presidency in 2008.

Just as clearly, courting Israel and the Likud Lobby was also important to her political ambitions.

Tony Blair Admits Israeli Role

Any lingering doubt that Israel played a major role in the U.S.- U.K. decision to attack Iraq was dispelled a year ago when former Prime Minister Tony Blair spoke publicly about the Israeli input into the all-important Bush-Blair deliberations on Iraq in Crawford, Texas, in April 2002.

Inexplicably, Blair forgot his usual discretion when it comes to disclosing important facts to the public and blurted out some truth at the Chilcot hearings in London regarding the origins of the Iraq War:

“As I recall that [April 2002] discussion, it was less to do with specifics about what we were going to do on Iraq or, indeed, the Middle East, because the Israel issue was a big, big issue at the time. I think, in fact, I remember, actually, there may have been conversations that we had even with Israelis, the two of us [Bush and Blair], whilst we were there. So that was a major part of all this.”

According to Philip Zelikow – a former member of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, the executive director of the 9/11 Commission, and later counselor to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice – the “real threat” from Iraq was not to the United States.

Zelikow told an audience at the University of Virginia in September 2002, the “unstated threat” from Iraq was the “threat against Israel.” He added, “The American government doesn’t want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell.”

But it wasn’t as though leading Israelis were disguising their hopes or an attack on Iraq. The current Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu published a pre-invasion piece titled “The case for Toppling Saddam” in the Wall Street Journal, in which he wrote:

“Today nothing less than dismantling his regime will do … I believe I speak for the overwhelming majority of Israelis in supporting a pre-emptive strike against Saddam’s regime.”

The Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz reported in February 2003, “the military and political leadership yearns for war in Iraq.” And, as a retired Israeli general later put it, “Israeli intelligence was a full partner to the picture presented by American and British intelligence regarding Iraq’s non-conventional [WMD] capabilities.” In the United States, neoconservatives also pushed for war thinking that taking out Saddam Hussein would make Israel more secure.

Those Israeli leaders and their neocon allies got their wish on March 19, 2003, with the U.S.-U.K. invasion.

Of course, pressure from Israel and its Lobby was not the only factor behind the invasion of Iraq — think also oil, military bases, various political ambitions, revenge, etc. — but the Israeli factor was a central one.

A Calculating Senator

I’m afraid, though, that these calculations aimed at enhancing Israeli security may ultimately have the opposite effect. The Iraq War and the anti-Americanism that it has engendered across the Middle East seem sure to make Israel’s position in the region even more precarious.

If the Iraq War does end up making the region more dangerous for Israel, the fault will lie primarily with Israel’s hard-line leaders, as well as with those American officials (and media pundits) who so eagerly clambered onboard for the attack on Iraq.

One of those U.S. officials was the calculating senator from New York.

In a kind of poetic justice, Clinton’s politically motivated warmongering became a key factor in her losing the Democratic presidential nomination to Barack Obama, who as a young state senator in Illinois spoke out against the war.

Although she bet wrong in 2002-03, Clinton keeps doubling down in her apparent belief that her greater political vulnerability comes from being perceived as “weak” against U.S. adversaries. So, she’s emerged as one of the Obama administration’s leading hawks on Afghanistan and Iran.

I suspect she still has her eye on what she considers the crucial centers of financial, media and other power that could support a possible future run for president, whether in 2012 if the Obama administration unravels or in 2016.

Another explanation, I suppose, could be that the Secretary of State genuinely believes that the United States should fight wars favored by right-wing Israelis and their influential supporters in the U.S.

Whichever interpretation you prefer, there’s no doubt that she has put herself in the forefront of American leaders threatening Iran over its alleged “nuclear weapons” program, a “weapons” program that Iran denies exists and for which the U.S. intelligence community has found little or no evidence.

Bête Noire Iran

As a former CIA analyst myself, it strikes me as odd that Clinton’s speeches never reflect the consistent, unanimous judgment of the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, issued formally (and with “high confidence”) in November 2007 that Iran stopped working on a nuclear weapon in the fall of 2003 and had not yet decided whether to resume that work.

Less than two weeks ago (on Feb. 10), in a formal appearance before the House Intelligence Committee, National Intelligence Director James Clapper testified:

“We continue to assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons in part by developing various nuclear capabilities that better position it to produce such weapons, should it choose to do so. We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons….

“We continue to judge Iran’s nuclear decision making is guided by a cost-benefit approach, which offers the international community opportunities to influence Tehran.”

Who’s in Charge Here?

Yet, in her determination to come across as hard-line, Clinton has undercut promising initiatives that might have constrained Iran from having enough low-enriched uranium to be even tempted to build a nuclear arsenal.

Last year, when – at the urging of President Obama – the leaders of Turkey and Brazil worked out an agreement with Iran, under which Iran agreed to ship about half of its low-enriched uranium (LEU) out of country, Clinton immediately rejected it in favor of more severe economic sanctions.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva were left wondering who exactly was in charge in Washington — Hillary Clinton and her pro-Israel friends, or Obama.

Brazil released a three-page letter that Obama had sent to Lula da Silva a month earlier in which Obama said the proposed uranium transfer “would build confidence and reduce regional tensions by substantially reducing Iran’s” stockpile of low-enriched uranium.

The contrast between Obama’s support for the initiative and the opposition from various hardliners (including Clinton) caused “some puzzlement,” one senior Brazilian official told the New York Times. After all, this official said, the supportive “letter came from the highest authority and was very clear.”

It was a particularly telling episode. Clinton basked in the applause of Israeli leaders and neocon pundits for blocking the uranium transfer and securing more restrictive UN sanctions on Iran – and since then Iran appears to have dug in its heals on additional negotiations over its nuclear program.

Secretary Clinton is almost as assiduous as Netanyahu in never missing a chance to paint the Iranians in the darkest colors – even if that ends up painting the entire region into a more dangerous corner.

More Hypocrisy

On Feb. 15, Clinton continued giving hypocrisy a bad name, with her GWU speech regarding the importance of governments respecting peaceful dissent.

Five short paragraphs after she watched me snatched out of the audience Blackwater-style, she said, “Iran is awful because it is a government that routinely violates the rights of its people.” It was like something straight out of Franz Kafka.

Today, given the growing instability in the Middle East – and Netanyahu’s strident talk about Iran’s dangerous influence – it may take yet another Herculean effort by Joint Chiefs Chairman Mike Mullen to disabuse Netanyahu of the notion that Israel can somehow provoke the kind of confrontation with Iran that would automatically suck the U.S. into the conflict on Israel’s side.

At each such turning point, Secretary Clinton predictably sides with the hard-line Israeli position and shows remarkably little sympathy for the Palestinians or any other group that finds itself in Israel’s way.

It is now clear, not only from the WikiLeaks documents, but even more so from the “Palestine Papers” disclosed by Al Jazeera, that Washington has long been playing a thoroughly dishonest “honest-broker” role between Israel and the Palestinians.

But those documents don’t stand alone. Clinton also rejected the Goldstone Report’s criticism of Israel’s bloody attack on Gaza in 2008-09; she waffled on Israel’s fatal commando raid on a Turkish relief flotilla on its way to Gaza in 2010; and she rallied to the defense of Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak this month when Israeli leaders raised alarms about what kind of regime might follow him.

Just last week, Clinton oversaw the casting of the U.S. veto to kill a U.N. Security Council resolution calling on Israel to stop colonizing territories it occupied in 1967. That vote was 14 to 1, marking the first such veto by the Obama administration. Netanyahu was quick to state that he “deeply appreciated” the U.S. stance.

Silent Witness

In the face of such callous disregard for what the Founders called “a decent respect for the opinions of mankind,” words failed me — literally — on Feb. 15.

The op-eds, the speeches, and the interviews that others and I have done about needless war and feckless politicians may have done some good but, surely, they have not done enough. And America’s Fawning Corporate Media (FCM) is the embodiment of a Fourth Estate that is dead in the water.

I counted about 20 TV cameras at the Clinton speech and reporters galore. Not one thought to come outside to watch what was happening to me, and zero reporting on the incident has found its way into the FCM, save a couple of brief and misleading accounts.

A Fox News story claimed that “a heckler interrupted” Clinton’s speech and then “was escorted from the room.” Fox News added that I “was, perhaps, trying to hold up a sign.” CNN posted a brief clip with a similar insistence that I had “interrupted” Clinton’s speech, though the video shows me saying nothing until after I’m dragged away (or “escorted”) when I say, “So this is America.” There also was no sign.

Disappointing, but not surprising. But I guess I really do believe that the good is worth doing because it is good. It shouldn’t matter that there is little or no guarantee of success — or even of a truthful recounting of what happened.

Jail

One of my friends, in a good-natured attempt to make light of my arrest and brief imprisonment, commented that I must be used to it by now.

I thought of how anti-war activist Dan Berrigan responded to that kind of observation in his testimony at the Plowshares Eight trial 31 years ago. I feel blessed by his witness and fully identify with what he said about “the push of conscience”:

“With every cowardly bone in my body, I wished I hadn’t had to do it. That has been true every time I have been arrested. My stomach turns over. I feel sick. I feel afraid. I hate jail. I don’t do well there physically.

“But I have read that we must not kill. I have read that children, above all, are threatened by this. I have read that Christ our Lord underwent death rather than inflict it. And I’m supposed to be a disciple.

“The push of conscience is a terrible thing.”

As Fr. Berrigan clearly understood, the suffering of the victims of war is so much worse than the shock and discomfort of arrest.

For her part, Sen. and/or Secretary Clinton seems never to have encountered a war that she didn’t immediately embrace on behalf of some geopolitical justification, apparently following Henry Kissinger’s dictum that soldiers are “just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.”

For us Veterans for Peace, we’ve been there, done that. And so, enough already!

Moreover, beyond the human suffering of those caught up in war, there’s what’s in store for the rest of us. As recent rhetoric and disclosures of leaked documents have made clear, what lies ahead is a permanent warfare state, including occupation of foreign lands and new military bases around the globe — unless we have the courage to stand up this time.

Already well under way is creeping curtailment of our rights at home. “A state of war only serves as an excuse for domestic tyranny,” wrote Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn — one who knew.

I think we need to bear in mind that we are part of a long line of those who have taken a stand on these issues. As for those of us who have served abroad to safeguard the rights of U.S. citizens — well, maybe we have a particular mandate now to keep doing what we can to keep protecting them.

This article appeared first on Consortiumnews.com.

As insane as it might sound, the United States may soon be getting involved in another war in the Middle East. According to White House spokesman Jay Carney, “no options” have been taken off the table when it comes to the situation in Libya.

The American Dream
Feb 26, 2011

As insane as it might sound, the United States may soon be getting involved in another war in the Middle East. According to White House spokesman Jay Carney, “no options” have been taken off the table when it comes to the situation in Libya. By saying that “all options” are being considered, that is basically a way for the Obama administration to threaten Gadhafi without actually coming right out and threatening him. In recent days, news reports have been appearing all over the mainstream media hyping the possibility that we may have to take military action in Libya. This would not be happening if the White House did not want it to happen. The truth is that Barack Obama is apparently seriously considering U.S. military action in Libya. At first that would probably consist of air strikes and missile attacks, but if the Obama administration decides that it is going to take ground forces to get the job done then we could eventually see the U.S. military actually invade Libya. But the truth is that any military intervention in Libya would be a really, really bad idea. Is it really wise to stick our young men and women into the middle of an incredibly bloody civil war? Do we want to spill even more American blood in order to protect “U.S. interests”? Do we really want to spend young American lives to keep the price of oil low? The truth is that the world hates us enough already. How much more will they hate us if we decide to start bombing Libya into oblivion?

All kinds of justifications are already being floated for potential military action in Libya. Barack Obama is publicly declaring that the killing of civilians in Libya has got to stop. As if the U.S. government cares so much about the deaths of civilians. Millions upon millions of Africans have been slaughtered in Africa over the last couple of decades in numerous civil wars and we have not intervened.

So why now?

Well, because oil is at stake.

If Libya did not produce about 2 percent of the world’s oil nobody in the U.S. government would really care much about what is going on in Libya.

But because Libya is Africa’s largest oil producer suddenly the death of their civilians becomes a matter of “international concern”.

Another reason being floated for taking military action in Libya is the “weapons of mass destruction” that Gadhafi supposedly has.

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal went on and on about how concerned the U.S. government is about the “weapons of mass destruction” that are still under Gadhafi’s control….

The government of Col. Moammar Gadhafi hasn’t destroyed significant stockpiles of mustard gas and other chemical-weapons agents, raising fears in Washington about what could happen to them—and whether they may be used—as Libya slides further into chaos.

The Wall Street Journal article also stated that U.S. officials believe that Gadhafi possesses “1,000 metric tons of uranium yellowcake” which they believe are a serious threat to the international community.

Doesn’t that sound exactly like something we have all been told before?

The truth is that so much of what we are seeing in the mainstream news right now are “trail balloons” that are being floated by the U.S. government.

They want to see how the American people and the rest of the world are going to respond.

Just check out the CBS video news report posted below. The American people are being mentally prepared for potential U.S. military action against Libya….

But what is this really all about?

Are Barack Obama and the U.S. government really that concerned about the deaths of a few thousand protesters?

No.

The truth is that they are concerned about Libya’s oil fields.

Bank of America Merrill Lynch analyst Sabine Schels recently told Reuters the following….

“We expect Libyan production to be shut down completely and we might lose sweet crudes from Libya for a prolonged period of time.”

That is what this is all about – keeping the flow of oil going around the world.

But the media is trying to pull on our heart strings by highlighting the plight of the protesters.

A recent CNN report quoted Navi Pillay, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, as saying the following about the escalating violence of Libya….

“Although reports are still patchy and hard to verify, one thing is painfully clear: in (a) brazen and continuing breach of international law, the crackdown in Libya of peaceful demonstrations is escalating alarmingly with reported mass killings, arbitrary arrests, detention and torture of protesters.”

So the United States, the “police of the world”, have to step in and save those poor people, right?

Oh, and if the first thing we do is to secure “key infrastructure” such as the oil fields that will be okay too, right?

We live in an insane world.

If the international community wants to take action against Libya, shouldn’t this go through the United Nations?

Well, apparently the United Nations Security Council is going to discuss a draft resolution that would impose economic sanctions on Libya, but that isn’t going to mean much to Gadhafi at this point.

If the United States and NATO want to take military action, they are going to have to do it on their own because both Russia and China would likely block the approval of military force by the United Nations.

But wasn’t Obama supposed to be a peacemaker?

Well, that is what he wanted you to believe.

Not only has Obama greatly escalated the war in Afghanistan, now it looks like Obama is laying the groundwork for another war in the Middle East.

In a recent article entitled “Analysts: More Libyan bloodshed could prompt U.S., NATO intervention“, Michael Martinez of CNN noted that the White House has publicly acknowledged that Barack Obama is discussing how to “immediately respond” to the crisis in Libya with other world leaders….

In separate phone conversations with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and British Prime Minister David Cameron, Obama “expressed his deep concern with the Libyan government’s use of violence, which violates international norms and every standard of human decency, and discussed appropriate and effective ways for the international community to immediately respond,” the White House statement said.

So what would a “response” by the United States look like? Well, apparently a whole “range of options” is being considered….

“The leaders discussed the range of options that both the United States and European countries are preparing to hold the Libyan government accountable for its actions, as well as planning for humanitarian assistance,” the White House statement said.

So does this “range of options” include military action?

On Thursday, U.S. State Department spokesman Philip Crowley commented on the ongoing discussions inside the Obama administration about the situation in Libya and admitted that “the military is fully involved in these discussions and doing its own thinking about options that can be presented to the president.”

As the violence in Libya escalates there are some troubling signs that the U.S. is getting ready to do something. The U.S. embassy in Libya has been closedand U.S. personnel have been pulled out of the country.

If Gadhafi makes a “wrong move” we could potentially see military action within days.

Ynetnews.com says that an anonymous “European official” is claiming that the U.S. and NATO have already been very busy making plans for military action against Libya….

The source said NATO and US warplanes stationed in Italy may be ordered to take down Libyan planes, and that electronic warfare against them may already have been implemented.

The source told al-Quds al-Arabi that NATO forces may launch an aerial attack on Libya or fire missiles from warships positioned in international waters near Tripoli. Libyan army weapons caches may also be targeted, the source said.

The rest of the world is not amused by all of this.

For example, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is urging the United States and NATO to stay out of what is going on in Libya….

“Give them the opportunity to determine their own fate through natural means and not with any kind of outside interference.”

There is a lot of wisdom in what Putin is saying there. This is a fight for the Libyan people. It should be up to them to decide the destiny of their own nation. If the United States intervenes now, it will no longer be a “revolution of the people”.

The truth is that Libya is not a place we want to be sending U.S. troops. Libya is a deeply divided nation made up of a large number of tribal factions. Many of the tribal factions seriously dislike one another. That is not something you want to step into the middle of.

Not only that, but the people of Libya are not too fond of the United States. Any U.S. military intervention, no matter how “benevolent”, would be deeply resented. Our soldiers would rapidly become targets just like they are in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The U.S. government certainly cannot afford any more wars. We have spentover a trillion dollars on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan combined. We are in debt up to our eyeballs and we cannot afford another war that is going to cost us hundreds of billions more dollars.

Not only that, but when the U.S. military gets into a country they almost never leave.

Today, the U.S. military has a total of over 700 foreign military bases and is in 130 different countries around the world. We never left Germany after World War 2. We never left Japan after World War 2. We never left South Korea after the Korean War. It looks like we will not be leaving Iraq or Afghanistan for quite a long time to come.

Can we really afford to be the police of the world? Can we really afford to have troops in almost every nation on earth?

Hopefully Barack Obama will come to his senses and will not order military action against Libya. This is a Libyan revolution and this is a fight for the Libyan people to decide.

Any intervention by the United States would be absolutely disastrous.

The United States government cannot get enough of war. With Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi’s regime falling to a rebelling population, CNN reports that a Pentagon spokesman said that the U.S. is looking at all options from the military side.

Paul Craig Roberts
Prisonplanet.com
Feb 26, 2011

The United States government cannot get enough of war. With Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi’s regime falling to a rebelling population, CNN reports that a Pentagon spokesman said that the U.S. is looking at all options from the military side.

Allegedly, the Pentagon, which is responsible for one million dead Iraqis and an unknown number of dead Afghans and Pakistanis, is concerned about the deaths of 1,000 Libyan protesters.

While the Pentagon tries to figure out how to get involved in the Libyan revolt, the commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific is developing new battle plans to take on China in her home territory. Four-star Admiral Robert Willard thinks the U.S. should be able to whip China in its own coastal waters.

The admiral thinks one way to do this is to add U.S. Marines to his force structure so that the U.S. can eject Chinese forces from disputed islands in the East and South China seas.

It is not the U.S. who is disputing the islands, but if there is a chance for war anywhere, the admiral wants to make sure we are not left out.

The admiral also hopes to develop military ties with India and add that country to his clout. India, the admiral says, “is a natural partner of the United States” and “is crucial to America’s 21st-century strategy of balancing China”. The U.S. is going to seduce the Indians by selling them advanced aircraft.

If the plan works out, we will have India in NATO helping us to occupy Pakistan and presenting China with the possibility of a two-front war.

The Pentagon needs some more wars so there can be some more “reconstruction.”

Reconstruction is very lucrative, especially as Washington has privatized so many of the projects, thus turning over to well-placed friends many opportunities to loot. Considering all the money that has been spent, one searches hard to find completed projects. The just released report from theCommission on Wartime Contracting can’t say exactly how much of the $200,000 million in Afghan“reconstruction” disappeared in criminal behavior and blatant corruption, but $12,000 million alone was lost to “overt fraud.”

War makes money for the politically connected. While the flag-waving population remains proud of the service of their sons, brothers, husbands, fathers, cousins, wives, mothers and daughters, the smart boys who got the fireworks started are rolling in the mega-millions.

As General Smedley Butler told the jingoistic American population, to no avail, “war is a racket.”As long as the American population remains proud that their relatives serve as cannon fodder for the military/security complex, war will remain a racket.

The move is being called the biggest such program since the Marshall Plan, which was instituted to rebuild Europe after World War Two.

“In the US, Bill Richardson, former Governor of New Mexico, a leading Democratic foreign policy thinker and a confidant of President Obama, told The Times: “Western governments need to think of this as a Marshall-Plan-type moment and a dramatic change in the world’s security order.”

“As senior officials from the EU, US, Japan and Australia prepared for an emergency summit on the Middle East in Brussels this week, Mr Richardson added: “We have to find a way to get on the right side of these democracy movements that are going to explode, and continue to explode,” reports the Australian.

In other words, dirty money stolen from taxpayers already laboring under the harshest economic conditions in several generations will be used to buy off whoever takes charge after the globalist-manipulated revolutions that have now reached Libya and threaten to engulf Saudi Arabia.

The Obama White House is already considering a huge aid package which will entice Egypt’s business insiders to play ball, “in return for cooperation with Israel’s private sector.”

A separate $4 billion subsidy program is also in the pipeline aimed at keeping food prices down during “Egypt’s transition to democracy,” even as record numbers of Americans are forced on food stamps in the United States.

EU foreign policy chief Baroness Ashton, who has never been elected to public office in her life, is also set to launch a European Union-led effort to subvert the revolutions, by using billions in taxpayer funds sequestered by Brussels bureaucrats at a summit designed to “nurture democratic structures” (buy off new dictators), “first in Egypt and Tunisia but potentially in Libya, Algeria, Jordan, Yemen and Bahrain.”

Unelected Bilderberg water-carrier David Cameron wasted little time in making nice with Egypt’s new post-”revolution” military dictatorship as part of an effort to cash in on the tidal wave of “democracy” now sloshing around the region.

The British Prime Minister led no less than eight (yes – eight!) different defense firms on a tour of the region, even as Libyan dictator Colonel Gaddafi used weapons bought from British companies to slaughter hundreds of protesters.

RELATED: Hypocrisy goes on: Cameron takes arms dealers with him on Egypt visit to promote democracy

If the U.S. economy “grows” by 4 percent in 2011, but by the end of the year we are paying $3.00 for a loaf of bread, $4.00 for a gallon of milk and $5.00 for a gallon of gasoline are the American people going to be better off economically or worse off?

The Economic Collapse
Jan 26, 2011

If the U.S. economy “grows” by 4 percent in 2011, but by the end of the year we are paying $3.00 for a loaf of bread, $4.00 for a gallon of milk and $5.00 for a gallon of gasoline are the American people going to be better off economically or worse off?  The answer is obvious, but most “experts” in the mainstream media continue to insist that as long as U.S. GDP is increasing and as long as the stock market is going up that our economy is improving.  But that is just not the case.  If the amount of money in circulation was relatively constant, those measurements would be helpful, but unfortunately the U.S. government and the Federal Reserve are dramatically pumping up the money supply right now.  Just because larger amounts of paper money are changing hands does not mean that the economy is getting stronger.  Of course GDP is going to rise when there is much more money in the system.  But economic growth that is fueled by inflation is just an illusion and it is not an indicator of economic health at all.

A very basic example shows this very easily.  Imagine if suddenly everyone in the United States had the amount of money they owned instantly doubled.  Would the U.S. economy be twice as healthy?  Of course not.  Very quickly prices would rise to meet the new level of money.

Well, in the United States today our “authorities” are pumping massive amounts of new dollars into the system.  That is one reason why so many people are so upset about the Federal Reserve’s “quantitative easing 2″ program.  The Federal Reserve is creating money out of thin air and pumping it into the financial system.  The first people that get their hands on this new money are Wall Street banks and major financial institutions.  The idea is that eventually all of this new money will “trickle down” and will help average Americans, but that just does not seem to be happening.

In addition, when the U.S. government goes into more debt, this also creates more money.  The U.S. government has accumulated far more new debt during the last two years than it ever has in any other two year period. When the U.S. government spends all of this money that it borrows it introduces a massive amount of new money into the system.

There are many ways to measure the money supply, and one of the most basic (M1) is displayed below.  As you can see, thanks to the actions of the Federal Reserve and the U.S. government, the money supply is rising at an almost exponential rate at this point.  The money supply has grown rapidly at various points in the past, but what we are witnessing now is really unprecedented….

So what happens when you have a lot more money chasing roughly the same number of goods and services?

Well, you have inflation of course.

Are our “leaders” alarmed by any of this?

No, in fact they plan to pump up the money supply even more.  The Federal Reserve seems content to continue their “quantitative easing” program and Barack Obama is proposing all kinds of new federal spending which will be funded by more debt.

So the truth is that we had better have some significant “economic growth” during 2011.  If this amount of money is pumped into our financial system and we don’t see any “economic growth” then that would be an indication of a major league economic breakdown.

But instead of looking at things rationally, many mainstream economists are hailing the fact that the U.S. economy may grow by a few percentage points in 2011 as a sign that happy days are here again.

According to a recent article in USA Today, economists are becoming increasingly optimistic about 2011, and the consensus seems to be that economic growth in the United States will fall somewhere between 3 and 4 percent….

Economists are more optimistic about the recovery than they were just a few months ago, significantly upgrading their forecasts for 2011 as consumers open their wallets.

Unfortunately, the irrational optimism is not limited to just the United States.  As global leaders prepare to descend on the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland many mainstream media outlets are declaring that the worldwide financial crisis is over and that we are now entering a glorious boom time for the global economy.  For example, the following is how one recent article from Bloomberg opened….

For only the third time since the Industrial Revolution, the world may be entering a long-term growth cycle that will lift all economies simultaneously, driving bond yields and commodity prices higher.

People don’t seem to realize that just because more money is changing hands and just because financial markets are going higher that it doesn’t mean that the economic situation is improving.

If a rising GDP and a soaring stock market truly were strong indicators of economic health, then Zimbabwe would have been one of the strongest economies on the planet over the last 10 years.

Inflation changes everything.

Unfortunately, official U.S. government inflation figures have become so manipulated that they are of basically no value at this point.  Whenever one particular category starts to experience significant inflation, the U.S. government simply removes that category from the inflation calculations.  Over the past 40 years the way that inflation is calculated has been changed way too many times.

If you really want to get a good idea of what is happening with inflation, a good thing to do is to look at the basic commodities that everyone uses around the world.

For example, according to the United Nations, the global price of food hit an all-time high in December.  Not only that, but almost every major agricultural commodity that you could possibly name experienced a double-digit percentage increase in price during 2010.

In addition, the price of oil is steamrolling towards $100 a barrel again.  In fact, many analysts are convinced that the price of oil will set a new all-time record in 2011.

A recent editorial in Newsweek was not optimistic that we will be able to stem this rising tide of inflation….

The final dam to stopping $150-a-barrel oil and $4-a-gallon gas is being breached, as financial regulation continues its daily erosion into worthlessness.

So what is the answer to these problems?

Well, according to many of the top “economic leaders” in the world, the solution is to create even more money and even more credit.

Between 2000 and 2009, the total amount of credit in the world grew from 57 trillion dollars to 109 trillion dollars.  Now the World Economic Forum saysthat we need to grow the total amount of credit by another 100 trillion dollars over the next ten years to “support” the anticipated amount of “economic growth” around the world that they expect to see.

Does that make any sense?

We have to double the amount of debt in the world so that the world economy can grow?

But this is what the world economic system has become at this point.  It is a never ending debt spiral that requires constantly increasing levels of debt and paper money.

That is a huge reason why precious metals such as gold and silver are becoming so popular.  Investors are becoming sick and tired of the constantly inflating paper currencies.  Gold and silver are both very much in demand right now.  For example, the Chinese are voraciously gobbling up gold right now.  Also, the Central Bank of Russia has announced plans to purchase 100 metric tons of gold per year in order “to replenish the country’s gold reserves”.

But what about average Americans?  What is going to happen to them in a world where prices are rising rapidly?

Well, the answer is very simple.  In an environment of rapidly rising prices, the standard of living for most Americans is going to go down.

In this economic environment, employers are simply not going to increase salaries fast enough to keep up with the rising price of food, gas and health care.

In addition, there are tens of millions of Americans that are on fixed incomes.  As prices rise, those fixed incomes will simply not go as far.

So the truth is that most Americans are going to find their finances stretched even thinner in the months and years to come.

Inflation is like a thief.  When prices rise it means that the purchasing power of all the dollars that we have accumulated goes down.

But for our politicians, inflation can be a helpful thing.  They can take inflation-fueled “economic growth” numbers and claim that their policies are working and that the economy is becoming healthier.

A year from now when these jokers trot out their “economic growth” numbers and yet the cost of nearly everything you buy has increased dramatically, don’t you believe their propaganda.

Yes, U.S. economic numbers are most likely going to experience a little bit of inflation-fueled “growth” in 2011.

But it will not mean that our economy is improving.